Is it a boy or a girl? You decide

For some women, a partner in baggy Y-fronts simply won’t suffice. They are intent on corralling their men into ball-crushing underwear because tight pants, allegedly, enhance a couple’s chances of having a baby girl. As supposedly does avoiding ovulation day for your reproductive romp, because sperm that make male babies live fast and die young and will usually win the race to the egg. A woman also increases her chances of having a daughter, apparently, if she gorges on dairy products, douches with vinegar before sex (to massacre the acid-hating “male” sperm) and takes certain herbal supplements.

These are old wives’ tales. The only way to guarantee either a daughter or son is to undergo pre-implantation genetic diagnosis: a genetic analysis of an embryo before it is placed in the womb. This is illegal in Britain except for couples at risk of having a child with a life-threatening gender-linked disorder. It’s also illegal for clinics to offer sex selection methods such as MicroSort, that sift the slightly larger X chromosome-bearing (female) sperm from their weedier Y chromosome-bearing (male) counterparts, and then use the preferred sperm in an IVF cycle. With a success rate hovering around 80-90 per cent, it’s better than Mother Nature’s odds of conception, but not immaculate.

Years ago I agreed with this ban on socially motivated sex selection. But I can’t defend that stance today. My opposition was based on two worries: the gender balance being skewed—look at China—and the perils of letting society think it’s acceptable to prize one sex more than the other. Unlike many politicians, however, I think it is only right and proper to perform an ideological U-turn when presented with convincing opposing evidence.

A 2003 survey published in the journal Human Reproduction showed that few British adults would be concerned enough about their baby’s gender to use the technology, and most adults wanted the same number of sons as daughters, so a shortage of one sex would be unlikely in the west. Bioethics specialist Edgar Dahl of the University of Geissen found that 68 per cent of Britons craved an equal number of boys and girls; 6 per cent wanted more boys; 4 per cent more girls; 3 per cent only boys; and 2 per cent only girls. Fascinatingly, even if a baby’s sex could be decided by simply taking a blue pill or a pink pill, 90 per cent of British respondents said they wouldn’t take it.

What about the danger of stigmatising the unwanted sex if gender selection was allowed? According to experts on so-called “gender disappointment,” the unwanted sex would actually be male. The website www.in-gender.com reveals an online world overwhelmingly dedicated to the memories of daughters who never existed. I had assumed—perhaps the legacy of an Indian heritage—that the preference would be for boys, and that the legalisation of sex selection would reinforce, rather than overturn, the patriarchy. But in the west, at least, it is girls who are favoured.

Not only that, but in 2008, and for the first time ever, more girls were born in New Delhi than boys: 1,004 girls for every 1,000 boys. This statistic owes much to a government scheme for poor families, whereby a girl accrues around 5,000 rupees at several stages through the education system, receiving the money when she turns 18. But if misogynistic India can produce a bounty of girls, albeit through bribery, then my worry about them being unwanted is a little misplaced.

Permitting sex selection is also an indirect means of population control. It would alleviate some couples’ perceived need to try again and again in the hope of securing one Petronella amid a panoply of Peters. I met someone in this situation recently: Michelle, the very feminine mother of five boys, told me she might have stopped at one if the stork had brought her a girl.

Personally, I don’t understand why people want to choose their baby’s gender. But am I justified in wanting people like Michelle to conform to my opinions, when their desires don’t bring obvious harm to others? I may think it is old-fashioned to want a son so that he can inherit the family business, or a daughter to have someone to go shopping with. But how different is that from the other preferences and expectations we have for our children, such as hoping they will be gifted at mathematics, music or sport? We all nurture secret expectations for our children: I hope that mine will be clever, beautiful, witty and wise. Perhaps it is not the end of the world if we allow some parents to add “female” or “male” to the list.