This is about half of what makes a Montessori preschool useful. They believe kids should start working at 3.
By “malady” I meant the thing that the OP might be noticing, which is people being caught off-guard, going from 0 to 60, and commenting on it. Comedians joking about how hard it is and what all was surprising about it.
If you grew up as the apprentice to a neurosurgeon, helping him to swap out drills and bone saws, washing blood off the implements, etc. it won’t turn the job of neurosurgeon into something easy when you decide to do it as an adult, but I would expect that you’ll be a lot more comfortable digging straight into someone’s skull, a lot less squeamish about blood, more accepting that they might accidentally kill a patient, etc. Or, ** at least closer in comfort level to it as a veteran surgeon might be able to get. **
Likewise, in the medical field, there are tales of people choosing not to become a doctor or stopping their education at some point when they realize the ramifications of what the job means. I would expect that sort of talk to be more rare if everyone did serve as an apprentice to a surgeon of some form, through their formative years.
And, yes, I would expect some to realize that they hate it and absolutely refuse to continue doing it given any freedom to do so.
To your average surgeon barber from medieval times, who was simply born into a family that practiced that profession, coming to modern days, he’d be flummoxed by seeing a book on, “Getting comfortable with blood.” By the time you were old enough to read such a book, the question would already be moot. And if someone was looking at book titles, they might note that instructional books about coming to grips with the hardship of being a surgeon have a certain time period where they disappear, as you go further back.
We would say that it’s at that point that the malady of doctors having problems with blood began. Which is to say, it’s the time when the world changed in a way where your average doctor had to go from theory to practice, without the upbringing to know exactly what she was getting into beforehand.
Well, sisters would share nursing, for example; one of my friend’s Dads grew up in Sri Lanka in the 30s and his mother and aunt co-nursed their children - I don’t think I need a cite to say that such co-nursing was likely common long before the 1930s. Children who were placed in orphanages at birth up to and including the Victorian age were usually provided with a wet nurse paid for by the charity that funded the orphanage.
It’s unlikely that there wasn’t a formal or informal arrangement between poor women in the past to keep each others’ babies alive by being a wet nurse for other people’s babies if the mother was ill or otherwise unable to feed the baby after birth (not uncommon) and there was another mother nearby who was producing milk (also not uncommon) and got paid for her nursing in the form of money or food.
Yeah, but this part is what I find unlikely, personally:
That’s what sounds like some sort of weird psychology experiment.
They might well have been not expected to bother mother most of the time, but their older siblings would have been in the house at least some of the time.
For similar large families they would also usually have had aunts of an age that was too young to go out to work but old enough to look after toddlers, because it’s not like a family of twelve kids is going to have aunts and uncles who are all adults. Plus most societies didn’t toss grandmothers and great-aunts onto the streets when they could no longer work outside the home - there would have been people around.
There are photographs of young girls looking after younger siblings in Victorian times, and paintings of similar going back long before that. That’s not exactly ancient times, but it doesn’t lead me to believe that ancient humans corralled their babies and ignored them despite having people around who could provide some care.
Except the OP wasn’t asking about when the tasks of caring for a newborn began to be seen as surprising or unexpected, but when they began to be seen as grueling hard work. I think those two questions have different answers.
You’ve rebutted your own hypothesis here with this analogy. That is, someone apprenticed to a barber-surgeon from a tender age would indeed likely grow up to find surgery less unfamiliar or horrifying than someone who came to it as an adult, but they would be no less likely to recognize that surgery is bloody, messy, and difficult.
Similarly, mothers who had experience with caring for infants during their own childhoods would naturally find its tasks more familiar, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t recognize the grueling hard work they involved.
Yep. Those are some of the points I was raising in https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22097245&postcount=10
A lot of women are caught off guard by the difficulty of infant care, but that doesn’t mean the work would be any less difficult without this surprise. The OP doesn’t really support your interpretation.
It used to be “sleep when the baby sleeps” and “arggh, I can’t get the baby to stop crying” and “my nipples are a bloody mess and nursing feels horrible” belonged in that category of things called Wimmen Talk. Back in the day, as is now, women shared their difficulties with other women to get advice and support. Men in the past might not have been privy to these ventings and conversations, but I promise you they have always been with us.
What’s funny is that the only time I recall being mommy shamed by a stranger is when I went out to dinner a week after having my youngest. We were heading to the restaurant and an older woman stopped to admire my daughters. When we told her the baby was literally a few days old, she glared at me as if I was juggling knives. Not because of the baby’s health, but because “it’s not safe for you to be outside ”. She asked me if my mother knew what I was doing, which then prompted another glare when I told her no and that my mother was hundreds of mile away.
It’s unlikely this would’ve been her reaction if the strain that comes with postpartum recovery and newborn care historically haven’t been regarded as big deals. But again, this is something a man isn’t going to be sensitive to, because old women on the street aren’t scolding them. The lecture I got is a lecture that is older than time.
The women you talk about aren’t the ones who are bitching about how tough it is to raise a baby either…
“If I don’t see it on Reddit or Facebook and its not in English, then it isn’t happening.”
— Man on internet who apparently thinks only working mothers “bitch” about infant care.
Reminds me a tiny bit of the story my parents tell about when I was about 3 weeks old. My dad worked at a mall store, and took me in to show off to his coworkers. He had the diaper bag, bottle and whatever else he needed. Meanwhile, my mom got a little admonished by her grandmother when she found out. “You let him take the baby without you??” Like my dad was incapable of watching a 3 week old for a few hours :rolleyes:
I agree with every word. Then when the kids grown up, they’ll throw every mistake you make back in your face. Because now it’s assumed every bad behavior is the parents’ fault.
I think it was always known to be hard work. The problem is, in pre-industrial, agriculturally based societies everything else was hard work too.
That is partly the reason for the pattern of women moving into their husbands’ families and living either together, or in close proximity to, their sisters-in-law and under the domination/direction of their mother-in-law. It didn’t always work out great - there is lots of times where women resented it - but at least there were other women around who at least had some experience in raising children, and could offload child care to some extent. Yes, it sucked to be expected two days after giving birth to put the kid into a sling and go out and hoe the garden/milk the goat/pound the grain, etc., etc., etc. But at least you didn’t have to worry if Junior was going to get into the best pre-school so he will make it eventually to Harvard. More like “what if I get pregnant again and have to kill the newborn because my last isn’t weaned yet and I can’t nurse two at the same time”.
Regards,
Shodan
Well, that just seems like an annoyance to me. Who the heck would want to have three year olds stumbling around their feet when at work? Better they play with sticks and stones in the sand pit!
As a former stay-at-home dad who raised 3 kids through the diaper years (while going back to college), I’m annoyed by the dad hate in our culture. When I mentioned it at the time I expected people to respond with, "Wow, you’re taking care of your 3 kids under 5 AND you’re going back to school? You’re a fantastic dad!
Instead I got, “Wait, you mean you’re not working? Why aren’t YOU working?” or something similar. The response was nearly universal from both liberals and conservatives. I quickly learned to keep it to myself.
Yeah, that sucks. The only way we’re going to get past the current cultural expectation of the maternal “double shift” in doing both paid work and the majority of housework and childcare is by recognizing the right and responsibility of fathers to take on these duties too.
It also depends on the baby. My first baby started sleeping through the night after only a few weeks. “Wow, this is easy,” I thought.
Second baby didn’t sleep through the night until she was about 2 years old. And she didn’t nap. And I had a 4-year-old to care for as well. I was exhausted.
Those people can speak for themselves.
I would have said 3 months. Something in that ballpark, though.
For my friend, there was the assumption that he was a dead-beat dad: no job, separated, and supervising the kid on his court-ordered contact time.
I am amazed that your prescription for reform is coupled with the casual assumption of a nuclear family.
My wife and I have joked that kids start smiling around 2-3 months out of self preservation, because if the little fucker didn’t start giving SOME sort of positive feedback after a couple of months, … 