[removed]

I guess I just bristle at the phrase "husband stitch" because it's reductive of a biological system that does not get nearly enough attention in medicine. Sex can hurt for five gagillion reasons after childbirth and more doctors need to recognize that, screen for it, and treat it.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

In east Asia, when the ruler is an empress regnant would she have concubines?

Edit: Also would the harem even be a thing if there was an empress regnant on the throne?

A blog on web MD is an opinion not a fact. Secondly, you're speaking of anecdotal evidence. One perspective among millions of perspectives on the topic.

That's not statistically significant and, quite frankly, it's disturbing that you think those are valid sources.

Or maybe the vulva is just so swollen and torn right after birth that stitching it back into place is more of an art than a science.

[removed]

I was speaking from personal experience, but here's an OB's take:

https://blogs.webmd.com/womens-health/20180316/an-ob-weighs-in-on-the-husband-stitch

Disclaimer that this is set during the Ptolemaic Dynasty. So these are most likely representations of Mediterranean colonizers -not the Ancient Native Egyptians.

[removed]

Source?

I wonder if something was lost in the shift from midwifery to male-dominated hospital births. Maybe our ancestors' midwives had knowledge of childbirth and recovery that's been lost to time or is only just being rediscovered.

What's right for you isn't right for anyone. Also, the literature doesn't support husband stitched as it messes with the way the vagina unfolds during sex.

Secondly, husbands would ask for this when their wife was under andI and couldn't consent to the "procedure". The entire basis for the "husband stitch" is misogynistic.

It is just as barbaric as FGM.

[removed]

The classic (but I’ve never seen it in 25 years of L&D work) “husband stitch” was put deep into the underlying muscle. A 1st degree tear is so shallow that it doesn’t effect the muscle.

Someone could tie a first degree tear stitch too tight, for sure, in an attempt to make the woman’s vulva “look right”, whatever that means.

So the issue was scar tissue. That's what I attributed my pelvic pain to after my first childbirth, until a pelvic floor therapist diagnosed vaginismus instead. She assigned pelvic relaxation exercises that might have been adjacent to massage.

I just think the phrase "husband stitch" is reductive and fails to acknowledge the complexity of pelvic floor dysfunction and treatment.

[removed]

[removed]

I am not a historian or history buff, so this is some anecdotal stuff that might help in your research. in brazil (and I believe other Latin cultures) there's a practice called "the husband's stitch" and it is exactly what I sounds like. the dr will do one or more stitches than needed after episiotomy or perineal tear, in order to make sex more pleasurable for the husband's, completely disregarding the woman's comfort and safety. a lot of people who had this done report extreme pain and sometimes can't have penetrative sex at all afterwards

Untrue. I was stitched “too close” after I had my first, and it was only a first degree tear to begin with. While I absolutely believe this was not an intentional “husband stitch”, it was observed by my postpartum midwife and I needed some massage to break up the scar tissue from that botched job. Luckily I’m fine now, and have had two uncomplicated births and easy recoveries since the .

It doesn't matter how it looks, neither will notice it. That's fine for vaginal intercourse. What about if the couple routinely partake in cunnilingus?

Perhaps the women didn't want any more kids and this was one way to discourage their men from wanting to have sex.

[removed]