Breastfeeding Mom in restaurant stare off...

Micky Dolenz

I knew a lady who breastfed her kid until they were around 5. Mainly at night to put them to bed. I thought it kinda weird. She did admit that it was harder for her to give it up then the child.

lazygal

intheclouds wrote: »

Actually I have no idea how baby or child feeding works at all, breastfeeding or not.

If you dont have children I dont think its unusual that you wouldnt know how it works.

Even if you do have children, I suppose different people and cultures do things differently.

So if you breastfeed him twice or three times one day, but just once the next day, what does your body do with the excess milk, or how does it know to produce more some days? Thats probably a really dumb question but I genuinely wouldnt have a notion.

Your body adjusts over time. Cluster feeding for the first few days, then at six weeks and 12 weeks' old there's another adjustment. My body makes milk for when its needed at this stage, because I fed on demand since my children were newborns. Newborn milk is totally different to toddler milk anyway.

smash

lazygal wrote: »

If I was a stricter mother I'd have weaned him at two-that was my plan. But he loves his morning feeds and the odd time he's sick or upset the breastmilk is the best thing for him. Trust me, you wouldn't feel sorry for him if you saw how happy he is having his feeds and when he tells me how yummy it is. It's for their benefit that I breastfed-I really didn't particularly like feeding either of my children for a long time.

To be honest, I would feel sorry for him because if feel that he's being babied and not being allowed to grow up to reflect his age.

lazygal

smash wrote: »

To be honest, I would feel sorry for him because if feel that he's being babied and not being allowed to grow up to reflect his age.

He's two. How grown up should he be? He loves dinosaurs, cars, trains, diggers, all food and his books. And he loves having his breastmilk too.

intheclouds

lazygal wrote: »

Newborn milk is totally different to toddler milk anyway.

Really? How so?

Micky Dolenz

lazygal wrote: »

Your body adjusts over time. Cluster feeding for the first few days, then at six weeks and 12 weeks' old there's another adjustment. My body makes milk for when its needed at this stage, because I fed on demand since my children were newborns. Newborn milk is totally different to toddler milk anyway.

I knew another lady who breastfed her own twins and even donated breast milk. She is a slight little thing but by christ could you produce milk. She did tell it would scale back the less she did it, but demand was high.

eviltwin

lazygal wrote: »

He's two. How grown up should he be? He loves dinosaurs, cars, trains, diggers, all food and his books. And he loves having his breastmilk too.

Isn't it the recommendation of the World Health Organization to breastfeed until two anyway? Don't understand all the fuss, he's two and he's happy to continue. Fair play to you.

eviltwin

intheclouds wrote: »

Really? How so?

Breast milk adjusts over time to suit the child's nutritional needs

Micky Dolenz

I think WHO recommend that kids be breastfed until they are 30 months. Although they do factor in the poorer countries where an suitable alternative may not be readily available.

lazygal

intheclouds wrote: »

Really? How so?

Newborn milk is colostrum intitally, its a different composition. When the weather is warmer, the milk changes to be more thirst quenching, during other times it adjusts too. One of the reasons my older child weaned was because I was six months pregnant and the taste changes as your body adjusts to getting ready for a newborn. My toddler doesn't need the fattier milk babies who don't eat solids require, so it doesn't make that milk, it makes milk for a toddler.

intheclouds

eviltwin wrote: »

Breast milk adjusts over time to suit the child's nutritional needs

Thats mad isnt it? No idea about that at all!

greenorchard

seamus wrote: »

Some irrational arguments are just funny, they come up in the same format in the oddest of places.

"I've no problem with breastfeeding, but...."

There are a few people taking a lot of time to discuss what breastfeeding mothers should do in public while still claiming that they've no issues with breastfeeding.

This. There's people on this thread who claim to have no problem with breastfeeding but have also said that it's unnecessary to do it in public & babies should be fed milk from a bottle in public instead. So they DO have a problem with it or they wouldn't make such a ridiculous suggestion.

Lizony

Im not against breastfeeding in public but that picture does seem to have been done to get attention instead of her just breastfeeding her child so it seems a bit silly.

lazygal

eviltwin wrote: »

Isn't it the recommendation of the World Health Organization to breastfeed until two anyway? Don't understand all the fuss, he's two and he's happy to continue. Fair play to you.

Yes, it is recommended to feed until two years of age. I had planned on weaning him when he turned two but he's happy and I'm not too bothered so I left it.

Kev W

This seems like it would be a brilliant subject for one of those Ask Me Anything threads.

smash

lazygal wrote: »

He's two. How grown up should he be? He loves dinosaurs, cars, trains, diggers, all food and his books. And he loves having his breastmilk too.

Well he's old enough to not be babied by giving him your breast to sooth him whenever he gets upset. Honestly, if he's eating food then the breast is a comfort thing and nothing more and I'm of the opinion that you do it for you and not him. Either way, that's your choice. I might not agree with it and I've explained why but it's your choice so I've no interest in arguing about it as I find you an interesting poster.

Micky Dolenz

lazygal wrote: »

Yes, it is recommended to feed until two years of age. I had planned on weaning him when he turned two but he's happy and I'm not too bothered so I left it.

I don't think there is anything wrong with that. It must be an amazing bonding time to have. You'll probably miss it more than him.

Kev W

smash wrote: »

Well he's old enough to not be babied by giving him your breast to sloth him whenever he gets upset. Honestly, if he's eating food then the breast is a comfort thing and nothing more and I'm of the opinion that you do it for you and not him. Either way, that's your choice. I might not agree with it and I've explained why but it's your choice so I've no interest in arguing about it as I find you an interesting poster.

Get him a job digging turf, that'll toughen him up.

lazygal

smash wrote: »

Well he's old enough to not be babied by giving him your breast to sloth him whenever he gets upset. Honestly, if he's eating food then the breast is a comfort thing and nothing more and I'm of the opinion that you do it for you and not him. Either way, that's your choice. I might not agree with it and I've explained why but it's your choice so I've no interest in arguing about it as I find you an interesting poster.

It really isn't solely a comfort thing as there are nutritional and health benefits to extended breastfeeding. But at two years of age what's wrong with a bit of comfort as well?

Micky Dolenz

I was never breastfed, well not as a kid anyway. My Ma tells me it wasn't the done thing in those days.

Surely there have been studies of adults who were and were not? Would be an interesting read.

lazygal

Kev W wrote: »

This seems like it would be a brilliant subject for one of those Ask Me Anything threads.

I would be happy to do one on breastfeeding. I never saw myself as someone who'd still be feeding a two year old but here I am and I'm happy to answer people's questions.

lazygal

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I was never breastfed, well not as a kid anyway. My Ma tells me it wasn't the done thing in those days.

Surely there have been studies of adults who were and were not? Would be an interesting read.

There have been studies. There's myriad reasons for health outcomes, but breastfeeding is the best for babies until six months at least, and WHO recommendations are to feed until two years of age.

greenorchard

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I was never breastfed, well not as a kid anyway. My Ma tells me it wasn't the done thing in those days.

Surely there have been studies of adults who were and were not? Would be an interesting read.

Numerous studies have shown there's a range of health benefits - it reduces the child's chances of developing various illnesses & allergies. It's also been shown to reduce the mother's risk of developing breast & ovarian cancers.

esforum

lazygal wrote: »

My first child weaned naturally, at 14 months. Natural weaning occurs when the child is ready to wean. Maybe that's two, maybe its four. Here's some information on it.

http://www.lalecheleague.org/llleaderweb/lv/lvdec00jan01p112.html

I am as well versed on breast feeding as any man can be and I am well aware of the benefits which mostly finished at the 6 month stage which is not coincidently also roughly when a child is ready for solid food. You are coming across in this thread as one of those people who thinks they know everything about a subject and need to educate the others. I can google all day long and find a lot of sites that will say 2 is too old.

If a child at 2 is still showing no signs then it may not self wean for the simple reason that its no longer about food or sustinance but a habit / comfort thing. One which mammy is supporting. the child may possible see it as a bonding event and be reluctant to lose that. Thats not a dig at you in case it reads like it, just possible alternatives.

Its no different to a soother and as I stated and you ignored, nappies. there comes a time when its in the childs interest for the adult parent to make decisions.

I know a woman that breast feeds a 4 year old, trust me you dont want to be that person. Hes a nice kid but social skills and outward behaviour are very lacking. Tellingly the mother admits she wants him to remain a baby as long as possible being the last.

lazygal

esforum wrote: »

I am as well versed on breast feeding as any man can be and I am well aware of the benefits which mostly finished at the 6 month stage which is not coincidently also roughly when a child is ready for solid food. You are coming across in this thread as one of those people who thinks they know everything about a subject and need to educate the others. I can google all day long and find a lot of sites that will say 2 is too old.

If a child at 2 is still showing no signs then it may not self wean for the simple reason that its no longer about food or sustinance but a habit / comfort thing. One which mammy is supporting. the child may possible see it as a bonding event and be reluctant to lose that. Thats not a dig at you in case it reads like it, just possible alternatives.

Its no different to a soother and as I stated and you ignored, nappies. there comes a time when its in the childs interest for the adult parent to make decisions.

I know a woman that breast feeds a 4 year old, trust me you dont want to be that person. Hes a nice kid but social skills and outward behaviour are very lacking. Tellingly the mother admits she wants him to remain a baby as long as possible being the last.

I can leave him overnight with my parents without an issue. He can cope fine without me when I am in work-I was back in full time work when both my children were 11 months old. I don't need dire warnings about other mothers and their breastfeeding experiences because what works for one mother and child won't work for another. I have friends who never breastfeed for many reasons and others who did it and hated it and others who's children weaned at three and a half. There's no one best way of breastfeeding, but it is recommended by the WHO to feed until a child is two years of age.

Micky Dolenz

lazygal wrote: »

There have been studies. There's myriad reasons for health outcomes, but breastfeeding is the best for babies until six months at least, and WHO recommendations are to feed until two years of age.

greenorchard wrote: »

Numerous studies have shown there's a range of health benefits - it reduces the child's chances of developing various illnesses & allergies. It's also been shown to reduce the mother's risk of developing breast & ovarian cancers.

There will be obvious health benefits alright. Everything about it is a good idea, getting fed from the body who grew you, just screams right.

I'm more interested in the social differences if any. Do adult men view breasts in a different way. I suppose it would only apply to kids who were breastfed long term.

One eyed Jack

osarusan wrote: »

But you didn't leave the answers. You've obviously answered them from your perspective. You've said any number of times on this thread that this woman was being inconsiderate.

So please tell us, prior to the stareoff with the other customer happening, what exactly was she doing that you deem to be inconsiderate and attention seeking?

If she chooses to breastfeed in public, she's already considering herself over other people, and I don't have any issue with that, because she has to feed her child. It's when she decided to look around to see who's looking at her, and then engages in a stare-off, that I would say she was attention seeking. She needn't have bothered getting into a staring match, and you can come back and say the other woman shouldn't have been staring at her, but we can only control our own behaviour, we can't realistically control the thoughts and behaviour of other people around us.

lazygal wrote: »

But they are for feeding children. Again, you are projecting your feelings onto breastfeeding. You never told me how I could breastfeed considerately either. Why would you hope many women feel the same as you about breasts?

Breasts aren't for feeding children, that's what mammary glands are for. Men have breasts too, and under certain circumstances can lactate too. I'm not projecting my feelings about breastfeeding on this one, on this occasion I'm suggesting that not everyone shares your reductionist thinking that breasts are solely for feeding children (which they aren't, at all). There are many people in Western society who attach far more value to women's breasts than simply serving a functional, biological purpose.

I'm sure you're aware of women who have had mastectomies and the thought of you suggesting that well they were only for feeding children anyway would leave those women reeling. In those circumstances I'm sure you'd be capable of showing consideration for someone else besides yourself, and that's all it comes down to really. It's not simply about breastfeeding, it's about having consideration for other people. How you do that? Well that's up to you, I'm sure you're able to use your best judgement.

eviltwin wrote: »

When you are a nursing mother that is their primary function. Especially when you have a child who is hungry and getting cross. A woman on a plane can't exactly do much else but feed the child can she? What's more offensive to you, a glimpse of breast or a screaming baby?

I don't think of a woman's breasts solely in terms of their functionality. I do that with inanimate objects. That's why I don't think in reductionist terms. I find such thinking leaves me cold tbh. If a woman is on a plane and she needs to breastfeed her child, but I can see she's self-conscious about it, I'm not going to lean over to her and say "Oh don't mind me, you go right ahead", because that's likely to make her even more self-conscious IMO. If her baby needs food, then that should be her priority, and not who's looking at her while she's doing it. I certainly wouldn't be among them anyway, and a screaming baby wouldn't bother me at all either. I'm well used to babies crying, never bothered me in the slightest, because I don't expect babies to have the same consideration for other people as I would expect adults to have for other people.

It's just my opinion that actions like the woman in the OP has done, aren't about breastfeeding, they're about drawing attention to themselves, and that's excusable in children, just not so much in adults. Each scenario is a judgement call that will depend upon context. If a woman wants to breastfeed in public - by all means, have at it, but then looking around to see who's looking at her, and getting into stare-down matches? That's just silly, and I wouldn't give her the attention she craves. I'd simply carry on about my own business.

NachoBusiness

Kev W wrote: »

If your entire argument is "they're only looking for attention" then you have no argument.

Seriously, why do you keep shifting user's argument regarding certain women, to being about how all women? You are deliberately trying to suggest that people have an issue will public breastfeeding, period, why do you keep doing this? Wouldn't be because it's easier for you to do so than actually try and address points being made. Frame your retorts in such a manner and you might come across as wanting to have a discussion rather than just get your scalp.

Unless you can demonstrate how the desire for attention is an inherently bad thing.

I have just made it clear to you that in and of itself, it's not. Like I said, if they want to start a public exhibitionist website, let them at it, I'll check it out but when you use your children as part of that attention seeking, it's contemptible. That goes not just for the woman in the OP, but also all the way from appearing in Channel 4 docus (or other media on extending breastfeeding) to making overtly sexual YouTube videos regarding the same. Get the attention you crave on your own. No need to exploit your children in the process.

intheclouds

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I'm more interested in the social differences if any. Do adult men view breasts in a different way. I suppose it would only apply to kids who were breastfed long term.

There may also be impacts for children who saw mammy breastfeeding younger children in the family, so they had it normalised by seeing it going on throughout their childhood.

I am of the era where women didnt breastfeed and so never saw it happening at all as a child. I remember being a little shocked the first time I saw public breastfeeding.

One eyed Jack

esforum wrote: »

You are coming across in this thread as one of those people who thinks they know everything about a subject and need to educate the others.

I think that comment is very unfair tbh. I'm glad to hear lazygal's experience of breastfeeding because it is educational, and I'm glad she's chosen to educate others, she's doing a hell of a lot more to educate people about breastfeeding and encouraging other women to breastfeed than the woman in the OP has done IMO.

Yeah_Right

Kev W wrote: »

By that same token:

"Oh no! someone is feeding their child! I must make sure that they know that I do not approve! It is absolutely my business how people feed their children!"

Cool. Glad we both agree that they are both morons and should just get on with their day.

Yeah_Right

eviltwin wrote: »

When you are a nursing mother that is their primary function. Especially when you have a child who is hungry and getting cross. A woman on a plane can't exactly do much else but feed the child can she? What's more offensive to you, a glimpse of breast or a screaming baby?

The screaming baby. Definitely the screaming baby is way more offensive. I don't care if the mother has to get completely nude as long as she stops the baby screaming. Especially on a plane or anywhere else I'm trapped with them.

Samaris

It is a tad unfair to assume (although I freely admit I didn't read the article, so if it was a stunt, well, fair enough to complain) that she was attention-seeking or looking for someone to be offended so she could glare just because she noticed someone. I rather suspect that if I'd been breastfeeding for a while, I would be inclined to do the normal eyeballing out a window, looking at things that attract my attention (without staring at people!) and indeed probably still pick up when someone's scowling at me or making gestures at me. One does get that prickle at the back of their neck if they feel someone eyeballing them. Well, unless one is off in their own little world, which admittedly does happen to me too.

The long and short of it is that we only have this woman's account to go by, and I don't find it particularly unbelievable. I've had conversations with people breastfeeding and found it no different to if they're rocking a child or burping it. It's just one of those things.

It's also a tad victim-blaming to insist that the victim of the unwanted attention -should- just rise above it. Of course we all prefer to think we rise above other people's rudeness, but in truth, I'm sure we've all had occasions where something in our brain goes "enough is enough" and either made a comment, or eyed back, or otherwise indicated in some way that the unwanted attention has been noted and is being considered to be very bad-mannered.

osarusan

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If she chooses to breastfeed in public, she's already considering herself over other people, and I don't have any issue with that, because she has to feed her child. It's when she decided to look around to see who's looking at her, and then engages in a stare-off, that I would say she was attention seeking. She needn't have bothered getting into a staring match, and you can come back and say the other woman shouldn't have been staring at her, but we can only control our own behaviour, we can't realistically control the thoughts and behaviour of other people around us.

So she just went into the cafe with no attention-seeking motives? She did nothing inconsiderate until after the woman stared at her?

And therefore your entire argument that is premised on 'if you are inconsiderate of others, you lose the right to complain when they are inconsiderate to you' is rendered irrelevant as she had done nothing inconsiderate and hadn't lost the right to be upset by the staring.

Samaris

Aha, that article I linked a few pages back turns out to be a hoax story. Okay-doke, I hold up my hands when I'm incorrect!

There have been some rather rotten incidents against parents breastfeeding their children though. I can only say I'm relieved that that wasn't one of them!

Kev W

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Seriously, why do you keep shifting user's argument regarding certain women, to being about how all women? You are deliberately trying to suggest that people have an issue will public breastfeeding, period, why do you keep doing this? Wouldn't be because it's easier for you to do so than actually try and address points being made. Frame your retorts in such a manner and you might come across as wanting to have a discussion rather than just get your scalp.



I have just made it clear to you that in and of itself, it's not. Like I said, if they want to start a public exhibitionist website, let them at it, I'll check it out but when you use your children as part of that attention seeking, it's contemptible. That goes not just for the woman in the OP, but also all the way from appearing in Channel 4 docus (or other media on extending breastfeeding) to making overtly sexual YouTube videos regarding the same. Get the attention you crave on your own. No need to exploit your children in the process.

Are you reading my posts from another dimension? I never said a word about "all women" even in the part you quoted!

You're making all kinds of assumptions and wild accusations and frankly I'm not going to bother with your nonsense anymore.

One eyed Jack

osarusan wrote: »

So she just went into the cafe with no attention-seeking motives?

It's hard to say IMO, but given that she thinks she was making a stand on behalf of women everywhere who breastfeed, I wouldn't put it past her to have thought she was conducting some "social experiment" to make a point. Remember that "10 hours in NYC" video? Those sorts of things can tend to make a person very cynical of a person's motives.

She did nothing inconsiderate until after the woman stared at her?

Hard to say if she was even being stared at without evidence, a photograph would have done, and no, I have no reason just to take her word for it when it's clear from the photo she was going for maximum exposure (no pun intended), not for breastfeeding in public, but for staring another woman down.

(What she was hoping to achieve by that, other than confrontation, is beyond me tbh, as we don't even see the other woman in the pic, just other diners around her who have no interest in her)

And therefore your entire argument that is premised on 'if you are inconsiderate of others, you lose the right to complain when they are inconsiderate to you' is rendered irrelevant as she had done nothing inconsiderate and hadn't lost the right to be upset by the staring.

Judging by her attitude, it's safe to assume IMO that she had no consideration for anyone else but herself, even going so far as to have her friend take a picture of her staring another woman down so she could post it on her social media page, or her blog another poster mentioned or whatever. She never had the right in the first place to be upset by someone staring, because they're not actually doing anything to her. It's intimidating, and it's rude, and it's unnecessary, but like the woman choosing to breastfeed in public - it's not illegal.

I'd have every sympathy for a woman whom I thought didn't set out to draw unwanted attention to herself, but this particular woman IMO, isn't that woman. She's anything but the poster girl for breastfeeding she thinks she is IMO, and the women who have contributed to this thread and given their own experiences of breastfeeding have done more to educate people and promote breastfeeding IMO than this woman has done by making herself the focus of attention.



In my opinion of course (I really shouldn't have to premise or finish every post with that, it should be understood).

wakka12

Obviously for attention, we all know having your tit out is a bit inappropriate despite it being used to feed a child. If one of my family members did it Id be embarassed, but its up to people if they want to. Im not going to stare at them or make them feel bad about it, its fine, I think of it the same way I would seeing somebody pick their nose in public. Don't particularly recommend but doesn't offend either

Neyite

Breastfeeding is brilliant tbh. And some of the science behind it is fascinating.

Breastmilk:

• Helps a mother heal quicker post partum, and helps her lose the baby weight quicker.
• Saves thousands on infant formula.
• Babies crying stimulates milk production. If a baby cries, its mother starts to leak milk. Babies will go through phases of fussyness and crying more just prior to a growth spurt, which will increase milk supply so that there is supply there to meet demand.
• Produces a feel-good hormone in both baby and mother and helps sleep.
• Is unique to every single woman, and differs at different times of the day too.
• It also differs from newborn to toddler, delivering tailored nutrition.
• Has two parts to it - foremilk which is watery and thirst quenching, then hindmilk which is richer and fattier and fills the baby up.
• A woman only produces as much or as little as she needs.

bee06

I have to say this thread is fascinating. When I saw the blog in the OP when it came up on my Facebook last week my first thought was a cynical one. I never thought it would generate 40 odd pages of discussion because to me breastfeeding is just a natural thing most women do when they have a baby. I'm the oldest of five and my mom breastfeed us all so it never struck me as unusual or embarrassing etc. To have someone liken it to picking your nose in public is a bizarre statement to me.

To the men who find it embarrassing or weird I'm curious to know how you would feel if/when the mother of your child was breastfeeding?

lazygal

bee06 wrote: »

To the men who find it embarrassing or weird I'm curious to know how you would feel if/when the mother of your child was breastfeeding?

My husband has said before I was breastfeeding, he would have thought things like 'if you're old enough to ask for it, time to give it up' and that people feeding a toddler were a bit weird. But now he's seen all the benefits for us and our children he's a huge breastfeeding advocate.

One eyed Jack

bee06 wrote: »

I have to say this thread is fascinating. When I saw the blog in the OP when it came up on my Facebook last week my first thought was a cynical one. I never thought it would generate 40 odd pages of discussion because to me breastfeeding is just a natural thing most women do when they have a baby. I'm the oldest of five and my mom breastfeed us all so it never struck me as unusual or embarrassing etc. To have someone liken it to picking your nose in public is a bizarre statement to me.

To the men who find it embarrassing or weird I'm curious to know how you would feel if/when the mother of your child was breastfeeding?

I'm more curious to know how would you phrase that question given that according to the woman in the article, it was another woman who she claims looked at her with disgust.

I don't know if it can really be said it's the most natural thing most women do when they have a baby as clearly there are many women (including the woman in the article) who seem to have great difficulty with breastfeeding.

I think there are definitely ways of having open discussions about breastfeeding to dispel some of the myths and misguided notions about breastfeeding, but the overwhelming feeling that this woman was just engaging in a bit of self-promotion is one that I just can't get out of my head tbh.

People objecting to women breastfeeding in public is pretty rare in my experience, obviously even more rare than women who actually choose to breastfeed in public, and I think personally, that has more to do with women themselves simply being too shy to breastfeed in public because they think other people are going to be looking at them.

The woman in the article did nothing to dispel this myth, in fact all she did was reinforce it IMO.

mynameis905

wakka12 wrote: »

Obviously for attention, we all know having your tit out is a bit inappropriate despite it being used to feed a child. If one of my family members did it Id be embarassed, but its up to people if they want to. Im not going to stare at them or make them feel bad about it, its fine, I think of it the same way I would seeing somebody pick their nose in public. Don't particularly recommend but doesn't offend either

No it's not. Grow up ffs.

lazygal

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don't know if it can really be said it's the most natural thing most women do when they have a baby as clearly there are many women (including the woman in the article) who seem to have great difficulty with breastfeeding.

Why do you think 'natural' means 'easy'? Giving birth is natural, but far from easy for many. I found breastfeeding tougher than recovery from my c section first time around. I had a lot of difficulties, but I am so glad I worked through them and was able to cope much more easily second time around.

Hammer89

I've had my cousin whip her tit out in my living room before and it made me extremely uncomfortable. I've got no problems with the act itself, but given that it was just the three of us in a small enough room, she could've asked if it would be okay.

lazygal

Hammer89 wrote: »

I've had my cousin whip her tit out in my living room before and it made me extremely uncomfortable. I've got no problems with the act itself, but given that it was just the three of us in a small enough room, she could've asked if it would be okay.

Would someone who was bottle feeding have to ask if it was ok?

mynameis905

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I wouldn't put it past her to have thought she was conducting some "social experiment" to make a point.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I have no reason just to take her word for it when it's clear from the photo she was going for maximum exposure

One eyed Jack wrote: »

by her attitude, it's safe to assume IMO that she had no consideration for anyone else but herself

This is your classic posting style isn't it? Refuse to discuss the issue at hand and instead go off on a tangent about how you really don't like 'attention seekers' and try to discredit the source as much as you possibly can.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don't know if it can really be said it's the most natural thing most women do when they have a baby as clearly there are many women (including the woman in the article) who seem to have great difficulty with breastfeeding.

Another sly little dig at breastfeeding. "I've no problem with breastfeeding but is it really the most natural?"

Of course it's the most natural way of feeding an infant. The female body has evolved and developed mammary glands for the express purpose of feeding. It wasn't until the 1920s that formula milk became widely used.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I think there are definitely ways of having open discussions about breastfeeding to dispel some of the myths and misguided notions about breastfeeding

We're having a discussion but most of the myths and misguided notions on this thread are coming from your posts.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Pretty much every woman I've been around who's breastfed did so without making a song and a dance and a feminist statement. It's natural, it's good for the baby, this business of semi smothering the child as its being fed is unfair as is expecting a small baby to be fed in a bathroom.
However, show a little bit of decorum for your surroundings. It can be absolutely done discreetly without impacting your or your babies comfort. Why not make an effort to make everyone feel comfortable within reason?

One eyed Jack

lazygal wrote: »

Why do you think 'natural' means 'easy'? Giving birth is natural, but far from easy for many. I found breastfeeding tougher than recovery from my c section first time around. I had a lot of difficulties, but I am so glad I worked through them and was able to cope much more easily second time around.

I think lazygal in fairness most people would interpret something that is said to be natural to come easy to someone, in this context the assumption is that breastfeeding being natural means it's easy for most women. We're actually making the same point, but in different ways, and I already posted my wife's experience of her difficulties with breastfeeding and all around her people saying "most natural thing in the world", which made her feel like a failure as a mother because she couldn't do it, and every time she tried and failed, it only made her feel worse because for something that's supposed to be so natural, clearly for some people, it's anything but.

I'm not even going to comment on the birth tbh, jaysus even remembering it made me shudder there tbh! That's one I'd have preferred to stay outside the delivery room for, but I figured it's the "done thing" nowadays for the father to be present. It really wasn't necessary for me to be in the room, at all! I'd have much preferred to be outside smoking a cigar tbh :pac:

Hammer89

lazygal wrote: »

Would someone who was bottle feeding have to ask if it was ok?

Not unless she planned on doing it naked.