What Do You Think of TIME‘s Breastfeeding Cover?

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by EnderD_503

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...

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

Originally Posted by Glenn

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).

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.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Glenn

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).

Originally Posted by Kobi

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.

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.

[aishah]

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.

[princessbelle]

Originally Posted by aishah

snip~

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.

Already posted here but wanted to high five this.

I'm sick to death of some people saying we don't mother correctly or we don't breastfeed long enough or we breastfeed too long. Measure, measure, measure, constantly.

Seriously? Know what? Pretty darn sure we WOMEN can figure it out and have over a billion years ago. QUIT measuring us!!!

Leave us alone, Time, and quit trying to make us look bad, no matter which side we are on. We do the best we can with the resources and time that we have with our kids.

Geeze.

[girl_dee]

Originally Posted by princessbelle

Already posted here but wanted to high five this.

I'm sick to death of some people saying we don't mother correctly or we don't breastfeed long enough or we breastfeed too long. Measure, measure, measure, constantly.

Seriously? Know what? Pretty darn sure we WOMEN can figure it out and have over a billion years ago. QUIT measuring us!!!

Leave us alone, Time, and quit trying to make us look bad, no matter which side we are on. We do the best we can with the resources and time that we have with our kids.

Geeze.

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!

[BrutalDaddy]

Originally Posted by Cajun_dee

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.

[girl_dee]

Originally Posted by BrutalDyke

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.

Exactly.....how often have you seen or heard the term deadbeat mom? Not very.

[SugarFemme]

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.

Originally Posted by princessbelle

Already posted here but wanted to high five this.

I'm sick to death of some people saying we don't mother correctly or we don't breastfeed long enough or we breastfeed too long. Measure, measure, measure, constantly.

Seriously? Know what? Pretty darn sure we WOMEN can figure it out and have over a billion years ago. QUIT measuring us!!!

Leave us alone, Time, and quit trying to make us look bad, no matter which side we are on. We do the best we can with the resources and time that we have with our kids.

Geeze.

[BrutalDaddy]

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.