Time magazine image of breastfeeding

[banana87]

Apparently this image is kicking up a hot debate in the US.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/time-magazine-cover-showing-mother-828267

I really wish people would educate themselves about the benefits of extended breastfeeding before proclaiming its child molestation. Utterly crap.

oops...

www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/time-magazine-cover-showing-mother-828267

The comment from the editor really sums it up - it is an astonishing picture.

I don't know about you, but my own experience of bf wouldn't include this sort of pose!

if it made me look that good then I would happily pose like that.

Sadly my reality is a little different.

But I agree with TSM and the editors comments.

as typical says, if I looked that good I'd happily pose like that! Sadly DS would probably not be needing a chair to stand on at the moment

I really do not like the headline though - I hate this setting up mums against each other.

I hope the child exploitation comment is referring to him being on the cover and not to him being breastfed.
How do we normalised feeding older children? This is ridiculous!

Just read ithe mirror article and comments she made. Good for her. I want to be part of this. If more of us freaks who feed older childrenn stand up to be counted then people may at least leave those who choose to feed to 18m or 2 alone. I am slightly embarrassed to admit even at work (a very pro bf organisation) how long I feed for. Tbf it has never come up.

I don't think this is about the benefits of extended breastfeeding, it's about raising the issue about the normality of it and the freaky Western culture that says it's more normal to feed your child artifical milk substitutes than human milk.

We are the freaks, not the normal "extended" breastfeeders.

I think it's an arresting image and I understand why the editor used it.

I don't think it normalises breast feeding though - quite the opposite - i think it panders to the 'freaky weirdo' image

i think if they want to promote extended breastfeeding (or illustrate an article that defends it) it would be better to show a real image of a child breastfeeding, in a typical cuddly position. That would probably be a more comfortable image for the child in the picture too, rather than being put in an unnatural pose. But I suppose they wanted to shock. Somehow defeats that message though too when the headline talks about "extremes" parents will go to.

I don't like to see breastfeeding talked about in terms of what are, in the west, relatively quite extreme experiences.
Most AP parents don't breastfeed past 3. And the child looks 5 if he looks a day, so contributes to the "Freak" image even more.

Gosh but she is a gorgeous woman.

I am still bf my three year old, but I would never feed him like that! Looks very uncomfortable. I suppose it's got people talking - but not always in a good way! I had to stop reading comments on another site as they made me so angry!

She's an attention seeker. Pity she uses her child to show off.

goodness what an idiotic comment by 'eileen' below that article. she says that because he can eat he does not need any milk! so what babies as young as 4-6 months dont need milk then?

im taking a wild stab here but i think they might have used this pose as it shows clearly the age of the child which is the point of the article. i agree that sitting with the child accross your lap is more comfortable and probably would have been more 'palatable' to those who aren't comfortable with extended breastfeeding but i think the point of this article was to say that she is breastfeeding a child who is past the baby stage and that this is normal so they avoided putting him in what would be seen as a 'baby' pose (laying across the lap) to really make their point. tehy want people to see that this child is in no way a baby and is infact a walking talking almost 4 year old and that it is perfectly normal for him to have his mother's milk.

does that make sense or am i talking out my ass?

no iswym
also makes the point that as they get older many don't feed in the cradle hold. DS never used to, once he was old enough not to, DD always does, or lying down.

DS2 can climb onto my lap and help himself now I think some people are beginning to wonder if I'm some sort of hippy or weirdo because I still BF a 13 month old. But that is their problem.

what nancy said

she has done very little to make it easier for EBF

I think the picture is bloody awful. It's exactly like Nancy said upthread, it doesn't normalise extended bf, it makes it seem even weirder. Like that programme ages ago with the 5+yo still breastfeeding, the media purposely uses it to stir up debate.

I know that the article is supposed to be about the benefits of extended feeding, but surely if the WHO want the western world to realise that extended feeding is normal they should encourage the media to use positive imagery to go with it?

Booy: That does make perfect sense.

an image like dr coconut shared would normalise EBF

this does not, and I am VERY ambivilant about her BF her 5 year old adopted son too

I grew up in a rural developing country and it was common for kids to be still bf at 3 or 4. I think 4 was the max I saw. They would be running around and just come to have a drink. Not particularly nurturing as it wasn't a sit down and bond time. it was literally an 'I'm thirsty, where's mum?' kind of thing. totally led by the child too.
So it makes me laugh when people say it's child molestation or it's 'all for the mum' or it's unnatural. yeah, like drinking artificial milk from a silicone bottle is natural!!
Don't like the title though. Mum against mum and not a thought for those who couldn't. Not their fault but society isn't geared towards it and then you point and laugh 'you're not mum enough'.

I don't get why you even need to normalise ebf, it's no bugger else's business, I actually hate all this AP lark, it's making a "thing" of just doing wtf you want to do with your own children. I just don't get why it needs a name and a movement and books and proponents .

You want to sleep with your child and breastfeed until they are 7 and do this and do that, and? Why on earth does it need a name/label?

Agree that this is something we can contribute to. I make a point of being open about feeding mine beyond when most people assume I'll have stopped. I also totally blank any shocked reactions! Normalization is the way forward.

The picture certainly is provocative. I can't make my mind up about it. In a practical sense, my nipples are wincing at the thought of breastfeeding my 3.7yo like that, in case she fell off the chair.

I really hate the headline though. 'Mom enough'? Really? There's nothing wrong with breastfeeding a 3yo but there's nothing wrong with not breastfeeding a 3yo either. Why do they feel the need to turn it into an argument about who is 'right'? Does their circulation need that much of a boost? Bit of a cheap headline IMO.

I think it's a horrible picture but, hey! Time got what it wanted! And that wasn't a discussion on extended bfeeding....

The pose on the front cover says a lot more about the photographer's and editor's squeamishness and conflation of breastfeeding with sex than about extended breastfeeding.

I think Alyssa Milano tweeted something at the editor to the effect of 'NO, you are supposed to be making things easier for breastfeeding mothers, not more difficult' and I think she is right that this is the image people will have in their minds if someone decides to be upfront about 'attachment parenting' or 'extended breastfeeding' and that it will make a lot of other people wrinkle up their noses.

I did it before it had a name, and I felt it was no-one's business but my own -- and it didn't look one bit like the picture. I called it me being a mother, and breastfeeding.

I agree that normalisation is the way forward but this is not the way to achieve it.

(Unfortunately there are a lot of 'Eileens' about)