Breast isn't best: readers tell US parenting magazine

[December27JJB]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Readers of a US parenting magazine are crying foul over the publication's latest cover depicting a woman breastfeeding, with some calling the photo offensive and disgusting.

"I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine," one woman from Kansas wrote in reaction to the picture in Babytalk, a free magazine that caters to young mothers. "I was offended and it made my husband very uncomfortable when I left the magazine on the coffee table."

Her reaction was part of some 5,000 letters the magazine has received in response to a poll to gage reader sentiment about Babytalk's August cover photo, which shows a baby nursing.

Several readers said they were "embarrassed" or "offended" by the Babytalk photo and one woman from Nevada said she "immediately turned the magazine face down" when she saw the photo.

"Gross, I am sick of seeing a baby attached to a boob," the mother of a four-month-old said.

Another reader said she was "horrified" when she received the magazine and hoped that her husband hadn't laid eyes on it.

"I had to rip off the cover since I didn't want it laying around the house," she said.

A national television program also ran a segment on the controversy, interviewing several people in New York who expressed disgust over the cover photo.

The picture in Babytalk was aimed at illustrating the controversy surrounding breastfeeding in the United States, where a national survey by the American Dietetic Association found that 57 percent of those polled are opposed to women breastfeeding in public and 72 percent think it is inappropriate to show a woman breastfeeding on television programs.

Babytalk executive editor Lisa Moran said though most of those who responded to the poll about the cover photo gave the magazine a thumbs up, she was surprised that some 25 percent expressed outrage.

"There is a real puritanical streak in America," Moran told AFP. "You see celebrities practically baring their breasts all the time and no one seems to mind in this sort of sexual context.

"But in this very natural context of feeding your child, a lot of Americans are very uncomfortable with it."

She said the controversy is all the more surprising in light of concerted efforts by the US government and health professionals to encourage women to breastfeed.

"Everyone is saying that breastfeeding is best for baby but there is so little support for it in public," Moran said.

She said the Babytalk cover photo marks the first time a major parenting magazine in the United States dares to break the taboo about showing a woman's breast and the outrage it has prompted is not about to discourage editors from doing it again.

"This hasn't scared us off at all," Moran said. "We're thrilled and hopefully this will help women get more support for nursing."






http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060804/od_afp/afplifestyleussocialbreastfeeding

[December27JJB]

I dont see whats wrong with breastfeeding. I am still nursing my 14+ month old. Why are people acting like they have never seen a boob before!?!? :mad:

[msnicolea]

Unbelievable. I can't believe the puritanical attitude some people have. And the woman who had to "rip off the cover" so her husband couldn't se it? WTF? I'm pretty sure he's seen a breast before.

What nonsense. And what a lovely picture--that baby is friggin adorable. Good for Babytalk!

[thelittlebabu]

And the woman who had to "rip off the cover" so her husband couldn't se it? WTF? I'm pretty sure he's seen a breast before.
With a wife like her, I'm not so sure.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

Unbelievable. I can't believe the puritanical attitude some people have. And the woman who had to "rip off the cover" so her husband couldn't se it? WTF? I'm pretty sure he's seen a breast before.
Bwah! Something tells me that that family has more than it's share of issues!

[wendalah]

Oh boy, here we go....!

[ignutzz]

Oooh, a breastfeeding thread I can have an opinion on! :D

This is so freakin' absurd. It's those folks who are up in arms that have some serious issues, not the editors that decided to run the image.

As a personal anecdote, I have always been a little uncomfortable around BFing women ONLY because I didn't want THEM to feel embarassed/uncomfortable that I was there while they were trying to do something so intimate. However, my best friend just had a little boy and we visted them at the hospital. She was completely comfortable doing what she needed to do to get situated and get DS latched on while I was there seeing everything and I lost all of my discomfort. :)

I think if more people would just get used to seeing BFing, as I did, it would go a long way to dispelling the "ew, gross" factor!

[msnicolea]

With a wife like her, I'm not so sure.

touche!

[MLA]

Oooh, a breastfeeding thread I can have an opinion on! :D

This is so freakin' absurd. It's those folks who are up in arms that have some serious issues, not the editors that decided to run the image.

As a personal anecdote, I have always been a little uncomfortable around BFing women ONLY because I didn't want THEM to feel embarassed/uncomfortable that I was there while they were trying to do something so intimate. However, my best friend just had a little boy and we visted them at the hospital. She was completely comfortable doing what she needed to do to get situated and get DS latched on while I was there seeing everything and I lost all of my discomfort. :)

I think if more people would just get used to seeing BFing, as I did, it would go a long way to dispelling the "ew, gross" factor!

I was just coming in here to post basically the same thing. I still have some discomfort w/NIP but I really think it's just due to not having been around it that much. We need more NIP, not less.

And that photo was in no way inappropriate or a cause for embarrassment. It's not like there was areola showing or anything. There was less breast in the photo than there is on most red carpets nowadays.

[Sandie78]

I think you could probably say I have a "puritanical streak." I am very modest, and I think that the breast-baring dresses that women wear down the red carpet are often beyond inappropriate. That said, I have NO problem with this magazine cover or women NIP. Seriously, what is wrong with people that boobs can be flashed all over the place except in this context.

[southerner]

Can this be the Pottery Barn thread all over again?

[MLA]

Can this be the Pottery Barn thread all over again?


Man, I hate when I don't understand references! The only pottery barn thread I know about is the one in All Things Home (Finding Pottery Barn Stuff Cheaper)

[kam]

From my recollection, the pottery barn thread was about a wall poster used as decor in one of the catalogs. It (gasp) had a naked woman.

For this particular magazine especially, it makes me laugh that it had such a reaction. Wow.

[Sophia]

Can this be the Pottery Barn thread all over again?

No. You could only sort of make out the boob in the PB catalog if you squinted.

FWIW, my son is nearly 14yo and I didn't have a problem with him seeing the BT cover. He knows boobs are for feeding babies--it's where his littlest sister gets her food. I'm really surprised there's been such a backlash against the mag by so many people.

[Sophia]

By the way, you can see the cover in question here (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/060727/060727_breastfeeding_cover_vmed.widec.jpg). Shocking! :eek: :rolleyes:

[MLA]

From my recollection, the pottery barn thread was about a wall poster used as decor in one of the catalogs. It (gasp) had a naked woman.

For this particular magazine especially, it makes me laugh that it had such a reaction. Wow.


Oh yeah! I remember that now. I guess I'd blocked it out. It was just so ridiculous.

[GeekGirl]

IIRC, the problem with the Pottery Barn picture wasn't the breast, it was the "bush". Of which you could also hardly see. :rolleyes:

[ysolde]

Years ago, I did an internship at the UN, where breastfeeding is encouraged. There seemed to be several women breastfeeding their infants on any given day, in public, and no one batted an eyelash. I can't imagine anything more natural.

Really, some women can't have their husbands look at a photo of a child nursing? Why?

[jennylou]

I'm surprised this has caused such a reaction. We see far more flesh exposed on an every day basis on television, in movies, in magazines and heck, in catalogs (forget the Victoria Secret catalog, you can find boobies in the JC Penney catalog).

[kris97]

So ridiculous. It's a parenting magazine! They're not showing girl-on-girl action - they're showing a child nursing. :rolleyes:

[msnicolea]

I know! I wonder if these same women who are complainging keep their husbands/children away from Sports Illustrated, Cosmo, the VS catalogue, Television, Movies. . .

[msnicolea]

So ridiculous. It's a parenting magazine! They're not showing girl-on-girl action - they're showing a child nursing. :rolleyes:


Well, it COULD be girl on girl action--no telling if the baby's a he or a she! ;)

I emailed the magazine, telling them I support their decision.

[maggieb]

I'm so glad to see that cover, but what's hilarious is that Babytalk magazine is considered to be a fairly conservative magazine when it comes to parenting issues. Good for them!

[Hello Kitty]

I'm not surprised by this reaction at all - it just gets old, IMO. DH just got his Maxim (or Stuff, or whatever I got from the free magazine thread) and I asked him to compare the two covers - both showing equal amounts of boobage. When I pulled up the Baby Talk picture he gasped and said 'oh my gosh'. DH isn't an ass, and he's very well informed of the benefits of breastfeeding, but that's still his reaction.

I agree that NIP needs to be more commonplace so that people aren't as shocked by it (like how Maxim and Stuff covers aren't in opaque plastic bags) and more used to it being an everyday thing.

[kris97]

Well, it COULD be girl on girl action--no telling if the baby's a he or a she! ;)

I emailed the magazine, telling them I support their decision.

True. ;)

[nic]

I have that issue at home and it never crossed my mind that anyone would get upset over it. I can't believe these people are serious, they all have way too much time on their hands.

[colz85]

There was less breast in the photo than there is on most red carpets nowadays.

I think what bothers me is the double standard. Boobies are great if they are shown in an ornamental context, but not if they are shown in a functional one?

What. Ever.

[Hello Kitty]

I don't understand why 'Ew gross!' is the visceral reaction? The only thing I can think of is that people are so conditioned to associate boobs as sexual, that when they see them being used for their god-given purpose, they still associate it with being sexual. And to associate a child and a woman engaging in that activity just repulses them because they can't see it as any other way?

[curlyjr]

I'm not a big fan of NIP. but I still think the outrage over the cover is ridiculous. It's a parenting magazine for the love of God, and part of being a parent is feeding your kid. Some people should just relax.

[kindermom]

So ridiculous. It's a parenting magazine! They're not showing girl-on-girl action - they're showing a child nursing. :rolleyes:
LOL. Too funny. I think the cover is beautiful. I only wish I could have such a lovely photo of myself and my DD. As so many people have said, there is so much worse out there in the media that the outrage is ridiculous. You would think that people who have had babies had seen breasts before.

[jnettie]

I don't understand why 'Ew gross!' is the visceral reaction? The only thing I can think of is that people are so conditioned to associate boobs as sexual, that when they see them being used for their god-given purpose, they still associate it with being sexual. And to associate a child and a woman engaging in that activity just repulses them because they can't see it as any other way?
I'd have to agree with this idea.

I want to know if these same people wrote Vanity Fair to complain about naked pregnant Britney Spears. :rolleyes:

Oh, a mags like Maxum are way worse! There's naked boobs or near naked boobs on the cover all the time! Somehow that's ok, but not a baby nursing on a parenting mag? Probably one of the few legit reasons to have a naked boob.

[udsweetpea]

I think its great for the magazine, but for some reason, the picture looks a little creepy. I have no idea why.

[GeekGirl]

I think its great for the magazine, but for some reason, the picture looks a little creepy. I have no idea why.

Having been there...be careful using that word in relation to NIP...:cool:

[udsweetpea]

Having been there...be careful using that word in relation to NIP...:cool:

Oooh... ok. Guess I should use a different word. Maybe it was the angle of the photo or something.

[cocoa_femme]

"I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine,"

So, if the breast were smaller she wouldn't have had a problem? :p

[PG-rated]

So apparently none of those outraged readers have basic cable? Because that's exactly what they show on every single episode of "Dr. 90210" - the entire boob, minus the nipple.

[sparkle&shine]

So I had to see the picture that was causing the 'outrage' amongst some.....It is a really nice picture!!! I will have to show it to DH and see what his first reaction is (fwiw I am still nursing my 21 month old so he sees nursing all the time).

I think I saw more of Pamela Andreson's breasts in her most recent wedding pictures.

[rachrich]

As y'all have said-it is ridiculous. People need to get a grip, seriously. My DH sees boobs on tv and he drools, and sadly (and mabye grossly-which isn't a word) he would see that magazine cover and be like "ooooh booby." LOL he's pretty immature about that sometimes though. :)

I think it's awesome of BabyTalk to have such a beautiful picture on their cover. I personally have no qualms about seeing people NIP. I think it's great...more power to those of you who do it.

[Pink Pixie]

Unbelievable :rolleyes: Those idiots who are "offended" need to get a life.

[SingleWhiteFemale]

While I'm not against nursing or discreet nursing in public, I am somewhat put-off by some of the reactions here. Yes, Maxim does show more breast on its cover, anyone who has cable can get quite an eyeful, and I see half-dressed girls in skimpy outfits all of the time. But, for some people such is not okay across the board. I am friends with several people who believe in modesty, are agains the nudity on magazines, in pop culture, on television, and then some. And they were off put by this magazine cover (as they've also complained about Blender and other publications). So, are their feelings any less valid because "it is a breast shown in its biological function?" Of course not, and it is not right to discount that. There are people who gave the response of "breastfeeding is icky" and I don't defend that, but people are entitled to feel however they do (I'm not defending their spouting off at the mouth, but they are entitled to their opinion). But some people are not comfortable seeing breasts at all, whether the intent is to be titilating or shown at their biological function, and their feelings should be respected. I may not agree with their stance, but they shouldn't be called "idiots" or told to "get a life" for having a different standard of modesty.

[Rico'sAlice]

So, I showed my husband. His first reaction was "Aw, that's cute." Then I asked him if he thought it was sexy. He said "Well, you can't really see anything." Then I asked him if he thought it was "offensive and disgusting" and he laughed and said no. So I read him the whole article out loud and I swear I kept feeling like I was reading something from the Onion. It would really be funny if it wasn't true. But that it is, is very sad.

[FoxyBlue]

I dislike oversexualized nudity or anything suggestive of oversexualized nudity.

Were that a 'giant boob' with hints of aerola, I might be offended. I think that when you are photographing a subject for a media publication, the final shot is somewhat within your control. You can't say "oops, a little nipple slipped out", and so there's no need to show nipple.

However, this is a functional shot of a breast in action, and it's not even a nipple! It's basically, extreme cleavage, with a baby attached.

It's not the lesser of two evils to me. In fact, if my FH found this sexy, I'd be pleased. I think it's great to find motherhood sexy.

Supermodels sauntering across my TV in the most revealing underwear possible, to a strip club soundtrack? Not so much.

As for NIP, I would personally prefer NOT to see someone's ENTIRE breast/nipple while I'm eating, walking, whatever. Just like, while taking a major dump is not SHAMEFUL, it is not something I want to witness. And god forbid anyone suggest I am comparing breast feeding to a bm. I am just saying that natural functions are not inherently 'dirty', but that doesn't mean I want them all performed in public.

Sex is beautiful, but I believe it should not be a blatantly, unescapably public act.

So, to sum up, what's the big deal about major cleavage with a baby, as opposed to a nipple tassle or 'designer dress' attached?

[philnikki]

I am a mom, so probably a little biased in my thoughts on the subject.

When I look at that picture, I can only think of the mother/child bond. I do not see it in any kind of icky/sexual light. If you asked me to look at the picture when I was 12 year old, I would probably have been weirded out. That would have been just a simple lack of maturity.

I do not understand how it is possible that we can be in the year 2006 and generally people STILL feel "bothered" by breastfeeding. I can understand being modest, etc, but come on now, people really need to grow up!

[Foley42]

I showed the mag cover to DH and he said, "ok it's a boob." I asked him if he had a problem with it and he said "of course not." I don't think it's a big deal, I think it's beautiful. Even though I'm not a mom yet I agree with philnikki...it shows the mother-child bond.

[paulinaaa]

Jeez are you kidding me?! That's nothing. That's less than nothing!

God this country is so damned pathetic sometimes. :mad:

Edit to add: boob_nazis (http://community.livejournal.com/boob_nazis/1737571.html)

The Live Journal staff said that an image of a breastfeeding child is "inappropriate" because it falls under the category of an explicit/sexual/violent nature. :rolleyes:

[{b}]

DH heard about this controversy, looked at the cover, and said "Is that the breast everyone's up in arms about? It's just skin." He totally expected that it must be some sort of nipple shot to cause this much ruckus.

[nettreefrog]

Writing this response as my DS is attached to my own boob. Personally, I think this is another example of American "values" getting in the way of common sense and what is healthy for children. I want to cite the June article from the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/health/13brea.html?ex=1307851200&en=34fe96e9a7b62c93&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss) that states basically that the breast is indeed best!

Are these people who write in not aware that breast fed babies are more protected from colds, flu, ear infections, diarrhea and even obesity?

"Ample scientific evidence supports the contention that breast-fed babies are less vulnerable to acute infectious diseases, including respiratory and gastrointestinal infections, experts say. Some studies also suggest that breast-fed babies are at lower risk for sudden infant death syndrome and serious chronic diseases later in life, including asthma, diabetes, leukemia and some forms of lymphoma, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Research on premature babies has even found that those given breast milk scored higher on I.Q. tests than those who were bottle-fed."

To those people who are offended, I say "get over it--and accept the healthy human connection!" Heck, as a taxpayer, they should be overjoyed about mothers creating children who are healthier!

[Toonces]

It's interesting... the current issue of Mothering (http://www.mothering.com/sections/current_issue/current_issue.html) magazine has a BFing photo on the cover (pic halfway down page) and I don't recall anyone being up in arms over that. Is it just b/c Baby Talk is a more mainstream publication and Mothering is "crunchy"?? I'm pregnant and nursing my 22 month old so you know what my take is on all the controversy.

[jnettie]

Americans just can't deal with boobs. When DH and I were on the beach in the south of France, almost all the women were topless...even the ones with kids running around. Guess what? No one cared! They were just boobs! 51% of the adult world has boobs. Get over it.

[sue-bert]

I'm not a big fan of NIP, although ultimately I support mothers who choose to do so. I'm also not a big fan of plunging necklines or bosom-baring clothing.

That being said, I saw the photo on the cover of the magazine and didn't bat an eyelash. I thought it was very modestly photographed.

Actually, my attention was drawn to the cute chubby baby and not the breast to which he was attached.

http://img.timeinc.net/parenting/web/images/0806_BT_cover.jpg

[ejs]

I showed both covers (BabyTalk and Mothering) to my DH and asked his opinion. He said that neither bothered him, but that he would have guessed people got more upset over the Mothering one because it was obviously a breast. About the BabyTalk one, he said that at a quick glance, it could be a breast or an elbow or some other random part of the anatomy. He said it doesn't jump immediately jump out that it's a breast.

I asked him if he thought that either would be inappropriate for the cover of Time or Newsweek, instead of a parenting mag. He said, "not at all."

Just thought I'd include a guy's opinion.

I'm still floored that subscribers to a parenting magazine would be aghast at either of these photos.

[isign]

I know! I wonder if these same women who are complainging keep their husbands/children away from Sports Illustrated, Cosmo, the VS catalogue, Television, Movies. . .

I personally wouldn't want my young son (if I had one ;) to see the VS ads, or Cosmo or Maxium, and DH doesn't read mens mags. It's just us, don't like it. We saw this magazine in my Dr's office, and thought nothing of it. I support the magazine's cover.

So apparently none of those outraged readers have basic cable? Because that's exactly what they show on every single episode of "Dr. 90210" - the entire boob, minus the nipple.

What is Dr 90210? Never heard of it.

[gizzyntaz]

Hmm, the first thing I notice when I see that cover is the article title, "Why Women Dont Nurse Longer" and I'm actually a little curious what they say?

I'm wondering how the people who were outraged about this cover felt about the cover a while back that had the little girl in the bikini? I can't remember if that was Baby Talk or American Baby. Honestly, that upset me much more because it seemed like they were trying to sexualize that little girl with her outfit. {shrug}

Oh, and for the record - most of us NIP moms don't expose as much boob as the cover might lead you to believe.

[maggieb]

Last night I asked DH what he thought of the cover and his response was, "It looks like that baby's nursing on her stomach, not her breast. What's the problem? It's natural."

[IrishMeg]

I think that is just about the cutest picture in the whole world. I love pictures of nursing babies!

[PG-rated]

What is Dr 90210? Never heard of it.
It's a reality show on E! that follows plastic surgeons. When they show the patients coming for consultations or follow-ups, they show their entire breasts (so they can show size and contour) with just the nipple blurred out.

[jnettie]

Well, when I asked my DH, his response was "is that it? You can't even tell it's a boob" in his disappointed guy voice. :rolleyes:

[DallasLady]

I don't understand why 'Ew gross!' is the visceral reaction? The only thing I can think of is that people are so conditioned to associate boobs as sexual, that when they see them being used for their god-given purpose, they still associate it with being sexual. And to associate a child and a woman engaging in that activity just repulses them because they can't see it as any other way?

I agree. In our society breasts=sex, so to see a woman with a baby to her breast is obscene to many, because breasts are for male sexual enjoyment, not for babies.

[katmg]

I'm glad to hear that other people's DH's didn't really think it necessarily looked like a breast. I was so focused on the cute baby that I didn't even think about it being a photo of breastfeeding. :o That being said, I'd be okay with it even it was more explicitly a breast.

I guess the "controversy" over this picture is because of the response of the readers of the magazine. Mothering magazine would probably not be read by people who have issues with breastfeeding.

[wendalah]

BTW--Some men have lactation fetishes. If you go into any basic run-of-the-mill sex shop I guarantee there will be a "lactating babes" porn available for rent. (Ditto pregnant babes--some guys have fetishes about that too.) So, really, it's all good. We can have our cake and eat it too when it comes to breasts being sexy and functional at the same time. ;)

[artist]

Wow! (Have only read first post.) People have got to lighten up! It's breastfeeding, not porn. Have any of these people been to a museum and seen paintings of Mary breastfeeding Jesus?

How sad that people would get all uptight about something like that!

[udsweetpea]

What I find more disturbing is naked Britney Spears on the cover of Bazaar. Has anyone seen that?

[ejs]

What I find more disturbing is naked Britney Spears on the cover of Bazaar. Has anyone seen that?

Why is that disturbing? Did the cover Demi Moore did while she was pregnant disturb you also?

[Smittenk]

I usually stay away from these threads so against my better judgment:

I don't have a problem with the picture being on the cover...I actually received that mag in the mail (Don't know why I get them...I don't have a subscription) but when I saw it I did say "eee" to my DH.

Sorry I think I might be one of the "idiots" some of you are talking about. I understand it is natural...I understand that is what they are meant for...I get all that...I just don't want to see it. It isn't the naked breast part..I am totally fine with nudity and showing skin. I look away when I see a mother BFing...it gives me ummm an icky feeling I guess you could say.

And I'm not saying that I think the women are icky who BF.

And I think everyone's opinions are valid...each woman should do what they feel comfortable with. My pet peeve is when people try to force their opinion on women who are expecting. I have already been "told" by my MIL that I have to BF when I have a baby. Ummm no actually I will choose what I do with my own body and I won't feel guilty about that.

[Larissa]

Why is that disturbing? Did the cover Demi Moore did while she was pregnant disturb you also?

I find it disturbing simply because it's Brittney ;) Actually, I have to admit, it's the first public photo of Brit looking pulled together in quite a long time. It's amazing what a good hair and makeup person can do for you :D

[MichelleRenee]

I don't have a problem with the picture being on the cover...I actually received that mag in the mail (Don't know why I get them...I don't have a subscription) but when I saw it I did say "eee" to my DH.


Same here. I am all for breastfeeding, but some pics in magazines (I am thinking of one in particular) are just too much. I am talking about ones that are so close up that your face would be touching the woman's boob if it were real and not a picture. I would never shove my face that close to a breastfeeding woman's boob so why do I want to see a picture up that close? Talk about shoving it into people's faces... literally.

[udsweetpea]

Why is that disturbing? Did the cover Demi Moore did while she was pregnant disturb you also?

Uh no, its because its Britney ;) What I meant was... if people have a problem with boob on a magazine cover, then they should also have a problem with Britney showing just as much boob.

[msnicolea]

I'm just disturbed that britney the trainwreck is pregnant again-I don't care what she shows or doesn't show.

[Larissa]

I'm just disturbed that britney the trainwreck is pregnant again-I don't care what she shows or doesn't show.

Bingo!!

[Sarah]

While I'm not against nursing or discreet nursing in public, I am somewhat put-off by some of the reactions here. Yes, Maxim does show more breast on its cover, anyone who has cable can get quite an eyeful, and I see half-dressed girls in skimpy outfits all of the time. But, for some people such is not okay across the board. I am friends with several people who believe in modesty, are agains the nudity on magazines, in pop culture, on television, and then some. And they were off put by this magazine cover (as they've also complained about Blender and other publications). So, are their feelings any less valid because "it is a breast shown in its biological function?" Of course not, and it is not right to discount that. There are people who gave the response of "breastfeeding is icky" and I don't defend that, but people are entitled to feel however they do (I'm not defending their spouting off at the mouth, but they are entitled to their opinion). But some people are not comfortable seeing breasts at all, whether the intent is to be titilating or shown at their biological function, and their feelings should be respected. I may not agree with their stance, but they shouldn't be called "idiots" or told to "get a life" for having a different standard of modesty.I don't know about that. I have pretty darned conservative standards about modesty, but I am not offended in the slightest by this cover. Context does matter, IMO, and this is a totally nonsexual, nontitillating picture, with no real nip exposed. That boob could almost be a shoulder, it's so unspecific looking.

[Sarah]

I just don't want to see it. It isn't the naked breast part..I am totally fine with nudity and showing skin. I look away when I see a mother BFing...it gives me ummm an icky feeling I guess you could say.
I'm totally not attacking you here. But I wonder if you could sort of articulate why you feel this way. I mean, if BFing doesn't upset you, then why are you grossed out, or why do you "not want to see that?" I mean, I am not upset seeing other nude women in locker rooms or whatever. What's the big deal, even if it is being shoved in your face? It's an awesome thing to do.

[PinkMartini]

As soon as I saw the cover, I just KNEW people would be up in arms about it :rolleyes:

As PP's have said, I just don't understand what people don't 'get' about BF'ing. THATS WHAT BREASTS WERE MADE FOR. Sorry, they weren't made as play things for your husband.

I'm as conservative and modest as they come and I see not one thing wrong with that picture. I just don't get it... Does anyone here think this country will EVER be 'ok' with BF'ing? And what will it take for that to happen?

[Smittenk]

I'm totally not attacking you here. But I wonder if you could sort of articulate why you feel this way. I mean, if BFing doesn't upset you, then why are you grossed out, or why do you "not want to see that?" I mean, I am not upset seeing other nude women in locker rooms or whatever. What's the big deal, even if it is being shoved in your face? It's an awesome thing to do.

Sarah, I wish I could articulate it better! :o It is hard to explain. I don't have a problem with women who choose to BF...it is a personal choice. I have always known that I don't want to BF...I have felt that since I was young. It has always grossed me out and it didn't help that when I was about 12 I saw a woman full out BFing her 4 and a half year old. It was the cousin of a friend of mine and it made me soo uncomfortable and I have forever remembered that. I am even uncomfortable with the sound of it :confused: It kind of turns my stomach.

I would never ever tell a woman that she shouldn't BF so that is why it makes me sooo mad when women tell me that I will change my mind...or that I should reconsider my feelings. I think your BBS your choice. I agree it is awesome for the people who choose to BF but it isn't for everyone and I don't think that the people who don't like it should be made to feel bad about it.

Anyways yeah hope that helps explain it a little bit better.

[udsweetpea]

I've always turned away when I see BFing only to respect their privacy. Maybe people who turn away like me are "weirded" out because its something they normally wouldn't look at but now its right in their face? I don't know, but that could be it.

[lml41981]

Wow...Smittenk...I'm so sorry you have that point of view about breastfeeding. I have to say that for *me,* the benefits of breastfeeding far outweighed any feelings of weirdness I might have had. :(

As for someone's breastfeeding being "in your face," umm...nah...It's in my DD's face.

[udsweetpea]

As for someone's breastfeeding being "in your face," umm...nah...It's in my DD's face.

I was talking about the magazine cover not your boob.

[Esq.]

My DH said that the cover looked like the baby was sucking on a butt cheek. :)

I was at Target today, and the Naked Boppy's that they sell there have a picture of a mother and baby nursing on them. Why does no one get offended by that?

[wendalah]

I think, honestly, the discomfort some people feel comes from the fact that you aren't supposed to see breasts in public in America. I personally don't have an issue with nudity--I myself am not perturbed about things like topless beaches, taking off my clothes at the gym, getting naked at the doctor's office, etc.--so I'm not uncomfortable with it. But I can see where because of our societal parameters some people might be a little uncomfortable in regards to NIP. Yeah, there is a baby covering the boob, but when the baby moves its head--there's the BOOB! You know? Not even the little scrap of material covering it.

[lml41981]

I think, honestly, the discomfort some people feel comes from the fact that you aren't supposed to see breasts in public in America. I personally don't have an issue with nudity--I myself am not perturbed about things like topless beaches, taking off my clothes at the gym, getting naked at the doctor's office, etc.--so I'm not uncomfortable with it. But I can see where because of our societal parameters some people might be a little uncomfortable in regards to NIP. Yeah, there is a baby covering the boob, but when the baby moves its head--there's the BOOB! You know? Not even the little scrap of material covering it.

Nothing against you because I somewhat agree with you, though I wish it weren't like that.

Correction: You aren't supposed to see breasts in public in America unless they're being used for the sexual function. Some people are in uproar right now because Arlington School District in the DFW metroplex is no longer allowing girls to wear shirts that show cleavage. Why are parents rushing to defend their teenaged daughters' right to show cleavage in school but breastfeeding is taboo when it shows breast? I see more boob on women walking around the mall than I do on most women who NIP.

[wendalah]

Repeat:

Yeah, there is a baby covering the boob, but when the baby moves its head--there's the BOOB! You know? Not even the little scrap of material covering it.


Again, I don't care, but that little scrap of material seems to make a difference to many people. You aren't supposed to see bare boobs in America except in the movies; how's that. As for the parents rushing to defend their teenage girls' right to wear what they want--I'd bet they probably aren't up in arms about NIPing.

[PinkMartini]

Correction: You aren't supposed to see breasts in public in America unless they're being used for the sexual function.

Totally agree! And when someone on the red carpet flashes some nip no one is up in arms about it....

[wendalah]

And when someone on the red carpet flashes some nip no one is up in arms about it....

Are you kidding me? Remember the Janet Jackson Super Bowl thing? People were freaking over that.

[prudies]

Funny, I was just thinking about this thread. Did anyone read this month's Vogue? There's a picture of a model all decked out in glamorous clothes, breastfeeding her son.


http://s2.supload.com/image.php?get=angelal_vogueus08062.jpg

[msnicolea]

Nipplegate

[j*east]

DH and I saw the original cover (not the Vogue pic) on the Daily Show. DH said it could well be an elbow on the cover. It's funny to hear/read the reactions and then look at it...the baby's head is bigger than the breast!

The Vogue pic is way more explicit! Prudies, I couldn't read the text...was the BFing part of the story, or just random? Maybe that's the next way to get shocking fashion photos...with breastfeeding?

[Delta]

Prudies - did you get that from my post at MDC? ;)

The article actually has nothing to do with breastfeeding, it's about cosmetic dentistry and braces and such. If you look at the model's (Angela Lindavall) teeth you can see they are painted gold. My guess is she was doing a shoot for this article and had her son there with her, he wanted to nurse, so she did and they took the pic and that was the one they went with. She's a pretty crunchy model mom.

Pretty cool. :)

[mrs_pell]

The article actually has nothing to do with breastfeeding, it's about cosmetic dentistry and braces and such. If you look at the model's (Angela Lindavall) teeth you can see they are painted gold.

I've been lurking along from time to time, but I just had to say that when I saw the Vogue picture, the thing I noticed the most wasn't the breast feeding (an older child at that), but the first thing I said was "Are her teeth gold??" :D

[prudies]

No, I haven't been on MDC in ages. :cool: The contrast between breastfeeding and gold teeth was striking. Maybe that's why they chose that photo for an article on cosmetic dentistry. I thought the photo was beautiful, except for those damn gold teeth!

[PinkMartini]

Are you kidding me? Remember the Janet Jackson Super Bowl thing? People were freaking over that.

Red Carpet does not equal Superbowl for me... IIRC most of the people that complained about the Superbowl was because it was during the day when kids would still be up watching tv and some people watch the superbowl as a 'family event.'

I hardly doubt many children see red carpet entrances, and even if they do, I've never heard of anyone complaining about the nip exposure going on there