Today Show
 

I watched an interview with Mom, child, Time Magazine person and the doctor who advocates this type of patenting. Mom looked and seemed pretty ok with her and her family's choice to breastfeeding till the age the child is at. She was weaning him now, she also stated that this was not for everyone and both her and the doctor said it was a choice some mothers could make and if you can't you can apply some of the parenting not all.

I personally feel the picture taken was marketing and the controversy ran amok.

What I will NEVER understand is why people have to sexualize, pervert, be so crude regarding a mother and her child and their choice.

The comments that have been made were so disgusting and ugly.

If you have MSNBC on your phone you can watch the interview on there.

Oh Holy Hell, how did I miss this one!!

With my first daughter I breastfed until she weaned herself at 7 months. Awesome! She also preferred to sleep in her crib and didn't like to be held a lot. She is still somewhat touch sensitive unless I tackle her. ;)

With Sophia all rules flew out the window. She wanted to be strapped to my body 24/7...seriously! She nursed until she was 3&1/2 and would have joyously continued had I not weaned her. The kid LOVED nursing!! And honestly, I really didn't give it a second thought because it was something she loved and it was such a wonderful bonding experience for us both. We would rock and hum songs and she would twist my earlobe around in her fingers. I would practice extended breastfeeding again in a heartbeat were I to have another baby and that was our chosen path.

I also nursed my daughters anywhere and everywhere. I wasn't some militant mom who was out to defy social norms, but I did see value in my baby eating when and where she wanted to and me not having to cover her up in the Tucson heat with something so other humans don't have to experience the vile shame that is my breast. GASP!

Have I been shamed for all of this? You betcha! Not so much by family, even though by the time Sophia was 3 they were all "uh...you're STILL nursing her??" but many times strangers would express their displeasure...to which I would always smile and ask if they would like to eat their lunch/breakfast/dinner in the bathroom. I also had a partner who thought it was disgusting and asked me to not ever talk about that part of my parenting philosophy.

Ultimately, you just have to do what feels right and FUCK everyone else's opinions. Our breasts are not just fun-bags. Feeding babies is what they are there for, dammit!

I also co-slept with Sophia because I worked crazy long hours and she missed me. Today she is unbelievably smart, totally independent and very healthy...as is my oldest!

Shamers be gone. Mom's, do what speaks to your heart and stand firm to your convictions! I haven't read the article and probably won't because I've lived through it in real time. ;)

Gotta go graduate now. XOXO, Novela

In Quebec mother, father and/or adopting parent can without fear of losing their job have a year unpaid leave and receive from the provincial government 55% of their pay weekly. Mother gets an additional 18 weeks before the birth, the father 5 weeks. Adoptive parents can have a total of 70 weeks. If you are pregnant and can’t work because your job is deemed dangerous to your pregnancy for any reason you can leave as soon as you are pregnant and receive CSST (workman’s comp –90% of your salary) for the duration as well as 52 weeks after the birth of the child. Gotta love the French mind set.

I haven't read the article (I don't read Time magazine, but I'll see if it's on their website), but I agree very much with these two statements. When it comes to breastfeeding North American society seems to have this uncanny desire to try to sexually objectify and shame women, and portray breastfeeding as some kind of kinky activity between mother and child with an invisible hetero cismale spectator.

At the same time, the cover makes me wonder about the intentions behind designing the cover. I don't know, but something about the way the bodies are posed seems like the cover is purposefully trying to sexually objectify/shame/pervert breastfeeding. Maybe if I read the article more would be clarified, but it makes me wonder if that is typically how the mother in the article breastfeeds her child, if this is a natural pose, or if it was staged that way for a purpose. And if their bodies were posed/staged, then that does disturb me. Not because of the act of breastfeeding itself, but because it then becomes another example of sexualising women's bodies in the media for the purpose of attracting the hetero cismale gaze. So instead of talking women's relationships with their children and the social stigmas against breastfeeding, we're back to a conversation with the hetero male spectre in the background...

Selling magazines...plain and simple.

As a regular member of a few hetero-male sites, where feminism is usually frowned upon, and because the child is a boy, I think many hetero-men may view this cover picture as symbolic of the sissification of American men by modern women(for which there seems to be a growing belief and angst).

Hmmm
 

DING DING DING..

The photograph itsel brings out some pretty fucked up thinking.

It's what's happening to women and breastfeeding there's some weird reactions to where mothers making a choice are being singled out for feeding their child.


It's a choice that these women make it shouldn't be degraded, it should be celebrated because they say fuck you and your assumptions I'm nurturing my child the way and she/he pleases.

My cubs are all grown and still curl up next to me like when they were babies. Parenting is something that comes with no garuantees of success, no instructions, no manuals, we just do it and hope we don't ingrain the shit our parents did.

We hope they are evolved and hope through them change comes, breastfeeding or not...

I wouldn't do it but I don't have a problem with it.

Society has got to get over their revulsion of women's bodies.

The cover was staged for effect. The photographer, Martin Schoeller, explains his vision as:

When you think of breast-feeding, you think of mothers holding their children, which was impossible with some of these older kids,” Schoeller says. “I liked the idea of having the kids standing up to underline the point that this was an uncommon situation.”

Capturing various attached parents — and their reasons for attachment parenting — was Schoeller’s biggest goal for the sitting. “It was important to show that there’s no stereotypical look for a mom who practices this kind of parenting,” Schoeller says.

http://lightbox.time.com/2012/05/10/parenting/#1





Cant say that I follow this line of reasoning r.e. the "sissification of American men" in regards to the photo. I'm thinking men who have a "sissified" problem are more likely to be those who were taught to believe women are meant to be barefoot, pregnant, silent, pieces of property and indentured servants who are supposed to worship the ground they walk on. Thats a patriarchy and privilege issue for another thread. ;)

I went looking for the magazine which was supposed to hit the newsstands today. It isnt here yet.

I would say not following this line of reasoning is probably a good thing. However, it doesn't make it any less a reality and a problematic one at that. The men you are talking about who think women should be barefoot, pregnant and silent also don't go for women making sissies out of boys and have considerable angst over the detrimental effect modern women are having on men. Thus this current attack on women's rights.

women tamed dot com (don't really care to give them hits from here) is one of a BUNCH of anti-feminist websites discussing how women are trying to make sissies out of boys, if anyone's not familiar with that rhetoric. it's a very common thread in conservative thought nowadays.

along with the sexualization of women's bodies, there's this whole undercurrent of oedipus complex/sexualization of the mother/son relationship that kind of drifts underneath breastfeeding discussion (particularly past the age of 1) a lot of the time, and i think it ties into the blaming of women for "sissifying" men. it's disgusting that that is what shapes popular opinion about breastfeeding, but it does. that's the first thing i thought of when i saw the cover of time.

i agree with others who've said it's staged and used to create shock value. i don't read time, partly because of stunts like this. i don't think there's anything wrong with breastfeeding or not breastfeeding, and i think women should be able to feed their kids anywhere they want.

Got no issues at all with a mother breastfeeding her kid. Not my place at ALL to decide when it should stop, etc. I do have questions on when I wonder where you have to draw the line due to having been exposed to a five year old eating a waffle then looking at the mom and saying, "I'm thirsty!" So mom lifts off half the top and kid grabs a tit and begins sucking away. Customers were very uncomfortable and I could totally understand why. Pump it out and put it in a bottle? Is it really different then just spending time with the child, reading, cuddling, listening to music, etc.? Yet it isn't my decision to make and I get that.

With that said I do have a major problem with the cover in regards to how things can be "percieved". Normally I don't give a shit. I go against society's standards of "norm" with how I look and the fact I'm in the wrong body, etc. Yet each single time I look at this cover I can't help but think of how this is simply "legal" child porn for some pedophile to jack off to.

Seriously. There are so many ways to get a point across then this, in my opinion. Nothing more then a way to garner attention (for the magazine) and give pedophiles a chance to get off with a magazine that won't get them thrown in jail just because the picture is being touted as an "educational" tool.


Just a Tool,
Brute.

You said just what i was trying to convey (only in pretty puffy pink font) that when we were stay at home moms we were unfit, when we went to work we were unfit, now we are back at home nursing our babies and we are yet wrong again.

Blah!

I do find it almost amusing that there seems to be no satsifying the whole "what makes a perfect mother" scenerio. My mom did the very best she could with what she had and considering the sperm donor was a dick, she did pretty damn good in my mind.

Damned if you do. Damned if you don't. Screw what society feels if you're doing the best you can for your own. That's my view.

Brute.

When my daughter was a baby, my Mom was always giving advice. shes on the breast too long. Shes on the bottle too long. She should be potty trained. She should be done with binky....all these "shoulds". I parented by instinct and my childs needs. But, the best advice I ever got was from cousin....."as long as your kid isn't drinking out of a bottle, sucking on a binky , or wearing diapers when they are 21, quit worrying about the shoulds as it all evens out". Of course it was said with tongue in cheek, but he was right.

^ 5 cajun :))))) ** kicks the June Cleaver act off the stage ** lol

im whole heartedly for a woman breastfeeding her child in public private hell do it in the line in the grocery store if your child needs it but the cover of a magazine come on people there's better things to put on the cover . breastfeeding is natural and there's nothing wrong with it till someone puts a picture like that one on the cover ofa magazine.

Breastfeeding
 

I breastfed my son solely for five months, no water, no formula...just breast milk...so, as one can imagine...I fed him in all kinds of places....a ladies room in a department store, my truck....but I have to say..I neve encountered anyone discriminating...hmmm. now this was 30 years ago...lol...perhaps, it was a time when breastfeeding was becoming popular again...don't know, but I found strangers to be supportive..I did try to be discreet...(cover us with a light blanket....It was a wonderful experience...extremely tiring, but wonderful...he fed every 3 hours all that time...(he's graduating Med. school next week) <smile>...and regarding the photo in the magazine?....what bothered me the most was the rise they tried to get out of publishing it....and they did...pros and cons....Me? It's all individual...If that's what one wants and needs...it doesn't affect me...I did what I could...and am grateful....Love you Bobby!!!! Congrats...!!!!

I did not read the whole thread yet. I just had to chime in. I breastfed my daughter until she was 3 1/2. I initiated the weaning. She was not pleased. She still remembers it! I did not shroud my child in a shawl. My child did know that it was my body and she did not lift my shirt whenever she wanted. I see that as teaching a child boundaries. We all have our physical space.

I don't like that picture. It does not represent my experience of breastfeeding. As far as the acceptable age for nursing? Pfft! I support any Mother to make that decision for herself. I practiced attachment parenting in the way that felt right to me. Children are individual. I don't fault any woman's decision on how to raise their child.

I agree the photo was meant to be provoking. There is something about her stance, the look in her eyes, etc. People are talking about the issue which is not a bad thing. The title makes me think the article has something to do with the "mommy wars."

I never nursed in public to get a reaction. I was just doing what needed to be done and at the level I felt was acceptable. It wasn't meant to be a statement or to shock. I do hope that maybe by other mothers saw me maybe it would encourage them to do the same. It's kinda like coming out of the closet, the more people that do it, the easier it is to do yourself.

I have nursed everywhere. Would you rather my child scream bloody murder in a restaurant or nurse quietly? I think most people would choose the latter.

A woman I used to go to a playgroup with was nursing her month old baby in the food court of a mall with a big nursing cover. Someone at the table next her asked her is she could do that someplace else! Unbelievable! He couldn't even see anything. She said no and stayed but said after she left she cried.

It's not up to mom's to make other people comfortable with breastfeeding. It is not perverse, obscene, or sexual. Get over it.

I think there is a reason they used a standing male child in the photo.

How do you think the general public would have reacted if the child had been a girl?

Thoughts
 

I think it would of had the same kind of comments and they would of been just as ugly. Her son being in the pic (she has 2) I feel scares the binary thinkers and leads them down the road of perverse crude thoughts and comments.

We seem to hypersexualize children a lot for some odd reason.

Yes!
 

Exactly, womens bodies are not their own, patriarchal shenanigans and impositions would have you believe that a womans body is for men's enjoyment and we have holes to fill and a set of titties for them to do so as they please.

Um yes, she had a male child. It happens.

http://healthland.time.com/2012/05/1...-lynne-grumet/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shanno...b_1510510.html

two really good articles about the model and her kids.

No one can dispute the fact that a mothers milk is what is best for the BABY. Any BABY! Any baby animal until they are old enough to hunt for themselves or eat solid food. And when a baby is hungry it should be fed. No one should take issue with that. That's what breasts are for, but breast feeding a 6 yr old? I find this very disturbing, alarming and beyond strange.Once a child has teeth, they no longer need substance from breast milk, they can get it from food. I haven't read the article , nor do I care to. If it's ok to breast feed a 6 yr old , why stop there ,why not a 16yr old ? Or a 26 yr old? There are plenty of ways to nurture and bond with your kids ,that doesn't involve breast feeding a child who no longer needs it for substance. I find it disturbing, on many levels.

the model states in the article that she breastfed her older son (who is i think 5 or 6) because he was adopted and the process was really traumatizing for him. she only did it for a short amount of time to help him adjust and connect while he learned english and got settled in. makes sense to me.

I do not have children but think breast feeding is a normal thing some moms choose to do.

feel free to correct me:
By age three, aren't children well into eating on their own? If this is true, I am not understanding the purpose of this photo.

My curiosity made me wonder. What if this child on the cover were female ... Would it bring out gay-haters in the U.S. to rant this could create lesbians? I do believe the child's gender in photo was selected with tremendous care.

Thoughts
 

So after watching a few interviews, learning more about the intent I can now really voice what I strongly feel about this particular way of marketing, because it's what it is marketing.

The magazine stirred up tons of controversy the way the child is posed, it's put Moms against Moms regarding who's the better parent or not. The picture is misleading since I thought it would be about when or when not to breastfeed a child and how Mom's that choose to are literally being bullied in society and shamed for doing what feels right to them.

It's a OLD MAN telling women how to *parent*, how to be *better* Mom's. What the hell does this old guy know and most importantly WHY are we as women listening to this MAN telling us or giving us advice on how to better parent.

I'd rather seek advice from a Mom before some old guy who they could not put on the cover because let's be honest, Mom on the cover is the sexist ideal of a *hot mom*

Thin, blonde, pretty he's not gonna sell covers like she is, throw in a stool and an almost 4 year old child posed into the mix and you have controversy and this magazine sells a bit more, women are dogging out one another on Mother's Day.

It's disgusting sometimes how we allow *men* to display images of us (women) in ways that can be, are demeaning especially to something as important as.

Motherhood.