PDA

View Full Version : Time Magazine's Breastfeeding Cover



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

WindSpirit
05-12-2012, 02:24 AM
Breast feeding is done in private, at least in the USA. There are separate rooms with doors for nursing. I think Prancer already addressed that part.


Why should Time magazine and the mother/child in question make such a public display of it? I find it extremely offensive. Why? You said nothing about the child's age, so I'm guessing you find breastfeeding in public offensive in general.

I've noticed quite a few people in the US treat breastfeeding as if it were a disease that needs to be kept hidden. I see absolutely nothing wrong or offensive about breastfeeding, public or otherwise. If you don't stare, your chances of seeing anything are very slim to none.

The main function of breasts is to feed children. So even though I'm not a mother myself, don't plan to become a mother, I don't understand what the whole brouhaha is all about.

As for this particular cover. While I do think it's weird to breastfeed your child past a certain age, she's hardly the first woman to do it. Unless it can be proven that it harms children, I couldn't care less.

The photo itself is good, and I think they used a young and attractive mother to make breastfeeding more appealing and acceptable. Which it should be in the first place, so I have no problem with that.

Prancer
05-12-2012, 02:24 AM
I would personally pump.

Well, again, pumping would be beside the point.

And again, if extended breastfeeding isn't considered freakish in his environment, I doubt if it will be an issue for him, regardless of how old he gets.


Scoreless athletics is everywhere.. This way no one feels bad about themselves.

i recently attended a "silent" soccer game. no screaming or cheering or clapping. This way neither team could be perceived as being more popular, and no player could be singled out as really fab. Strange world.

I thought silent games were designed to prevent parents from screaming at their kids.

the goal is to make parents aware that the kids can play without their coaching, yelling, and other disruptive influences during play. (http://www.arlnow.com/2012/05/04/silent-soccer-in-arlington-this-weekend/)

Also, for your reading pleasure, a statement from a youth soccer league director that says, in part,: "there are enormous benefits to giving children the opportunity to enjoy exploring the game's possibilities without the distraction of being micro-managed from the sidelines.

The American youth soccer system has recently recognized that over-coaching our young players stifles their creativity and development, which the international soccer community has been telling us for years."

http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/lessons-learned-silent-soccer-game-180400532.html

Cheering the good players has never, to my knowledge, been considered a problem, nor does it have anything to do with boosting the self-esteem of the poor players.

UGG
05-12-2012, 02:32 AM
They used a young and attractive mother with a child that looks older than his age to cause controversy. If they had frumpy Frannie nursing her two year old that did not look 4 who was wearing onsie PJ's in her home, not staring at a camera lens breastfeeding on the sofa..what fun would that have been?

Most women who breastfeed in public don't want to cause a scene about it. They just want to feed their baby and get on with it. That is also why this cover is dumb and non realistic.

tarotx
05-12-2012, 02:45 AM
The picture is disgusting imo. I feel showing a breast be sucked by a child not in a cuddling bonding between mom&child way to be crass and like an adult comedic moment. I didn't breast feed (physically couldn't) but I think it's a great thing to do for your child if you feel comfortable and have the time&health. But I think a child should be done with the nipple no later than 3 when they can easily hold a cup. This is actually for breast feed or bottle feed. I weaned my son of the bottle at 12 months but we had sippy cups which he gave up at 3. Sippy cups are used different than bottle but it makes getting fluids easy. So I can understand Breastfeeding that long. I just find the picture is sending the wrong message and will get that boy laughed at. He'll probably be able to get past it if he has a strong bond with his mom but why chance having that be the cause of your losing that bond in the future? Why chance your son getting ridiculed?

My son sleeps with us some times because he has nightmares and it's easier to get him back to sleep in our bed. This isn't really AP because we don't have a routine bonding experience through it. I fully understand wanting that with your child and it's a personal choice.I try not to judge and don't want to be judged.Easily said than done I know...

Sometimes I think both sides are totally judgmental about the other's choice. Families have to make the best choice for themselves. It's only the picture that I find at best distastefully sending the wrong message about AP and potentially harmful to the boy's psyche.

agalisgv
05-12-2012, 02:46 AM
I don't get why people think a 26 yo mom who's fit is unrealistic :confused:.

For those who breastfeed past infancy, they aren't breastfeeding in public at all since it's pretty much confined to bedtime.

And PML that some think 4yo are googling images of national magazine covers to tease others. We don't remember what happens two weeks ago in our presidential elections. No one is going to remember this a month from now. And certainly not some preschoolers LOL.

Much ado over nothing I say...

cruisin
05-12-2012, 02:47 AM
My coworker's son is 6 and wouldn't think to Google such a thing. If the kid gets teased because someone found out, there's either a malicious parent afoot or his mom was stupid enough to publicize it.

Time magazine is sold in super markets. People will see it, that includes kids.

Ugh, you're right. I breast fed, and sometimes in public. I was discrete. I do not think breast feeding in public places is wrong, it is fine. But, this photo does not portray nurturing. It is just bizarre.

milanessa
05-12-2012, 02:48 AM
I don't get why people think a 26 yo mom who's fit is unrealistic :confused:.



Who said that or even implied it?

agalisgv
05-12-2012, 03:01 AM
Who said that or even implied it?

The fact that she's so young and modelish make me go....right! Why not the Mom-next-door?

They used a young and attractive mother with a child that looks older than his age to cause controversy. If they had frumpy Frannie nursing....
Of course Time would have to choose a mother who actually looks like a model. There have been other comments that the mom looks more like a model than a "real" mom, with the implication that real moms should be older and less fit/attractive. I don't find 26 to be at all young for a mom.

On a separate note, I think when people say their concern is how this will result in a child being bullied and how concerned they are over that, it's really a smokescreen for them to express their disapproval with the depicted behavior. I recall similar arguments made for the parents that wouldn't disclose their child's gender. People said it was horrible not because they had any gender hang-ups, but because this would result in the child being bullied, and the parents were bad for doing that to their child.

Kind of a similar argument here. Course, in any other context, most would place the blame of bullying on the ones doing the bullying rather than the parents of the bullied child. So IMO it's not really concern over bullying that's being expressed, but general uncomfortableness with what's depicted. That's fine, but I think it would be more honest to just admit that than feign concern over possible bullying ten years or so from now.

milanessa
05-12-2012, 03:08 AM
There have been other comments that the mom looks more like a model than a "real" mom, with the implication that real moms should be older and less fit/attractive. I don't find 26 to be at all young for a mom.



I didn't get that from the posts you quoted but, okay, you did.

WindSpirit
05-12-2012, 03:12 AM
Most women who breastfeed in public don't want to cause a scene about it. They just want to feed their baby and get on with it. That is also why this cover is dumb and non realistic. I doubt it was meant to be realistic. I think it was meant to convey a message and spread awareness, kind of like gay parades.

Breastfeeding is still considered tabu by many in the US. Or, as I said before, like a disease that needs to be kept hidden. It's not a disease, it's the most natural thing in the world.

The woman doesn't show more of her breast that most celebrities in the media (actually less, I would say), but OMG, she has a child attached to it, how dare she actually use her funbags for the purpose they were intended for and not for the mere pleasure of onlookers?

cruisin
05-12-2012, 03:17 AM
There have been other comments that the mom looks more like a model than a "real" mom, with the implication that real moms should be older and less fit/attractive. I don't find 26 to be at all young for a mom.

On a separate note, I think when people say their concern is how this will result in a child being bullied and how concerned they are over that, it's really a smokescreen for them to express their disapproval with the depicted behavior. I recall similar arguments made for the parents that wouldn't disclose their child's gender. People said it was horrible not because they had any gender hang-ups, but because this would result in the child being bullied, and the parents were bad for doing that to their child.

Kind of a similar argument here. Course, in any other context, most would place the blame of bullying on the ones doing the bullying rather than the parents of the bullied child. So IMO it's not really concern over bullying that's being expressed, but general uncomfortableness with what's depicted. That's fine, but I think it would be more honest to just admit that than feign concern over possible bullying ten years or so from now.

The concern, for me, is the staging of the photo. It does not connote a nurturing mother/child bonding moment. It comes across as defiant, in your face, and almost creepy. Because of the staging/posing. That is why I have concerns for the child. And why not just hide his face? Why use the child?

Southpaw
05-12-2012, 03:18 AM
It's not a disease, it's the most natural thing in the world.

When push comes to shove I think farting in public gets a worse rap than breastfeeding.

IceAlisa
05-12-2012, 03:19 AM
Breastfeeding is still considered tabu by many in the US. Or, as I said before, like a disease that needs to be kept hidden. It's not a disease, it's the most natural thing in the world.

The woman doesn't show more of her breast that most celebrities in the media (actually less, I would say), but OMG, she has a child attached to it, how dare she actually use her funbags for the purpose they were intended for and not for the mere pleasure of onlookers?

I don't have a problem with breast feeding in public even if all of the boob is exposed. But I don't buy the argument that because something is natural, it belongs on public display. Can you think of certain all-natural bodily processes that don't fit this bill in our culture? I think it's fine to nurse in public because if the baby is hungry, they cannot be explained that mommy has to hurry and find a secluded spot, could they hold the wailing a few minutes and not because it's natural.

I, however, have a problem with a superior attitude that certain moms (and dads) of the "everything natural persuasion" sometimes exhibit. I cannot tell you how many times I was given a lecture about giving a birth in a hospital, having an epidural (horrors, neurotoxin!!!) and giving my son cow's milk (cow pus was the expression used) when he was a toddler.

SFGate had an article about a new mom with her baby who were booed for using disposable diapers on the street of San Francisco. True story, linked here at the time.

jeffisjeff
05-12-2012, 03:34 AM
I didn't get that from the posts you quoted but, okay, you did.

To me she honestly looks like a model - gorgeous (well above average), very photogenic and seemingly comfortable posing in front of the camera. TBH, when I first saw the cover, I just assumed, without much thought, that she was a model, and that the kid was too (the expression on his face is priceless). Then I decided that was just too creepy to be possible. :o :lol:

milanessa
05-12-2012, 03:39 AM
To me she honestly looks like a model - gorgeous (well above average), very photogenic and seemingly comfortable posing in front of the camera. TBH, when I first saw the cover, I just assumed, without much thought, that she was a model, and that the kid was too (the expression on his face is priceless). Then I decided that was just too creepy to be possible. :o :lol:

I don't disagree she's lovely -what I was questioning was the idea that anyone said that it is unrealistic that a 26 year old mom could be fit. I think we're all a little conditioned to see a magazine cover and assume "model" because they usually are. If not then they're often a well known figure.