Posted on 10/23/2006 9:03:42 AM PDT by Pharmboy
Blue-eyed men prefer blue-eyed women, apparently because eye color can help reveal whether their partner has been faithful, researchers said on Monday.
"Before you request a paternity test, spend a few minutes looking at your child's eye color," Bruno Laeng and colleagues at the University of Tromso in Norway said in the study.
Under the laws of genetics, two parents with blue eyes will always have blue-eyed children, it said. So a blue-eyed man can know his blue-eyed wife or partner has cheated on him if their child has brown eyes.
"Blue-eyed men may have unconsciously learned to value a physical trait that can facilitate recognition of own kin," the scientists said in the journal Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.
The scientists asked 88 students to rate the attractiveness of models based on pictures manipulated so that half of them had blue eyes and the other half had brown eyes. The blue-eyed men in the group showed a preference for blue-eyed women.
But brown-eyed men, who cannot find any clues about paternity from a child's eye color, had no preferences by eye color. Women showed no preference for brown- or blue-eyed men, irrespective of their own eye color.
A quarter of children born to two brown-eyed parents who have both brown and blue-eye genes among their ancestors will have blue eyes. The rest will be brown.
In a second study, 443 young adults of both sexes were asked about the eye color of their partners -- blue-eyed men were also the group with the highest proportion of partners with the same eye color.
"My daughters have blue eyes, but their eggs can also carry the brown eyed gene because of their dad."
Nope. If they have truely blue eyes, they have two "blue" alles.
(Each sperm carries 1/2 of your husband's DNA. Just happens that the 1/2 they got was "blue")
The other possibility is that your daughters don't have "true" blue eyes, but rather hazel --- a mixture of blue/brown.
Your family is too complex. You should be presented to a genetics class and see if they can figure it out. ;-)
I agree, I think Suri looks part Asian. But Katie's eyes just are very much like that, like Suri's. Maybe Tom's donor-helper was an Asian man?
Same here, except I'm the wife (blue-eyed), my husband has blue eyes, and we have 3 blue-eyed kids ;-). And yes, my dating preference before I met my husband was for blue-eyed guys.
That happened in our family too. My dad has blue eyes, my mom has hazel eyes, and one of my sisters has brown eyes. Hazel is the dominant gene and would possible "cause" the brown eyes.
Department of the Obvious...
My sister (gray eyes) and her hubby (blue) have 4 children, 3 blue-eyed, 1 green-eyed. Her inlaws are both brown-eyed.
I have red hair and it skipped a generation in my family. My dad has Norwegian genes and he has a red beard (when he grows it), but he was a towhead as a child then turned darker as he got older. Same for my husband, who has Scots and Sicilian genetics.
You can't make this stuff up!
As a good dad should. He was the honorable one in the family, obviously.
Oh, haha, I didn't know. :-)
No he doesn't. The writer of this stupid article does but not my brother in law, who understands biology very well.
You, meanwhile, need to read my post.
Cool website!
LOL
That's what I am thinking :)
This article is correct, as is my post.
The remaining possibility, discussed in the many posts you did not read, is that one or both parents do not have true blue eyes, but rather hazel eyes that look blue.
I read the hazel-eye comments but they were irrelevant. I told the story of my sister and her husband and their kids and their grandfather, using them as a concrete example. But like an nosy old woman looking for conflict and interested in abusing others, you imputed motives all through my post that were not there and never were issues.
I did not say my brother in law had any lack of understanding of the science of Mendel or any other science. YOU, however, very rudely and out of the blue, with NO basis for your accusations, accused my brother in law of not understanding science. You had NO basis for this. I'm correcting you because you are accusing people YOU DO NOT KNOW of not knowing the most basic elements of science. You are wrong. You probably don't want to take this any further because you are going to continue being wrong and being corrected no matter how many times you try to cover up your old-womanish busybodying that has NOTHING to do with anyone you know. Don't insult my relatives, particularly with baseless charges. Go insult your own relatives. Mine aren't ignorant.
Look, here is your statement:
"My sister has blue eyes and so does her husband. But her son has brown eyes and it's because one of her parents (my dad) had brown eyes."
Now, to have truely blue eyes, one must have two recessive blue allels --- bb.
Sister = bb
Bro-in-law = bb
You will only get blue eyes. Period.
In the case of your sister having true blue eyes, the brown color of the your and your sister's father's eyes is irrellevant, other than as a statistical oddity.
(The reason for this is that each sperm carries only 1/2 of the DNA set of the father, as does each egg, albeit for the mother.)
Now you mention your sister's father having brown eyes.
Brown can be expressed BB, Bb, or bB.
The circumstances indicate to me that your sister is Bb --- which generally results in brown eyes ---- but can result in Hazel.
Here your sister passed on the "B," which took the normal course of being dominant and resulted in a brown-eyed kid, instead of your sister's hazel.
Oh, and before you accuse people of "not knowing the most basic elements of science," you might want to read their profile.
The Farkle family, perhaps?
Wow, that's a blast from the past. Wonder whatever happened to her...
Great minds, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.