Woman Breast-fed Baby-Told It Is Weird

Ziz wrote:Dear oh dear, the Mail is still pandering to primitives by doing stories about women breastfeeding.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:Dear oh dear, the Mail is still pandering to primitives by doing stories about women breastfeeding.

,
And women are still running to the papers whinging that they should be able to breast feed anytime, anyplace, anywhere, no matter how unprofessional or unsuitable that place may be.

The only difference in this story is the tree hugging mother is not gurning to the camera with her breasts out...though there is time.

nicko wrote:All Mail readers are "primitives"?

All two and a half million of 'em?

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:
,
And women are still running to the papers whinging that they should be able to breast feed anytime, anyplace, anywhere, no matter how unprofessional or unsuitable that place may be.

The only difference in this story is the tree hugging mother is not gurning to the camera with her breasts out...though there is time.

And so they should - only a true primitive or pervert would object to someone naturally feeding a baby.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

And so they should - only a true primitive or pervert would object to someone naturally feeding a baby.

Breast feeding is great, as long as it's done with a modicum of sense and sensitivity.
For eg, a woman who breast feeds her baby is a crowded paddling pool, (this was yet another publicity hungry compensation grabbing idiot who made the tabloids fairly recently) is rightly stopped. then runs crying to the papers because she is SO embarrassed and feels worthless by the whole ordeal....is a woman not really fit to have a child imo.

Ziz wrote:

nicko wrote:All Mail readers are "primitives"?

All two and a half million of 'em?

Most of them - and not very bright too.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

Most of them - and not very bright too.

Lol....yet many of the most popular and interesting threads discussed on  forums has started off with a story plucked from guess where?

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

Breast feeding is great, as long as it's done with a modicum of sense and sensitivity.
For eg, a woman who breast feeds her baby is a crowded paddling pool, (this was yet another publicity hungry compensation grabbing idiot who made the tabloids fairly recently) is rightly stopped. then runs crying to the papers because she is SO embarrassed and feels worthless by the whole ordeal....is a woman not really fit to have a child imo.

The baby is what matters not the sensibilities of the prurient.

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

Lol....yet many of the most popular and interesting threads discussed on  forums has started off with a story plucked from guess where?

I know - thick people tend to pluck from the Mail - no mystery.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

The baby is what matters not the sensibilities of the prurient.

Exactly Ziz....glad you have seen the common sense of it all.
Poor baby being splashed and knocked around in a crowded pool because the mother thinks her rights are more important than the tots comfort.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

I know - thick people tend to pluck from the Mail - no mystery.

And what of the people who answer and debate the topic...are they thick too?

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

And what of the people who answer and debate the topic...are they thick too?

They are endeavouring to educate the less fortunate.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

They are endeavouring to educate the less fortunate.

No...they are getting into the spirit of it all Ziz....just as you do yourself.

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:
Exactly Ziz....glad you have seen the common sense of it all.
Poor baby being splashed and knocked around in a crowded pool because the mother thinks her rights are more important than the tots comfort.

It is for mother and baby to determine when baby needs feeding - not you or anyone else.

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

No...they are getting into the spirit of it all Ziz....just as you do yourself.

No, no - I'm here on a mission of mercy.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

It is for mother and baby to determine when baby needs feeding - not you or anyone else.

I'm sure if the baby had a choice he would have preferred to be in the comfort of the nearby seating area, where he would be safe and settled....no story in that though. .

Original Quill wrote:OK,someone please explain the difference...

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

I'm sure if the baby had a choice he would have preferred to be in the comfort of the nearby seating area, where he would be safe and settled....no story in that though. .

Where a mother chooses to feed her baby is up to her - not you.

Original Quill wrote:OK,someone please explain the difference...

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:OK,someone please explain the difference...

Err...one is getting fed?

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

Where a mother chooses to feed her baby is up to her - not you.

It should be up to common sense, sadly that's not always the case.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:OK,someone please explain the difference...

Err...one is getting fed?

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

It should be up to common sense, sadly that's not always the case.

No - it is up to the mother.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:
Err...one is getting fed?

There's 'upper torso' in both pictures.  Neither of the photos are provocative.  The readers (if any) are bothered by something in their minds, not in ours.  Just like beauty...nudity is in the eye of the beholder.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

No - it is up to the mother.

Not all mothers are capable of making common sense decisions....how much better would life be if they were.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

There's 'upper torso' in both pictures.  Neither of the photos are provocative.  The readers (if any) are bothered by something in their minds, not in ours.  Just like beauty...nudity is in the eye of the beholder.

I find both pics lovely too....I don't think that's the issue here though.

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

Not all mothers are capable of making common sense decisions....how much better would life be if they were.

What is common sense to one is not to another - there are no absolutes.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

What is common sense to one is not to another - there are no absolutes.

Is that why kids are taken into care, or need professional help to sort out their confusion thanks to bad parenting?

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

Is that why kids are taken into care, or need professional help to sort out their confusion thanks to bad parenting?

No child is taken into care for being breast fed in public.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

No child is taken into care for being breast fed in public.

The conversation has expanded...keep up.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

There's 'upper torso' in both pictures.  Neither of the photos are provocative.  The readers (if any) are bothered by something in their minds, not in ours.  Just like beauty...nudity is in the eye of the beholder.

I find both pics lovely too....I don't think that's the issue here though.

History of men's swimwear wrote:Since ancient times, men’s swimwear has been on a journey from virtual non-existence at one extreme, to providing incredible performance, durability and style at the other. The journey started out well over 100 years ago as a means of covering up to preserve modesty and dignity in public, progressing through various styles and designs to achieve this end. Public opinion eventually shifted to the extent that bare-chested men were socially acceptable.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:

I find both pics lovely too....I don't think that's the issue here though.

I fail to see that it isn't the issue.  The basis of the complaint is that breastfeeding is a form of nudity.  Nudity at a minimum involves exposure of mucocutaneous tissue having to do with reproductive organs.  There is no mucocutaneous tissue on breasts.  

During Victorian days it was considered improper to expose the male upper torso during bathing.  Now it common:

History of men's swimwear wrote:Since ancient times, men’s swimwear has been on a journey from virtual non-existence at one extreme, to providing incredible performance, durability and style at the other. The journey started out well over 100 years ago as a means of covering up to preserve modesty and dignity in public, progressing through various styles and designs to achieve this end. Public opinion eventually shifted to the extent that bare-chested men were socially acceptable.

There is no difference between men's and women's chests, save that there is an abundance of fat and mammary glands subcutaneously in women.  It's all in the minds of the beholders.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I fail to see that it isn't the issue.  The basis of the complaint is that breastfeeding is a form of nudity.  Nudity at a minimum involves exposure of mucocutaneous tissue having to do with reproductive organs.  There is no mucocutaneous tissue on breasts.  

During Victorian days it was considered improper to expose the male upper torso during bathing.  Now it common:



There is no difference between men's and women's chests, save that there is an abundance of fat and mammary glands subcutaneously in women.  It's all in the minds of the beholders.

Would you find it acceptable for a man to strip off and bear his chest in the middle of an interview then Quill??

I don't find breast feeding or nudity offensive, but I do think there are places that are unsuitable to breast feed a baby.
A busy swimming pool or in the middle of a job interview is not imo suitable.
You and Ziz think it is...I don't...vive la difference.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I fail to see that it isn't the issue.  The basis of the complaint is that breastfeeding is a form of nudity.  Nudity at a minimum involves exposure of mucocutaneous tissue having to do with reproductive organs.  There is no mucocutaneous tissue on breasts.  

During Victorian days it was considered improper to expose the male upper torso during bathing.  Now it common:



There is no difference between men's and women's chests, save that there is an abundance of fat and mammary glands subcutaneously in women.  It's all in the minds of the beholders.

Would you find it acceptable for a man to strip off and bear his chest in the middle of an interview then Quill??

Syl wrote:I don't find breast feeding or nudity offensive, but I do think there are places that are unsuitable to breast feed a baby.
A busy swimming pool or in the middle of a job interview is not imo suitable.
You and Ziz think it is...I don't...vive la difference.

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

Would you find it acceptable for a man to strip off and bear his chest in the middle of an interview then Quill??

I don't find breast feeding or nudity offensive, but I do think there are places that are unsuitable to breast feed a baby.
A busy swimming pool or in the middle of a job interview is not imo suitable.
You and Ziz think it is...I don't...vive la difference.

I think a baby's needs come first - a man bearing his chest in an interview is not serving the needs of a baby.

Only weird people finding feeding a baby inappropriate because of other's sensibilities.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

I think a baby's needs come first - a man bearing his chest in an interview is not serving the needs of a baby.

Only weird people finding feeding a baby inappropriate because of other's sensibilities.

I think it's a bit weird that women run to the papers exposing their babies to the worlds press just so they can gurn at the camera with a hurt expression on their faces and their tit hanging out.  

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:

Would you find it acceptable for a man to strip off and bear his chest in the middle of an interview then Quill??

I wouldn't be the least bit offended if there were a reasonable justification.  The only reason we would feel it's weird would be because there is no fathomable justification for it.  There is, with a breast feeding mother.

Syl wrote:I don't find breast feeding or nudity offensive, but I do think there are places that are unsuitable to breast feed a baby.
A busy swimming pool or in the middle of a job interview is not imo suitable.
You and Ziz think it is...I don't...vive la difference.

But you fail to justify your sense of impropriety, wherever you assign its unsuitability (restaurant, pool, etc.).  Nursing is a life function...I think it has first priority.  Beyond life functions, I am simply indifferent about bare breasts.

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

I think it's a bit weird that women run to the papers exposing their babies to the worlds press just so they can gurn at the camera with a hurt expression on their faces and their tit hanging out.  

Money talks - and fools fall for the bollox in the Mail.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

Money talks - and fools fall for the bollox in the Mail.

And yet here you are Ziz...looking down your nose at the paper yet eagerly discussing it's content.

nicko wrote:He buys it every day !

Ziz wrote:

Syl wrote:

And yet here you are Ziz...looking down your nose at the paper yet eagerly discussing it's content.

Eager to educate primitives.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I wouldn't be the least bit offended if there were a reasonable justification.  The only reason we would feel it's weird would be because there is no fathomable justification for it.  There is, with a breast feeding mother.



But you fail to justify your sense of impropriety, wherever you assign its unsuitability (restaurant, pool, etc.).  Nursing is a life function...I think it has first priority.  Beyond life functions, I am simply indifferent about bare breasts.

Restaurant = suitable.

Swimming Pool = not suitable.

Apart from the babies safety, what if the baby sicks up a bit which often happens when feeding?
Are other babies and children expected to swim in unclean water?

You see, it's all a matter of common sense and consideration Quill.

Syl wrote:

Ziz wrote:

Eager to educate primitives.

I wont ask who you consider to be the primitives....in your over inflated sense of self you probably think everyone.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:

Restaurant = suitable.

Swimming Pool = not suitable.

Apart from the babies safety, what if the baby sicks up a bit which often happens when feeding?
Are other babies and children expected to swim in unclean water?

You see, it's all a matter of common sense and consideration Quill.

We are talking past one another.  For me:

Anywhere it's appropriate for men = it's appropriate for women.

The only way breastfeeding plays into this is it creates justification for the female where neither male or female nudity would be appropriate otherwise.  That would be in restaurants, airport and train lobbies, hospitals, hotel lobbies...any public place where necessity trumps propriety otherwise.