User Panel
Quoted: few years ago stumbled onto a talk program featuring the woman that played Mrs. Brady, mother in the "Brady Bunch"... she was in her 80's, said she grew up on a farm in Nebraska... they were talking about kids and childbirth and stuff... said her mom had 10 kids, and everytime she did she went into a bedroom by herself and came out with the baby.. View Quote so where does the stork and cabbage patch come into play? we're gonna need a PowerPoint presentation |
|
Life and death were common. Marriage is a much later concept because the odds of your spouse lasting more than a couple kids was uncommon.
My great grandfather married another woman as his first wife died in child birth. As far as breast feeding, if you didn’t produce enough milk someone else did. Also natural selection, women with berthing hips were selected over skinny women. Woman also mated with the strongest man who could provide for her and their children. Weak died, strong survived. Made us stronger. Until now. |
|
Quoted: I wonder how long the mothers back than rested before getting back out there to help their tribe/family. View Quote My mother after giving birth to her 3rd kid, my sister, walked herself to the smoking area to have a cigarette, 45min after child birth and was ready to leave and go home. |
|
Quoted: Probably chewed through it. Then left the tag end on the baby until it dried up and fell off. Heck, they probably made soup out of the placenta. I know intellectually that it's all good protein but View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: What were they using a rock to cut the umbilical cord? Probably chewed through it. Then left the tag end on the baby until it dried up and fell off. Heck, they probably made soup out of the placenta. I know intellectually that it's all good protein but When you haven’t eaten in 3 days and your baby mama almost died in child birth, beggers won’t be choosers. |
|
|
Quoted: Life and death were common. Marriage is a much later concept because the odds of your spouse lasting more than a couple kids was uncommon. My great grandfather married another woman as his first wife died in child birth. As far as breast feeding, if you didn't produce enough milk someone else did. Also natural selection, women with berthing hips were selected over skinny women. Woman also mated with the strongest man who could provide for her and their children. Weak died, strong survived. Made us stronger. Until now. View Quote North Mississippi AllStars - Skinny Woman - HQ |
|
At the risk of being callous and pissing off some, Darwin got a lot of things right. That thingy called 'survival of the fittest' is a thing.
If Mom survived her first child, and hubby provided enough food to keep her and child alive, he maybe got laid again, and mom popped out another. If the baby was strong and healthy, the cycle repeated. The weaker males sometimes didn't make it home from the hunt, or if they did, they were empty handed. Likewise, the weaker females didn't survive their first childbirth - malnutrition, disease, etc. The strong survived, the weaker ones didn't, for the most part. The strong males sought out the strong females, hoping to breed strong kids. Then liberalism happened, the weak got fed, the ill got cared for. The strong didn't want any part of breeding with the weak, so the weak bred amongst themselves, creating more weaker kids, because some of them survived, too. And so we get to today, where eventually all wimmenz that want to, can get pregnant, and with enough medical care, have a C section, and deliver a child that can, with enough medical care and baby-sitting, get old enough to have sex with some dweeb, and the cycle goes on. Today, death of either mother or child during childbirth is almost unheard of. I sometimes think that if we cheat Darwin out of his dues for long enough, some of the above 'survivors' might live long enough to climb the food chain and even become 'chiefs' or even politicians, and get into positions of power. Oh, just hang on a mother-fuckin' minute...... we're fooked. ETA As usual, beaten like a red-headed step-child while I was 2-finger pecking at the keyboard. |
|
Neanderthals didn’t have lawyers; so they didn’t need multimillion dollar facilities for child birth.
|
|
|
How do you think women have kids in many parts of the world today that don't have first-world medical care?
Natural selection got us to where we are, and now we are going backwards. |
|
Quoted: If things didn't work right they died, that's a huge part of why the life expectancy was so low until the 1900's. Sure people lived to be older, but the average was way lower because people regularly died young. View Quote And why so many kids were born per family. Have 12, maybe 4 survive to adulthood. |
|
Quoted: During child birth now a days we have somewhat sterile rooms and equipment. We have technology to let us know if a woman needs a c-section. How did the early humans do this? What were they using a rock to cut the umbilical cord? What if the mother wasn't able to produce milk after birth? These are burning questions!!! View Quote I know it's difficult to believe...but before there was Amazon...there was the Stork Delivery Service. This service delivered newborns to caves and grass huts throughout Europe newborns fresh from the factory. |
|
Quoted: If things didn't work right they died, that's a huge part of why the life expectancy was so low until the 1900's. Sure people lived to be older, but the average was way lower because people regularly died young. View Quote That's an explanation, but not THE explanation. Here's the reality: 1. Birth weights were, on average, a lot lower because nutrition was worse. It's easier to pass a smaller baby through the birth canal. 2. People (including women) were much more physically fit, since 99.9% of all labor was manual, and most people spent most of their waking hours in manual labor tasks. 3. Women would have 5+ kids per woman, on average. Subsequent deliveries tend to be easier than the first. 4. Women gave birth squatting, not laying in a hospital bed. Current delivery methods are easier for the doctor, not the woman or the baby. |
|
Quoted: And why so many kids were born per family. Have 12, maybe 4 survive to adulthood. View Quote |
|
The Meaning of Life: The Third World |
|
|
Quoted: That was true even up to the first half of the 20th century View Quote This. Walk through any rural cemetery. Where my parents are buried, there are lots of infant headstones, under five was not rare. A few teens, too. Most were born in the 1910’s-30’s. Almost every family lost a baby or two to disease. TC |
|
|
|
Granted, Fred wasn't a neanderthal, but I'm sure this is applicable.
The Flintstones : Fred Flintstones Is Having A Baby : So Epic |
|
High birth rates, high death rates, high infant mortality rates.
Go take a stroll through an old cemetery. Lots of babies and kids buried there. Life was nasty, brutish, and short. |
|
|
A LOT of them (women and children) died in childbirth and then a lot of the children died in infancy.
|
|
As others have said the mortality rate was super high. Old saying that child birth is a woman’s war is historically very correct.
Upright walking is the main culprit. Species that evolve this trait run into birthing problems. |
|
|
Quoted: My mother's mother was pregnant and got sick with something, probably pneumonia, we could cure with a pill today. She died. This was common at the time, the 1930's. During pioneer days, it was common for men to have several marriages ended by deaths during child birth. then the death rate for women was much higher than for men. Darwin is always on duty. One wonders what he will do with us where weakness is a virtue and merit is almost a crime. View Quote I had an ex-girlfriend die of Pneumonia after a bout of Influenza-B. She was a bit hippie and refused modern medicine, both her and her son had whooping cough a few years earlier. Anti-vaxxer. Five bucks worth of anti-biotics would have cured her and not left her young son without a mother. Don't have to go back that far. |
|
Quoted: More lived than died. Now we save the ones that should have died. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/figures/m4838a2f1.gif View Quote It was even worse back in the 1800s. If memory serves, a child had around a 40% chance of death before age 5 and around a 55% change of death before age 15. Once past 15, the average life span was in their 60s. Women also had it bad as the rate of death during child birth was around 10%. |
|
|
Quoted: At the risk of being callous and pissing off some, Darwin got a lot of things right. That thingy called 'survival of the fittest' is a thing. If Mom survived her first child, and hubby provided enough food to keep her and child alive, he maybe got laid again, and mom popped out another. If the baby was strong and healthy, the cycle repeated. The weaker males sometimes didn't make it home from the hunt, or if they did, they were empty handed. Likewise, the weaker females didn't survive their first childbirth - malnutrition, disease, etc. The strong survived, the weaker ones didn't, for the most part. The strong males sought out the strong females, hoping to breed strong kids. Then liberalism happened, the weak got fed, the ill got cared for. The strong didn't want any part of breeding with the weak, so the weak bred amongst themselves, creating more weaker kids, because some of them survived, too. And so we get to today, where eventually all wimmenz that want to, can get pregnant, and with enough medical care, have a C section, and deliver a child that can, with enough medical care and baby-sitting, get old enough to have sex with some dweeb, and the cycle goes on. Today, death of either mother or child during childbirth is almost unheard of. I sometimes think that if we cheat Darwin out of his dues for long enough, some of the above 'survivors' might live long enough to climb the food chain and even become 'chiefs' or even politicians, and get into positions of power. Oh, just hang on a mother-fuckin' minute...... we're fooked. ETA As usual, beaten like a red-headed step-child while I was 2-finger pecking at the keyboard. View Quote Vaccination, antibiotics and the Haber process have more to do with what you described over anything that liberalism has done. |
|
|
Childbirth killed a shitload of mothers and babies for a very long time.
Imagine being a woman in an age when you knew that there was a solid chance you might die in 9 months once you figure out you are knocked up. It's why midwives have pretty much always been a thing, the old bats that could have 40 children with no issues were put in charge of helping the young women with it. |
|
Quoted: At the risk of being callous and pissing off some, Darwin got a lot of things right. That thingy called 'survival of the fittest' is a thing. If Mom survived her first child, and hubby provided enough food to keep her and child alive, he maybe got laid again, and mom popped out another. If the baby was strong and healthy, the cycle repeated. The weaker males sometimes didn't make it home from the hunt, or if they did, they were empty handed. Likewise, the weaker females didn't survive their first childbirth - malnutrition, disease, etc. The strong survived, the weaker ones didn't, for the most part. The strong males sought out the strong females, hoping to breed strong kids. Then liberalism happened, the weak got fed, the ill got cared for. The strong didn't want any part of breeding with the weak, so the weak bred amongst themselves, creating more weaker kids, because some of them survived, too. And so we get to today, where eventually all wimmenz that want to, can get pregnant, and with enough medical care, have a C section, and deliver a child that can, with enough medical care and baby-sitting, get old enough to have sex with some dweeb, and the cycle goes on. Today, death of either mother or child during childbirth is almost unheard of. I sometimes think that if we cheat Darwin out of his dues for long enough, some of the above 'survivors' might live long enough to climb the food chain and even become 'chiefs' or even politicians, and get into positions of power. Oh, just hang on a mother-fuckin' minute...... we're fooked. ETA As usual, beaten like a red-headed step-child while I was 2-finger pecking at the keyboard. View Quote Almost. The USA has the highest rate of mortality in child birth in the developed world. |
|
Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/69748/grandma-all-people-think-about-is-sex-th-2479409.JPG View Quote Dude looks like he is about to say, "You know I had a vasectomy 16 years ago, right?" |
|
Quoted: During child birth now a days we have somewhat sterile rooms and equipment. We have technology to let us know if a woman needs a c-section. How did the early humans do this? What were they using a rock to cut the umbilical cord? What if the mother wasn't able to produce milk after birth? These are burning questions!!! View Quote Arighty. Humans have the hardest births out of all of the animal kingdom. It's a combination of two things: First, we have the biggest noggins. Second, humans have narrow pelvises, because it makes it easier to walk upright. Women have slightly wider pelvises than men, but still, they're quite narrow among primates. Putting it bluntly, no woman ever said "Geez, it was so hard getting my kids's shoulders out", it's the noggin they complain about. Once a kid's head is through, the rest of them just slides on out nice and easy. And yes, some kids get their heads stuck in their mother's pelvic opening, and if the doctor can't turn the kid with the pump (or whatever it's called), it's emergency c-section time. If you compare neanderthal pelvises to human pelvises, neanderthals have a wider pelvis, with a larger pelvic foramen. Also, they have smaller craniums. Put those two together, and you get... much easier birth, at least assuming they're not breach. Also, having a doctor and staff around, with NICU, etc. isn't necessary for birth... it's only necessary to keep the survival rate of mothers and children at levels we consider acceptable. Even with the difficult human births, humans have survived as a species for hundreds of thousands of years. Today, a whole lot of people give birth in huts every day, with no medical help. Lots die/died either being born or giving birth, but enough survived to let the species grow and flourish. So yeah... neanderthals would have had to cut the umbilicus, and it's all but a given that the neonatal mortality was high. But, survival rate was still high enough for them to survive for a cool million years on this planet, before humans out-competed them during an ice age. Going back to the head size vs. pelvis size... this is why humans have to be born while their brain is still infantile. Giraffe babies are dropped out during a migration, and generally have to be up, walking, and migrating with the mother within a couple of hours. Meanwhile, humans are still growing that huge noggin for another year after birth before they're really walking. |
|
Quoted: I had an ex-girlfriend die of Pneumonia after a bout of Influenza-B. She was a bit hippie and refused modern medicine, both her and her son had whooping cough a few years earlier. Anti-vaxxer. Five bucks worth of anti-biotics would have cured her and not left her young son without a mother. Don't have to go back that far. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: My mother's mother was pregnant and got sick with something, probably pneumonia, we could cure with a pill today. She died. This was common at the time, the 1930's. During pioneer days, it was common for men to have several marriages ended by deaths during child birth. then the death rate for women was much higher than for men. Darwin is always on duty. One wonders what he will do with us where weakness is a virtue and merit is almost a crime. I had an ex-girlfriend die of Pneumonia after a bout of Influenza-B. She was a bit hippie and refused modern medicine, both her and her son had whooping cough a few years earlier. Anti-vaxxer. Five bucks worth of anti-biotics would have cured her and not left her young son without a mother. Don't have to go back that far. You're talking about an idiot problem, not a science problem. |
|
|
|
Quoted: Sometimes when a Daddy Neanderthal and a Mommy Neanderthal love each other very, very much……….. View Quote Attached File |
|
|
It turns out women are capable of giving birth outside a sterile medical environment. My last kid was born in a van.
As for what happened when things went sideways, a lot of women and kids died. Low life expectancy figures of years past were largely driven by high infant and early childhood mortality. If you lived to the age of 7 or so you had a decent chance at what we would consider a pretty normal adult life span. A stroll through the older section of a cemetery can be eye opening. Lots of family plots with several very young kids in them. Often with a headstone simply inscribed "infant girl". Some parents waited a few years before naming kids. |
|
My grandfather was one of 18, less than half made it to adulthood. They pushed out a ton of kids back then and hoped for the best.
|
|
Quoted: During child birth now a days we have somewhat sterile rooms and equipment. We have technology to let us know if a woman needs a c-section. How did the early humans do this? What were they using a rock to cut the umbilical cord? What if the mother wasn't able to produce milk after birth? These are burning questions!!! View Quote They bit through the cord. |
|
Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/122302/F843D55C-3E31-42CB-9CC7-689B7EFE7906-2479305.jpg View Quote Thought it was spelled with an E not a A |
|
Quoted: During child birth now a days we have somewhat sterile rooms and equipment. We have technology to let us know if a woman needs a c-section. How did the early humans do this? What were they using a rock to cut the umbilical cord? What if the mother wasn't able to produce milk after birth? These are burning questions!!! View Quote What do you think animals do every day in the wild? Clearly it is possible to successfully give birth without a hospital. |
|
Women had children much younger too, not waiting to 30-40 years old. Human body much more resilient when you’re young.
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.