Sign into an existing account

By 8 or 9 they should be intelligent enough that you can teach them not to share this information with others.

Lol "oven_stuffer"

New account or someone's alt?

Either way welcome aboard the "talk" train.

1488

i was imagining a machine that would jam them in the hot box. are you thinking of hansel and gretel?

Too comfortable and too uninformed to understand. Fortunately, both situations are changing rapidly.

There is a war on reproducing the most. Can't win it if you're not even in the game.

All correct but my point was that c-sections can also make it harder for a woman to get pregnant or may even cause infertility.

Due date is a guess. Just wait it out. I had my last baby at nearly 42 weeks.

I can almost garuntee a 50/50 coin flip chance you will end up with cesarian if you go through with induction

Don't agree to a C section unless they can show you via an ultrasound that the placenta is degrading. That is the reason they use for inducing or caesareans on "past dates" women. Sound like she is already on the way so shouldn't need any interventions but they will probably try and push some. Might be too late but a "Stretch and sweep" is the only medical one worth doing. Get her to walk some stairs, or one leg on the curb the other off, or bounce on an exercise ball. Drink a bunch of pineapple juice, have unprotected sex if she's up for it.

haha yeah. could be born on the first day of spring which is cool too.

I am reading a book right now (Deep Nutrition by Catherine Sheridan) that talks about this. She says that a woman needs about three years between kids to recover fully and for the next kid to have all of the nutrients necessary. It's really interesting

Hahaha!

I love it. It's so pretty.

Well I look forward to it. I think we should hash it out.

As I say consanguinity overall relatedness is measure that is objectively calculable. People like the Irish, the Swiss, and the Poles will seem to have a lot of SNPs in common with each other and you would expect these groups to be heavily related within the last 10,000 years. Some southern euro groups like Iberia, southern Italy, Greece, seem less related because of higher admix of EEF and other middle eastern groups. Same with the Caucasus for similar reasons. All of western eurasia and north Africa are fairly related within the last 30 or 40 ky. Its a line of continuum and where to draw the line is somewhat arbitrary. Using geographic boundries sometimes works because geography correlates quite well to genetics. Or it used to.

One might ask, if I include italians or armenians as europeans, why not turks or iranians? Or jews? Its a good question. But I think there are some differences that are gene based that are more difficult to measure.

Recent relatedness may have a bigger impact because people living under a particular set of environmental and political conditions may behave far more similarly. And that is because the genes that allow us to adapt behaviorally to a particular set of conditions may change very quickly. Hunter gatherers and agrarians behave differently. Polygamists and monogamists behave differently. People from cold climates and hot climates behave differently. Changes in any of these conditions can make a group evolve rapidly. Geneticly. Within a couple thousand years or even a few hundred.

Whites have lived under similar conditions recently which had caused some behavioral similarities that are probably genetic but more difficult to quantify. Albanians for instance were more polygamist and are behaviorally distinct from their neighbors. Christianity/monogamy seems to have a huge impact on traits like cooperation, intelligence, work ethic, crime.

Most social problems are caused by genes. Whites have a lower frequency of these genes. Whites shouldn’t have to include groups with high rates of criminality and low rates of cooperation in our society, which is fundamentally an economic partnership based on consanguinity. This is the purpose of all societies as they evolved naturally.