How gross can breeder selfies get

http://news.yahoo.com/powerful-c-section-photo-goes-viral-for-all-the-105000789.html

Prepare yourself before viewing

I'm sure many of us have scars from surgeries but we don't go attention-whoring with them all over the internet.

My hysterectomy scar looked just like that (before it healed... and they do) Can hardly find it now. The message is good though. These martyr moos who want to go nachural no matter the cost to baybee or moo need to get a clue that, perhaps, this option would be a good idea. (does anyone remember my stories of Vegitina? Yep, still veggin out though .. now she can get a few 'uggs' out of her mouth)
IF.. and that's a big IF... I would have EVER had a kyd... I would have begged for a C-section...with general anest. Stop bitchin' moos!

This is one of the most anti-feminist, pronatalist images I have ever seen. It is reducing this woman to the sum of her reproductive organs, as if nothing else about her matters. Notice the placement of the baby. It's betwen her legs, as if her only reason for existance is to incubate babies. You don't see her face. It's as if she has no wants, no needs, no desires, no accomplishments, no name. There is no autonomous, accomplished, sparkling, charming woman. There is just a uterus.

Why would any modern woman want herself to be totally anonymized and objectified in such a pose??

It's as if Medieval history met the modern digital camera and photoshop.

This is a modern Hand Maid photo.

This is a powerful image. But it sends a message that this feminist finds extremely offensive.

Quote
Peace
... There is just a uterus.
.

Exactly!

Quote
Peace
This is one of the most anti-feminist, pronatalist images I have ever seen. It is reducing this woman to the sum of her reproductive organs, as if nothing else about her matters. Notice the placement of the baby. It's betwen her legs, as if her only reason for existance is to incubate babies. You don't see her face. It's as if she has no wants, no needs, no desires, no accomplishments, no name. There is no autonomous, accomplished, sparkling, charming woman. There is just a uterus.

Why would any modern woman want herself to be totally anonymized and objectified in such a pose??

It's as if Medieval history met the modern digital camera and photoshop.

This is a modern Hand Maid photo.

This is a powerful image. But it sends a message that this feminist finds extremely offensive.

hankyou
With the backlash against abortion and birth control, (!) and the attendant glorification of mothers in feminism, it does not surprise me we are moving backwards.
Frankly, the more pictures that show what kind of damage pregnancy does to bodies, the better. If *I* were in charge of sex ed, I would make sure that odious site, Shape of a Monster and Scary Mommy confessions, were included in the curriculum.

Also, abortion would be presented as a GOOD choice, along with a complete history of abortion in America.

______________________________________________________
Someday we'll look back on this moment and plow into a parked car.

Evan Davis

Quote
Peace
This is one of the most anti-feminist, pronatalist images I have ever seen. It is reducing this woman to the sum of her reproductive organs, as if nothing else about her matters. Notice the placement of the baby. It's betwen her legs, as if her only reason for existance is to incubate babies. You don't see her face. It's as if she has no wants, no needs, no desires, no accomplishments, no name. There is no autonomous, accomplished, sparkling, charming woman. There is just a uterus.

Why would any modern woman want herself to be totally anonymized and objectified in such a pose??

It's as if Medieval history met the modern digital camera and photoshop.

This is a modern Hand Maid photo.

This is a powerful image. But it sends a message that this feminist finds extremely offensive.

EXACTLY. hankyou

And when that kyd's older I bet it will be THRILLED that a photo exists—on the internet no less!—of its face planted right on its Moo's cooter.

What IS it with the VBAC bullshit? Most Cesareans are done because they need to be done (usually birth canal will not allow for the passage of the baybee). I really don't get it. My ex was told that she could not give birth the "normal" way (it would literally have killed her). So she said "fine, no problem". She is now past the age for sprogs but years ago she told me that if she had any more sprogs they'd have to be delivered via C-section and that was OK with her.

I really don't get VBAC being such a damn big deal. Is the very real possibility of death of both moo and baybee (or possible harm to the baybee such as brain-damage) really worth it to these cows?

And that photo is just gross. The moo exhibitionism is sickening. When I was younger, no self-respecting woman would be showing off a C-section scar.

Quote
rudeawakening

Quote
Peace
This is one of the most anti-feminist, pronatalist images I have ever seen. It is reducing this woman to the sum of her reproductive organs, as if nothing else about her matters. Notice the placement of the baby. It's betwen her legs, as if her only reason for existance is to incubate babies. You don't see her face. It's as if she has no wants, no needs, no desires, no accomplishments, no name. There is no autonomous, accomplished, sparkling, charming woman. There is just a uterus.

Why would any modern woman want herself to be totally anonymized and objectified in such a pose??

It's as if Medieval history met the modern digital camera and photoshop.

This is a modern Hand Maid photo.

This is a powerful image. But it sends a message that this feminist finds extremely offensive.

EXACTLY. hankyou

And when that kyd's older I bet it will be THRILLED that a photo exists—on the internet no less!—of its face planted right on its Moo's cooter.

Maybe the reason she smooshed it's face against her vag is because it didn't come out of their earlier. I really do feel sorry for the kyd though.

Quote
Peace
This is one of the most anti-feminist, pronatalist images I have ever seen. It is reducing this woman to the sum of her reproductive organs, as if nothing else about her matters. Notice the placement of the baby. It's betwen her legs, as if her only reason for existance is to incubate babies. You don't see her face. It's as if she has no wants, no needs, no desires, no accomplishments, no name. There is no autonomous, accomplished, sparkling, charming woman. There is just a uterus.

Why would any modern woman want herself to be totally anonymized and objectified in such a pose??

It's as if Medieval history met the modern digital camera and photoshop.

This is a modern Hand Maid photo.

This is a powerful image. But it sends a message that this feminist finds extremely offensive.

This :GOMIIMOG