Here’s a Facebook post has me wondering about biology and English:
***link to a younger male Facebook user*** 26 years ago on a mildly snowy night in NYC you made me a mom. You were such a smart, sweet, adorable and enthusiastic little guy! You are responsible for most of my knowledge of dinosaurs, volcanos, frogs and Pokémon’s. …
[over a collage of happy baby/toddler photos]
Is this a reasonable use of the English language? Does it comport with human biology?
No to both, which means that the author is either a government school success story or just nuts.
Although, on reflection, there’s another possibility: the child was adopted.
Sure it’s reasonable but it’s obviously not about a child giving birth to an adult woman.
A human female “making a man” out of a hitherto intimately inexperienced human male by supplying such experience to him is common parlance.
A drill instructor “making a soldier” out of a new recruit is not about the D.I. giving birth to a person.
The woman in question had no experience as a parent before the child arrived. Therefore he and his requisite demands as a child caused her to enter into the role of mother for the first time — “made her a mom”.
Also I have heard that there are permanent changes to a woman’s body upon her first pregnancy. That’s a profound way in which a child, or a unique soul arriving on Earth from wherever souls originate to manifest itself in both a corporeal and spiritual life here, causes a woman to irreversibly enter that state of physical being or “makes her a mother”.
Assuming he is her oldest child, then I think this usage is cromulent. After all, she wasn’t a mom before he was born, and she was after he was born.
I’m pretty sure I was never consulted nor gave consent on my birth. Mommies rape their children by birthing them without consent, that is the only biological fact.