Skip to comments.Time magazine cover -- forget the breast, what about the boy?
Posted on 05/11/2012 11:54:39 AM PDT by servo1969
Jamie Lynn Grumet, the 26-year-old mother featured on the cover of Time magazine breastfeeding her 3-year-old son, has done more this week than become the poster woman for attachment parenting, the sometimes laudable movement that advises parents to be physically and emotionally available and responsive to their children. She has shown the limits of such a concept, and the ways in which it can be twisted into a bizarre, contemptible caricature of itself.
Grumet is a model, and models have to have at least healthy dose of narcissism (television journalists like me, too, by the way). But I fear Grumet has more than whats healthy.
Because she thought nothing of becoming far more famous than she ever was or ever would have been by getting naked on the cover of Time using her son as a propletting him, in fact, look right into the camera and be completely recognizable while sucking her nipple. He may never be better-known for anything than for being a breastfeeding 3-year-old on the cover of a national magazine.
When he enters school later in his young life he may be ridiculed for it. And these realities hint at a woman who could (and I have not evaluated her) have very poor boundaries and be willing or likely not only to nurture a child, but to absorb him, deny him his personhood and render him no more than her appendage.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
See, Grumet loves being photographed. And she apparently loves having her son breastfeed. And she loves attention. And shes happy enough to get naked in front of other people (which there may be nothing wrong withfor her). But that may or may not be the case for her 3-year-old boy, which seems not to have mattered to herat all. And if his will was bent to hers in order to have him suck his mothers nipple in front of a photographer and makeup artist and art director and all of America, then it stands to reason that his will may be being bent to hers in all sorts of waysincluding protracted breastfeeding.
The truth is that what Time magazine may have unwittingly captured and been party to was a grotesque form of psychological abusethe parading into public of an intimate moment (intimate for mother and child) at the sole direction of that childs mother, who didnt stop to think that her child may not be able at the age of three to know what he thinks about the whole thing, much less to stop it, if he wanted to.
Grumet has stained the attachment parenting movement by documenting how easily it can go wrong, when used as an excuse for poor boundaries and manipulation.
In a way, while looking at the Time magazine cover, we are all Grumets son and may know something of his possible plight: finding her a compelling and dramatic presence, seduced by her combination of sex appeal and motherhoodunable, in fact, to detach from her.
Talk about a prescription for psychological disaster.
This is self-centeredness at its worst, sold as good parenting. And this is an act of media violence against a child, committed by adult journalists who also commandeered his will (as did his mother), for sensation and profit. Rarely do we get such evidence of how wrong parenting can go, how poorly journalists can behave and how slow we can be to recognize ugliness when it is disguised as something beautiful.
Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team. Dr. Ablow can be reached at email@example.com.
I think maybe you could breastfeed a little extra, say to 18 months or so, if your child has a weakened immune system like in a preemie. But basically if your kid has teeth and can walk it's time to lose the nipple.
Seems like some kind of protracted infancy to me.
And appearently (info from an interview I read) her mom breastfed her till she was six so nutty-ness runs in the family.
I dunno. When I saw the cover, I asked the same question that I know is on everyone’s mind.
It has to do with Laz.
Attachment parenting seems to be another way to limit family size...
In all seriousness, the first thing I thought of when I saw that picture was, “That kid is going to have to live with that the rest of his life.”
I think a lot of us did.
Breasts work as long as you make them work!
You just know that kid will have the cover plasted on his locker and never live it down. That’s one sick, sick, sick mama.
He MAY be ridiculed? This poor kid will never live this down for the rest of his life.
Imagine this kid's life on the playground. What in the hell was his mother thinking? Hell always be known as the kid with the tit in the mouth. For decades, people will wonder where is he now and give him unwanted attention.
This woman must be a sick bastardess to do this to her kid. And where in the hell was the little guys father to stop this insanity? I understand that he wouldn't even come out on a talk show this sickee was on this morning. And that the kid was acting like a brat.
She absolutely should be ashamed of herself!
They should have used me instead of the kid.
No, it’s a way to build your own self-esteem through the child.
When I was young and raising my first child, we lived in a resort town with a beach. One day a few women with preschool age kids went to the beach and let the kids run around and play while we socialized . The one woman was president of the local La Leche League. About every 20 minutes her kid, who was between 2 and 3 would run up to her, pull down her bathing suit and stand there sucking away.
I never went to the beach with the woman again.
what happens when this kid asks his friends over for lunch LOL
You have to ask yourself who the real weirdos are.
I personally feel the whole thing is rather perverted.
It is the public nature not breast feeding till three. It is only uncommon in western cultures that it has become an issue.
We may be the weirdos, but then again, we don't live in a third-world country.......yet.
“Breasts work as long as you make them work!”
Yeah? Just try to get them to mow the yard.
So, in the 3rd-world context, breast feeding to the age of 5 makes sense. In the context of the rest of the world, though, it doesn’t. Breasts are sex objects. You favor public breast-feeding? Breastfeeding at work? I am asking myself who’s the weirdo.
The general rule is... if the kid can ask for it... it’s time to stop breastfeeding.
The first thought that occurred to me is that she is doing this more as a form of weight-loss for her modeling career than for the boy’s well-being.
Yeah, I wouldn’t mind having some of that for lunch, but I don’t really care how long she breast feeds junior. Just don’t do it on a magazine cover.
I’ll bet her husband is really proud of her and his kid.
My breasts wouldn’t mow the lawn but standing without a shirt in the yard they’d work having someone else to mow the lawn.
Yeh but I bet he’ll have a Lambourghini before any of us. Even a 3 year old can be a prostitute....thanks to his mom.
Look, some things are difficult and highly resistant to change ~ like providing homosexual couples with a right to a vaginal delivery ~ you grab one of those ol’boys and lay out the problem to him he’ll blanch white as a sheet!
First off, you sicko, I never said that was their “only purpose.” But ASSume away, like the Trayvon crowd.
Just FYI, dummmy, I had 4 children, all of them nursed.
Breasts are for feeding the young, you have assigned an extra use.
Article states he's 3 years old.
Looks to me like 3 going on 5 or 6.
Looks like a case of incest with a minor to me.
1) See post #26.
2) Are you saying that that “use” is not one intended by God?
Does the boy have a role model to aspire to?
Lasted about 2 minutes into the first phone call to the company headquarters.
Breasts provide lactic fluids to young'ns. Simultaneously they are made up of some degree of erectile tissue ~ and are tied into the nervous system with a special link that does all sorts of things.
However, the purpose is the purpose. The rest of that stuff keeps you in her tree and not somebody else's tree!
Remember, in nature all genes have multiple purposes. Else you'd be a sea slug.
I have no problem what so ever with breastfeeding... I have no problem even with breastfeeding in public (although I would encourage women to use a cloth of small towel to cover themselves while they feed their child.
I have a HUGE problem with what THIS WOMAN did! This is out and out child abuse! and someone (either this woman or the editors of TIME) needs to be put in jail for this! I find it OUTRAGOUS, and is sexual exploitation of a child, distribution of child pornography and is no different than if TIME had a picture of that poor kid sucking on his dad’s wee wee.
CPS should get involved on this.
Waiting for some lefty wing nut to criticize the militaristic woodland camouflage pants on the kid.
NAILED IT !
When I saw the cover, I thought this kid had better grow up to be a cage fighter or live out the song, “Boy named Sue”.
What the hell were these people thinking?
I think the kid’s pretty lucky actually..... /snark
If you think this was weird you should see what goes for normal in scandinavia.
I would make the supreme sacrifice and volunteer to take his place.
Don’t San people have teeth?
Teeth are God’s and nature’s clue that kid is ready to wean.
We ignore God and nature’s messages at our peril.
Don’t San people have teeth?
Teeth are God’s and nature’s message that the kid is ready to wean.
We ignore God and nature at our peril. Always. As my mother said a thousand times, you can’t flim flam Mother Nature.
I just hand my son $10.00 to mow the yard and I keep my moobs under my shirt.
Post a picture of your “yard mowing inspirations” so we can all see their magic. LOL
My contempt for Time and the cover creatures scares me,I seldom react to things I dislike so vehemently but I thought it almost pornographic if not actually pornographic.
And I hope Time loses so much business that they are out of it in a month or two.
Those skinny jeans do it for me. Oh Lawd....That woman is hot.
The world is just not ready yet!
What do breasts and toy trains have in common?
Everybody wants to play with them?