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

[Mom-ninja.]

Provocative is not a synonym for sexual.

 

Yes, provocative as in shocking. Right? If so, I personally don't find it shocking.

 

Provocative as in trying to stir the pot?....Well, it is that. Simply because extended nursing is not customary in our society. And yes that pose and look on her face were on purpose.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Kleine Hexe

[Mom-ninja.]

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.

 

This I agree with. The title is what bothers me.

[LibraryLover]

Yes, provocative as in shocking. Right? If so, I personally don't find it shocking.

 

Provocative as in trying to stir the pot?....Well, it is that. Simply because extended nursing is not customary in our society.

 

 

To get a reaction.

[Mommyfaithe]

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

 

I extended nursing with my kids...but not ONE of them EVER stood on a chair!! Just YUCK!!!!

 

That does not represent extended nursing. That picture is NOT encouraging either. BLECH!!!!!

[nmoira]

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

While you were each staring in a challenging manner at an audience of (understood) onlookers?

[Ibbygirl]

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!

 

:iagree::iagree:

 

I nursed my Autistic son until he was several months into his 5th year because with his sensory issues he just wouldn't eat hardly anything and would only drink apple juice and breast milk. I never intended to nurse that long, but life throws you curve balls and you have to roll with it and I thought it was the best thing to do for my child's health. He eventually weaned himself.

 

I would hate it if people held me up for ridicule for trying to do the best I could for my son because I nursed him for longer than the norm. And no, he never latched on standing on a chair! :glare:

 

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 know right! Sheesh! I think they are trying to be shocking and sensationalistic which doesn't really help build a bridge of understanding to people like me who already are considered weird for nursing longer than the norm.

[Mrs Mungo]

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

 

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.

 

I agree with both of these. I nursed my kids until they were 2 1/2. But, this photo is intended to be provocative, in the sense of stirring controversy.

[Catwoman]

 

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

 

Thanks for posting the link to that article!

[Mommyfaithe]

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.

 

:iagree: It was almost p*rnographic......eeeewwwww....again.

[LibraryLover]

I don't think it's gross or tacky.

 

I think it misrepresents. EBF is a relationship. That is posed, set-up.

 

Plus, the child looks uncomfortable, his head turned that way etc. It's not an honest portrayal. Yes, those of us who have nursed older littles have found ourselves in positions that are not most comfortable, but we try to manuever out of them.

 

I am sure the mother had no say in what photo was used on the cover. She is lovely and her little boy is darling.

[nmoira]

:iagree: It was almost p*rnographic......eeeewwwww....again.

He is her 3yo son. He is nursing. That is not pornographic.

[LibraryLover]

[double post

Edited May 10, 2012 by LibraryLover

[LibraryLover]

I agree with both of these. I nursed my kids until they were 2 1/2. But, this photo is intended to be provocative, in the sense of stirring controversy.

 

 

Yes, and a photographer trying to do his/her job. It's a cover-shot, for sure.

[Catwoman]

I didn't BF my ds, but I'm certainly in favor of anyone who chooses to BF, and I think that both this magazine cover and the title of the article promote anti-BF sentiments, because the mom looks so "unmotherly," and the title is just plain over-the-top. It's sickening that the intention here was clearly to be divisive and to create controversy where very little existed beforehand, rather than to present real and helpful information. They could have used a picture of the same mom, cuddled on the sofa with her ds, and it still would have been controversial to many people who have never witnessed a mom BFing an older child, but it would have represented the love between a mother and her child, and would have seemed far more natural.

 

Personally, I think that publicity-hungry mom should be ashamed of herself for posing in such an unnatural way, and for quite probably making her son the object of ridicule as he gets older. She wasn't posing in that way to promote the concept of BFing an older child as being a healthy, normal, or nurturing thing; she was doing it to get on the cover of Time Magazine, and to stir up controversy. :glare:

[Georgiana Daniels]

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

 

LOL, I thought Advanced Placement.

 

Agree that the pose is awkward and done so on purpose to sell magazines. Too bad the mom didn't see it coming :glare:

[6packofun]

I'd say that the WORDS are at least as provocative as the photo. "Are You Mom Enough?" Really??

 

What's odd to me is that there is any breastfeeding *activism* at all. The "campaigning" has gotten so out of control. It's natural, it's good...and, uh, that's it. I don't care who does it or for how long (usually), but there's no need to gush about it being SO beautiful and sweet and indicative of better motherhood choices...etc. It's a kid eating. If you don't want other people making a big deal of it, then DON'T yourself. And that includes all the intentional flashing because you want to test reactions and start a fight. Just feed your kid and quit talkin' about your boobs already. (This is to the moms it applies to, not all bf moms.)

 

I hope ALL moms at least try breastfeeding...but I didn't and don't feel guilty about it. I hope my girls DO, but if they don't, so what?

[LibraryLover]

He is her 3yo son. He is nursing. That is not pornographic.

 

 

I agree. I am just glad she isn't wearing 3 inch heels. It could have gone that way.

[Ibbygirl]

I didn't BF my ds, but I'm certainly in favor of anyone who chooses to BF, and I think that both this magazine cover and the title of the article promote anti-BF sentiments, because the mom looks so "unmotherly," and the title is just plain over-the-top. It's sickening that the intention here was clearly to be divisive and to create controversy where very little existed beforehand, rather than to present real and helpful information. They could have used a picture of the same mom, cuddled on the sofa with her ds, and it still would have been controversial to many people who have never witnessed a mom BFing an older child, but it would have represented the love between a mother and her child, and would have seemed far more natural.

 

Personally, I think that publicity-hungry mom should be ashamed of herself for posing in such an unnatural way, and for quite probably making her son the object of ridicule as he gets older. She wasn't posing in that way to promote the concept of BFing an older child as being a healthy, normal, or nurturing thing; she was doing it to get on the cover of Time Magazine, and to stir up controversy. :glare:

 

LOL Cat, once again :iagree: with you! I think I should just put this little guy :iagree: on everything you say, because you almost always express what I'm thinking much better than I could have! :p

[kitten18]

I don't think it's gross or tacky.

 

I think it misrepresents. EBF is a relationship. That is posed, set-up.

 

Plus, the child looks uncomfortable, his head turned that way etc. It's not an honest portrayal. Yes, those of us who have nursed older littles have found ourselves in positions that are not most comfortable, but we try to manuever out of them.

 

I am sure the mother had no say in what photo was used on the cover. She is lovely and her little boy is darling.

:iagree:

[leeannpal]

He is her 3yo son. He is nursing. That is not pornographic.

It is if it is on the cover of a magazine. Any woman has the right to nurse their three year old, but photographing it and displaying it to the world crosses a major line to me.

[Parrothead]

I agree. I am just glad she isn't wearing 3 inch heels. It could have gone that way.

Yes, it could have. And it could have been done well with the mom in 3 inch heels.

 

I think what is so wrong with the picture is that it is so sterile. There isn't any love or affection in the pose. If the mom had her arms around the child I think it would have been more in line with what nursing *should* look like. Even with him in the chair, any sign of affection would have made that photo okay.

[LibraryLover]

Yes, it could have. And it could have been done well with the mom in 3 inch heels.

 

I think what is so wrong with the picture is that it is so sterile. There isn't any love or affection in the pose. If the mom had her arms around the child I think it would have been more in line with what nursing *should* look like. Even with him in the chair, any sign of affection would have made that photo okay.

 

 

Yes. That is what bothers me the most. They left out the relationship part.

[ereks mom]

They made the nursing look se*ual.

Wrong way to handle it.

 

:iagree:

[nmoira]

It is if it is on the cover of a magazine. Any woman has the right to nurse their three year old, but photographing it and displaying it to the world crosses a major line to me.

Neither sexual organs nor acts are depicted or even suggested. It is not pornographic. The word I think people are looking for is "erotic," but that's a whole other can of worms.

[kitten18]

It is if it is on the cover of a magazine. Any woman has the right to nurse their three year old, but photographing it and displaying it to the world crosses a major line to me.

Why?

[Catwoman]

LOL Cat, once again :iagree: with you! I think I should just put this little guy :iagree: on everything you say, because you almost always express what I'm thinking much better than I could have! :p

 

:001_wub::001_wub::001_wub::001_wub:

 

I would have agreed with you, too, if you'd posted first! :001_smile:

[Heatherwith4]

It almost looks like they were trying to make it look s*xy, which of course it isn't. I'm still nursing 2yo DD, and I suspect I will still be nursing her at 3. However, I think I'll be holding her in my arms, and most likely be looking at her, and her at me. I don't understand the need to make nursing a divisive issue.

[leeannpal]

Why?

Because breasts are also sexual objects.

[justamouse]

It is if it is on the cover of a magazine. Any woman has the right to nurse their three year old, but photographing it and displaying it to the world crosses a major line to me.

 

Well, the word prono is about causing se#ual excitement. Not about BFing. Why would you equate the two? That picture is not about causing such excitement, (though is is a grenade in the Mommy Wars) anymore than this one is;

 

 

Though I think the photo was tacky, I in no way equate BFing with sexual stimulation.

[nmoira]

Because breasts are also sexual objects.

So are my earlobes.

[justamouse]

So are my earlobes.

 

My painted toenails.

[leeannpal]

So are my earlobes.

I suppose you could make that case for any body part. Is it not o.k. to express my opinion on here?

[PeacefulChaos]

Not trying to hijack, but what someone mentioned earlier about how advocates sometimes end up doing the opposite of what they are intending, did anyone see this blog post/article regarding lactivists? For some reason, it made me think of it.

[Mom-ninja.]

To get a reaction.

 

Exactly. I said that, yes? I did in my head. :D

 

 

 

I know right! Sheesh! I think they are trying to be shocking and sensationalistic which doesn't really help build a bridge of understanding to people like me who already are considered weird for nursing longer than the norm.

 

Of course they are trying to be shocking. They want to sell magazines.

 

 

I agree. I am just glad she isn't wearing 3 inch heels. It could have gone that way.

 

They'd need a taller chair. ;)

 

 

Maybe a picture of the mom trying to apply mascara while her toddler sits on the counter nursing? Once you can do that you are a nursing champion. :lol:

[momofkhm]

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

 

I didn't know there were other photos until you said it.

 

Not fond of the one of the mom with the wine glass. I don't care that it's probably apple juice.

[nmoira]

I suppose you could make that case for any body part. Is it not o.k. to express my opinion on here?

I expressed mine. It just happens to be different from yours.

[LibraryLover]

I'm a bundle of confusion. lol

[clarkacademy]

I really wonder how that boy will feel as an adult or a teenager. People advertise their children under their own agendas and it is not right. I breastfed I also used modesty. I would never want to make another person feel awkward. I don't want my young teen boy seeing this at the grocery store at all.

[hsmamainva]

I agree with both of these. I nursed my kids until they were 2 1/2. But, this photo is intended to be provocative, in the sense of stirring controversy.

 

Agreeing with Mrs. Mungo.

 

I nursed my youngest (who has special needs) until she was 4 1/2, but never in public after she reached the age of 2 or so. It wasn't something I felt I needed to put "on display" and no one knew she was still nursing unless I chose to tell them (my daughter had a 'code word' for nursing that she would say when she wanted some 'snuggle time').

 

This is deliberately "in your face".

[Scuff]

:iagree: It was almost p*rnographic......eeeewwwww....again.

 

That's what I was thinking. Sickos who like child porn are going to love it.

[ssavings]

Even if it's not p*rnographic, er*tic, or s*xual, the pose is strange and unnatural. There seems to be no affection between the mother and child. It totally misses the relationship aspect of EBF.

[delaney]

Great. That's just the way I want my nursing my youngest to 3 years viewed. BTW that kid looks way older than 3 in my opinion. Ick, ick, and double ick.

[leeannpal]

I expressed mine. It just happens to be different from yours.

No, you questioned the validity of my opinion. I didn't make a judgement about yours.

 

The photo is supposed to be shocking. Is it any wonder that there are those of us who think it is highly inappropriate?

[Harriet Vane]

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:

[Mom-ninja.]

I suppose you could make that case for any body part. Is it not o.k. to express my opinion on here?

 

Your opinion happens to be that breastfeeding a child is a sexual act. Or one to be compared to a sexual act.

 

You basically said that this woman looks like she's doing something sexual with her child. Not cool.

[Loudwater School]

I thought it was awesome.

 

I mean, it's annoying that the media still likes to (and can) get everybody's goat by making a cover image that shows a tall little one nursing in an unusual position with a short mother of opposite genders in order to make breastfeeding sexualized.

 

But it was awesome that a woman said, "This ISN'T sexual and if you think it is, you need to re-evaluate your SELF."

 

Oh, and to the person who said Madonna pictures look more natural -- really?! Babies who sit straight up and stare at the camera are natural?! Women draped in tons of layers of fabric with completely naked babies are natural?! Babies floating on tiptoes on laps or hovering a couple of inches of their moms' inner elbows are natural?! No way! Three-year-old boys pulling a stool over to find some mama milk while Mama chops stuff at the counter or stirs a pot is totally natural. I've had three who've done just that.

[leeannpal]

Your opinion happens to be that breastfeeding a child is a sexual act. Or one to be compared to a sexual act.

 

You basically said that this woman looks like she's doing something sexual with her child. Not cool.

You must be kidding, right? No, that is not what my opinion expressed. I breastfed my daughter. I did not have a photographer come in, take pictures, and display them for the world to see. That is what is wrong-not breastfeeding itself.

[Mom-ninja.]

I don't want my young teen boy seeing this at the grocery store at all.

 

And my pre-teen boy would not even bat an eye at the picture? Why? Because he's used to it.

[nmoira]

No, you questioned the validity of my opinion. I didn't make a judgement about yours.

 

The photo is supposed to be shocking. Is it any wonder that there are those of us who think it is highly inappropriate?

I question your logic, not your right to your opinion.

[justLisa]

You must be kidding, right? No, that is not what my opinion expressed. I breastfed my daughter. I did not have a photographer come in, take pictures, and display them for the world to see. That is what is wrong-not breastfeeding itself.

 

HA! If it weren't absurd I would be offended.

 

I had a professional photographer take birth photos, first breastfeeding photos, and again later. It was so I could capture and always have remembrance of the two most beautiful times in my motherhood. What is WRONG, is treating breastfeeding in photo like it is anything different than a child's first b-day, communion, first haircut, graduation.....