Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Extended Parenting Controversy? Options · View
Nikki703
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 7:21:33 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/7/2009
Posts: 13,920
Location: The Other Side Of The Mirror


How do you feel about this? Healthy? Wrong? Child Abuse?

Time breastfeeding cover sparks controversy

By Dylan Stableford
Senior Media Reporter

The May 21, 2012, cover of Time (Time)

This week's Time magazine cover features Jamie Lynne Grumet, a 26-year-old woman breastfeeding her three-year-old son. Grumet was one of four mothers photographed by Time for a cover story on "attachment parenting," an approach--outlined by 1992's "The Baby Book" by Dr. Bill Sears--that recommends extended breast-feeding, co-sleeping and "baby wearing." Time's cover line for the May 21 issue asks, "Are You Mom Enough?"

The provocative cover, published online Thursday, was met with the predictable Twitter jaw-drop.

"Love the Time cover," AllThingsD.com's Peter Kafka wrote. "In the cringiest way possible."

"Anybody else slightly slack-jawed over this week's Time cover?" The Atlantic Wire's Adam Clark Estes asked rhetorically.

"Breastfeeding your 3-year-old is one thing," the Daily News' Bill Hammond wrote. "But putting a picture of him doing it on the cover of Time?"

"The kid on the cover of this week's Time magazine is really going to hate middle school," Gavin Purcell observed.

"Heads up, parents!" John Cannon warned. "If you're planning to take your kids grocery shopping, you will have to explain this Time mag cover."

"I would be way more impressed with Time if they put a mom on the cover in the typical age bracket of 'attachment parenting,'" Salon's Irin Carmon tweeted. "Not a 26-year-old."

Time managing editor Rick Stengel defended the decision for the cover.

"We used an image that represents the attachment of a mother and child," Stengel said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe." MSNBC showed the cover but blurred the breast out during the broadcast. ABC's "The View" covered it up, too.

"I don't wince when I look at the picture," he continued. "I think it's provocative. I think it's a little whimsical. I think she represents an outlier of women who are breastfeeding beyond one year. The cover is meant to get your attention. It gets your attention. I think this is a legitimate debate. It's a debate lots and lots of women are having."

It's not the first time Time has put a breastfeeding mom on its cover. In 1999, the magazine's cover featured a woman breastfeeding her baby for a special report on the war in Kosovo. And Time has featured breasts on its cover before for stories related to breast cancer.

It's worth noting that the international cover of Time's May 21 issue does not feature a breastfeeding image--it's new French president Francois Hollande.

Nonetheless, it's likely going to get Time magazine censored at some newsstands. New York's Hudson News has a history of covering up magazines in its window display that put scantily clad women on their covers. In 2006, the Grand Central Terminal newsstand put sheets of paper over three consecutive issues of FHM.

Later that year, Hudson News censored an issue of Marie Claire featuring a topless Ashley Judd.

LadyX
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 7:39:54 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,804
Damn, people in this country are prudes; how embarrassing it is that people are worked up over that. I think I was really meant to live elsewhere.

As for the actual issue at hand- there's no moderation, it seems. No "well what works for one kid, or family, might not work for another"- everyone feels like they have to pick a side and harshly judge the other side. Mommy wars are vicious and exhausting.
Buz
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 7:46:39 AM

Rank: The Linebacker
Moderator

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 8,056
Location: Atlanta, United States
It definitely will catch your eye on the news stands and magazine racks. Of course that is why they did it, to sell issues and make a profit. I don't have an issue with it.

Personally, I think it's about time she weened that kid off the tit. But it ain't my kid.

lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 7:52:38 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,460
Location: Alabama, United States
Buz wrote:
It definitely will catch your eye on the news stands and magazine racks. Of course that is why they did it, to sell issues and make a profit. I don't have an issue with it.

Personally, I think it's about time she weened that kid off the tit. But it ain't my kid.



My thoughts exactly. Time magazine isn't doing anything altruistic. They put an image on the cover that they knew would be controversial. The more controversy the more people talk about it. The more people talk about it the more magazines they sell.

edit... and the cover doesn't offend me. Americans ARE too prudish. A woman should be able to breastfeed her child just about anywhere she sees fit. Breastfeeding is natural and beautiful. But the cover pic is unnecessarily "in your face" in a blatant attempt to offend the easily offended.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
1curiouscat
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 7:54:21 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/25/2011
Posts: 1,144
Location: São Paulo , Brazil
I have family is the States that just had children and unanimously said that its becoming more dificult by the day to breastfeed in public. LX - i agree with you that people are genuinly prudes. Can´t handle seeing a human baby suckling on their mother´s nipple.

Here in Brasil, it is common for women to breastfeed everywhere. Furthermore, I have been involved in coversation with friends over dinner and the women that have children even go on to say that their breast take on a complete diferent meaning to them once they are breastfeeding. They are no longer regarded sexually in any way. They are purely for feeding their child and that exposure of the nipple or the breast is secondary. Which is a bummer for the husband - but that a diferent story.

Although I am a male, and I understand that my opinion is not as relevant, breastfeeding is fundamental in the life of a baby. The milk created by the mother is more then just food - the amount of anticorps (sp?) and essential vitamins for the hormonal, muscular, mental and health growth of her baby. The longer you breastfeed your child the better he/she will be prepared health wise.








Overwhelming Reality

From Across the Room
sunshinehigh
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 7:56:32 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/27/2012
Posts: 208
Location: United States
I personally don't have a problem with her breastfeeding her child, or persuing the attachment parenting lifestyle...What I do however have an issue with is the title.

I am a mom and chose to bottle feed my son, I do not practice attachement parenting, does that somehow not make me mom enough



Also even though I know the mag only did this for sells it seems like there should be more of a connection between them. The hap hazzard way that she is breastfeeding him makes it seem more of a publicity thing.
Nikki703
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 8:07:56 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/7/2009
Posts: 13,920
Location: The Other Side Of The Mirror
I personally have no problem with it either, although I do agree with Sunshine that the title, "Are You Mom Enough" is a little insulting to Mom's who dont breast feed.

Its pretty obvious Time is just trying to sell magazines. Is it just me or is that a big 3yo? LOL!!

And Xuani you are so right. We are a society of prudes!!

The thing I find hillarious is that if someone like Larry Flynt had put this on the cover, there would be cries of Child Porn!!

Edit: I also love the look on the kids face!! Like he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, LOL!!
littlemissbitch
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 8:21:21 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/6/2011
Posts: 776
Location: the land of enchantment, United States
put that pic alone on a forum here and suddenly its child porn.
im all for breast feeding babies anytime .. anywhere but im sorry i draw the line when the kid can stand tit level to you. honestly looking at that picture..the subject matter and mostly the way its composed.. makes me want to stab out my mental eye.

littlemissbitch ~ professional face ripper offer, at your service..
Piquet
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 8:31:55 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/12/2009
Posts: 339
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Dear O dear, that cover is sure to spark a new spate of incest stories here on Lush all of which will achieve ' Famous Story' status by the time the weekend is over...but seriously, the paediatric crowd here in Australia tell you that you should breastfeed the young uns for as long as possible / practical but not when you turn up at school during morning break and offer them the boob.

Oh, Ok I just saw the fine print. The kid looks way older than 3 and this photo will come back to haunt him one day...



http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/claudia-incarnatapart-vii.aspx
latinfoxy
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 9:09:12 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/5/2011
Posts: 818
Location: Here
littlemissbitch wrote:
im all for breast feeding babies anytime .. anywhere but im sorry i draw the line when the kid can stand tit level to you.


I have to say i completely agree with you here, is society full of prudes? yes, but im not saying this because im one, if you want to breastfeed your child in front of me or in the streets or wherever you feel like doing it go for it, but in my opinion when your baby is old enough to walk to your breast then your kid is too old to be breastfed.

Guest
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 9:31:58 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 691,353
Apparently, the average to stop breastfeeding a child, is at 4.2 years... (according to the WHO)

That's a little old for me. I fed both of mine until they were two and, by that time, it was more of a comfort thing anyway. (I had to stop with the youngest anyway, as she kept fucking biting me...)

I don't have a problem with people breastfeeding older kids, as I say, it wouldn't be my personal choice, but I agree that society as a whole are far too judgmental regarding other people's parenting choices, or lack thereof...

I do agree though that the choice of this as a cover pic, was certainly deliberately provocative...
mercianknight
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:28:02 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/11/2009
Posts: 2,027
Location: whispering conspiratorially in your ear, Bermuda
I don't care what anyone says... Iwant that woman to adopt me and let me get my gums on those nips!! She's hot! binky

"Whoa, lady, I only speak two languages, English and bad English." - Korben Dallas, from The Fifth Element

"If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must man be of learning from experience?" - George Bernard Shaw
lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:09:45 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,460
Location: Alabama, United States
Even some noted breastfeeding advocates have taken issue with this cover....

Blossum and Milano weigh in

First off, Mayim Bialik—an outspoken advocate of breastfeeding and attachment parenting—promised to "go to bat" on behalf of "all of the amazing women who helped me be the mother i was meant to be."

"This is for you, La Leche League International and for every lactation consultant and fellow mama warrior who held me while I cried. this is not easy, to try and speak for all of us, but i will do my best to make you proud," the Big Bang Theory star wrote.

But she tweeted, "Cover of TIME magazine looking to be inflammatory about [attachment parenting] much? Dear goodness."


Alyssa Milano also thoroughly supports breastfeeding but not the Time cover.

"@Time, no! You missed the mark! You're supposed to be making it easier for breastfeeding moms. Your cover is exploitive & extreme," she chided via Twitter, recommending another article for people to read instead.


=================

How differently would people react if Octomom was on the cover doing this?







When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
LadyX
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:12:01 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,804
I love how we're trading judgmental mom attitude for harrumphing outrage at (gasp) an exposed breast and a suckling child! The outrage! Cover your eyes, good-virtued citizens!
MrNudiePants
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:14:32 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,226
Location: United States
I think this is the first time in my entire Lushlife that I agree with most everybody posting in this thread. Yes, Americans are way too fucking prude. Yes, women should be allowed to breastfeed in public. Americans are way too hung up on nudity and need to concentrate on evil acts, rather than just thinking that simple nudity and breastfeeding are evil in and of themselves. I think the woman in the article is an idiot, though. Not just for turning her son into a spectacle, but for her whole philosophy. Every other mammal stops breastfeeding their young when they're ready to transition to solid food. Why should her little precious be any different? That said, it's her body, and her kid. She can raise him however she wants, and I don't have the right to say boo about it, nor should I.
lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:20:56 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,460
Location: Alabama, United States
LadyX wrote:
I love how we're trading judgmental mom attitude for harrumphing outrage at (gasp) an exposed breast and a suckling child! The outrage! Cover your eyes, good-virtued citizens!


An exposed breast and suckling child isn't outrageous to me. The near nudity isn't an issue. Breastfeeding isn't the issue. It's a glorious thing. But the manner in which they present it is unsavory. Like mentioned above, the title "Are you mom enough?" implies that anyone who doesn't breastfeed or who is to modest/shy to do it so publicly is less than "mom enough".

If the goal is to enlighten and advance the cause of breastfeeding and attachment parenting, yet it sets the cause back instead, then it was poor choice. No matter of why, prudish Americans or not. If the end goal isn't met then it wasn't a good decision.

I have no issue with a mom breastfeeding in a restaurant, on a bus, plane, in the park, at a party. The picture is only meant to stir people up and sell magazines. As the saying goes, "there's no such thing as bad press."





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
LadyX
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 11:45:41 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,804
That's the thing: Mayim Bialik (or anybody else) is sorely mistaken if she somehow thought this was supposed to advance any causes. Time has no dog in that fight, they dont care either way. It's a feature piece meant to attract readers and provoke discussion, hopefully resulting in it's being linked across the blogosphere for a week or so. Outside of that, all we're left with is apparent dismay that magazines choose controversial images to market themselves. Why wouldnt they?

Participation in the mommy-wars = large readership.
Milik_the_Red
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 2:10:00 PM

Rank: Internet Philosopher
Moderator

Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4,992
Location: somewhere deep under the Earth, United States
I'm not a parent and I make no judgements. I do think that the kid will be tormented by his classmates as the years go by.

Dirty_D
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 2:50:08 PM

Rank: Head Nurse
Moderator

Joined: 4/15/2011
Posts: 7,487
Location: Soaking up the sun, United States
I have seen and commented on this several other places already. I breastfed my children till they were 18 months. It is soooo much better for the child then other replacements. The body changes the composition of the milk to give the child everything they require as they age. I have friends who breastfed until their children were 3. Their children are normal well adjusted adults at this point. They were deans list students. Another friend who fed her child till 3 is younger and has the same sort of issues many others do with children her age.

The mother might have spared her child some, but honestly, I doubt this is the first time a parent has utilized a child to get their moment of spotlight/advance their cause. To each parent their own.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 8:03:57 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,226
Location: United States
1Zratedgal
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 8:12:44 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/1/2011
Posts: 701
Location: Northern California, United States
Interesting topic Nikki!
I can see the controversy and opinions going in many directions on this!

Personnally, I would not have approved of this when I was in my 20's or 30's.
But my viewpoints along with the times have changed.

As some of you may know, I still lactate at middle age.
It is more a sexual thing but in terms of life, I would donate it if it would help others

The video that MrNudiePants posted has been around for some time and it stirs up the pot whenever it appears.

I no longer find issue with Breastfeeding children of nearly any age in public.
It is hard for me to draw a line but I would have to say that if it were a teenager, then it becomes a public display and not something completely acceptable by the general public.

Kisses!

Steph
Guest
Posted: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:06:54 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 691,353
1. Breast feeding is "pumped" into a mother's brain from the time she steps into the hospital. Some mom's can't, thus the breast pump. Like many Cosmo ads/articles/bullshit, it's a great way to make Mom feel really, inadequate.

2. The kid sucking sucking on his mom's tit. Well, if you want to rear a pussy that will get his ass kicked day in and day out, then keep on letting him suck on it. Oh, and good luck with getting more than 5 hours of sleep if the kid ain't on the bottle with some yummy cereal in it.

3. Time magazine? Really? How useless have you become? It's about time, Time, let it go.

Now, Happy Mother's Day all, let 'em fly, and I would be more than happy to suck on 'em all.

Before you take the "ewwww" stance, the kid on the tit. That itself is ewww. A newborn, very cute and nothing wrong about it. After about 2 - 3 years old, it's time to grasp some reality.
Guest
Posted: Saturday, May 12, 2012 12:43:18 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 691,353
My brother in law was breast fed till he was FIVE!!!!! Can tell you the problems he has!!!
Guest
Posted: Saturday, May 12, 2012 6:00:53 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 691,353


Just saw this and had to post...
DLizze
Posted: Saturday, May 12, 2012 10:50:32 AM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 4/23/2011
Posts: 2,568
Being male, I am biologically incapable of becoming pregnant; therefore I have no right to an opinon on abortion. Similarly, I do not feel I have a right to an opinion on breast feeding. I would respectfully suggest to all those males who have expressed opinions that unless you are capable of breast feeding, and are a parent, or have breast fed a child, you probably do not have a right to an opinion, either.

"There's only three tempos: slow, medium and fast. When you get between in the cracks, ain't nuthin' happenin'." Ben Webster
Guest
Posted: Saturday, May 12, 2012 6:55:05 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 691,353
If the dad with a kid is as present and informed about the rearing of a child as the mom, then, yeah, they can opine. And, if my kid were still on the breast after two, sorry, the ex and I would have had words.
DLizze
Posted: Saturday, May 12, 2012 9:19:09 PM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 4/23/2011
Posts: 2,568
Point taken. I didn't mean to exclude any activly parenting fathers.

"There's only three tempos: slow, medium and fast. When you get between in the cracks, ain't nuthin' happenin'." Ben Webster
Dirty_D
Posted: Sunday, May 13, 2012 6:07:06 AM

Rank: Head Nurse
Moderator

Joined: 4/15/2011
Posts: 7,487
Location: Soaking up the sun, United States
eviotis wrote:
1. Breast feeding is "pumped" into a mother's brain from the time she steps into the hospital. Some mom's can't, thus the breast pump. Like many Cosmo ads/articles/bullshit, it's a great way to make Mom feel really, inadequate.

If more mothers would utilize lactation specialists more mother's would be able to breastfeed. Most times can't is truly improper technique/training. Breast milk is without question THE VERY BEST food you can give your child.

2. The kid sucking sucking on his mom's tit. Well, if you want to rear a pussy that will get his ass kicked day in and day out, then keep on letting him suck on it. Oh, and good luck with getting more than 5 hours of sleep if the kid ain't on the bottle with some yummy cereal in it.

My friends who have utilized extended parenting, be it breastfeeding to 3 or the family bed, actually have children who are leaders of their sports teams. One aspect of your life is not the only building block to a personality!Having had two children I breastfeed to 18 months and 1(stepson) that was bottle feed, I can tell you that breastfeeding led to much more sleep. No heating milk, no mixing. Always ready, always perfect temp. The body is an amazing thing, the composition of a mothers milk changes slightly as the child's needs change. Mother's milk is the bes,t most digestible food for a child.

3. Time magazine? Really? How useless have you become? It's about time, Time, let it go.

They are a media outlet. They try to create controversy and discussion. Looks like they are being successful.

Now, Happy Mother's Day all, let 'em fly, and I would be more than happy to suck on 'em all.

Before you take the "ewwww" stance, the kid on the tit. That itself is ewww. A newborn, very cute and nothing wrong about it. After about 2 - 3 years old, it's time to grasp some reality.
rushman1uk
Posted: Sunday, May 13, 2012 10:26:28 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 12/26/2008
Posts: 273
Location: newcastle, United Kingdom
I see no problem with the woman breastfeeding her child at that age. It's upto her when she want's to stop, not law makers or morale people. It's her body, her son/daughter, let her be!
Buz
Posted: Monday, May 14, 2012 8:46:43 AM

Rank: The Linebacker
Moderator

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 8,056
Location: Atlanta, United States


Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.