Did anyone see the ITV News piece about of water bills on customers?

But women’s words are definitely the issue here!

Threads on this topic constantly get deleted. I can really only assume it is because some people really don’t want it widely known that this happens.

I mean, in Australia women received police visits for pointing out the issues with these males feeding their infants the secretions from male breasts.

The other thread was deleted following “numerous reports” apparently. Knowing what we know about the monitors that turn the waters of FWR into shark-infested custard, I’d be interested to know how many of those reports were from actual members and how many were from sounding the “they’re talking about that acronym they mustn’t be allowed to talk about because it makes us look bad” klaxon to the unregistered.

Whether the baby is suckling or not, is not the phenomena of males breastfeeding the greatest example of cultural appropriation ever? I mean, it doesn't get more "female" than this, other than giving birth, and even more so as the two functions are intimately connected.

But I thought in this activist age, cultural appropriation was one of the biggest no-nos ever.

Cue expelling from college, white Americans donning sombreros and fake taches and downing industrial quantities of tequila...innocent enough (other than the puking).

But a man appropriating right at the heart of femaleness, this gets a free pass.

Oh, I forgot. You're not "appropriating" femaleness if you "are" female, whatever you started off as. Silly me.

Mumsnet has deleted the thread talking specifically about Mika breastfeeding, so I expect this one will go the same way shortly.

Has a GP prescribed these drugs for this specific purpose?

I thought I'd peaked a long time ago but ...

Women are no longer permitted to point out the obvious, even on a woman-centered, woman-run forum predominantly for and viewed by women, many of whom are mothers .
It really IS be kind and say nothing, or "scroll on by" as we were told on the other thread, and threats of reportings which unfortunately mumsnet seem only too happy and quick to acquiesce to.

If you think your voices as women are being drowned, and literally deleted, you are absolutely right.

So, a male person does this and it has no benefit for the infant, and women need to just be kind and what? Not point out some of the reasons motivating that male?

Depriving their infant of the energy and the stomach space they need for nutritious milk.

What should we be allowed to say? By now I have read enough accounts of why these male people do this, not once is it child centred. And yes, I have read some fetish driven accounts written by the very males doing this.

If, as is generally agreed (by anyone who understands science and/or has not lost their critical reasoning) there is no benefit to the baby of being encouraged to suckle at a man’s nipple in public, why encourage it to do so?

The only other person who could be benefiting from this is the man.

What kind of non-perverse benefit could an adult man be gaining from having an infant suckle on one of his erogenous zones?

Genuine question, because I can’t think of any.

Then you are not defending this male person?

or do you believe that there is simply no fetish involved here?

Or you just wish to scold people who see things differently to you
again?

What should we call a man making a baby suckle at his nipples to eat chemically induced "milk" to validate his feelings?

Excellent point well made. There’s no other reason apart from it being all about him

Yep, no argument from me.

Coz he's a self indulgent cunt

I mean like all mothers who breastfeed.

So if there's no benefit to the baby, why would a man want to do this?

Why is he doing it then?

I breastfed my babies because it was best. Like all mothers.

Apologies, that was in response to @Helleofabore

Eh? Why would I do that when IMO there is no benefit and I never said there was?

Could you tell us please what is the benefit for this infant to be fed induced secretions from a male breast?

I am very happy to post the maximum mls that a male can produce and just how much an infant needs.

Mine hadn't even got started. It was zapped immediately. And I think some topics are worth the effort of additional moderating, as the topics are so serious they deserve to be aired and discussed opening. And I include the medically dubious posts being allowed to stand, sunlight is important.

An awful lot of the posts on the thread were basically just calling this man a pervert and a paedophile. It's not in the spirit of civil or constructive debate and could open MN up to libel claims. If MN was to delete all those it would probably be 50% of the thread gone!

At some point it's easier for them to just delete the thread.

Why zap the whole thread? With all the links to legitimate scientific studies, now gone.
You have to ask who's benefit these deletions are for, and why.

The last time I looked in on the thread there was some spectacular TRA nonsense being posted. So I suspect MN didn't want the hassle of moderating.

I don't understand women who are OK with this. Are you all ok with their DD's meeting a man, giving birth to a baby, then that man taking over the role of mother and pretending to breastfeed the child?

This. Why can't more men do it if it's so easy and harmless and nothing to see here? Breastfeeding is a traumatic experience for some women, male partners could try instead?

Good question.
Again, what exactly was said in the thread that was against the rules that individual deletions could not have dealt with it?
Why zap the whole thread? With all the links to legitimate scientific studies, now gone.
You have to ask who's benefit these deletions are for, and why.

And why a couple of "reports" justifies sweeping all the concerns for safeguarding under the rug of zealous ideology.

Without fail EVERY time, threads about biological functions are deleted, be it men having periods, breastfeeding etc.
EVERY TIME.