Comment by undecisive | Hacker News Reader

Comment by undecisive | Hacker News Reader

> In the case of a woman who has a fully developed muscular system and has had ample physical exertion all through the pregnancy, as is common with all more primitive peoples, nature provides all the necessary equipment and power to have a normal and quick delivery. This is not the case, however, with more civilized Women who often do not have the opportunity to develop the muscles needed in confinement.

Ignoring the depressingly-predictable classist/colonialist tone, it's interesting to note that modern medicine recommends things like pelvic floor exercises to help with childbirth, primarily to prevent unwanted urination during childbirth and incontinence afterwards it seems.

But this observation - if correct - might lead us to conclude that certain types of exercise help the actual act of childbirth more than others.

Do we know if this has been corroborated / debunked? I'm wondering if there are any agencies out there with specific recommendations for those who are trying for a baby, for exercises that are actually proven to make childbirth quicker or less painful?

There exist gyms and personal training education for pregnant and postpartum women. I considered sharing one here, but I realized that the comportment of many on HN would be disruptive to them.

Ignoring the depressingly-predictable classist/colonialist tone

Isn't it an anti-classist tone if anything? It's associating "civilization" with weakness, confinement, and a lack of opportunity, and associating primitive living with fully developed muscles and says it provides for a normal and quick delivery. How is that not an endorsement of primitive living? I don't see how you can call that paragraph colonialist unless you see the word "civilized" and just turn your brain off.

Yeah I think it's pretty undisputed there are downsides to the current day "civilized" life of office jobs and automotive vehicles consisting of precious little necessitated physical exertion or exercise of any type.

1) It divides people into "primitive" and "civilized", which delineates an ingroup and outgroup;

2) The document is written for civilized people, because surely the document wouldn't call its readers primitive;

3) The flip side of "developed muscles" is "barbaric lifestyle" - the "proper" thing for women at the time was NOT to develop said muscles, but rather to maintain a "trim figure" ("one of the best exercises for a woman are her household duties, and that besides those she doesn't need more exercise", from a 1941 article);

4) In sum, given the context, the "endorsement" is a grudging admission that on this one issue the "primitive" women might be stronger, but in no way an overall endorsement of the lifestyle.

> "barbaric lifestyle"

> "trim figure"

Where are you getting these quotes from?

First are scare quotes, second is from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20th_century_women%27s_fitness..., the title of a 1967 article.

I think you're making a lot of assumptions about someone you've never met and know nothing about.

It divides people into "primitive" and "civilized", which delineates an ingroup and outgroup;

Right, in the context of "look at us poor pathetic civilized people whose broken bodies need this apparatus to reproduce unlike those strong primitives who can do it in the normal way.

Colonialist: To my mind, it was the 's' on the phrase "primitive peoples". In other words, it is implying that people in our "civilized" society suffer from this, but those more primitive peoples outside of our society may be exempt - simply because they do uncivilized things that our civilized ladies wouldn't dream of.

Classist: Because of course, that's bunkum. Because even in 1960's "civilized" american society, maybe the upper class lady would keep herself "in confinement" but that doesn't mean that the majority of women would or could.

So no, I wouldn't say it's anti-classist.

(Note: I had presumed that George Blonsky was a doctor - but no, apparently he was a "mining engineer". I suspect he would have been reasonably well educated, but maybe not if he thought spinning pregnant women around to expel their babies was a good idea. So I don't know - maybe the classism was accidental. But it's definitely there.)

I do not know any recommendations for quicker/less painful childbirth.

However, pregnant women do currently get completely different advice then they used to. As in, advice for me was to continue doing sport normally, just not stuff where you risk falls or hits (skiing, climbing, box). You get obvious advice to not overdo it, but hiking, running, swimming, cycling, dancing etc are recommended.

Anecdotally, older generation tended to act as if I was irresponsible or somehow courageous for doing these, recalling that they had been expected to stop all that for the sake of a baby.

> with more civilized Women who often do not have the opportunity to develop the muscles needed in confinement.

Note massive cultural shift in here even outside of pregnancy - western women have all the chances in the world to develop any muscles they please. More or less, we are expected to care about fitness or it is at least normal to care about it.

One that was recommended in the literature (and I suppose makes sense) was stretching.

It's also nonsense. It's not about having muscles, it's about having children aged 13 instead of 30.

A 13-year old is actually very likely to develop serious complications if pregnant. Their body is not developed enough for childbirth.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com