I guess it makes sense, but I’ve never thought of it like that before.

  • FinjaminPoach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    15 hours ago

    A show i watched as a kid was a Dr Who Spinoff called The Sarah Jane Adventures and a main character is a faux-human created by aliens in a lab, who therefore has no belly button. I’ve always thought that was really interesting and that it’s unfair we can’t have smooth, holeless abdomens too.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      9 hours ago

      eh, if aliens ever produce lab-grown humans, i think there’s a 99.9% chance they’ll have belly buttons too, guessing that they’re growing them in artificial wombs where the baby makes an umbilical cord.

      i mean why would you do it any other way? maybe an infusion directly into the arm or sth …

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        right? the umbilical system is frankly so useful and well designed that it’s one of the few things you can’t use as evidence against god creating us. It actually looks like some thought was put into the design.

    • Murse@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      13 hours ago

      unfair we can’t have smooth, holeless abdomens too.

      Gonna throw this upfront: Don’t image search this unless you’re prepared to see some seriously mutilated babies on the brink of, or in some cases shortly after their death. This is close to the top of the worst NSFL shit on the internet.

      Anyway, gastroschesis. Birth defect in which the intestines are outside of the body at birth. The fix is to basically cut a new hole and shove them back in, with the resulting wound being kinda at the doctor’s / parent’s discretion: they can immitate a natural belly button, or just say fuck it and give it a clean closure line, the resulting scar from which can heal with virtually no visible scar tissue. I think it’s more common for there to be -some- disfigurement from the scarring, but babies have fucking super powers when it comes to healing, and a wound that would give you or me a ropy, nasty scar, would look like a little scratch on them.

      So, not quite smooth/holeless in the way you’re probably thinking, but potentially not far off from it - all you need to do is be born with a condition that’s likely to kill you!

      • shoe@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        My niece had this! Her parents elected to leave her without a belly button and, yep, no visible scar tissue :). Pretty incredible, given how dire things looked when she was born.

      • lb_o@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        12 hours ago

        On the bright side - 95% survival rate.

        Thanks for sharing, was a strange read, but made me fear less essentially.

        • Murse@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 hours ago

          95% survival rate

          Oh, I had no idea it was that high! I had ~50% on my brain. That’s pretty incredible looking at some of these - crazy portions of their abdominal contents are just hanging out.

    • lugal@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      There is a religious debate in the Talmud if Adam had a belly button

      • FinjaminPoach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I imagine that, if he hasn’t (because shaped from clay or whatever) then it implies that the presence of a belly button in every other human is a “flaw,” which is in-line with the idea of fallen creation.

        That said, “made in God’s image” does not mean resembling God. It means made as God’s “imagers” - symbols of his power and keepers of his will. It’s a concept inherent to every other early middle eastern religion; Idols of a deity, even as little statues, are exactly that. Yahweh didn’t need statues because humans were his “statues”.

        A mistranslation, unfortunately.

      • SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 hours ago

        If Adam had one and he was made in the image of god, would that mean that god had one as well? And that god therefore had a mother?

          • SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            If we could combine that with drinking wine or beer and playing cards, I’d be interested. Oh, and of course, don’t take it seriously because that would kill all the fun.