You keep asking why...

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-13-2008
You keep asking why...
1104
Tue, 12-16-2008 - 2:48pm

wedding websites

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-16-2003
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:04pm

Emily-
ITA with "wanting has nothing to do with it. We're mammals. Somewhere deep down we have to "want" to feed our young the way mammals are supposed to."

I think it can apply to childbirth(pre-anaesthesia & elective c-sections)as well. How did all those women give birth w/o drugs? Simple you did it because you had no other choice. Was it fun, did it make them happy? Really doesn't matter they had to give birth it didn't matter if they wanted to or not. Same with BF'ing-you did it because you had to for the survival of your baby.

Andi



Andi


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:10pm

"So let's say babies that are born too early or under extreme circumstances can't latch properly due to those circumstances... then we could say ff'ing is yet another attempt to keep babies alive that long ago might not have made it. Would that be a fair statement? Then you can argue it's been overused, just like c-sections and other interventions?'


It's a bit of a double edged sword.

Cathie

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-03-2007
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:24pm

<>


I understand and agree to the above.

 

stephanie041209.gif picture by shellnick2003

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2007
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:26pm

Gotcha. This is about the first time I have disagreed with you, ever, haha.

Ohhhhh BTW! Guess what I bought yesterday?

A Beco Butterfly! *swooooon* I found an AWESOME deal on TBW. I am sooo excited!




Powered by CGISpy.com






Photobucket
Photobucket


Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket





Photobucket



Photobucket
PhotobucketPhotobucket
Photobucket




Powered by CGISpy.com
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2007
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:34pm

Your primary argument: Some women just don't want to bf and this has historically been the case. When women gave up prematurely, other women were ready to step in and help.

Does this post prove it somehow? No. Of course there were women who could not bf and their family unit would certainly step in to help whenever possible. But that was not what you were arguing. That's what I mean by your argument keeps evolving. Of course I'm never going to be able to completely answer your posts because you'll always change the game and then charge me with not staying a step ahead of you.

On top of that, I'm reading a lot of straw men in your post to me. I choose to avoid absolutes like "always" or "never," so to infer that I have said them is a direct misrepresentation of my argument.

I never said that only the very rich could hire a wet nurse, only that those who did had to have the means and wet nurses weren't cheap. In times (Victorian England now) when people lived on bread, sugar, lard and tea (very rarely eating vegetables, fruit, or meat), having the luxury to hire a wet nurse required either quite a lot of money or the absolutely dire necessity of it. "Not wanting to" would not have been an option for at least 90% of the population.

"Putting anything you could concoct into a bottle or a cup was not done?"

Yes, I'm sure there were instances of that. What part of your primary argument is that statement designed to uphold?

You have a lot of interesting sources. I'm afraid that the LLLI source you provided for the history of wet-nursing and cross-nursing supports my argument, not yours.

I'm not going to do a lit review of all the sources you've provided because I simply do not have the time or inclination. Your argument has been lost in "what if" scenarios and random examples. Exactly what are these sources designed to show?

<>

I'm going to leave these questions for someone who has a greater knowledge of sociology and cultural anthropology, for those are not my fields at all. I can speculate with backing on the historical stuff, but the other stuff I could only speculate and have a chance of being right.

The problem with the use of online sources for the argument of history (which has been my only argument in this vein, you will notice) is that online sources are notoriously suspect. Many of the sites you posted up are websites that I would reject out of hand for historical research quality. There isn't much I trust online, and the access to databases that I do have are probably access that you don't have. Unless you have unrestricted access to something like JStor or Ebsco, in which case I can probably find some scholarly journal articles citations for you.




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks to Heather (blessedmom0508) for the beautiful signatures!
Lilypie 1st Birthday PicLilypie 1st Birthday Ticker
PhotobucketPhotobucket
Photobucket

Photobucket




Powered by CGISpy.com


Thanks

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-10-2005
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:36pm
I've been contemplating another Vat, myself... I love my Vat.
Photobucket
CL for Reflux
 
"That's the
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2007
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:41pm
D'oh! I hadn't even thought to check Ebsco or Jstor for information about this! What a waste of library fees!



Powered by CGISpy.com






Photobucket
Photobucket


Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket





Photobucket



Photobucket
PhotobucketPhotobucket
Photobucket




Powered by CGISpy.com
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2007
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:42pm
I drool at the thought of a vat. If I'm still BW a lot in 6 months, I think I'm going to indulge in a Vat or Storch..



Powered by CGISpy.com






Photobucket
Photobucket


Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket





Photobucket



Photobucket
PhotobucketPhotobucket
Photobucket




Powered by CGISpy.com
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-14-2003
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:47pm

This just reminded me of the last scene on MASH, when they were hiding from the Korean soldiers, and there was a woman



~*~ Catherine, mom to three grown men - Jason, Michael & Joshua and Granma to Christopher & Leia.


iVillage Member
Registered: 10-27-2006
Fri, 12-19-2008 - 6:48pm

Pages