Well, I'm glad a man has explained what's what about breastfeeding, Mollypup. Seeing as no man, ever (bar a couple of female to male post-operative transsexuals) has breastfed, and has zero experience of what it is like to produce milk, have breasts, feel a child suckle, or, indeed, be a woman, I really rate his advice above all else. 
And that woman was not sat there 'with her tits out', she was preparing to breastfeed. It's got nothing to do with mothers having an "I'll do what I want, when I want" attitude, as you ridiculously put it, it's mothers having a "my baby must have its needs met" attitude. You see, one problem with breastfeeders is that we do rather tend to presume that other people won't be immature, ignorant twats who'd take issue with a child's needs being met, and that, if for some pathetic reason the sight of a suckling infant upset or perturbed them in some way, those people would have the good grave to feel ashamed, realised they were being ridiculous and decide to address whatever inadequacies or personal issues led them to be perturbed in the first place.
If you think the discomfort of ignorant, immature adults matters more than a baby's need for nourishment and comfort, or that attending to your child's needs is 'militant', then please remain childless. The baby's needs always come first, bottle or breast fed. Babies are not like adults who can choose to go hungry for a bit, or rationalise it, to make things convenient for others.
What did people do in the past? Women breastfed their children whenever, and wherever, since the dawn of time. What with the human race dying out if they hadn't done, FFS. It's the covering up or bottle feeding debate that's new, dearie.
And on a better note:
I've only ever had really nice experiences with older people witnessing my DS Bfing. They seem to go all misty-eyed about it. One old geezer shouted, "That's the good stuff, Sonny!" with a cheer, when DS latched on furiously when he was very little.