The Sex-Ratio in Human Populations 
1:1, from the point of view of maximum reproductivity, is 
simply a waste of male biomass. Biologically, it can be argued 
that there are something like a million tons of unnecessary men 
in this country alone. The record production of a woman is 
said to be something over 50 children, a total much increased 
by the birth of twins and triplets which could not normally be 
relied on. A fertile man, on the other hand, could easily father 
500 children, or considerably more if he got himself properly 
organized. Possibly, therefore, in man a ratio of one male to ten 
females would ensure maximum reproductivity in relation to 
biomass and a ratio of this kind might therefore expect to have 
a substantial survival value. 
This thought raises two further queries: one social, one bio- 
logical. First, what social changes and ultimate social organiza- 
tion would be brought about in man by a permanent sex-ratio 
of 10 males per 100 females? Obviously universal polygamy 
would be inevitable and the moral and legal codes relating to 
sexuality would change accordingly. Monogamy rather than 
polygamy would become the social crime, and men, like drone 
bees, would be expected to do little except reproduce their kind. 
Women would do the work as well as bear the children, as in 
fact happens at present in many primitive peoples, and the 
complications of surtax would be unimaginable. 
All this may be good extrapolation, but in fact we are stuck 
with the chromosome mechanism. What then can be done about 
controlling the sex-ratio to individual wishes or national needs? 
It may be that, sometime in the future, biological science will 
solve the problem of breeding XX female-producing males or 
obtaining parthenogenetic humans which, according to theory, 
would inevitably be female. More likely, it may become pos- 
sible to accentuate the factors, if any, which affect the ratio of 
normal mature spermatozoa produced by the testis. But the 
only procedure at present even remotely in sight is the in vitro 
separation of X- and Y-spermatozoa, combined with artificial 
insemination. As this would not necessarily involve donor 
insemination, it might be socially acceptable. Claims to have 
separated animal or human spermatozoa into two groups by 
97 
