On Babies and Motherhood

Jan 11, 2007 11:58

Warning: For those of you who know my baby-hostile history, the following content may surprise you. Try not to go all essplody from my about-face.My good friend Kenyata became pregnant in April, and it was surprising to both of us how excited I was for her. It is her first child, and as she's anchored in "natural" traditions, she has decided to ( Read more... )

kimoni, self-analysis, relationships

Leave a comment

Comments 4

(The comment has been removed)

peppermintspice January 12 2007, 00:14:12 UTC
Yeah - I considered being a surrogate a little bit, and then decided it would be foolish to give myself stretch marks for nothing. However, I've since learned that if you coat your belly with real shea butter and herbal salves every time it itches, the skin will expand without any stretch marks - I've seen Kenyata's belly as proof. Amazing.

The funny thing is that about six months ago, I learned about this new non-invasive tubal ligation process, and I'm getting much closer to the time when they'd actually do it. At first I was like, man I'm saving up for this! and then thoughts of "what if I do want to have a kid someday" snuck in. . . and then Kenyata got pregnant, and slowly but surely my position began to change.
Although Anne Geddes photos still make me want to puke my brains out.
Heh.

Besides, you're too artsy to have a kid. :D

Reply


Oh, I dunno. sehrnett January 11 2007, 23:28:24 UTC
I don't think I will feel less female if I never have a kid and it is very unlikely at this point that it is going to happen.

I'm just indifferent to having them and I think you need to make them your life's work if you do. If you are not going to give it your best until they can go on their own, there is no point in doing it. And I am way too selfish for that.

I don't want to be defined by any biological act. I'm more than my uterus.

Reply

Re: Oh, I dunno. peppermintspice January 12 2007, 00:10:55 UTC
I figured you'd be one of the "my uterus doesn't define me" commenters. Of course YOU are more than your uterus, true - so is each woman. That's not my point. It's fine to not have or not want kids, and indeed some women simply can't. But the capacity to give birth is the top defining characteristic of being a woman in general. Cold as this may sound - and of course it's my own opinion here - no woman will ever experience the complete fullness of what it means to be a woman until she has been with child. Besides, it's not *just* a biological act - while my post was rooted in the biological process, I am talking just as much about the emotional, mental, and spiritual nurturing characteristic to motherhood ( ... )

Reply

I know it is a big change for you. sehrnett January 15 2007, 19:33:58 UTC
If you're happy with it, I am happy with it.;)

That said, I am emotionally, mentally and spiritually nurturing to all the people in my life, adults and kids. My mom had my kid brother when I was 15. In many ways, I got "out" my need to have a kid with him.

I don't cease to be a woman if I chose not to, or cannot, or become to old to, breed. (Hmmm. That seems like too many commas but you get what I mean.)

And if you say it is about being "with child", does that mean that if I got pregnant and aborted it, that I would be more of a woman because I had done what a biological imperative dictates? Just curious.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up