Even my liberal AP self does not feel great about this week's Time mag cover

[LibraryLover]

It's provocative in a way toddler (I think of 3 yr olds as toddlers...even if they aren't toddling...) nursing isn't.

 

http://blog.chron.com/momhouston/2012/05/time-magazine-stirs-with-cover-of-3-year-old-breastfeeding/

[justLisa]

I would never look at that and think it is a positive message for nursing an older.

 

I nursed mine through toddler hood but this is just....bleh.

[Farrar]

Oh good grief.

 

I have no problem with 3 yos nursing if everyone is happy with the state of things... but they've posed the cover in a really provocative way.

[Jen in PA]

Short mother, tall toddler (on a chair no less!), and nursing standing up? They went all out to make that cover shot as awkward and unnatural as possible.

[TXMomof4]

I haven't nursed that long, but nothing like taking a not-that-uncommon thing and skewing it to look weird. How many of you with toddlers have them stand on a chair to latch on? :glare:

 

Irk!

[Just Kate]

I feel sorry for that little boy who is pictured on the front of Time magazine like that! You know, he WILL grow up some day. :rolleyes:

[Ailaena]

Wow. And that's huge coming from me.

 

 

Not necessarily s*exually provocative, but more like she's doing it to prove a point, not because she's into AP...

[fairfarmhand]

Oh good grief.

 

I have no problem with 3 yos nursing if everyone is happy with the state of things... but they've posed the cover in a really provocative way.

:iagree:

[newlifemom]

I would never look at that and think it is a positive message for nursing an older.

 

I nursed mine through toddler hood but this is just....bleh.

 

:iagree: Well, I didn't nurse mine past 14 mos, but it isn't a positive message.

[Lilymax]

Maybe it's because I'm still breastfeeding my 2.5 year-old, but I don't see anything provocative about it. I actually showed it to my 10-year-old just now to show that yes, indeed, there are kids as big as his brother or bigger that still breastfeed. (Because they sometimes ask, "Shouldn't he be over that by now?") ;)

 

At this point, it's mostly at bedtime and first thing in the morning, so we do keep it private. But ideally, I wish we didn't have to; that it would be OK in this society to nurse and not be judged.

[Guest submarines]

I've nursed way past three. The cover isn't a supportive or even neutral, obviously. What's worse, I don't understand what that mother was thinking. She can't be an extended nursing advocate, right? :confused: The cover is a mockery of a nursing relationship. And she has her child facing the camera too? Another example of NPD, that's what I think. :ack2:

Edited May 10, 2012 by sunflowers

[Farrar]

Is it actually a real mother and child? Or is it (shudder) staged? Or photoshopped maybe?

[AdventureMoms]

I haven't nursed that long, but nothing like taking a not-that-uncommon thing and skewing it to look weird. How many of you with toddlers have them stand on a chair to latch on? :glare:

 

Irk!

.

 

Yeah, the chair thing is odd. They said they did that because it was "physically impossible" to pose in a more traditional in-arms position with an older child. My fairly large 4yo can still nurse in arms. (Though she usually

prefers laying down)

[TracyP]

Hmmm, I'm torn. I don't think it is horrible. Why does the kid have to be looking at the camera like he just got caught stealing a cookie from the cookie jar? If it weren't for that, I don't think I would have a problem with it.

[Farrar]

It's just so weird and unnatural looking (and, again, spoken as someone who has seen 3 yos nurse with no judgement) - I had to ask.

[Guest submarines]

.

 

Yeah, the chair thing is odd. They said they did that because it was "physically impossible" to pose in a more traditional in-arms position with an older child. My fairly large 4yo can still nurse in arms. (Though she usually

prefers laying down)

 

:iagree:

 

Physically impossible? So is she saying that's how she'd normally nurse? :confused: I can think of quite a number of positions which wouldn't be viewed as a mockery.

Edited May 10, 2012 by sunflowers

[Scarlett]

I am not against extended nursing AT ALL, but wow that shot is just weird.

[Wolfmeis]

I read the Huffington Post article about it.

 

The mother IS an advocate of extended nursing, but she didn't obvs choose to pse like that. It was the photographer's idea to do it this waym and to make it as polarizing as possible. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/10/time-cover-breastfeeding-attachment-parenting_n_1506017.html?fb_action_ids=10151109917518677&fb_action_types=news.reads&fb_source=other_multiline

 

Some of the other pictures were a lot more normal.

 

http://lightbox.time.com/2012/05/10/parenting/#1

[LibraryLover]

What? lol That's the *only* way a 3 year old can nurse? Really?

[DarlaS]

Is it actually a real mother and child? Or is it (shudder) staged? Or photoshopped maybe?

 

The linked article stated she it was a 26 year old mother with her 3 year old son in the very first paragraph.

 

Not sure how anyone can even wonder that... how could they even come close to pulling it off legally otherwise? :001_huh:

[DarlaS]

I think the point here, which will unfortunately be missed because of the pose, is that not just hippies practice extended nursing etc.

 

I'm rather disappointed in Time. Like another poster stated, that little boy will eventually grow up.

[Guest submarines]

I read the Huffington Post article about it.

 

The mother IS an advocate of extended nursing, but she didn't obvs choose to pse like that. It was the photographer's idea to do it this waym and to make it as polarizing as possible. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/10/time-cover-breastfeeding-attachment-parenting_n_1506017.html?fb_action_ids=10151109917518677&fb_action_types=news.reads&fb_source=other_multiline

 

Some of the other pictures were a lot more normal.

 

http://lightbox.time.com/2012/05/10/parenting/#1

 

I'm really tired of "advocates" who won't educate themselves about the nature of media distortion, or naively believe that "they" will be different, and then end up harming the movement, rather than doing anything positive about it.

 

It's not the first time, really.

[PeacefulChaos]

I thought this quote under one of the not-so-weirdly staged photos was interesting:

"It's so funny that the women who ask breast-feeding parents to cover up wouldn’t write to Victoria’s Secret to ask them to take down their ads."

 

Read more: http://lightbox.time.com/2012/05/10/parenting/#ixzz1uUQv10eu

 

and true. Which is funny because I'm not even a breastfeeding mom, and I would much rather see VS take down the huge ads in the mall than worry about how a mom is feeding her baby! (VS ads I never noticed in a negative way til I had little boys, of course. ;) )

[Farrar]

Okay, totally real then. The rest of the pictures are normal looking and some are kinda sweet, with the kids half-sitting, half-propped on laps and so forth. I hate the way they do things like this in the media with alternative lifestyle choices - finding the most out there people or choosing only the most out there quotes or showing images meant to turn people off to it. And then they say, but, hey, we were fair, we showed what we saw... Not that I really expect anything else, it just makes me sad.

[Momma H]

They made the nursing look se*ual.

Wrong way to handle it.

[justLisa]

The other pictures are beautiful IMO. But that cover. Unfortunately most people won't even VIEW the other photos.

[Guest submarines]

I read the Huffington Post article about it.

 

The mother IS an advocate of extended nursing, but she didn't obvs choose to pse like that. It was the photographer's idea to do it this waym and to make it as polarizing as possible. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/10/time-cover-breastfeeding-attachment-parenting_n_1506017.html?fb_action_ids=10151109917518677&fb_action_types=news.reads&fb_source=other_multiline

 

Some of the other pictures were a lot more normal.

 

http://lightbox.time.com/2012/05/10/parenting/#1

 

"“When you think of breast-feeding, you think of mothers holding their children, which was impossible with some of these older kids,†Martin Schoeller explained. “I liked the idea of having the kids standing up to underline the point that this was an uncommon situation.â€"

 

Seems like an artistic project for the photographer, which I can understand. I also understand that he has no clue about breastfeeding an older toddler.

 

I wonder if the mother had any choice over the cover image.

[stripe]

I don't see any similarity to a Madonna and child scenario. Those look natural and loving. This Time photo looks awkward.

 

Let's hope they don't do a cover on short husbands with tall wives next week so they can reuse the chair prop.

 

 

...and stretching the top down will lead to elastic giving out. Better to find a different style.

[DarlaS]

Wow, he is a big 3 year old. Well at least in my world.

 

Yeah, he's a big kid and she's tiny.

 

Okay, totally real then. The rest of the pictures are normal looking and some are kinda sweet, with the kids half-sitting, half-propped on laps and so forth. I hate the way they do things like this in the media with alternative lifestyle choices - finding the most out there people or choosing only the most out there quotes or showing images meant to turn people off to it. And then they say, but, hey, we were fair, we showed what we saw... Not that I really expect anything else, it just makes me sad.

 

Me too.

 

They made the nursing look se*ual.

Wrong way to handle it.

 

:iagree:

[KatA]

I read the title and thought Associated Press. Anyone? Just me then... Sigh.

[justasque]

Sigh.

No one pulls down their shirt to nurse in public.

This was intentionally designed to create controversy and conversation and page links and culture wars and money.

[Guest submarines]

The other pictures are beautiful IMO. But that cover. Unfortunately most people won't even VIEW the other photos.

:iagree:

 

And even if they look at them, they won't see them as beautiful, because their mind is already primed to see extended breastfeeding as gross and unnatural.

[Soror]

Currently nursing my 2.5 yo here. I do not like that pic at all. I think it is good to bring awareness but I'm not sure that this does so in a positive way.

[nmoira]

Short mother, tall toddler (on a chair no less!), and nursing standing up? They went all out to make that cover shot as awkward and unnatural as possible.

This. Mine weaned at 4.5 and 5 respectively, so I'm far from against extended nursing. I get that the cover is meant to be provocative, but IMHO that's antithetical to act of nursing, which is about the relationship between the mother and child.

[kitten18]

Oh good grief.

 

I have no problem with 3 yos nursing if everyone is happy with the state of things... but they've posed the cover in a really provocative way.

:iagree:

Okay, totally real then. The rest of the pictures are normal looking and some are kinda sweet, with the kids half-sitting, half-propped on laps and so forth. I hate the way they do things like this in the media with alternative lifestyle choices - finding the most out there people or choosing only the most out there quotes or showing images meant to turn people off to it. And then they say, but, hey, we were fair, we showed what we saw... Not that I really expect anything else, it just makes me sad.

Like articles on homeschooling. They find the most radical of unschoolers or the most strict, conservative, homeschoolers.

 

 

The other photos are beautiful.

[WishboneDawn]

It's just so weird and unnatural looking (and, again, spoken as someone who has seen 3 yos nurse with no judgement) - I had to ask.

 

Yeah, that.

 

I nursed mine until they were 18 mos and 3 years respectively and expect to nurse into toddlerhood again with Lauchie. I expected to see a loving picture of a toddler curled into his/her mom while breastfeeding, not a young boy hanging off the nipple of an inattentive model as if he were a fashion accessory.

 

I don't see anything in that picture that reflects the reality of extended nursing.

[TXMary2]

I never thought I would be disgusted by breastfeeding. The kid on the covers looks six, not three. I have to wonder if that is intentional. The photo is disturbing.

[justamouse]

That picture is spoiling for a fight, which is why I don't like it. It IS provocative, in all the bad ways. BF your three Yo, I could care less, and I actually think it's great, but between the picture and the title, they're not doing AP any favors.

 

But, the other article about the norovirus was great about making me rethink these plastic reusable bags and instead making myself some washable ones.

Edited May 10, 2012 by justamouse

[Roadrunner]

Let's hope they don't do a cover on short husbands with tall wives next week so they can reuse the chair prop.

 

:lol::lol::lol:

 

 

 

The cover makes me uncomfortable to look and I have no problem with 3 year olds nursing. I agree that some of the other picks are wonderful.

Does anybody remember several years ago a big controversy over a cover of a baby magazine with a mother nursing an infant? If that irked some people, I just can't imagine the commentary on this one.

[Mom-ninja.]

I know..really. Who in heck would want to nurse like that? She looks more like a vending machine in that pose.

 

Well, I have.

 

Not in public. But I have nursed in every position and situation possible, I believe. So, yes. I have nursed my 3 yr old while he stood on a chair.

 

I have nursed while sitting on the floor, and my toddler was above me on the couch and leaning over me. That's a more accurate picture of toddler nursing. I call it acrobatic nursing.

 

The choice of picture is to catch your attention. Which it does. It is there to draw you to think, "What?!" and buy the magazine because you're now curious (either in a good or bad way) about the article.

 

I also do not see anything at all provocative in that picture. Maybe because I can't ever ever in my mind equate nursing (in any position) as provocative. Maybe because I'm so used to see nursing women and children of all ages all the time that I just don't blink an eye.

 

Because when I first saw the picture I laughed and thought, "Yep, been there done that."

 

I see nothing wrong with the picture. I see something wrong with a society who looks at it and finds it provocative.

[Jennifer3141]

Tandem nursed until DS was 3 1/2 and DD was 4 1/2. That pic on the stool is ridiculous.

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

I am not against extended nursing AT ALL, but wow that shot is just weird.

 

:iagree: It is a totally unnatural pose, and doesn't represent what extended nursing really looks like. I think it's tacky.

[LibraryLover]

 

 

I see nothing wrong with the picture. I see something wrong with a society who looks at it and finds it provocative.

 

 

Provocative is not a synonym for sexual.

[goldberry]

Totally pro BF here...that pic still was uncomfortable for me. Nothing natural about it at all.

[melissad2]

Short mother, tall toddler (on a chair no less!), and nursing standing up? They went all out to make that cover shot as awkward and unnatural as possible.

 

:iagree:

[Mom-ninja.]

Tandem nursed until DS was 3 1/2 and DD was 4 1/2. That pic on the stool is ridiculous.

 

Then I guess I'm ridiculous because I've done it. ;)

[Caitilin]

Oh good grief.

 

I have no problem with 3 yos nursing if everyone is happy with the state of things... but they've posed the cover in a really provocative way.

 

:iagree:

I am all for EBF, but the picture is just tacky.

[clarkacademy]

That cover is just gross.

[Coffeetime]

I don't like it. Not because I feel like it's obscene, it makes me feel like it's making fun of women who choose to do that (yet the title almost makes fun of those who don't). It's just so awkward feeling.

 

Ok, totally not into AP here- but this is what I don't get. I didn't read the article, but I did slightly bristle at the insinuation that if you don't do extended nursing you're reason is because you're obviously not "Mom Enough" to handle it. The photo, the title... everything about that cover is clearly meant to provoke a fight between AP and non-AP parents. Don't like it one bit.

[Catwoman]

I feel sorry for that little boy who is pictured on the front of Time magazine like that! You know, he WILL grow up some day. :rolleyes:

 

I was thinking the same thing. :ack2:

 

IMO, there was no reason to put that photo on the cover of any magazine. I was expecting to see a photo of a loving mom gazing down at her sweet child, and this was nothing like that. The mom's expression was very challenging and not at all "motherly," and as was already mentioned, I feel sorry for the kid.

 

There was nothing "natural" about that photo. It looked completely contrived and posed, and I found myself wondering if the woman was really the kid's mom or if they were both models doing a job.