nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Why is breastfeeding in public acceptable?

ZilkyG

Genuine question. This seems to be all the rage now, and the argument for it, is that it's completely natural! Well so is ****ting, yet society dictates that we must withdraw to the shadows for something so 'natural'.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

volchitsa

joe40 wrote: »

There are millions of natural things. The context of this conversation is feeding infants.
There are literally only 2 options. Breast milk or formula milk.
In that context breastfeeding is the most natural way, with well proven health benefits.
You could just mention 1000s of other things that aren't related but why?

Hilariously, a poster upthread actually informed us that babies were "probably" given milk from plants before breastfeeding was even a thing.

Yeah I couldn't believe it either. And he said other posters didn't know anything about biology?

scarepanda

the beer revolu wrote:

Here too? I know that is the case in the UK

The law is stronger here than in the UK.

suicide_circus

https://nypost.com/2018/11/08/why-this-mom-is-still-breastfeeding-her-9-year-old-kid/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons

i'd probably do a double take if i saw this

One eyed Jack

FunLover18 wrote: »

I've admitted before that the arousal of a potential mate may be a function of breasts (more specifically breast size) but if that is the case it is, like you said, an evolved function but before that they were always making and storing milk, therefore it ks their primary/main/principal function and they can carry out this function regardless of size. To suggest that arousing men is a function of breasts on a par with producing milk is ludicrous.

It’s only ludicrous because you don’t like the idea that breasts in female humans evolved the way they did to attract a mate. It’s really not that out there as there are numerous examples in evolution of things evolving the way they did to serve a symbiotic purpose. In other words, if you’re only concentrating on the individual, you’re missing the bigger picture that is evolution as a whole. Only recently research has suggested that dogs evolved a specific muscle to make them more appealing to humans -

Dogs evolved a special muscle that lets them make puppy dog eyes

Just because you want to believe in breasts having a primary function, it doesn’t follow that what you want to believe is their primary function, is actually true. That’s just something you learned as a result of living in a society where it makes one appear more intellectually rigorous if they can disassociate themselves from their primitive instinct to find breasts attractive as a result of their sexual orientation.

Fair enough if you feel a need to deny evolution, but it would be silly to suggest anyone else should or be branded a pervert for something they have no control over. I didn’t learn to find breasts sexually attractive for example, I don’t find all breasts sexually attractive, but the idea that I shouldn’t find them attractive because their primary function according to you is for feeding babies? That’s a ludicrous idea, and in any society it’s a ludicrous idea, yes, even societies where women don’t tend to cover their breasts. They’re just as aware as we are that their breasts are sexually attractive, and the idea that they wouldn’t see breasts as sexually attractive because they’re surrounded by naked breasts? That’s just stupid, frankly. It would be like suggesting that because I’m surrounded by women I shouldn’t find individual women sexually attractive.

Even if I weren’t an incorrigible pervert, I would still have no control over what I do or do not find sexually attractive. It’s only because of the culture I grew up in that I actually learned what is appropriate and inappropriate behaviour in public. Staring at women’s breasts I find attractive is a consequence of evolution. Turning away because it’s considered inappropriate in our society to stare, is the learned behaviour.

suicide_circus

breasts are multi functional, no? even tribal societies in which women go bare chested, breasts are still erogenous.

suicide_circus

Smart Bug wrote: »

Because society has fetishised the female breast, it seems verboten to some people.

"society" did no such thing

volchitsa

suicide_circus wrote: »

breasts are multi functional, no? even tribal societies in which women go bare chested, breasts are still erogenous.

Evidence for this? I've certainly read the exact opposite anecdotally, but I don't know if there are any actual studies.

One eyed Jack

joe40 wrote: »

There are millions of natural things. The context of this conversation is feeding infants.
There are literally only 2 options. Breast milk or formula milk.
In that context breastfeeding is the most natural way, with well proven health benefits.
You could just mention 1000s of other things that aren't related but why?

Formula milk doesn’t grow on trees. There are dozens of species of plants in various parts of the world which humans evolved to derive nourishment from that are just as natural as breast milk.

The mental gymnastics you have to do to chastise others for the 1000s of other things they could mention which aren’t related, yet you’re clinging to the idea that because humans learned to breastfeed, it should still be practiced today when there are literally dozens of alternatives to breastfeeding, let alone choosing to breastfeed in public. That’s what we’re talking about - not just breastfeeding, but breastfeeding in public.

There is no need to do it, some women choose to do it, and when one is doing something in public, then they’re choosing to make it the public’s business, and they have no control over how the public react to that. You can of course tell people to mind their own business, but the fact is that they are minding their own business when a woman chooses to make her breastfeeding her child everyone’s business, by doing it in public.

Demanding that people shouldn’t react the way they do is no different to them demanding that you don’t breastfeed in public. Their reaction is perfectly natural to your assertion that what you’re doing is perfectly natural (not you specifically, I mean any woman who chooses to breastfeed in public).

the beer revolu

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Formula milk doesn’t grow on trees. There are dozens of species of plants in various parts of the world which humans evolved to derive nourishment from that are just as natural as breast milk.

The mental gymnastics you have to do to chastise others for the 1000s of other things they could mention which aren’t related, yet you’re clinging to the idea that because humans learned to breastfeed, it should still be practiced today when there are literally dozens of alternatives to breastfeeding, let alone choosing to breastfeed in public. That’s what we’re talking about - not just breastfeeding, but breastfeeding in public.

There is no need to do it, some women choose to do it, and when one is doing something in public, then they’re choosing to make it the public’s business, and they have no control over how the public react to that. You can of course tell people to mind their own business, but the fact is that they are minding their own business when a woman chooses to make her breastfeeding her child everyone’s business, by doing it in public.

Demanding that people shouldn’t react the way they do is no different to them demanding that you don’t breastfeed in public. Their reaction is perfectly natural to your assertion that what you’re doing is perfectly natural (not you specifically, I mean any woman who chooses to breastfeed in public).

Oh, please stop typing.
Please.

One eyed Jack

the beer revolu wrote: »

Oh, please stop typing.
Please.

Don’t address any of the points anyway whatever you do. Make a pointless post lamenting what you deem a pointless post, that’ll learn ‘em :rolleyes:

the beer revolu

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Don’t address any of the points anyway whatever you do. Make a pointless post lamenting what you deem a pointless post, that’ll learn ‘em :rolleyes:

I thought about addressing your endless nonsense points. Then I thought.... naaaa.
No point.
Anyway too busy in the chocolate tournament.

Plumbthedepths

One eyed Jack wrote:

The mental gymnastics you have to do to chastise others for the 1000s of other things they could mention which arenâ€™t related, yet youâ€™re clinging to the idea that because humans learned to breastfeed, it should still be practiced today when there are literally dozens of alternatives to breastfeeding, let alone choosing to breastfeed in public. Thatâ€™s what weâ€™re talking about - not just breastfeeding, but breastfeeding in public.

I can't believe the idiocy contained in the above, humans learned to breastfeed? It's instinctive, seriously have you any cop on at all?
A baby is born with the ability to latch on to a nipple, despite your claim that nature has no intent.
Every study everywhere has claimed that ( for want of a better expression) breast is best.

scarepanda

It's pointless addressing any of your points because your points and posts in general on this thread are pure and utter sh1te.

As a current breastfeeding mother I'd love to meet you in real life and see if you would actually have the balls to say some of the rubbish you've said here to my face as I nursed my child. I suspect not. It's very easy to hide behind a keyboard after all.

joe40

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Formula milk doesn’t grow on trees. There are dozens of species of plants in various parts of the world which humans evolved to derive nourishment from that are just as natural as breast milk.

The mental gymnastics you have to do to chastise others for the 1000s of other things they could mention which aren’t related, yet you’re clinging to the idea that because humans learned to breastfeed, it should still be practiced today when there are literally dozens of alternatives to breastfeeding, let alone choosing to breastfeed in public. That’s what we’re talking about - not just breastfeeding, but breastfeeding in public.

There is no need to do it, some women choose to do it, and when one is doing something in public, then they’re choosing to make it the public’s business, and they have no control over how the public react to that. You can of course tell people to mind their own business, but the fact is that they are minding their own business when a woman chooses to make her breastfeeding her child everyone’s business, by doing it in public.

Demanding that people shouldn’t react the way they do is no different to them demanding that you don’t breastfeed in public. Their reaction is perfectly natural to your assertion that what you’re doing is perfectly natural (not you specifically, I mean any woman who chooses to breastfeed in public).

There are not " literally dozens alternative s to breasmilk". There is one alternative formula milk.

It is too nice a day to spend any more time talking about this nonsense. I'm going to the beach, there might be women in bikinis but I'm going to chance it.

One eyed Jack

the beer revolu wrote: »

I thought about addressing your endless nonsense points. Then I thought.... naaaa.
No point.

In two posts now, you could have pointed out why you think they are nonsense, doesn’t have to be an essay, not asking for a thesis, just a short post to point out why, according to you, it’s nonsense. Instead of telling me not to post, why don’t you actually post something you think is worth reading instead? That would actually contribute to the discussion instead of you behaving as though I should defer to intellectual superiority, because you haven’t provided any kind of a counter-point that would have me think you actually are intellectually superior to me. You’ve just “stop typing”, like a baby throwing their toys out of the pram.

Outlaw Pete

Thread needs more Joey.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geIO6uc_MqE

Hannibal_Smith

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Formula milk doesn’t grow on trees. There are dozens of species of plants in various parts of the world which humans evolved to derive nourishment from that are just as natural as breast milk.

The mental gymnastics you have to do to chastise others for the 1000s of other things they could mention which aren’t related, yet you’re clinging to the idea that because humans learned to breastfeed, it should still be practiced today when there are literally dozens of alternatives to breastfeeding, let alone choosing to breastfeed in public. That’s what we’re talking about - not just breastfeeding, but breastfeeding in public.

There is no need to do it, some women choose to do it, and when one is doing something in public, then they’re choosing to make it the public’s business, and they have no control over how the public react to that. You can of course tell people to mind their own business, but the fact is that they are minding their own business when a woman chooses to make her breastfeeding her child everyone’s business, by doing it in public.

Demanding that people shouldn’t react the way they do is no different to them demanding that you don’t breastfeed in public. Their reaction is perfectly natural to your assertion that what you’re doing is perfectly natural (not you specifically, I mean any woman who chooses to breastfeed in public).

Learned to breast feed? Cows, pigs, cats, dogs, gorillas are all fed from their mothers teat. Did they learn that too?

One eyed Jack

joe40 wrote: »

There are not " literally dozens alternative s to breasmilk". There is one alternative formula milk.

It is too nice a day to spend any more time talking about this nonsense. I'm going to the beach, there might be women in bikinis but I'm going to chance it.

If the objective is to nourish an infant, then yes, there are dozens of alternative sources, means, and methods of delivery than breastfeeding. Formula just happens to be considered the most convenient in Western society, that’s why it’s preferred over breastfeeding, women just don’t have the time or the inclination to be arsed, frankly. That’s the reality of modern living in Western society.

I’d join you on the beach but I’m nursing one hell of a hangover after being out last night surrounded by women in the club shoving their tits up against me demanding my attention. And not a baby in sight! :pac:

Plumbthedepths

One eyed Jack wrote:

Nature doesnâ€™t have an intent. Thereâ€™s no specific reason has ever been determined as to why humans breastfeed (plenty of various theories put forward though), but itâ€™s certainly not something nature intended.

Hannibal_Smith wrote:

Learned to breast feed? Cows, pigs, cats, dogs, gorillas are all fed from their mothers teat. Did they learn that too?

I would assume he believes they were thought as he believes nature has no intent.

jam_mac_jam

One eyed Jack wrote: »

joe40 wrote: »

There are not " literally dozens alternative s to breasmilk". There is one alternative formula milk.

It is too nice a day to spend any more time talking about this nonsense. I'm going to the beach, there might be women in bikinis but I'm going to chance it.

If the objective is to nourish an infant, then yes, there are dozens of alternative sources, means, and methods of delivery than breastfeeding. Formula just happens to be considered the most convenient in Western society, that’s why it’s preferred over breastfeeding, women just don’t have the time or the inclination to be arsed, frankly. That’s the reality of modern living in Western society.

I’d join you on the beach but I’m nursing one hell of a hangover after being out last night surrounded by women in the club shoving their tits up against me demanding my attention. And not a baby in sight! :pac:

Name one alternative to breast milk from a plant for a baby not infant up before they have teeth. Just one. That was or is used. Just one

One eyed Jack

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Learned to breast feed? Cows, pigs, cats, dogs, gorillas are all fed from their mothers teat. Did they learn that too?

I don’t know, “monkey see, monkey do” is a fairly valid assumption that applies in human and animal behaviour, only humans had the capacity throughout history to develop alternative means of nourishing their infants so we didn’t have to breastfeed.

5uspect

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Formula milk doesn’t grow on trees. There are dozens of species of plants in various parts of the world which humans evolved to derive nourishment from that are just as natural as breast milk.

The mental gymnastics you have to do to chastise others for the 1000s of other things they could mention which aren’t related, yet you’re clinging to the idea that because humans learned to breastfeed, it should still be practiced today when there are literally dozens of alternatives to breastfeeding, let alone choosing to breastfeed in public. That’s what we’re talking about - not just breastfeeding, but breastfeeding in public.

There is no need to do it, some women choose to do it, and when one is doing something in public, then they’re choosing to make it the public’s business, and they have no control over how the public react to that. You can of course tell people to mind their own business, but the fact is that they are minding their own business when a woman chooses to make her breastfeeding her child everyone’s business, by doing it in public.

Demanding that people shouldn’t react the way they do is no different to them demanding that you don’t breastfeed in public. Their reaction is perfectly natural to your assertion that what you’re doing is perfectly natural (not you specifically, I mean any woman who chooses to breastfeed in public).

Breastfeeding is not just about nourishment, it’s also about building child immunity and the psychological need for skin to skin contact. To glibly dismiss it as a some sort of lifestyle choice that’s somehow equal to formula is wilfully ignorant.

Breastfeeding is by far the recommended way for infants to be nourished and fortified. Just because people have some bizzare hangups about nipples should in no way prevent a mother for doing what is best for her child. They absolutely need to consider breastfeeding before they choose to use an alternative for whatever reason, and there can be many reasons why not all women can breastfeed.

You also seem ignorant of how human evolution works. We didn’t evolve to derive nourishment from the thousands of plants we eat today, we selectively breed the vast majority of them. Can you point me to a plant that gives an infant the antibodies it needs to fight off an illness the way breastmilk can?

There is no need to walk, just drive everywhere!
There is no need to talk, just write ill informed messages on boards!
There is no need to drink water, drink Brawndo. It's got electrolytes

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Did somebody on this thread really write “before breastfeeding was a thing”? What, like the day before Homo sapiens came into existence?

Plumbthedepths

One eyed Jack wrote:

I donâ€™t know, â€œmonkey see, monkey doâ€ is a fairly valid assumption .

It's not valid as I have seen newborns, human and animal latch onto a nipple without being shown. Also the majority of newborns from multiple species are 'blind' so like most of your nonsense 'monkey see, monkey do ' is also bullsh*t.

bee06

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t know, “monkey see, monkey do” is a fairly valid assumption that applies in human and animal behaviour, only humans had the capacity throughout history to develop alternative means of nourishing their infants so we didn’t have to breastfeed.

If you put a newborn baby on it’s mother’s chest it will crawl to the nipple to latch on. It’s the baby’s instinct. It’s not watching all the other babies going “hmm, that looks good, I’ll have me some of that”.

Plumbthedepths

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote:

Did somebody on this thread really write â€œbefore breastfeeding was a thingâ€? What, like the day before Homo sapiens came into existence?

Yep, hilarious isn't it?

B0jangles

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Did somebody on this thread really write “before breastfeeding was a thing”? What, like the day before Homo sapiens came into existence?

Aren't mammals literally named 'mammals' because of the whole producing milk to feed their offspring 'fad'?

jam_mac_jam

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Did somebody on this thread really write “before breastfeeding was a thing”? What, like the day before Homo sapiens came into existence?

Yes. We gave babies plants, there are many alternatives....

Breastfeeding is cultural and learned behaviour by new born.

Harika

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Yes. We gave babies plants, there are many alternatives....

Breastfeeding is cultural and learned behaviour by new born.

What plants did you give newborn?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Paladium30 wrote: »

I never suggested walking from a tree to a river is more natural than breastfeeding, I said it's no less natural than breastfeeding.

I'm an advocate if breastfeeding and women being allowed to do it in public, it's healthiest for the child. What I'm challenging is the assertion that it's the most natural thing which is meaningless hyperbole.

People are free to have their opinion on what constitutes appropriate behaviour, part of being an adult is not having such thin skin that a differing opinion causes stress and anxiety.

And others are free to consider that opinion a steaming pile of shíte. The whole “It’s a free country” sentiment applies to all or nobody.