Apes, including humans, are physiologically riders, meaning that they carry their babies with them as opposed to leaving them in nests or dens because their breast milk composition is not suited to leaving their infants alone for long periods of time (Ross, 2001). But unlike humans, apes don’t need a tool to carry their infants in part because they have body hair for their infants to cling to but it’s more complicated than simply having body hair and a baby that can grasp it. Hair strength, density, infant weight, carrying position, adult posture, and even humidity play a part in successful infant carrying without tool use. Continue reading
In western culture, there is a long tradition of women suffering through labor… something about an apple? Throughout the history of obstetrics, theories have been tossed about to explain humanity’s apparently unique difficulties in childbirth. One of the more recent is the Obstetrical Dilemma which posits that the female pelvis is too narrow to give birth to human babies (without a lot of professional, technical intervention, and even then… ) but too wide (wider, on average, than a male pelvis) to be efficient.
Racist Roots with a side of Misogyny
The OD hypothesis came into being around the same time that hospital birth was becoming the norm in the United States. In 1949, Aldoph H. Schultz, from the John Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland published a paper titled Sex Differences in the Pelves of Primates about the pelvic measurements of a variety male and female cadavers from a selection of primate species. Among these non-human primate species are chimpanzees, gorillas, and negroes.
Yes, you read that correctly. And if you aren’t horrified, I am not sure I want you reading my blog.
Schultz believed that black people represented a different species of primate, describing their pelvic measurements as more animalistic than whites, as a means of explaining why they had easier births. His research was used to justify the lack of medical care available to pregnant black women across the U.S. but even more so in the Jim Crow south. Continue reading
In honor of William Hogarth’s birthday, November 10th, I would like to analyze the babywearing featured in his March of the Guards to Finchley, painted in 1750. During the summer of 2017, I was fortunate to visit the Foundling Museum in London and see it in person.
It is important to note that babywearing is a very recent term associated with concepts, like attachment parenting, that was unheard of in the 18th century– I use the term here as a verb to describe “use of an infant carrier”.
Hogarth is one of my favorite artists. The level of detail, the characterization, and subject matter of his paintings and etchings keep me coming back again and again to find something new. Hogarth revolutionized the public’s consumption of art with mass-produced etchings of his painting sold on subscription. He is well known for his moralistic series of The Rake’s Progress and The Harlot’s Progress (the latter of which was made into a miniseries). His style combines realism and the satirical, the serious with the bawdy. Continue reading
When a chimpanzee is born, they are able to grasp their mother’s fur with their hands and feet and cling on effectively within weeks. A human newborn is not as strong or directed in their efforts though they still retain some of the so-called primitive reflexes from our common primate ancestor which fade as a human baby gets older. Newborn humans can strongly grasp with their hands (palmar grasp reflex) and they can flex their toes (plantar reflex) but due to their foot morphology, which lacks an opposable hallux (a big toe that looks more like a thumb) they cannot grasp with their feet as they do with their hands.
This is a problem for a species of “riders“, mammals whose breastmilk composition requires them to carry their baby with them for frequent feedings, unlike “parkers” whose offspring can be left for long stretches while their mother hunts or forages (or goes to the bathroom by herself for crying out loud!) If a baby cannot cling to it’s unlikely to survive, most rider mothers cannot afford the extra energy (literally in the form of calories) to carry their infant and it would certainly slow her down in the face of danger. Even if the mother did everything in her power to carry and protect her baby, the odds are against their survival and so that babies trait, the trait for not being able to cling on, wouldn’t get passed on. Unless of course, the mother was clever enough to make a technological adaptation for easier carrying… (you see where I am going here). Continue reading
Online communities can bridge nationalities and culture. They have their own lexicons, taboos, and beliefs. There are many online communities focused on babywearing, High End Babywearing is one that values carriers for their utility, as objects (even art), and for their monetary value. Carriers as investment pieces. Carriers as status symbols within their closed community. This interview was originally posted in Iowa City Babywearer’s blog, August 20th, 2015. Republished with permission of Kelsey Sandeno.
Today I interviewed Kelsey Sandeno about the world of High-End Babywearing. We discussed the distinctions between High End (HE), Highly Sought After (HSA), and Hard-To-Find (HTF) carriers, as well as some of the jargon found in High-End Babywearing communities. Continue reading
The use of infant carriers wasn’t a novel concept in North America in the 20th century but it had a stigma of poverty or transience attached to their use in the West since the European Middle Ages. The post-war (WWII) Baby Boom seems to be the impetus for changing attitudes about infant carriers over the following half-century. Patents for infant carrying devices were filed in quick succession after WWII ended. Even though traditional infant carriers were known of and in use, North American parents wanted innovated forms made of new materials for their modern lifestyles. Yet even then, many people were suspicious of use infant carriers and the implications for the relationship between parent and child.
Humans, like the other Great Apes, are physiologically riders; breast milk composition is not suited to parking infants for long periods between feeding (Ross). For this reason among many others, our species has had to carry our babies with us wherever we go. Unfortunately, humans find carrying infants more difficult than our evolutionary cousins for three reasons: lack non-grasping feet and body hair, physically helpless infants and, most importantly for this post, the relative size of our infants.
Non-human apes in the taxonomic family Hominidae (literally means “Great Ape” and makes me think of Charlotte’s Web’s “Some Pig” but I digress) have smaller, more precocious babies than humans. Adult gorillas, for example, are significantly larger than adult humans, yet their newborns are about half the size of human newborns. Chimpanzees, which are our closest extant evolutionary relative and have a similar adult body weight to us, give birth to newborns that are around 3% of their adult size, while humans have newborns that are around 6% of adult size (DeSilva). At what point since our common ancestor with chimpanzees, did hominins start having bigger babies? Continue reading