Why oh why aren't babies born with their teeth already in situ..?

It would save a lot of trouble all round.. I blame the ladies for being too impatient and pooping the baby out 18 months too early.. selfish

so they wouldn't be breast feeding, so women wouldn't need breasts ? Are you quite mad ??

They'd still have backsides SFB – even bigger ones.

women don't need sticky-out, lady-bump type breasts for breast feeding – apes don't have them.

They'd still have backsides SFB – even bigger ones.

flat chests and fat arses ? Hello celibacy 🙁

women don't need sticky-out, lady-bump type breasts for breast feeding – apes don't have them.

I knew that but you're spoiling the joke 🙂

that has indeed… cleared that one up 🙂

teeth and nipples? 😯

any bigger and they don't fit through the pelvic aperture. Its natures compromise you see.

any bigger and they don't fit through the pelvic aperture. Its natures compromise you see.

But with teeth they could make their own exit, a la Alien.

I sppose we'd all be an only child that way, but as an up side look at how much we'd all save on mothers day cards

It's a bad design… teething babies are a bore..

If the women were designed to carry the foetus or another 18 months.. and had a larger…. ahem.. 'aperture'.. they would also be set up for carrying watermelons home from the supermarket..

bad design

but a a larger…. ahem.. 'aperture' would mean it'd be like throwing a chipolata up the mersey tunnel. Where's the fun in that? We'd all feel as inadequate as Hora. Imagine the collective angst

And there was me thinking this was a comment on my current "overdue" status 😉 (yes I know, it's all me me me)

bad design

I think woman can be one of the most beautiful things there are, it's the babies that are badly designed 🙂

fair point Mr Barnes