Extended bf pic

[VictorianSqualor]

Don't know if this has been linked before but isn't the picture in this article lovely?

I like the image.

I think it is provoctive.

I think it is deliberately sexy and stylized.

I also think that the response on the NM thread (which I scanned is fascinating and very different to the one here)

One theme in particular on the NM one caught my attention and though not on our thread exactly I think there are echos of similar sentiments. Let me explain.

A lot of the NM responses seemed to object on the basis that bfing pictures should contain loving meaningful looks between mother and child highlighting the bonding that bf brings. (I paraphrase a lot of it was also ewwwwwww!)

On this thread there is an element of the idea that bfing pictures perhaps shouldn't also be sexy/stylized or objectivy women.

Right If you are still reading well done you!

1. I think that it is probably a good thing that a range of poses all included in promoting bfing. Including women looking goreogus and conventionally (media-driven?) sexy and also for example, just plain bored!
   I think a great pic would be a mother feednig while reading the paper. Totally ignoring bf child, becausse let's be honest eventually sometimes bfing can be boring and you do other stuff, like erm, mumsnet.

2. I think that there is a separate arguement as to whether the promtotion of bfing should be an opportunity to NOT capitualet to the media driven view of sexiness of women, and instead to also alongside promote normal attractiveness of the kind that is real and natural to women.

If you have managed to follow that you deserve a prize

VVVQV:
"Any unpleasant and unthought through assumptions you presume me to have, are no more than an antidote to the opposing opinions put forward here (and on the link) about extended or tandem feeding and this womans supposed motives and feelings at the point of photograph. "

d'you know, vvvqv, I disagree with you. I think you're just being unpleasant because someone has disagreed with you, and done it well. PW hasn't made a single assumption about the motives and feelings of the woman photographed. Her entire argument rests upon the idea that this woman's thoughts and feelings might not be the only ones at play in the construction of the image.

I have, in fact, read the entire thread. Which is where I got your (unpleasant and unthought-through) assertion that "I think I'll go as far as saying that if you feel a dislike (note I said dislike and not indifference) for this picture of a mother and her children, then you are either very prudish, or have hang-ups about your own bodies. I really really do. I can't see any 'normal' reason for not liking it."

Which, IMO, is ludicrously narrow-minded, and pretty controlling.

Spot on slur.

I think it's important to show that ALL women can and do b/feed. It's breaking the staid and dull stereotype of what sort of woman b/feeds, and challenges the concept of both b/feeding and still being a sexual being and not have to be one or the other.

slur, I think a range of images is definitely something to fight for. As I think was said, at the v beginning, even by those who disliked this image.

I liked your whole post.

oh fgs. I didnt say that PW had made any assumptions. Why on earth is this about PW at all?

YOu dont like my opinions - that's cool. You disagree with what I say - that's cool too. But please stop making it about me trying to be nasty/horrible/snidey/whatever about PW when I've never made it about her at all.

Not in the slightest.

Have been pondering this debate all afternoon and then up pops slur with more or less what I wanted to say. We do need more images of women around breast feeding, but in normal situations. My bf days are now over but in the past when I needed to get my boob out, sober, in a cafe, at 10am, I really could have done with it being a more normal every day experience for everyone else. As slur says we need images of women breastfeeding in mundane situations, ie chatting to friends sitting at home, on the bus, in a cafe, at the table whilst trying (and ultimately failing) to grate cheese with one hand for older siblings, reading bed time stories to older kids etc etc It was remarkable how quickly my DH got used to women he'd known fully clothed for years whipping boobs out left right and centre in our lounge over coffee. I can not however imagine him keeping his composure if he walked into find the woman in the photo in that position on our sofa..and I would be sorely tempted to hoof her and her artfully arranged children out onto the street. Hmm, possibly I do have ishooos

Ach. VVVQV. You were rude and unthinking in your assessment of why me, policywonk, and several others weren;t quite as ra-ra-ra about this image as you were. Instead of taking those ideas on board, you said that they were motivated by prudishness and hang-ups about our bodies.

That's why the discussion has continued.

At one point, PW was the only one standing up to you. Which is why she's featured in my own argument

OBM, do you actively dislike this image then?

Ah, well, your mistake, and PW's mistake was presuming that I was in fact referring to any comments you or PW were making.

I wasn't. But feel free to think it's all about you anyway.

I just asked DP about this picture. His response:

"She's an attractive woman .... nice jeans ... the kids look a bit old ..." DS is only 1 ... I shall have to monitor this situation

When I asked if he would describe it as provocative he said yes, that it is obviously done for a reaction, and it would be less provocative if she was wearing a cardigan and sandals. Presumably she's still also in jeans at this point!

Personally I think it is sexualised to a degree which isn't a good thing much like any sexualised, airbrushed, highly 'produced' picture of a woman isn't a good thing (compared with me in scabby combats and acne). The sexy bit is totally unrelated to the breastfeeding bit. The breastfeeding bit is fine. It's just something you do, like washing the dishes and picking up dogshit, innit?

you know what ladies? she would be very happy to see this argument. that was the whole point.
But she doesn't really give a toss what anyone thinks.
That's the message of the photo.

Who was asking about the garage thing?

It means that her business (draagdoek.nl - ie slings) has outgrown her garage and is now in a normal business premises.

I only have one ds (2.8yo) and I can tell you for sure that when I feed him in bed, I am usually asleep!!

Well I do, and I don't HM. I don't think that the cure for the [eurgh] response to ebf is to make sure that the ambassadress looks like [photoshop out the actual, you know, breastfeeding kids] a cosmo/very soft porn model

Like a few others on this thread, I don't think that solves the fundamental problem, whcih is that society has a fucking breakdown when tits aren't tits. When they're breasts, in fact.

I think that this image encourages that viewpoint by saying 'hey, don't panic!!! These breasts aren't out of bounds/use for you!! Well, yes, they are, technically, being used by a child - but the rest of the body is entirely unaffected by that! See - it can still be presented for your consumption in precisely the same way as it was before those children started encroaching on your territory!"

"Ah, well, your mistake, and PW's mistake was presuming that I was in fact referring to any comments you or PW were making"

So you're now saying that I'm not motivated by prudishness or body-issues if I dislike that image? Oh I see! Well then, in that case, no problem.

I don't think this image is intended to solve the problem as a standalone "It's OK, chaps, I've cracked it, I'm gonna lie here and breastfeed the kids, in my jeans, tousle my hair a bit and Bob's your father's brother, every woman who sees me will want to emulate me" - but as part of a range of photos, fab.

In fact, wasn't this kind of the aim of the MN breastfeeding calendar? To take bf AWAY from being all soft-focus doe-eyed mothers in smocks gazing adoringly at their offspring?

And I think you and PW are being ott in your response to VVV's comments - she very clearly singled out those who actively dislike this image and think "eeeeeewwwwwww" at "tits being used for toddlers to dangle from" - not those who find elements of it challenging.

OBM, you've just said you do and you don't dislike the image, so perhaps you have part-time body image issues - weekend ones, maybe? You could take them to the zoo?

then why didn't she say something along those lines much earlier hm? She seemed to me to be attempting to embarrass anyone who wasn't prepared to toe her line on the 'liberatedness' of the image.

I do, btw, actively dislike the image, as a standalone image, which is how it has been presented to us - just not for the reasons that VVVQV expects.

"I was never confused, oh no"

I really hope that you are attempting humour hm? If not, you';re being pretty rude and personal.

Attempting humour? Oh, you wound me, OBM!

She has been saying it. And clarifying it several times over for the hard of understanding.

I'm sorry but you are having a laugh now. It's perfectly clear what I meant and to whom it was aimed at. I've further clarified. If you feel embarrassed, got at, or personally attacked I suggest you look at why you feel so, instead of trying to lash out at me for it.

are you talking about me saying that I do and i don't dislike the image, with your (again, potentially quite hurtful) zoo comments?

I'm hoping so.

I was expressing the fact that I dislike the image itself, and think it fails - quite drastically - in its aim.

But I admire the aim.

You see, she's confused. I think I'd best leave her to it

I'm not trying to wound you at all. I'm pointing out that you saying "perhaps you have part-time body image issues - weekend ones, maybe? You could take them to the zoo?" could be considered to be rude and personal.

You have no idea whether I have body issues or not. I may have no breasts, or three. You are being thoughtless, is my point.

OBM, lighten up!

I was being whimsical - you said you do and you don't dislike the image.

VVV had said she was only referring to people who actively disliked the image.

Therefore I suggested perhaps you had part-time body issues. And, in manner of dad who sees his children on the weekends, I suggested you could take them to the zoo.

It's not my best attempt at humour, no.

But it has changed the subject quite neatly from old tousle-hair, so I feel my work here is done.

I didn't mean to cause you a moment's discomfort with my words - I thought it quite clear that the concept of taking part-time body issues to the zoo would be taken as it was meant - lightheartedly.

I never thought I'd have to write a dissertation on it.