To think their is NOTHING wrong with extended breastfeeding or wet nursing?

[Thisisaname]

Look at the comments below

I was researching extended breastfeeding and came across this.
I see nothing wrong with this, I wouldn't be 'scared' for life if I could remember being breast fed or found out I was given someone else's milk.
I think the only 'scarring' would come from going from the natural environment of being fed from something to then finding out a large majority find it sexual, not the actual feeding itself.

allwaysthebaddie, every single study done on the subject of infant and child independence - as well as common sense - show that the more security and comfort and closeness to the mother a baby and toddler has (it's up to 5 at least, btw), the more independent and confident a child will grow up to be. People mistakenly think that small children have a similar way of understanding, thinking and feeling about the world to adults, but they don't. They are much more confused and overwhelmed than we believe.

If a child knows that it can access comfort and closeness to its mother whenever it wants and needs it, they grow up with the unconscious belief that the world is good and safe and that they can confidently achieve what they want and they feel good about themselves and positive towards others precisely because they had their emotional needs met as tots, so they are not dysfunctionally full of unmet emotional needs as adults (which creates unhappiness, poor lifestyle choices, addiction, abuse, etc.). One of the primary ways to provide this unconditional access to security and meeting needs is breastfeeding. It is always rated as one of the bet methods in studies on it and also make sense. Breastfeeding is not just brilliantly healthy and immune-boosting, it is incredibly important for giving children comfort, security, support, learning to trust thatbtheir wants and needs can be met... You get the picture. Breaking a child away from that in the mistaken belief that it will foster independence has the exact opposite effect.

I despair that something so obvious is so unobvious to so many people. You don't even need to read any literature on the subject for it to be as obvious as night following day!

That French 'feminist' is a well-known misogyny-apologist and discredited by most other cultural theorists and feminists.

Self-identified Feminists are actually more likely to EBF and attachment parent than other groups, as they are consciously committed to equality and the promotion of feminine mores, behaviours, skills and wisdom.

Women who feel disgusted by any sort of breastfeeding have a right to their feelings but are unknowingly aligning themselves with misogynist thinking that adversely affects them too in other areas of life. Why would women want to submit to the inculcation that breasts are solely sexual and for men to look at enjoy, which is the basic message behind our society being so fucked-up and pathetic over breastfeeding, which is the only function of the female breast and is genetically designed to occur until children are 5 at the very least?!

www.whale.to/a/extended_breastfeeding.html

The type of mums to EBF are also the type to provide a very close and secure home life for their DC's. So any studies are not likely to give a true reflection of the value of EBF. Only child centric Mums EBF.

GREAT post oxfordbags!!

Of course there is nothing wrong with extended BFing or wet nursing. Both are completely natural.

I feel quite sorry for people who feel "disgusted" by it - it must be awful to be so far removed from your own biology.

Re feminism - personally, I've felt that BFing has been the ultimate feminist act. Sustaining my child with my own body, rather than paying good money to male dominated corporations to do the same...and for every man who has ever talked to my chest rather than my face, using my breasts for their primary purpose has taken that power back.

Theoretically I'd be happy to continue until DS self weans, safe in the knowledge that this won't be much longer, although I am much less tolerant of feeding when I don't feel like it these days or it doesn't feel convenient for me (whereas I would have obliged when he was younger.) But personally for me I wouldn't want to continue once he gets a wobbly tooth - that's the absolute cut off for me, based on this theory of them being ready to stop by the time their jaw changes shape for the adult teeth to come through, and also my own squeamishness about wobbly teeth and not wanting one to get too near to me!

YANBU. I bf DS1 was 2 weeks (had planned on a year but didn't work out), DS2 is still breastfed at 11 months, I'd like to stop at 3 or beforehand if he wants to but that's only because I really hate breastfeeding! I only do it because he needs it and gets so much comfort from it, he still feeds about 8 times a day. The "for the mother" comments are ridiculous.
I see nothing wrong with breastfeeding an older child until they choose to stop, they're not being forced to do it, it's not creepy and it's not abuse. Anyone who gives their child cows milk is giving their child a breastmilk substitute. Children need milk, it's much weirder to force them to wean from the breast and then give them milk meant for baby cows.
I give DS1 cows milk btw (and the odd cup of breastmilk) so not judging anyone but when you really think about it, it's weird to give cow's milk instead of human milk.

EXACTLY, Paella Umbrella, EXACTLY! And you too, DontEvenThinkAboutIt (one of my personal sayings, btw)!

I find that there is a depressing trend in our society that women are told that they have to get their 'old' selves and lives back as soon as possible and that children have to fit into their parents lives in ways that are actually not developmentally very good. People think being child-centric is being a martyr mummy or other patronising terms, and also that we are more likely to make our children spoilt brats, etc. In actuality, children who do not get their early needs met sufficiently, have to grow up too quickly, don't get enough quality attention from their parents/primary caregivers, and yet who get lots of material possessions, clothes, special trips, etc., to 'make up' for all that (and to assuage the parents' guilt), are often allowed to get away with certain behaviours and habits because parents don't want to be the tough guy when they see them so little, so these are the ones who are spoilt and badly-behaved, because their true needs have not been properly met and they've been forced to adopt a false set of needs to want meeting.

Not saying that WOHM or non-child-centric parenting choices are all like this, and certainly not a majority. Just that society has this ridiculous idea that focusing on a child and their needs when they are little is bad for them. It's a long game - put utmost effort in at the start, reap the rewards for longer and longest.

PS Thank you, Sugarandspite :)

Comparing Aboriginal and Sioux Indian cultures with Western culture is like trying to compare bananas with soap.
No doubt EBF does no harm, medically. It is clear that the growing/changing bond between the mother and child is perhaps the driving force behind EBF. If not then I stand corrected.
Most women are not in a position to EBF for reasons we already know.
A number of comments have drawn attention to the fact that EBF essentially takes the form of very limited feeding rather than it being the main or additional source of nutrition. A quick feed here and there. What purpose does this serve?
So, based on previous comments.. EBF... Is it predominately for comfort and bonding? Is it a mother not able to move on? Or is it for health reasons? Is it all of these? Do some mothers feel drawn more to one reason than another?

Nutritionally, BF is not necessary when a baby is weaned.
In some cultures where children are BF until later in life other forms of nutrition may be severely limited.

Oxford That is a rather simplistic view. You are essentially condemning any woman who perhaps wears nice lingerie or who seeks reconstructive surgery after breast cancer as kowtowing to misogyny. Breasts are part of being a woman with or without children. Are you saying that women who choose not to have children or who sadly can't are not permitted to view their own breasts as anything aside from functional?

Did you read the blog about Mongolian culture and feeding?

Even small amounts of bmilk still have benefits, bmilk changes as a child gets older, infintely better than cows milk, which children are encouraged to drink.

Of course, I'm not saying that, Absolute, what a ridiculous thing to say. Over-extrapolate much?! I merely meant that we have breasts to breastfeed, not that we can't use or view breasts in other ways. I like a snazzy bra as much as the next woman. But thinking that Bfing or EBF is disgusting is misogynist. It comes from being unknowingly brainwashed by misogynist thinking in society. How can an essential biological function disgust and perturb rational adults? Do you get disgusted by the thought that people have saliva glands and allow them to moisten their mouths? It's as pointless and odd as that.

To anyone reading this, I certainly do not think that about non-breastfeeders or women who have undergone mastectomies. That is Absoluteeightiesgirl mistsken extrapolation because of her agenda, not my beliefs.

And it is a LIE that children do not need Bm once they are weaned. You stand to make yourself look ridiculous if you come out with that bonkers old chestnut. Find me a single study done on the topic that agrees with that and I will eat my hat and post a profile pic of me doing so. How can you peddle these clichés without having out any thought into them? Do you know ho harmful it is to spread such nonsense?

There is a myth that the science that proves tots should be BF until at least two and then it is really good thereafter also only refers to countries where nutrition is perhaps not so great or so easily available. This is untrue. It appiles to every child ever born and ever will, regardless of maternal geography or wealth. Breastmilk is nutritionally ideal and changes as the child grows, as I've detailed on this thread previously. Nothing can offer the benefits, the nutrition, the vitamins and minerals and so much more. Whilst it is true that we in the West are lucky enough to be able toprovide out Dc with excellent nutrition, nothing we can give them gets close to matching what breastmilk can give them. So an argument could be if we can give them good nutrition, isn't that good enough? But the answer will always be, if I can give my child better than that and it is free, easy (if you can BF), and offers the child wonderful comfort, bonding and soothing, why on earth would I not choose the best for them?

EBF does not essentially mean very limited nursing for all EBFers. You are presuming that after a certain age, all children just have a quick nurse here and there, now and again. Many children nurse frequently and intensely well beyond 18 months, to choose a random age. My son still feeds freauently and intensely at newrly 2, for example. The idea that I am making him do it for my weird issues is preposterous. You can no more make a child Bf than you can make them eat something they hate. And who sould try to shove one of the most sensitive partsof their body into an angry mouth full of teeth, ffs?!

Absolute, your posts really do reveal a telling lack of you considering the emotional need of a child that are met by BFing.

zcos to answer your questions from p9. My smallest age gap is just over two years but I know tandem feeders weigh much smaller gapos. Yes breeding does reduce fertility but it is not recoimended as contraception for good reason. Once a baby goods a reasonable length of time without as feed in a 24hr period is 6hrs and does so regularly periods generally return, esp if that Six hr gap is overnight. My periods never came back properly when feeding, I still got preg the firsdt month of trying.

Yes I fed baby first if both together. I made sure to give baby the fullest breast but you would find what works for you. Your body will make enough for both hence why women with twins and triplets can bfeed.

I suggest reading adventures in tandem nursing or looking up 'the leaky boob. Or analytical armadillo on Fb as they have loads if info as does Kelly mom. I never planned to tandem feed it just happened.

Your supply may dip in preg and sometimes the taste changes and a baby doesn't like it, they may wean at this point or just carry on. Mine carried on! I found it a bit painful at times, just the initial latch for a min and then it was fine.

I think that's all your questions covered but shall check and do ask on here or pm me. Plus there are some threads in breast feeding about tandem feeding if you do a search. Congratulations on your newborn :) 9 wks us very young do impressed you are already thinking about number two!

Absolute what reasons do we all know why mothers of ebf babies part 6 longue can't work? Because I will have to give them to dh and ds's nursery, both of which I leave him with for a full day.

bm as a generous breakfast drink can clearly provide benefits without the bfing taking place outside the home. I can easily see that continuing for years, well beyond the stage when I went to a cafe fir me to have lunch and ds to have a bf. Or do you eat nothing healthy at breakfast time as nutritious food can only be consumed in public?

By years I mean 2-3

Oxford
I take great exception to the last sentence in your post.

Regardless of what your opinion is your posts display a commensurate lack of consideration for those who, for whatever reason, do not BF. Your post smacks of arrogance and simplicity which fails to consider the facts that actually, children do pretty well without being BF or EBF.
You have failed to understand the point I was making that being babies do not NEED to be BF as a comparison between different cultures NOT because it is nutritionally inadequate but unnecessary.

You have failed to see that the comments I made were based on what I have read on this thread from other posters and not of what I presume. To accuse me of peddling nonsense is amusing to say the least. To also state that I have an agenda is laughable.

My own experiences of the health benefits for BF children are severely tarnished and without wanting to re-post why I suggest you go back through the thread and see for yourself. Has this affected my view on EBF. Quite possibly.

I am simply trying to canvass opinion based on how I see this thread has developed. A number of posters who have/are EBF have offered reasoned and insightful responses. I have spent time reading posted links and doing my own research. I still stand by what I said but I have read and taken on board the comments made by other posters.
Early some posters have become quite defensive and have lashed out. Could I have chosen my words more carefully in my first couple of posts?... Yep, probably. You, on the other hand just come across as a know it all who clearly finds it difficult to accept alternative viewpoints.

And for the umpteenth time..... At no point have I said EBF is disgusting.

I Became pg with ds4 when ds3 was 8 weeks old! I was expressing though so don't know if that made a difference

moo mins expressing will make a difference yes. They day if baby is exclusively fed from the breast, no bottle, no dummy and if they feed so many times in 24hrs and no big gaps overnight then you should be OK but its not totally guaranteed at all.

absolute I am very sorry about your dd :( leukemia is a bastard it wouldn't matter if she had bfed till whatever age, its a vile vile disease and we need to do more research into how to cure it. I am running the bupa 10k in may with the 'wooly hugs' mnet team for child cancer world. Xxxx

Certainly my EBF DD2 is my more pessimistic and security seeking of my children, the one who takes things at home and outside to heart.

Her big sister is a natural optimist, who trusts absolutely, that she is loved and that whatever the world throws at her she will succeed. Crazy as she is the socially inept, dyslexic, who gets bullied and has to work very hard to get the teachers to see she has a brain.

DD2 is very academic, socially astute and makes friends easily. Her school reports glow in the dark and yet she is the one who still for a few minutes in the evening needed mum in the most fundamental way a child can.

Absolute, sorry if I offended you, but a lot of what you say is offensive and yes, you are peddling clichés, stereotypes and myths with a lot of what you say.

I really don't understand the attitude that BFing unnecessary. Yes, we are lucky enough to live in a culture where there are alternatives if women cannot or chose not to BF, but we cannot get round the simple fact that breast milk is the best nutrition for children when the mother can breastfeed successfully.
Your argument is very reductive. How far do we take your logic? A child can have cuddly toys so we don't need to hold them?! Saying Bfing is unnecessary is missing the point of Bfing entirely. Must we be utilitarian automatons with our children and just give them the least possible so long as it reaches some arbitrary level of acceptable?

What is so scary for people about the thought of giving babies the best, giving them as much as possible? What is threatening about lavishing love and comfort on them when they need it most so that they will feel cushioned and confident throughout their whole lives? Where does this notion of not going beyond what is necessary come from? It's almost as sad for the adult as the baby.

You have your own reasons for not feeling positive about BF/EBF and I am sorry for that. However, it is really wrong and unfair to then use your very subjective bias to present your feelings and negative issues surrounding the subject as facts.

I do not have any problem with other people not Bfing, or Bfing for a short period of time, or whatever. I support women's right to choose not to BF and I sympathise with those who wanted to but who couldn't (or not for very long). I was bottle-fed, I would hardly slate my own lovely mum. However, the annoying thing about having to defend Bfing against the mountain of lies, myths and nonsense about it is that one can appear anti any position but one's own and even evangelical. Your individual experience in the matter should not be presented as facts and evidence. No-one is accussing bottle-feeders or short-term BFers as being bad mothers, or making dubious choices and yet people like you feel free to present personal prejudice as evidence as to why anyone who did differently from you as odd and wrong.

It annoys me, having to appear evangelical about BFing when it is just an ordinary, everyday part of life for me and DS. I don't think about it and I certainly don't lounge about feeling smug or superior or thinking about how other mothers are nursing their children, if at all. I don't really care how others feed their children, I just don't want to hear ignorant, narrow-minded, misogynist lies and misunderstandings passed off as facts (or as something culturally more 'right') about something that is entirely natural, normal and positive. And I'm saying this in general, not nec. to Absoluteeightiesgirl. People get off on moaning that Bfing is forced down their throats by the medical profession, etc., but the truth is that society is incredibly twisted and hateful towards Bfing.

Let's look at what being repulsed by BF or EBF really means: a person is disgusted by a vulnerable, needy baby or child wanting sustenance, love, comfort and nutrition. Disgusted by a woman giving those things. Disgusted by woman using her body in ways that have nothing to do with pleasing, attracting or serving men. It's heartbreaking that people feel it, heartbreaking that women get sucked into this vitriol towards their own sex.

Of course there are other ways to offer sustenance, love, comfort and nutrition. And women are free and right to choose whatever ways they want. But why are these choices okay but the primal, biological imperative of the easiest way, the way our bodies were designed to do it, are so offensive and repulsive?! It's so messed-up!

(And again, by saying our bodies were designed to do it, I am not automatically critiquing women who don't or can't, or those missing one or both breasts, etc. Just pointing out a generic biological fact.)

Oxford
I don't have the energy.
Lets just agree to disagree on this one.

Great posts oxfordbags

Okay, Absolute :)

BTw, the only reason I've wrote big posts is that I have some rare free time! I possibly ought to do sensible stuff instead of going on Mn and Fb all day (possibly... But probably not)!

Thanks, Emily.

I am not really all that bothered by extended breastfeeding tbh (hell, I only got to 3 weeks with DS so am in awe of anyone who goes beyond a year!) and I think that society has major weird issues surrpunding breastfeeding full stop.

However, I dont really understand it when children breastfeed up until they are 8 or 9, as this goes beyond all the 'milk teeth' stuff (yes I know that some children are still losing their teeth at a later age, but the milk teeth thing is just to give an approximate age of stopping breastfeeding isnt it, rather than there actually being a physical link between still having milk teeth and wanting to breastfeed?)

Startail what would you have done if your daughter had decided not to give up breastfeeding at 9? Would you let her carry on? Until secondary school? What would have been the cut off for you (if there was one at all?) and why would you have made that the cut off?

Not judging just interested really as I have never heard of anyone in 'real life' breastfeeding their child until such an age.

Oxford
Nothing wrong with going on MN or FB all day. I am also enjoying some free time hence why I am also kicking around here. I forced myself out of the kitchen as I could have sworn I heard the bottle of Rosé calling my name from the fridge.

Scarlet the idea of the milk teeth thing is that as the jaw changes shape to accommodate the adult teeth, children lose the ability to latch. This is supposed to happen at 7ish but I suppose that "ish" could be as far apart as 5 or 9 years old.