jam_mac_jam wrote: » It is extremely rare to feed kids that long though. So not really what you are going to encounter in public or private.
Gwen Cooper wrote: » jam_mac_jam wrote: » It is extremely rare to feed kids that long though. So not really what you are going to encounter in public or private. Oh yeah, it would be rare. But I have seen it and I personally don't find it to be something to frown upon if a 2-3 year old kid is breastfed few times a day.
pwurple wrote: » So is this your real problem... Snobbery? The educated white women like breastfeeding so it must be bad? Well Boo bloody hooo. Get over yourself. The poor brown women also breastfeed. Baby needs food. Woman makes milk. End of story. Doesn't matter how many degrees anyone has, or how threatened any incel dudes around are. Baby still needs food.
Breastfeeding is ok in public, because the alternative is imprisonment/banishment of women.
It's just not practical any other way. Let down reflex alone would be a good enough reason... Baby is crying for food, milk comes out like the nipple is a frikken showerhead. Absolutely no point in having a pumped bottle of pre-prepped breastmilk there, the woman will just be soaked either way.
All this faffing with gear and covers and locations and cries, and worrying about who sees what. Who gives a shlt. Just Feed the damn baby. Keep it simple.
sbsquarepants wrote: » Jaysus - that kids a bit old for the tit isn't he! Babies - let them at it, but that fella will clearly remember sucking the diddies off his ma, that shít just has to fúck you up! (although I must confess I would have a little nibble on them myself, she's pretty hot - but the important point is she's not my ma)My mots cousin breastfed her daughter up to some stupid age, 5 or 6 - I always found it extremely weird!
One eyed Jack wrote: » What? No it isn’t? No women are going to be imprisoned or banished from society for choosing not to breastfeed in public. To the best of my knowledge it hasn’t happened in Europe, the US, the Middle East or Africa. Perhaps you’re aware of a society where this has happened, maybe you could enlighten me?
One eyed Jack wrote: » for the majority of women, breastfeeding is impractical when there are far more practical alternatives available to them.
pwurple wrote: » Well, if they can't breastfeed in public, where do you suggest they do it? Out of public = banished. So, is it breastfeeding full stop you have a problem with. Not just in public. Feeding humans with human milk instead of the bovine version is weird for you?
One eyed Jack wrote: » I didn’t suggest any woman couldn’t breastfeed in public in the first place? Are you just not reading what I’ve written, because that’s the only conclusion I can think of. In none of my posts have I ever suggested that women shouldn’t breastfeed in public. That’s why I agreed with you when you said nobody cares. The vast majority of people actually don’t care about women who choose to breastfeed in public. They have more important things to be thinking about. My issue is with being told I have an issue with something, in spite of the numerous number of times now I have clarified that I do not have any issue with women who choose to breastfeed in public. .
At one point in this thread I was jumped on because I said I would support any woman who chose to breastfeed in public, and told by a two posters they wouldn’t want my support. I didn’t offer them any support, I pointed out that I would always ask a woman breastfeeding if there was anything I could do, and if there wasn’t, I’d leave her to it
One eyed Jack wrote: » I didn’t suggest any woman couldn’t breastfeed in public in the first place? Are you just not reading what I’ve written, because that’s the only conclusion I can think of. In none of my posts have I ever suggested that women shouldn’t breastfeed in public. That’s why I agreed with you when you said nobody cares. The vast majority of people actually don’t care about women who choose to breastfeed in public. They have more important things to be thinking about. My issue is with being told I have an issue with something, in spite of the numerous number of times now I have clarified that I do not have any issue with women who choose to breastfeed in public. At one point in this thread I was jumped on because I said I would support any woman who chose to breastfeed in public, and told by a two posters they wouldn’t want my support. I didn’t offer them any support, I pointed out that I would always ask a woman breastfeeding if there was anything I could do, and if there wasn’t, I’d leave her to it, It appears to me as though some people want people to have issues with it, and that’s how they’re reading people’s posts, with that attitude in mind. I would suggest dropping your own preconceived notions and judgments about other people before you think it’s public breastfeeding you’re being criticised for. It’s not.
volchitsa wrote: » TBF that does not sum up your posts accurately
One eyed Jack wrote: » I didn’t suggest any woman couldn’t breastfeed in public in the first place? Are you just not reading what I’ve written, because that’s the only conclusion I can think of. In none of my posts have I ever suggested that women shouldn’t breastfeed in public.
pwurple wrote: » Dude, maybe it's because you're flipflopping around like a fish. The title of the thread is "Why is breastfeeding in public acceptable". If you want to go off and discuss something else, perhaps this isn't the thread for it? Is your only point really that you don't care either way? Because you could have written that a lot more succinctly, than those essays above!
I have no idea why you think any breastfeeding woman would need some random dude asking if he could help her breastfeed. :rolleyes: Naw lad, you're alright, she's got it. :pac::pac::pac:
One eyed Jack wrote: » You’re taking the piss volchista? You have gone out of your way to misrepresent my opinions on numerous occasions. I couldn’t trust you to sum up even this sentence without misrepresenting what I’m saying to suit your own prejudices.
One eyed Jack wrote: » They’d eat what they were given, or die. What they were given would likely have consisted of mainly plant based nutrition, including milk from plants like I suggested earlier, long before breastfeeding was a thing -The Evolution of Diet
One eyed Jack wrote: » I know what you mean - I can’t decide if I’m being trolled or not or are people actually pretending they aren’t aware of stuff that could have been learned from a secondary school science book.
volchitsa wrote: » Ah the old "ad hominem" classic. Old, tired and unconvincing, you need to do better.
One eyed Jack wrote: » My thoughts exactly as I read your post. I also said earlier I wouldn’t respond to you again, so we’re done here. Done with this thread actually tbh as it’s going nowhere and shouldn’t even have gone this far, and wouldn’t have gone this far if I hadn’t constantly to correct posters misrepresenting what I’d said. It’s not trolling to correct people when they’re purposely misrepresenting what you’ve said.
Neyite wrote: » Every time I see a thread like this it reinforces my belief that the breastfeeding isn't the thing that outrages the male posters against it, it's the fact that the woman has dared to use her breasts for a purpose other than to give them a boner and their egos can't take that.
One eyed Jack wrote: » The sheer volume of reactions it generates both positive and negative would suggest that people even in this country alone, are divided on the issue, but it shouldn’t surprise anyone that posters here would have overwhelmingly positive opinions about it and try to portray anyone who disagrees with the idea of it being appropriate behaviour in public as abnormal.
One eyed Jack wrote: » Nature doesn’t have an intent. There’s no specific reason has ever been determined as to why humans breastfeed (plenty of various theories put forward though), but it’s certainly not something nature intended.
One eyed Jack wrote: » Breastfeeding has enjoyed the odd resurgence throughout history before being seen as something only commoners do. It’s why in Victorian times they had wet nurses (something else that’s enjoying something of a resurgence on social justice media), but for the vast majority of people it’s nothing more than an unusual trend that comes and goes - one minute it’s trendy and new and ‘in yer face ye old fogey’, the next its been consigned to history as a primitive practice.
One eyed Jack wrote: » That’s a belief based upon culture rather than having any scientific basis. Given that they are biologically referred to as secondary sexual characteristics in mammals and the fact that only in humans females are the breasts permanently enlarged, alternative evolutionary theories suggest that their permanently enlarged state evolved that way to attract attention from potential mates. Point being really that there isn’t any such thing as the breasts having a “primary function” from a biological perspective at least. As I pointed out earlier in the thread - humans were once lactose intolerant, but evolved to tolerate lactose in milk, and we’re the only species which drinks the milk of other mammals too.
Soy milk would likely have been just as popular as breastfeeding, if it didn’t taste like shìte.
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).
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:
One eyed Jack wrote: » 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.
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.
Jenna James wrote: » I personally dislike it but I guess it's a right.
One eyed Jack wrote: » Even Facebook up until recently banned sharing photos of breastfeeding as it was considered a violation of the company’s community standards -https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/11/facebook-breastfeeding-photo-ban-lifted-freethenipple-campaign-pictures_n_5484788.html?guccounter=1
Originally Posted by Neyite View Post Every time I see a thread like this it reinforces my belief that the breastfeeding isn't the thing that outrages the male posters against it, it's the fact that the woman has dared to use her breasts for a purpose other than to give them a boner and their egos can't take that.
Reviews and Books Galore wrote: » All joking aside, but do you actually believe that?
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » Nestle and their ilk (scum), did a great job of promoting their inadequate product and making people think that breastfeeding isn't essential. Breastfeeding in public should not be shunned. There are laws to protect women who chose to breastfeed. A law was created because such ignorant people exist. It's madness.
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » ??? Seriously? No reason to breastfeed? That's a ludicrous statement.
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » Well you can thank snobbery for that, and in more recent times scumbag companies like Nestle also helped with the positioning of breastfeeding. Breastfeeding is far from an "unusual trend".
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » Maybe it was an evolutionary mistake. It could be that simple. Breasts grow when producing milk, however much that may be depends on the person.
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » Based on what exactly?
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » What plants will give the same nourishment as breast milk? Any of those plants produce colostrum?
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » What a completely nonsensical post. You don't "need" to... Tell that to a baby that wants to be fed. You are suggesting using formula or "one of dozens" of other options (which you haven't mentioned yet) as a substitute for breast milk. Just so some immature fool doesn't get offended? Why should my child ingest something created in a factory, which has less nutritional value than breast milk when in public? Have you ever tried to heat a bottle up on a train or bus in -20 degrees? I highly doubt it somehow.
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » Dozens, so at least 24 options. Name one option that is as convenient as the breast?
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » Using a strawman to back up your silly argument. Time and can't be arsed. How condescending.
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » Would you believe that it's mainly the infant that leads when it comes to breastfeeding? The woman doesn't need to do much at all. If you ever seen a 2-3 minute old child crawling on the mother to find the breast. It's amazing. Mother doesn't need to do anything but let it happen and support the weight of the child.
Naya Elegant Performance wrote: » Your points seem very philosophical to be honest, plenty of fluff. There's not a lot in there that would suggest you know anything about breastfeeding. Regards one of your earlier points. What food could you give a cave baby, in the first 10 minutes of it's life?
One eyed Jack wrote: » I said there’s no specific reason has ever been determined as to why humans breastfeed. Plenty of theories put forward from an evolutionary perspective, such as the idea that humans had evolved with mammary glands and nipples before they were ever human, before evolution branched off into mammals, birds and amphibians. It’s a bit like the question of which came first - the chicken or the egg?
TerrorFirmer wrote: » Can't believe there is so much hot-headed debate about it really. Breastfeeding is perfectly grand, though some discretion is appreciated in some scenarios (that does not mean slinking off to the toilets). Is there really any more to say than that, from any angle of the argument?
One eyed Jack wrote: » It was essentially economic factors which drove the adoption of artificial alternatives to breastmilk feeding.
One eyed Jack wrote: » None of them. I didn’t suggest that any of them would either. That’s kinda the point of suggesting that they are alternatives to human breast milk. In the story I linked to earlier of the woman who appeared on the cover of TIME magazine, circumstances called for her medical team to consider alternatives for the infant such as soy milk -About 12 hours after my son was born, the doctor's debated whether to give soy or cow's milk formula to my baby. Many preemies have lactose intolerance and also sometimes soy allergies.
One eyed Jack wrote: » I don’t know about you but where I come from, the physical and mental health of the person or people with responsibility for caring for the infant is of equal importance as the physical and mental health of the infant. If the physical and mental health of the people responsible for caring for the infant is compromised, that undoubtedly has a knock-on effect on the health of the infant. I haven’t ever tried to heat a bottle up at -20 degrees, but I have seen the guilt experienced by many women who have been unable to breastfeed for that same infinite number of reasons, which weren’t helped by their experiences of “overly enthusiastic” midwifes and family members and friends with a mixture of condemnation and coercion to try and get the women to breastfeed.
One eyed Jack wrote: » It wasn’t a strawman, and it wasn’t intended to be condescending either. I’m not sure why you took it that way but it was a rather informal observation of a reality based upon my experience. When women I know have given birth, their lives don’t just stop to give them time to have their life revolve around their new infant. Breastfeeding takes a considerable amount of time that many women in my experience at least simply have said they don’t have time to devote the time and the effort necessary to do it. This is borne out by numerous surveys which see a significant drop-off in breastfeeding rates as soon as women leave the hospital after giving birth.
One eyed Jack wrote: » I’d genuinely like to believe that, but would you believe that hasn’t been my experience? I’m afraid I haven’t been fortunate enough to witness the phenomenon you describe. It does sound amazing, nothing like the reality of witnessing my wife giving birth, and frankly it’s not something I ever want to witness again.
One eyed Jack wrote: » Well of course there’s not a lot in my posts that would suggest I know anything about breastfeeding because the fact is, like most people - I don’t know a lot about breastfeeding.
