angeldog, yes, everyone I know weaned before 6 months (although to be fair, the guidelines have changed a few times fairly recently, so it's not like there's been an established 'norm' for weaning post-6 months around for a while).
belgo, I really agree that the experience of BF-ing after the 1st few weeks is very different, and a lot easier - and that most women give up during that difficult time when if only they'd hung on, their experience would have got a lot better. That's part of my gripe with the pro-BF info I had, in that I'd say now what it mostly described was what BF-ing was like post 6 weeks. Esp all the stuff about how convenient it was. I remember being glued to the sofa with a cluster feeding 3 week old for hours and hours, exhausted and desperate for a break, wondering what kind of a loony would describe it as convenient??
Others in my BF group have said the same, and that as a result they were unprepared for how tough it was to start.
Is the tone of this article really that bad? She doesn't dismiss others as 'lesser women' for bottle feeding (the opposite, in fact, she says she wouldn't criticise them). We might all have different experiences, sure - so if this writer found it hard, and views it as a positive thing but one which comes at a cost, isn't that legitimate, if that's her experience? And how is it defeatist? Doesn't she say how determined she is to keep going, and that she feels it's been worth it?
I'm a bit concerned that there's an 'acceptable' way to talk about BF-ing publicly, and where someone's personal experience isn't all blissful and wonderful and unqualified joy, they can't be honest about it. I don't see how that helps.