Chest feeding?!

[Pickybrow]

I don’t think I’ve ever heard this phrase! Would this apply to a mtf or ftm? I’m so confused.

Welcome down the rabbit-hole. It's all just a seething mess of chest-feeders, menstruators, pregnant people and non-prostrate owners down here!

We're not allowed to mention breasts, periods, vaginas; anything women have that men don't. We are still expected to celebrate the mighty Penis, however, and the fact that apparently some women now have one.
The ones that don't all of us are supposed to be fine with this. Go figure...

I'm complete fine with it just so long as I can all men ejaculators.

See, the key to working it out is to always deny biology, then you'll get it.

So a transman denies she is female and denies her body parts their actual name, so..."front hole" and "chestfeeding"

But a transwoman denies he is male and wants to appropriate the female terms for women's biology for himself so he gets to 'breast' feed, and has a clit-on-a-stick.

HTH.

I don't have an issue with someone using the terminology they feel appropriate to them, or to the like-minded individual they are hoping to hook up with, in what is essentially a private communication.

Only when such terminology is applied to public documentation aimed at the general lactating population would i have an issue.

We're not allowed to mention breasts, periods, vaginas, anything that women have that men don't
Of course we're fucking allowed. Who the hell can stop us? Women are going to carry on talking about their periods, breastfeeding will always be called breastfeeding.
People have done a good job at pushing back against the use of 'cis', we need to carry on pushing back against this shit. Chestfeeding will never catch on.

Can a man (as in a man-man) take hormones to stimulate milk production? Or is he just missing anatomy?

A man-man can lactate (sometimes it is the only symptoms for pituitary tumours for example) but meaningful lactation, which can feed and sustain a baby can only be achieved by a woman. There’s recently been a case where a TIM achieved a ‘modest’ lactation with loads of meds and pumping but it was short lived and they stopped doing it well before the baby was 6 months old.

Thanks.

In their own private conversation, sure, whatever. But I will not accept it being imposed on the rest of us, or accepted as proper terminology in professional settings, (particularly health and medical).

And really, if someone is so avoidant that they can't even use an objective word for a part of the human body, that's a serious psychological issue that desperately needs addressing.

clit-on-a-stick

🤣

And it's not mothers milk it's human milk (in the same aisle as cows' milk I suppose. Maybe I should have said bovine milk so as not to upset non-udder-bearers...)

So a transman denies she is female and denies her body parts their actual name, so..."front hole" and "chestfeeding"

Re "front hole" besides being a term that is offensive and childish, it is anatomically incorrect. The urinary meatus is anterior to the vagina and the anus. More biology ignorance from TRAs.

Not criticising you, criticising the terminology that I find most horrible.

Oh I agree.
I helpfully suggested they reevaluate their preferred terminology to

Front hole
Front front hole
Back front hole

I expect it to catch on any day now

My FTM trans friend chest fed. Women who are not trans breastfeed. It's not that hard to grasp surely?

It is concerning that a woman, a mother, is so disturbed by her own biological functions that she needs to create euphemisms for her own female body parts. It ought to be something she gets assistance with to find a way to not reject her own body. A recovering anorexic generally goes to great lengths not to pass on disordered attitudes to food and body to her children.

I think similar consideration should be given to women who identify as hating or denying their own female bodies. It's a cause for support, not celebration.

SomeRandomBird

Is the term chestfeed used only when the breasts have been removed but milk can still be produced?

Or are the breasts anatomically as they were but the language changed?

It's a cause for support, not celebration. Exactly. The notion that we must protect their fragile mindset by pretending that these things don't exist for everybody around them as well, though, is frankly mind blowing.
But that appears to be what we are being asked to do.

Thanks my friend identifies as male and therefore prefers the term chestfeeding. Although trans, he is happy he had the anatomy to give birth before transitioning. The midwifes were happy to support him in the chestfeeding and calling him 'him' - I can't see the harm. He isn't trying to change language for all women just for himself.

Thanks- if the woman has has a mastectomy then there isn’t any breast tissue left to lactate. The term seems to be used by female to trans people who don’t want to accept that they have breasts.....while breastfeeding.

How does that work? Surely if the fatty tissue has been removed, but then lactation is encouraged, the breast tissue would swell up again because it was full of milk, and the breast would therefore effectively grow back?

(Can you tell I'm an expert on biology? )

'He isn't trying to change language for all women just for himself.'

Exactly. This is in effect a private communication.

Thank you Mumsnut - nobody else's business really apart from the chestfeeder concerned!

Thanks for the explanation.

www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/trgh.2017.0044

This article describes the case of a trans-identifying man who fed his newborn for about six weeks, thanks to a cocktail of drugs which of course the baby would have shared. Utterly uncritical, uninformed coverage in most of the media. The 'scientific' article fails to say anything at all about whether the milk was similar in composition to a woman's milk, whether the TIM produced any colostrum, how the baby was affected by the drugs etc etc.

There are other cases of TIMs and other men experiencing lactation, but not producing enough milk to feed a baby exclusively. In the report above it is stated that this baby was fed exclusively by the biological father (not the terminology used, but I assume this is what happened) for that first six weeks, as the biological mother didn't want to do it. Not a word after that about the mother in the entire article. No reference to checking that she really did not want to feed her own baby, as opposed to giving in after a lot of browbeating.