AIBU to think that women should not have to be discreet when breastfeeding?

[lalaland3008]

I'm not saying that anyone should purposely flop both boobs out into someones dinner. But it makes me really mad that some people think women should have to be discreet when feeding their baby, sit in a corner or breastfeeding 'booth'.

I also think a breast is just not comparable to a penis to a vagina and if people are offended because they see breasts as purely sexual then that is their own problem.

Noone would object to me sitting in public drinking my coffee or feeding my baby a bottle of cows milk yet people find breastmilk offensive.

I'm not bitty mad I lasted 2 weeks breastfeeding but it still makes my blood boil that it is seen as controversial by many.

AIBU?

It is not part of my argument. I am pointing it out. You seem incapable of understanding this. Or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Sorry, but you are wrong Wmw. When a newborn baby has been latched onto a human breast, in the immediate few seconds afterwards the nipple is shaped roughly like the top section of your little finger. I'm a peer supporter, I've observed many feeds and it's always the same - even if there is a problem with attachment this stretching out happens, but the shape of the nipple is wrong.

Humans fail to breastfeed more often than other mammals because we no longer live in a culture where breastfeeding is normal. Many women have never seen a baby being breastfed before they have their own. In anthropological studies of societies where formula has never been introduced there is a similar success rate with breastfeeding to other mammal groups.

Humans fail to breastfeed more often than other mammals because we no longer live in a culture where breastfeeding is normal.

I disagree - we design bottle teats more in emulation of other mammal's teats for a very good reason - they work better.

Having just done some research - it seems that Primates (ie, us, and monkeys) due to their "learning brain" do have a period of learning how to breastfeed wheras in other mammals it is largely instinctive.

If you separate a female monkey from other female monkeys so that she never witnesses a female nursing her young, she is significantly likely to have problems nursing her own young. See a parallel? Also, monkeys who are first-time mothers are more likely to have difficulty than mothers of subsequent baby monkeys - again this is reflected in humans.

Source (with many other quoted sources/studies): shell.newpaltz.edu/jsec/articles/volume3/issue4/VolkV3I4.pdf

It's not physical difficulty which prevents women from breastfeeding, it's lack of support and knowledge within society in general. Midwives don't get adequate training, and they don't have time to help. It is infinitely easier for them if you bottle feed, so the only ones with a vested interest to support women breastfeed are those who have a personal passion for breastfeeding.

Anyway, I'm off to my La Leche League meeting to flash my boobs at a bunch of other women in order to get free cake

Shall I use my powers for good or evil?

The mechanics of bottlefeeding are totally different to the mechanics of breastfeeding. Your argument makes no sense. Here is a handy diagram.

www.thefoodoflove.org/feeding.htm

Whatme - your own 'ad hominem' is calling people who disagree with you 'the breastfeeding mafia', doncha think?

Please stop dipping your toe into evolutionary biology and lactation physiology. You don't know much about it, you're making elementary errors in comprehension and interpretation, and you don't have the observational experience of many women here who have, collectively, seen thousands of women's breasts and nipples :)

The human female does not, taking the bigger picture, have any more difficulty breastfeeding than other primates....as long as her social/cultural group don't throw up barriers, which of course western society does. There will always be women who do find it difficult/impossible for purely non-social/cultural reasons, just like the occasional mama gorilla or ape, 'cos nature is less concerned with the efficient working of an individual body than the whole species.

To take a further example of barriers which are not entirely 'natural': we are probably trying to breastfeed babies who in other eras 'nature' would have allowed to die (prems or low birthweight babies, for example). Now, it's wonderful that modern medicine can save lives like this, but it would take many, many thousands of generations before it became easy to bf a 3 lb 32-weeker, and it will probably never happen anyway as there is no real evolutionary advantage to doing so...evolution not being remotely bothered about the survival of comparatively few individuals.

Whatme you say "I disagree - we design bottle teats more in emulation of other mammal's teats for a very good reason - they work better."

So now you're an expert in bottle and teat design?!

The teats are designed that way because they are attached to a bottle - a bottle which is a different shape, requires a different sucking/swallowing action to 'deliver' its contents, and which has no 'let down'.

A bottle which really had a human-nipple type teat would be very inefficient.

207 threads and still running

Anyway, we need to define discretion here, lets say we are in terminal 2 stanstead airport, 6am August per example

I dont give a shit if I see a woman BF, good on her I say!

However (SHOOT ME) I would rather not see her breasts in their entirety. Reason being is that I know if I am reacting, others will worse than me and it makes me feel uncomfortable on her behalf

This is where breastfeeding covers are a bloody godsend, as I myself BF everywhere in the world, hosital waiting room, Heathrow, large family parties

and noone could see a thing, so I felt 100% comfortable

this is just an opinon, but I think BF covers were really marvellous and I wsh I'd had one with my first

porca, the issue is not your feelings on seeing bf/breasts....you can't help whatever negativity or preference you have for not seeing 'breasts in entirety' and of course every woman is entitled to prefer being covered or partially or not at all.....'tis up to her :)

The point is that women should not 'have' to be 'discreet' - they should be permitted and supported to bf their babies anywhere and anyhow, without any potential observer showing disapproval or worse insisting she goes elsewhere.

"Wikipedia - An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.

QED."

QED my arse. An ad hominem attack would be if someone said, "You can't trust Whatmeworry's argument because she didn't even pass her GCSEs/is a member of the BNP/worships Satan in her spare time." It's attacking the person, rather than the argument. But describing you as "patronising" is simply referring to your style of argument, rather than a feature of your personality.

tictok your argument could be used equally by nudists too. And they would be right to use it.

Women should be able to wear short shirts showing their duff without being harassed too, but we all know all that does is draw negative attention.

Woman should be able to breast feed in public, but other people will not take kindly to it for a whole host of reason, starting with religion.

It's not black and white. You have to see the grey. This is not an ideal world no matter how badly you wished it were.

but otoh black and white change over time because people challenge it

the idea that women should be allowed to wear practical clothes that allowed them to join in "male" pursuits made a fair few gentlemen (and ladies) uncomfortable at the time, but they had to put up with their discomfort and we are now able to take up physical work and rock climbing and marathon running because our world is not restricted by the thought of the poor gentleman who caught sight of an exposed leg for the first time

if we had stuck to the most sensitive denominator, we'd all be wearing crinolines (assuming that we belonged to the crinoline wearing classes)

I get what you're saying, but we're not there yet. Just have a look at Slutwalk and see what sparked all that off.

Hell, my countries PM got away with raping a girl because "she was wearing a short dress". And then he got an invite to dine with the queen!

sorry, a short skirt, not a short dress.

So is that a reason not to challenge?

No. But it is the reason why things are as they stand today.

I loathe the statement 'I'm fine with breast feeding as long as it is discreet' which seems to be around quite a lot (not on MN particularly).

The implication is that bfing is only 'fine' as long as no one knows you are doing it, which is ridiculous. Apart from anything else, not everyone finds discreet breast feeding easy (5lb8 DD2 and G cup breasts).

Anyway, YANBU. Women should be able to bf or not bf in whatever way they wish without worrying about others reactions.

No one has responded to my previous question.

WhiteWidow, do you mean the one about portaloos? I'm not sure I understood it tbh. No, I wouldn't want to see someone else using the toilet - but I thought portaloos had walls?

What I meant was, people are saying that the wee and poo comparison is a daft one, because we don't wee and poo in public because of sanitation. what if there were portaloos that didn't have walls? That were sanatory. Would they use them, would they wnt to see people using them? No, I wouldnt either but if we breast feed in public and it's 'natural', why isn't that?

I don't know. I have no wish to see people defecate in public. I ahve no wish to see people have sex in public. I don't mind seeing people eat in public.

Precisely, SPB.

Whitewidow, the baby is eating and drinking, not defecating - at least he may be defecating at the same time, but this is well tucked away in a nappy :)

Whatme, you have a very, very poor understanding of evolution.

Fair enough.

People may want to drop the point of it being 'natural' and silly how society sees it as wrong.

Anyway hopefully both sides can learn to be tolerant