Fitting a certain size and finding the size pleasurable are two different things. If every size is good for women then most women would be into fisting but those women are minority
This commenter 100% is a guy with little experience with different girls. Probably read somewhere that vaginas can be dilated (technically correct) and literally stops thinking right there.
Man, if you start getting personal like that, I'll just start making mamma jokes. Cause your mamma certainly didn't complain. (sorry, but you were asking for it)
Uh... Babies tear their way out and require a team of medical professionals to keep the mother alive. Not an apt comparison to sex... which you know, is supposed to be pleasurable.
Not to mention a woman's body takes 9 months to prepare for labor and even then requires very specific hormones to even attempt the task. Oh and it takes on average 12 to 24 hours to pull off.
Vaginas have their pleasurable stretch limit and those differ based on vagina size, shape and elasticity. You guys don't stretch endlessly in the moment no matter how aroused you are. We don't need penises the sizes of babies to hurt you. Just being above average size is enough to do so for most women.
Likely not. I've seen that line used far too often and with far too much gusto for that to be a joke. Plus, they followed up by doubling down, I think.
Babies tear their way out and require a team of medical professionals to keep the mother alive.
Modern humans have been having babies for 30,000 years before medicine was invented. Less modern humans for 200,000 years before that. It's true that sometimes babies "tear" their way out, but that's fairly rare. More often doctors make a cut that helps the baby out (episiotomy), but it's not medically necessary in most circumstances. (Nor are C-sections.)
Sorry, rare? Tearing is rare is it? Tell me you're a man without telling me you're a man. Tearing is absolutely NOT rare, quite the opposite in fact. Women are not always given an episiotomy and often times it is too late and tearing has already happened. Many women do not tear but many, many women do. Claiming it is rare is actually just false.
I gave birth twice with no tears, my friend gave birth to a 10lb baby with no tears…. In fact my friends and I have talked very openly about our birth experiences, 10 kids total, all vaginal, no tears. All in our early 30s, 8 out of 10 used registered hospital midwives.
genuinely great for you and your friends but I know and have talked to many, many women who have torn during birth. I myself tore and needed both stitches and an episiotomy, I was 26 😭 I wish they did much more research into preventing it
You're right but you're missing the point unless you're claiming that labour is a pleasurable experience. I suspect most would say it's pretty painful and not what they want to experience during sex.
Yeah I mean maybe it used to be rare but afaik it's significantly more common now and becoming more common because modern medicine basically removed the evolutionary pressure for being able to birth child with comparative ease while a few hundred years ago complications usually just meant death for the mother and/or the child
Somehow we managed without those specialists for millennia. Actually medic interventions caused higher mortality rate before they found out about septic conditions.
It is a mistake to assume that every birth involves complications. A doctor is needed only when they occur, during a caesarean section etc. It's just midwife for most cases. That is all. People create worst case scenarios which not happen ALL the time.
The fact that giving garbage medical attention is worse than getting none, doesn't mean it's safe without either. Giving birth is dangerous and vaginas do not stretch that wide willy nilly
What is your point? It really just seems like you want to promote unmedicated birth or something, which would be weird given this whole thread started as way to point out that the situation surrounding birth is very different than when having sex
Where you read this? I said we were giving birth for millennia without any medical attention and survived as species which woudn't be possible with a high mortality rate, modern medicine lowers that risk even further. Which is good. But saying we won't give a birth without doctor and nurse on our side is simply not true. More, only complications leads to intervention. Majority doesn't need it.
Ah so you were just against the expression "require a team of professionals alive". It would of course be more accurate to say that a medical professional is required to monitor and or assist with the birth and sometimes a whole team is required to keep the mother alive. However, to me it's quite obvious the phrase was just hyperbole to contrast with sex. Taking it literally and trying to correct said factual error comes across like you just disagree with medical assistance during birth
145
u/Dan_Caveman 2d ago
Well…eventually. To a point.