Posting Pics of kid breastfeeding dolls

[Kobi]

I should have added to the above, that as I am not a parent, I never had to grapple with this kind of stuff. So, I dont know what all goes into making a decision that works for any particular individual.

So, I'm trying to understand the parental thinking process in this kind of stuff. I find I can be pretty clueless to stuff outside of my realm of experience.

[*Anya*]

Breastfeeding dolls. Excuse me but who exactly is this company kidding? This is crass commercialism at its worst.

I can see a bunch of business people sitting around a table, brainstorming the next big idea in doll sales: "Hey, I've got it! No one else has a doll that breastfeeds! We will make a killing"!

I am a mother that did breastfeed. I do believe, personally, that it is nature's most perfect food. Can and should all mothers breastfeed? No, of course, not! Are there multiple reasons why many can't or chose not too? Of course! No judgment here!

This has zero to do with encouraging a 4-year old to nurse 20-years later but everything to do with the almighty dollar.

Do I also think our society needs one more damn reason to sexualize or encourage little girls to grow up any faster than they already do?

Hell no!!

[Novelafemme]

"Psychologist Susan Bartell, a contributor to babycenter.com, is "uncomfortable" with the doll in part because the 3- to 6- year-old kids it's intended for "are not developmentally at a point where they think about their bodies in terms of nurturing a baby. This isn't really something they should have to think about," she says.

But Sally Wendkos Olds, author of The Complete Book of Breastfeeding, sees the doll as "a lovely way to introduce the topic to little girls who are interested and curious."

Our society "has eroticized the breasts to such an extent that their true purpose has been forgotten," she adds.

Lost in all the discussion about the doll's cultural relevance is the fact that, at $69.99, it's a pretty expensive investment for a toy that doesn't do very much, says Marianne Szymanski, author of Toy Tips: A Parent's Essential Guide to Smart Toy Choices. "If you're OK with your child doing this kind of play, you can do it for a lot less."

I poked around a wee bit looking for more information and found the above. I have to say I wasn't as visually disturbed by the doll as much as I originally thought I would be. A "real" looking baby doll that attaches its mouth to a little, plastic, flower-shaped binky sewn to a halter-top. The baby cries when it's hungry and burps when it's done eating. I have to say that if this had come out when I was pregnant with my youngest, I might have considered getting it for my then 4 year old.

I totally agree with your thoughts regarding gross commercialism and capitalism, Anya, believe me! But, as a mom with pretty good common sense, I would have purchased the doll because my four year old really struggled when her little sister was born...as some kiddos do when another child enters the family. For a very brief time she reverted back to wearing diapers again during the day, threw big old temper tantrums, and had a melt-down when I needed alone time to nurse her baby sister to sleep. This doll could have made the transition a bit less difficult, who knows? Although, at $70, I might have been the one traumatized in the end!

Traditional heteronormative gender roles are problematic for me as well. Even though there were baby dolls in our house, they were only used as the pretend "victim" in a gruesome three stroller pile-up in the middle of our living room, or found soaking wet in the toilet. My girls both shunned the pretty in pink, baby doll phase of their childhoods. We had a plethora of toys for them to chose from and they simply chose others.

As for pictures on the internet. I'd have to see them for myself before pondering whether or not I would have done the same. I think many of us go through a trial by fire when it comes to learning a lesson about internet friendly information sharing. It took me a couple of times getting into "trouble" for sharing via the interwebs before I decided to be a bit more careful...especially where my daughters are concerned. What seems innocent to me can be taken and bastardized by someone else with ill intent in mind.

All in all, I don't think I have a huge problem with the doll. It's like many things in life...if I don't like it, I just won't buy it. If I have a fundamental issue with it, then I won't shop where the doll is sold. There is some power behind being a consumer.

Lastly, I want to add that breastfeeding is indeed a personal issue for many. I was incredibly sad when my oldest weaned herself at seven months. When my youngest was born she was tongue tied and we were instructed to wait until she was four months old before having her frenulum snipped. So that meant I had to pump around the clock if I wanted her to have my milk. And I did! I was part of a group of attachment parenting moms and babies and I'll never forget the day I showed up toting baby bottles. I was treated like I was the anti-christ and actually left the play group infuriated! These moms had no idea what was in the bottles or why I was bottle feeding yet they judged me in a heartbeat. I was so mad I was spitting nails! Fast-forward three years and I still had a nursing toddler who, just before I finally weaned her, stood in the doorway with one hand on her hip and the other pointing up at me sternly demanding her "milky time." It was a crazy 3.4 years but I loved it and feel very fortunate I was able to experience extended breastfeeding. My sister on the other hand, who has severe PTSD, made the choice not to because it triggered her OCD and made her extremely anxious. It broke her heart not to nurse her two kids but she knew she needed to be mentally well in order to nurture her kiddos the best way she could. And truly, a more wonderful mom I have never before seen! I could whip out my boob anytime, anywhere, slap the baby on there and go about my business. But then again I'm not the worlds most modest person and I have very few (if any) body issues. But I respect each person's individual decision, including whether or not to buy a breastfeeding doll for the child.

Thanks for listening!

[Martina]

Originally Posted by Novelafemme

I have to say that if this had come out when I was pregnant with my youngest, I might have considered getting it for my then 4 year old.

i think it would be a cool toy for a kid, boy or girl, whose mom was breastfeeding. He or she could breastfeed the doll right along with mom. Totally cute.

[EnderD_503]

Originally Posted by blush

Actually, you kinda proved my point. You were given Barbies and you didn't play with them. The child chooses the toy. I don't like Barbies either, for a myriad of reasons. I don't consider them a nurturing toy.

Not really. The point is the child doesn't choose the toy. The toy was bought for me. Luckily, unlike most other children, I had a mother who was a tomboy as a child and wasn't fond of pink, frilly dolls herself. So it was no problem for her if I wanted to play sports/be outside, play with a train set or play with lego, instead.

The point is that most children in our society really don't have that choice. I think about my nephew, for example, who has two sisters. He is always being told, by the same family members who never ceased to give me Barbies despite that they already knew what I played with, that he can't play with his sisters' dolls because he's a boy. Most parents are unfortunately pretty rigid, and do struggle with it when their child expresses interest in playing with toys that aren't "gender appropriate." Before he had two younger sisters, he was never even given the opportunity to see a doll to want to play with it. The only reason he even has that potential is because of his sisters.

So no, the kids don't choose the toys in many, many cases. The people who buy the toys choose the toys. So what would motivate most parents to buy this breastfeeding doll for their child? Probably not their kids request in most cases.

Originally Posted by blush

I find it interesting that you're so bothered by toys that encourage caring behavior.

I have no issue with parents (not toys) encouraging caring behaviour in their own children. I do have a problem with toys marketed towards girls (and lets not downplay the role of marketing here, because this toy is absolutely being marketed towards girls. Toys don't sell without marketing.) that encourage nurturing behaviour. As far as parents teaching kids to care about other people and how to interact with others, that I have no issue with. But that is up to the parents to demonstrate with their own behaviour and interactions with others around them. It's not the job of a breastfeeding doll or kitchen set or whatever.

The word nurturing itself is completely wrapped up and steeped in implications of "maternal instincts" just as its direct ancestor, nourrir in French means to feed, and going back even further at its origins mean specifically a mother feeding a child through the breast. Quite literally what this doll does.

Those origins are still heavily implicated in the word "nurture." If I care and support a friend/loved one, as far as I'm concerned I am not nurturing them through any kind of developmental stage (which is at the crux of nurturing) nor am I taking part in their upbringing, nor am I raising them. If I care about and support another human being, then it means exactly that: I am caring about them and supporting them.

Originally Posted by blush

You're also referencing marketing of toys, which is a whole different ball game. A baby doll is not inherently evil. Marketing a baby doll only to girls is. Many of the messages marketing toys is not healthy. That doesn't make a baby doll unhealthy.

It is not a whole different ball game. It is, in fact, the most important factor in any heavily gendered toy. Action figures are bought for boys because they are heavily marketed towards boys, and the implications of that marketing are completely intertwined with modern society's values and traditional gender roles. Dolls are bought for girls because they are heavily marketed as "gender appropriate toys," and the same thing mentioned above goes for dolls. You cannot take marketing out of the equation, and I would argue that that is actually the majority of the problem here. These toys were created and marketed for a reason, and parents are heavily influenced by those reasons in conjunction with their own upbringing. Nothing is "inherently evil," but nothing is void of the influences which provide it with it's primary role. You cannot, at this stage in our society, take the marketing out of this doll or most other toys, for that matter.

Originally Posted by blush

What you're referring to is a lack of options given to children for the toys they want to play with. That is a parenting choice, and differs entirely from the actual toy. A child should be given a healthy choice of toys geared towards their interests, whatever they may be. If a child shows interest in nurturing behavior, they should be given a toy that they can nurture.

A child "should" be given many things. The reality is, they aren't. So we can sit here and theorise about how utopic society should be or could be, or we can actually look at how these toys (and the marketing attached to them) are being used and what they are teaching children as young members of our societies, as influenced by their parents who were in turn influenced by the marketing and their own upbringings, as well as current gender norms.

Edit: I don't know. To me it just seems a matter of practicality as far as creating change in society. In my view, saying something isn't inherently "evil" can detract from what it's actually being used for. I don't really view anything in this world as "evil," personally, but I do see the way everything in the human world has its social functions that can't be escaped. Especially when it comes to children/upbringing. Many parents are essentially trying to "mould" their children with their own values/beliefs at that stage.

Originally Posted by blush

Ender, my Goof is transgendered, and we learn daily from each other. I'm not unaware of the horrors of the wrong toy or social expectations that come with those toys. Childhood comes with "toy baggage" for many of us. My point is the individual child should motivate a toy purchase. Not their gender, their gender expectation, or marketing companies.

But the reality is that, in most cases, they aren't the sole motivating factor. In many cases the child doesn't factor in at all.