C-sections result in more gay male babies. You've never heard this before because they refuse to study because they are afraid it may turn out to be true... During delivery, the mother forces a huge amount of hormones and other important things to the baby on its way out! It is believed during C-sections that the hormones and other stuff not being forced into the baby during delivery is creating an absence that is later displayed as a homosexual male. True or not true. Concerned or not concerned. You will never know the truth until the medical community is politically-incorrect enough to research it... In the meantime, how many male kids have you known the past 15 years who are gay. Now how many were c-sections? You don't need a huge government research project to get an indication of the uncomfortable truth...

For my final month of pregnancy in June 2010, I had the experience of fighting to avoid a Caesarian delivery when my daughter was diagnosed breech in utero instead of relaxing and resting leading up to the birth of my first child. I was terribly upset because I am hoping to have as many as four (and knew many doctors frown on VBAC), not to mention that my family history had my kin with super easy and short deliveries and that was the most desirable potential outcome. I lived in a 3 story walk up and was very concerned about being alone with a newborn and recovering from surgery with so many steps, something my doctor didn't consider at all, and I planned to exclusively breastfeed my baby (something that Caesarians can interfere with). The doctors of course, jumped immediately to schedule a Caesarian once they saw that my fetus was breech without mentioning any other ideas. I did my own research in books and on the internet and insisted on a ECV (external cephalic version). Once I reached 37 weeks, this was done in a hospital where nurses regaled me with every detail of every potential bad outcomes and I had to sign releases stating that I would not hold the hospital responsible if I or my child were injured, or worse killed. I was treated like I was crazy for not wanting the surgery. I was determined and went forward--the chances of these bad outcomes were considerably less than the potential surgical complications in a Caesarian. Throughout the planning for the ECV, everyone made known their opinion that I was "selfish" for not merely taking the doctor at their word and trying to pursue a positive "birth experience." Even my pointing out that statistically my chances were worse with the surgery didn't sway anyone. Finally with the injection of a muscle relaxant and three doctors literally manhandling my abdomen, my daughter was successfully turned, despite her fighting the effort. I was offered no pain medication or epidural during this process. It was excruciating and I had the distinct feeling that I was being "punished" for insisting on the process. But I left happy and hopeful that the baby would not turn back at nearly 38 weeks. I went into labor 10 days later and my daughter had the last laugh as she was sunny side up for over 24 hours of slow labor, which included 2 hours of pushing. After 16 hours of back labor, I had an epidural to rest and prepare for pushing. So in the end, I didn't get my easy quick vaginal delivery nor did I have to deal with surgery. Because I've had one breech child the chances of another are much, much higher in my case, so I may have to revisit this again. Most likely I will insist upon pain relief and subsequent ECVs if this occurs. I'm very glad I did everything possible to avoid surgery. But I'm disappointed that I had to suggest the ECV and that I wasn't offered pain relief during that process (I hear this is standard in other countries where an ECV is always attempt