Feel ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTED stories

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by cobl04

I know that, I meant conscious as in "alive"... wrong word.

That's what nathan's problem is. A newborn baby is alive and awake, but it doesn't yet have consciousness. Until 2 months or so, they act purely on instinct. They don't take stock of their surroundings and make conscious reactions to them. They have no working memory. For lack of a better term, they're on autopilot

[cobl04]

^what I wish I'd said.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by nathan1977

No. Mom-shaming constitutes mom-shaming.

"Fucking moron."

"That woman is an idiot."

"Idiotic."

"Insane."

"Dick hooks."

"People like these should be barred from ever having children."

And the more colorful commentaries since.

Calm down. None of these statements are directed at every mother in the world, just a handful. I think you are taking this debate far too personally and making it more than it actually is.

I'm sorry for your loss, but we are not talking about life and death here. Just different forms of development in the brain that leads to consciousness.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by cobl04

^what I wish I'd said.

hahaha I knew what you were getting at

[anitram]

Originally Posted by nathan1977

No. Mom-shaming constitutes mom-shaming.

"Fucking moron."

"That woman is an idiot."

"Idiotic."

"Insane."

"Dick hooks."

"People like these should be barred from ever having children."

And the more colorful commentaries since.

???

What part of this has to do with shaming her BECAUSE she is a mother?

Her ignorance of the effects of UVA/UVB rays is related to her identity as a mother now?

You've totally lost the plot here.

[Diemen]

Ok, folks, things have gotten way too contentious in the last few pages. Let's ease off the trigger a little here.

Nathan, I appreciate that this may hit a nerve for you, but I think the comments you object to, while maybe not the most politely phrased, are not directed at all mothers, but at one mother who engages in practices that, scientifically, put her child's health at risk. Should we accept as okay any and all ideas about raising a child?

[PhilsFan]

Originally Posted by nathan1977

No. Mom-shaming constitutes mom-shaming.

"Fucking moron."

"That woman is an idiot."

"Idiotic."

"Insane."

"Dick hooks."

"People like these should be barred from ever having children."

And the more colorful commentaries since.

I know it's been said, but since it's directed at me, I just want to reply that this explanation tells me absolutely nothing. Again, all you're doing is copy and pasting the same quotes from three pages ago that I was asking you about. You seem to think this is self-explanatory, but trust me, it's not.

[Galeongirl]

Originally Posted by nathan1977

No. Mom-shaming constitutes mom-shaming.

"Fucking moron."

"That woman is an idiot."

"Idiotic."

"Insane."

"Dick hooks."

"People like these should be barred from ever having children."

And the more colorful commentaries since.

That's not mom shaming. It's idiot shaming. And the idiot in case just happens to be a mom...

Originally Posted by Diemen

Ok, folks, things have gotten way too contentious in the last few pages. Let's ease off the trigger a little here.

Nathan, I appreciate that this may hit a nerve for you, but I think the comments you object to, while maybe not the most politely phrased, are not directed at all mothers, but at one mother who engages in practices that, scientifically, put her child's health at risk. Should we accept as okay any and all ideas about raising a child?

You had me at scientifically.


But that is indeed the point we all had.

[bono_212]

Originally Posted by dan_smee

To be fair, that handicapped kid should not be killing whales in a suburban neighbourhood

Thank you for the momentary laugh.


As for the topic at hand, I do have a bit of curiosity about something, not that I have any plans, mind you, but I do wonder about something. Maybe we could start a thread for birthing practices after all, but I digress, here's the question: These "water births", my only familiarity with them comes from the show King of the Hill, actually. While I'm sure the show was a fount of factual information, I had read an article on Cracked once (man, I am batting 1.000 on great sources here), that discussed the idea that the current practices for giving birth in hospitals (e.g. in the horizontal) are completely backwards from the way women should be giving birth.

Is that correct? Is it (scientifically speaking) better to give birth in a more....for lack of a better word...squatted position? And is that the idea behind water births?

And IF that's the case, is it true that in a water birth, you have to go all the way with the naturalness of it and you can't have access to the drugs?

I, uh...am totally...not...thinking of future plans or anything here >_>

[anitram]

There is a lot of truth to the notion that you should keep moving in labour. There is also a lot of truth to the idea that doctors are too quick to induce labour with drugs which have the effect of slowing it down and making it more difficult. Definitely plenty of material for a thread.

But let us also not lose sight of the fact that women used to routinely die in labour for centuries upon centuries. So if you are one of the lucky ones who has a straightforward labour and everything is great, perfect. But there are many women for whom birthing in a pool or squatting at home is simply not a medical option. So it is never going to be a one-size-fits-all answer.

[jeevey]

As for the topic at hand, I do have a bit of curiosity about something, not that I have any plans, mind you, but I do wonder about something. Maybe we could start a thread for birthing practices after all, but I digress, here's the question: These "water births", my only familiarity with them comes from the show King of the Hill, actually. While I'm sure the show was a fount of factual information, I had read an article on Cracked once (man, I am batting 1.000 on great sources here), that discussed the idea that the current practices for giving birth in hospitals (e.g. in the horizontal) are completely backwards from the way women should be giving birth.

Is that correct? Is it (scientifically speaking) better to give birth in a more....for lack of a better word...squatted position? And is that the idea behind water births?

Standard practice in hospitals uses the 'semi lithotomy' position, which is sitting slightly reclined with the knees elevated in the same way they are for a pelvic exams. There are several reasons why this is not a great position to deliver. Your pelvic bones naturally have quite a bit of flex, mostly in the back around the tailbone. Sitting on the tailbone eliminates that flex and narrows the outlet. Moving to a forward leaning position actually allows the pelvic outlet to enlarge by something like 30%. Also semi lithotomy directs the weight of the baby's head on the perineum, increasing the incidence of tears. All those things tend to make babies slow descending and can contribute to interventions like episiotomy and vaccuum extractions, but hospitals like to use it because it's very easy for the doc to see, keeps the orientation looking the same as the medical textbook and all. It's very unusual for a woman to deliver in any other position in hospital. I know that I was bodily hoisted into it at my first birth.

Most women, if not directed otherwise, end up giving birth in some sort of upright or forward leaning posture. Hands and knees is a very common spontaneous position, which makes sense because it's the least amount of pressure for her. Sometimes if there is a really big baby with a very tight fit you end up with the woman in a very deep squat like on a stool or with a squat bar, but often you have to ask her to do it. That position puts a lot of pressure on the perineum and can increase tearing but gives the widest spread of the hip bones.

Water birth helps with those things in several ways. It's really, really relaxing so it helps with the pain a lot. It makes those forward leaning positions easier because of the lack of gravity. The warmth helps the soft tissue to stretch. For many women the privacy the water gives is a big deal- the woman is not totally exposed, and it encourages the docs to keep their hands off. Some medical staff get very handsy, often 'checking' a woman too often, sometimes without asking or even notifying her that they are going to, and some women find it impossible to focus and relax that way.

As for drugs, I think it would depend. Waterbirth and epidurals, spinal blocks or pudendal nerve blocks totally don't mix. I suppose you could have demerol/numbane if you were having a waterbirth in hospital, but most midwives or birth centers wouldn't offer it. But movement and the water (and touch) are really effective pain relief themselves, so it depends what you want.

That was really long, but if mods want to move this to a birth practices thread that's fine with me.

[jeevey]

Also, nathan, I am sorry for the loss of your baby and also so sorry that you didn't get a little more humane respect in here about it. I get that people like to discuss, but I totally don't get the uncaring aggression within this forum. I don't understand why disagreement needs to sound so much like personal opposition.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by jeevey

so sorry that you didn't get a little more humane respect in here about it.

because trying to trump an argument in that way is despicable.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by jeevey

Also, nathan, I am sorry for the loss of your baby and also so sorry that you didn't get a little more humane respect in here about it. I get that people like to discuss, but I totally don't get the uncaring aggression within this forum. I don't understand why disagreement needs to sound so much like personal opposition.

How did he get no humane respect here? No one laughed at what happened to one of his kids or insult him. I really don't know how you can say that.

Does FYM get aggressive here? Sure, it does. It always has been. Does it get personal? Yeah, if you offend someone, say something that doesn't make sense, or if you take a comment the wrong way. This is no different from many online forums.

It sounds like you are hijacking Nathan's posts so you can complain that FYM doesn't go the way you want it to go. That sounds very selfish.

[PhilsFan]

Originally Posted by jeevey

I don't understand why disagreement needs to sound so much like personal opposition.

I think it's offensive to make strawman arguments and ignore the posts of the people you disagree with.

[LJT]

It's not disgusting, just very creepy, it's like the prelude of a serial killer. A guy is running round Birmingham stabbing random women with an ordinary needle, most of the time in the thigh/backside area. Just the once then gone.

Birmingham needle attacks: man may have struck 11 times, police say | UK news | theguardian.com

[bono_212]

Am I seeing things, or are they wearing ICP makeup?



God, the implications of them doing that are so scary. What if they're reusing the same needle, or one thing...

[deep]

this is heart breaking

[cobl04]

Trans woman invents a revolutionary golf club. Grantland journalist decides she's a little bit strange and decides to "investigate" her private life, because he's a "reporter". Despite her protests, he threatens to out her as a trans woman with a few inconsistencies in her story. She kills herself, and the journalist seems completely oblivious to the fact that he's likely contributed to her suicide. He seems to think the "story" is worth telling. What the fuck does someone's gender have to do with a golf club?

Read and vomit.

Dr. V’s Magical Putter «

[Vlad n U 2]

And INDY says transphobia is a made up term and not real at all. Right.