collected by Westermarck,[5] seem to demonstrate a connection between
an abundance of nutrition and females, and between scarcity and
males, in relatively higher animal forms and in man. The main facts in
support of the theory that such a connection exists are the following:
Furriers testify that rich regions yield more furs from females and
poor regions more from males. In high altitudes, where nutrition is
scant, the birthrate of boys is high as compared with lower altitudes
in the same locality. Ploss has pointed out, for instance, that in
Saxony from 1847 to 1849 the yield of rye fell, and the birth-rate of
boys rose with the approach of high altitudes. More boys are born in
the country than in cities, because city diet is richer, especially
in meat; Düsing shows that in Prussia the numerical excess of boys is
greatest in the country districts, less in the villages, still less
in the cities, and least in Berlin.[6] In times of war, famine, and
migration more boys are born, and more are born also in poor than in
well-to-do families. European statistics show that when food-stuffs
are high or scarce the number of marriages diminishes, and in
consequence a diminished number of births follows, and a heightened
percentage of boys; with the recurrence of prosperity and an increased
number of marriages and births, the percentage of female births
rises (though it never equals numerically that of the males).[7]
More children are born from warm-weather than from cold-weather
conceptions,[8] but relatively more boys are born from cold-weather
conceptions. Professor Axel Key has shown from statistics of 18,000
Swedish school children that from the end of November and the
beginning of December until the end of March or the middle of April,
growth in children is feeble. From July-August to November-December
their daily increase in weight is three times as great as during the
winter months.[9] This is evidence in confirmation of a connection
between maleness, slow growth, and either poor nutrition or cold