Scientific evidence for humans having Alpha males?
[quote="Alliekit]
It would be interesting because that goes against accepted birth gender ratio. Boys are more commonly born than females due to female fetuses being more likely to be aborted by the body.
XX sperm are a minuscule amount larger due to increased genetic information. However there is no proven survival difference between the sperm
In fact there is one study that suggested more males were born because in vitro Y sperm are more function and live longer
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract[/quote]
Thank you. I've always heard and read the opposite of what you are saying here (it's not a topic I looked into much though), so thanks for bringing this up. Turns out what I've been hearing/reading is an outdated but very persistent idea.
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 32,869
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
It would be interesting because that goes against accepted birth gender ratio. Boys are more commonly born than females due to female fetuses being more likely to be aborted by the body.
XX sperm are a minuscule amount larger due to increased genetic information. However there is no proven survival difference between the sperm
In fact there is one study that suggested more males were born because in vitro Y sperm are more function and live longer
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract[/quote]
Thank you. I've always heard and read the opposite of what you are saying here (it's not a topic I looked into much though), so thanks for bringing this up. Turns out what I've been hearing/reading is an outdated but very persistent idea.[/quote]
It was also commonly believed that Y swim faster than X due to their less genetic mass, but this was debunked a while ago.
It would be interesting because that goes against accepted birth gender ratio. Boys are more commonly born than females due to female fetuses being more likely to be aborted by the body.
XX sperm are a minuscule amount larger due to increased genetic information. However there is no proven survival difference between the sperm
In fact there is one study that suggested more males were born because in vitro Y sperm are more function and live longer
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract[/quote]
Thank you. I've always heard and read the opposite of what you are saying here (it's not a topic I looked into much though), so thanks for bringing this up. Turns out what I've been hearing/reading is an outdated but very persistent idea.[/quote][/quote]
It was also commonly believed that Y swim faster than X due to their less genetic mass, but this was debunked a while ago.[/quote]
Admittedly in studies it's shown to be a miniscule amount that won't make a difference. As I was looking into this the general consensus was that there is not enough difference between the sperm to make a difference. Although its still a mystery to why boys are born more than girls despite the fact it should be 50:50
It would be interesting because that goes against accepted birth gender ratio. Boys are more commonly born than females due to female fetuses being more likely to be aborted by the body.
XX sperm are a minuscule amount larger due to increased genetic information. However there is no proven survival difference between the sperm
In fact there is one study that suggested more males were born because in vitro Y sperm are more function and live longer
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract[/quote]
Thank you. I've always heard and read the opposite of what you are saying here (it's not a topic I looked into much though), so thanks for bringing this up. Turns out what I've been hearing/reading is an outdated but very persistent idea.[/quote][/quote]
It was also commonly believed that Y swim faster than X due to their less genetic mass, but this was debunked a while ago.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
Admittedly in studies it's shown to be a miniscule amount that won't make a difference. As I was looking into this the general consensus was that there is not enough difference between the sperm to make a difference. Although its still a mystery to why boys are born more than girls despite the fact it should be 50:50[/quote]
I actually thought that more girls were born than boys. I mean, except in Asia where a lot of girls are aborted, the majority of human populations are 51% female and 49% male.
After birth men at any age have a higher mortality risk than women the same age. Child mortality is slightly higher and in puberty it's definitely higher due to more risky behaviour. Men's life expectancy is lower. 51% 49% because people of all ages are counted. While there are more male babies there are more very old women.
Why should it be 50:50? Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you mean but didn't you just say there were more female miscarriages and thus more boys are born?
Or do you mean it should be 50:50 because there is no reason why having more men than women should be beneficial for human populations? In that case: since boys have slightly higher childhood mortality rates and more likely die of accidents in puberty there (probably) aren't more men in the reproductive age.
After birth men at any age have a higher mortality risk than women the same age. Child mortality is slightly higher and in puberty it's definitely higher due to more risky behaviour. Men's life expectancy is lower. 51% 49% because people of all ages are counted. While there are more male babies there are more very old women.
Why should it be 50:50? Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you mean but didn't you just say there were more female miscarriages and thus more boys are born?
Or do you mean it should be 50:50 because there is no reason why having more men than women should be beneficial for human populations? In that case: since boys have slightly higher childhood mortality rates and more likely die of accidents in puberty there (probably) aren't more men in the reproductive age.
The second one and that could very well be true. Also I have to warn when I'm talking about a disproportionate ratio in terms or real world it is small. Something like 107:100. Even so at it is suprising as it seems there is still a 50:50 chance of an egg being fertilised with either sperm.
And you are exactly right about why thethere is a higher female population especially when people are living longer. It's also why dementia is more prevelant in women because men die before they reach the age were it becomes commonplace
It would be interesting because that goes against accepted birth gender ratio. Boys are more commonly born than females due to female fetuses being more likely to be aborted by the body.
XX sperm are a minuscule amount larger due to increased genetic information. However there is no proven survival difference between the sperm
In fact there is one study that suggested more males were born because in vitro Y sperm are more function and live longer
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract[/quote]
Thank you. I've always heard and read the opposite of what you are saying here (it's not a topic I looked into much though), so thanks for bringing this up. Turns out what I've been hearing/reading is an outdated but very persistent idea.[/quote][/quote]
It was also commonly believed that Y swim faster than X due to their less genetic mass, but this was debunked a while ago.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
Admittedly in studies it's shown to be a miniscule amount that won't make a difference. As I was looking into this the general consensus was that there is not enough difference between the sperm to make a difference. Although its still a mystery to why boys are born more than girls despite the fact it should be 50:50[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
I actually thought that more girls were born than boys. I mean, except in Asia where a lot of girls are aborted, the majority of human populations are 51% female and 49% male.[/quote]
That's true but I'm talking specifically about birth ratio. Norhwind had a very good answer for this
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 32,869
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
It would be interesting because that goes against accepted birth gender ratio. Boys are more commonly born than females due to female fetuses being more likely to be aborted by the body.
XX sperm are a minuscule amount larger due to increased genetic information. However there is no proven survival difference between the sperm
In fact there is one study that suggested more males were born because in vitro Y sperm are more function and live longer
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract[/quote]
Thank you. I've always heard and read the opposite of what you are saying here (it's not a topic I looked into much though), so thanks for bringing this up. Turns out what I've been hearing/reading is an outdated but very persistent idea.[/quote][/quote]
It was also commonly believed that Y swim faster than X due to their less genetic mass, but this was debunked a while ago.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
Admittedly in studies it's shown to be a miniscule amount that won't make a difference. As I was looking into this the general consensus was that there is not enough difference between the sperm to make a difference. Although its still a mystery to why boys are born more than girls despite the fact it should be 50:50[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Maybe because male aspies are evolutionary advantageous for the group (humanity) but totally useless for mating?
/adding salt to the wound.
It would be interesting because that goes against accepted birth gender ratio. Boys are more commonly born than females due to female fetuses being more likely to be aborted by the body.
XX sperm are a minuscule amount larger due to increased genetic information. However there is no proven survival difference between the sperm
In fact there is one study that suggested more males were born because in vitro Y sperm are more function and live longer
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract[/quote]
Thank you. I've always heard and read the opposite of what you are saying here (it's not a topic I looked into much though), so thanks for bringing this up. Turns out what I've been hearing/reading is an outdated but very persistent idea.[/quote][/quote]
It was also commonly believed that Y swim faster than X due to their less genetic mass, but this was debunked a while ago.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
Admittedly in studies it's shown to be a miniscule amount that won't make a difference. As I was looking into this the general consensus was that there is not enough difference between the sperm to make a difference. Although its still a mystery to why boys are born more than girls despite the fact it should be 50:50[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Maybe because male aspies are evolutionary advantageous for the group (humanity) but totally useless for mating?
/adding salt to the wound.[/quote]
Im really confused what does that have to do with what we were discussing?
It's because men are much better at dying. Check gender ratios at a specific young age, not overall.
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 32,869
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
It would be interesting because that goes against accepted birth gender ratio. Boys are more commonly born than females due to female fetuses being more likely to be aborted by the body.
XX sperm are a minuscule amount larger due to increased genetic information. However there is no proven survival difference between the sperm
In fact there is one study that suggested more males were born because in vitro Y sperm are more function and live longer
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract[/quote]
Thank you. I've always heard and read the opposite of what you are saying here (it's not a topic I looked into much though), so thanks for bringing this up. Turns out what I've been hearing/reading is an outdated but very persistent idea.[/quote][/quote]
It was also commonly believed that Y swim faster than X due to their less genetic mass, but this was debunked a while ago.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
Admittedly in studies it's shown to be a miniscule amount that won't make a difference. As I was looking into this the general consensus was that there is not enough difference between the sperm to make a difference. Although its still a mystery to why boys are born more than girls despite the fact it should be 50:50[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Maybe because male aspies are evolutionary advantageous for the group (humanity) but totally useless for mating?
/adding salt to the wound.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
Im really confused what does that have to do with what we were discussing?[/quote]
It's just a theory-joke:
The excess males that are being born might be the aspie males, who are advantageous (in evolutionary sense) for the group but not for mating.
And the "aspie genes" continue to being passed on by female aspies.
Yeah, just a few percent of a male population that won't be able to find a partner. No big deal.
But like we discussed the ratio evens out after puberty so unless you are dating as a baby there shouldn't be to much of an issue of mismatch ratio. But then that's not including asexuals and homosexuals in which women are more likely to be gay
Yeah, just a few percent of a male population that won't be able to find a partner. No big deal.
But like we discussed the ratio evens out after puberty so unless you are dating as a baby there shouldn't be to much of an issue of mismatch ratio. But then that's not including asexuals and homosexuals in which women are more likely to be gay
According to this info (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... bruary2016) it only evens out at 26. Most people start dating before 26.
Yeah, just a few percent of a male population that won't be able to find a partner. No big deal.
But like we discussed the ratio evens out after puberty so unless you are dating as a baby there shouldn't be to much of an issue of mismatch ratio. But then that's not including asexuals and homosexuals in which women are more likely to be gay
According to this info (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... bruary2016) it only evens out at 26. Most people start dating before 26.
Won't dating be more difficult for young men than for young women but more difficult for older women than for older men either way simply because there are more women willing to date an older man than her own age than men willing to date women older than themselves and because there are more older men who are into young women than older women who are into young men?
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Evidence of Israel's genocidal intentions toward Gaza? |
27 Jan 2024, 4:55 pm |
Israeli evidence of UNRWA Hamas ties Flimsy |
07 Feb 2024, 3:13 pm |
What the hell is wrong with humans? |
01 Jan 2024, 10:54 pm |