I don't want to jinx it.
Wow. This is an amazing article.
My sister said that as women on her team got pregnant, they tended to fall into either the "I love the miracle of my beautiful pregnant body" or the "how long until I get a beer?" camp. I've assumed I'd be in the first camp, 'cause I have hippie tendencies and 'cause I'm just generally chill about stuff. One never knows, of course, either what the pregancy will be like or her own reaction to it. It is silly to speculate about something that isn't a current possibility and that can't be known in advance. But I was reassured to read this. And I can absolutely promise any imaginary boy who is thinking of becoming real and getting involved with me, that should we decide to be permanent and have children, I will not ask you to be the pregnant one.
UPDATE: I've been really enjoying the SLOG recently, and very very often, when I'm especially taken with a piece, it was written by Charles Mudede. Some of his posts make me tilt my head and then think 'perhaps I'll understand when I am enlightened'. A lot of his posts make me decide that he must have a gorgeous baritone voice and a huge vertical and then think 'perhaps he is single'. He had another take on the Empathy Belly article. It falls into the 'perhaps when I am enlightened' category, and I think the last paragraph was kinda tacked on, but he is always interesting. Comments 8 and 13 cracked me up.
My sister said that as women on her team got pregnant, they tended to fall into either the "I love the miracle of my beautiful pregnant body" or the "how long until I get a beer?" camp. I've assumed I'd be in the first camp, 'cause I have hippie tendencies and 'cause I'm just generally chill about stuff. One never knows, of course, either what the pregancy will be like or her own reaction to it. It is silly to speculate about something that isn't a current possibility and that can't be known in advance. But I was reassured to read this. And I can absolutely promise any imaginary boy who is thinking of becoming real and getting involved with me, that should we decide to be permanent and have children, I will not ask you to be the pregnant one.
UPDATE: I've been really enjoying the SLOG recently, and very very often, when I'm especially taken with a piece, it was written by Charles Mudede. Some of his posts make me tilt my head and then think 'perhaps I'll understand when I am enlightened'. A lot of his posts make me decide that he must have a gorgeous baritone voice and a huge vertical and then think 'perhaps he is single'. He had another take on the Empathy Belly article. It falls into the 'perhaps when I am enlightened' category, and I think the last paragraph was kinda tacked on, but he is always interesting. Comments 8 and 13 cracked me up.
posted by Megan at 3:57 PM
15 Comments:
I do NOT want these comments to try to convince anyone of any position on pregnancy based on any experience you've had or your beliefs about pregnancy. Both are completely irrelevent to other people's desires and physiology and pregnancy. Right? It is RUDE to try to persuade other people in any direction on a matter so deeply personal.
Sigh. Irrelevant.
some folks enjoy both feelings, though at different times in the pregnancy ;-)
the mother of my little gems enjoyed the experience intensely but wasn't disappointed to get to the end of it: it comes with these lovely little prizes!
(and can the CAPTCHA text be any longer? Geeez)
This comment has been removed by the author.
When my mom's pregnancy came to an end many years ago today, it was only the beginning of her emotional roller coaster. Bless her soul.
http://www.hodakvalue.com/blog/2007/07/this_is_life.html
I get the impression that reaction to pregnancy is highly physiological, rather than attitude-based.
I had an easy time, twice, but it was literally easy -- very little of the standard aches and pains, very minor nausea (one food aversion, which was really annoying -- I spent hours cooking our usual Christmas dinner, and found I couldn't eat the stuffing, because when I'm pregnant proscuitto isn't food. It didn't smell bad or anything, just as if it were something you'd have to be insane to eat, like paint or wood chips.)
I didn't have the 'ooo, the miracle of the creation of life' reaction, but I'm pretty low on the tendency to get awed by stuff. I did get weirded out by having something inside my guts, kicking me, that wasn't me, but not particularly unpleasantly weirded out. It's just strange in a way that was completely alien to me up till that point.
But from watching friends, it's all in how it happens to physically affect you individually. If it's easy, it's easy, and if its hard, it really objectively sucks a lot.
I've seen what you're saying, LB. It also seems like there isn't any predicting how the pregnancy will feel.
I've always thought those bellies were silly because 1) they hit you all at once with something that naturally would happen gradually, allowing you to adjust, and 2) you don't get any of the natural highs of the real pregnancy/hormones/soon to arrive real baby. They seem meant to exacerbate the negatives. - dithers
Interesting article. I got the impression that writer was rather selfish but I respect her courage in representing herself truthfully.
I've occasionally thought I'd handle the pregnancy stuff better than the other half. Germs that inconvenience me send her into hospital, and all that beefcake I've spent years building up would handle an extra 30lbs pretty well. I'm not too keen on a C-section, but it can't be that big a deal. Of course the real kicker would be societal reaction.
What LB said. I had relatively little morning sickness, almost none, but my friend at work was miserably unable to eat most things and keep them down. She barfed on the bus every morning, it was terrible for her.
I think overall I got off easy, but then at the end I couldn't sleep for shiz for the whole last two months. I also imagined I'd get away without the swollen feet, but at the T-1 month mark, my feet and ankles became ridiculous. Still, I think my pregnancy was better than average until the delivery which got complicated but which also could have been worse.
Things are much more intimidating when they are in the future, rather than in the past...
By the way, I have nothing against the chick in the article, but can you imagine getting your boyfriend pregnant just for kicks? Not because of your own inability to conceive or some other serious reason? I realize that on some level she may not have been completely serious, but I come from a line of peeps who take medical intervention rather seriously. You don't go injecting a man you love with female hormones and then subject him to a purposely ectopic pregnancy (very risky for both parent and baby) for no good reason, not if you as a woman were built to have a baby without going through those things.
Worst case scenerios are all about expecting the unexpected... but I wonder if anything in this world is more centrally recognized than motherhood. It is one outward showing thing, without which our species would simply not exist. For all of that, and all the time we have existed, the store of knowledge has grown, but it is only recently that we have not had to counter infant mortality with having larger families. So all the stories, the strangers offering advice and such used to serve the purpose of preparedness. Perhaps the overall sense of familarity, is still one thing that binds us as a community. People do often go overboard, though. Drove my ex crazy when people would give her advice unasked. Especially since the advice was so often wildly inaccurate. I think it was kindly given though, really.
On the other hand entirely...
Megan and Dubin both hit on something that was clunkin' around my whole head, though naturally I look at it a bit differently, and that's the point. The first article is very interesting and ultimately sorrowfull on loss, but struck me also like this... acting as if gender roles are actually societal constructs, and thus can be changed by society if the will is strong enough.
men and women are constructed differently for a reason. [and how happy does that make us?] For that reason we aren't really that interchangeable. The uterus is not a spin on oil filter, even if you can grow one artificially...
That's NOT to say that part of gender role ISN'T a societal construct. It is. But there is all the difference between amplification of roles, and contradiction of roles...
d - Not really with you on this point:
men and women are constructed differently for a reason. [and how happy does that make us?]
'Cause people weren't constructed. And there wasn't a reason. And while some parts of evolution lead to some beautiful systems, some are a jumbled mess. And we just happen to like it in retrospect, because it is what we are used to.
The fact that men and women are different doesn't justify any outcomes of that difference. Some of those differences do exist and some may be the result of gender roles, but there was not purpose or design to them that means that any outcome is inherently valuable. I want outcomes based on real or alleged gender differences to be thoroughly examined and their worth to be measured by things we consciously decide are the important metrics to us.
AND - it doesn't make everyone happy.
ah, Megan, sorry I didn't explain enough...
I was using contructed to mean we are made and we have a complex structure that makes us different from, say rocks. In saying made, I mean grow in the womb. I'm not delineating between billions of years of chaos from the big bang through evolution to us and created by some[thing] complete as we are.
You were constructed by your mother's body, using a blueprint based on her body and that of your father's body.
For some reason or complex interplay of circumstances, higher species seem to be divided into genders. Seems like if there was an evolutional reason not to have genders, we wouldn't. [various sharks and others that could change if necessary not withstanding]
That was the only meaning I was aiming at.
"I want outcomes based on real or alleged gender differences to be thoroughly examined and their worth to be measured by things we consciously decide are the important metrics to us."
What do you mean there?
A couple of things occur to me reading that, but my interpretation is likely to be wildly off, so please amplify.
One was: Does this mean that perhaps evolution was wrong?
Two was: We as thinking creatures, with the capabilities to medically change our structures, should now engage in a discussion where we start from scratch, questioning everything about our existance?
and, on the happy thing, I was only being general. There is much in this world to be unhappy about... and interpersonal relationships, are always high on the list.
On the other claw, I'm not sure my mind wraps around the idea of a world of pure androgyne... because the frame of reference would be so different.
D
Mudede had a very weird comment on how sex with pregnant women is offensive to nature. But I'll take your word that he has good days.
I think "offensive to nature" is just another way of saying "fun".
I'll be flying to Germany in a few hours, in an airplane, which is DEFINITELY offensive to nature - but not all that much fun, so I could be wrong.
Post a Comment
<< Home