This postgot me thinking which is more painful (since I have experienced neither myself) pregnancy and childbirth or swift kick in the nuts?
If I had to speculate I would put a kick in the nuts more on par with severe menstrual cramps.
What say you all?
Also:
Women who have children, did you desire pregnancy and childbirth or was it just what you had to suffer through in order to have a baby at the end of it all?
Men who have children, would you suffer a kick in the nuts in order to have your children?
Pregnancy was an interesting experience and there were some good things about it. Overall though, I’d have rather just had the baby. If there were artificial wombs and I wanted another kid, sign me up.
And childbirth, no, not a single thing good about that for me.
From what I have gathered from talking to my husband and male friends about it, the pain from the kick in the nuts is twofold - the sharp pain from the contact and the stomach churning lingering pain afterwards.
I don’t know what to compare the kick part to, but the lingering pain seems very comparable to a bad menstrural cramp. Just that stomach sickening, long term, “low tone” kind of pain that lasts and lasts.
To answer the OP - I loved being pregnant. Did it twice, and had some no so fun stuff, like hemoroids and sharp nipple pain, but I loved it. The labor and delivery was not so fun, but the really hurty writhe in your bed pain only lasted a few hours, and it was extremely cool from a science/experience point of view.
Raising the kids is the deal breaker for me. I wanted five, but after the second and the sleepless nights and the 18 years of heavy responsibility, we decided to stop.
I really found pregnancy fascinating, and am very glad I had the opportunity to go through it. It wasn’t always fun, but it was very, very interesting, and feeling the baby move/kick/roll was endlessly amazing: I never got tired of that. Delivery was an emergency c-section under general anesthetic, and I would say that was probably worse than a generic kick in the nuts: it was certainly scarier, and the first day or so afterwards was pretty painful.
Obviously the op is an unanswerable question, but here’s a more reasonable one - which is worse, childbirth or a kidney stone? Or is it an apples and oranges comparison? I’ve had kidney stones, so I know what those are like and surely some of the mothers around here have dealt with both at some point.
Based on my husbands reaction when getting kicked in the nuts, I would say that the pain level of labor and getting kicked is about the same, but labor last much longer, making it worse.
That being said, I would go through labor again, in a second. My daughter is completely worth it, and it was only about 9 hours long. Pregnancy was hell. It was 9 months of pure, uncomfortable misery. I had a relatively complication-free pregnancy and it is still a major factor in my uncertainty regarding more children. To me, it is kind of like having a bucket of water dumped on you versus a constant drip of water on your forehead over 9 months.
No, that the only way to produce offspring rests on men (not women) – who must consent to be kicked in the balls. In another thread someone stated if procreation rested on men suffering a kick in the nuts then the birth rate would dramatically decline because getting kicked in the nuts was more painful than childbirth. I said the only reason women suffered through childbirth was their desire for a kid - not because they think childbirth is nice or not that painful - and men who genuinely desired children would suffer a kick in the nuts if that was the only way to have a kid. However, since I have experienced neither childbirth or a hard kick in the balls I thought it would be interesting to solicit opinions from those who have.
I’ve known someone who has had kidney stones and gone through unmedicated childbirth within a few months of each other. She says the kidney stones were worse.
But then, every labor’s different, and she had one that she was able to get through without asking for medication.