This gem of a news story perfectly illustrates what I have written about regarding the connections between female sexuality and child rearing. In the year 2014 British people still regard co-sleeping as a marriage-threatening practice, and leaving the baby to sleep and cry alone the norm that “feels right”… “just like the sex” [not] And this is to the extent of labeling this medical research “controversial”, because of course the baby is seen as a direct competitor to the husband and does not belong in the monogamous nest. Could this possibly be an indicator that most marriages are based on something other than love? What does this mean in terms of the quality of the mother’s touch through which she communicates affection? What kind of affection is this, when the woman (society) sees affection for an adult, sexually developed man and affection for a baby as mutually exclusive?
You gotta love the title:
Bad news for dads: Babies ‘should share mother’s bed until age three’ because it’s good for their hearts
It might as well read: “Beware, your baby wants to fuck your wife”. But I would be hard-pressed to think that men take it so badly because of the biological accident that is motherhood, as well as to believe that a baby cannot be possibly soothed by the proximity of a male. But these considerations are not very likely to enter their consciousness given how self-aware they are in their choice of headlines. If they only knew it is not really dads they are picturing there as “self-interested lovers”, but mothers themselves as the possessive sex-traders who married them, then they might reconsider their definition of “controversial”.
Co-sleeping is just an effect of basic humaneness, not a goal to be sought “for the sake of the baby turning out healthy”. The heart does not fundamentally suffer because of the lack of physical proximity, but because of the lack of dignity.
This is why the positive sides of co-sleeping are only portrayed as effects of an action to be taken methodically in response to medical advice:
Sleeping alone makes it ‘harder for mother and child to bond and damages the development of the brain’
According to this, it is not that the mother’s attitude is contrary to bonding with the child (let alone the husband) but that the bonding and the healthy brain will follow the action of bringing the child to your bed as night follows day!
It will not. Bonding does not follow co-sleeping, but co-sleeping follows bonding. Society is always opposed to the mother-child bond because the basis of society for thousands of years (at least since we began farming) has been the farming of the children through the linguistic device of morality:
Researchers believe this lead to bad behaviour as the child grows up
And this “bad behaviour” is defined thus:
Dr Bergman said that changes to the brain brought on by stress hormones may make it more difficult to form relationships later on, leading to problems such as promiscuity.
One might as well laugh at how transparent they are, bless them, when expressing what marriage and family really means for them and their genetic inheritance. God forbid that the child becomes PROMISCUOUS! That SURELY is a baaad thing to be! LOL!! Don’t you just want to get a sneaky peek into their bedroom as they put the child to sleep in the other room; or travel back in time to the night club in which they met; or exploring the quality of their “relationship forming skills” as they resort to contracts like marriage to control their fits of jealousy… Ah, society, that faithful woman!:
This said (and let’s finish on a positive note, shall we?) things are luckily not black and white, though this helps for the sake of explaining what goes on inside a divided soul. All people, believe it or not, have a heart, even if it has been wrecked by years of crying alone since they started at the cradle. People also truly love the people they marry, and don’t want to blackmail them (or themselves) with arbitrary withdrawals of affection which might involve the genitals or not.