Friday, July 28, 2006

Breastfeeding in PUBLIC?!?!!? And on The Cover of a MAGAZINE?????!!!!

Okay. So I saw this here article on CNN today. It was also mentioned in the mamasays newsgroup.
Okay.

"I was shocked to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine." One says.

You must be equally shocked, then, to see your own breast while nursing your own child.

In truth, this whole 'uproar' doesn't surprise me at all. We are 'talking' about BabyTalk magazine here. It is very mainstream. You are more likely to find that in most doctor's offices than Mothering, where you see breastfeeding babes all over the place, unabashedly.

"A breast is a breast. It's a sexual thing." One Texan woman says.

Hey, I didn't know they were just sexual!!!

The editor of BabyTalk made a comment that strikes to the core of it all:
"There's a huge Puritanical streak in America..."

If that ain't the truth, I don't know what is.

Anyone else care to respond??? An open invitation......

4 comments:

KrisUnderwood said...

i really wanted to do a more put-together post.

this was written as i was still sputtering from the idiotic comments from the readers of BabyTalk as well as the fact that breasts really ARE just sexual.....

MapleMama said...

I've heard the magazine has gotten over 500 negative letters re: the cover. UNBELIEVABLE!

Flossing your teeth is recommended by the American Dental Association. Breastfeeding is recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics. Yet - would they get 500 complaints for a cover photo of someone flossing their teeth? I'm just saying.

Lora said...

Breasts on magazine covers...Let's see? So far i have seen jessica simpson's, janet jacksons, britney spears', and many more. What were they using their breasts for? Milking something, I guess. The pocket books of America perhaps? Now, that's gross.

KrisUnderwood said...

maplemama-first I would just like to say i love the name you chose as username. I dont know, it just struck me as very lovely sounding.

According to CNN and the article on CANOE (and just about everywhere else), the magazine got a whopping 700 letters, 98% of them having something negative to say. 700.
In that same article (CANOE), in a poll of 4,000 BabyTalk readers, 1/4 of the responses were negative, calling it(the cover) inapproprate.

Yeah- I doubt it about the teeth bit.

Lora-I dont know of any fashion magazine, or teen magazine or that matter, that doesnt show a little bit-if not more-skin. How ironic is it that it is acceptable to show that kind of stuff-stuff that could be labeled as soft porn, mind you-and not acceptable to show a woman nursing her baby, the most natural thing to do?
I very much agree with your 'Milking Point.'

Again-I go back to that quote:
"There is a huge puritanical streak in America..."
And THAT is what is dangerous.

Perhaps I should have made this into an entire post....