YANBU. It’s a biological fact that up until approximately 28 days ago, your baby was physically part of your body. I certainly didn’t want to be away from mine at that age. I needed him to be near and I have no issues saying it.
For the record, his father has a great relationship with him and as I was the primary carer, I obviously did have a different and greater bond initially. If the father of your child decides to withdraw from parenting because you want your tiny baby close, then you have a DP problem in a major way.
As for the arguments about feminism, 1930s and 50% ‘ownership’ of a baby, I have this to say. Feminism should support, not undermine women. The OP knows that she wants her baby close to her. It’s the opposite of feminism to say that she’s wrong and that she should ignore her feelings (based on biology I might add) and let the father make himself happy. Secondly, in the 1930s, if the baby was born in a hospital, it would have been brought to visit it’s mother regularly but primarily cared for by someone else for approximately a week. After that, once they got home, baby would have to fit into father’s lifestyle. House would have to be cleaned, food cooked, shopping done, laundry done and after a long day at work, the man would expect everything to be nice and peaceful. These days, when you give birth, you keep your baby with you. You do skin to skin, feed on demand, co-sleep (keep your baby beside your bed at least), breastfeeding is promoted, baby psychology studied, etc. All of these things are for the benefit of the baby, not the parents. It doesn’t bloody matter how much DNA you contributed, baby comes first. So, who’s needs are met by the father taking the baby to his brother’s house? Baby’s needs? No. Mother’s needs? No. Father’s needs? Yes! A resounding success for feminism.