I wouldn't want to "cut" my husband out of the birth process. For one thing I wouldn't feel that I had the right to do this since the baby belonged to both of us...I had my 2 sons back in the "old days" where fathers didn't play as big a role as they do today in childbirth. But I was glad to have my (first) husband by my side as much as possible...I never really thought in terms of this being sentimental or not...Even though I was the one "carried" and gave "birth" to our sons it was always a "joint effort" and "shared experience" to me. (Just brought this up because it was mentioned in the opening post.)

I enjoy being sentimental about some things. And I never want to give this up...But I know it's not healthy to just live in the past...I have to "be present" in each and every new day and have some plans and dreams for my future too.

Subjective sentimentalism, either you're kidding or you're cynical ...

You might want to check with the father of the baby...he might view watching the birth of his child as something more than a sentimental or practical moment...

Family picture are not taken to remember what our loved ones look like, they are taken to document once in a life time moments, anniversaries, birthdays, weddings, vacations, stuff!...They are as Pix stated precious keepsakes, memories to share for years and years, family heritage to hand down from generation to generation...For example, my grandmother passed away long before I was born...All I have as a way to know her are a few pictures which I treasure...

And underwear...how does that figure into sentimental...If you want to let people know you don't wear panties or bras, just tell them....TMI!!!

that last one is more about 'practical' vs 'traditional'

and I understand being at the birth is totally subjective in its significance

I would be fine if the father wasnt into actually VIEWING The birth process, as long as he loved his child

I would also be fine if he felt the need to watch the process...

I just wouldnt personally have a NEED for him to,,,


and pictures, well, they are nice to have as documentation for future generations, but the need to carry them around in the present for people you already are seeing that same day,,,

is not really necessary, or something I am interested in doing,,,

most people that dont know ya, dont really CARE What your family looks like and those who care, probably already Know you well enough to have seen them,,,at least in my experience,,,


but I am just not a 'picture' person in general, I can read about the event without having to see the photo of it, and feel just as satisfied,,,

"...sentimentalism... obliterates any possibility of fuller reckoning with the complexities of history. In his essay "everybody's protest novel", James Baldwin argued that by cheapening tragedy, sentimental novels help to reinforce the reality that made the tragedy possible in the first place. Sentimentalism, Baldwin wrote ], is rooted in a "medieval morality of black, white the devil, the next world- posing alternatives between heaven and flames." -A. Zaitchik

I will translate what she is saying:

Yep most things are sentinmental , just cause they make you feel better, which makes things easier

As for undies, dont wear the things, I have never been able to see any reason for women to need them. its not like we have anything to hold in.

haaaaa

^5 just another thing created to make money,,totally unnecessary,,,

haaaaa

^5 just another thing created to make money,,totally unnecessary,,,

If you want to leave skid marks in jeans, shorts or slacks, then go for it. I'm not doing your laundry anyway.

If a top-heavy woman wants to be saggy, then I won't object. I might laugh, but I won't object.

Among you humans, who are more sentimental, men or women?

I only wear underwear if I date. (I don't want her to think I am slut)

Where I live is hotter than hell...throwing on another layer is just retarded.

I don't get the reason for poverty.

Doesn't the human race produce enough food, clothing, and housing for everybody to have enough to live on?

Are some folks using way more than they need, or are there just too many of us and too few resources?

I could go on for hours talking about the reasons for poverty, but that discussion should take place on a thread dedicated to that subject.

I thought the subject was, "things you don't get the point of".

Maybe I was mistaken.

I'm not crazy about pictures unless we are on a vacation in which I will capture the memory.

Undergarments are lame unless you. Need them, in which case my chest needs support, yes it's entirely necessary.

I'm not into hugging and kissing everyone every time I see them because it's the "cool/friendly" gesturey thing to do, it's fake if nothing else.

I find getting older some things are more sentimental than not. Especially knowing my kids aren't getting any younger.

I DO THINK a father should be at a child's birth for both purposes of moral support and it's their child, have a heart. It's like if neither of your parents came to your graduation....it shows you actually care and that you are proud.

My ex never came to my daughters ice skating or my sons basketball, but when they get awards he first one to brag about it... I feel like saying shut the hell up you don't even know how talented they are....

Yes, that is the subject of this thread. I would be hijacking this thread if I started to describe all of the reasons for poverty's existence. An in-depth discussion on that topic should be on a thread dedicated to that topic. At least that is my opinion.

Jeanniebean, I so TOTALLY agree with you!! July 16th would be soooo much better to celebrate independence day. I bet it would solve a lot of alleged illusions of independence.

Or if it were truly to celebrate independence, you could take that as a paid holiday off work, any time, any day, and as many days in a year as you independently wished to.

F, yeah. My kind of holiday. We'd have somehow link it in with cooking turkey. That's an absolute must on this continent. No self-respecting holiday can pass without slaughtering a turkey for each household around here.

On the other hand, history does not exist. History, as in a recount of summary of events in the chronological succession of societal events.

History does not exist because it is supposed to be a summary, which involves summarizing impressions (subjective, thus inaccurate) as much as summarizing facts. And summarizing, as a process, is selective, therefore human subjectivism is always a factoring agent what to include in the summary.

This is so because only humans can summarize.

I read once part of a very detailed summary of Hungary's history. It was about 200 times more detailed than the same topics covered in high school courses I took. So much so, that after a while it looked like the Hunter chasing Bugs Bunny in the house: lots of screaming, some running away, some chasing, both screaming, and the background kept repeating itself as if on a looped "infinite" tape that is moved constantly.

Because in this history book, more detailed, there were always kings, wars, people who wanted to dethrone the king, opportunists, people who wanted power, and the process kept repeating infinitely. You'd get dizzy reading that book if you get sick on marry-go-rounds.

-------------------
Another criticism of Baldwin can be summarized by saying that American style sentimentalism is incredibly different from European type sentimentalism in movies and literature. In America, Hemingway was a realist, and Disney a sentimentalist. In Europe, Hemingway is a true sentimentalist, and Disney, a sugar-coated trite kitch.

Realism is often indistinguishable from sentimentalism. Realism is real, and so is European sentimentalism. It is not the description of emotions, in emotional terms, that is the sign of European sentimentalism; but that it makes you cry, and cry bitterly and with gusto. And yet not one word in the piece said "heart" "love" "pain", "desolution", "beautiful". No, the words in European-style sentimentalism carry no individual loads of emotionality; instead, the message or the combination of words create the effect of bringing out emotions in the viewer or reader.

In America, sentimentality American style is used in schmalzy movies, in patriotic moves, in any movie that wins an Oscar. It is used in movies like "Red October". In America, movies of reality portray a lot of guns being fired, or a courtroom trial. Sometimes American-made movies are entertaining. At around the same rate as European movies, given the same amount of movies made.


Americans made one movie a long time ago, and all subsequent ones are made on the same idea and emotional paradigm. Good movies, even original and very entertaining movies use that prescription. Human expression is so, that it is able to produce the best art and the most vile art, given the same set of restrictions.

Freedom of breadth and depth of expression is not a factor at all in the creation of a potentially good or bad movie or book. Originality to be able to work well with what you got available as a creator is.

According to my calculations usign the above hypothesis, pregnant women would be well advised to always wear undies. Something might drop out, something the woman does not necessarily want to lose on the streetcar or on her way to the polling station. Pollinating station. Repollinating station.