Australia Breastfeeding Association Abandons Women and Babies - Part 1

[CTPW]

Feed your newborn babies experimental drugs!

What? Does that sound absurd and possibly even criminal?

Well, that was yesterday’s perspective, and today is a new day.

The Australian Breastfeeding Association reckons this is A-Okay.

Read all about it here - www.criticalthinkinginapassiveworld.com/local-news-1/the-aba-abandons-women-and-babies-part-1

By the way, have you read this review of that case study you referred to.

lascapigliata8.wordpress.com/2018/03/26/analysis-of-study-of-induced-lactation-in-trans-identified-man/

@Helleofabore

I am interested OP, there was an issue with a study where one of the researchers, a trans person themselves, didn’t feed their own infant using this method because of the unknown effects on the brain from the drugs. Was it the study you referred to, or a different study. The researcher was successful in inducing lactation in some one else to feed an infant.

It seemed highly dodgy to me that they would do this experiment to another child but not their own.

I will look into this. I am not sure if it is the case study I referenced or not, but am interested to find out. Thanks for the info!

[quote Helleofabore]By the way, have you read this review of that case study you referred to.

lascapigliata8.wordpress.com/2018/03/26/analysis-of-study-of-induced-lactation-in-trans-identified-man/[/quote]
Yes :) I reference it in one area of the first article. Xx

I'm confused.

This is about female people who don't ID as a woman feeding their baby, yes?

@NiceGerbil - it’s about a male bodied person who identifies as a woman being given drugs (and referred to as a woman and “she”) to breast feed a newborn infant, as the sole nutritional source.

Can you point me to which bit please I missed it! And haven't got my glasses on so can't see screenshot. Sorry.

@NiceGerbil

I'm confused.

This is about female people who don't ID as a woman feeding their baby, yes?

No, it isn't about women at all. Women with mental and physical factors that may complicate breastfeeding have always existed, and the complex nature of body/sex dysphoria is not something that a volunteer mother (breastfeeding counsellor) is suited to address. The paid staff (Lactation Consultants) would be the only ones fit to handle complex mothers, and they would not need a 124 page document to explain how to assist those mothers. It also would not need to be a public spectacle. It would be an internal resource guide or further private training and guidance provided to the consultants. Regardless of any tiny iota of credibility the booklet may get due to some people thinking it is for some women out there, the ABA clearly advocates for and supports men, that are on a mix of untested drugs, to induce lactation and breastfeed a baby that was not born from their body - because men cannot birth babies.

I can't find that in the booklet though!

Sorry I've looked 3 times.

Please give me a pointer- which section even?

@NiceGerbil

I can't find that in the booklet though!

Sorry I've looked 3 times.

Please give me a pointer- which section even?

Chapter 5 is literally about induced male lactation and it references (numerous times) a study on a man breastfeeding a baby. Chest feeding is a male-based term. This term is in the title of the booklet. Chests do not feed. Breasts do. The ABA references numerous "studies" (which are all flawed in many ways) that support men inducing lactation to be the source of nourishment for babies. It cannot be made any clearer that the ABA is advocating for men to breastfeed babies if you read the article and read the booklet.

Agree with all previous comments, honestly I'm shocked at how this insanity has taken over in recent years. I'm praying that it returns and this period of time will be looked back on with complete bemusement, at how we ever got to the point that the rights of women and children were ever pissed all over in such a disgusting way. I honestly put anyone who believes in this crap in the same category as flat earthers. In fact even worse- humans have known about the realities lf human biology for far longer than we've known the earth is isn't flat.

It just strikes me as being so incredibly narcissistic. And yes agree that it's neglect.

@JackGrealishsShorts

Agree with all previous comments, honestly I'm shocked at how this insanity has taken over in recent years. I'm praying that it returns and this period of time will be looked back on with complete bemusement, at how we ever got to the point that the rights of women and children were ever pissed all over in such a disgusting way. I honestly put anyone who believes in this crap in the same category as flat earthers. In fact even worse- humans have known about the realities lf human biology for far longer than we've known the earth is isn't flat.

It just strikes me as being so incredibly narcissistic. And yes agree that it's neglect.

As much research as I do, and as much as I know about this and other issues here in Australia and around the world, I am regularly shocked and appalled and the new levels of absurdity society and our norms & laws reach.

That's not my read of chapter 5 at all. At the start it says:

'in both situations, the milk-making tissue in the breasts/chest starts from
a non-lactating state and needs to be stimulated to make milk. Those who
have been pregnant (or have fed a baby before) may find it easier to make
milk than those who haven’t, because pregnancy changes milk-making
tissue. However, this is not always the case.

People who have never been pregnant, who no longer have (or have never
had) ovaries or are past menopause can often produce some milk to varying
levels. This is unless there has been surgery that has removed all of the milkmaking tissue or severed the ducts to the nipples. This is very individual.'

The first is about women.

The second I would read as women because of the reference to milk producing tissue and ducts.

I did find one reference to males in that section-

' how much milk people assigned male at birth can make is still unknown,
but in one case, a parent who had induced lactation reportedly produced
240 mL of milk per day.'

I am all for sharing and discussing the loss of words etc etc etc.

For me, the document has been misrepresented here and I don't think that's helpful.

People who have never been pregnant, who no longer have (or have never
had) ovaries or are past menopause can often produce some milk to varying
levels. This is unless there has been surgery that has removed all of the milkmaking tissue or severed the ducts to the nipples. This is very individual.

I read that as including biological males as well- given that the author chose to go with 'people', given that there is a reference to having never had ovaries.

@NiceGerbil

That's not my read of chapter 5 at all. At the start it says:

'in both situations, the milk-making tissue in the breasts/chest starts from
a non-lactating state and needs to be stimulated to make milk. Those who
have been pregnant (or have fed a baby before) may find it easier to make
milk than those who haven’t, because pregnancy changes milk-making
tissue. However, this is not always the case.

People who have never been pregnant, who no longer have (or have never
had) ovaries or are past menopause can often produce some milk to varying
levels. This is unless there has been surgery that has removed all of the milkmaking tissue or severed the ducts to the nipples. This is very individual.'

The first is about women.

The second I would read as women because of the reference to milk producing tissue and ducts.

I did find one reference to males in that section-

' how much milk people assigned male at birth can make is still unknown,
but in one case, a parent who had induced lactation reportedly produced
240 mL of milk per day.'

I am all for sharing and discussing the loss of words etc etc etc.

For me, the document has been misrepresented here and I don't think that's helpful.

I haven't read the whole document, but this section alone gives me the rage. It makes the agenda very clear, which is to lump males and females all into the same category of "person" or "parent", pretending that biology is completely irrelevant even in the context of breastfeeding, and implying that a male person has "milk-making tissue" and can produce milk, which is complete and utter nonsense.

I would have no objection to a document that refers to women, trans men and non-binary parents who are biologically female (or "observed female at birth" if they prefer) getting support to feed their babies by breastfeeding - or, if they prefer to use the word "chestfeeding", fine (just don't make everyone else use it as well).

But no male person, whether it is a man, trans woman or non-binary parent who is biologically male, should be attempting to induce lactation or "chestfeed" their baby. It's not in the baby's best interests and it's not ethical. And no healthcare professional or breastfeeding support group should be supporting those males either. They should focus on supporting females and their babies.

I expect that makes me a "TERF" but so be it. The breastfeeding/chestfeeding issue is the final straw for me.

Totally agree @AnotherEmma

I'd go one further and suggest a family where a man is wanting to chestfeed (actually I don't mind using the term with reference to biological men, it makes it quite clear to me that a man cannot breastfeed) should be reported to social services and monitored. Or at the very least closely monitored by a health visitor but of course many countries eg USA don't have health visitors.

I'm just so sick of it all.

As a woman who struggled with breastfeeding and the complete lack of support postnatally, as many of us here did, I'm completely sick of all the effort that is going into trying to appease an absolutely tiny minority of people, either through the language all of these organisations are using (the only words that they are looking for and matter are 'women' and 'breastfeeding' as far as I'm concerned). And as for encouraging and supporting biological men to breastfeed- I don't have the words to express how horrible I find this. Funny how so many women who are unable to breastfeed use formula milk without making a fuss.

All of the crap and pressure that is put on women to breastfeed. The complete lack of interest about tongue tie and all the other problems that can arise. Why can't even half the energy go into trying to help women and babies, as goes into trying to appease the feelings of such a small minority?

God yes, imagine if they put this focus on tongue tie. Pretty much all the bf problems I see bad have experienced myself come down to bloody tongue tie.

@AnotherEmma

I would have no objection to a document that refers to women, trans men and non-binary parents who are biologically female (or "observed female at birth" if they prefer) getting support to feed their babies by breastfeeding - or, if they prefer to use the word "chestfeeding", fine (just don't make everyone else use it as well).

But no male person, whether it is a man, trans woman or non-binary parent who is biologically male, should be attempting to induce lactation or "chestfeed" their baby. It's not in the baby's best interests and it's not ethical. And no healthcare professional or breastfeeding support group should be supporting those males either. They should focus on supporting females and their babies.

I expect that makes me a "TERF" but so be it. The breastfeeding/chestfeeding issue is the final straw for me.

Thank you. I don't understand how it isn't clear to everyone...However... I go further to explain in this article (just published) - www.criticalthinkinginapassiveworld.com/local-news-1/the-aba-abandons-women-and-babies-part-3

@FannyCann

Totally agree *@AnotherEmma*

I'd go one further and suggest a family where a man is wanting to chestfeed (actually I don't mind using the term with reference to biological men, it makes it quite clear to me that a man cannot breastfeed) should be reported to social services and monitored. Or at the very least closely monitored by a health visitor but of course many countries eg USA don't have health visitors.

You are sane and decent and using your beautiful brain.

I have quoted the wrong responses a couple of times. Apologies for any confusion!

@JackGrealishsShorts

I'm just so sick of it all.

As a woman who struggled with breastfeeding and the complete lack of support postnatally, as many of us here did, I'm completely sick of all the effort that is going into trying to appease an absolutely tiny minority of people, either through the language all of these organisations are using (the only words that they are looking for and matter are 'women' and 'breastfeeding' as far as I'm concerned). And as for encouraging and supporting biological men to breastfeed- I don't have the words to express how horrible I find this. Funny how so many women who are unable to breastfeed use formula milk without making a fuss.

All of the crap and pressure that is put on women to breastfeed. The complete lack of interest about tongue tie and all the other problems that can arise. Why can't even half the energy go into trying to help women and babies, as goes into trying to appease the feelings of such a small minority?

I agree! I think you will enjoy my most recent article about this. www.criticalthinkinginapassiveworld.com/local-news-1/the-aba-abandons-women-and-babies-part-3

I read your articles, OP.

The action of supporting and advocating for any man to chest feed a baby is in direct opposition to the well-being of women and their babies.

Absolutely. This is a very important point. I would probably word it slightly differently myself; I'd say male, to include cis men and trans women. Because I have no issue whatsoever with trans men breastfeeding (assuming they are not taking medication that could harm the baby).

@AnotherEmma

I read your articles, OP.

The action of supporting and advocating for any man to chest feed a baby is in direct opposition to the well-being of women and their babies.

Absolutely. This is a very important point. I would probably word it slightly differently myself; I'd say male, to include cis men and trans women. Because I have no issue whatsoever with trans men breastfeeding (assuming they are not taking medication that could harm the baby).

Thank you for your support! Regarding the use of the word "men" = Man/men is the word for an adult male. There is no separation. They are one in the same; only an indication of age + sex.

Well, trans women are biologically male but don't identify as men, so I prefer to make it as clear as possible who I'm referring to. I don't think TWAW but I don't insist on calling them men either, just because they are biologically male. Trans women is fine.