Some people just can’t make the quantum leap between the normal feeding function of the breast and the salacious breast image created by those who just love to make things “dirty.” This year, it happened in a Texas Target. A breastfeeding mom in a remote corner of the store says she was harassed and mortified by store staff.
Michelle Hickman says her nursing child was covered with a blanket, yet Target employees would not leave her alone while she nursed in a store area she says no customers walked through. Since that November 29th incident outside Houston, hundreds of mothers have participated or plan to participate in” nurse-ins” nationwide to support Hickman and every nursing mother’s right to publicly nurse her child without scorn.
In a country where breasts are publicly displayed (and revered) for all the wrong reasons there is no logical reason a mother with a child suckling at her nipple, usually covered with a scarf or blanket, should become the object of harassment and threats. On any beach in America women sun-bathing with their tops untied will roll from back to front to catch more rays and will display more breast than any young mom sitting with a child nursing.
More to the point, Americans pay for Vegas shows, cable TV, Playboy, Hustler, X-rated videos or topless bars and strip clubs to watch parades of non-nursing breasts. They spend big money to attend movies and theatres spotlighting bare-breasted and even nude actors of both genders in sexual romps-- but a suckling child offends them.
Women were created with breasts to deliver the healthiest (and cheapest) form of nourishment possible to their children. Nursing babies is normal and even healthy: Pam Anderson probably isn’t.
Those who see breasts as sinful sex toys often blame others for their misguided view. An old joke tells of a man who claimed to be obsessed with breasts and sex and who asked a psychiatrist for help.
The shrink showed the patient several Rorschach ink blot images: at every one, the patient claimed the image reminded him of a breast. Finally the doctor had to agree that the patient was disturbed and obsessed with breasts.
Offended, the patient then protested, saying, “What do you mean? You’re the one who showed me the dirty pictures!”
Nursing Moms are not Lady Ga Ga in dishabille. They are not Hollywood or TV stars exhibiting their mammary ware for profit. Neither are they local pole-dancers naked from the waste up and tucking dollar-tributes into their tiny G-strings. They are just women feeding their hungry babies.
Those of you to whom nursing mothers represent a “dirty picture” might best stay out of the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican where the entire ceiling is little more than legions of naked men and women, full frontal and beyond. Alternatively, if the sight of a nursing child offends you, just put a blanket over your head!
________________
(This originally appeared in my Keene (NH) Sentinel column)
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
escrito por nada
Wren Dancer
FusunA
Leepin Larry
Out on a limb
Miguela Holt y Roybal
Salon.com
Comments
However--(there's always a however, isn't there) I wonder a bit. This lady is a native of Germany. Europeans always seem to have different "standards"--this was a totally natural and comfortable act for this lady. With many Americans, there seems to be either a "look at me" attitude or a "DON'T look at me" attitude, both calculated to draw some level of attention and to reinforce that grand American concept of "entitlement".
what is so shameful about feeding your baby?I find it very strange, this attitude that breast feeding is somehow, evil, dirty or sinful. I've had young moms in the US say 'oh that's gross, I'm going to use formula' If it's so gross, sinful, dirty, etc..then why do we have breasts? Women have been breast feeding since the beginning of time. We never would have survived as a species if it wasn't for mothers' milk. Last I checked no one has ever excavated paleolithic formula containers.
This is not an issue in Scandinavia or Europe or South and Central America. Only in the US has breast feeding been twisted into something evil.
Breast fed babies are healthier, less likely to have allergies, asthma and immune system problems. They catch less colds, maintain healthier weights and are smarter.
I wonder what the good (easily shocked) people of the US would do if the practice of wet nurses came back. Probably massive coronaries.
Time to grow up people, breasts are for babies!
r
Even Walter in his comment (above) expresses his "preference" in regard to something that is just not any of his business at all. To tell such a person that they have no "right" to such an opinion - indeed to any opinion at all - about the question of breast feeding (or a multitude of other questions) is seen as infringing upon "their" rights.
Nonsense! No one has unlimited "rights" to an opinion on things that do them neither harm nor good.
I gladly accept that whether or not anyone breast feeds anywhere that cannot possibly cause me harm (like behind the wheel of car) is just no business of mine. I flatly refuse to have ANY opinion on things that are none of my business.
.
Again, if it's ok to display breasts for recreation and sexual stimulation it ought to be similarly ok to display them for nursing babies.
Please note that I did not say that people "cannot hold an opinion" on anything. I said that they do not have a "right" to hold some opinions. I also said that I - me - do not allow myself to hold such opinions on matters that do not concern me. I hope that I did not mislead you as to my meaning.
.
Oryoki's point applies, too. In some people a tendency comes about to create an issue where none ought to exist. Then comes the harrassment.
SkyPixie, I am offended by your comment directed at me.
As my father always said, "opinions are like assholes; everybody has one." I've got mine. I don't begrudge you your's.
My apologies to you, Mary Ann.
Lezlie
I'm with Oryoki, Poppi Iceland, SykpixieO, and Paul Fornale with their replies which address your topic.
Rated♥
I wonder about the 'sexualization' of breasts ( not to deny Matt's point about there being an erotic allure ~ of course there is ) ~ but the sexual commercialisation ... the posters, magazines, silicon enlargement etc. ~ it's as if breasts are specifically for grown-up men, & not babies at all.
How did it, when did it all begin to go so skew-wiff ?
Formula has its place, but I worry J&J ( & co ) have an undue influence.
rated
Humans are the only species on this planet where the females have constantly engorged breasts. In ALL OTHER instances, females breases only become enlarged when they are ready to mate.
Human females can mate at any time. It's a huge evolutionary advantage, and a big reason why we are the dominant species on the planet. Couple this with the human male's ability to impregnate the female throughout the course of his life, and a bit of modesty isn't the worst thing in the world that we could call for.
Women should not be shamed for the feeding function of their breasts, and when there is no other option, they should feel comfortable feeding their children whenever and wherever they have to, but when there is another option, it ain't that damn hard to step out for a bit.
Regardless, the government shouldn't be regulating this behavior.
BUT - if Lady Gaga had a baby, then she would be a nursing mother, now wouldn't she?
Half of the families in our church have 6-12 kids, so, there are newborns every sunday. Most of the mothers just breast feed as a matter of routine when their kids want fed, thus no one makes a big deal out of it. Also, our church gals have gotten prettty good at being discreet; to the point that they can begin feeding in mid conversation and you aren't aware they started feeding. (Most of their towels match their outfits)
The first time I ever noticed a woman breast feeding was in a restaurant. She had 2'x2' wool patches over her nipples and a wool sweater. The patches were secured by velcro. When her kid got hungry she removed a patch, fed the kid and stuck the patch back. You saw some nipple, but she was pretty quick about it.
Have a great day.
Furthermore, I wonder if this is just another reminder of stereotypical male dominance and, in this case, fear. The way I see it, men love boobs, in their restaurants, at their sports games, flashing at their rock concerts - generally, for their entertainment. But as soon as breasts are being used for something other than their own selfish entertainment, like for their designed purpose of feeding an infant, these men, and those they've unfortunately influenced with their ignorant thought, are uncomfortable and try to ridicule and shame mothers who nurse their babies.
p.s. there is a short article in the latest Bitch magazine (the underground issue) about this and the rise of "breasturants" - Hooters and other restaurants that serve food with a big helping of short skirts and cleavage.
you get used to it, kinda. It brings one back to common ground, to certain socializing fundamentals, to the communal, concomitant community related aspects of everyday existence, regardless of anyone's (everyone's), also, individual perspective (s) .
@L. Larry... Long story... see... once upon a time, long ago, in a far away............. & and so... suddenly ~~~~then ~~~~~~ just when....
Plus, breast milk is FREE! Take that Nestle!
and specifically how the human species is UNIQUE among all primates at having extraordinarily developed breasts as a primary sexual characteristic.
our closest primate relatives (chimps and gorillas) have mammary glands which are almost indistinguishable from the chests of those species. this is hardly the case with humans, though.
it is well established in the scientific community that human breasts evolved into the egaggerated, tumescent, sexually responsive form as an inducement for face to face copulation, and more frequent copulation.
their primary purpose has become sexual allure, not lactation.
I am completely in favor of (discreet) public nursing. but posts like this which militantly (and hilariously) assert that the sight of bare breasts is not an ocassion for sexual arousal in the male are simply beyond belief.
there are adult education courses in evolutionary biology at your local community college you might consider.
Balt, your pompous, pseudoscientific wordsmog elides an essential concept: breasts do not exist independently, as do other natural phenomena, like rainbows or slime molds. Instead, breasts have owners. These are people, called women, and it is up to the individual owners of breasts to determine what their purpose(s) will be at any given time. Sometimes the purpose will be lactation, sometimes the purpose will be sexual allure; but the overwhelming majority of the time the purpose of breasts will be to just go along as their owner gets through her day.
Essentially, they are prosecuting a thought crime.
pENis foUR brEAst
urINate foUR feeDIng
buCKet foUR blANkeT
inConTEnEnt maN foUR nurSINg mOthEr
nOw hoW doEs uR arGUEmeNt holD uP
inConTEnEnt maN dEcideS to UriNaiT iN a buCKeT in thE miDDLe of a sTORe
sTORe emPLoyEEs aSk fOUr hIM to uSE reSTroom or dREssINg rOOm
hE claiMS wHaT he is doING is nATURaL aNd woN"t leAVe hIgh trAffiC loCAtiON in sTOre
pUT a bUCket oVeR uR hEad mARy Ann