When people hear my wife's done NCB twice, they look at her like she's some sort of closet hippie. Meanwhile, I'm like, "She's wearing pearls and eyeliner, dumbass, think for a second." It's like we put a KPFA bumper sticker on our Hummer. Every previous generation of human beings was produced by NCB, save the last two, and now it's like you're superhuman if you even try it. This is, of course, only true if we believe it's true. OTOH, my wife gets a little charge out of knowing that she's an acknowledged ass-kicker when it comes to birth. It's the only endurance sport she's ever played, and she got the same cache as if she'd run a marathon out of the blue. "Holy shit, you ran a marathon? You?"

Like RP, we weren't/aren't categorically opposed to drugs. We just wanted to see how far we could go before hitting a breaking point. At that point, I would have asked for Demerol without any remorse.

Some people have bad birth experiences. A woman I greatly respect recently told me she would have scheduled a c-section if she'd known she would be in back labor for 42 hours. Well, duh. In a previous era she might have died, and the world would be poorer for it.

My main point is that "drug-based pain control" and "epidural" should not be used interchangeably. My secondary point is that an entire society that delivers children while having an otherworldly detachment from their nether regions will probably not have the same understanding as their millions of female ancestors that life has a cost.

I don't know about that. I have no kids and I am quite aware that life has a cost. In fact, I'm putting money aside for the early retirement pipe-dream, while you plan savings for someone else's college precisely because life has a cost.

Don't fight the hypo.

I have had at least 3 kids, that I know of (or acknowledge putative parental liability for) and I didn't take drugs during any of the births. I say suck it up. No offence and npi.

I'm with you on it. Solidarity! Word.

I never would have gotten to this part of the post had ncs not quoted you. Basically, then, you are saying that no male ever has or every will have any real understanding that life has a cost?

Also, you sound very like that whole "women have pain in childbirth and cramps during their periods because of Eve doing that thing with the apple" camp, which is creepy as fuck.

Huh. I just thought he sounded like a "this worked for us and therefore I look down upon those who don't make the same choices I do (or, I guess, technically, my wife does)" sort of person. But I'm always the last to catch biblical subtext. Damn my liberal hippy parents for my godless upbringing!

I think he sounds like both. Arrogant and misogynistic -- a winning combo.

No, Atticus, the fact that you "admire" your wife for bearing the pain does not erase the essential crappiness of the quoted sentiment.

WTF? You've already admitted you didn't read my post. Why don't you try that before you decide what my character flaws are?

I'll try again to sum up, since you clearly lack the attention span:
(1) I love my wife and admire that she had the guts to finish what she set out to do.
(2) In a hypothetical utopian world in which birth is painless, antiseptic and entirely convenient FOR EVERYONE EVERYWHERE, there will be no one left to remind us how difficult, messy and costly it has been for 99.9999% percent of history. Or how difficult it remains for the 95% of the people on this planet who don't have any birth plans other than to survive the process if possible.

Note for you fans of logic out there: assuming (2) means I want birth to remain difficult, messy and costly in terms of human life regardless of choice is a part of the syllogism I didn't provide. That comes entirely from Fringey.

I wish this exchange had occurred on the FB so I could give a appropriately smarmy and snarky reply. Alas, this is the parents board, and I must set a good example.

Duh, I reread the entire thing when I realized I'd missed the gem of regretfulness that we just don't understand that life has a cost. Of course, even lacking epidurals, we are sadly no longer as aware that people can easily die in childbirth if hospitals are not available, that children come out all fucked up if you don't get enough folic acid, and so on. And we don't really have that deep understanding of osteoporosis and being a bent-over little old lady because babies sucked all the calcium out of your bones.

And our teeth don't fall out because of the dental care. And we can heat and cool our homes at will. And we get to go in cars and planes and trains, and so just don't really appreciate how onerous it was for people who settled the frontier.

Perhaps you were just making a really stupid statement, and it's not about Eve.

Whatever. I've never had reason to doubt your intelligence or short-term memory before, and out of respect for you I will pretend you never posted this.

On induction
 

RP, et al:

The newest study say that epis and, particularly, early epis do not slow labor at all, so now they may be given earlier instead of waiting until after 4-5cm or so. I'm not sure I buy this study, but whatever, some of you might be interested - I think it was on cnn.com not too long ago.

I have no idea if I could have delivered #1 the old-fashioned way. I came in for my induction at almost 4cm and in 12 hours, I went to 6cm and then back down to 4 and baby show no signs of budging. We went for a c-s since the OB thought the baby was probably too big. Maybe he wasn't - maybe it was that I wasn't physically ready to deliver at 38.5w, but by the time he was 40w+, he would have been over 11lb*, so I suppose the induction, though it ultimately failed, was the best option under the circumstances. If the induction had failed for no reason than the fact that I wasn't ready to deliver, I would have been pretty pissed at having unnecessary surgery. Anyone looking at an induction for convenience really should take a look at the c/s rates due to failed induction before agreeing to it.

C/s have a lower rate of infant mortality, but a higher rate of mommy-mortality than vag. deliveries. OBs usually offer the infant stats, not the mommy stats if questioned. No OB will get sued for an unnecessary c/s resulting in a healthy baby, so why not push them (especially repeats), especially since the fees are higher?

p.s. to TMDiva - #1 never learned to latch on, little slacker, and despite the help of consultants, etc., I pumped for a year. Not fun. Did not want a repeat of that. Turns out #2 is a freakin' Hoover who I can't get off the boob. I wish you a little Hoover this time around!

*No, no gestational diabetes, just lucky like that.

You still don't get it. Let me try it this way: In a hypothetical utopia in which everyone buys their babies at thrift stores, males and females alike will think differently about the costs of bringing new life into the world than we presently do. They will think that cost is somewhat lower than a neighboring hypothetical utopia in which 85% of them buy babies at thrift stores and 15% deliver vaginally, and of that group .05% die. This is true whether or not those deliveries are painless.

Continue to note, if you will, that I make this observation, which I continue to believe is true, without believing that it is a good thing that people suffer and die. I only note it has an effect on their dispositions and appreciation of life that they do. You, meanwhile, are beating the crap out of a straw man that we presently lack an understanding of the cost of life because of the wide availability of epidurals today (an argument I did not make). I join you in thinking such an argument would be, if made, ludicrous. Now join me in acknowledging that no one here has yet made it.