Breastfeeding Mom in restaurant stare off...

ThinkProgress

sup_dude wrote: »

Breast milk would be more sterile than a glass of cows milk.

Ya learn something new everyday. Tnx!

Senna

Has one single woman said they would also breastfeed in the same manner in a restaurant?

Do whatever you want but don't expect no reaction when you choose the method of feed that displays the most breast.

BTW, she looks like a complete attention seeker.

Panthro

I see a boob, wooooo!

Ave Sodalis

ThinkProgress wrote:

Ya learn something new everyday. Tnx!

No problem unless the woman herself has a problem, then breast milk should be sterile. However, if she has something wrong, she would either not be breast feeding, or it doesn't matter if she breast feeds or not.

Senna wrote:

Do whatever you want but don't expect no reaction when you choose the method of feed that displays the most breast.

And why is that?

Qualitymark

In grownup countries like France feeding your babies as nature intended is normal.

lazygal

ThinkProgress wrote: »

Would breastfeeding in certain circumstances not be considered unhygienic?

Like in a restaurant/cafe... something like that? (Bodily fluids + food?)

Genuine question.

Nope. Children suckle the milk directly into their mouths and swallow instantly.

I've breastfed in loads of places, from restaurants to a funeral. Never once got a reaction and I've been breastfeeding for over three years with my two children.

Panthro

La Fenetre wrote: »

Cheaper than hooters and better food too.
The great thing is you can now stare as long as you want at their tits, just as long as you let them stare back. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Them staring back?!
No way! But that's a clear violation of my rights and my personal melarky what's its.
Not on my watch, hell no.
No sir eeeeee

Panthro

lazygal wrote: »

Nope. Children suckle the milk directly into their mouths and swallow instantly.

I've breastfed in loads of places, from restaurants to a funeral. Never once got a reaction and I've been breastfeeding for over three years with my two children.

Just so we're all on the same page....
You breastfed your baby at the funeral, right....?!

lazygal

Panthro wrote: »

Just so we're all on the same page....
You breastfed your baby at the funeral, right....?!

Yes. Like I said. Did you not believe me?

La Fenetre

Panthro wrote: »

Just so we're all on the same page....
You breastfed your baby at the funeral, right....?!

There's nothing quite beats getting your tits out a funeral for a bit of attention.
That yank in the OP is clearly an amateur.

lazygal

La Fenetre wrote: »

There's nothing like getting your tits out a funeral for a bit of attention.

There's nothing like using the phrase getting your tits out in the context of breastfeeding to show you haven't a clue how breastfeeding works.

One eyed Jack

mynameis905 wrote: »

This is what I said:

This is what you misquoted:

For the record I have no problem with someone displaying their whole breast while feeding their child but please do not edit my post and then quote it to suit your own argument.

For the same record, I have no problem with a woman displaying their breasts for any reason, I have a problem with someone claiming that they're being stared at in disgust, and then instead of showing us this person who they claim was staring at them in disgust, she shows us a picture of her breastfeeding her child in what has to be a very uncomfortable manner. There are recommended ways to breastfeed in public, such as pulling up her top so as not to expose the whole breast when only exposing the nipple is necessary.

The reason I edited your post was simply to highlight how your own use of language was taking what I had posted out of context and playing down what didn't suit you, and playing up what did, putting your own spin on things and ignoring context and so on.

By all means more women should be encouraged to breastfeed, but there's no necessity to encourage women to whip out the whole breast to do so, when the baby only needs to be attached to the nipple.

lazygal

One eyed jack sometimes women and children need to feed in different ways. Others sensitive reactions to me feeding my children in the most suitable manner possible weren't and aren't going to affect how I breastfeed. Breastfeeding is how babies and children should be fed. Regardless of how other people think it's whipping out a breast.

Ave Sodalis

One eyed Jack wrote:

For the same record, I have no problem with a woman displaying their breasts for any reason, I have a problem with someone claiming that they're being stared at in disgust, and then instead of showing us this person who they claim was staring at them in disgust, she shows us a picture of her breastfeeding her child in what has to be a very uncomfortable manner. There are recommended ways to breastfeed in public, such as pulling up her top so as not to expose the whole breast when only exposing the nipple is necessary.

One eyed Jack, you are aware that you've contradicted yourself here?

La Fenetre

lazygal wrote: »

There's nothing like using the phrase getting your tits out in the context of breastfeeding to show you haven't a clue how breastfeeding works.

You missed a trick by not tweeting a pic of yourself with your tit out, staring daggers at the deceased's relatives at their loved one's funeral.

lazygal

La Fenetre wrote: »

You missed a trick by not tweeting a pic of yourself with your tit out, staring daggers at the deceased's relatives at their loved one's funeral.

Lolz. Yes getting my tits out at a funeral for attention was much more important than feeding my child so he didn't scream the place down.

I thought you were prolife? How much more pro-life can I get than not only gestating two children but using my breasts to feed them for years after the birth?

One eyed Jack

sup_dude wrote: »

And why is that?

Because it's unusual?

Of course anything unusual or out of the ordinary is going to draw attention, perhaps even more so if the intent is to draw attention.

Could she have breastfed without exposing her whole breast? Of course.

Does she have to? Of course not, but then she doesn't have an expectation that people shouldn't stare when she's doing something that she knows people are going to stare at her for doing.

That's not doing women who breastfeed any favours, because most women who breastfeed don't expose their whole breast when feeding.

mynameis905

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The reason I edited your post was simply to highlight how your own use of language was taking what I had posted out of context and playing down what didn't suit you, and playing up what did, putting your own spin on things and ignoring context and so on.

Whether you agree with my posting or not, don't you dare edit someone else's post.

One eyed Jack

sup_dude wrote: »

One eyed Jack, you are aware that you've contradicted yourself here?

I'm actually not aware of any contradiction there tbh. By all means a woman can expose her breasts for whatever reason she wants.

Suggesting that there are better ways to breastfeed in public, doesn't contradict that statement.

mynameis905

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There are recommended ways to breastfeed in public, such as pulling up her top so as not to expose the whole breast when only exposing the nipple is necessary.

Recommended by who exactly?

Ave Sodalis

One eyed Jack wrote:

That's not doing women who breastfeed any favours, because most women who breastfeed don't expose their whole breast when feeding.

A woman should be able to take off her top to breastfeed if she needs to. This whole "cover yourself as much as possible" is not doing anything to remove the issues surrounding breast feeding.

Ave Sodalis

One eyed Jack wrote:

I'm actually not aware of any contradiction there tbh. By all means a woman can expose her breasts for whatever reason she wants.

Except on the other hand you're saying she should cover up as much as possible.

La Fenetre

lazygal wrote: »

Lolz. Yes getting my tits out at a funeral for attention was much more important than feeding my child so he didn't scream the place down.

For maximum effect, you should have got the father to whip his lad out and piss in a bottle, at the same time, I mean nature calls after all !

lazygal

mynameis905 wrote: »

Recommended by who exactly?

People who've never breastfed a baby or toddler.

lazygal

La Fenetre wrote: »

You should have got the father to whip his lad out and piss in a bottle, at the same time, I mean nature calls after all !

Yes. Feeding a baby and an adult urinating are the same thing.

La Fenetre

lazygal wrote: »

Yes. Feeding a baby and an adult urinating are the same thing.

What wrong with answering the call of nature there and then ?

lazygal

La Fenetre wrote: »

What wrong with answering the call of nature there and then ?

Lolz. You've some odd ideas if you think me breastfeeding and my husband needing to urinate are the same thing.
Is breastfeeding frowned upon by prolifers?

La Fenetre

lazygal wrote: »

Lolz. You've some odd ideas if you think me breastfeeding and my husband needing to urinate are the same thing.
Is breastfeeding frowned upon by prolifers?

No it isn't, I think it was a great move. Why doesn't your husband whip out the lad and answer the call of nature there and then as well, what's wrong with that ? Are pro abortionists a bit squeamish ?

BettePorter

It's all about perspective and time and place really. For instance .... if u go on holiday with ur husband and his mates you'd have no problem lying on a lounger in ur two piece with ur hubs best mate standing next to u in his shorts. Yet if you came down the stairs in ur bra and knickers and he was standing in the hall ud lose your life and never live it down!

Basically there's a time and place for everything .... I don't care if the woman next to me takes out her breast to feed her hungry child. Likewise I don't care that the guy at the opposite table is eating his meal like a cement mixer on full power..... bit id prefer he ate it with his mouth closed to be honest. IMO the videoed woman in question was right to feed..... but cancelled it out by being one of 'those' ppl who insist on being outraged for a cause that exists only in their head.

mynameis905

La Fenetre wrote: »

No it isn't, I think it was a great move. Why doesn't your husband whip out the lad and answer the call of nature there and then as well, what's wrong with that ? Are pro abortionists a bit squeamish ?

Because her husband is a grown man capable of feeding himself and using the bathroom unaided. An infant cannot be expected to conform to the same standards as an adult. If a child is hungry they need to be fed, if they need to go to the bathroom they'll use a nappy until they're fully toilet trained. What part of this are you having problems grasping?

Azalea

La Fenetre wrote: »

Why doesn't your husband whip out the lad and answer the call of nature there and then as well, what's wrong with that ?

It's not feeding a hungry baby. He can go to the toilet - it would be an awful mess for staff to clean up too if he just urinated in a restaurant or whatever, at the table.

One eyed Jack

lazygal wrote: »

One eyed jack sometimes women and children need to feed in different ways. Others sensitive reactions to me feeding my children in the most suitable manner possible weren't and aren't going to affect how I breastfeed. Breastfeeding is how babies and children should be fed. Regardless of how other people think it's whipping out a breast.

Exactly lazygal, as it should be, and I truly wish more women had your attitude. But the woman in the OP doesn't have your attitude, she's more concerned with someone staring at her while she's breastfeeding, and then still not feeling the validation, she decides to upload a pic of herself breastfeeding to social media amongst claims that one woman tried to 'shame' her.

My wife wasn't able to breastfeed when she had our child, in spite of repeated attempts by the nurse to try and get her to breastfeed. My wife didn't go on social media and claim that women breastfeeding are trying to 'shame' those who can't (there were plenty of women made her feel like crap about it though), because that would have been silly.

The same case applies to this woman - so someone stared at her while she was breastfeeding, one woman. Did she miss the many other people in the restaurant that weren't staring?

What does that tell us about whether breastfeeding in public is socially acceptable or not when many more people simply don't care, than the minority that do? By making a big deal of it on social media, that's only fostering the perception that they're trying to eradicate - namely that there's no big deal about it. Clearly for them, there is!

La Fenetre

Azalea wrote: »

It's not feeding a hungry baby. He can go to the toilet - it would be an awful mess for staff to clean up too if he just urinated in a restaurant or whatever, at the table.

Why he could easily just wizz in a bottle, he's only answering natures call after all, why shouldn't he do it there and then ? Taking a piss, is the most natural thing in the world.

Ave Sodalis

One eyed Jack wrote:

What does that tell us about whether breastfeeding in public is socially acceptable or not when many more people simply don't care, than the minority that do? By making a big deal of it on social media, that's only fostering the perception that they're trying to eradicate - namely that there's no big deal about it. Clearly for them, there is!

But going by this thread alone, people clearly do care! How many people, yourself included, is of the opinion that women should be as covered up as possible when breastfeeding?

lazygal

La Fenetre wrote: »

Why he could easily just wizz in a bottle, he's only answering natures call after all, why shouldn't he do it there and then ? Taking a piss, is the most natural thing in the world.

You're being deliberately obtuse here. Unless of course you can't see the difference between a hungry baby and an adult who needs to urinate.

One eyed Jack

sup_dude wrote: »

Except on the other hand you're saying she should cover up as much as possible.

I'm not saying a woman should cover them up, I'm saying there's no need to expose more than is necessary, and it's not necessary IMO to expose the whole breast while breastfeeding.

That has nothing to do with modesty or being a prude or anything else, and arguments that suggest that women only have breasts because they need to feed babies, ignores the fact that many women have breasts and don't consider them for functional use only.

Of course breasts are sexualised in any society, because they are considered secondary sexual characteristics, they're not just a utilitarian milk delivery system and I'd hate to view a woman's breasts in such reductionist terms.

Azalea

La Fenetre wrote: »

Why he could easily just wizz in a bottle, he's only answering natures call after all, why shouldn't he do it there and then ? Taking a piss, is the most natural thing in the world.

It is, but it's not the same as feeding a baby.
Breastfeeding in public can be done without exposing the breast - I can understand people feeling uncomfortable if she exposes her entire breast but can't understand an issue with women breastfeeding with the breast covered.

La Fenetre

Azalea wrote: »

I can understand people feeling uncomfortable if she exposes her entire breast but can't understand an issue with women breastfeeding with the breast covered.

Not at all, the more tit out the better.
Makes a boring funeral much more interesting.

lazygal

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'm not saying a woman should cover them up, I'm saying there's no need to expose more than is necessary, and it's not necessary IMO to expose the whole breast while breastfeeding.

That has nothing to do with modesty or being a prude or anything else, and arguments that suggest that women only have breasts because they need to feed babies, ignores the fact that many women have breasts and don't consider them for functional use only.

Of course breasts are sexualised in any society, because they are considered secondary sexual characteristics, they're not just a utilitarian milk delivery system and I'd hate to view a woman's breasts in such reductionist terms.

Breasts, babies and feeding are different for everyone. Skin contact is really important in the early days and if the baby needs the whole breast out to feed so be it. You might have views on how you think women should breastfeed but that does not mean we all fall into those rules or guidelines. Plus you might have an awkward bra on or the top isn't easy to access and I'm damned if I'm getting a new wardrobe so someone isn't freaked out because my toddler needs to feed.

lazygal

La Fenetre wrote: »

Not at all, the more tit out the better.
Makes a boring funeral much more interesting.

I can spot the only tit out on this thread anyway.
Is the prolife position anti breastfeeding?

Ave Sodalis

One eyed Jack wrote:

Of course breasts are sexualised in any society, because they are considered secondary sexual characteristics, they're not just a utilitarian milk delivery system and I'd hate to view a woman's breasts in such reductionist terms.

But a utilitarian milk delivery system is exactly what they're being used for when breast feedimg and shouldn't be thought of as anything else under the circumstances.

La Fenetre

lazygal wrote: »

I can spot the only tit out on this thread anyway.

Don't be so hard on yourself. I'm sure some people at the funeral enjoyed it.

lazygal wrote: »

Is the prolife position anti breastfeeding?

Not at all, are the pro abortion lobby anti nature when nature calls ?

One eyed Jack

sup_dude wrote: »

But going by this thread alone, people clearly do care! How many people, yourself included, is of the opinion that women should be as covered up as possible when breastfeeding?

I don't think people care so much about breastfeeding as much as they do that this woman is making a big deal of the fact that someone stared at her while she was breastfeeding because of the way she was breastfeeding.

Was it necessary for her to expose her whole breast? No, it wasn't, IMO. I've seen plenty of women breastfeeding in public who didn't feel it was necessary for the whole world to know she was breastfeeding. There's no shame in it, but it's also no reason to be expecting that everyone should see it as this great symbol of motherhood either.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

It's a pity that society has identified breasts as sexual objects. There should be a problem with breastfeeding, but there is. Do we just hold our hands up and say "fcuk it" and do what feel is right? Or do we start educating people and hope that future generations are not as narrow minded as we are now?

The offended person is not completely at fault. They have been educated a certain way, what is right and what is wrong. Sure they have a choice, but a leopard can't change it's spots.

I wish you could breastfeed when you wanted, but it's not really the case. I mean, we have been covering up our bits and bobs for thousands of years. You can't just change that over night.

eviltwin

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'm not saying a woman should cover them up, I'm saying there's no need to expose more than is necessary, and it's not necessary IMO to expose the whole breast while breastfeeding.

That has nothing to do with modesty or being a prude or anything else, and arguments that suggest that women only have breasts because they need to feed babies, ignores the fact that many women have breasts and don't consider them for functional use only.

Of course breasts are sexualised in any society, because they are considered secondary sexual characteristics, they're not just a utilitarian milk delivery system and I'd hate to view a woman's breasts in such reductionist terms.

Any new mother has to learn to breastfeed. Its the most natural thing in the world but its actually really difficult to master. Its even harder to learn how to do it in a way that no one around you knows what you are doing. Cut mums some slack. No mother I can think of wants to give the public an eyeful of her breasts, she is trying to feed her child as easily as possible and sometimes people see more than they should. Its embarrassing enough dealing with that without someone giving you a hard time. Breasts have a primary function and that is to feed infants, leave mothers alone to do that. Of course if someone is showing everything in order to prove a point then fire away but how many women actually do this.

greenorchard

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

If we're going to start on necessity then its not necessary to breastfeed your child in public either. You can bottle feed, either with breastmilk or formula.

Pretty much everything is a choice nowadays. We've evolved from huddling together in caves.

Wow, so a breastfeeding mother should feed her baby artificial milk in public rather than feed her baby the way nature intended?

By the way, my baby refuses to drink expressed milk from a bottle & a lot of other breastfed babies are the same. I guess I should stay at home for the next few months for fear of offending people by doing something as unnecessary as feeding my child.

eviltwin

La Fenetre wrote: »

Not at all, the more tit out the better.
Makes a boring funeral much more interesting.

Stay classy dude

lazygal

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don't think people care so much about breastfeeding as much as they do that this woman is making a big deal of the fact that someone stared at her while she was breastfeeding because of the way she was breastfeeding.

Was it necessary for her to expose her whole breast? No, it wasn't, IMO. I've seen plenty of women breastfeeding in public who didn't feel it was necessary for the whole world to know she was breastfeeding. There's no shame in it, but it's also no reason to be expecting that everyone should see it as this great symbol of motherhood either.

Just because you've seen x or y or think breastfeeding works a certain way doesn't mean it's like that for every mother and child.

inocybe

eviltwin wrote: »

Any new mother has to learn to breastfeed. Its the most natural thing in the world but its actually really difficult to master. Its even harder to learn how to do it in a way that no one around you knows what you are doing. Cut mums some slack. No mother I can think of wants to give the public an eyeful of her breasts, she is trying to feed her child as easily as possible and sometimes people see more than they should. Its embarrassing enough dealing with that without someone giving you a hard time. Breasts have a primary function and that is to feed infants, leave mothers alone to do that. Of course if someone is showing everything in order to prove a point then fire away but how many women actually do this.

My baby used to make slurpy noises when he didn't latch on properly, that was fun in public :P

Ave Sodalis

One eyed Jack wrote:

Was it necessary for her to expose her whole breast? No, it wasn't, IMO. I've seen plenty of women breastfeeding in public who didn't feel it was necessary for the whole world to know she was breastfeeding. There's no shame in it, but it's also no reason to be expecting that everyone should see it as this great symbol of motherhood either.

So... they shouldn't have to cover up... but they should cover up. You still don't see the contradiction?