Reason #1006 why women’s sport is different: Paris Olympics: Athlete’s plea to let baby stay in village is refused

MissLucyEyesBarrow
You're going to have to explain to me the relevance of that cartoon strip

crunchermuncher
Thanks for at least attempting to understand my stance, but I still believe you have got the wrong end of the stick.

I actually said that parents have to make sacrifices. Parents give up smoking, stop swearing, change their working hours or jobs, take jobs they hate or even give up careers they love for the sake of doing what they think is best for their children. She is giving up the atmosphere of the village - at nighttime only.

Any parent of a dependent child of any age is in the same position with regard to living in the Olympic Village.

I gather that what you are saying is that whatever choice a mother makes in relation to her children, whatever age they are, she should be supported. I don’t agree with that as a blanket statement, though efforts should be made to fulfil reasonable requests. Staying in the Olympic Village is a unique experience. She wants that experience and she wants to breastfeed her child at night. She doesn't need to do either, she wants to. They are both perfectly reasonable wants, but they are not needs. The IOC's refusal, on the grounds that there is no suitable room, is not unreasonable in her case. Mothers of babies and younger children are a different story and would have a stronger claim on my sympathy, especially if they are single mums.

It is ridiculous that nobody has thought of making any provision at all for the purpose of enabling babies and very young children (up to a certain age) to stay overnight with a competitor parent. This lack mainly affects single mothers more than those with involved partners, or fathers in general. And it is all of a piece with the IOC’s lack of consideration of women. There should be a minimum amount of suitable provision for mothers (and in theory, fathers) of nursing infants. Special rooms in the nursery complex, or perhaps adaptable accommodation, or just a preparedness to stump up for offsite accommodation if there is excess demand that year. Hopefully the LA 2028 architects are taking note. The IOC is awash with cash and could easily subsidise the additional cost for poorer host countries in the future.

Clarisse talked about the benefit to herself of the bf-ing routine. To my mind, that is a valid argument. She is perfectly entitled to think of the effect on her competition chances. (In previous posts, I emphasised the benefit to her because other posters were trying to make it about the welfare of her child.)

Her accommodation should be being paid for by the IOC or the French judo federation. If she is having to pay for it herself or through a personal sponsor, then it's unfair on her. She’s an athlete representing her country at the Olympics and they should put her up.

She won’t be living in the athletes' village, which is a shame for her, but she won't be the only one, and the day nursery itself is in the village.

She and her child will be fine. I don't think that's telling her to just be grateful for crumbs.

Ok, thanks for telling me why you quoted the guidelines. Ignore the repeat of that question. I asked because they didn't support what I thought you were saying, ie that children must be breastfed (by those who can, obv) as long as possible. I had queried whether it was essential in my first post, all the guidelines I've seen seem to agree that after 2 years old it's optional.
I don't find breastfeeding weird. I think it should be more acceptable to do it in a quiet corner of a cafe, for example, and I strongly disagree with mother and baby feeding rooms in big shops or venues being rebranded as family rooms.
My best friend breastfed her first son until he was 4.5, but stopped earlier with the second one. Much like you - perhaps it's a recognised pattern. I don't think bf-ing a toddler or preschooler is weird, I think it's optional. If the mum thinks it's worth continuing, great.

I've explained why I asked about stopping bf-ing to go on holiday in another post.

I have tried , not twitted. Doh.

You're missing the point. She's being asked to make a choice that a male athlete wouldn't have to, for lack of provision. Some of us think that's not ideal. I don't understand why you seem so invested in arguing that it's not a problem, or that she is in some way being selfish - that seems to be heavily implied.

Yes, there are work arounds. Yes she can stay outside the village and some people choose to do that. But there might be benefits to her performance from staying onsite for example,we can't know, and its a choice that the other athletes have that she doesn't.

For some of us, its the principle here that's important, regardless of how much aggravation she is or isn't suffering.

I have twitted to understand what point you're making. It seems to be that 'because she's a mother with a child in tow (leaving aside the argument over the necessity of bf-ing a toddler), she shouldn't expect the same choices, and if she does, she's a bit selfish'? If Ive misunderstood and that's not the case, what are you saying?

It all seems so 1950s. It's the same underlying assumption that kept our mothers and grandmothers stuck at home (yes I'm being hyperbolic to make a point, #notmymum etc), that mums should make sacrifices for their kids that dads would never be expected to, because that is a woman's lot in life. We gestate and birth therefore the sacrifice and responsibility is ours as well.

If that's not what you believe, why argue so vehemently that this mother's choices aren't important and she should suck it up?

Textbook.

I apologise for misinterpreting you, but I think I had good reason.

Can you let me know why you quoted the NHS guidelines?

Clarisse is not being forced to stop bf-ing at night. She can do so. She just can't do it in the village because there is no suitable accommodation, which we have all agreed there should be.

She could alternatively have chosen to take this as a good time to gradually stop bf-ing, but she wants to continue because it's important to her. There will be a day nursery so she can play with her daughter in the daytime as well as snuggling up in the evening in her offsite accommodation.
Yes, a break in breast feeding can lead to a cessation of production, but some mothers carry on producing for six weeks after stopping. And stopping the breastfeeding of a 2.5-3-year old is fine. Some women do keep gf-ing their toddlers, but those children aren't what you would call nursing infants.

What if Clarisse's judo bouts were scheduled at the same time as her daughter's nighttime feeds? Should she demand that the competition times be changed in order to enable her to bf? Would she withdraw from the competition? She wouldn't do either of those things, she would make other arrangements for feeding her daughter - or change the feeding timetable. She would know weeks if not months in advance what time her bouts will be and could adapt accordingly without distressing her toddler.

OvaHere
I didn't say Clarisse's demands were egregious, I said her case wasn't. In the article, it says that a British archer had to express 80 bottles of breast milk before the 2021 Tokyo Olympics because her baby - which she thought she was going to have to leave at home - was entirely dependent on mother's milk at the time. (At the last minute, children were allowed in.) That was genuinely a dilemma about competing or mothering. Clarisse's dilemma is breastfeeding at night versus staying in the village.

Also the reason I mentioned guidelines (not in UK so wasn't NHS but strangely enough most guidelines are similar) was because you seemed to think it was strange for her to be feeding a two year old. I am fed up to the back teeth of people who seem to think breastfeeding is strange or unnatural. I am fed up of people commenting negatively on how long a baby is breastfed for.I was questioned while pregnant, when my babies were less than 24 hours old and on and on and on until I stopped with each of them. It was relentless. A woman should never have to justify her decision to breastfeed her baby. I never came across something similar for those who don't breastfeed. Even when goaded into commenting on somebody else's choice, I didn't and simply said it was my choice to feed my baby how I was). I only fed my first for a year but grew a thicker skin for my second (still less than the guidelines so I must think myself a criminal).

Nowhere have I said a woman shouldn't go on holiday if she chooses.

It should be the mothers choice and she should be fully supported in her decision, not be forced to make a decision because the alternative is too tricky.

I think Bella wants to deliberately misrepresent what I said. Nowhere have I said a mother must continue to breastfeed or that stopping would be a "heinous crime". I have repeatedly said a women should not be forced to stop, and yes, a temporary stop can lead to the unintentional end of breastfeeding. I have also said repeatedly that the child's age is irrelevant as it is an issue faced by many mothers in competitive sports. Mothers petitioned to be allowed to bring nursing infants to the Tokyo Olympics including Ona Carbonell, Alex Morgan and Aliphine Tuliamuk.

I hadn't noticed that you were the only poster. It simply struck me that there were several posts in a similar vein. Your subsequent posts have answered my questions. I understand your viewpoint.

Going by my own experience of breastfeeding a toddler, if she stops for a week when her toddler is already down to a bedtime feed, she'll stop producing. It's unlikely she'll be able to express, with anything less than hospital grade equipment, if at at all. Pumps are very poor at simulating a baby or toddler's suck, so many women can't express milk, even if they can successfully breastfeed.

I was extraordinarily lucky in being able to produce huge volumes of milk in response to a pump during the newborn period, but when I experimented with a handpump two years later while still breastfeeding a toddler, nothing came out. I was absolutely producing milk, but the pump.was never going to get it out.

I have done it once and am currently breastfeeding my second child (age 2) to sleep now
It's normal, and more common than people think!

I don't care if Clarisse is asking for something a bit awkward to accommodate.

These fuckwits let men into women's sports, taking women's records, medals and sponsorships.

Absolutely nothing a female athlete might demand will ever be as egregious as that.

EmotionalSupportViper
Forgot this bit...

Obviously this Clarisse wants to continue to feed her child. The point is that she is being denied her choice.
She can continue to bf her child at night. She just can't do it if she chooses to stay in the village. The child doesn't care about being in the village, Clarisse does. A man would not be in this situation, but you have to remember that some competitors who are mothers or fathers choose to stay offsite anyway. It's not a given that the village is where the mothers will want to be, although I agree is that it should be an option.

If that toddler is used to being comforted at night with a breast feed, then making her go "cold turkey" will be distressing for both her and her mother.
Absolutely. What I have suggested is that the athlete could use the intervening months to gradually change her daughter's routine - if she decided that staying in the village was an opportunity which she could not miss.

Why shouldn't a mother choose to feed her baby as long as she is comfortable with? Perhaps this is her bonding time with her daughter - she will train long hours and possibly have less time to share with her than many parents.
She can continue - unless stopping for a short time would mean she couldn't start again on a regular basis? Genuine question, I don't know the answer. The NHS guidelines say you can restart after stopping, though milk volume may be reduced. (But bf-ing a 2-3-year-old is about bonding, not nutrition - she's not a baby.) Whether stopping and restarting is realistic in practice, I don't know. And the guidelines don't say how long a break from bf-ing is envisaged.
I think Clarisse says in the article that she takes her child with her to other competitions, there would be no point in doing that if she didn't get to spend time with her there. And there is going to be a day nursery.
Also - Dad/Granny/Auntie/Godmother - all or any of them could spend correspondingly more time with the child. Do you feel that that would adversely affect the daughter's bond with her mother?

The point it that everything is catered to men, to the extent of even allowing them into women's sports etc - something that allows mediocre male athletes to apparently excel. Well, only in their own minds - we all know that they are not only cheating but being facilitated by the very bodies that should be protecting the women spaces.
100% agree. Apart from men forcing their way into our sports categories, there is:
Funding, sponsorship, media exposure - all men, men, men.
Sexual abuse, over-sexualisation of some athletes.
Bodyshaming, mocking women for being muscular or being "fat".
Results being scoffed at and compared to men (the ones in men's competition) as if that is a fair comparison.
Fewer coaching opportunities, partly because of the lack of pregnancy and maternity rights.
And governing bodies and sport organisers obdurate refusal to accept that women's sport is real sport.

I don't think that Clarisse would be a "bad mother" if she didn't continue to feed her daughter, any more than I think women who bottle feed are bad mothers.
Good. Neither do I. I asked the question (about voluntarily stopping for up to a week) because some posters seemed to regard any break from bf-ing a toddler as a heinous crime.

I feel sick with rage. We are constantly told it infringes males' human rights if they are forced to choose between cross-sex hormones and remaining competitive in sport, so they have to be allowed to compete with women so they can beat us.

But women have to choose between competitive sport and the rest of their lives all the time! This woman has managed to do something incredible here in returning to international sport after pregnancy and birth, but the IOC couldn't even accommodate her with a private room for her and her toddler.

The men of the IOC need to fuck off.

I didn't think I was lecturing anyone (I certainly didn't intend to) and I'm just one poster, not several, but since the majority opinion seems to disapprove of my comments, i deduced that you were probably talking to me.
So would you mind asking me specific questions?

crunchermuncher
The IoC is not being inclusive to female athletes by potentially making them choose between feeding and competing (again, it's not relevant that this isn't 'harmful to the child' - and anyway isn't that a terribly low bar?). It's not about 'having it all' it's about not wanting to live in a world where the default provision for everything is what men need, and women can just get on with it.

How is she being asked to choose between bf-ing and competing? As I said before, if the IOC said she had to live onsite during the competition and could not have her baby overnight, that would be making her choose between her bf-ing routine and competing. She has opted to stay offsite because there is no suitable accommodation in the village. We all agree this must change, and soon. But what she is actually choosing between is bf-ing in the evening and living in the village. Lots of other athletes don't live in the village, either. Offsite accommodation might even be preferable to a mother.

It seems to me that many posters are saying that the child must continue to be breastfed, come what may. She doesn't have to be. That is where the daughter's age is relevant. Some seem horrified by the idea that a two-and-a-half year old might be weaned or fed and cuddled by someone else at night for a couple of weeks after being with her mother in the daytime. Is that what you are saying?

The "having everything" comment was in relation to being in the Olympic Village, not being in the judo competition.

I agree this uniquely affects women and that we're not just like men. The whole point of feminism for me is that we are different, our career trajectories and lives don't have to follow the male model. Our sports are just for us. Our sports kit is designed for us. Our training regimes are differently structured. And yes, we urgently need pregnancy and maternity rights in sport. I just don't think that this particular case is that egregious.

Sorry - changed the order of a sentence and was left with "this Clarisse" - should have just been Clarisse (had had this athlete)

If that toddler is used to being comforted at night with a breast feed, then making her go "cold turkey" will be distressing for both her and her mother.

Why shouldn't a mother choose to feed her baby as long as she is comfortable with? Perhaps this is her bonding time with her daughter - she will train long hours and possibly have less time to share with her than many parents.

The point it that everything is catered to men, to the extent of even allowing them into women's sports etc - something that allows mediocre male athletes to apparently excel. Well, only in their own minds - we all know that they are not only cheating but being facilitated by the very bodies that should be protecting the women spaces.

I don't think that Clarisse would be a "bad mother" if she didn't continue to feed her daughter, any more than I think women who bottle feed are bad mothers. They aren't. We do what we feel is best for our babies and ourselves. This isn't something anyone should "judge" for. Breastfeeding suited me and my babies - it doesn't suit everyone, and indeed many women (and many babies) are unable to breastfeed. Doesn't make anyone a "bad mother."

Obviously this Clarisse wants to continue to feed her child. The point is that she is being denied her choice.

Thank you. I would appreciate that.

believerinbiology
The situation with pregnancy and maternity rights is improving, and hopefully Clarisse Agbegnenou's advocacy will help to speed up the pace of change.

I don't know how else to say that I believe in enabling and supporting breastfeeding for all mothers who want to and are able to, working in or out of the home and that I agree with making provision for bf-ing mothers in accommodation at sporting events.

What was your reason for quoting NHS guidelines about bf-ing to 2 years and beyond?

Yes, of course some breast-fed children will not take to a bottle of formula and some mothers struggle to express. Every case will be different, but in principle, it's not harmful to the child to try those options. I asked about Agbegenou's particular circumstances - single mum or not - in my first post because I couldn't see any reason why another adult carer could not take over the feeding/cuddling - that was a reasonable suggestion, backed up by the NHS guidelines.

The ideal situation would have been onsite provision for mother and child. That is not possible. She has made the choice which will enable her to continue bf-ing through the competition. She could just as well have decided that she really wanted to immerse herself in the whole Olympic village experience and therefore taken steps to help her child adjust to the change in nighttime routine in the four or five months before Paris 2024. Either choice would have been valid in this case.

Do you have an opinion on whether or not a mother of a 2.5 year old child should be able to go on holiday without her child? I think she should be, in principle.

I don't understand the straw man of it not being necessary to bf a 2 year old.

The issue is that bf uniquely affects mothers. A sub category of the sex class women. This is not an issue men will ever face.

The IoC is not being inclusive to female athletes by potentially making them choose between feeding and competing (again, it's not relevant that this isn't 'harmful to the child' - and anyway isn't that a terribly low bar?). It's not about 'having it all' it's about not wanting to live in a world where the default provision for everything is what men need, and women can just get on with it.

Where women don't have to act like men to fully participate in public life in all the same ways that men do. Equality of opportunity for women and men.

I can't believe that in 2024 we're still having to justify why that should be a right not a privilege.

Sharron Davies excellent book Unfair Play goes into shocking detail about the lack of representation of women both in the IoC and the games themselves(and the audio book is on Spotify). One stat I remember is that the women's marathon only became an event in 1984! Only 40 years ago!

Also as earlier stated she advocates for all female athletes who are breastfeeding. I have also said she and many others have been impacted by similar barriers when their babies were much younger if you insist on highlighting the current/future age of her child. What about when she spoke up previously? What if she goes on to have another child. She wants to remove unnecessary blocks to mothers in sport.

I never said it was essential. You did. A woman should have her choice supported. She should not be forced to stop feeding her child by arbitrary barriers imposed by her sporting organisation. You keep twisting people's words. Nobody has said a child should only be allowed bond with its mother FFS and not any other adult.

For many women it's not as simple as "just give them a bottle". Some women have difficulty expressing, they have to find the time to do this in advance of leaving their child and then while away to relieve engorgement. (In addition to their training/nutrition/rest plan). They may have a child who refuses a bottle. They may have to contend with hormone swings/ breast pain when they don't feed or their body adjusting to a more permanent end to feeding. I could go on and on. A sports organisation should not force a woman to choose.