Let me back track.
I actually don't think that women need extra support. I believe that women have been socialized to appear/be dependent, and to think that the person that they should rely on is the one that got them in that "situation" to begin with. I don't have enough anthropological or historical knowledge regarding childbirth so let me defer this to someone else, but perhaps this attitude is unique to the United States. Look at our social policy: Our Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) came to be because of the states tiring of supporting mothers--so they went after those escape artists aka deadbeat dads. The state didn't impregnate mothers, the babydaddies did, so it only made sense.
Enter Michel Odent.
Michel Odent is a French obstetrician to say the very least. He is a gifted man who has been instrumental in the childbirth movement, advocating for midwifery and the importance of mother-child bonding, and speaking against the medical establishment, utilizing 50 years of experience and research. He has recently come forth with seemingly controversial information:
I'm convinced that the participation of fathers is one of the main reasons for long and difficult labours. And there are a number of basic physiological reasons for this.And I said "seemingly" because, from reading an array of comments across the internet, it would appear that many are offended by this information. However, upon reading men's, midwifery advocates', and a select group of women's comments, I discovered that everyone was NOT in disagreement.
First, a labouring woman needs to be protected against any stimulation of the thinking part of her brain, the neocortex, for labour to proceed with any ease.
This part of the brain needs to take a back seat and allow the primal "unthinking'' part of the brain, connected to basic, vital functions, to take over.
Yet, motivated by a desire to "share the experience'', the man asks questions and offers words of reassurance and advice. In doing so, he denies his partner the quiet mind she needs.
The second reason is that the father's release of the stress hormone adrenalin as he watches his partner labour causes her anxiety and prevents her relaxing.
It has been proven that it is physically impossible to be in a state of relaxation if there's an individual standing next to you who is tense and full of adrenalin.
With a man present, a woman cannot be as relaxed as she needs to be during labour. Hence, the process becomes more difficult.
Let's step back again.
When men were allowed to be in the hospital delivery rooms, it was a start of yet another "movement." It was politically correct to be in the room. Grandmas and sisters got the boot. Men leading obstetrics was another movement. Midwives and birth attendants got the ax. And this trend continues into the present with it being politically correct to have the father doing at least half of what a mother is doing--even leading up to having half custody of the child upon separation and divorce (or even if the couple was never together and only had sex which produced a child). In fact, it's soooo trendy and politically correct that it has become social policy (see Legislation to Help Deadbeat Dads Get Back in Control of Their Families). Previously, the religious groups led this movement, now it is our government (arguably based on religious tenets) that creates policy to force marriage, and, if not marriage, then joint child custody and/or father child custody (see The Office of Child Support Enforcement Wants to Promote Both Agreed Upon Child Support Orders and Custody and Visitation Orders and Michael Hayes Wants to Build "Family-Centered" Child Support).
Fathers are in. Mothers are out.
It would be one thing if all men/fathers were genuinely concerned with babies, children...child-rearing and caretaking. But the evidence shows that they are not (see The New Fatherhood, Same As the Old One). This is about the money. Money and power.
Where can men pay for entry, sit around and do nothing, all the while having a great time, even perhaps missing most of the event, doing little of the work, to just show up at the end and join in, or take credit, and earn a return?
1. With a prostitute
2. As the obstetrician
3. In his child's life
4. At a sport's event
Just because a man has seen and felt the vagina and otherwise naked body does not give him an open ended invitation to witness the same. Family, friends, nurses, doctors and midwives are present because of the consent given by the birthing woman. Anything short of consent is a violation--a rape (do an internet search on "birth rape"--an interesting topic). This is part of the continued exploitation of women, and, of course, Black women and mothers in particular who get the extreme end of objectification and vilification.
The birthing Kelis had every right to determine what kind of energy she wanted in her presence. Pregnancy is taxing, labor is hard, and birth is a reward...a reward to those who invested in it. If word around the net has it correct, Nas did not earn his place there. He has no right. It is not a father's right or anyone else's for that matter outside of the autonomous being in which the pregnancy occurred.
Society squelches women and subjugates them to the rights of men, partially by eliminating the support that we have provided to one another and substituting it with men. This is what defines the patriarchy. Supporting Kelis as a woman and mother is supporting her child. To do the opposite is at the detriment of her child. We as women want to reproduce (or not) as we want, birth like we want, raise our children as we want...Through current social policy, misogynist legislation and propaganda, and religious ideals, our society seems to be trying to completely eliminate us as women and mothers.
In the words of former President Jimmy Carter:
The carefully selected verses found in the Holy Scriptures to justify the superiority of men owe more to time and place - and the determination of male leaders to hold onto their influence - than eternal truths...Welcome to motherhood, Kelis. Be the strong and fierce woman that you are. This is how great children are raised.
...During the years of the early Christian church women served as deacons, priests, bishops, apostles, teachers and prophets. It wasn't until the fourth century that dominant Christian leaders, all men, twisted and distorted Holy Scriptures to perpetuate their ascendant positions within the religious hierarchy...
The truth is that male religious leaders have had - and still have - an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter. Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world...
