No, I don't think it was satire. It seems clear to me that this is someone whose sense of values is twisted into the idea that the female breast is something dirty and disgusting (see the derivation of the word "smut") -- the usage of the phrase "pull a tit out in public and hang a child from it" is diagnostic all by itself.
(It also, unsurprisingly, sounds like something which would be posted in childfree.)
I think that it's the loud and blatant attention moms that the article writer is talking about.
That's what I was seeing. the good ones, the ones that don't make a scene, and all that good stuff, this doesn't apply to.
and hey, ow. that hurt. I'm a member of childfree. don't hate. the ones that we do hate on are the ones that make the good ones look bad. Bad parents, Bad kids, Bad actions; that's what childfree frowns upon.
I don't see anything here that implies the women in question are "baring it all". Indeed, if you're baring it all, you aren't nursing. The nipple has to be in the mouth for the baby to get food.
And childfree? Last I checked, it was full of hateful people who make the rest of the childfree world look bad. Which is why I never joined it. I'm a member of the quieter childfree comms.
I am a bit mean, I will admit (I'm in that comm and the mean comm.). Personally, I'm fine with women nursing, if they're being polite about it and not screaming about it. Yes, there will be stares. We're raised in a culture that isn't nudity friendly for adults, and it will take time for us to get adjusted. And there are always people who wear hats on their backsides.
What I mean is that, the ones that this article is probably referring to are the mothers that want attention and such just because she had a baby (omg, look at me! I had a baby, I am teh_awesomea). I know exactly what I mean, I really do. it's hard to get across without voice and much hand gesturing (you know the italian stereotype of constant hand movement? it's true.). The loud, obnoxious mothers.
I like childfree because I like reading the stories about bad parents, and the actual bad_parents comm is too depressing for me.
They have gotten less hateful and X-TREEM *guitar riff* as time has gone on, even though there was a nasty spat about the 'mothers-who-support-childfreeness' that was just eyerolly.
The tone is overly snide, but I agree, at least, that there are more important things for people to be spending time on. If the greatest oppression you suffer is the inability to breastfeed in public, you're lucky.
There may be more important things, however, if your biggest problem is that other people breastfeed in public, you can't pull that argument anymore.
Also, if you can't breastfeed in public, and you're a nursing mother, you're confined to your house. Many babies have problems with nipple confusion. If you give them a bottle, this interferes with their ability to nurse from the breast. Many women have trouble pumping. They can't pump milk. They therefore can't give EBM. And the less you nurse (or pump), the less you produce. This can produce a vicious cycle of women supplementing with formula, producing less milk, and then having to supplement more.
This isn't "a tiny bit of oppression". This is a big deal.
This isn't "a tiny bit of oppression". This is a big deal.
I totally agree, for exactly the reasons you mention.
These bills are introduced mainly to protect those breastfeeding in a public area from being told that they have to remove themselves from said area in order to feed their child. That causes many people to be asked to feed their child in the bathroom. I don't kow how many public bathrooms you've been to, but most of the ones I've seen are pretty filthy. If I don't even like going in there to take care of urgent elimiation business, I sure as hell do not want to feed my child in there!
Also, in some areas if their public indecency law is not amended to exclude breastfeeding, a woman could theorectically be arrested for nursing her child.
Very often, the women making such a big stink about getting these laws amended or written in the first place are discreet nursers to begin with. But as with any legislative action you want to happen, you have to make some noise to make some change.
There may be more important causes, but I don't like to use the more important cause argument. Is it important to have music? Yes. Is it more important to feed the hungry, probably. But if we only focused on feeding the hungry, no one would be supporting the arts, and our culture would suck. So, I am in favor of anyone working on any good cause. And this is a good cause. It's about changing cultural views so that women aren't seen as inherently dirty and mothers aren't confined to the house. That's important.
The only battle I successfully fought was a very small battle. I got a blind-friendly traffic light installed at a particular intersection. It was a good intersection for it - very busy, large, right by a BART (our local train system) station, and only a block away from a blind center, which if you BARTed into, you'd need to cross that intersection to get to. It wasn't the most vital thing to do to change and improve the world, but I think it was a good cause. It was self-serving, I freely admit, but still a good cause. And so many people don't even bother to try for the self-serving good causes. So, I support anyone taking any action large or small that is positive.
Besides, I can't figure out how to rank good causes to figure out which is most vital. Is it education or food or maybe immunizations or housing or curing diseases... which isn't that pointful I suppose if we don't immunize and treat people... or cleaning up the environment. And then I feel bad that I don't put helping animal shelters into the list, but I do think we should help humans first and then work on being better to animals, and yet all those poor cats and dogs and rabbits and such... Which is when most people just give up and do nothing helpful at all. Better to do what you can and not get overwhelmed.
No, I don't think it was satire. It seems clear to me that this is someone whose sense of values is twisted into the idea that the female breast is something dirty and disgusting (see the derivation of the word "smut") -- the usage of the phrase "pull a tit out in public and hang a child from it" is diagnostic all by itself.
(It also, unsurprisingly, sounds like something which would be posted in childfree.)
I think that it's the loud and blatant attention moms that the article writer is talking about.
That's what I was seeing. the good ones, the ones that don't make a scene, and all that good stuff, this doesn't apply to.
and hey, ow. that hurt. I'm a member of childfree. don't hate. the ones that we do hate on are the ones that make the good ones look bad. Bad parents, Bad kids, Bad actions; that's what childfree frowns upon.
I don't see anything here that implies the women in question are "baring it all". Indeed, if you're baring it all, you aren't nursing. The nipple has to be in the mouth for the baby to get food.
And childfree? Last I checked, it was full of hateful people who make the rest of the childfree world look bad. Which is why I never joined it. I'm a member of the quieter childfree comms.
I am a bit mean, I will admit (I'm in that comm and the mean comm.). Personally, I'm fine with women nursing, if they're being polite about it and not screaming about it. Yes, there will be stares. We're raised in a culture that isn't nudity friendly for adults, and it will take time for us to get adjusted. And there are always people who wear hats on their backsides.
What I mean is that, the ones that this article is probably referring to are the mothers that want attention and such just because she had a baby (omg, look at me! I had a baby, I am teh_awesomea). I know exactly what I mean, I really do. it's hard to get across without voice and much hand gesturing (you know the italian stereotype of constant hand movement? it's true.). The loud, obnoxious mothers.
I like childfree because I like reading the stories about bad parents, and the actual bad_parents comm is too depressing for me.
They have gotten less hateful and X-TREEM *guitar riff* as time has gone on, even though there was a nasty spat about the 'mothers-who-support-childfreeness' that was just eyerolly.
The tone is overly snide, but I agree, at least, that there are more important things for people to be spending time on. If the greatest oppression you suffer is the inability to breastfeed in public, you're lucky.
There may be more important things, however, if your biggest problem is that other people breastfeed in public, you can't pull that argument anymore.
Also, if you can't breastfeed in public, and you're a nursing mother, you're confined to your house. Many babies have problems with nipple confusion. If you give them a bottle, this interferes with their ability to nurse from the breast. Many women have trouble pumping. They can't pump milk. They therefore can't give EBM. And the less you nurse (or pump), the less you produce. This can produce a vicious cycle of women supplementing with formula, producing less milk, and then having to supplement more.
This isn't "a tiny bit of oppression". This is a big deal.
This isn't "a tiny bit of oppression". This is a big deal.
I totally agree, for exactly the reasons you mention.
These bills are introduced mainly to protect those breastfeeding in a public area from being told that they have to remove themselves from said area in order to feed their child. That causes many people to be asked to feed their child in the bathroom. I don't kow how many public bathrooms you've been to, but most of the ones I've seen are pretty filthy. If I don't even like going in there to take care of urgent elimiation business, I sure as hell do not want to feed my child in there!
Also, in some areas if their public indecency law is not amended to exclude breastfeeding, a woman could theorectically be arrested for nursing her child.
Very often, the women making such a big stink about getting these laws amended or written in the first place are discreet nursers to begin with. But as with any legislative action you want to happen, you have to make some noise to make some change.
There may be more important causes, but I don't like to use the more important cause argument. Is it important to have music? Yes. Is it more important to feed the hungry, probably. But if we only focused on feeding the hungry, no one would be supporting the arts, and our culture would suck. So, I am in favor of anyone working on any good cause. And this is a good cause. It's about changing cultural views so that women aren't seen as inherently dirty and mothers aren't confined to the house. That's important.
The only battle I successfully fought was a very small battle. I got a blind-friendly traffic light installed at a particular intersection. It was a good intersection for it - very busy, large, right by a BART (our local train system) station, and only a block away from a blind center, which if you BARTed into, you'd need to cross that intersection to get to. It wasn't the most vital thing to do to change and improve the world, but I think it was a good cause. It was self-serving, I freely admit, but still a good cause. And so many people don't even bother to try for the self-serving good causes. So, I support anyone taking any action large or small that is positive.
Besides, I can't figure out how to rank good causes to figure out which is most vital. Is it education or food or maybe immunizations or housing or curing diseases... which isn't that pointful I suppose if we don't immunize and treat people... or cleaning up the environment. And then I feel bad that I don't put helping animal shelters into the list, but I do think we should help humans first and then work on being better to animals, and yet all those poor cats and dogs and rabbits and such... Which is when most people just give up and do nothing helpful at all. Better to do what you can and not get overwhelmed.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
And they wonder WHY.
no subject
*shudder*
no subject
no subject
No, I don't think it was satire. It seems clear to me that this is someone whose sense of values is twisted into the idea that the female breast is something dirty and disgusting (see the derivation of the word "smut") -- the usage of the phrase "pull a tit out in public and hang a child from it" is diagnostic all by itself.
(It also, unsurprisingly, sounds like something which would be posted in
no subject
That's what I was seeing. the good ones, the ones that don't make a scene, and all that good stuff, this doesn't apply to.
and hey, ow. that hurt. I'm a member of childfree. don't hate. the ones that we do hate on are the ones that make the good ones look bad. Bad parents, Bad kids, Bad actions; that's what childfree frowns upon.
no subject
And
no subject
no subject
I like childfree because I like reading the stories about bad parents, and the actual bad_parents comm is too depressing for me.
They have gotten less hateful and X-TREEM *guitar riff* as time has gone on, even though there was a nasty spat about the 'mothers-who-support-childfreeness' that was just eyerolly.
And the non-angry posts are very useful.
no subject
no subject
Also, if you can't breastfeed in public, and you're a nursing mother, you're confined to your house. Many babies have problems with nipple confusion. If you give them a bottle, this interferes with their ability to nurse from the breast. Many women have trouble pumping. They can't pump milk. They therefore can't give EBM. And the less you nurse (or pump), the less you produce. This can produce a vicious cycle of women supplementing with formula, producing less milk, and then having to supplement more.
This isn't "a tiny bit of oppression". This is a big deal.
no subject
I totally agree, for exactly the reasons you mention.
These bills are introduced mainly to protect those breastfeeding in a public area from being told that they have to remove themselves from said area in order to feed their child. That causes many people to be asked to feed their child in the bathroom. I don't kow how many public bathrooms you've been to, but most of the ones I've seen are pretty filthy. If I don't even like going in there to take care of urgent elimiation business, I sure as hell do not want to feed my child in there!
Also, in some areas if their public indecency law is not amended to exclude breastfeeding, a woman could theorectically be arrested for nursing her child.
Very often, the women making such a big stink about getting these laws amended or written in the first place are discreet nursers to begin with. But as with any legislative action you want to happen, you have to make some noise to make some change.
no subject
The only battle I successfully fought was a very small battle. I got a blind-friendly traffic light installed at a particular intersection. It was a good intersection for it - very busy, large, right by a BART (our local train system) station, and only a block away from a blind center, which if you BARTed into, you'd need to cross that intersection to get to. It wasn't the most vital thing to do to change and improve the world, but I think it was a good cause. It was self-serving, I freely admit, but still a good cause. And so many people don't even bother to try for the self-serving good causes. So, I support anyone taking any action large or small that is positive.
Besides, I can't figure out how to rank good causes to figure out which is most vital. Is it education or food or maybe immunizations or housing or curing diseases... which isn't that pointful I suppose if we don't immunize and treat people... or cleaning up the environment. And then I feel bad that I don't put helping animal shelters into the list, but I do think we should help humans first and then work on being better to animals, and yet all those poor cats and dogs and rabbits and such... Which is when most people just give up and do nothing helpful at all. Better to do what you can and not get overwhelmed.
no subject
And they wonder WHY.
no subject
*shudder*
no subject
no subject
No, I don't think it was satire. It seems clear to me that this is someone whose sense of values is twisted into the idea that the female breast is something dirty and disgusting (see the derivation of the word "smut") -- the usage of the phrase "pull a tit out in public and hang a child from it" is diagnostic all by itself.
(It also, unsurprisingly, sounds like something which would be posted in
no subject
That's what I was seeing. the good ones, the ones that don't make a scene, and all that good stuff, this doesn't apply to.
and hey, ow. that hurt. I'm a member of childfree. don't hate. the ones that we do hate on are the ones that make the good ones look bad. Bad parents, Bad kids, Bad actions; that's what childfree frowns upon.
no subject
And
no subject
no subject
I like childfree because I like reading the stories about bad parents, and the actual bad_parents comm is too depressing for me.
They have gotten less hateful and X-TREEM *guitar riff* as time has gone on, even though there was a nasty spat about the 'mothers-who-support-childfreeness' that was just eyerolly.
And the non-angry posts are very useful.
no subject
no subject
Also, if you can't breastfeed in public, and you're a nursing mother, you're confined to your house. Many babies have problems with nipple confusion. If you give them a bottle, this interferes with their ability to nurse from the breast. Many women have trouble pumping. They can't pump milk. They therefore can't give EBM. And the less you nurse (or pump), the less you produce. This can produce a vicious cycle of women supplementing with formula, producing less milk, and then having to supplement more.
This isn't "a tiny bit of oppression". This is a big deal.
no subject
I totally agree, for exactly the reasons you mention.
These bills are introduced mainly to protect those breastfeeding in a public area from being told that they have to remove themselves from said area in order to feed their child. That causes many people to be asked to feed their child in the bathroom. I don't kow how many public bathrooms you've been to, but most of the ones I've seen are pretty filthy. If I don't even like going in there to take care of urgent elimiation business, I sure as hell do not want to feed my child in there!
Also, in some areas if their public indecency law is not amended to exclude breastfeeding, a woman could theorectically be arrested for nursing her child.
Very often, the women making such a big stink about getting these laws amended or written in the first place are discreet nursers to begin with. But as with any legislative action you want to happen, you have to make some noise to make some change.
no subject
The only battle I successfully fought was a very small battle. I got a blind-friendly traffic light installed at a particular intersection. It was a good intersection for it - very busy, large, right by a BART (our local train system) station, and only a block away from a blind center, which if you BARTed into, you'd need to cross that intersection to get to. It wasn't the most vital thing to do to change and improve the world, but I think it was a good cause. It was self-serving, I freely admit, but still a good cause. And so many people don't even bother to try for the self-serving good causes. So, I support anyone taking any action large or small that is positive.
Besides, I can't figure out how to rank good causes to figure out which is most vital. Is it education or food or maybe immunizations or housing or curing diseases... which isn't that pointful I suppose if we don't immunize and treat people... or cleaning up the environment. And then I feel bad that I don't put helping animal shelters into the list, but I do think we should help humans first and then work on being better to animals, and yet all those poor cats and dogs and rabbits and such... Which is when most people just give up and do nothing helpful at all. Better to do what you can and not get overwhelmed.