To wonder why people get so inflamed over breastfeeding on here?

[DaisyLovesMetronidazole]

I'm not bashing Mumsnet in general - I think it's a great site.

I fully understand the benefits of BF. I breastfed all of mine for 18 months. It was great.

Some of my friends did it for longer, others not as long, others not at all.

On here, as soon as someone says something less than 'Mumsnet Mainstream' about it, they seem to get jumped on a lot more heavily than anyone flaunting even very controversial opinions on other matters. In the other thread, I'm guessing almost 50% of replies involved telling the OP to fuck off.

Is anyone else confused at all, or am I completely alone?

LOL Porphyra....

I'm relatively new myself....so I guess that in itself makes us valid targets . People here don't seem very welcome towards newbies at all....

Did a quick google of this site before joining and knew the kind of stuff I could face (you know, the "f* right off"type of comments). Type Mumsnet and Bully and it all comes up....interesting read.

I do wonder whether some people just argue for the sake of it?

I will NEVER be a round peg on here (if it means keeping schtumm and not saying what I really think). I'm not here to be popular, just to express my point of view! (which as I said before is as valid as the next persons).

It's amazing how easily people's comments get twisted/misconstrued..........

"most people dont, mind, notice or care how you or anyone else feeds their child"

In other words, rightthinking folk see the near wholesale disappearance of breastfeeding as normal part of life for the vast majority of all but the tiniest babies, and the hugely profitable baby milk industry which precipitated (and has benefited from) its demise, as a non-issue'.

OP - the drip feed of opinion that breastfeeding actually doesn't matter is what accounts for my participation on bf threads.

OP, here's why I get steamed up, in miniature. I could have picked many other posts, but this one is a perfectly decent illustration:
crashingwaves Sun 22-May-11 18:36:07
"I don't really get the big deal with breastfeeding either, to be honest. I don't just mean in terms of people wanting to do it in public (100% behind) but the problem is as soon as you gently say that there is perhaps a way of doing it that's considerate you get a right old flaming"

When people use words like "considerate", it looks a lot to me like their true colours coming out. After all... what is an "inconsiderate" way of breastfeeding in public? What does that really mean? Almost certainly, it means "risking someone seeing a brief flash of nipple as the baby latches on or off, or exposing some flesh of the breast or belly". At which point, I've gotta admit, the urge for me to scream "Getta fuckin' life! Why the fuck would you care if you saw a bit of nipple" is pretty strong.

I know there are more mature reactions. I spent a while on the feminist board talking about better ways to give feedback, about the value of a spirit of inquiry ("I'd love to know why you think that there can be inconsiderate ways to breastfeed in public" etc etc). But I'm all too human at points, and sometimes I prefer just to go with the flow and get a bit cross about it instead.

I have no problem with people expressing negativity about extended breastfeeding as long as they're prepared to be challenged as to their knowledge and experience of feeding older babies.

So - yes, you think bf a 3 year old is odd and possibly unethical, despite there being no evidence of harm in this behaviour. But then you possibly also think it's ethically ok for a mother to refuse to breastfeed her newborn on no greater grounds that she simply doesn't like the idea of it - even in the face of clear evidence that babies denied their mothers milk are more likely to become I'll, and in the case of preterm babies, die.

My only explanation for the misfit between these two opinions is rooted in the fact that as a nation we a) are obsessed with child abuse and worry that ther's something sexually inappropriate about bf an older child, and b) we value the concept of consumer choice to almost sacred status, and c) we are so enraptured with big brands we trust them with our children's lives and health, even when we know that the milk we make ourselves is safer and better.

I really am not trying to start an argument.

MillyR, I'm genuinely not sure what you're trying to say. I'm not sure I agree about the whole conformity thing. You only really addressed it from the side of the anti in public BFer (conformist?) and someone acting against his/her 'rules', when the pro in public BFers get equally (if not more) angry. Also, I chose to start this thread because breastfeeding is a huge thing on here. I mean, I don't see half as many threads about shopkeepers and muslims.

Supermoo, I don't think I need to be passionate about my parenting choices. I love my children and do my best, but doing my best involves maintaining some objectivity and making some choices I know to be the best even if I'd rather do differently, IYKWIM.

Hairfullofsnakes, you explained what angers you, but I still can't really see why it does. Similarly to the way I felt after reading other BF threads, I'm slightly confused.

OP, there are three answers to the passion question:

1. Lots of people get passionate about lots of different things in life. There are fora out there with people having passionate arguments about Star Wars characters.
2. This particular topic combines food, sex, consumerism, public health, and ickle tiny babies, among many other things. Those are all topics that people feel strongly about for understandable reasons.
3. Vehemence attracts vehemence.

Porphyria, we shouldn't accept all choices and opinions. We should accept choices that do not harm others and opinions that are not aimed at making or wanting other people to change their harmless behaviour. Your post was asking if the woman should curtail her behaviour and show consideration for the narrower ranges of behaviour that you would like to see in public life.

While many people do not accept your view; it doesn't mean they can't tolerate you being allowed to express it. Nobody is asking for your posts to be deleted by MN.

My comments were not aimed at the content of your post, as you didn't every suggest that the woman was deliberately behaving that way in order to have an impact on other people. Other people on the thread repeatedly said that.

DLM, people who are pro breastfeeding in public will be defending it because it is important to them that they are allowed to do it in public, and that when they do so, they are not prevented from doing so.

I don't think they get any more angry than any other minority group whose behaviour has been curtailed in the very recent past, and who have had to have laws put in place to protect their rights. If it wasn't the case that breastfeeding women have been asked to leave cafes and other public places prior to the law being put in place, and as a consequence other breastfeeding mothers have limited where they go and what they do with their child in order to avoid such confrontations, then people passing critical comment on BF on the internet wouldn't be such a big deal.

There are of course situations where the roles are reversed. There are people who will criticise FF mothers, and try and make them feel bad, and be generally vile. This is again about wanting people to conform and all be the same.

The reason why it comes up a lot on MN is because almost everyone on here has either FF or BF.

But whichever group is being criticised, the argument is essentially the same.

'I don't think you should do X. I think you should be asked/encouraged/made to stop doing X'
'It is none of your business that I do X. Be more tolerant.'
'If you criticise me for telling you how to behave, you're intolerant.'

It is completely irrational.

Daisy - it doesn't anger me, it saddens me that the importance of bf is dismissed and that there are women who put their lifestyle choices firstor simply give up with bf even though bf has very important benefits to a baby.
I understand that there are women who cannot bf - of course I do - but why is it so taboo to say a lot of women simply don't persevere through the problems of bf to give their baby one of the greatest gifts the can ever have - breastmilk.

While many people do not accept your view; it doesn't mean they can't tolerate you being allowed to express it. Nobody is asking for your posts to be deleted by MN.

What you seem to have overlooked/condoned Milly is that quite a number of people on the other thread were incapable of tolerating Porphyria's opinion...and resorted to telling her to "F* right off" or ridiculed her, accused her of being a troll and all the rest of it....which is what this thread is all about after all! Whilst your posts are becoming increasingly "preachy" (saying what people SHOULD and SHOULD NOT do) you seem to completely condone other's treatment of porphyria...which could very well have been hurtful towards her. Why is this?

Many others shared her (and my) view that breastfeeding tended to be done discreetly (it being seen by many a very intimate and private moment between mother and child) but you don't seem to be taking this on board...and instead assume that offences have been directed towards the breastfeeding Mother (which is ridiculous).

But back to the subject of the thread....
It is NOT acceptable (IMO) to level abuse at someone who is purely, succinctly and in-offensively expressing their opinion on a subject....that is NEVER acceptable.....not in my book.

The examples you mention are matters of hygiene. We don't let people leave human waste in public places because it is a health issue to do so. We don't let men get out body parts that excrete waste where food is being served because it is unhygienic to do so. It has nothing to do with someone exposing a body part that provides food in a venue that provides food. These are more than rules - they are the law in the UK.

Your comparison of breastfeeding with the excretion of waste is a very unpleasant concept.

And my comments were not aimed at your original post. My comments were about why people make certain assumptions about people's intent; you didn't make assumptions in your post. You described what happened and described your own feelings. You never mentioned what the woman's feelings were.

SAM, I am saying what people should and shouldn't do because Porphyria suggested I was saying something different. The basis of moral thinking is working out how to minimise harmful conduct - it is hardly a novel concept, or one that people disagree with. It shouldn't have to be explained at all.
I think many people responded to P in the tone that she posted in.

No, I don't take on board your point that breastfeeding should be done discreetly. Women should do it in whatever manner they want to do it. Seeing someone breastfeed in whatever manner they choose has no impact whatsoever on you going about your business.

I also do not condone all of the responses people made to Porphyria. But I don't feel there is a point in responding to people like that on a thread on any topic. It is better to just report them and have them removed.

OP, Porphyria provides some really excellent examples of the kind of language and comparisons that wind people up - so much so that it seems like it's intentional.

1. She compares breastfeeding publicly and someone defecating in the street and implies that both are unacceptable. She gives the following rationale:

• "not because they are harmful..." - human defecation in the public street is, of course, extremely risky, and sewerage is one of the top three public health interventions of all time. Breastfeeding in public definitely does not harm anyone, however.
• "...but because they are generally unnecessary" We do many things in public that could be done only in private, so this part of the rationale doesn't hold up
• "and could be perceived as offensive" Circular logic. Why would it be perceived as offensive if it doesn't harm someone? And again, we do many things in public that could be perceived as offensive.

1. She compares breastfeeding in a restaurant to a man exposing his genitalia in a restaurant for five minutes before urinating. She paints a picture of a man deliberately setting out to offend ("got his tackle out" "5 mins before" "sauntering off to the toilet" "odd, unnecessary and I'm guessing a teeny bit offensive" "to some people"). Each of these phrases has the effect of suggesting that BF'ing mothers are deliberately being offensive in feeding their children: that they, too:

• deliberately expose themselves for lengthy period of times
• are careless of the people around them

It's this kind of deliberately inflammatory language that pisses people off. And that's especially the case when the truth comes out right at the end of the post, and it's what we suspected all along: "not everyone finds it a welcome sight" - ie, the problem is that she is offended, for some reason internal to her, by the sight of breastfeeding, because it involves a "bodily part that [is] normally considered private" (I highlight involves because, of course, all that normally happens is that an observer knows there is a breast and nipple involved - they can't see a blimmin' thing.) Why should a BF'ing mother care about the fact that some random observer may possibly be offended by the knowledge that milk is coming out of a nipple into a mouth in a place where other human beings may see the mother and child? Especially given that the observer would have to stare really hard to actually see said nipple for more than a second or two?

Porphyria - going to the toilet and engaging in sex are private behaviours in pretty much all cultures and always have been. Exposure of the breasts during breastfeeding is generally only considered indecent in countries where women keep most of their bodies covered in public (some middle-eastern countries) and in countries like the uk where bottle-feeding has made public breastfeeding a rarity.

In other words exposure of your breast while feeding a baby isn't considered universally to be indecent.

OK, Porphyria, you say "the general acceptance (amongst the enlightened, if you like) [is] that behaviours which are liable to cause offence to some people are generally avoided."
You presumably consider yourself enlightened. Did you not think that the behaviour of comparing breastfeeding to defecation was liable to cause offence to some people? If so, why did you not avoid that behaviour, by choosing an analogy that wouldn't offend those people?

You see, I disagree with porphyria but can't really bring myself to get riled up over her opinion.