UC questions? - Page 5 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 150 Old 05-05-2006, 07:10 PM
 
CryPixie83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: drifting away...
Posts: 3,163
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bluefish
I did talk about my past birth, but it sure wasn't encouraged. 2 days after it happened MIL was telling my dh "I just needed to get over it!"
Grrrr MILs suck..... Of course my MIL got all offended when she was severely "shushed" for closing the squeeeeeaking door (multiple times) during a contractions
CryPixie83 is offline  
#122 of 150 Old 05-05-2006, 07:50 PM
 
JesseMomme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I had to have Dh kick MIL out of the L&D room - she just waltzed right in there! It's one thing to birth for an audience but to have your monster in law around, no way!
Quote:
I know what you mean. NFP is such a way of life for me that it's hard to imagine that other women don't know what their cervixes are doing today! LOL. I did talk about my past birth, but it sure wasn't encouraged. 2 days after it happened MIL was telling my dh "I just needed to get over it!"
I dont know what may cervix is doing : I just check CM. Of course I've felt it before...it's just that I'm lazy and don't do that often

Getting over it...my mom would say that to me a lot. When I was rebelling and saying heck with you all I'm having the baby at home, everyone started saying oh no! I don't think she's "over" the first birth. Ya think? Then I talked about all the things I didn't like with ds2's birth and she was blown away because she thought the whole thing was just beautiful. Well, I just needed to "get over it". I had PPD, twice she said "You need to get over it!" to that.

So, I had very little in the way of real life support. My few close friends didn't even have kids yet, and probably thought I'd totally lost my mind talking about UC. Dh was the only one I could talk to about anything, which helped...and at least ds2's birth totally opened his eyes as well - "so that's what Jessica was talking about!"

SO yes I agree in this society one isn't really "allowed" to have negative feelings about what they even feel is a "good" birth. Get over it already, you have a healthy baby.
JesseMomme is offline  
#123 of 150 Old 05-05-2006, 09:21 PM
 
2bluefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I do have to hand it to my MIL. Over this past year and half, she has changed her tune. She saw a program on tv on waterbirth, and it really helped her understand a little better what my deal is with natural birth. We've had some nice conversations *this* pregnancy. I've actually shared more info with her than I will with my own mom - not UC though. She had alot of repressed stuff about her births - when her second was crowning the nurses held her legs shut and told her to wait the doc wasn't there yet. She broke her tailbone and found the recovery very difficult. :-(
2bluefish is offline  
#124 of 150 Old 05-05-2006, 10:44 PM
 
Kundalini-Mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LOVING LIFE and oh, so thankful!!!
Posts: 2,772
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by OtherMother'n'Madre
Would I do it over? Not only yes but hell yes. I feel horribly guilty about my birth and even now a year later it makes me cry. I won't ever be able to tell my daughter what it was like to have her. I was passed out as she was born. My memories are heresay from my equally distraught husband. Would I do it over? My god yes. To know I could have done it by getting some support kills me. I could have called my sister and I did think about it but I didn't. I just needed someone to tell I COULD do it. That's all. A phone call would have helped me fulfill something I felt I NEEDED.
I'm so sorry
Kundalini-Mama is offline  
#125 of 150 Old 05-05-2006, 11:45 PM
 
MamaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I shouldn't post, as I haven't read all the previous posts on this thread. I'm sorry...
I just noticed one thought on the first page, that kind of irritated me. Forgive my comments if they have previously been voiced.

Somewhere I read on this thread, that most of the doula's clients were *happy* with their hospital births. I'm not sure what that has to do with UC. My PERCEPTION of happiness has little effect on any aspect of my life. Talk to my four year old. He would tell you that he is happy with a lunch of OREOs. That doesn't mean that eating OREOs is healthy or anything else. It simply means that in his perception, he is happy with eating them. Most of your clients would never have the opportunity to see if they would be *happier* with something else.
And regardless of how they *felt*, UC birth is about much more than a feeling. My feelings on birth don't influence my reality that I want the safest environment for my children, my husband and myself. That includes our emotional, physical and spiritual well being. Birth without an attendant can be about safety, integrity, respect, modesty, love and healing. I have yet to see a hospital birth that touched on all of those things.
MamaT is offline  
#126 of 150 Old 05-06-2006, 12:11 AM
 
cravenab00's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,905
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaT
I shouldn't post, as I haven't read all the previous posts on this thread. I'm sorry...
I just noticed one thought on the first page, that kind of irritated me. Forgive my comments if they have previously been voiced.

Somewhere I read on this thread, that most of the doula's clients were *happy* with their hospital births. I'm not sure what that has to do with UC. My PERCEPTION of happiness has little effect on any aspect of my life. Talk to my four year old. He would tell you that he is happy with a lunch of OREOs. That doesn't mean that eating OREOs is healthy or anything else. It simply means that in his perception, he is happy with eating them. Most of your clients would never have the opportunity to see if they would be *happier* with something else.
And regardless of how they *felt*, UC birth is about much more than a feeling. My feelings on birth don't influence my reality that I want the safest environment for my children, my husband and myself. That includes our emotional, physical and spiritual well being. Birth without an attendant can be about safety, integrity, respect, modesty, love and healing. I have yet to see a hospital birth that touched on all of those things.

wife to my awesome DH, homeschooling, unassisted birthing, food growing, life loving mama to 5 crazy monkeys. :
cravenab00 is offline  
#127 of 150 Old 05-06-2006, 03:39 AM
 
mamabear3's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds
Well, they do. I think the question (and maybe this is what you meant) is really, "why don't they tell their real stories?" Several reasons I think, some of which I mentioned previously: because it's too painful; because they are in denial; because they don't feel "allowed" to have negative feelings about what is supposed to be a happy event; because by the time they've figured it out there are no convenient opportunities to revist it (in other words, everybody is expecting a birth story right after the birth, so there is a space that already exists for it, but a year later, you have to go to some effort to make that space -- it doesn't just occur naturally in casual conversation); because people don't really want to hear anger coming from women; because people don't understand why it matters and therefore tend to be dismissive, which hurts; because people tend to try to "fix" it or criticize rather than than simply sympathize; because the mother doesn't want to alienate others in the birth community; because she doesn't want to be seen as a "failure"; because she doesn't want to make the midwife or other birth attendants (like the husband) feel bad...

anybody got any others?
I am new to this forum and have been reading the UC posts to hopefully learn more! I have had homebirths, but not UC, so I can only respond to this particular part of the thread with my own experience!

I felt ecstatic with my experience right after it (intervention free home water birth- Midwife attended) until I learned that my husband had been shoved aside and was really upset about the whole thing. I guess I didn't really understand how upsetting it was.

I had "fought" with everyone I knew about the benefits of homebirth and to just let me have my birth. I felt like everyone (friends, family, church members, etc) were waiting for something bad to happen. Afterwards I only told everyone all of the GREAT things about my birth in hopes of changing peoples perceptions. I had no forum for really expressing my disappointment.

Fast forward 14 mths after the birth. I was in Doula training and we were discussing helping our clients process negative birth experiences or hard feelings regarding it. I broke down sobbing! I was so surprised that I was that upset about it. Fortunetely, I was surrounded by homebirthing, kind hearted women who TOTALLY understood why I was upset. No one diminished it and our instructor let me deal with my hurt feelings. It felt so good!

I honestly think that has brought me much closer to wanting a UC. I am much more in tune with what I expect from those around me for this birth and hope that things go as planned! Otherwise, You will all hear more from me!

I feel sad that there are not more places where women can process negative feelings IRL, where they can be surrounded by women who can solidify their feelings.

Thanks for letting me share and hopefully this isn't too OT!
mamabear3 is offline  
#128 of 150 Old 05-06-2006, 09:49 AM
 
pageta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 2,699
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Okay, this may be a dumb question, but wouldn't it make sense that the more people you have at your birth, the more opportunity there is for them to complicate things? If you're just by yourself, no one is there to mess with you. Yes, a doula may mean well and fully intend to help your birth be a good experience. But people are human and they can do dumb things that can really irritate you. I think when you're in a lot of pain, you're even more prone to irritation. So doesn't it make sense that you would want to have as much privacy as possible? I just totally don't understand the people who talk about who they're inviting and what they (the mother giving birth) should wear in order to be modest. But even people who are there with a purpose can be a hindrance rather than a help. My ideal birth is still when my dh does not know I'm in labor and I give birth at home - he is terrified of birth and I really hate to admit this but I long for the old days when the fathers got to sit in the waiting room.

The doula I had at my first birth just rubbed me wrong, and I knew that before I gave birth. I'm still glad I had a doula because I needed someone to guide me through what was happening. This time I don't need that. I've been able to learn well beyond what I knew the first time.

Here's another dumb illustration that keeps coming to mind: buying or selling a house with a realtor or by owner. When we sold our house and bought this one, we sold with a realtor. She was a wonderful realtor. I had been renting when the house I was in went up for sale and she was one of the realtors who showed it. The other realtors - they were rude and you would not believe the tacky things they said about the house. She, on the other hand, was so professional, so personable, so genuine - I was really impressed. So we hired her to sell our house for us. The house we bought, on the other hand, was for sale by owner. As the transactions progressed, it became clear which was the "easier" route. With the transaction with realtors involved, if a problem came up, the company with the problem (insurance, termite, bank, whoever) talked to the buyers who talked to their realtor who talked to our realtor who talked to us and we told our realtor what to tell their realtor what to tell the buyer to tell the company that was causing the trouble. Talk about impossible! We got screwed so bad on a couple of issues because communication was impossible! With our purchase, on the other hand, I called up the other owner directly and everything was so easy to handle. Both transactions had glitches, but in one they were mountains and in the other they were just molehills. Now obviously, if you sell by owner, you have to know a bit more about the process - the best place to advertise, what to ask for a price, and so forth. But doing that little bit of homework is so worth the hassle you save yourself, in my opinion. I think it's the same way with birth professionals. You can have the most wonderful people and be happy with an attended birth if you don't want to go to the trouble of figuring out how to do things yourself. I think a lot of women have wonderful births like that, though there are also a lot of horror stories about stupid things professionals do. Or you can do a little extra homework and not have to worry about some well-meaning person doing something that ended up being really stupid. I mean, people are not perfect.

So while I can understand why some people might have "wonderful births" with attendants present, I can also totally understand why there are those of us who would rather be left alone, no matter how wonderful the attendants may be. I don't think you have to have a horrible birth experience in order to long for a UC, though most of us seem to learn about UC as a result of some bad experience. I think you can have beautiful births, call them such, and still long for a UC. There are people who like Hershey's chocolate and think it's great - I studied in Europe for a quarter and learned about European chocolate, and let me tell you, Hershey's chocolate tastes like soap to me so I refuse to eat it. But I know all sorts of people who eat Hershey's chocolate and think its great.

Tana, wife to Steve (5/02), mom to Ben (7/03), Joey (10/06) and Caroline (9/09)
pageta is offline  
#129 of 150 Old 05-06-2006, 11:18 AM
 
Synchro246's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You know I never really answered the origional question (though I have never HAD an UC myself).

"I don't think you have to have a horrible birth experience in order to long for a UC, though most of us seem to learn about UC as a result of some bad experience." Pageta

I knew about homebirth from my older sister. I went to the library some years later and happened upon UC. I found the whole sexuality aspect intriguing. I also thought about all the animals in my life who had given birth- they all hid. My dad grew up on a farm and he said that any time you accidently scared a cow in labor that her labor would slow or stop.

UC is in harmony with biology. Our instincts tell us to birth (semi-)alone, it's our culture that insists we need so much help. I am in no way saying that a midwife or even a doctor can't be helpful (I'm planning on being a midwife). Attendants can be a hinderance- it's just biology that makes it this way.

Human birth is a double edged sword. We have all this biology telling us to birth alone (or with minimal/close people) AND we have a fairly new configuration (upright walking/big brains) that, although very sucessful, is buffered by the fact that the anatomy isn't as ideal for birth as other mammals. Thankfully, this setup has been around long enough that it's more than fine for >90% of women. Women in that 90% who have quality nutrition are probably best off delivering without an attendant. This is provided that they haven't succumed to the fear of birth that permeates our culture (because fear hinders birth).

I think someone who chooses UC is usually not afraid of birth and is just following her natural instincts. (now referencing Pageta's quote above) I think sometimes it takes a bad experience for a woman to be aware of her natural instincts.

~laura
and planning to eat it again
Synchro246 is offline  
#130 of 150 Old 05-06-2006, 01:41 PM
 
2bluefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I learned about UC at the same time I learned about homebirth. It just made perfect sense that I would UC. I'm a "do it yourself" kind of gal - dh is too. But dh was not on board - I think he was worried about what everyone else would think. So I found a midwife who had had UCs - next best thing, right? Maybe it was the next best thing. I can't imagine trusting anyone else at my birthing. However, it is not the *same* as UC, and that can be emphasized enough. (I have other thoughts on this, but I'm going to post them in my 'tangent'.) My previous birth has little bearing on why I am *choosing* UC - I'm not doing it to "fix" something. My previous birth has actually in some ways paved the way for me to have a successful UC this time - because there were some issues in my life and marriage that needed to be resolved, and they were indentified and resolved through that birthing process. For me a move to UC is not a "running from" but an "evolution toward" - how about others who have had previous attended births?
2bluefish is offline  
#131 of 150 Old 05-06-2006, 02:49 PM
 
cottonwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
For me a move to UC is not a "running from" but an "evolution toward" - how about others who have had previous attended births?
I think there *is* a common misperception that all UC is a reaction to having been treated badly by care providers. As I mentioned earlier, my second birth, which was attended by a midwife (and her assistant,) was healing and empowering. It wasn't a bad experience in any way. But there were some things missing. So, no, it's not a "running from", it's just realizing that it can't give me these things, and this other choice can.
cottonwood is offline  
#132 of 150 Old 05-06-2006, 02:59 PM
 
babykaoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by djinneyah
i want to be free to follow my instincts, and i would feel inhibited by having a midwife present, like i'm supposed to be performing for her. this is how i feel around *any* type of medical professional, a midwife would be no different in my eyes.

my husband, family, and friends are supportive of my decision

Sarah- following my bliss, mama to 3 :
Dd to Ds: "Let's have a snack party! I got us chips, and a hammer!"
babykaoss is offline  
#133 of 150 Old 05-07-2006, 07:28 AM
 
amm0406's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I haven't had a UC but am considering it. I had a C-section with my first child and no hospitals in my area are very supportive of VBACs, I can't afford a midwife to do an HBAC, and none of the hospitals in my area offer private rooms and privacy is important to me in the bonding period with my family. Lastly, I am Native American and while some women did have midwives or others in the tribe to help them give birth, many women would go squat behind a tree, have their baby, wrap it up, and go back to the home to clean, cook, and take care of the kids. That's just the way it was. If women could do it then, why couldn't we do it now?
amm0406 is offline  
#134 of 150 Old 05-07-2006, 10:31 AM
 
JesseMomme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds
I think there *is* a common misperception that all UC is a reaction to having been treated badly by care providers. As I mentioned earlier, my second birth, which was attended by a midwife (and her assistant,) was healing and empowering. It wasn't a bad experience in any way. But there were some things missing. So, no, it's not a "running from", it's just realizing that it can't give me these things, and this other choice can.
Interesting. My "running from" eventually became an "evolving into" as time wore on. By the time I was pregnant with Ds3 (preg #3) I was more evolved than "runny"
JesseMomme is offline  
#135 of 150 Old 05-07-2006, 10:36 AM
 
JesseMomme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: not here anymore
Posts: 8,278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by amm0406
That's just the way it was. If women could do it then, why couldn't we do it now?
Exactly. Birth was just a way of life, not a trial to be feared and overmanaged, or managed at all.
JesseMomme is offline  
#136 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 12:56 PM
 
georgia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: tl;dr
Posts: 26,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In an effort to maintain the comfort of those who do choose UC, please remember that the intent of this forum is not to denigrate the choice of Unassisted Childbirth in any way. A discussion of attended birth can be hosted in the main Birth and Beyond forum.

If you see any posts that are not in keeping with the spirit of the UC Forum, please don't respond to the thread, but rather report it to either me or annakiss by PM or use the "Report Post" triangular button at the bottom lower left of the screen.

Thanks for your cooperation.

I have retired from administration work, so if you have a question about anything MDC-related, please contact Cynthia Mosher. Thanks!
 
georgia is offline  
#137 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 02:22 PM
 
barefoot mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,528
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
<<<Human birth is a double edged sword. We have all this biology telling us to birth alone (or with minimal/close people) AND we have a fairly new configuration (upright walking/big brains) that, although very sucessful, is buffered by the fact that the anatomy isn't as ideal for birth as other mammals. Thankfully, this setup has been around long enough that it's more than fine for >90% of women. Women in that 90% who have quality nutrition are probably best off delivering without an attendant. This is provided that they haven't succumed to the fear of birth that permeates our culture (because fear hinders birth).>>>


Just curious.....
I've heard people say this before- that our anatomy is not ideal for birth. Why is that? I have to say I personally have a very difficult time believing it would be anything but perfect. What is this statement based on?

Not criticizing......honestly curious where this comes from

sorry- couldn't quite figure out the quote thing
barefoot mama is offline  
#138 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 02:35 PM
 
Synchro246's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's just that upright walking has made our pelvic opening smaller than semi-upright or fourlegged walking (which was around much longer). This upright walking was so advantagous for us that it outweighed the slightly harder birth. Same is said for brain size. Big brains are such an advantage that more people lived with them than those who had smaller brains, the trade off is that the baby must be born at a more immature age than it would be.
No evolution is "perfect", but the benefits of the evolution always outweigh the previous state, or the evolution would not have occured.

This can be said for almost anything. It takes more energy and more genetic material to create two organs when one would do the trick, but having two organs pays off big when one defects. Moles are blind because they don't really need to see in the dark and it takes less energy and genetic material NOT to make eyes. The jaguar is fast, but at the expense of stregnth.

I think our bodies are near perfect for birth, but we have traded up-right walking and big brains for the really easy birth that most other animals experience.

~laura
and planning to eat it again
Synchro246 is offline  
#139 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 02:51 PM
 
2bluefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Interesting - I'm glad *I'm* the product of an intelligent designer! LOL ;-)
2bluefish is offline  
#140 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 03:06 PM
 
cottonwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm skeptical too. My pelvis is plenty big enough for a baby's head to come through, and I suspect I'm not an anomaly in that sense. Yes, our anatomy (not to mention our high-functioning neocortex) doubtless makes birth different from us than for other mammals. But it's wild animals, or domesticated animals that are allowed to birth in private (although possibly less so because they are more sedentary,) that have such easy births. Watched/managed animal births often have difficulties similar to human watched/managed births.
cottonwood is offline  
#141 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 03:28 PM
 
Synchro246's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
True. My pelvis is BIG too. Good thing because my kiddo's head was HUGE. I think my birth would have gone more smoothly had I not been watched.

~laura
and planning to eat it again
Synchro246 is offline  
#142 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 03:46 PM
 
Godiva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Finally home :-)
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yeah, I have what some refer to as "birthin hips", obviously a product of my evolution to birth babies easily. Why are men attracted to the "36 24 36" woman? because it's his instinct to find a woman who is fit, has big hips for easy birthing and large breasts for ability to nurse a baby (which I know small breasted women nurse just as well, I am fairly small myself) Believe it or not, but our instincts are to find mates suitable for good childbearing so our evoluion will continue for the better.
Godiva is offline  
#143 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 04:19 PM
 
Synchro246's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
1) it's funny how far off track this thread has gone from the OP

2) baily- you made me think of "I like big butts and I cannot lie. All you other brother's can't deny. . ."

~laura
and planning to eat it again
Synchro246 is offline  
#144 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 05:00 PM
 
cottonwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(which I know small breasted women nurse just as well, I am fairly small myself)

Right, so to put words in your mouth what you mean is that men have an instinct to look for protuberant breasts as a signal that the mother is developmentally ready to care for a baby. In a society with little in the way of verbal communication and social affectations, which would have been the case when these instincts were evolving, there would be very few cues to determine this other than the form of the body. A woman with very small breasts could be confused with an adolescent girl; safer (from a survival point of view -- that is, survival of the woman and child) to go with the woman who was obviously biologically ready to bear a child.
cottonwood is offline  
#145 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 05:00 PM
 
Godiva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Finally home :-)
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
HAHA I used to listen to that song all the time at highschool dances!
Godiva is offline  
#146 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 05:00 PM
 
2bluefish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
LOL, I have a big pelvis and big breasts - big tummy too though - sorry dh :-)
2bluefish is offline  
#147 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 05:02 PM
 
cottonwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Man, you guys are kids. I'm so old I only know that song from Shrek.
cottonwood is offline  
#148 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 05:03 PM
 
Godiva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Finally home :-)
Posts: 1,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds
(which I know small breasted women nurse just as well, I am fairly small myself)

Right, so to put words in your mouth what you mean is that men have an instinct to look for protuberant breasts as a signal that the mother is developmentally ready to bear and care for a baby. In a society with little in the way of verbal communication and social affectations, which would have been the case when these instincts were evolving, there would be very few cues to determine this other than the form of the body. A woman with very small breasts could be confused with an adolescent girl; safer (from a survival point of view -- that is, survival of the woman and child) to go with the woman who was obviously biologically ready to bear a child.
Yes, lol you said it much better.
Godiva is offline  
#149 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 05:08 PM
 
cottonwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
safer (from a survival point of view -- that is, survival of the woman and child) to go with the woman who was obviously biologically ready to bear a child.
Well, and I ought to clarify that the reason why this is, is that being able to conceive doesn't mean being developmentally able to bear safely. I don't know why that would be. But whatever the reason, for men to be instinctively sexually attracted to women with protuberant sexual zones is a safeguard against that.
cottonwood is offline  
#150 of 150 Old 05-08-2006, 05:15 PM
 
Synchro246's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fourlittlebirds
Well, and I ought to clarify that the reason why this is, is that being able to conceive doesn't mean being developmentally able to bear safely. I don't know why that would be. But whatever the reason, for men to be instinctively sexually attracted to women with protuberant sexual zones is a safeguard against that.
Maybe because the life expectancy of humans was so much shorter before that women who's genetics risked earlier puberty had some increase in # of children born. Perhaps it's another fine example of evolution with tradeoffs.

~laura
and planning to eat it again
Synchro246 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off