Science: Attractive parents more likely to have daughters

posted at 11:28 am on August 2, 2006 by Allahpundit

Candor compels me to preface this by admitting it’s pretty much all boys in my family.

Sorry, mom.

It’s good to know, though, that when Kirsten Powers and I finally get together, we don’t have to wait to start thinking about pink themes for the nursery:

[W]hy are beautiful people more likely to have girls? Kanazawa says scientists studying humans and other species have found that parents who possess any heritable trait that increases male reproductive success at a greater rate than female reproductive success will have more males than female babies, and vice versa.

Because men value physical attractiveness more than women do when looking for a mate, good looks increase the reproductive success of daughters much more than that of sons. So attractive people should have more daughters — which is exactly what Kanazawa found.

Is there any heritable factor that does more for male reproductive success than hotness does for females?

Besides wealth, I mean.

And, of course, “confidence.”

Here’s the good news:

His theory also suggests that, over time, women should have become more attractive than men. These data confirmed his hunch. More than half of all women in the sample — 52 percent — were rated as “attractive” or “very attractive,” compared with 42 percent of the men.

In a million years, all women will look like Angelina Jolie. And all men will be really, really self-assured. Evolution, baby: it’s enough to make me wonder if we need those sex robots after all.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Kirsten Powers? Really?

Ah, Juliet Huddy and I will have you two over for dinner anyway.

Pablo on August 2, 2006 at 11:37 AM

Is Huddy available?

Dude, I’ll fight you for her.

I’LL FIGHT YOU FOR HER.

Allahpundit on August 2, 2006 at 11:41 AM

Did I mention all of my female children? It looks like I’m going to have to adopt if I want a son.

Pablo on August 2, 2006 at 11:47 AM

Juliet and Kirsten….Hhmmmmm My dreams are complete.
I am willing to test this theory.. where does one sign up?

shooter on August 2, 2006 at 11:51 AM

Candor compels me to preface this by admitting it’s pretty much all boys in my family.

Hahahahaha. But hot boys!

Karol on August 2, 2006 at 11:54 AM

when Kirsten Powers and I finally get together

Blonde liberals who can’t hold their own against Michelle over brunette conservatives? Allah, your cred is dropping.

Anwyn on August 2, 2006 at 12:04 PM

Just the kind of junk science that is a symptom of brain damaged evolution worship. And, considering the tens of millions of innocent unborn we have murdered in the last few decades, how accurate can any of these numbers be.

Idiots.

NRA4Freedom on August 2, 2006 at 12:23 PM

Candor compels me to preface this by admitting it’s pretty much all boys in my family.

Well, in the interest of science, then, what does “pretty much all boys” mean?

You got a sister down at the bottom of the totem pole who’s left to splutter indignantly, “Pretty MUCH?”

:)

Anwyn on August 2, 2006 at 12:33 PM

Candor compels me to preface this by admitting it’s pretty much all boys in my family.

Do tell what does “pretty much” mean in this context?

You got a forgotten sister somewhere down the totem pole who’s left to splutter indignantly, “Pretty MUCH?!??”

:)

Anwyn on August 2, 2006 at 12:35 PM

Ha. No, just that we’re all boys in the immediate family, but I have a few female cousins.

So we’re … “pretty much all boys.”

Also, I’m a poor excuse for a man, so it works that way too.

Allahpundit on August 2, 2006 at 12:36 PM

Bleeargh, sorry for the doublepost, I thought my first got eaten.

Anwyn on August 2, 2006 at 12:36 PM

Also, I’m a poor excuse for a man, so it works that way too.

Aawwww. That your estimate of yourself or what Kirsten said when she found out you’re one of Michelle’s go-to guys?

Anwyn on August 2, 2006 at 12:42 PM

The logic of this science has me confused.

I understand males prefer attractive females, leading to a preponderance of attractive offspring of both sexes.

Good looks increase a female’s chances for mating. But, even the ugliest female alive today has about as many ancestral generations behind her as the prettiest. If we assume there is a single common ancester, they are both offspring of the same tuna. In other words they have equally successful lineage since the beginning of time.

We have to get real. Only sperm determine the sex of the child. Seems more the case that male sperm hide out when dad is with a good looker. Could it be the hormone surge caused by an ugly woman scare off the delicate female sperm so only the boys are left to make the crossing?

Don’t pick on me now. I’m darn ugly so I can say it.

entagor on August 2, 2006 at 12:57 PM

Eureka!

Ugly women finally have a bargaining chip!

entagor on August 2, 2006 at 1:03 PM

You can have Kirsten & Juliette, if you leave Kieran Chetry for me. Rroowrw.

Number 2 on August 2, 2006 at 1:03 PM

This is just another example of junk science in the MSM!

I am incredibly good looking and have 3 incredibly good looking sons and no daughters!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on August 2, 2006 at 1:04 PM

I hate to leave the onus on ugly women.

No doubt ugly men do not influence the stats because all their sperm, both male and female determinant, are trying like heck to get away from their ugly father. In this stampede, sex determinant factors count less than the desire to escape their living hell.

I speak of course, as the product of one who got over the wall.

entagor on August 2, 2006 at 1:37 PM

PS, I’m all with the kidding around with Allah, if that was not clear. Funny isn’t my first language, but it was my intent.

Anwyn on August 2, 2006 at 1:43 PM

Hmm, yet I’ve seen some gay couples whose members probably rate as attractive, but they didn’t have any children at all, let along any daughters. I guess it’s just another theory shot down by the facts.

Kralizec on August 2, 2006 at 2:02 PM

Dread Pirot Roberts, you made me laugh heartily, even though you might not have intended to :) My mother looked like Ingrid Bergman and my father looked/danced like Gene Kelley. They both also had a very good brain. Scientifically I have no expertise on this topic.

Anecdotally, what if Einstein would have married Marilyn Monroe, and what if their children would have had her brains and his looks? Something for Allah to consider, except that Kirsten has been saying the right things on the Middle East lately and might be open to switch to his politics, given enough love for such brilliance, never minding his self-assessed looks :) Our mystery man – keep on giving!

Entelechy on August 2, 2006 at 2:19 PM

Dread Pirate Roberts, I’m so sorry I bodged your handle – I was laughing too hard…sincerely,

Entelechy on August 2, 2006 at 2:22 PM

Not a problem Entelechy!

“Oh Lord it’s hard to be humble…”

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on August 2, 2006 at 2:47 PM

AP:

Is there any heritable factor that does more for male reproductive success than hotness does for females?

Is Huddy available?

Dude, I’ll fight you for her.

I’LL FIGHT YOU FOR HER.

Well, since you asked…

Yup. Size, muscle, and a willingness to use it to beat down any male competition.

EFG on August 2, 2006 at 3:10 PM

I think it will be more like, in a million years, all women will look like Michelle Malkin and they will be conservatives as well.

Ok. The suck up factor in that statement may be pretty high but that does not diminish my sincerety. I would have mentioned Jessica Alba instead if I knew she was a conservative.

DannoJyd on August 2, 2006 at 3:12 PM

What does this mean for parents of homosexual boys?

bopbottle on August 2, 2006 at 3:15 PM

Whatever happened to “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”?

Rick on August 2, 2006 at 4:07 PM

Dang, and I was hoping to have boys when it’s baby time…

NTWR on August 2, 2006 at 5:09 PM

Paul Newman, Elvis Presley, George Strait, Frank Sinatra,
Sean Connery, etec., etc., etc., must have had some really ugly parents.

gary on August 2, 2006 at 5:17 PM

Ah the yellow book girl and me. Five daughters for sure.

im4eagles on August 2, 2006 at 5:52 PM

Have you all overlooked Megyn Kendall? I understand she’s married, but is she happily married?

mikeyboss on August 2, 2006 at 6:07 PM

Too bad Michelle will never have any boys.

Dr. Charles G. Waugh on August 3, 2006 at 12:07 AM

Another humorous assumption of biosocial theories is that women, since they have generally more conservative mating habits, have selected out over millennia those masculine characteristics they consider most desirable. Or, in other words, men are what they are because that’s the way women want them. Yet still they complain. Jeez!

Dr. Charles G. Waugh on August 3, 2006 at 12:25 AM

Ignoring the obvious annoying evolution mentality that is behind this crap, I think entagor makes a lot of sense (above).

Beyond that… Kirsten Powers!? Dude, I used to agree, and I’m not in to bashing someone because of their looks… but I can’t let slide that you need to take a closer look. I saw her on Cavuto or one of the weekend business shows or something, in one of the basement studios (for some reason) and she either lost her make-up bag or I don’t know what, but it was scary that’s all I can say. I’m not going to say “hideous” or anything, because I think it was more the shock of seeing someone without make-up being less than average, when I used to think she was pretty hot. Seriously AllahP, I’m just lookin’ out for you not knocking your taste, because I was fooled for quite a while too.

Now, on the other ladies mentioned…. Huddy is hot, but I have to ask something… Did anyone else notice when she transformed? She started out at FNC kind of cute, but sort of conservatively dressed, and rather plain Jane to be honest. Then it seemed like overnight I’m seeing her on Fox & Friends weekends in tight low cut tops with tiny skirts and fishnets, a new hairstyle, etc. I’ve noticed FNC has put a little work in to Molly Henneberg lately too, in addition to a few others.

Now, like I said, Huddy is hot… But what about Kiran Chetry!? Julie Banderas!? Rebecca Gomez!? Yoooooow! These 3 women aren’t just “hot”, they are unbelievably hot. Like, the kind of hot that confuses me about what normal women really look like. I get lulled in to this sense that regular women look like that, and I have a hard time giving more than a passing glance at all these average girls I see.

We know Chetry is married to the weatherdude, but what about Banderas and Gomez? Anyone know?

By the way, incase any of the other FNC ladies are reading this, I don’t mean to leave you out because there are plenty more of your that are hot as well, but I have to be honest and say that I think those are my favorite 3.

RightWinged on August 3, 2006 at 3:59 AM

where’d my comment go? too long?

RightWinged on August 3, 2006 at 5:23 AM

oh there it is, my bad… it wasn’t showing up before for some reason

RightWinged on August 3, 2006 at 4:11 PM