• about me
  • also me
  • email me: dicta (dot) chick (at) gmail (dot) com
  • Tuesday, February 01, 2011

    Some historical perspective

    On the baby's gender, that is...

    As everyone knows, we are going to find out the sex of the baby, as soon as the baby lets us. Both SM and I believe our kidlet is a boy. Most everyone else seems to think the baby is a girl. As one friend said, she pictures me with a girl — but then she went on to say, “But I’m always wrong, so that means it’s probably a boy.”

    But here’s some food for thought. If you look at the biological parents of each generation, we seem to have a bit of a family tradition: first-born boys.
    * SM's and my generation, circa the late 1960s: both sides (two families), our parents’ first-born were boys — SM, my brother
    * Our parents’ generation, circa the late 1930s: both sides (four families), our grandparents’ first-born were boys — SM's uncles J. and C., my dad and my mom’s older brother J. who died as an infant
    * Our grandparents’ generation, circa 1910: okay, this is where some first-born were girls

    I find it curious that we have to go back one hundred years, literally, before you can find a first-born girl on either side. I believe that my maternal grandparents were both younger siblings of first-born daughters. I’m not sure about my dad’s grandparents or SM's side.

    So it’s a tradition for both of our families: first-born boys since the early 1900s.

    I wonder if this observation will change anyone's mind to thinking we're having a boy...?

    Labels: ,

    eXTReMe Tracker