Now I've never personally read that best-seller (as I've never been expecting anything of the baby variety), but I assume it makes a series of generalizations about the female body and typical baby growth and such. I wonder why it has been deemed the guru of all 'being pregnant' literature? If it is that easy to generalize symptoms like those, than why isn't there a definitive guide to let's say 'How you should feel when falling in L-O-V-E'?
The difference obviously is that one has scientific backing and the other, well let's face it, is a crap shoot; often a two-faced Indian coin toss, in fact (think Batman). There's nothing definitive about being in love, or falling in love, or the steps and stages anywhere in between. There's very few generally accepted statements that you can even make referring to it. Women and men react so differently to the same stimulation of whatever hormones effect brain chemistry and tell you, in nothing less than flashing neon (preferably pink) signs that you have feelings for another human being and that it may or may not border on the emotion better known as love. Just like anything involving hormones, some people are more inclined to react strongly, while others are less impacted.
Just some food for thought. Relationships are tough cookies, tread with stilettos not flip flops. And always carry bandages.
No comments:
Post a Comment