I mean really. All that stretching, ripping, and bleeding. It would still be killing women if not for medical science. Why hasn't nature caught onto this shit and wised up?!
If a woman is physically fit and has a child standing up as nature intended, she doesn't have this pain.
As to a high probability of death in olden times, well nature didn't ever want there to be so many babies.
So in other words, OP, you want us to have giant opening between our legs?
Not in the Fifties. Remember what Patsy says in the the "Birth" episode of "Absolutely Fabulous"?
"My mother didn't give birth. She had something removed!"
[quote]I mean really. All that stretching, ripping, and bleeding.
Sounds like a typical Friday night!
So that the kid doesn't slip out before he/she is cooked.
R1 is right. "Primitive" women give birth naturally, standing up, or squatting. Within a couple of hours they are back out working in the fields.
Our male-dominated medical system put women on their backs during childbirth, making the birth much harder. Our male-dominated religious system forced them to bear far too many children, far too close together,and beginning at far too young an age.
Also civilization has discouraged nature's weeding out of weak genetic stock (thin-hipped women, etc.)
Finally, the advanced evolutionary development of the human being is also to blame. Human baby brains are relatively bigger than any other animal brain, so they have a harder time getting through the birth canal.
What, you prefer spawning and dying?
R6 is correct
Nature should make them numb from head to toe, feeling nothing. Give them a rush of endorphins. Natural drugs.
Just a couple hits of Jungle Juice and that head pops out without any issues!
because Eve was weak.
R6 is sort of right, except for the second paragraph, male dominated nonsense. He sounds like he is a literary studies grad student. Generally, each birth is easier for the mother. Adults reach their full dimensions by 18 or so, including the pelvis. I don't think the male dominate religious system is encouraging 15 year olds to have babies. It is actually better if the birth occurs while the mother is a young adult. The first birth tends to have a very long labor period, but the mother and baby usually do very well.
Because of the excellent prenatal care in the past 100 years, babies are extremely large compared to the female pelvis. This can cause pain and trauma.
According to a midwife/rn colleague, births that are done in a more natural setting (even a hospital room that looks like a bedroom helps) and with women friends and family assisting and supporting tend to be much less painful and traumatic to the mother than when labor is treated as a medical emergency.
Both R6 and R12 are right, but both left out another important modern problem. Babies nowadays are WAY too big as a result our our abundant, carb heavy diets. They should be 5-6 lbs...and WERE for most of human history. Much, much easier to deliver a 5.5 pounder than a 9.5 pounder.
you'd think they'd have a computer that could do it nowadays
Remember when they used to knock women out in the 1950s when they were getting ready to give birth? They'd wake up and the baby would be presented. They stop that when they started screaming that it was harmful to the baby.
I hate my friend Nature. She is such a cunt.
R9 I read somewhere that nature does have a mechanism which sort of overrides memory of the pain. Obviously it isn't 100% effective (remembering some of Mother's comments.)
Watch a few episodes of Call the Midwife to see how it was back in the fifties for poor women. It sucked for the most part.
[quote] He sounds like he is a literary studies grad student.
Not only wrong, but has nothing to do with anything I said.
R12 sounds like he was a STEM student who had next to no history or sociology and still thinks he knows everything.
Newborns are huge now. Ten pounders are not uncommon.
I agree, it has to do with the size of the babies -I speculate that even in ancient times, babies born in agriculturally wealthy societies to affluent women were still too large.
The hunter/gatherer children were even smaller, with a many miscarriages as well.
Anyone have any evidence that average birth weights are increasing in the US?
Last study I can find is a decrease since 1995 of 2 ounces.
I was three pounds and I'm more evolved than all of you.
"I read somewhere that nature does have a mechanism which sort of overrides memory of the pain. "
I think that's true of all pain, not just childbirth. People who have had serious temporary pain don't remember exactly what that felt like. I mean, I had peritonitis and surgery and complications and was in screaming agony for a week, and I remember that I had pain, but I don't remember exactly what it felt like. Many other people have told me the same thing - the brain doesn't retain a detailed memory of pain.
The old joke is "...and that's why women have more than one child".
I don't know nothin' 'bout birthin' babies!
There's no way it's not going to hurt, standing up or not.
R24 I was having a pretty large and deep skin tumor removed when all of a sudden he hit an area where they either missed with the anesthetic shots or it didn't take. O-M-G .. I will NEVER forget the raw wartime pain of a scalpel about .25 an inch deep and slicing.
My granny use to say that back in the "old country", women woudl have their babies in the fields under a tree during break time, and go right back to work
"Oh my God. I'm back. I'm home. All the time, it was... We finally really did it ... You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!"
We are switching to the new platform for The DataLounge this weekend. All of our mobile users have been using it for over a week and all first time users have been using it for about a month - which adds up to well over one million users. So we're ready to end this phase of the testing and move everybody to the new site. (more)
And yes, we've changed the look and some of how it operates.
Yes, we know you just *hate* it in well in advance.
Yes, we know we suck.
Yes, we are the biggest suckers that ever sucked.
But it was time for a change and with the huge shift to mobile it was long overdue. We've taken this opportunity not only to update the look but also make major changes under the hood (or "bonnet" if you're either British or pretentious or both). And we have to prepare for 2016 - a presidential election year where we can normally expect to see a 60% jump in traffic (yes, we've seen 5 presidential elections so far…Christ we're old).
The site has a bunch - nay, plethora - of new features which will make the site more usable: better search, the ability to ignore posters and threads, see link previews, to pick up a thread where you left off, spam and malware filtering and more.
If you want you can go explore and see for yourself, Click here.
And while running the tests we've noticed two interesting reactions to the new system - people are spending more time on the site and more people that come stay around longer and look at more stuff. Both good things. Yay!
Possibly we've not slain all the dragons and there will be issues that come up during the switchover. There's a help button in the lower right hand corner of the page which you can use to send us bug reports.
Please include as much information about the hardware (PC, Mac, Tablet, Phone etc), operating system (Windows, Mac OS, Android, iOS etc) and browser (Chrome, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer etc) that you are using as possible to help us replicate and fix the problem.
Please note that complaints about colors, fonts, icons and the like are not "bugs" - they are design choices that we've made and we expect one or two cases of world-class bitching. But they won't actually cause headaches, scurvy, heart attacks, Restless Leg Syndrome, Morgellon's Disease or the vapors (but have your smelling salts at hand just in case).
Talking to DataLounge servers. Please wait a moment...