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.

One final comment.

Just because I let DD2 BF for a long time doesn't mean I subscribe to AP.

I can't abide slings, co slept only if DD and I happened to fall asleep feeding. Have no objection to sleep training if it works for you. DD1 was impossibly stubbon and DD2 very sensible about annoying mum at night. This is a lot of why she was allowed to carry on BF. She instinctively knew when to let me stick her back in her own room.

As for non shouty liberal positive discipline. Well I'm dreadfully old fashioned and think it leads to big headed spoilt little brats.

Exactly startail. Choose what suits you and your baby- we are not all the same.

i dont like the picture,it is set up to look posed and extreme
i imagine when normally bf her son she doesnt adopt that particular pose,nor does he climb on a chair
no it doesnt normalise extended bf,it is a picure posed to get a reaction

I have no feelings against extended breast feeding. As far as I am concerned mums can feed their offspring until they go off on their first date for all I care. Their child, their breasts, their business.

But I do care about an exhibitionist mother exploiting a small child to whip up a debate about a cause she happens to be believe in.

I agree with what merrymouse and some others have said, namely that it's not a normal breastfeeding pose. Nobody bfs standing up (least of all with both parties standing up, and one of them on a chair!) So the pic is designed o make bfing an older child look as weird and freakish as possible.

I wonder if the tendency for mothers to wean later outside the west has more to do with the lack of decent contraception than the 'naturalness' of breastfeeding into toddlerdom and beyond? We're lucky in that we don't (thankfully) need to rely on breastfeeding to avoid conception.

I read the message under the actual (appalling) title as the article being critical about AP, non?

I happen to be entirely approxing of EBF/AP in theory, but in RL cannot/couldn't hack it .

Btw, DS1(9) and DS2(8) thought 'the wee guy looks 6' but were otherwise not very impressed by the picture either way, and DH though mum 'was hot'. I live with an unfairly vast majority of unreconstructed males.

Also, btw, I was really interested in the feminist/art historical take on that image, thanks.

re it being exploitative of the child, i kind of agree, but as i said there are lots of children in the media and advertising etc, where do we draw the line? i think it would be an interesting debate maybe on a thread just for that purpose.

i am thinking of all the celebrity stories you get re children, the take a break stuff, all the parenting programmes so super nanny, even wife swop children are involved in. imo these are exploitative and i often feel sorry for the children involved, they have no say :(

but re extended bfeeding it is still seen as odd as seen by some comments on here and the other thread and also i saw a supernanny show a few weeks ago where a mum was bfeeding a 14mth old and super nanny/jo went on about it being for the mother at this age adn the baby needs to move on and grow and develop AND then they put the 14mth old to bed but instead of having a bfeed they gave hera bottle of milk.... prog like that dont help many issues tbh.

and i dont think anybody is 'foisting' their ideals and their way of parenting on anyone, we all make our own choices but i would say in the mainstream media, tvh magazines etc that bottlefeeding is presented as the norm, yes there is the breast is best message but ultimately its bottlefeeding you see on tv generally, its fairly super nanny type parenting that you see on tv, with routines and babies in cots and their own rooms etc, which is fine, thats not being foisted on anyone either, but it would be nice if there was a balance and it seems that on supernanny etc co-sleeping is often presented as a negative as was the 14mth old bfeeding, there was nothing positive said about it at all.

most mother and baby magazines etc all promote the baby in a cot (tho they putt he 6mths in your rooms guidelines) ditto breast is best but here are the best bottles and sterilisers etc, whicfh is great people need that info but as a general rule ebf and co sleeping etc when they are mentioned is done in a sort of 'ooh look at this wierd/extreme behaviour' type way, which is not helpful.

and often those in the articles/written about dont choose the slant the editor etc takes on the article.

but hey nice and normal co sleepers, extended bfeeding wouldnt sell! which is the crux of the matter and why this has been done the way it has.

anyway i think i am losing my point, too tired, need to get small people to bed.

but i do think a good debate would be about using children in advertising/media and what is ok and what isnt, ie pampers nappies, boden catalogue ok? super nanny prog.... prob not ok imo. children are everywhere in the media and how do we draw the line with what is and what isnt ok for them?? ultimately parents are making the choices? but also prog makers and editors play a big part in what they choose to show and how they edit it and make the parents and the children look.

Startail, I agree - I don't think that BF longer and AP are necessarily linked. I do some of it - co-slept (cos it was easier and I got more sleep that way), but didn't sling and certainly I'm more shouty than I probably should be!

But that's the thing about parenting isn't it - within sensible limits (i.e. not abusing or neglecting your child) you do what works best for you, regardless of whether or not it fits some formulaic "style".

i have co slept, used slings, used pushchair, bfed and bottlefed, hell i have one child that has a dummy and i am probably too shouty occasionally. i also have strict rules re bedtime and my kids have from a young age pitched in and helped around the house etc, lots of what i have done would be seen as 'attachment parenting' but some of it isnt and some would see me as strict. tbh i never chose a certain way of parenting i have done what works and kind of muddled along and its going ok so far, istn that what most of us do...

The pose is a rubbish advert for attachment parenting - it certainly doesn't make BFing look like a bonding experience.

dianaibclc.com/2012/05/11/yes-shes-4-and-yes-shes-still-breastfeeding/

and this is a lovely story of a mum still bfeeding her 4 yr old in response to the times story. there are pics as well, its a really lovely article :)

I dont agree with bf an older child (school aged child) but each to their own in the privacy of their home and family. But this mum has done her child no favours parading him like that in an inernaional magazine in a less than nurturing pose, bordering on sexual. I would say the same had the mum not been as attractive. God help that child in years to come when that picture comes back to haunt him which it well might

5madthings what a lovely story, brouught a tear to my eye. I hope that the little girl is now better, now. I just did not lke that picture on Time magazine, it was a totally different image than the one that you posted a link of dianibclc blog.

yep made me cry as well and the comments under it are great, so different to the times article but they wouldnt publish that woudl they as its just showing that ebf can be normal!! they wanted the shock factor.

Is bf'ing and using a sling, now seen as attachment parenting?
Heaven, help us.

In that mothers position, if i was able to i would have done the same.

Sorry I don't get this "normal" phrase,it's just what some mothers do.To say it is normal would infer that those of us who don't bf until are dc are 4 are abnormal. Breast feeding until 4 is not standard or typical in this country at all as we all parent completely differently and long may that continue.

The photograph doesn't bother me and it's obviously posed. However, I wouldn't want to expose my child to the media like that. That photo will never disappear. It will be there forever and there is a strong possibility he will be teased about it in the future. I wouldn't want that for my child.

I'm very pro-bf and bf DS1 until he was 3.2 and still bf DS2 (nearly 2). It's an important part of how I parent in the early years and I'm very pleased to do it. I'm all for normalising bf and extended bf, but this article doesn't do that.

MrsH, you can infer what you like - but it implies nothing of the kind. It's normal to bf as long as both parties are willing and able - that doesn't make it ABnormal to carry on until 4 or later, nor does it make it ABnormal to stop earlier!

Lovely blog post you linked to, 5madthings - hope the little girl doesn't have to have that surgery done again.

normal as it is the biological norm its what we are designed to do and you arent notmal if you dont do it,we have evolved and created alternatives which is great for that that want/need them, myself included having bottlefed as well as bfed, but its normal as in its not outrageous or wierd, its a normal biological function iyswim?

thankyou thumbwitch you put it better than i did :)

:)