Fat baby

kqualls5

So I'm 26 weeks, 5 days. We had an ultrasound done yesterday because of some abnormalities found at our 18 week ultrasound (everything resolved on its own, he's perfectly healthy). But. He already weighs 2.7lbs. And everything I've read on pregnancy trackers say they should be nearing 2 lbs at 27 weeks. My question is more so for not first time moms, have any of you had babies measuring a little ahead of the weight game but not have to deliver a 10 pound baby?

peppercorn16

The estimates can be off in either direction-- e.g. he could be smaller or larger than the estimate you were given-- and sometimes by quite a lot. The pregnancy trackers are also just an "average" and are certainly not right on for every pregnancy, or else we would all be born at the same weight! If your doctor isn't concerned, try and relax momma!

kqualls5

BostonTerrior2008 said:

"Fat Baby" for your title? Seriously?

Ultrasounds are notorious for being off +/- 2lbs. They are just estimates, not an exact science. Babies grow at different rates, have growth spurts in utero, etc.

kqualls5 said:

So I'm 26 weeks, 5 days. We had an ultrasound done yesterday because of some abnormalities found at our 18 week ultrasound (everything resolved on its own, he's perfectly healthy). But. He already weighs 2.7lbs. And everything I've read on pregnancy trackers say they should be nearing 2 lbs at 27 weeks. My question is more so for not first time moms, have any of you had babies measuring a little ahead of the weight game but not have to deliver a 10 pound baby?

Yep that is my title... And I know they get growth spurts. I was just asking if anyone had similar experiences with them being in a higher weight percentile at first but ended up "average". (Don't really want to push a huge baby out, and everyone around me who have had children are making it seem like I will, based on yesterday's measurements.)

kqualls5

peppercorn16 said:

The estimates can be off in either direction-- e.g. he could be smaller or larger than the estimate you were given-- and sometimes by quite a lot. The pregnancy trackers are also just an "average" and are certainly not right on for every pregnancy, or else we would all be born at the same weight! If your doctor isn't concerned, try and relax momma!

Ah that makes sense. I had no idea that the measurements could be off! Trying to relax, just approaching my due date is making me paranoid about every situation, one being having to push out a giant. Thank you for the info!!

erincjackson

I measured ahead with all of my pregnancies and my biggest baby was 8lb 3oz which I don't consider too big. As pp have mentioned there is a margin of error in ultrasound measurements also.

kqualls5

erincjackson said:

I measured ahead with all of my pregnancies and my biggest baby was 8lb 3oz which I don't consider too big. As pp have mentioned there is a margin of error in ultrasound measurements also.

Thank you

sorarose

My DS measured 2 weeks ahead most of my pregnancy, and I was terrified! He was born shy of 39 weeks and weighed 7lb in change. U/S can be off, so don't worry about it!

PrimRoseMama

kqualls5 said:

"Fat Baby" for your title? Seriously? Ultrasounds are notorious for being off +/- 2lbs. They are just estimates, not an exact science. Babies grow at different rates, have growth spurts in utero, etc.

So I'm 26 weeks, 5 days. We had an ultrasound done yesterday because of some abnormalities found at our 18 week ultrasound (everything resolved on its own, he's perfectly healthy). But. He already weighs 2.7lbs. And everything I've read on pregnancy trackers say they should be nearing 2 lbs at 27 weeks. My question is more so for not first time moms, have any of you had babies measuring a little ahead of the weight game but not have to deliver a 10 pound baby?

Yep that is my title... And I know they get growth spurts. I was just asking if anyone had similar experiences with them being in a higher weight percentile at first but ended up "average". (Don't really want to push a huge baby out, and everyone around me who have had children are making it seem like I will, based on yesterday's measurements.)

My son measured 9 lbs going towards delivery at 41 weeks. They were worried he would be an 11 lb baby. I was borderline GD and so larger babies in that case are not unheard of. They measured DD at 37 weeks at 10 lbs. Same situation.

DD was 6 lbs 12oz.
DS was 7 lbs 11oz.

So in my case I think weight measurement can be way off and given my experience I wouldn't worry about it. Traditionally, a large baby is not grounds for an elective C section anyway. So, you might be pushing a larger baby out because that is how babies are traditionally born. So, if that worries you then you have other issues to consider.

ArtlessIbex

I was warned that DD would probably be 9 lbs, and I may need a c section.
I had a natural vaginal birth and she was 6 lbs, 6 oz.

Nicolewinsbingo

My son measured big...I think 2 weeks ahead. I got big fast with him. He decided to come out early at 37w6d at 8lb3.5oz. If he had waited until term I guess he may have weighed around 9-9.5lbs. I think their head size matters more when pushing anyways. My guy had a big head, but the delivery was still good, no stitches.

delujm0

DD was measured at 26 weeks and was developmentally right on track but in the 27th percentile for size (i forget the exact weight). She was born at 39+6 weighing 7lbs 7oz (so basically exactly average) and 20.5" long which is in the 95th percentile.

So...the ultrasound measurements really can be garbage, and in either direction. Don't stress about it.

PrimRoseMama

BostonTerrior2008 said:

kqualls5 said:

BostonTerrior2008 said:

"Fat Baby" for your title? Seriously?

Ultrasounds are notorious for being off +/- 2lbs. They are just estimates, not an exact science. Babies grow at different rates, have growth spurts in utero, etc.

kqualls5 said:

So I'm 26 weeks, 5 days. We had an ultrasound done yesterday because of some abnormalities found at our 18 week ultrasound (everything resolved on its own, he's perfectly healthy). But. He already weighs 2.7lbs. And everything I've read on pregnancy trackers say they should be nearing 2 lbs at 27 weeks. My question is more so for not first time moms, have any of you had babies measuring a little ahead of the weight game but not have to deliver a 10 pound baby?

Yep that is my title... And I know they get growth spurts. I was just asking if anyone had similar experiences with them being in a higher weight percentile at first but ended up "average". (Don't really want to push a huge baby out, and everyone around me who have had children are making it seem like I will, based on yesterday's measurements.)

Sorry, but I find it sad that you label your LO as "fat" while in utero. Though, you probably meant measuring ahead, but still using the term fat is not appropriate, IMO.

Agree. Too loaded a term for an infant not even born yet.

kqualls5

PrimRoseMama said:

BostonTerrior2008 said:

kqualls5 said:

BostonTerrior2008 said:

"Fat Baby" for your title? Seriously?

Ultrasounds are notorious for being off +/- 2lbs. They are just estimates, not an exact science. Babies grow at different rates, have growth spurts in utero, etc.

kqualls5 said:

So I'm 26 weeks, 5 days. We had an ultrasound done yesterday because of some abnormalities found at our 18 week ultrasound (everything resolved on its own, he's perfectly healthy). But. He already weighs 2.7lbs. And everything I've read on pregnancy trackers say they should be nearing 2 lbs at 27 weeks. My question is more so for not first time moms, have any of you had babies measuring a little ahead of the weight game but not have to deliver a 10 pound baby?

Yep that is my title... And I know they get growth spurts. I was just asking if anyone had similar experiences with them being in a higher weight percentile at first but ended up "average". (Don't really want to push a huge baby out, and everyone around me who have had children are making it seem like I will, based on yesterday's measurements.)

Sorry, but I find it sad that you label your LO as "fat" while in utero. Though, you probably meant measuring ahead, but still using the term fat is not appropriate, IMO.

Agree. Too loaded a term for an infant not even born yet.

I'm really thankful for replies I've gotten about certain things I've struggled with, and the search bar has been my best friend when I'm paranoid something is only happening to me. But. (This is not me starting a fight so please don't roast me, just standing up for my "inappropriate" title) a lot of you guys are overly sensitive about things, like saying gender vs. sex, or showing genitals on ultrasound photos (seriously, not the same as showing their privates after their born, people). I love my healthy baby boy, but the ultrasound (measurements & 3d photos) make him look like he could be a chunk. Does that mean I'm going to call him fat boy when he's here & make fun of him & be insensitive? Nope.. I just don't get why it's so inappropriate. I promise I did not hurt his feelings with my title.

Miss Lilac

kqualls5 said:

PrimRoseMama said:

BostonTerrior2008 said:

kqualls5 said:

BostonTerrior2008 said:

"Fat Baby" for your title? Seriously?

Ultrasounds are notorious for being off +/- 2lbs. They are just estimates, not an exact science. Babies grow at different rates, have growth spurts in utero, etc.

kqualls5 said:

So I'm 26 weeks, 5 days. We had an ultrasound done yesterday because of some abnormalities found at our 18 week ultrasound (everything resolved on its own, he's perfectly healthy). But. He already weighs 2.7lbs. And everything I've read on pregnancy trackers say they should be nearing 2 lbs at 27 weeks. My question is more so for not first time moms, have any of you had babies measuring a little ahead of the weight game but not have to deliver a 10 pound baby?

Yep that is my title... And I know they get growth spurts. I was just asking if anyone had similar experiences with them being in a higher weight percentile at first but ended up "average". (Don't really want to push a huge baby out, and everyone around me who have had children are making it seem like I will, based on yesterday's measurements.)

Sorry, but I find it sad that you label your LO as "fat" while in utero. Though, you probably meant measuring ahead, but still using the term fat is not appropriate, IMO.

Agree. Too loaded a term for an infant not even born yet.

I'm really thankful for replies I've gotten about certain things I've struggled with, and the search bar has been my best friend when I'm paranoid something is only happening to me. But. (This is not me starting a fight so please don't roast me, just standing up for my "inappropriate" title) a lot of you guys are overly sensitive about things, like saying gender vs. sex, or showing genitals on ultrasound photos (seriously, not the same as showing their privates after their born, people). I love my healthy baby boy, but the ultrasound (measurements & 3d photos) make him look like he could be a chunk. Does that mean I'm going to call him fat boy when he's here & make fun of him & be insensitive? Nope.. I just don't get why it's so inappropriate. I promise I did not hurt his feelings with my title.

Upgraded to "chunk." How charming.

DustyMelons

kqualls5 said:

"Fat Baby" for your title? Seriously?

I'm really thankful for replies I've gotten about certain things I've struggled with, and the search bar has been my best friend when I'm paranoid something is only happening to me. But. (This is not me starting a fight so please don't roast me, just standing up for my "inappropriate" title) a lot of you guys are overly sensitive about things, like saying gender vs. sex, or showing genitals on ultrasound photos (seriously, not the same as showing their privates after their born, people). I love my healthy baby boy, but the ultrasound (measurements & 3d photos) make him look like he could be a chunk. Does that mean I'm going to call him fat boy when he's here & make fun of him & be insensitive? Nope.. I just don't get why it's so inappropriate. I promise I did not hurt his feelings with my title.

Hmm, maybe you have a point. Traditionally regular posters here are big on using correct terms.

Maybe you should rename this thread to "Fat Fetus" instead.

sorarose

kqualls5 said:

"Fat Baby" for your title? Seriously? Ultrasounds are notorious for being off +/- 2lbs. They are just estimates, not an exact science. Babies grow at different rates, have growth spurts in utero, etc.

So I'm 26 weeks, 5 days. We had an ultrasound done yesterday because of some abnormalities found at our 18 week ultrasound (everything resolved on its own, he's perfectly healthy). But. He already weighs 2.7lbs. And everything I've read on pregnancy trackers say they should be nearing 2 lbs at 27 weeks. My question is more so for not first time moms, have any of you had babies measuring a little ahead of the weight game but not have to deliver a 10 pound baby?

Yep that is my title... And I know they get growth spurts. I was just asking if anyone had similar experiences with them being in a higher weight percentile at first but ended up "average". (Don't really want to push a huge baby out, and everyone around me who have had children are making it seem like I will, based on yesterday's measurements.)

Sorry, but I find it sad that you label your LO as "fat" while in utero. Though, you probably meant measuring ahead, but still using the term fat is not appropriate, IMO.

Agree. Too loaded a term for an infant not even born yet.

I'm really thankful for replies I've gotten about certain things I've struggled with, and the search bar has been my best friend when I'm paranoid something is only happening to me. But. (This is not me starting a fight so please don't roast me, just standing up for my "inappropriate" title) a lot of you guys are overly sensitive about things, like saying gender vs. sex, or showing genitals on ultrasound photos (seriously, not the same as showing their privates after their born, people). I love my healthy baby boy, but the ultrasound (measurements & 3d photos) make him look like he could be a chunk. Does that mean I'm going to call him fat boy when he's here & make fun of him & be insensitive? Nope.. I just don't get why it's so inappropriate. I promise I did not hurt his feelings with my title.

Listen, I think it's weird to share u/s pictures with perfect strangers anyway and I understand why people get heated when the terms sex and gender are used synonymously. However, I do have to agree with you here on the "fat" comment. I'm not sure why we're immediately jumping to the conclusion that OP is using it in a derogatory way. I took her for being sarcastic and didn't think anything of it; I'm going to trust she won't fat-shame her child.

And personally, I love a chubby baby. The more rolls, the merrier. 

kynbar5

I agree with pp on being off on weight either way. My 4th was suppose to be 10+ lbs and was a little over 8 which isn't that bad. And for the record, fat, chunky, thick, etc. babies are so much cuter and I prefer mine that way.

maelic

My daughter measured ahead the entire third trimester and was 9.5 lbs and relatively short, so she was plenty chunky. My vulva has only somewhat recovered and now I'm putting it through the paces again with number 2, who is a boy and likely to be bigger. Hooray! 

Bigboobsmcgee

sorarose said:

 

Listen, I think it's weird to share u/s pictures with perfect strangers anyway and I understand why people get heated when the terms sex and gender are used synonymously. However, I do have to agree with you here on the "fat" comment. I'm not sure why we're immediately jumping to the conclusion that OP is using it in a derogatory way. I took her for being sarcastic and didn't think anything of it; I'm going to trust she won't fat-shame her child.

And personally, I love a chubby baby. The more rolls, the merrier. 

Because people, especially the regular posters, love to assume the worst in people and their comments and they love telling other people they are wrong.

I agree with you on the rest.

Bigboobsmcgee

 

ArtlessIbex said:

I was warned that DD would probably be 9 lbs, and I may need a c section. I had a natural vaginal birth and she was 6 lbs, 6 oz.

A c-section for a 9lb baby?!

Both of my kids were 9lbs 1oz and I pushed them out vaginally. My OB also told me they were going to be bigger than that so I was relieved when they were ONLY 9 pounds

Bigboobsmcgee

Miss Lilac said:

"Fat Baby" for your title? Seriously? Ultrasounds are notorious for being off +/- 2lbs. They are just estimates, not an exact science. Babies grow at different rates, have growth spurts in utero, etc.

So I'm 26 weeks, 5 days. We had an ultrasound done yesterday because of some abnormalities found at our 18 week ultrasound (everything resolved on its own, he's perfectly healthy). But. He already weighs 2.7lbs. And everything I've read on pregnancy trackers say they should be nearing 2 lbs at 27 weeks. My question is more so for not first time moms, have any of you had babies measuring a little ahead of the weight game but not have to deliver a 10 pound baby?

Yep that is my title... And I know they get growth spurts. I was just asking if anyone had similar experiences with them being in a higher weight percentile at first but ended up "average". (Don't really want to push a huge baby out, and everyone around me who have had children are making it seem like I will, based on yesterday's measurements.)

Sorry, but I find it sad that you label your LO as "fat" while in utero. Though, you probably meant measuring ahead, but still using the term fat is not appropriate, IMO.

Agree. Too loaded a term for an infant not even born yet.

I'm really thankful for replies I've gotten about certain things I've struggled with, and the search bar has been my best friend when I'm paranoid something is only happening to me. But. (This is not me starting a fight so please don't roast me, just standing up for my "inappropriate" title) a lot of you guys are overly sensitive about things, like saying gender vs. sex, or showing genitals on ultrasound photos (seriously, not the same as showing their privates after their born, people). I love my healthy baby boy, but the ultrasound (measurements & 3d photos) make him look like he could be a chunk. Does that mean I'm going to call him fat boy when he's here & make fun of him & be insensitive? Nope.. I just don't get why it's so inappropriate. I promise I did not hurt his feelings with my title.

Upgraded to "chunk." How charming.

Good lord, get over it.

llybeck

Bigboobsmcgee said:

sorarose said:

 

Listen, I think it's weird to share u/s pictures with perfect strangers anyway and I understand why people get heated when the terms sex and gender are used synonymously. However, I do have to agree with you here on the "fat" comment. I'm not sure why we're immediately jumping to the conclusion that OP is using it in a derogatory way. I took her for being sarcastic and didn't think anything of it; I'm going to trust she won't fat-shame her child.

And personally, I love a chubby baby. The more rolls, the merrier. 

Because people, especially the regular posters, love to assume the worst in people and their comments and they love telling other people they are wrong.

I agree with you on the rest.

Saying a kid/baby/fetus is fat doesn't really sit well with a lot of people. I've heard a few people say this IRL and others have asked them not to. Fat isn't usually a term of endearment, it has nothing to do with regular posters thinking the worst of people, it's just not a term a lot of people like to hear in regards to someone else. It's a bit cringeworthy for some. 

Bigboobsmcgee

llybeck said:

Bigboobsmcgee said:

sorarose said:

 

Listen, I think it's weird to share u/s pictures with perfect strangers anyway and I understand why people get heated when the terms sex and gender are used synonymously. However, I do have to agree with you here on the "fat" comment. I'm not sure why we're immediately jumping to the conclusion that OP is using it in a derogatory way. I took her for being sarcastic and didn't think anything of it; I'm going to trust she won't fat-shame her child.

And personally, I love a chubby baby. The more rolls, the merrier. 

Because people, especially the regular posters, love to assume the worst in people and their comments and they love telling other people they are wrong.

I agree with you on the rest.

Saying a kid/baby/fetus is fat doesn't really sit well with a lot of people. I've heard a few people say this IRL and others have asked them not to. Fat isn't usually a term of endearment, it has nothing to do with regular posters thinking the worst of people, it's just not a term a lot of people like to hear in regards to someone else. It's a bit cringeworthy for some. 

Yes, clearly. I'm not surprised that it bothers people on here.

fourtsixand2

Bigboobsmcgee said:

 

ArtlessIbex said:

I was warned that DD would probably be 9 lbs, and I may need a c section. I had a natural vaginal birth and she was 6 lbs, 6 oz.

A c-section for a 9lb baby?!

Both of my kids were 9lbs 1oz and I pushed them out vaginally. My OB also told me they were going to be bigger than that so I was relieved when they were ONLY 9 pounds

Could be a legitimate concern if, say, the mother is petite?  I'm a FTM but I have 'heard' that smaller women have a harder time delivering large(r) than average babies.  I'm 5'1" myself, but a little chunky - surely do hope a c-section isn't forced unless absolutely necessary.

Bigboobsmcgee

fourtsixand2 said:

Bigboobsmcgee said:

 

ArtlessIbex said:

I was warned that DD would probably be 9 lbs, and I may need a c section. I had a natural vaginal birth and she was 6 lbs, 6 oz.

A c-section for a 9lb baby?!

Both of my kids were 9lbs 1oz and I pushed them out vaginally. My OB also told me they were going to be bigger than that so I was relieved when they were ONLY 9 pounds

Could be a legitimate concern if, say, the mother is petite?  I'm a FTM but I have 'heard' that smaller women have a harder time delivering large(r) than average babies.  I'm 5'1" myself, but a little chunky - surely do hope a c-section isn't forced unless absolutely necessary.

Hope not! 

I'm 5'9" so maybe that helped with my gigantic babies. (Sorry, is the word "gigantic" too offensive?!)

PrimRoseMama

Traditionally, other words like "gigantic", "large" & "big" do not carry the same weight as the word Fat. 

Fat is not a nice word with regards to the average person. It might be different for infants, but even my pediatrician avoids it with regards to babies/toddlers/children that are on the percentiles that can be bigger. Its just a matter of being conscious of the power that words have. So, I don't think its out of line to say that calling your fetus "fat" straight out of the gate can border on an unhealthy view of what a healthy baby should be.   

ecwk

Qbf

Because people, especially the regular posters, love to assume the worst in people and their comments and they love telling other people they are wrong.



As far as the fat debate goes, I just don't see it as offensive when referring to a baby. I think fat babies are awesome. I mean that in the most affectionate and least derogatory way you can imagine.

delujm0

I call my 18lb 4 month old my "lil fatty" all the time...I think her fat rolls and enormous thighs are adorable. Is it a little weird to refer to an unborn baby as fat? Kind of....usually you hear them just called large or big. But I didn't take the OP to mean this in a derogatory way. I think we need to move on from the fat debate.

That being said my initial advice stands...a scan at 26 weeks will tell you just about nothing about the baby's ultimate size at birth, so don't worry about it. I know lots of women that delivered 9+ pound babies vaginally and they all recovered just fine.

kyraaD

as for OP's question: like PP's have said, the estimates they give you on baby's weight can be off by quite a bit. i doubt you'll be pushing out a 10lbs baby!! haha. but i understand the worry. I'm so scared my LO will be a big baby. my SO was over 8lbs, where as i was only 6lbs. we shall see!

as for the "calling fetus fat" debate: i dont understand why so many ladies on here are butthurt about it. i HIGHLY doubt that OP meant it as a derogatory comment towards her own unborn child. & honestly, you want a fat baby. fat = healthy. if someone told me my baby was fat, i would take it as a compliment! some people are just WAY too sensitive IMO.

kaila1980

those wight estimations could be off... 

llybeck

Bigboobsmcgee said:

llybeck said:

Bigboobsmcgee said:

sorarose said:

 

Listen, I think it's weird to share u/s pictures with perfect strangers anyway and I understand why people get heated when the terms sex and gender are used synonymously. However, I do have to agree with you here on the "fat" comment. I'm not sure why we're immediately jumping to the conclusion that OP is using it in a derogatory way. I took her for being sarcastic and didn't think anything of it; I'm going to trust she won't fat-shame her child.

And personally, I love a chubby baby. The more rolls, the merrier. 

Because people, especially the regular posters, love to assume the worst in people and their comments and they love telling other people they are wrong.

I agree with you on the rest.

Saying a kid/baby/fetus is fat doesn't really sit well with a lot of people. I've heard a few people say this IRL and others have asked them not to. Fat isn't usually a term of endearment, it has nothing to do with regular posters thinking the worst of people, it's just not a term a lot of people like to hear in regards to someone else. It's a bit cringeworthy for some. 

Yes, clearly. I'm not surprised that it bothers people on here.

Yeah, well I meant in general, hence the reason why I brought up hearing it IRL (in real life) from people and others being uncomfortable with it. I actually don't know many people who are comfortable with it, real life people. But clearly you have an issue with people on TB so what I'm saying isn't going to change your mind anyways. Just thought I'd give you a perspective that a lot of people share, not just on TB. 

Muggle lover

llybeck said:

Bigboobsmcgee said:

llybeck said:

Bigboobsmcgee said:

sorarose said:

 

Listen, I think it's weird to share u/s pictures with perfect strangers anyway and I understand why people get heated when the terms sex and gender are used synonymously. However, I do have to agree with you here on the "fat" comment. I'm not sure why we're immediately jumping to the conclusion that OP is using it in a derogatory way. I took her for being sarcastic and didn't think anything of it; I'm going to trust she won't fat-shame her child.

And personally, I love a chubby baby. The more rolls, the merrier. 

Because people, especially the regular posters, love to assume the worst in people and their comments and they love telling other people they are wrong.

I agree with you on the rest.

Saying a kid/baby/fetus is fat doesn't really sit well with a lot of people. I've heard a few people say this IRL and others have asked them not to. Fat isn't usually a term of endearment, it has nothing to do with regular posters thinking the worst of people, it's just not a term a lot of people like to hear in regards to someone else. It's a bit cringeworthy for some. 

qbf**

Yes, clearly. I'm not surprised that it bothers people on here.

***qbf
qbf******
Yeah, well I meant in general, hence the reason why I brought up hearing it IRL (in real life) from people and others being uncomfortable with it. I actually don't know many people who are comfortable with it, real life people. But clearly you have an issue with people on TB so what I'm saying isn't going to change your mind anyways. Just thought I'd give you a perspective that a lot of people share, not just on TB. 
***qbf

I've never witnessed someone being upset over a baby being called fat IRL. Anytime I have heard it, it was in the context of it being an adorable attribute. My nephew is fat, and probably the cutest baby I've ever seen.

DrillSergeantCat

I guess it is a double standard, but I have no issues with a baby being called fat. Most people think fat baby = healthy baby. I believe the negative connotations begin once they're out of infancy and into toddlerhood. 

FinePlacentaPie

Bigboobsmcgee said:

sorarose said:

 

Listen, I think it's weird to share u/s pictures with perfect strangers anyway and I understand why people get heated when the terms sex and gender are used synonymously. However, I do have to agree with you here on the "fat" comment. I'm not sure why we're immediately jumping to the conclusion that OP is using it in a derogatory way. I took her for being sarcastic and didn't think anything of it; I'm going to trust she won't fat-shame her child.

And personally, I love a chubby baby. The more rolls, the merrier. 

Because people, especially the regular posters, love to assume the worst in people and their comments and they love telling other people they are wrong.

I agree with you on the rest.

Aren't you a regular poster?

FinePlacentaPie

I call my baby (toddler now, I guess, I still haven't adapted to that) a chunk all the time. Someone else calls him that, all bets off, but me? Eh. I like the squish.

kalanieileen

*sigh* this all just stems from the stigma the word "fat" has.. And sadly these comments about the OP continue to prove that stigma has weight (ba-dum-tchss!) but really, it bothers me that "fat" has such a negative connotation because of how people use and refer the word. The word itself isn't derogatory. It's how people use it. I was FAT and I owned it! I was large and in charge and BEAUTIFUL. I only lost weight because it was affecting my health. If I didn't let other people's negative view of the word fat bother me, then it wasn't a negative word. Is anyone going to tell me I'm being insensitive to myself because I called myself fat? Not trying to start any keyboard warrior drama here, just saying it's the way that people use the word which makes it insensitive.

mcklough

my parents called me the "sugar plump fairy" when I was a kid. I grew up to be a fat adult but I think it's funny and charming.

Bigboobsmcgee

FinePlacentaPie said:

Bigboobsmcgee said:

sorarose said:

 

Listen, I think it's weird to share u/s pictures with perfect strangers anyway and I understand why people get heated when the terms sex and gender are used synonymously. However, I do have to agree with you here on the "fat" comment. I'm not sure why we're immediately jumping to the conclusion that OP is using it in a derogatory way. I took her for being sarcastic and didn't think anything of it; I'm going to trust she won't fat-shame her child.

And personally, I love a chubby baby. The more rolls, the merrier. 

Because people, especially the regular posters, love to assume the worst in people and their comments and they love telling other people they are wrong.

I agree with you on the rest.

Aren't you a regular poster?

I suppose I am but I guess I just don't group myself with a lot of the other "regulars" because of their attitudes (mainly on the tri boards). I'm sure they feel the same about me and that's fine too.

kyraaD

BostonTerrior2008 said:

kyraaD said:

as for OP's question: like PP's have said, the estimates they give you on baby's weight can be off by quite a bit. i doubt you'll be pushing out a 10lbs baby!! haha. but i understand the worry. I'm so scared my LO will be a big baby. my SO was over 8lbs, where as i was only 6lbs. we shall see!

as for the "calling fetus fat" debate: i dont understand why so many ladies on here are butthurt about it. i HIGHLY doubt that OP meant it as a derogatory comment towards her own unborn child. & honestly, you want a fat baby. fat = healthy. if someone told me my baby was fat, i would take it as a compliment! some people are just WAY too sensitive IMO.

You call a grown woman, a teenager, a pre-teen or an adolecent fat and it's considered rude and mean, harsh, etc- but it's ok to call a baby born or unborn fat? Double standard IMO. Fat is just not a nice word to use to descibe someone, period.

it may be a double standard, but that's just how it is unfortunately. like i said before, fat baby = healthy baby. so i dont see a problem calling an infant "fat", "chunky" or any other variation.

kqualls5

BostonTerrior2008 said:

kyraaD said:

as for OP's question: like PP's have said, the estimates they give you on baby's weight can be off by quite a bit. i doubt you'll be pushing out a 10lbs baby!! haha. but i understand the worry. I'm so scared my LO will be a big baby. my SO was over 8lbs, where as i was only 6lbs. we shall see!

as for the "calling fetus fat" debate: i dont understand why so many ladies on here are butthurt about it. i HIGHLY doubt that OP meant it as a derogatory comment towards her own unborn child. & honestly, you want a fat baby. fat = healthy. if someone told me my baby was fat, i would take it as a compliment! some people are just WAY too sensitive IMO.

You call a grown woman, a teenager, a pre-teen or an adolecent fat and it's considered rude and mean, harsh, etc- but it's ok to call a baby born or unborn fat? Double standard IMO. Fat is just not a nice word to use to descibe someone, period.

It is so different. 1st off he's not outside of my womb yet, so he has no idea mommy titled a thread "fat baby", and if I told him 4 years from now I'm sure he wouldn't care, because he's not going to be an overly sensitive little boy, like I feel like the majority of overly sensitive and "politically correct with your words" women are raising. Sorry, I just don't think it's bad. Plus, fat rolls are adorable. Do I want to push out a giant? No, not at all. I'm a baby when it comes to pain & the recovery from child labor itself, then add on the fact pushing out a big ol baby? No thank you... Do I want a cute lil fat & healthy baby after he's out? Of course. The original question was basically if scans have been off about your baby's percentile. Not an invitation to attack me for calling MY child a WORD.

lalala2004

kqualls5 said:

BostonTerrior2008 said:

kyraaD said:

as for OP's question: like PP's have said, the estimates they give you on baby's weight can be off by quite a bit. i doubt you'll be pushing out a 10lbs baby!! haha. but i understand the worry. I'm so scared my LO will be a big baby. my SO was over 8lbs, where as i was only 6lbs. we shall see!

as for the "calling fetus fat" debate: i dont understand why so many ladies on here are butthurt about it. i HIGHLY doubt that OP meant it as a derogatory comment towards her own unborn child. & honestly, you want a fat baby. fat = healthy. if someone told me my baby was fat, i would take it as a compliment! some people are just WAY too sensitive IMO.

You call a grown woman, a teenager, a pre-teen or an adolecent fat and it's considered rude and mean, harsh, etc- but it's ok to call a baby born or unborn fat? Double standard IMO. Fat is just not a nice word to use to descibe someone, period.

It is so different. 1st off he's not outside of my womb yet, so he has no idea mommy titled a thread "fat baby", and if I told him 4 years from now I'm sure he wouldn't care, because he's not going to be an overly sensitive little boy, like I feel like the majority of overly sensitive and "politically correct with your words" women are raising. Sorry, I just don't think it's bad. Plus, fat rolls are adorable. Do I want to push out a giant? No, not at all. I'm a baby when it comes to pain & the recovery from child labor itself, then add on the fact pushing out a big ol baby? No thank you... Do I want a cute lil fat & healthy baby after he's out? Of course. The original question was basically if scans have been off about your baby's percentile. Not an invitation to attack me for calling MY child a WORD.

You know, people can be born sensitive simply because that's their personality....