Posted on 03/01/2003 3:28:37 PM PST by MadIvan
This week I will be mostly writing about breasts so read on, smut hounds. Actually, I will be writing about breastfeeding. No, not so sexy. And thats the problem, really, with the whole subject. We know that bosoms primary purpose is to feed infants, but we also live in a breast-obsessed society, where you can order yourself a pair of celebrity-lookalike knockers in your lunch hour.
Bosoms are everywhere: peering out pertly at the Baftas, bulging enticingly from advertisement hoardings, on extravagant display down your local high street, draped in wisps of fabric and omnipresent on MTV. Bosoms are sexy. Cor! Phwoar! Except, er, when theyre on display doing what theyre there for. No wonder were confused.
Not as confused as an Australian state parliament, though, which last week evicted Kirstie Marshall, a 33-year-old MP, for breastfeeding her 10-day-old daughter Charlotte in the chamber. Apparently this was because under some convenient antiquated law, Charlotte was a stranger to the house and therefore banned. A bizarre sort of reasoning, this, under which it would presumably be perfectly acceptable to breastfeed non-strangers, ie fellow MPs, without risking eviction. Lets just gag quietly and move swiftly on.
In Britain, a plan to allow women MPs to breastfeed in the House of Commons chamber was blocked by Michael Martin, the Speaker, last year. He overruled plans to allow women to breastfeed in the chamber, committee rooms and public gallery and instead decided to invest in four breastfeeding rooms with nappy-changing facilities (maybe its just me, but the idea of a special breastfeeding room has an unattractively bovine ring to it). Two years ago, Betty Boothroyd similarly blocked a request by the MP Julia Drown to breastfeed in the Commons tearoom.
Somethings not right here. Breastfeeding is natural, and good for both mother and child, which is why health authorities spend huge amounts each year encouraging new mothers to say no to the evil bottle and yes to the cosy breast pads, pumps and other fun accessories that come with the job. Whatever your views on breastfeeding, it would be absurd to deny women the right to feed their children in public. Why, then, does the subject make so many people wriggly and uncomfortable? Youd think it was a male thing and youd be right, but only to a certain extent. Ive seen men, often fathers themselves, die upon entering a room and sighting a woman breastfeeding her child: they go scarlet, they stammer, they make their excuses and practically gallop out of the room. Some men often the older ones are scandalised, as though a mother feeding her child was in fact (the hussy) putting on some kind of saucy floor show.
Theres a problem here and its not the mothers: its to do with men having instantly sexual reactions to a bosom. Theres a time and a place for sexual reactions to a pair of bosoms, and a nursing woman maternal, gentle, nurturing is not an appropriate recipient of such thoughts. Which men know full well hence their usually completely OTT reaction: panic, alarm, bluster, exit and the muttered I think its disgraceful and Couldnt she find a quiet room? which tell you more about the complainant than about the hapless woman.
I find this strange and incredibly irritating. If men cant differentiate between bosoms doing their thing and bosoms bursting alluringly out of a bra on a billboard well, its about time they tried harder and time we stopped indulging them. Why should a nursing mother be penalised for other peoples uncomfortable thoughts? Why should she be driven to nursing her children furtively, in another room, or with a ridiculous giant blanket thrown over both mother and child? What annoys and flummoxes me more, though, is the way the disgraceful argument has trickled its way into womens reactions.
I know two women with small babies who wouldnt dream of breastfeeding in public: they simply wont do it, even though this refusal can, and does, lead to incredible discomfort and stress for everybody involved.
Neither of them, pre-baby, would have batted an eyelid at going out in the skimpiest, sheerest, most revealing tops. Both go topless on holiday and have never expressed discomfort at the idea of having it all on show for anyone who cares to cop an eyeful. So whats the problem now? Its not nice, apparently. And this isnt necessarily a bonkers minority female view: motherhood, with its attendant insecurities, has a way of turning the most unlikely people into total weeds or temporary prigs. Nobody, after all, is suggesting you take off your shirt and bra to breastfeed comfortably: were talking discreet. And yet there is a division: women who breastfeed in public are almost despised by women who breastfeed only in private.
Its a sorry, namby-pamby, babyish (ho ho) state of affairs. The Victoria state parliament has ordered a review of parliamentary rules as a result of Marshalls eviction last week, which is something. Back over here, though, women are still made to feel ambiguous about doing something as fundamental as feeding their own children wherever they happen to be at the time. How pathetic can you get? And would Kirstie Marshall have been evicted if shed merely been wearing a very low-cut top?
According to research, one in four women takes no exercise at all. According to the Daily Mail, this means theyre going to die of cancer. This is a bit rich, no? One in four women may not go to the gym, or go jogging, but unless they are clinically obese and need to be craned out of their seat to get to the shops, they walk, run, hare after their children, bend down to pick up socks and toys with the monotony of an aerobics routine, and so on. We work all the hours God sends, we bring up children, we run houses, we try to remain vaguely physically attractive; we split ourselves into 18 to please everybody and make sure everyones happy and its not good enough, because we should swim more. Is it any wonder one in four of us would rather put her feet up?
Lemme try again...she's on the left.
While in Washington on a speaking tour in 1900, Churchill was introduced to a generously proportioned woman - from Richmond, Virginia. Proud of her family's adherence to the former Confederacy, and still not accepting the Reconstruction - the process of re-incorporating the southern states into the United States - she declared, as she gave him her hand, "Mr. Churchill, you see before you a rebel who has not been Reconstructed."
"Madam," he replied, gazing upon her imposing bosom, "reconstruction in your case would be blasphemous.
And:
Getting on for half a century later, Churchill visited Richmond, Virginia, where a sculpture of him was being unveiled. A magnificently Rubenesque lady came up to him and cooed enthusiastically at him: "Mr. Churchill, I want you to know I got up at dawn and drove a hundred miles for the unveiling of your bust."
Looking at her generous endowments, Churchill answered, "Madam, I want you to know that I would happily reciprocate the honour."
Am I to believe from this that women in Virginia all have large breasts? ;)
Regards, Ivan
Lady, I wish you could be a man for just a little while.
Thanks for the Churchill anecdotes...hadn't heard them before, but they seem in character!
Cheers,
PB
What about a right to feed a baby with an artificial formula? Is eating allowed in public on condition that it is based on artificial ingredients? Can grown-up people eat in public?
All this rights talk is ridiculous - it is based on false Enlightenment myth of lone savages dropped into the primordial wilderness without any parents to take care of them (to breast-feed them without formula, o horror) but endowed with the absolute set of rights to be negotiated away in the social contracts.
That's the problem right there. The "bosom" shouldn't be on display when a woman is breastfeeding, but should be discreetly covered. Yet, I have NEVER seen a woman who is breastfeeding do this. The breasts are on full display for all to see. If women were discreet, and properly covered, there would not be this problem. But since they are not discreet, that's why there's a problem.
You don't truly equate feeding a baby with sex, do you?
Is a bottle feeder similar to someone using a vibrator in public? Ban them too?
Are you nuts? Do you really think new mothers are rushing out to the mall so they can defiantly breastfeed infront of total strangers? Do you think these women have nothing better to do?
Sorry, but most likely the mom has things which need to get done and breastfed babies tend to get hungry often.
Might I suggest that you have seen plenty of women breastfeeding who are covered up, and because they are covered, you haven't noticed it?
I have very rarely seen a breastfeeding mother who isn't at least attempting to be discreet. It isn't always easy. But to suggest that "most" breastfeeding women are baring their breasts is simply ridiculous.
Nursing mothers, who feel it incumbent upon them, to be in the work force, should expell their milk, put it in bottles, and hire a nanny. Either stay home and nurse ( and don't drag the poor wee bae to a bloody mall ( ! ) , or make other arrangements for the care and feeding of said baby. Or, the women could choose to not have a baby at all. See... there are three good alternatives to her problem and those who think that everyone else should accomodate their whwims. :-)
I only have one child. OTOH, one of my dearest, oldest, and best friends has four. No, she NEVER had to openly nurse in public; not once. So, there goes that position. OTOH, I knew a woman, who OPENLY and FLAGRANTLY nursed her son, until he was five. It was NOT done with good taste and I can only surmise that she had / has mental problems.
I don't have any " hangups ", which need taking care of, dear. Respectfully, I suggest that some women, who feel the need to exhibit themselves and demand to do in public, what should be done in private/not ostentaciously, are the ones with " hangups. :-)
Seriously, children usually put themselves on feeding schedules; Dr. Spock ( who was wrong about so very much ! ), or not.
Frankly, I have a problem with anyone who flaunts body parts, which should remain hidden; no matter who is doing it. As the old saying goes : discreation is the better part of valor. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.