[LMB] Moldy oldy comments, was Cavillo and her ilk

M. Haller Yamada thefabmadamem at yahoo.com
Fri Jun 24 23:55:06 BST 2011


The thing about any reproductive and sexual discussion is that even though there 
are general trends, there are so many exceptions to the rule that trying to 
paint things in a general fashion winds up . . . painting nothing in particular.

Carrying a baby for nine months may jump-start a loving relationship. It could 
also jump-start a kind of perverted, control-freak relationship where Mom builds 
up an image of what baby is going to be, and when baby turns out to be a real 
person at about 2 years of age, things can go to hell. A mother who is going to 
be distant is going to be distant whether she carries the baby, or grows it in a 
can, too. Case, by case, by case. It's impossible to predict anything, because 
sometimes after the baby comes, the Mother Changes Her Mind . . . this could 
swing either way. And sometimes, the Mother Is Confirmed in Her Expectations. 


Personally, I had good pregnancies and enjoyed that time (child birth  . . . not 
so much). It wrought changes in my body, and I've never had less trouble losing 
weight in my life. (-: Obviously, I am one of those "cases" and not the normal 
trend. I have no trouble believing that some women (and most men, LOL!) would be 
better off with a UR. And that goes for the babies, too. Some pregnancies are 
very, very hard on the poor babies . . . .

Fatherhood in relation to a UR is also the same thing: there are some very very 
good fathers out there, and some very very bad ones. I think some fathers 
benefit from watching their baby grow inside their partner -- it gives time to 
adjust to the idea, and their love for their partner automatically becomes 
entwined with their love for this new little thing. However, I bet some fathers 
are just as likely to love a baby that comes out of thin air, so to speak. Case 
by case.

Bad fathers are often accidental sperm donors, and I think the moms are well rid 
of them. Irresponsible fathers are a grey area -- they think they want the 
fatherhood, but it turns out that children annoy them. Good fathers (like good 
mothers) should be a national treasure -- a world treasure. They should get 
awards and parades and things . . . even though they don't care about that.

At any rate, I think a child does better with at least two adults who love 
him/her. The parents can tag-team when one gets tired, they can combine 
resources (financial, knowlege, physical, time, etc) to make sure the children 
get what they need. I was lucky to marry into a functional family, and my first 
baby had six loving adults to tag-team her care. (And I was too anal to take 
full advantage of that, LOL!) But then again, a dysfunctional family of six 
adults teaming up to make the child fulfill THEIR needs . . . nightmare. It 
wouldn't work for everyone.

UR technology will be too expensive at first to be a casual sort of thing . . . 
only the people who really need it will be able to get it. But . . . as they 
make mistakes, and also discover good strategies, the parents who come after 
should be able to use their own judgement as to whether they want to use a UR or 
not.

Micki

(And Paula, if you re-read Thad and Damien's posts, you might see they are not 
trying to impose some sort of societal norm on you -- rather, they want to 
express their own feelings of what societal image *they* want imposed on 
themselves. They want men to be seen as real partners, NOT sperm 
donors/paychecks. I didn't see anything that said, "All women must have babies." 
I know other people have put that unfair pressure on you, but I haven't seen it 
in this discussion.)


More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list