Ken's love of babies - but not the 1st 6 months

[2xx1xy1JD]

Here's a heart-warming description of a father's love for his children:

 

Quote

...men bond much later with their babies because there is little to play with in the first few months, and nothing to play with in holding a screaming two month old.

 

Mom's still get the rush of Oxytocin that comes from nursing and holding, but men may not get this, unless perhaps they are skin to skin with the baby or playing around with the baby. Makes sense with boys/men being so activity driven.

 

A low libido in women can also come from her getting her happy feeling chemicals from the baby, so who needs sex. There was no comparison between sex and playing with any of my babies, who I loved dearly after the age of six months when they could play :).

 

from the secret comment section of this post: lorialexander.blogspot.ca/2014/09/distinguishing-between-needs-and.html#idc-container

 

I know this was mentioned in one of the other Lori megaposts, but I found this so horrifying that it needs its own thread. If Ken claims that he loved his babies dearly after the age of 6 months - then he must be saying that he did NOT love his babies during their first 6 months.

 

I don't think this is a one-off. Ken's made comments like this before, about having no interest in babies under 6 months.

 

He also made this lovely comment, giving advice to a young husband and father:

 

 

Quote

...told him to hold her arms and tell her that she was ton stop misbehaving, being angry with him all day and calling him names if she wanted any cooperation from with helping around the house or with the kid.

 

From comment section of this post: lorialexander.blogspot.ca/2014/01/the-self-discipline-of-one-flesh.html

 

Aside from the shitty advice to physically restrain a wife - which may very well be illegal in some jurisdictions - Ken thinks that it is perfectly appropriate for a father to stop caring for his own child if he has a problem with the mother. Can't you just feel the love as he refers to this man's child as "the kid" instead of "your child"?

 

Guess what, Ken? My husband and BILs may be heading straight to hell (according to you) because none of them believe in Jesus, but they all fell head over heels in love with their babies from day one. Caring for "the kid" wasn't a chore or a favor done to reward the mother. They actually wanted to be with their own babies.

 

I also really have to wonder about the parenting here if Ken thinks that there is nothing interesting about a baby for the fist 6 months, and that 2 mo old babies just scream. Babies start to interact from the beginning. That study with Dr. Feldman assessed fathers' interaction at 6 weeks and 6 months. Another study by Dr. Feldman found that when fathers had higher levels of oxytocin and interacted with their babies, the level of oxytocin in the BABIES also increased. Research has also shown that oxytocin makes babies happier. I know that some babies are just colicky, but I have to wonder if Ken thinks that 2 mo old babies are just screaming bundles of misery because his kids didn't get the contact that they needed from either parent. Ken obviously had no interest in them, and Lori was insisting that they sleep train by 3-6 weeks.

[terranova]

As much as I think Ken is a total dickhead, I can't blame him for this.

My husband hasn't really bonded with our daughters until they're about 2 months old (current baby is 7 weeks and it's just starting). It's pretty hard for some Dads to bond when baby just wants to breastfeed, shit and sleep. He does love his girls to bits, but finds it quite hard before that age.

[Full enough quiver]

Yeah, can't snark this one. The first 6 months were absolutely awful. I loved my daughter to pieces, but couldn't wait for infancy to be over.

[Pathfinder]

Well, I will snark... even though a newborn is not that reciprocal, she still has needs and a father can help fulfill them. The idea that a baby is only worthy of his attention when she can not scream and make him feel good and happy is ludicrous.

And what is it with people thinking that the oxytocin "high" is like some drug fix that supersedes everything else in life? I must have missed the boat because I don't recall having any psychedelic trips when I breastfeed and mothered my four children. In fact, there were times that I was seriously depressed, as I felt smothered by the constant breastfeeding and like I didn't have control of my body anymore. But I loved my children... no matter how demanding it was, and regardless of the fact of their ability to reciprocate.

[SquirrelySquirrel]

Dude. Women aren't disinterested in sex because of all the highs of breastfeeding (god, he's an idiot). They're disinterested in sex because they are fucking EXHAUSTED! Maybe if you asshole manly men showed more of an interest in caring for your infants so your wives can catch a nap or a shower or 15 freaking minutes without being touched they would be more interested in sex. Or maybe not, but you should still be involved.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Dude. Women aren't disinterested in sex because of all the highs of breastfeeding (god, he's an idiot). They're disinterested in sex because they are fucking EXHAUSTED! Maybe if you asshole manly men showed more of an interest in caring for your infants so your wives can catch a nap or a shower or 15 freaking minutes without being touched they would be more interested in sex. Or maybe not, but you should still be involved.

That's the other part that drove me batty.

It's not that women suddenly become controlling bitches and suddenly decide to deprive husbands of their "needs" when baby comes along unless he is manipulated into helping out.

It's that caring for a new baby 24/7 is utterly exhausting. Friends who were medical residents and used to working 80-100 hours/week said that they found the sleep deprivation during mat leave harder, because at least residents know that they can sleep 2 out of 3 nights.

If male prisoners were forced to keep the same schedule as the average new breastfeeding mother, the ACLU would deem it torture. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/us/15gitmo.html?_r=2& [by my calculations, a prisoner moved 112 times in 12 times is moved, on average, every 3 hours. Breastfeeding moms of new babies need to nurse every 3 hours, and if they follow advice against bed sharing, that means getting out of bed, sitting upright, changing the diaper and trying to get the baby back to sleep until it's time to repeat the cycle. Yes, the context is obviously different, but it's still sleep deprivation.] Sleep deprivation also kills libido.

In the early weeks, breastfeeding wasn't making me high. It was making me screaming and cry in pain due to bleeding nipples. Engorgement and clogged ducts didn't feel wonderful either. The "high" of breastfeeding was mainly falling into a deep sleep.

Breastfeeding also drops estrogen. That, in turns, causes the vagina to dry up and start to shrivel up. [sorry to be graphic, but guys like Ken don't know basic biology. I'm a breastfeeding advocate, but won't sugar-coat the truth. This is what 53 months of breastfeeding did to my lady bits, according to my doctor. It got better after my last kid was weaned.]

[docmom]

Ken wasn't talking about bonding, he was talking about LOVING! According to him, men can't even begin to LOVE a baby until it can reciprocate- which is I think a very telling comment on Ken. He needs adoration. If you can't give it because you're a newborn, too bad he won't love you.

Yes, Dad's might have an issue bonding before babies can interact, but most normal men, love their babies from the get go. And most normal men know that if you put in a little effort during those first few months, you can still get those rewards- the smile, the falling asleep on your chest, the gurgles.

I'm not even going to get into the oxytocin argument. Man Ken's an idiot.

[Trynn]

BULLSHIT. When I was born, the nurse literally had to pry me out of my father's protesting arms. He had been holdin me, his newborn daughter, for a god 3 hours straight, and the nurse was afraid he'd pass out and drop me.

I'm no expert, but I think that was called A FATHER FORMING A FUCKIN BOND WITH HKS NEWBORN BABY.

It is also called a father loving his newborn baby.

Ken is a douche.

[usmcmom]

I'll definitely snark on this too. Ken's just selfish if he can't like a baby that "doesn't give back," but that seems to be his yardstick in all of his relationships - "I'll treat you well if you do this for me."

I just can't imagine a dad who isn't hands-on, interested and totally in love with his babies from the moment they arrive. Usmcdad was giddy with our babies from that first moment and wanted to hold them all he could. If I wasn't nursing or he wasn't at work, they were just as likely to be in his arms as mine; just as likely to see his face above their crib or changing table as mine, even when they were just days old.

I also wonder why Ken describes a two-month-old as always crying. Often, by two months, a baby has started to form a routine, is awake more, noticing the world around him, smiling, watching faces. I wonder why Ken's babies were so unhappy all the time. :cry: :cry:

[Tiger Lily]

That's the other part that drove me batty.

It's not that women suddenly become controlling bitches and suddenly decide to deprive husbands of their "needs" when baby comes along unless he is manipulated into helping out.

It's that caring for a new baby 24/7 is utterly exhausting. Friends who were medical residents and used to working 80-100 hours/week said that they found the sleep deprivation during mat leave harder, because at least residents know that they can sleep 2 out of 3 nights.

If male prisoners were forced to keep the same schedule as the average new breastfeeding mother, the ACLU would deem it torture. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/us/15gitmo.html?_r=2& [by my calculations, a prisoner moved 112 times in 12 times is moved, on average, every 3 hours. Breastfeeding moms of new babies need to nurse every 3 hours, and if they follow advice against bed sharing, that means getting out of bed, sitting upright, changing the diaper and trying to get the baby back to sleep until it's time to repeat the cycle. Yes, the context is obviously different, but it's still sleep deprivation.] Sleep deprivation also kills libido.

In the early weeks, breastfeeding wasn't making me high. It was making me screaming and cry in pain due to bleeding nipples. Engorgement and clogged ducts didn't feel wonderful either. The "high" of breastfeeding was mainly falling into a deep sleep.

Breastfeeding also drops estrogen. That, in turns, causes the vagina to dry up and start to shrivel up. [sorry to be graphic, but guys like Ken don't know basic biology. I'm a breastfeeding advocate, but won't sugar-coat the truth. This is what 53 months of breastfeeding did to my lady bits, according to my doctor. It got better after my last kid was weaned.]

Word! People (especially men because moms who choose not to breastfeed are still exhausted and hormonal) who have never breastfed don't have a clue. With my first child, she never slept regularly for the first six to eight months. Oh, she may have napped during the day for 10-20 minutes at a time, however, she never really slept and when she did, it was very lightly. It's not that she was colicky while she was awake, either. She was actually pretty content as long as I held or entertained her. If I didn't, then she cried which meant I couldn't get anything done (including getting a shower on some days). Thanks to being breastfed on demand, she never slept for long at nights. I was exhausted, hormonal, sore and touched out. Thankfully, my husband loved holding our daughter and having these long conversations with her when he wasn't working. That's when I showered. I remember when we brought baby #2 home and place her in her crib. She sucked her fingers and promptly fell asleep. I nearly wept! I was almost afraid to hope this child would be calm and laid back (and she was and still is to this day).

To suggest that a new mother is engaging in some sort of power play with the hubby shows exactly what Ken knows about women. NOTHING.

[Tiger Lily]

Well, I will snark... even though a newborn is not that reciprocal, she still has needs and a father can help fulfill them. The idea that a baby is only worthy of his attention when she can not scream and make him feel good and happy is ludicrous.

And what is it with people thinking that the oxytocin "high" is like some drug fix that supersedes everything else in life? I must have missed the boat because I don't recall having any psychedelic trips when I breastfeed and mothered my four children. In fact, there were times that I was seriously depressed, as I felt smothered by the constant breastfeeding and like I didn't have control of my body anymore. But I loved my children... no matter how demanding it was, and regardless of the fact of their ability to reciprocate.

I so agree because I certainly wasn't feeling a high in those first few weeks with my children. In fact, I cried for the first six weeks with my firstborn.

[feministxtian]

I seem to remember my father holding my daughter the day she was born...his comment" "oh good, now I have another little girl to spoil". He was over the moon with her. Same for my sons. So...even grandpas go ga-ga over the babies. My husband was the same when our grands were born. The daddies of the respective children weren't any different. I have pictures of my son and son-in-law holding the grands just after their births, and each one of them had a stupid shit-eating grin on their faces.

Ken is a flaming idiot who doesn't know jack shit about anything.

[polecat]

My husband happened to be home later than usual today, so I read it out loud.

His response:

"That's stupid. I couldn't feed them, but I held them a lot. Remember the colic hold? I had that effer perfected." He also changed them (cloth diapers, no less), helped bathe them and yeah, he even figured out ways to play with our newborns.

While I cannot judge people who don't bond with their babies right away (my sister didn't thanks to PPD, and I know it's a not uncommon experience), I have no trouble judging Ken, who takes his personal experience and applies it to every freaking man out there. Because KEN didn't bond, NO MAN BONDS. He's such an asshat.

[Firiel]

Ken is so dumb. Anyone other than Ken saying they didn't bond with their babies right at first would be pretty normal. I mean, my brother-in-law made a joke that his youngest (5 months) is almost cute, and he doesn't tend to be as close to his kids until they start to hit around 6 months when their little personalities become more obvious. The difference is, he is an awesome father... his kids are always SO excited when he comes home, and often the first thing he does is put down his stuff and play doctor (or whatever) with them. And despite not feeling as attached to the babies, he still helps her take care of their infants. Because, you know, he loves his family, poopy loud babies included.

And of course Ken turns a discussion of infants into a discussion about sex and how men shouldn't be expected to do anything "domestic" (like take care of their kids).

[Pathfinder]

As a Certified Nurse Midwife, I delivered just over a thousand babies and conducted hundreds of postpartum exams. Across the board, I saw so many overwhelmed, exhausted new moms and generally they were breastfeeding and not being supported adequately by their family.

It's true that a breastfeeding mom is the only source of nutrition for the baby, but good daddies will bring their wives water, food and do as much as they can to support them as they provide for their babies. A truly smart daddy will also be willing to feed pumped breast milk or formula (if they are supplementing) at night if his wife is exhausted and overwhelmed.

A horrible daddy is one who refuses to hold his newborn baby and merely looks at his wife and says "Your oxytocin-induced euphoria is enough for you to endure this without me."

[latraviata]

I'll definitely snark on this too. Ken's just selfish if he can't like a baby that "doesn't give back," but that seems to be his yardstick in all of his relationships - "I'll treat you well if you do this for me."

I just can't imagine a dad who isn't hands-on, interested and totally in love with his babies from the moment they arrive. Usmcdad was giddy with our babies from that first moment and wanted to hold them all he could. If I wasn't nursing or he wasn't at work, they were just as likely to be in his arms as mine; just as likely to see his face above their crib or changing table as mine, even when they were just days old.

I also wonder why Ken describes a two-month-old as always crying. Often, by two months, a baby has started to form a routine, is awake more, noticing the world around him, smiling, watching faces. I wonder why Ken's babies were so unhappy all the time. :cry: :cry:

My late husband aka Germont pushed me away from the cradle and said IT IS MY TURN NOW!!!

He was 38 when our first child aka Cuteneurorad was born and he told everybody that he never knew how fantastic and delightful (his) babies were.

Unfortunatley I was unable to breastfeed and we took turns to feed the babies, he changed them bathe them, sang for them in short from day one, he was absolutely in love with them, and their mother..... He treated me like a queen.

[RosyDaisy]

BULLSHIT. When I was born, the nurse literally had to pry me out of my father's protesting arms. He had been holdin me, his newborn daughter, for a god 3 hours straight, and the nurse was afraid he'd pass out and drop me.

I'm no expert, but I think that was called A FATHER FORMING A FUCKIN BOND WITH HKS NEWBORN BABY.

It is also called a father loving his newborn baby.

Ken is a douche.

THIS! My father loved me and my sister even before we were born. To this day he still has unconditional love for me an my sister. He worked swing shifts, but he made sure it spent time with us, and told us that he loved us.

I honestly believe Ken is incapable of loving anyone except his is own dam self!

[PennySycamore]

My husband happened to be home later than usual today, so I read it out loud.

His response:

"That's stupid. I couldn't feed them, but I held them a lot. Remember the colic hold? I had that effer perfected." He also changed them (cloth diapers, no less), helped bathe them and yeah, he even figured out ways to play with our newborns.

While I cannot judge people who don't bond with their babies right away (my sister didn't thanks to PPD, and I know it's a not uncommon experience), I have no trouble judging Ken, who takes his personal experience and applies it to every freaking man out there. Because KEN didn't bond, NO MAN BONDS. He's such an asshat.

The colic hold was actually invented by a man, the grandfather of a colicky baby.

I don't know how much my dad interacted with my older sibs, but there are a couple of things that stand out from when I was a baby 59 years ago. I was born brown as a paper bag due to severe Rh jaundice. My dad and grandmother had to rush me to the old Greenville General Hospital for exchange transfusions. When we got there, an intern met them outside the hospital and scooped me from my dad' arms to take me up to the nursery. My dad visited the hospital several times while I was there. At one visit, a doctor invited him in to the nursery to hold me. That just wasn't done in 1955. My dad always talked about that time, about how scared he was that they wouldn't get to the hospital in time.

[Maggie Mae]

So men are "activity driven" and women are, what? Lazy cunts? Thanks Ken, you s exist prick of a "man."

Ken is clearly a narcissistic manipulative jerk who is using religion as an excuse to be abusive and controlling of people he deems less than.

[browngrl]

I wonder what Ken's children think when they read things like this?

I know some parents of BOTH genders who did not really bond until their child was older. They have told me in confidence (in the context of a medical appointment) that they did not really start to bond with their children till they were older - but not one of these people would ever admit this (especially on the internet) in public for fear that it would hurt the children (even though in every example in my experience the parent has gone on to build a strong loving relationship with the child).

So while the time at which a bond is forged does not stand out so much to me - the casual and callous way Ken says what he says does stand out like a sore thumb.

edited because *damn you auto correct*

[usmcmom]

My late husband aka Germont pushed me away from the cradle and said IT IS MY TURN NOW!!!

He was 38 when our first child aka Cuteneurorad was born and he told everybody that he never knew how fantastic and delightful (his) babies were.

Unfortunatley I was unable to breastfeed and we took turns to feed the babies, he changed them bathe them, sang for them in short from day one, he was absolutely in love with them, and their mother..... He treated me like a queen.

I tell you what, nothing is sexier than a giddy daddy, in my opinion. If anything was going to induce me to want intimacy with my husband during those early months of motherhood, it was seeing him with our babies. Something about that tenderness....

I was not one to let them cry it out but I did lie in bed for the first few whimpers, hoping they'd settle down and go back to sleep. Not my husband. I don't how many times I did that hiss-whisper thing "DON'T GO IN THERE! SHE MIGHT GO BACK TO SLEEP," as he darted out of our room to calm a fussy baby.

I guess Ken and Lori's problem is that each never saw the other be selfless and tender - not just toward their spouse but toward their children. Sometimes, seeing how our spouse interacts with others, especially our children is what makes us feel those most loving and intimate feelings for them. If you are a selfish person, you don't attract love and tenderness. But I guess if you use the Bible as a weapon, you CAN attract robotic "respect" and cold, heartless sex.

[moodygirl86]

Don't lie Ken, you obviously don't love babies unless there's some sort of condition attached! You're supposed to love your kids unconditionally, particularly when they're too tiny to do anything for themselves, let alone you. And I say this as someone who is childfree by choice. This is because I haven't got a maternal bone in me, but at least I'm aware of this in myself and will never bring a child into the world who I can't love properly.

[docmom]

OK, I have to visit the "oxytocin" issue after all. I've breastfed all of my babies. I even enjoyed it. I've felt a little bit of a rush with letdown. I've also had good sex. The two are not even in the same ballpark. The reason I didn't want to have intercourse right after I gave birth had everything to do with fatigue (and the 3rd degree tears) and nothing to do with the "oxytocin" substitute. Now we know even more about Ken and Lori's sex life: he's not as good as oxytocin!

[salex]

I suspect Ken and Lori's children owe much of their happiness to having had a good nanny. And Lori, sometimes recognizes the nanny, even as she berates others who use child care of any type.

My husband's great aunt had a housekeeper who was key in raising her daughters... sort of like a non live in Alice from the Brady Bunch-- Full time cooked, ran kids around, kept the house going, etc, while the uncle and aunt both had careers, though the aunt was self employed and had some flexibility.

Said housekeeper was in family pictures at the 50th wedding anniversary, as well as was brought into the family home and cared for by the daughter's family along with the dad, after mom had died and all were aged. They recognized the "third parent" in this family.

I wonder if the Alexander children keep in touch with the Nanny?

[2xx1xy1JD]

Ken is so dumb. Anyone other than Ken saying they didn't bond with their babies right at first would be pretty normal. I mean, my brother-in-law made a joke that his youngest (5 months) is almost cute, and he doesn't tend to be as close to his kids until they start to hit around 6 months when their little personalities become more obvious. The difference is, he is an awesome father... his kids are always SO excited when he comes home, and often the first thing he does is put down his stuff and play doctor (or whatever) with them. And despite not feeling as attached to the babies, he still helps her take care of their infants. Because, you know, he loves his family, poopy loud babies included.

And of course Ken turns a discussion of infants into a discussion about sex and how men shouldn't be expected to do anything "domestic" (like take care of their kids).

I might say that I bonded MORE with my younger 2 after the first few months, when they had more of a personality, but I wouldn't make it sound like I didn't love them from the beginning. I'd say that I found parenting harder with my oldest until her reflux settled down and until she started sleeping better, but that has nothing to do with loving or caring for her.

It's the idea of looking at your own newborn baby and thinking that it's ok to say, "not so interesting, can't really play with it, cries a lot - I'll pass on involvement or loving until they grow some more" that has me horrified.

Honestly, there was no real difference between bonding time with my husband and I. The only thing that was different was that he took parental leave starting when Girl 1 was 5 mos old, and got to know her even better during that time. We were both fascinated by the newborn stage, and both thought that it was great when their personalities started to emerge. [i will admit to some gender differences in our family. I am responsible for all shopping and hair stuff and girl talks with the girls, he's responsible for most of the hockey and future boy talks with The Boy. With the babies, though, there wasn't much difference.]