To feel annoyed trees were cut down to print this anti-breastfeeding article

[cherrymama]

In the latest edition of Mother and Baby magazine (I bought it for the free gift) the deputy editor has an article about breastfeeding. In it she says that she "couldn't be fagged" to breastfeed and that breastfeeding her newborn using breasts that had previously been used for sex would feel "creepy". And that even the health benefits of breastfeeding "wouldn't induce her to stick her nipple in her bawling baby's mouth."

I think her attitude is horrible! I understand many people try to breastfeed and don't manage, but to say that it is creepy is another thing.

It was how she felt and as a journalist she expressed this view. There are many other mothers that feel this way. They do not need 'therapy', this can be a very normal emotion. She is entitled to put pen to paper with this view and use descriptive writing to express how she feels. This is so that other women who DO feel this way will know that they are not the only ones in the world and that there is someone that is not afraid to voice it.

It is 'taboo' because women who express that have these feelings and express this into the wider world get attacked and are made to feel parsimonious by women such as those on this thread.

It isn't normal to find breastfeeding "creepy".

So it's not OK to feel emotions and sensations that others don't deem as 'normal'? Does this apply to other areas, or just in breastfeeding?
IMO she has the right to say how she feels, and that may give others comfort.

I accept she's entitled to her opinion but to publish it in a parenting magazine is odd. I felt it was quite anti-breastfeeding with the strapline "you can keep your soggy breast pads" with a defiant and aggressive tone - I couldn't be fagged breastfeeding, I have a better use for my breasts, breastfeeding is weird - was the general message I took from it.

And to admit something is better for your baby but you can't be bothered to do it is deeply selfish.

She has a right to say how she feels.

She might want to think about the tone she uses when she expresses herself - ranting about how repelled she feels and equating the experience of breastfeeding to 'sticking a nipple in a bawling baby's mouth' is sensationalist and nasty, and actually intolerant.

monkeroo - you actually think that this sort of angry rant is comforting....to anyone?

Mother and Baby magazine anti breastfeeding?
I have written to several people about this and thought it right to alert you, as the lactivist, to something that has completely appalled me. The article in this month?s Mother & Baby magazine (July 2010)

?I bottle-fed. So what?? In which a mother chose to formula feed from

birth because ?I wanted my body back (And some wine)? I also wanted to give my boobs at least chance to stay on my chest rather than dangling around my stomach?. She goes on to say ?They?re part of my sexuality, too

• not just breasts, but fun bags. And when you have that attitude (and I admit I made no attempt to change it), seeing your teeny, tiny, innocent baby latching on where only a lover has been before feels, well, a little

creepy. I don?t think I?m the only one, either ? only 52% of mums still breastfeed after six weeks. Ask most of the quitters why they stopped and you?ll hear tales of agonising three-hour feeding sessions and ? the

drama! ? bloody nipples. But I often wonder whether many of these women, like me, just couldn?t be fagged or felt like getting tipsy once in a while?

On the matter of the positive aspects of breastfeeding, she said: ??

there are all the studies that show [breastfeeding] reduces the risk of breast cancer for you, and stomach upsets and allergies for your baby. But even the convenience and supposed health benefits of breastmilk couldn?t

induce me to stick my nipple in a bawling baby?s mouth.?

In all, this diabolical article is summed up in her own words:

?Breastfeeding: the most natural thing in the world. But what if, like me,

you don?t really fancy it??

I am completely appalled, this woman is none other than the deputy editor of Mother & Baby magazine (though this is not made clear in the article ? the picture used and header ?Viewpoint? would have you believe it were a

regular reader writing in).

This surely cannot be allowed, for a woman in her position to be so unapologetically negative regarding breastfeeding, sneering at breastfeeding mothers and generally spreading misinformation.

Even if nothing can be done, I think it is appropriate to alert the breastfeeding community that Mother & Baby magazine are quite obviously pro-formula (I counted no less than 16 formula/bottle feeding advertisements ? some of which directly targetted breastfeeders).

Sincerely,

Elle

(copied from the Lacticist website)

It is not odd to print it in a parenting magazine, not all mothers want to breastfeed, not all mothers are comfortable with it, not all mothers have someone on their side that feels the same way. She expressed an opinion that people who are pro-BF do not agree with, that however does not make it valid for other mothers that do feel that way. They are parents as well. To not print it would be censorship.

The thought of sticking her child's mouth round her nipple for food that may be saliciously sucked and adored by her husband do not equate as comfortable matches to her. She is entitled to feel that way and to express it!

Shocking article. So, effectively she is happy to share her breasts with her husband, but not her baby? She puts the ability to get tipsy ahead of the benefits of b/fing?

She has ishooos.....

As much as I think she's perfectly entitled to express her own feelings on breastfeeding, whatever they may be, I think that this:

"creepy. I don?t think I?m the only one, either ? only 52% of mums still breastfeed after six weeks"

is on at all. The implication is that half of mothers don't breastfeed for long because it's creepy. It's not for her to assume she knows anyything about why anyone else isn't breastfeeding.

Lacticist Website?! Hahahaha

Look, I'll spell it out.

This is not a 'free speech!' issue. She can say what she wants, she can think what she wants, she can even publish what she wants, within the law.

So please. No more 'why shouldn't she express her views?' posts, right?

The discussion is about

• the appropriateness of the tone - which is just nasty

• the information - which is wrong in many places (you can get tipsy when bf - not a big deal; your breasts will not dangle down to your knees; there is no evidence that large nos of women give up bf because they think it's 'creepy')

Why anyone, bf or ff, would find this a useful, interesting or helpful and supportive article is beyond me. There are plenty of other ways to support women who do not want to breastfeed without this sneery unpleasantness....as I said, she sounds as if she dislikes babies and their mothers!

The thing is tiktok, when you come from a POV such as mine- I didn't like bfing and wanted my body back- the article doesn't come across as nasty at all.

The nasty tone is subjective and depends on your own POV as a reader.

For example, I spat tea on the keyboard at the word 'lactivist'.

Misinformation is one thing, but a 'nasty' tone is just not there if you feel the way I do. In fact, I think the only thing I disagree with is her use of the term 'creepy'.

Here we go, bang the drums, shout out loud!! On marches the brigade.

Yes the facts are breastfeeding rates past 6 weeks are very low and having people go on and on about women (real women with feelings and emotions about BF) who don't like to do it, have problems doing it, think it's 'creepy', don't want to ruin their bodies, or whatever reason they may have are never ever going to be encouraged to do it more with the sort of attitude displayed by the BF Brigade.

You can catch more bee's with honey than vinegar. So very, very true.

So the word 'creepy' in connection with breastfeeding isn't nasty enough for you, tethersend?

The description of breastfeeding being 'sticking a nipple into a bawling baby's mouth' isn't nasty?

The description of breasts as 'fun bags' which 'dangle down to your stomach' as a result of breastfeeding isn't nasty?

Nothing to do with my point of view, tethersend - these comparisons are, objectively, unpleasant and intended to be so.

The sensation of a babe at the breast is totally unlike a sexual encounter IMO

if she thinks it is creepy there is something wrong with her - or perhaps her partners, view of what boobs are for

however, i will admit to an aversion to bumsex - we all know what THAT'S used for

ticktockclock - who has been the most 'vinegary' on this thread??

I suggest you as a strong contender, with your marching brigade stuff and your drums and your sneering.....

No I have not been 'vinegary' at all. I am defending this journalist and above all mother's right to publish how she felt. Just because it does not sit right with those who stringently support breastfeeding does not make it wrong, or unpublishable.

Last time I checked we live in a democratic society where we are able to make decisions about our own lives and support others in their decisions. I support the journalist/mothers right to express her feelings and opinion on breastfeeding rather than condem her or the article like so many other pro-BF women have. Just because her feelings do not match up to others do not make them any less valuable, that is something that others with one track minds are somehow unable to accept.

As the secondcoming said it is so very true that the BF supporters should concentrate their efforts encouraging and supporting those that want and choose to bf and leave those alone that decide this is not right for them. Harranguing women about their choice to FF is never going to advance BF in a positive way.

"So the word 'creepy' in connection with breastfeeding isn't nasty enough for you, tethersend?"

No, it's not.

"The description of breastfeeding being 'sticking a nipple into a bawling baby's mouth' isn't nasty?"

No, it's not.

"The description of breasts as 'fun bags' which 'dangle down to your stomach' as a result of breastfeeding isn't nasty?"

No, it's not.

My views and feelings on the subject mean I don't find those things nasty. I can fully understand how your views and feelings on the subject mean that you do. Sorry, but it's not objective.

Were she describing something I felt passionately about, I would undoubtedly find her tone nasty. As it is, I don't.

I haven't read the article but it sounds offensive.

I'm just trying to imagine if the shoe was on the other foot and the editor had written an article stating that FF was lazy, selfish and unnatural and that formula was bad for babies etc. Would she have been allowed to say those things, in the name of free speech? Personally, I wouldn't have found that acceptable either.

It's about putting your views across in a reasonably articulate way, isn't it? If one is a professional journalist, that ought to be achievable otherwise you're just going to come across as someone with a massive chip on their shoulder.

But that's not the point of the article. She is giving inaccurate information and using this to justify her decision.

Fine she doesn't want to b/f. Personally, I don't care, but I do care about her vile comments about b/fing. It isn't b/fing that makes a woman's breasts sag, but pregnancy. It isn't true to suggest that a woman cannot have a drink while b/fing.

She then turns statistics around to fit her own agenda. yes, it's something like 52% give up after 6 weeks, but these aren't women who 'can't be fagged'. They have tried, and probably had problems, so felt as if there weren't any other options. Very different than, 'couldn't be fagged' to start despite knowing the health benefits.

Have a feeling that the article was supposed to be a 'why I didn't want to breastfeed' article, but has back fired as she comes across as self centered, selfish and having problems she should discuss in a more private environment with professionals.

ticktockclock: "You suggest that BF supporters should concentrate their efforts encouraging and supporting those that want and choose to bf'

Indeed. And an article like this does not encourage or support women who choose to breastfeed - instead, it sneers at them and adds to the mountain of misinformation out there.

I have not 'harrangued' her, or anyone else, for her choice to formula feed. Not in any way at all, and I have never done this or wanted to do this in my life. People use formula for many reasons. I would prefer a world in which people used formula not because they are afraid of feeling 'creepy' or because they are repelled by breastfeeding, and often, feeling that way is not something someone chooses. But I don't criticise anyone for using formula at all.

ticktockclock's quote begins "bf supporters....." not 'You suggest' - 'you suggest' are my words.