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.

DS BFs in whatever position takes his fancy - not standing on a chair though! But standing on the ground when I'm in bed etc. I'm just glad when he stays still for 10 seconds, I don't worry too much about what position he's in as long as we're both comfortable.

You don't need furniture, dd2 much preferred to corner mum in the stairs to feed

Freakish

I don't like the photo at all. The DC has definitely been used. He is little more than a baby and yet he is in combat trousers, she is dressed to look powerful, it is almost military. He is very aware that it is a pose, you can't tell me that he normally feeds like that or that he was actually getting any milk in that photo. I might have embarrassing pictures of my DS at that age, but they are private- they are not there for the whole world to see and if DS didn't like them he can ask me not to show them, or even to tear them up. This is on the Internet for evermore and he has no control- I would be furious if I had been used like that- either by an attention seeking mother or one with 'issues'. You also can't tell me it would be on there if she was overweight, 'mumsy' and sitting on the sofa. It is exploitation to shock.

If one person was going to say freakish- or worse- (and many, many will) I simply wouldn't use my DC like that.

bronze, I hope you are not being deliberately obtuse. It is not the chair, it is the standing.

In the US, from what I know, BF is a lot more pump + feed, particularly with such short maternity leave. Added to that their weird attitude to nipples - google Janet Jackson + Superbowl - this was a shock cover designed to sell magazines and create publicity.

Not that there is anything wrong with the feeding.

Nothing wrong with the feeding- masses wrong with the photo and will put people off breast feeding which is the pity of it.

Certainly don't think the article has done the cause any good at all.

I don't mind the photo - I bfed my DS until he was 3 and he would sometimes feed standing up, with me sitting on the sofa. He would put one hand on his hip and try to turn to watch TV while feeding

I just read a very good blog entry by Jamie Lynne Grumet, the mother in the photo, called 10 things Breastfeeding Advocates Need to Stop Saying

She is making a statement with the photo: she is young (age 26), beautiful, and as a proponent of attachment parenting is unashamed/unapologetic that her son still breastfeeds. She goes against the stereotype of the 'slightly odd earth mother granola-munching hippy' that many would think typically do extended breastfeeding.

Of course she doesn't feed him like that normally - she is striking a strong and even defiant pose for those who would criticise or judge her choice.

I am in America, and she has been giving interviews about who she is and why she did it. She has stated that she was breastfed herself until age 6, and wants to do the same for her dc until they self-wean.

By striking this pose with her son, the subject now is 'controversial'. A more traditional photo would not have caused uproar, and would not have brought this sort of attention into the general arena for discussion.

I think the more important issue here is the 'Are you Mom enough' headline. It is asking if you are 'hard core' enough in your support of attachment parenting to commit to extended breastfeeding.

Clearly many Mums simply wouldn't want to breastfeed until their child self-weans (and we can discuss why/why not, and their needs/wants vs those of their dc), and others might want to but simply can't due to working schedules, etc. Does that make anyone a less committed Mum? And why are those who do extended breastfeeding often perceived as 'weird'?

The photo has sparked debate, and many of the e
ensuing discussions will challenge negative perceptions. We're discussing it now, for example!

I imagine it will do some good overall.

I think women should breastfeed for as long as they and their DC want to.

But publishing the image on the cover of Time magazine just can't be in the child's best interests.

have to say that I think it is a horrid picture, it says her son is 4 so not a baby or a toddler, but a child,
poor lad had been set up for ridicule at school,

I have looked at her bog- I can never understand why people post pictures of their DCs.

Exactly what IAmSherlocked said.

That picture is not going to do anything to change anyone's negative views on ebf, and will probably make people who've never given it any thought turn against it.

Total exploitation.

I think the headline is appalling and it seems from the article that the whole thing is to push attachment parenting which is yet another parenting book written by some guru who thinks they can lecture people how to parent.

Mothers should be left to parent in their own way,none of us need this continual drip feed of advice from people making money,studies,newspaper columns the lot.

You have your baby,you love it,you get on with mothering it end of.

Soo said mother wants to continue bfing woopy do.If she doesn't push her ideals on to me I won't push mine on to her.Many ,many women absolutely loathe bfing and just want their boobs back asap.It doesn't make those of us that bf for a short time or not at all less of a mum or a long term bfer more.It's 2012 and none of us have to bf full stop if we don't want to-yay!!!!!

Whole thing not worth the paper it was printed on.

I wonder if the cover is a metaphor for the modern mother-son relationship where children are molly coddled with designer clothes, bling gadgets and pocket money, wonderful multiple holidays etc and given every luxury and expect the bank of mum and dad including a house deposit, for far longer than ever before.And sons may well still be living with their mothers far beyond their teens.

Sorry I forgot to say I am not bovvered by this picture. Its less horrible than some of the war stuff they put up.

My sentiments exactly MrsHeffley- another parent who wants to make money out of telling other women what to do. In this case one I can't respect when she has a blatant disregard for the feelings of her DS.

It's just incredibly sad to me that something so incredibly ordinary has to be published on the front of a magazine.

She's not doing anything that thousands, probably millions, of women world wide do everyday.

But, sadly, in Western society they have to keep it secret because of the crazy attitude that breasts are for sex and only very grudgingly leant to babies for as shorter period as possible.

Please can we get it straight once and for all.

Mammals evolved breasts for FEEDING their young!

Their sexual attractiveness is purely secondary. Good breasts = mate who can sustain my infant and pass on my genes and all that stuff.

the argument about it being in the press is a seperate argument to extended bfeeding and normalising bfeeding in our culture i think?

LOTS of parents are in the media and so are their children for a variety of reasons, you ony have to look on the newspaper shelves and there is always someone on take a break, or the more upmarket magazines, some famous, some not so famous. its the way of the media now. its not something like or would do wiht my children, but at least its being done for something positive and raising awareness of bfeeding/extended bfeeding is a 'good cause'

look at all the child models in various catalogues etc, hell many parents would love to get their kid in a boden catalogue, everywhere you look there are children being used for media purposes, advertising etc.

look at all the childcare programmes, with supernanny and the american versions nanny 911 and the toddler taming house thing there was? this is nothing new, its come about certainly in the last ten yrs or so? i dont remember it all being so publicly available when ds1 was a baby? he is 12, but now there is a huge plethora of these 'reality' shows and this is just another aspect of that?

It is ordinary- so don't exploit the DC.

It's nothing about sex(believe you me at 6 weeks when I stopped bfing my twins the last thing dp and I were interested in was sex).

I wanted my body back and found babies feeding off me highly irritating let alone very painful. Just didn't like it and guess what I didn't have to like it.I went alcohol/caffeinn free for 7 bloody years of TTC,then 9 months of pg.I stuffed folic acid in avoided all manner of foods,was bloody knackered,sleep deprived and just wanted me back. 6 weeks was more than enough of having my boobs shredded.Thankfully I don't live in a 3rd world country and have access to the wonder that is formula and a steam sterilser.

Oh and here's a thing Ms Grumet extended bfeeding is "normal" to you,6 weeks is "normal" to me. Attachment parenting is "normal" to you but completely and utterly alien to me.Your ideals as a parent don't need to be foisted on me as my babies,my circumstances,my body and my personality are completely different to yours.One size does not fit all.