On Dec 14, 5:00 pm, mommycom wrote:

snip

I'm not saying that we won't try again though. Maybe fourth time's the charm for us?

Some research says that relatively stable attributes of a couple
affect the probability they will have a boy, with high status
increasing it and good looks decreasing it.

http://psychologytoday.com/articles/...622-000002.xml
Ten Politically Incorrect Truths About Human Nature
By Alan S. Miller Ph.D., Satoshi Kanazawa Ph.D.

'It is commonly believed that whether parents conceive a boy or a girl
is up to random chance. Close, but not quite; it is largely up to
chance. The normal sex ratio at birth is 105 boys for every 100 girls.
But the sex ratio varies slightly in different circumstances and for
different families. There are factors that subtly influence the sex of
an offspring.

One of the most celebrated principles in evolutionary biology, the
Trivers-Willard hypothesis, states that wealthy parents of high status
have more sons, while poor parents of low status have more daughters.
This is because children generally inherit the wealth and social
status of their parents. Throughout history, sons from wealthy
families who would themselves become wealthy could expect to have a
large number of wives, mistresses and concubines, and produce dozens
or hundreds of children, whereas their equally wealthy sisters can
have only so many children. So natural selection designs parents to
have biased sex ratio at birth depending upon their economic
circumstances--more boys if they are wealthy, more girls if they are
poor. (The biological mechanism by which this occurs is not yet
understood.)

This hypothesis has been documented around the globe. American
presidents, vice presidents, and cabinet secretaries have more sons
than daughters. Poor Mukogodo herders in East Africa have more
daughters than sons. Church parish records from the 17th and 18th
centuries show that wealthy landowners in Leezen, Germany, had more
sons than daughters, while farm laborers and tradesmen without
property had more daughters than sons. In a survey of respondents from
46 nations, wealthy individuals are more likely to indicate a
preference for sons if they could only have one child, whereas less
wealthy individuals are more likely to indicate a preference for
daughters.

The generalized Trivers-Willard hypothesis goes beyond a family's
wealth and status: If parents have any traits that they can pass on to
their children and that are better for sons than for daughters, then
they will have more boys. Conversely, if parents have any traits that
they can pass on to their children and that are better for daughters,
they will have more girls.

Physical attractiveness, while a universally positive quality,
contributes even more to women's reproductive success than to men's.
The generalized hypothesis would therefore predict that physically
attractive parents should have more daughters than sons. Once again,
this is the case. Americans who are rated "very attractive" have a 56
percent chance of having a daughter for their first child, compared
with 48 percent for everyone else.'