Cover Causes Controversy
 

The August cover of the magazine "Baby Talk" is causing quite a stir. So let's discuss.

http://www.parenting.com/parenting/babytalk/channel

I personally don't see the problem with it. It's a PARENTING magazine. and the major feature article is about breast feeding.

If Vanity Fair (or whoever it was) can do an article about Brit, and have her naked on the cover, what's the big deal about this??

Why is this magazine causing such controversy? People choose to make big deals out of small things and turn big things into small things. This is a woman's natural right. There isn't anything unnatural about it that it deserves such attention. From what I believe, this magazine isn't sold in stores...you have to have a mail subscription for it...but of course I could be wrong. But anyway, there is nothing wrong this cover and people need to leave it alone!

I see absolutely nothing controversial about the pictures/magazine cover.

It is tastefully done and doesn't "show" anything even remotely out of line.

And, as has been pointed out above, this is a natural human function.

Some people need to find something constructive to do with their time.

(Posted by the proud husband of a former member of the international board of directors of LaLeche League, International)

OMG did you know that women have these THINGS coming out in front of them? Men (and other women) view them sexually but BABIES EAT FROM THEM!!!!

Won't someone think of the CHILDREN!?!?
I'm too lazy to click on the article but is this the one with the woman who SHREDDED the cover so her 13 year old wouldn't see it? :rolleyes:

While it is certainly true that women have a right to opt to breastfeed, I think it's more important to point out that breastfeeding addresses a baby's right to EAT. Breastfeeding is (usually) the safest, most convenient, most nutritious and most affordable way to nourish an infant. I see nothing controversial about the cover. I think it's sad that some people are offended by it. Clearly, they've not been properly educated about the benefits of breastfeeding.

DeltAlum, hat's off to you and your support of LLL.

-gets off soapbox

3 year old children also have a right to eat. That doesn't mean that they should be dragged to a 5 star restaurant where they'll misbehave, be general pains in the butt and make the other patrons miserable.

I'm all for breastfeeding, and I could care less about the cover of some parenting magazine I've never heard of till today (hmm, publicity stunt perhaps) but I don't think this has anything to do with the baby's "rights." Breastfeeding is wonderful. So is sex. That doesn't mean I want to see either one if I'm not a participant.

But if as f8nacn says - that this mag is by subscription only - then it's DEFINITELY a publicity stunt to get their name out there.

I don't think it is. You can find "Baby Talk" at B&N and they give them away like last year's halloween candy at OB/GYN offices. Actually, most OB/GYNs have free subscription cards for their paitents that want them.

This causes controversy? Seriously what nut jobs think that this is some how offensive or controversial? Simply put babies breastfeed, and they can do it legally anywhere (at least up here) so why are people in a snit over this cover? Someone please explain...

It irritates me that some people find something so natural to be offensive. The cover is tasteful and pertinent to the subject of the magazine.

And also that people find breastfeeding in public to be offensive. It is not a health hazard (as compared to urinating or defecating).

Many body parts have dual functions. Hands can be used to caress someone or type on a keyboard, as an example. So why do some people have trouble accepting the fact that breasts can be both sexy (like practically any other body part) as well as nursing instruments?

I'm not a huge fan of women whipping it out to feed junior in certain public settings (particularly when said woman is not very discrete), and I personally haven't made a decision whether or not i'll be breastfeeding any future children of mine, but I have a hard time seeing this as offensive. You can't even see nipple or anything... he could be sucking on his fat, hairless father's belly button for all we know. Okay, maybe not, but it's not OH MY GOD IT'S A BOOBIE! Actually it looks like they airbrushed out any fragment of possible nipple.

Don't you typically see more boob on an issue of Cosmo or in the tabloids?

Drolefile's and 33girl's posts made me laugh.

Two things were/are very neat about LaLeche League (LLL).

First, the good it does for moms and babies.

Second, what it does to empower its members. When "Mrs. DA" ran the organization in Colorado, later was administrator for all of the Southwestern US and Southern California, and then on the International Board of Directors, it was actually very neat to be introduced at meetings as "Mrs. DA's husband."

It felt very good to me for her to be in the spotlight.

Like kddani, I'm not wild about women who "whip it out" without any attempt at discretion or modesty, but there is one thing I always got a kick out of:

Many years ago, in our county, a few women mounted a protest at a public pool, and have a "feed-in" or whatever they called it. The protest was stopped peacefully, and the "offenders" had to appear in court.

Which meant that they had to appear at Allegheny County's Court House, replete with three story frescoes, showing flora and fauna in allegorical forms, including women breast feeding! The irony was rich!

There's a glimpse of the one mural in the movie Mrs. Soffel, btw.

Have any argument you want about breastfeeding. However, I can also say that urinating is so natural. There are private places I could go to do that, but man if I gota go, I gota go! Right? Genitals have dual functions. They can be sexy, and they are also used as a health function. It couldn't be a health hazard if you're letting go in a sewer or something and not on ground where someone else can walk. The difference is? And seriously, do you really think the Taco Bell dining room or neighborhood park is germless enough to give your baby a healthy meal? Sick.

I feel the same about breastfeeding in public, than I feel about people changing their children's diaper in public. You can do something natural and be discrete about it.

Besides, people in this world are so messed up in the head, that I'm sure there is a pedophile on every corner. Why would you want to breastfeed in public when there could be some sicko watching and getting turned on by that?

I'm not offended by that mag cover though. Nothing real offensive about it. I've seen worse on other magazines sold in like CVS or something.

Thank you. I thought I was the only person who felt this way.

I'm not sure I will want to breastfeed in public per se, but if I'm out and about and it's time for baby to eat, I do NOT want to be feeding said baby in a bathroom. I don't think it's comparable to excretory functions. There isn't anything unsanitary about breast milk.

People who "whip it out" in ANY situation are lacking on class but the majority of women who breast feed in public do it rather discretely. You probably wouldn't even be able to tell without taking a second look.

And sometimes not even then.

Well, if you walk up close and squint maybe... :p

Nice to know you're into that sort of thing.

The 'dual-purpose' argument is pretty thin, I'll agree, but the health concerns are legitimate - urinating into a sewer is not really similar to feeding on a park bench, and defecating has no comparison whatsoever.

Also the 'germ' argument is patently ridiculous - is the Taco Bell dining room sanitary enough for you to eat? Is the park nice enough for you to have a picnic? Do you bleach out your kitchen every 30 minutes? Babies should be protected, but you're way out of control here.

Holy fucking crap.

First - PEDOPHILE. Would not be turned on, then, by ADULT BREAST. Jesus. Maybe you mean "Pedo with a food fetish?" Even that's retarded.

I just can't get down like this, it doesn't really apply to any argument against public breastfeeding.

The thing that manages to get overlooked in this whole thing is that some people were upset by the cover (please don't flame me, I'm just stating what has been covered on the news) and never read the actual article that the cover was promoting. The topic was "Why don't Women Breastfeed Longer?"
I read the article and it was actually quite interesting.

So here's a question for the GC community: How long is too long?

If you can ask for it, you're too old to get it.

Ideally (and I think as recommended by the AAP) mothers should breastfeed for the first year. I personally think anywhere from 12-18 or so months is acceptable, and even potentially up to 24+ months provided that nursing is not the child's main source of nutrition by that point (which would really be okay because breastmilk is the best food you can give to babies, but by that time they should be able to eat table food for every meal.)

But really, for those of us who had a low milk supply and weren't able to nurse exclusively, even *some* breastmilk is better than none.

So my final answer is: as long as you're able/willing.

I have seen that before!!!! A kid went up to her mom and stated that she was hungry, lifted her mom's shirt, and proceeded to nurse. She was about 5 years old. I swear I'm not lying!!

I once saw a 9 year old boy on the subway sucking on a pacifier. His mom tried to take it away from him and he started crying, screaming, and kicking like you would not believe.

How long is too long?

In terms of a male, when he get's married, it's his wifes problem.

Just kidding. It's an old joke.

That's funny DeltAlum! :D

My mom nursed me for quite a bit longer than was the norm at the time, I believe. Then again I didn't have teeth till I was a year and 3 months so that might have been a little different. :)

I'd say until the teeth mean that breastfeeding becomes breast-gnawing

As long as you can is good. The benefits to the baby outweigh any inconvenience (imo) and so are the emotional benefits to yourself.

Does this thread remind anyone of the Desperate Housewives episode in which a woman in Lynette's office breastfed her 5 year old son?

I have heard of a lot of moms using teeth as the cutoff point. That makes sense.

I got teeth very early and that's when the nursing ended. :) In the neighborhood where I grew up, there was a modern wet-nurse who worked out of her house. Her son was 5 years old breastfeeding and probably went longer than that so that she wouldn't dry up. But, that's about money, not healthy babies!

Actually, teeth don't matter unless the child is a natural "biter."

Listen, this is another one of those questions for which there is no real correct answer except perhaps, "whatever feels right."

The reason is that it is societal as much as physical.

In some societies, children (as oppossed to infants) nurse until four or five years old normally -- maybe even longer. Nobody bats an eyelash, because that's the way it is and has been there. My guess is that those folks would laugh a lot at us for our attitudes.

Some people would consider breastfeeding important for the comfort and mental relaxation of the child as well as for its proven nutritional benefits.

The most important thing is, as ISU Kappa pointed out, any breastfeeding is better than none because of the natural antibodies and other health benefits in human milk.

I breastfed until 4 months when the teething became too much. But she still got a mix because I pumped for a little while after that.

Ok obviously defecating is pretty gross and unsanitary, and so is peeing in public. But I also feel like whipping it out in public is unsanitary. Believe it or not, women sweat. I duno. I have no experience in this, but wouldn't you want to like clean up before the child eats?

I like eating in a park as much as I like eating in a Taco Bell dining room. In both places I'm VERY careful. Well as careful as you can be without cooking your own food.

Ok Pedophile was probably the wrong word, but there are sickos out there. And if a sicko is sitting there watching you breastfeed cuz he has a fetish with it... hey you're showing a private part of your body-- your fault. I feel the same about excessive cleavage. Don't bitch about someone staring if your tatas are hanging out. As someone else mentioned, if someone is doing is discretely in public to where you can't really tell what's going on, then go for it. But I just don't understand why it has to be made such a big deal.

It's not like a 4-star restaurant. When your baby is hungry and crying and wants to eat *NOW* you don't wait to shower or "clean yourself off", you unhook your nursing bra and latch your baby on, preferably discreetly. The baby gets - at max - a 3" area of the breast, areola and nipple. That's not a very large area to worry about keeping clean.

There's no good solution. If you nurse in public, people are going to get upset. If you don't nurse and your baby is crying because it's hungry, people are going to get upset. And you can't simply say "arrange your schedule to insure you're home to breastfeed." The whole process of feeding a baby can take anywhere from 10-60 minutes and an hour later, you have to start the whole thing over again. A new mother needs to get out of the house once in a while and there's no way you can get the baby ready, get the diaper bag ready, get yourself ready, strap him/her into the carseat, go to the grocery store or Target and do all your shopping in that short of time.

I hate to pull this card because I think it's a cheap excuse most of the time, but it's really one of those things where if you haven't BTDT, you really have no idea what it's like.

Let me say up front that this is not a snide comment. Honestly.

But it is obvious that you have no experience in this.

On this one point alone, remember that these are the same babies who suck on their hands and feet and all manner of toys that have been all over the floor in the house and everywhere else.

Everything they pick up goes in their mouth.

A little sweat ain't gonna hurt them.

One of the big benefits of breastfeeding is that mothers milk provides immunities for many illnesses.

This is exactly what I've been thinking through this thread. Thanks for saying it.