How Does Birth Order Affect Your Love Life?

[methodwriter85]

I thought this was a cute little article about birth order. I've always found birth order theory to be pretty fascinating, but I've never seen it applied to dating.Birth Order and Love Life

 

In terms of my own family, they got it pretty much right about the two oldest, but the middle child is not in any way dependable. My oldest neice, who's an only child, hasn't started dating yet so I can't really judge for that, either.

 

I went through a lot of angst a couple of years ago about being the last-born, so I really read up on birth order to fully understand why my older siblings really just loved to boss me around so much, even at the age of 20. It can all be pop psychology bunk, but from my own experience it tends to be true...only children are usually very mature, intelligent, and well-spoken for their age. The first-borns tend to be best at leading people, and tend to have perfectionist personalities...Adam P. is such a perfect example of the first-born type. Middle kids seem to be the ones that are all over the place. And the family babies tend to be the off-beat, fun-loving ones.

 

Kind of a cool idea to think that your birth order can explain your own personality quirks, no?

 

 

[Jwolf]

My favorite part of this article is the last line about youngest siblings pairing well with an only child.

 

"you'll make sure you aren't dining by candlelight because the electricity didn't get paid."

 

Classic.

 

 

 

[Frostina]

wow.. Interesting..

 

most of them are quite accurate :D

me being the oldest child, i could totally see it!!

 

well.. except for this bit: "First-borns aren’t the “seize the day” sort (you’re not one to text your sweetie to suggest meeting at this fun café you just walked past)" (but its not like, everybody's the same right?? )

[Arpeggio]

Lol, ironically, I'm the oldest child, and my boyfriend is tied for the youngest (he's a twin). XD

[Cia]

I'm a mishmash. At my dad's house biologically I was the youngest til I was 9. Then he married I became smack in the middle with 1 older step and 2 younger steps. As a teen I would visit my mom and there were 6 of us and I was 2nd oldest. I'm not quite sure where that puts me I've been middle and youngest. I have to say middle probably describes me the best, though not all of it fits. I'm married to a youngest.

[Ramon]

I'm a stereotypical middle child. My older brother and younger brother don't seem to fit the description of the oldest and youngest though.

 

Why is it that the youngest is the best match for the other three?!

[methodwriter85]

Because the baby is so loveable and fun?

[Jwolf]

 

Why is it that the youngest is the best match for the other three?!

 

Who doesn't love an irresponsible adventure seeker who's going to drive you to Atlantic City or Vegas? I'm a youngest, btw, 100 percent to the letter.

[methodwriter85]

Who doesn't love an irresponsible adventure seeker who's going to drive you to Atlantic City or Vegas? I'm a youngest, btw, 100 percent to the letter.

 

Gee, I can't help but notice that Cooper in The List is the youngest of three kids. What a coincidence.

 

They do say you should write what you know.

[Jwolf]

 

Gee, I can't help but notice that Cooper in The List is the youngest of three kids. What a coincidence.

 

They do say you should write what you know.

 

You caught me. Chapter 12 preview: Cooper and Kyle take an unexpected roadtrip across the country!

 

Back to topic: my curiosity isn't about the happy-go-lucky pairings. My question is what happens when two youngests get together? Is that a recipe for disaster?

 

 

 

[methodwriter85]

Honestly, it probably would be. There'd be no balance there.

[Skyline]

I dont really fit into this at all lmao. *is a freak*

[Bumblebee]

I'm the last born child, and I sorta but not really am like the first born and my sister is first born, and she is the annoying air-head last born

[Mark Arbour]

This study is anecdotal at best. Nothing to hang your hat on...more of a curiosity.

[Tipdin]

The birth order information did not fit my family very well.

 

Neither of my older siblings are take-charge kind of people, they're both a mess and have been floundering for years. Neither of my two younger siblings are fun-loving types.

 

I am the mid-kid and have been the stable care-giver in the family. And my partner is an only child - a spoiled, out of control, controlling little brat. He's a major over-achiever and worries about EVERYthing.

[hh5]

The birth order information did not fit my family very well.

 

Neither of my older siblings are take-charge kind of people, they're both a mess and have been floundering for years. Neither of my two younger siblings are fun-loving types.

 

I am the mid-kid and have been the stable care-giver in the family. And my partner is an only child - a spoiled, out of control, controlling little brat. He's a major over-achiever and worries about EVERYthing.

 

 

I the youngest.

 

I agree about the information is a not always a match ... perhaps they are only address certain types of parents.

[K.C.]

Was cool to read how it applies to some people and not others. I always read those articles but don't put too much thought into it. I'm a twin and we are as different as night and day, but we are kind of fun loving since we are the youngest.

[Voltaire]

I find these sorts of things silly, and yet I seem to always find myself reading them.

 

I imagine that one day, after I've accomplished all that I will accomplish in my life, the dementia will have eroded my brain to the point at which silly, nonsensical things such as this fly from my mouth. I hope by this point euthanasia is legal.

[Michael9344]

The study used to apply to my family but... well it just got messed up. I'm the oldest, and I admit I'm like running for the Mayor of Stepford. I guide every other person in the family (directly or indirectly) most of time. My younger sister who was the last born for ten years fitted the description. She's WILD. And then, now, we have another baby in the house. And she's VERY WILD but my first younger sister is still wild. None of us is dating anyone yet but I think that won't work out. Lol

[BenKT]

I am the only child, and I had been wondering why my previous relationships with the onlies and the youngest never worked out...LOL

[colinian]

I'm the oldest in my family (I have two sisters), my partner Doug is the youngest in his family (he has a brother and a sister). Based on the article Doug and I have made the correct choices. Of course, I've known that we were perfect for each other since the day we met nine years ago when we were 12 years old.

 

Colin

[John Galaor]

<br>I thought this was a cute little article about birth order. I've always found birth order theory to be pretty fascinating, but I've never seen it applied to dating.<a href="http://yahoo.match.com/y/article.aspx?articleid=7652&TrackingID=526103&BannerID=744515" class="bbc_url" title="External link" rel="nofollow external"><font color="#33ccff">Birth Order and Love Life</font></a><br><br> In terms of my own family, they got it pretty much right about the two oldest, but the middle child is not in any way dependable. My oldest neice, who's an only child, hasn't started dating yet so I can't really judge for that, either.<br><br>I went through a lot of angst a couple of years ago about being the last-born, so I really read up on birth order to fully understand why my older siblings really just loved to boss me around so much, even at the age of 20. It can all be pop psychology bunk, but from my own experience it tends to be true...only children are usually very mature, intelligent, and well-spoken for their age. The first-borns tend to be best at leading people, and tend to have perfectionist personalities...Adam P. is such a perfect example of the first-born type. Middle kids seem to be the ones that are all over the place. And the family babies tend to be the off-beat, fun-loving ones.<br>Kind of a cool idea to think that your birth order can explain your own personality quirks, no?<br>

<br><br>I agree with this idea.  There is another side to look at this.  It is called epigenetics.  Epigenetics talk about that some genes can get shrunk, or inactivated by the effect of environments conditions.   A very important part of environment is social.  Then, to have two bully older brothers can make you a timid shy boy.  Your testosterone fabric can get depressed, it is a theory of mine, and your attitude changes enough to make you different.  So many different, that you can feel subordinated to your older brothers, and ready to comply to most of his fancies  and to endure his bullies pranks. <br>I remember a video a hyenas.  The hyenas society is very hierarchical. The alpha female is so full of testosterone  that she has all males and females threatened and scared.  Even their puppies are so full of testosterone through  the milk they take that are a very quarrelsome team of fighters and often there are case of cannibalism among the cubs, or badly injured brothers that die as a result of the aggressions.   <br>But in general, a detail on the life of hyenas is that the alpha female has a lot more of testosterone than the rest of the pack.   Then, one story I saw in a video was about a male strong cub that was the favorite of mother alpha.  This male had often a favored position at feeding beside his mum, that protected him from bullying at the frenzy moment that is eating a prey.  Well, to end the story, a lioness that had an extreme hate for hyenas, killed one day the alpha female.  Then, the young cub, lost his protection and become the last monkey of the pack at the time of feeding. Then, the promising rank he would have of becoming an alpha male among their peers were lost forever.  It occurs that when the older lions of a pride are expelled from the territory they have by younger aggressive males, they become rather depressed and die of hunger in a mater of one or two weeks. They could had been living perhaps for a few more years, if they were not dethroned.  Then, I think the social conditions can change the wiring of the brain and also determine the activity or the inactivity of some genes.  That also could determine the composition or our hormones.  How high is the level of testosterone and how high is the level of oxitocine.  Then, in a boy that is in a lower rank dominated by older bullying brothers his body reacts depressing the production of testosterone, and increasing the level of oxitocine.  The oxitocine make us prone to be kind and loving with those around us. or with those that are on a rank over us.   <br>Then, among the alpha males in a human pack of high school teems, or in a college, to realize they are the top dogs, made them to produce even more testosterone. <br>Imagine you could not a virtual experiment with humans.<br>You get one of these bullies, a top dog in high school,  and put him a dangerous environment like a prison full of hardened thugs.  Well, my prediction is that his attitude would change in a matter of a few days.<br>The simple fact of being detained and put it in a jail for a few days starts to depress his top dog attitude.<br>His testosterone levels would plummet to the most lower levels of his whole life in two or three days.  <br> Then, once he is put in a prison, he would probably end up being the bitch of some dangerous thug quite easily.  He would end being utterly dismissive and dominated.  His only strength would come from a perception that he would be protected by the master male that uses him as a bitch in property.<br>For being a top dog and a bully is a relative condition.  Your sense of being a top dog can change when you are challenged by new  threatening and scary top dogs.   <br>There are a lot of signs to define who would be a top dog, not only the body size, but the aggressive and threatening manners.  There is also the point that always the top dog is accompanied by some henchmen.  That gives the top leader a farther argument to upheld his threatening attitude.  <br>If our top aggressive bully from high school were put alone in a prison or a jail, the simple unknown environment would collapse their self assurance on his capacity to be a bully.  He is in unknown territory, and had not any allies to give him some help. <br>That make me go back to the case of the high school and the phenomenon of bullying.  In the case of bullying the person threatened or harassed feel impotent, because the top dog is always accompanied by his henchmen.<br>Then, as those guys are bullies, the crowd accept the facts as they are.  If the police or the head of the school starts questioning about a dramatic case of bullying in which someone hanged himself, nobody is gonna tell a word about what happened.  Nobody has seen anything wrong on the part of the bullies.  They were doing nothing wrong.  Not even the police or the head master want to know any of the facts, even if some loser want to tell them about.<br>This can explain the case of Columbine high school massacre.  While all commentators in the TV and newspapers declared that they could not understand what happened.  I understood it pretty well with the first news. Even if I never had been in a US high school. It was a crystal clear to me. Some forms of mild or strong bullying exists in all societies. So, it is easy to understand the case.  In the case of US as there are so many firearms, you have to decided between hang yourself simply, or to kill a bunch of rats before you blow your head up with a shot.<br>Bullying does not only happens in a forgotten high school in Colorado, it happens also in some other places, like here in GA.<br>You go to a chat, and you could feel that someone is starting to look at you as a good objective for bullying.  This always starts in small discreet steps.  Little by little is goes going up like anywhere else. <br><br><br>

[John Galaor]

I thought this was a cute little article about birth order. I've always found birth order theory to be pretty fascinating, but I've never seen it applied to dating.Birth Order and Love Life

 

In terms of my own family, they got it pretty much right about the two oldest, but the middle child is not in any way dependable. My oldest neice, who's an only child, hasn't started dating yet so I can't really judge for that, either.

 

I went through a lot of angst a couple of years ago about being the last-born, so I really read up on birth order to fully understand why my older siblings really just loved to boss me around so much, even at the age of 20. It can all be pop psychology bunk, but from my own experience it tends to be true...only children are usually very mature, intelligent, and well-spoken for their age. The first-borns tend to be best at leading people, and tend to have perfectionist personalities...Adam P. is such a perfect example of the first-born type. Middle kids seem to be the ones that are all over the place. And the family babies tend to be the off-beat, fun-loving ones.

 

Kind of a cool idea to think that your birth order can explain your own personality quirks, no?

 

 

 

Perhaps there is more than being the youngest or oldest or so. Perhaps there is a real genetic printing on being a top dog and so. Let's imagine that there are like three or six gens involved to determine a dominance.

Some genes determine dominance and some others submission. The genes in between can determine intermediate values.

Then, one can inherit most likely an "average" rank in dominance. We will be not a top dog, not the last dog.

Even then, with an average dominance we can have a tendency to dominate if we can. That is we try to dominate by default. That is, if we can, and the other part let us to dominate.

In this case, older brother is best situated to be a bully their younger bros. Unless the older brother was assigned by genetics to be mostly submissive extreme or something.

This could could explain that some older brothers could also be gay. The statistical significance of this discovery is not very strong. Then, in practice, of three or four brothers, all of them have some likelihood of being gay, but not with the same probability. That is what tell us this study about the rank among brothers in relation to being gay.

I am not meaning that the rank of dominance it the only variable to become gay. There most be other variables as well. I am thinking that the oxitocine can play also some role in this. Other variables can be that some "receptors" in the brain are faulty and are blind that it exists enough testosterone in the blood to make you a top dog. In this case, the faulty receptor makes you behave like you were lacking in testosterone. But your body frame, your strong bones, and bulky muscles can indicate that you have enough testosterone. Nevertheless you can be a huge queen or something. I had seen a few of these cases.

That's why I say that there is something more than mere dominance and merely an amount of testosterone in the blood.

By the way, the normal spread of levels in testosterone, can go from 250 ng/dl (nanograms per deciliter) to 1,250 ng/dl. Then, this great difference can a explain a lot about our behavior. So the average value of testosterone levels is about 750 ng/dl With only a little fraction (5% ?) having between 1000 and 1250 ng/dl While only a small fraction has between 250 and 500. These values are normal spread and refers only to about 70% of a population. Then, 15% have levels well below 250 ng/dl and yet another 15% would had levels over 1250. Probably till 1500 or more in the extreme.

Then, this wide range of levels in testosterone can explain a lot of things.

My theory is that high levels of testosterone made you a bad student.

On the other hand, very low levels of testosterone are not good either to be a good student, for your self esteem would be to low, and even your expectations to achieve something difficult.

 

Nevertheless, I postulated in other post, the condition of being dominant can be depressed or enhanced depending on the personal circumstances. I mean, it can be depressed or enhanced, over the layout of basic genetics. If you are often bullied by your peers, for whatever reason, your sense of dominance shrinks easily.

Then, a bully can start its career by bullying his younger brothers, and not being stopped by a father or a stern mother. Most parents ignore the circumstances among his children at home. They don't even care what happened to them in school.

On the other hand an only child can be a failure to being a top dog, even if his has a good combination of genes. This can happen because he lacks the training in fighting that younger brothers can provide. Then this lack of early fighting can be very bad to be dominant, for any fight whatever would scare you very easily. Then, this sort of training plays a fundamental role here. It is not different to being good at maths. If you are trained well early in life to perform this abstract operations you would be good at maths. If your training was average, your ability for maths would be average. The same is valid for a total lack of training. You will be very bad at learning maths.

 

In any case, the condition of being a top dog is mostly genetic, but it can be also relative. There is not any contradiction. I base this idea in something I told in my former post. When a top bully or a bunch of bullies met other bullies a lot stronger than they and more aggressive, their rank in dominance plummets. For the dominance of the bullies in a place, like a high school, is mostly fed by an absence of challenges.

When you consider the bunch of bullies of a high school, you could observe that they never met any challengers.

We can consider the as potential bullies a bunch of black thugs. But the most probably is that this thugs had dropped out of school to sell drugs or other business. On the other hand, while there is not any law for a bunch of new white bullies to be challenged by other bunch of white bullies, in the case that the challengers were blacks, it would cause an alarm, and the head of school would call the police, reporting the black bullies for harassment to the white bullies. That is why we see rarely this type of interracial fights.

Then the solution is a form of apartheid. The races are divided in an invisible limit, among white and blacks. There has to be on a hand the white bullies and the other the black bullies. That is what happens in prisons, for what I had seen in videos and written stories.

 

The case of dismissed dominance can be observed when a team of three young lion brothers kick out of his land the older lions with residence in a pride. They do that after a fight of five to ten minutes. It is very easy.

Then the losers left with their tail in their hind legs to die of hunger in a some days or weeks. They feel suddenly depressed and loose all faith in their abilities to hunt and survive.

That could happened to any of the bullies of a high school if they are put into a prison full of most scary thugs.

[West Coast Dude]

I thought this was a cute little article about birth order. I've always found birth order theory to be pretty fascinating, but I've never seen it applied to dating.Birth Order and Love Life

 

In terms of my own family, they got it pretty much right about the two oldest, but the middle child is not in any way dependable. My oldest neice, who's an only child, hasn't started dating yet so I can't really judge for that, either.

 

I went through a lot of angst a couple of years ago about being the last-born, so I really read up on birth order to fully understand why my older siblings really just loved to boss me around so much, even at the age of 20. It can all be pop psychology bunk, but from my own experience it tends to be true...only children are usually very mature, intelligent, and well-spoken for their age. The first-borns tend to be best at leading people, and tend to have perfectionist personalities...Adam P. is such a perfect example of the first-born type. Middle kids seem to be the ones that are all over the place. And the family babies tend to be the off-beat, fun-loving ones.

 

Kind of a cool idea to think that your birth order can explain your own personality quirks, no?

 

 

 

There's also a video on youtube that says like kids are more likely gay if they are the younger ones in the family...