Friday, July 28, 2006

Gross?




Which of these pictures is gross? Can you believe that nearly 1000 readers of Babytalk magazine found the cover picture of a mother breastfeeding her baby inappropriate? One mother, a mother who breastfed all three of her children, trashed the magazine because she didn't want her son to see the sexually explicit breast. I'm sure none of her kids ever saw her breasts when she breastfed her children. And I'm especially sure her 13-year-old son has never had an occasion to see a picture of breasts.

I don't have a problem with women breastfeeding in public. It is a normal, natural thing and people should see it as such. If men can't get past the idea that there is a semi-naked breast in front of them, then they need to grow the fuck up. What gets me is the fact that every day Americans look at images like the BBC shot of the bombing above - demolished buildings, fleeing refugees, wounded civilians - and never think to be offended or react to those images as gross. Nothing about war, famine, destruction, blood or death is shocking to the American public. But by god if a woman chooses to breastfeed her baby in public it is a moral travesty.

I'm not saying the images of war or destruction should be censored or removed from the press. But when I see such pictures, it gives me pause. I look at the shattered remains of a residential area in Lebanon and think about the people that lived there, what their lives were like, what they are like now, and it saddens me. I look at a picture of wounded Israeli soldier and wonder what he or she is thinking, what their life will be like now, how serious the injury is, and whether or not they think it was all worth it. These pictures grip me. These pictures are the ones that are gross and horrifying. Not a picture of a woman feeding her child. That picture simply makes me smile.

6 comments:

AT said...

I agree, Mel. I think the people who see breastfeeding as anything remotely sexual have some SERIOUS issues that need to be worked out.
I don't understand why anybody would have a problem seeing a woman breastfeeding a baby in public, and I think its a crying shame that some women are afraid of doing it.

Anonymous said...

zardoz says :

sometimes reading blogs

newspaper ,etc theres a lot of things

that are repeated,,

you still suprise me , with your

parellisms ,,diferent and on point

with the times ,,


sorry to do some asskissing but

i happen to agree with what you wrote

and thought it was philosophically

innovating,,,, =z=

Flubberwinkle said...

Oh for Pete's sake!... I'm ranting about the mother in the CNN article who wouldn't want her husband or son to see a "breast they shouldn't see"... and a mother who tore the cover of the magazine because "a breast is still a breast". WTF?

Your post leads me to think that free-thinking western society has their priorities "a tad" screwed up. War is tolerable, life-giving breasts aren't.
Are people more shocked their minds wander to sex by viewing a naked breast than viewing the horrors of death caused by war?

J.Doe said...

I am not against breast feeding at all. It actually is better for the baby than cow milk or formula or whatever. I don't find the picture on the cover of that magazine offensive either, but if a woman is going to breast feed her child in a public place I think she should at least try to cover up somewhat by throwing a blanket or towel over her.

Nicole said...

here here

It also drives me nuts when a movie with a ton of violence can be PG but something with language and adult situation can get slammed with the kiss of death NC 17.

Jay3gsm said...

Excellent post, you are spot on. Breastfeeding is so natural, it's what the breasts are for, after all! I'm shocked when people go on about how breast feeding in public is bad.

As already suggested, the moral state of the 'developed' western world is very screwed up.