Is it possible to control the gender of the yet-to-be-conceived baby?
491786
You can improve your chances. Sperm determine sex. A Y chromosome is lighter than an X chromosome. So, if you ultra-centrifuge sperm, the 'males' will be a higher fraction than the heavier 'females'. \n\nIt's done in animals all the time. It's not 100%, but it sure increases the odds.
902693
The answer is an unequivocal "NO"!  For starters, lets look at the rationale against such a proposition.  \n\nEvolutionarily speaking, sexual reproduction is important in that it has the advantage over asexual reproduction of mixing genetic combinations available to the offspring.  In the human species, this sexual reproduction requires both a male and a female.  What accompanies these facts is that the female is genetically prepared to carry a child once pregnant.  Such features which are vital to this are a uterus, the hormones estrogen and progesterone which prepare the uterus for implantation, ovaries to supply eggs, and a vaginal canal for birthing.  All of these features are primary sex characteristics that can only develop in the ABSENCE of a "Y" chromosome.  Evolutionarily, then, it is to the advantage of the species that phenotypic distinctions between males and females exist, and these physical differences preclude the possibility of the male of the species to be capable of pregnancy.  On this logic alone, men can not become pregnant.  But there is more evidence.\n\nSecondly, think about this:  humans and our ancestors have had millions of years to develop such features, if it were in fact possible, but it has NOT happened.  Why not?  Because there is no SELECTIVE ADVANTAGE for the human species of men acquiring these features and abilities. \n\nThird, there ARE cases of individuals that receive extra SEX chromosomes (look up Klinefelters and Turner' syndrome, for example) where individuals are born with XXY and XYY.  XXY individuals, as a rule, are infertile and can not produce children.  XYY individuals are fertile but are phenotypically male and do not develop uteruses and other features necessary to become impregnated.  So even in the cases of chromosal conditions that might perhaps favor male pregnancy, we do not observe males with the ability to be so.\n\nSo, IF a male had eggs they could not be fertilized because there is no way that the design of a male can receive semen into the genetalia.  But even if this were possible, there would be no place for the fertilized eggs to implant.  And if even they could implant, they couldnt grow because estrogen and progesterone are not present in high enough quantities in males to prepare the uterus (high levels of these hormones would have produced a female during development of the fetus).  This all boils down to the simple and obvious reality that males can not become pregnant.\n\nSomeone might perhaps argue, well it would be possible if certain mutations occurred.  This also is false.  Why?  Because evolution is a process that moves down a one-way street.  While such capability is present in lower organisms, higher animals are too specialized to be capable of such a transformation.  Even if all the proper sets of supposed mutations had amassed in one organism, that organism would either (one) not survive and be spontaneously aborted in utero, or (two) be born as an infertile individual.  Again, only lower animals with less well specialized sexual reproductive organs are capable of self-fertilization and "pregnancy" (flowering plants, for example, are capable of this).\n\nFinally, a genotypic male could undergo gender reassignment and become female, but a uterus and other "equipment" would have to be transplanted and various hormones taken.  I imagine, in theory, that this individual would be capable of becoming pregnant but in this scenario "he" is no longer "male".  \n\nGood question, but the answer is NO!
994857
Man will never be able to create a human.God won't allow it.They may be able to cure diseases using stem cells to create new functioning organs and that would be  a blessing.
114168
No.  A person is an individual substance of a rational nature.  Pre-viability, the baby is still a being with a rational nature, just not able to use reason yet.
301927
The medically preferred term for "hermaphrodism" is "intersexuality". In many cases of intersexuality, the individual is neither XX or XY - in Klienfelter's Syndrome, the child has one or even two extra X chromosomes (XXXY or XXY) - in Turner's Syndrome there is a single X (XO). You are probably referring to the rare type of intersexuality known as Chimerism, where some of the body's cells are XY and others are XX. Studies of chimeric animals have demonstrated the ability to give birth, but the gender of the resulting children are apparently determined by which of the mother's cells are involved in the fertilization.\n\nYou may want to read up on Chimerism, but I don't believe it is conceptually possible for an intersexual to give birth to its own child.
695608
You should be more concerned with the health of your unborn child than the sex.  There is always a reason for every thing....including the sex of your children.
862639
When the egg and the spermatozoid unit, a zygote if formed.  That zygote begin to develop, neither as male or female.  Or should I say it develops as DEFAULT which is, female.  At 6 weeks of gestation, the zygote becomes an embryo and THEN, and only then, it differenciate to male or female.  \n\nAs you may know, female have XX chromosome and male have XY chromosome.  On that tiny Y chromosome there's a gene, called SRY, that tells the embryo's body to produce testicules.  If the embryo's female, then the second X commands the formation of ovaries.  Then hormones are produced, and penis or uterus appear.\n\nYour nipples are simply made before that 6th week, when the zygote is a "default female" and once they're there, they stay there, even after the testosterone hormone start being produced.
271982
Good point Pazion. But I still say in millions of years we still have seen no physical evidence that this is genetic. There have been no new emergence of a new gender. We are still born male and female. Again, in the next million years we may find that we were wrong in our assumptions. But we will be dead and therefore we still will not care. So it's a lost point even discussing it.
168198
Actually, the odds are not 50:50.  The chances are 51.4 male to 48.6 female.  So the odds are slighly in favor of a boy.\n\nhttp://www.ourstolenfuture.org/NewScience/reproduction/sexratio/sexratio.htm\n\nAs people have said, the births are not connected so outcome of each event is independent.  So each birth event would seem to have the same likelihood as any other birth event.\n\nHowever, there may be individual factors which are not accounted for in this study.  We have several friends who have all girls.  3 girls in one family, 4 in another. While statistically plausible, and I haven't found any specific studies on this, I'm betting that there are heredity and environmental factors that are involved. Certainly their's some interest in why the birth rates of certain countries deviate significantly from the norm.\n\nHere's another website that talks about ways of modifying your behavior that might increase the odds of a boy or a girl.  It's not scientific but in the quote: "Dr. Moore also notes in his book that selecting a child's gender shouldn?t be taken too seriously, but he thinks using his methods make trying that much more fun."\n\nhttp://preconception.com/resources/articles/tochance.htm\n\nOf course, if you choose to adopt and make a proactive choice of gender (boy or girl), you have a much strongest choice of influencing the odds.
1141760
I say it is wrong.  Each sex has different characteristics and feelings and attributes.  A baby need both a female and a male role model.
665733
What is the gender that this one gender going to reproduce? I need an answer, then only I can answer your question.
960192
hhmm how bout some species being able to change sex in single sex inviroment
104960
it's called gender sensitivity man. what a man can do, a woman also can.
630487
only with artificial insemination or a surragate mother,\ntwo people from the sex cant make children and men cnat have babies anyway, only make em.
148814
No. Don't confuse the common phrase that "we all start as female" with the individual set of chromosomes. XY embryos are male; the "activation", so to speak, of the factors that will lead that individual to have male characteristics (gonads, genitalia and secondary sexual characters) occurs some time after the start of embryonic development. Thus if one examines an earlier embryo, males are indistinguishable from females.\nBut they each have their XX (females) or XY (males) sexual chromosome pair, and the proteins coded in their genome will lead to normal development of either sex.
79284
No... short answer, but it can be controlled.
666251
yes you can, some people even have peroids while they are pregant, which shouldnt happen but has.