Stitch rule

Common and disgusting, but unfortunately not always a joke. You probably know this but for the benefit of others who may not be aware, the Husband Stitch is a real thing that used to be pretty commonly done regardless of what the woman wanted and often without her foreknowledge or consent. It's an extra stitch or two placed when sewing a woman back up after a vaginal tear or episiotomy during labor. The purpose is to make the woman "tighter" so her husband can still enjoy having sex with her even though she's given birth, which is staggeringly misogynistic and cruel. And it usually results in really painful sex for the woman because her vaginal opening is artificially small plus now it has inflexible scar tissue. It's a horrific thing to do to a woman, especially after giving birth.

still enjoy having sex with her

If you need that to enjoy your partner you don't deserve them. That disgusting
Thank you for providing additional information!
Yep, a useful comment. I had no idea about such a thing.
Another thing to note is that the episiotomy itself is no longer a recommended procedure for routine births. The incision lengthens recovery time and brings complications of its own.
- Unfortunately, medical violence is a thing and many professionals, even when saying the episiotomy is a decision for the woman, put it in such a way that the message conveyed is that the episiotomy makes giving birth easier and quicker. What is witheld is that it makes it easier for them.
  
  Giving birth was turned into a surgical event, when it is only a phisiological one.
  
  Speaking as someone who would have been stillborn if not for a C-section, there are some surgical procedures that are kind of important.
  
  A C-section is a surgical act and extremely important as it has the potential to save lifes, both of mothers and children.
  
  The matter at hand is not about deeming all medical acts performed during a delivery as useless but to acknowledge that many are performed routinely without need and even without the agreement, previous information or consent of the woman and mother to be.
  
  One such is that oh-so-important act being routenily abused, with doctors pushing it to women with the argument that it is the safest way to plan the delivery. But planning a delivery is only a concern for the physician. If a pregnancy is normal under all aspects and there are no telling signs the delivery will be complicated, why point women to an unnecessary surgical act?
  
  "If a ... is normal under all aspects and there are no telling signs the ... will be complicated, why point ... to an unnecessary surgical act?"
  
  Minzdrav, is that you? /j
  
  Americans, please, for love of everyone you love, nationalize your healthcare.
  
  Giving birth was turned into a surgical event, when it is only a phisiological one.
  
  How can a woman give birth without the machine that goes PING?
  
  Which one?
  
  Seventh. Or you mean the machine?
  
  Which machine?
- I was under the impression it was forthe woman's benefit, that it is easier for a cut to heal than a tear. Is that not the case? Is the risk of tearing overblown?
  
  I think you actually have that backward. In general, a jagged tear heals quicker than an incision because there is more surface area in contact between the two pieces, so a larger number of cells can be working to repair the tissue. That said, I'm not a doctor and it's been 10 years since my wife and I looked into this before our first kid, so I may be misremembering.
  
  Nope, you got it right: my wife had to c-sections and afaik they cut just enough tissue to make possible to tear it apart. It healed very well.
  
  Glad your wife healed well; my wife had three c-sections and the first one was done by a very old-school OB in an emergency situation, so she never stood a chance. That said, even old-school c-sections are better than my wife and son dying in childbirth, so I'm still grateful for modern medicine, but it would have been nice if it was a little more "modern"
  
  Were the second and third child almost guaranteed to be born by C-section? My GF first childbirth had 2 incidents that had risks for the second pregnancy. We were a bit scared for the second birth. But it when the opposite way. She almost gave birth in the car. There wasn't even an hour and a half between the first real contractions and the birth of our child.
  
  I'm asking because I am curious to hear about different experiences than mine
  
  We live in a small town in a state that has a law that to attempt a VBAC, the hospital must have an full surgery team on site. It being such a small hospital meant they almost never had a full staff at any given point, so the second two were scheduled C-sections.
  
  However, like your experience, my wife went into natural labor the night before the second C-section was scheduled and almost certainly could have delivered naturally, but the hospital went ahead with the C-section anyway
  
  Ah I understand better. We have a lot of friends that have kids and they all pretty much had birth in a hospital, and to me it seems like they were a schedule and they all had a scheduled delivery and if the birth wasn't done by then, the doctors provoked the labor.
  
  We are lucky to have a midwife school program here that trains midwife as expert in pregnancy, birth and early weeks of the babies life, and our experience felt a lot more intimate. Like, they are legit medical expert in their field. The only restriction is that they cannot work with women with at risk pregnancy (so twins, mother ailments, etc).
  
  We had both pregnancy with the same midwife and we were lucky that both times, she was on call when my girlfriend went into labor. We were both times in the same delivery room at the birthhouse. It was radically different than what our friends experienced.
  
  Thanks for sharing
  
  These days, an epesiotomy is done to direct the tear. If the tear is allowed to happen spontaneously, it can go through nerves, arteries, and pelvic floor muscles, greatly increasing the chances of permanent problems with things like prolapses or fistulas at worst, and more commonly, long term problems with incontinence.
  
  It’s not about the surface area, a tear heals without creating a straight line of inflexible scar tissue in flexible tissue. You recover faster and better, because you distribute the new connections throughout the tissue, you don’t have this one rigid perforation to tear, so you don’t have to be healed up all the way before you can get back on your feet
  
  In general, it’s the opposite though - a sharp cut heals much faster than a rip, there’s far less damage to repair
  
  Thanks for the explanation!
  
  You recover faster and better, because you distribute the new connections throughout the tissue, you don’t have this one rigid perforation to tear, so you don’t have to be healed up all the way before you can get back on your feet
  
  Isn't this a function of the surface area, though?
  
  I mean…sort of? I can’t say that’s wrong, but I also don’t think it’s the full picture
  
  Like imagine a cut rope. Gluing the ends together joins it with a weak point, but if you unravel the ends and weave them back together, you can create a very strong connection, even without glue
  
  Yes, the surface area in the latter is far greater, but in addition to the surface area you have the structure - the weave itself grants strength, because when you pull the rope the fibers compress against each other, making it stronger than just surface area contact
  
  I think it’s kinda like that, surface area certainly plays a big part, but I think it’s more than that. It lets the muscles reweave themselves - as opposed to the skin and the uterus lining, which are cut in straight lines to minimize damaged surface area - they’re more like cloth than rope, you stitch them up in neat lines
... Jesus fucking Christ...
To add to your "for the benefit of others" explanation, this is also not a historical relic. It's still happening.

I work with refugees and a lot of women escaping fundie warzones are living with variations of this nightmare. So much mutilation, as little girls, preteens, post-giving-birth... Infections are common, tearing is common, and sex is torture. I've been doing this job long enough that I recognize the walk.
- Unholy fuckery! This makes me glad to live in country, where to get an operation you need to visit 9001 doctors and get 100500 approvals.

Jesus Christ, what kind of sick person comes up with stuff like that?

After the mother gives birth to a healthy baby boy, the father leans to the doctor and whispers “how long until we can have sex?”. The doctor replies, “I clock off at 3.”
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/husband-stitch-is-not-just-myth

testosterone poisoning
I worked for a man that thought it would be a funny thing to say soon after the delivery.

Look, I'm a guy. I laughed, until his (now ex) said that he actually said it.

I mean come on. It's funny as a joke, you don't ACTUALLY say that to a delivery nurse, my god.
- Yeah, people who act like it could never be funny are insufferable and people who actually do it are psychos.
Men 🤷🏻
- Sick people that's who.
  
  Ok but in this case it's men, specifically. That is what the hashtag is about.
  
  That's very generalising though.
  
  Personally, I try to avoid that whenever possible.
  
  When this was invented, the majority of doctors were men.
  
  It’s not generalizing if it’s true.
  
  Good on you.
  
  It's not generalising tho, these women describe situations they have experienced.
  
  It's not generalising tho, these women describe situations they have experienced.
  
  I never said it has never happened, just that you shouldn't put the blame on an entire gender.
  
  What are you even talking about? This post is about a specific example of misogyny in which a man is the perpetrator. You asked "who comes up with this?" and the answer is: men.
  
  First of all, I never asked you. I already knew what you would answer.
  
  The point is that a man is the perpetrator and not men as a whole.
  
  A much better and more precise answer to the question is "bad men", "sick people", "sick men".
  
  Saying that the gender itself is the problem is very generalising. A similar example could be "black people are criminals".
  
  You wouldn't make the same kind of generalising statements about other groups would you?
  
  If you want things to improve it's best not to alienate those sympathetic to your cause by associating them with shitty people by virtue of how they were born. Or else they might just go and become one of those shitty people too.
  
  Huh, and here all the men I know have never even the slightest bit upset about broad generalizing statements about men because they are secure in the knowledge that the statement doesn't apply to them... Sounds like a skill issue tbh.
  
  This statement doesn't apply to me. Still, when I am constantly lumped in the same category as rapists, sexual predators and any or all other demeaning terms, it does start to affect my self-esteem and make me doubt myself.
  
  Just like when you look at social medias and all the women are perfect. You know it's a tuned photo with a lot of work behind it. But you see it all the time : on your phone, TV and ads in general. And it does affect women, even if the beauty standards are irrealist, and humans come in all size and forms.
  
  This is the same principle in the two cases.
  
  The difference is that those photos are presented as if the unrealistic thing is desirable. As if it is something that everyone should want to be. While you're hearing "I wish men would stop being creepy" and acting like they're directly calling you personally a creep.
  
  I'm an AMAB nonbinary person, basically every time a woman sees me I can see her instinctively preparing for me to be that exact guy because I look like if Bigfoot dressed as Bob from Bob's Burgers. It sends my dysphoria through the roof every time. But even I can manage not to get bent out of shape when women call out men being toxic because I know I'm not guilty of the things they're calling out.
  
  So I say again. Sounds like a skill issue
  
  Do you realize that the exemple you give is the same principle as you criticize?
  
  It sends my dysphoria through the roof every time.
  
  But even I can manage not to get bent out of shape [...]
  
  You are sure about that? Dysphoria is a pretty big deal.
  
  Seems to me you still internalize the generalization made about people in your situation and it does affect you. Same as my examples.
  
  I can make the difference between women calling "all men" and myself as a person, and that wasn't my point.
  
  If everywhere you look, there is someone or something telling you that you are a bad person because of something you can't control, you can be as stoic as you want, it will affect you negatively. It's not a matter of if, but when.
  
  And it seems to me that you don't understand that my response was directly to your response to OP, not the #AllMen debate.
  
  Did... Did you just try to imply that my dysphoria is from me internalizing women saying men bad?
  
  So what is your point?
  
  What is your smug, dismissive attitude achieving?
  
  I know this statement doesn't apply to me, but it still hurts me. Just the same as any generalisation.
  
  I'm sure you'll say something about privilege, and I somewhat agree, but someone having privilege does not make it okay to completely dismiss them and group them in with shitty people for things out of their control.
  
  And again, rhetoric like this is one of the reason that young men are moving away from progressives into the hands of the alt-right. If you want things to get better and want men to be better, the first step is to not be an asshole to them for no reason.
  
  Oh no I get grouped in with shitty people all the time. I'm AMAB and I look very much like a man. I am acutely aware of how I'm seen. I see every single woman that sees me and instinctively recoils in anticipation of me being exactly that kind of man. It sends my dysphoria through the roof to be seen and perceived that way every single second of every single day. I deal with that pain all the time.
  
  But do you know what I don't do? I don't turn that around on women who are validly pointing out saying they hate when men do something messed up or creepy to women and tell them that they need to be more considerate of MY feelings on the matter. I don't tell them that they need to stop being an asshole to me if they want me to care about their issues.
  
  Personally I think there's a big difference between being perceived as a man and being directly told "no it's not "shitty people", it's men"
  
  You can't really do much about people's perception, but you can absolutely change whether you're directly a dick to someone because of how they were born.

Thanks for explaining it, wouldn't have understood it otherwise.

Not just a joke. It’s a thing that used to be more common but is still sometimes done.

I had a doctor straight-faced tell an entire class of college students about it, and how it was a good thing. This was within the last 15 years. I would bet it is still far more common we'd want to imagine.

Thanks for explaining it

Common and hilarious*