Man Who Complained About Breastfeeding Mother Gets Thrown Out Of Cafe

by Guest Sun May 31, 2015 8:42 pm

First topic message reminder :

When a man complained to a cafe owner about a woman breastfeeding nearby, she was having none of it.
The “middle-aged gentleman” told the owner of Cheese and Biscuits cafe “there was a mother breastfeeding out there and we might want to ask her to cover up”, according to the Sydney Morning Herald. But Jessica-Anne Allen was thoroughly unimpressed and asked him to leave her establishment in Queensland, Australia,
She said: ”We told him that we are a breastfeeding friendly cafe, that we have mothers' groups and ladies who come and breastfeed all the time and we would never ask a mother to cover up when she is feeding her child.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/31/man-who-complained-breastfeeding-mother-thrown-out-of-cafe_n_7479136.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

Well done to the cafe owner.

by Guest Tue Jun 02, 2015 6:34 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Why would anyone marvel at it? It's quite commonplace really. People get so poetic about these things.

Some women can't breast feed, and I don't think they should be made to feel that their baby will not be as healthy, and will not "bond".

I have to confess that I've yet to see the evidence that they can't make a formula just as good as the milk that comes out of the human breast. I think that argument is just ethical naturalism rearing its head.

That said, ever since I was a little boy I have wondered why men can openly bare their chests, but women must hide their own upper body. I don't need a tirade about how innocent and beautiful the female breast is...just answer the simple question: why men, and not women?

Is it sexily provocative? Hell no...it has to do with hunger. Is it an erogenous zones? No more for women than men. All it is is a mammary gland embedded in fat. Your nose has glands in it, too. Why hide the breast and not the nose?

“Infant formula is basically the same as breast milk”

Fact: Infant formula isn’t the same as breast milk. It's not a living product so it doesn’t have the antibodies, living cells, enzymes or hormones that protect your baby from infections and diseases in childhood and also later in life.

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/pregnancy-and-baby/pages/why-breastfeed.aspx#close

by Guest Tue Jun 02, 2015 6:36 pm

From the same link:

Health benefits of breastfeeding for your baby

Breastfeeding is the healthiest way to feed your baby. Exclusive breastfeeding (giving your baby breast milk only) is recommended for around the first six months (26 weeks) of your baby's life. After that, giving your baby breast milk alongside other food will help them continue to grow and develop healthily.

Breastfeeding is good for babies. Breastfed babies have:

less chance of diarrhoea and vomiting and having to go to hospital as a result
fewer chest and ear infections and fewer visits to hospital as a result
less chance of being constipated
less likelihood of becoming obese and therefore developing type 2 diabetes and other obesity-related illnesses later in life
less chance of developing eczema

Any amount of breastfeeding has a positive effect. The longer you breastfeed, the longer the protection lasts and the greater the benefits.

Infant formula doesn't provide the same protection. Breast milk adapts as your baby grows to meet your baby's changing needs.

Perhaps you had better have a talk with your daughter, who you say is a doctor Quill. The positive health effects of breast milk are well known.

by Original Quill Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:20 pm

risingsun wrote:Fact: Infant formula isn’t the same as breast milk. It's not a living product so it doesn’t have the antibodies, living cells, enzymes or hormones that protect your baby from infections and diseases in childhood and also later in life.

Define "living product". If they can isolate the 'recipe' for breast milk such that they argue it is better, why can't they just make it? I mean...Duh?!

risingsun wrote:Perhaps you had better have a talk with your daughter, who you say is a doctor Quill. The positive health effects of breast milk are well known.

My daughter might agree with you...I've never discussed it with her.

I'm not as interested in discussing the value of breast milk, as learning why the social convention of covering a female upper body. We wouldn't need to discuss the health benefits of breast milk; indeed, it's a distraction. The fundamental question is direct: why?

I must confess, I have never found the female breast particularly erotic, except inasmuch as it is kept secret. On the occasions I have witnessed a mother feeding with her bare breast, my inclination is to look away...but only because society makes such a big deal of it. That is my question: why?

by Tommy Monk Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:26 pm

Breast milk passes on immunities and protections to the baby.

I've read somewhere that some of the vitamin/mineral additives in powder milk is not good for the baby and can actually cause sleepless nights and crying etc...

by Original Quill Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:33 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Breast milk passes on immunities and protections to the baby.

I've read somewhere that some of the vitamin/mineral additives in powder milk is not good for the baby and can actually cause sleepless nights and crying etc...

Unless there is an economic argument, what they can discover, they can manufacture. Immunology is no secret. They synthesize vaccines all the time.

But as I say, all of this is a distraction. There is nothing erotic about the female upper body. Indeed, they openly permit display of shoulders, arms, legs, feet and even--horrors!--the sexiest of ears. Laughing

I think it is a convention that started in the Victorian era--like circumcision--that has absolutely no redeemable value or justification. Man Who Complained About Breastfeeding Mother Gets Thrown Out Of Cafe - Page 3 2190311264

Man Who Complained About Breastfeeding Mother Gets Thrown Out Of Cafe - Page 3 2190311264

by Tommy Monk Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:50 pm

Obviously free breast milk being better and cheaper needs no costly replacement...

by Guest Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:04 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Obviously free breast milk being better and cheaper needs no costly replacement...

That too!

by Original Quill Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:11 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Obviously free breast milk being better and cheaper needs no costly replacement...

Obviously. The mere fact that we are having this discussion is evidence that there are concerns. I just don't get it.

The breast is simply not a sex organ. Watching a mother feed a baby with her breast is no different from watching a mother feeding a baby with a bottle...or doing many other things. The curves of the body--male or female--can make a part of the body into a sex object. And that's what society does when it insists that the female upper-torso be covered: it emphasizes that curve and makes, by scarcity, it into a sex object.

In the Victorian era we used to do the same thing with the male body. Then, sometime in the 1920's or thereabouts, they removed the prohibition of naked male upper bodies and now its no big deal. It's the same thing.

by Guest Tue Jun 02, 2015 9:57 pm

If real equality exists the man had a right to complain if it bothered him..

by Guest Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:00 pm

I agree the man had a right to complain if he was uncomfortable .

by veya_victaous Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:32 pm

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:If real equality exists the man had a right to complain if it bothered him..

no he doesn't just like the Muslim doesn't have the right to complain you're eating pork

or yes he dies have the right to voice his complaint but the response doesn't not have to be to his liking

you have the right to do things, Not to stop others doing things Rolling Eyes

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 7:32 am

veya_victaous wrote:
heavenlyfatheragain wrote:If real equality exists the man had a right to complain if it bothered him..

no he doesn't just like the Muslim doesn't have the right to complain you're eating pork

or yes he dies have the right to voice his complaint but the response doesn't not have to be to his liking

you have the right to do things, Not to stop others doing things

The man was removed from the cafe for merely complaining though.

I think the cafe owner sounds a bit OTT. If I lived there I would probably not go there in case she got stroppy about something.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:00 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:

no he doesn't just like the Muslim doesn't have the right to complain you're eating pork

or yes he dies have the right to voice his complaint but the response doesn't not have to be to his liking

you have the right to do things, Not to stop others doing things

The man was removed from the cafe for merely complaining though.

I think the cafe owner sounds a bit OTT. If I lived there I would probably not go there in case she got stroppy about something.

That is not why he was removed though was it Rags?

He asked the owner to ask the lady in question to cover up.
They advised it was breastfeeding freindly and advised:

"We also told him there were plenty of seats inside, away from the woman and her friends, if he wanted and he seemed fine, and as far as I was concerned that was the end of it."

It was his next actions that created the owner to ask him to leave:

But as she brought the customer his drink, he said that he had spoken to the mother, who has asked to remain anonymous.
Furious, Allen put his drink straight into a takeaway container and asked him to leave the premises.
The 29-year-old said: "I was afraid that she would feel like she had to cover up from now on.
"And quite frankly, that is not good enough. It should never have been an issue in the first place because it is a form of adult bullying and is actually against the law to approach a breastfeeding mother and ask her to stop or cover up."

He is then not respecting the cafe policy is he and he is then harrasing the customer.
They have every right to ask him to leave after that.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:13 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

The man was removed from the cafe for merely complaining though.

I think the cafe owner sounds a bit OTT. If I lived there I would probably not go there in case she got stroppy about something.

That is not why he was removed though was it Rags?

He asked the owner to ask the lady in question to cover up.
They advised it was breastfeeding freindly and advised:

"We also told him there were plenty of seats inside, away from the woman and her friends, if he wanted and he seemed fine, and as far as I was concerned that was the end of it."

It was his next actions that created the owner to ask him to leave:

But as she brought the customer his drink, he said that he had spoken to the mother, who has asked to remain anonymous.
Furious, Allen put his drink straight into a takeaway container and asked him to leave the premises.
The 29-year-old said: "I was afraid that she would feel like she had to cover up from now on.
"And quite frankly, that is not good enough. It should never have been an issue in the first place because it is a form of adult bullying and is actually against the law to approach a breastfeeding mother and ask her to stop or cover up."

He is then not respecting the cafe policy is he and he is then harrasing the customer.
They have every right to ask him to leave after that.

The owner can ask him to leave for any reason, I'm just saying that she over-reacted and went OTT - IMO. She only had to say to the woman that it was perfectly OK for her breast feed and to ignore the man.

I'm still a bit confused about the law there. The woman said it's against the law for the man to ask someone not to breastfeed. As far as I can see, it's not against the law for a random person to ask someone to stop breastfeeding.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:17 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

That is not why he was removed though was it Rags?

He asked the owner to ask the lady in question to cover up.
They advised it was breastfeeding freindly and advised:

"We also told him there were plenty of seats inside, away from the woman and her friends, if he wanted and he seemed fine, and as far as I was concerned that was the end of it."

It was his next actions that created the owner to ask him to leave:

But as she brought the customer his drink, he said that he had spoken to the mother, who has asked to remain anonymous.
Furious, Allen put his drink straight into a takeaway container and asked him to leave the premises.
The 29-year-old said: "I was afraid that she would feel like she had to cover up from now on.
"And quite frankly, that is not good enough. It should never have been an issue in the first place because it is a form of adult bullying and is actually against the law to approach a breastfeeding mother and ask her to stop or cover up."

He is then not respecting the cafe policy is he and he is then harrasing the customer.
They have every right to ask him to leave after that.

The owner can ask him to leave for any reason, I'm just saying that she over-reacted and went OTT - IMO. She only had to say to the woman that it was perfectly OK for her breast feed and to ignore the man.

I'm still a bit confused about the law there. The woman said it's against the law for the man to ask someone not to breastfeed. As far as I can see, it's not against the law for a random person to ask someone to stop breastfeeding.

Why should she ignore a woman being harrased in her cafe? You are agin offering a subjective view point based on how youi would feel, when many others would be rightly annoyed after already telling the man it was breastfeeding friendly, for then that person to ignore this and ask the woman to cover up. That again is harrasment and again unless you do actually make a stand and point on this, then that person will never learn and do so again. Now this person will think twice before harrassing customers on breastfeeding. When again they are clearly big supporters of the law regarding the right of women to breastfeed. That is not being OTT at all.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:21 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

The owner can ask him to leave for any reason, I'm just saying that she over-reacted and went OTT - IMO. She only had to say to the woman that it was perfectly OK for her breast feed and to ignore the man.

I'm still a bit confused about the law there. The woman said it's against the law for the man to ask someone not to breastfeed. As far as I can see, it's not against the law for a random person to ask someone to stop breastfeeding.

Why should she ignore a woman being harrased in her cafe? You are agin offering a subjective view point based on how youi would feel, when many others would be rightly annoyed after already telling the man it was breastfeeding friendly, for then that person to ignore this and ask the woman to cover up. That again is harrasment and again unless you do actually make a stand and point on this, then that person will never learn and do so again. Now this person will think twice before harrassing customers on breastfeeding. When again they are clearly big supporters of the law regarding the right of women to breastfeed. That is not being OTT at all.

That's right - I'm giving my opinion. My opinion is that she went OTT, and that I probably wouldn't go to her cafe if I lived there in case she kicked off about something. I'm entitled to think that and to say that.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:28 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

Why should she ignore a woman being harrased in her cafe? You are agin offering a subjective view point based on how youi would feel, when many others would be rightly annoyed after already telling the man it was breastfeeding friendly, for then that person to ignore this and ask the woman to cover up. That again is harrasment and again unless you do actually make a stand and point on this, then that person will never learn and do so again. Now this person will think twice before harrassing customers on breastfeeding. When again they are clearly big supporters of the law regarding the right of women to breastfeed. That is not being OTT at all.

That's right - I'm giving my opinion. My opinion is that she went OTT, and that I probably wouldn't go to her cafe if I lived there in case she kicked off about something. I'm entitled to think that and to say that.

You are entittled to your view which it seems allows people to be harrassed and to not take action when they are harrassed for doing nothing wrong. That is the point you miss. This is what you fail to grasp, if someone does something wrong and you do nothing, that person then believes they can then do the same again. People learn from where people stand up for the rights of others. With that view you would allow people to continue to do wrong of which you can apply to many things.
He had no right to harrass her based on his own problem with the situation and they acted in the best way possible to show his actions were wrong.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:35 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

That's right - I'm giving my opinion. My opinion is that she went OTT, and that I probably wouldn't go to her cafe if I lived there in case she kicked off about something. I'm entitled to think that and to say that.

You are entittled to your view which it seems allows people to be harrassed and to not take action when they are harrassed for doing nothing wrong. That is the point you miss. This is what you fail to grasp, if someone does something wrong and you do nothing, that person then believes they can then do the same again. People learn from where people stand up for the rights of others. With that view you would allow people to continue to do wrong of which you can apply to many things.
He had no right to harrass her based on his own problem with the situation and they acted in the best way possible to show his actions were wrong.

It's my OPINION that the owner could have reiterated her stance and told the man that he shouldn't have approached the women instead of dumping his drink and making a scene. The other thing I don't personally like is the fact that she put it on the internet. If I went to cafe where the owner put disagreements concerning their customers on the internet, I wouldn't like it. It was a private issue concerning her establishment - more attention seeking IMO.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:40 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

You are entittled to your view which it seems allows people to be harrassed and to not take action when they are harrassed for doing nothing wrong. That is the point you miss. This is what you fail to grasp, if someone does something wrong and you do nothing, that person then believes they can then do the same again. People learn from where people stand up for the rights of others. With that view you would allow people to continue to do wrong of which you can apply to many things.
He had no right to harrass her based on his own problem with the situation and they acted in the best way possible to show his actions were wrong.

It's my OPINION that the owner could have reiterated her stance and told the man that he shouldn't have approached the women instead of dumping his drink and making a scene. The other thing I don't personally like is the fact that she put it on the internet. If I went to cafe where the owner put disagreements concerning their customers on the internet, I wouldn't like it. It was a private issue concerning her establishment - more attention seeking IMO.

Yes your opinion allows people not to learn and think its okay to harras people.
Again you are trying to allow people who do wrong to think it is okay as what effect will after already telling him the cafe is breastfeeding friendly have on him?
Nothing, because he already went against the Cafe's policy and the law, thinking he is above both. Such a person clearly after the first time not heeding the policy required further action to be taken and the action here was appropiate.
Your way allows a person to think they can ignore the law and the policy of the cafe, because clearly advising him the first time did nothing to stop him thinking he could do as he pleased.
He was taught a lesson and rightly so. If you think teaching a person a valid lesson is OTT, you may want to rethink whether you believe teaching is valuable at all to you.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:44 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

It's my OPINION that the owner could have reiterated her stance and told the man that he shouldn't have approached the women instead of dumping his drink and making a scene. The other thing I don't personally like is the fact that she put it on the internet. If I went to cafe where the owner put disagreements concerning their customers on the internet, I wouldn't like it. It was a private issue concerning her establishment - more attention seeking IMO.

Yes your opinion allows people not to learn and think its okay to harras people.
Again you are trying to allow people who do wrong to think it is okay as what effect will after already telling him the cafe is breastfeeding friendly have on him?
Nothing, because he already went against the Cafe's policy and the law, thinking he is above both. Such a person clearly after the first time not heeding the policy required further action to be taken and the action here was appropiate.
Your way allows a person to think they can ignore the law and the policy of the cafe, because clearly advising him the first time did nothing to stop him thinking he could do as he please.
He was taught a lesson and rightluy so. If you think teaching a person a valid lesson is OTT, you may want to rethink whether you believe teaching is a valuable life lesson.

No, I don't want to rethink anything.

Actually, my main opinion concerns this business of putting such stuff all over the internet. People do get banned from shops or cafes, or asked to leave, but the shop manager or owner doesn't usually splash it all over the internet.

I witness such incidents and sometimes I'm on the side of the shop, and other times I'm on the side of the customer. I wouldn't expect to see the incident in full glory all over the press and the internet though. That's just indiscreet.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:50 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

Yes your opinion allows people not to learn and think its okay to harras people.
Again you are trying to allow people who do wrong to think it is okay as what effect will after already telling him the cafe is breastfeeding friendly have on him?
Nothing, because he already went against the Cafe's policy and the law, thinking he is above both. Such a person clearly after the first time not heeding the policy required further action to be taken and the action here was appropiate.
Your way allows a person to think they can ignore the law and the policy of the cafe, because clearly advising him the first time did nothing to stop him thinking he could do as he please.
He was taught a lesson and rightluy so. If you think teaching a person a valid lesson is OTT, you may want to rethink whether you believe teaching is a valuable life lesson.

No, I don't want to rethink anything.

Actually, my main opinion concerns this business of putting such stuff all over the internet. People do get banned from shops or cafes, or asked to leave, but the shop manager or owner doesn't usually splash it all over the internet.

I witness such incidents and sometimes I'm on the side of the shop, and other times I'm on the side of the customer. I wouldn't expect to see the incident in full glory all over the press and the internet though. That's just indiscreet.

It is even more important to put all over the internet to teach further how wrong it is for people to wrongly think they can harras people. That is how you further get the message across and gain more support for where people back the right of women to breastfeed without being harrassed.
Seriously how on earth do you think progression has come about, if you think people should allow others to not take action after already advising them of something for them to blatantly ignore your policy and the law?
You can be on what ever side you wish to be, the matter of the fact here is that this was not over the top and is something that should be championed for women having the right to breastfeed their child without harrasment.
So I would champion anyone making the story public to show the vast majority of people showing their approval for such action and also to show how wrong it is to harras customers.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:55 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

No, I don't want to rethink anything.

Actually, my main opinion concerns this business of putting such stuff all over the internet. People do get banned from shops or cafes, or asked to leave, but the shop manager or owner doesn't usually splash it all over the internet.

I witness such incidents and sometimes I'm on the side of the shop, and other times I'm on the side of the customer. I wouldn't expect to see the incident in full glory all over the press and the internet though. That's just indiscreet.

It is even more important to put all over the internet to teach further how wrong it is for people to wrongly think they can harras people. That is how you further get the message across and gain more support for where people back the right of women to breastfeed without being harrassed.
Seriously how on earth do you think progression has come about, if you think people should allow others to not take action after already advising them of something for them to blatantly ignore your policy and the law?
You can be on what ever side you wish to be, the matter of the fact here is that this was not over the top and is something that should be championed for women having the right to breastfeed their child without harrasment.
So I would champion anyone making the story public to show the vast majority of people showing their approval for such action and also to show to also how wrong it is to harras customers.

I see it differently to you. I find this habit of making a fuss on the internet and to the press absurd. As soon as the woman did that, she became the bully IMO, and she's the one harassing the customer after she had already dealt with the situation IMO. She didn't name him obviously, but she wanted him to read it IMO.

Perhaps she didn't explain it very well to the man. She said it was a "breastfeeding friendly cafe", whereas in fact there's no such thing because that makes it sound like she has a choice in the matter - she doesn't, she has to follow the law. We also don't know the tone the man took when he spoke to the woman, so to call it "harassment" is also a bit OTT. Harassment usually involves a sustained attempt, not a one off.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:59 am

The breasting feeding debate has become another issue of feigning outrage.

Outrage about breast feeding.

Outrage about gay marriage.

Outrage abut UKIP.

And society will recognize this faux outrage & the breast feeding debate/outrage will slip quietly away.

I must learn how to become outraged more frequently because it seems I'm missing something.I'm not quite sure what,but being outraged appears to be very popular these days.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:03 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

It is even more important to put all over the internet to teach further how wrong it is for people to wrongly think they can harras people. That is how you further get the message across and gain more support for where people back the right of women to breastfeed without being harrassed.
Seriously how on earth do you think progression has come about, if you think people should allow others to not take action after already advising them of something for them to blatantly ignore your policy and the law?
You can be on what ever side you wish to be, the matter of the fact here is that this was not over the top and is something that should be championed for women having the right to breastfeed their child without harrasment.
So I would champion anyone making the story public to show the vast majority of people showing their approval for such action and also to show to also how wrong it is to harras customers.

I see it differently to you. I find this habit of making a fuss on the internet and to the press absurd. As soon as the woman did that, she became the bully IMO, and she's the one harassing the customer after she had already dealt with the situation. She didn't name him obviously, but she wanted him to read it obviously.

Perhaps she didn't explain it very well to the man. She said it was a "breastfeeding friendly cafe", whereas in fact there's no such thing because that makes it sound like she has a choice in the matter - she doesn't, she has to follow the law. We also don't know the tone the man took when he spoke to the woman, so to call it "harassment" is also a bit OTT. Harassment usually involves a sustained attempt, not a one off.

How can bringing a problem that women face daily to the public eye be absurd?
That shows you know little about the problem and wish that people were not outspoken against wrongs happenning.
That is what is really absurd, because you do not change opinions by being a quite little mouse, but being open and publicly supporting the right of women to breasrfeed their children. She wanted to send a message of support to all the women her breastfeed their children, and to those who would harras them. She then a clear message of support for the woman and rightly so.

Your second point about explaining is now very much subjective and I could easily argue you are making poor excuses for him.
Seriously, what is there not to understand, the cafe allows women to breastfeed?
Breastfeeding friendly means just that, to show how welcome the cafe is to breastfeeding mothers, where the reality is and faced by such mothers, they have and are asked to cover up in other places., even though they should not have to..
Again you look to defend him by making an even worse absurd notion as to how and what tone he spoke to the mother. That is irrelevant, its still harrasment no matter how poorly you try down play his poor actions. He had no right to speak to her about covering up.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:05 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

It is even more important to put all over the internet to teach further how wrong it is for people to wrongly think they can harras people. That is how you further get the message across and gain more support for where people back the right of women to breastfeed without being harrassed.
Seriously how on earth do you think progression has come about, if you think people should allow others to not take action after already advising them of something for them to blatantly ignore your policy and the law?
You can be on what ever side you wish to be, the matter of the fact here is that this was not over the top and is something that should be championed for women having the right to breastfeed their child without harrasment.
So I would champion anyone making the story public to show the vast majority of people showing their approval for such action and also to show to also how wrong it is to harras customers.

I see it differently to you. I find this habit of making a fuss on the internet and to the press absurd. As soon as the woman did that, she became the bully IMO, and she's the one harassing the customer after she had already dealt with the situation IMO. She didn't name him obviously, but she wanted him to read it IMO.

Perhaps she didn't explain it very well to the man. She said it was a "breastfeeding friendly cafe", whereas in fact there's no such thing because that makes it sound like she has a choice in the matter - she doesn't, she has to follow the law. We also don't know the tone the man took when he spoke to the woman, so to call it "harassment" is also a bit OTT. Harassment usually involves a sustained attempt, not a one off.

Good post Raggs.I agree with you.

And cases like this breast feeding debacle is heaven sent for the nutters who spend their entire lives living on the internet.They can introduce all the things in life that they otherwise don't experience.....hate..death threats...evil....moral outrage etc.

Their very persona's become entwined in platforms like Twitter & Facebook to such an extent that they cannot differentiate between the forums & real life.

This site is a good example & I love observing it.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:07 am

Yeah, because knowing what real life is all about means being against a woman feeding her child.

Here's you.

Here's actual perspective.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:08 am

Belatucadros wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I see it differently to you. I find this habit of making a fuss on the internet and to the press absurd. As soon as the woman did that, she became the bully IMO, and she's the one harassing the customer after she had already dealt with the situation. She didn't name him obviously, but she wanted him to read it obviously.

Perhaps she didn't explain it very well to the man. She said it was a "breastfeeding friendly cafe", whereas in fact there's no such thing because that makes it sound like she has a choice in the matter - she doesn't, she has to follow the law. We also don't know the tone the man took when he spoke to the woman, so to call it "harassment" is also a bit OTT. Harassment usually involves a sustained attempt, not a one off.

How can bringing a problem that women face daily to the public eye be absurd?
That shows you know little about the problem and wish that people were not outspoken against wrongs happenning.
That is what is really absurd, because you do not change opinions by being a quite little mouse, but being open and publicly supporting the right of women to breasrfeed their children. She wanted to send a message of support to all the women her breastfeed their children, and to those who would harras them. She then a clear message of support for the woman and rightly so.

Your second point about explaining is now very much subjective and I could easily argue you are making poor excuses for him.
Seriously, what is there not to understand, the cafe allows women to breastfeed?
Breastfeeding friendly means just that, to show how welcome the cafe is to breastfeeding mothers, where the reality is and faced by such mothers, they have and are asked to cover up in other places., even though they should not have to..
Again you look to defend him by making an even worse absurd notion as to how and what tone he spoke to the mother. That is irrelevant, its still harrasment no matter how poorly you try down play his poor actions. He had no right to speak to her about covering up.

She wasn't being a mouse - she dealt with the situation at the time, so there was no need for her to make a fuss in the press and on the internet.

Of course the cafe is welcoming to breastfeeding women - it's against the law for it not to be.

You are now harassing me for my opinion. No wonder you support all this attention-seeking all over the press and the internet.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:12 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:Yeah, because knowing what real life is all about means being against a woman feeding her child.

Here's you.

Here's actual perspective.

How quaint...an attempt at humour.

You forgot to come out with your usual tirade of racist,bigot,Muslim hater etc.

PS......Nearly forgot.I am not against a woman feeding her child.Please get your facts rights before you attempt communication with me. Embarassed

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:12 am

Shady wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I see it differently to you. I find this habit of making a fuss on the internet and to the press absurd. As soon as the woman did that, she became the bully IMO, and she's the one harassing the customer after she had already dealt with the situation IMO. She didn't name him obviously, but she wanted him to read it IMO.

Perhaps she didn't explain it very well to the man. She said it was a "breastfeeding friendly cafe", whereas in fact there's no such thing because that makes it sound like she has a choice in the matter - she doesn't, she has to follow the law. We also don't know the tone the man took when he spoke to the woman, so to call it "harassment" is also a bit OTT. Harassment usually involves a sustained attempt, not a one off.

Good post Raggs.I agree with you.

And cases like this breast feeding debacle is heaven sent for the nutters who spend their entire lives living on the internet.They can introduce all the things in life that they otherwise don't experience.....hate..death threats...evil....moral outrage etc.

Their very persona's become entwined in platforms like Twitter & Facebook to such an extent that they cannot differentiate between the forums & real life.

This site is a good example & I love observing it.

Thank you Shady.

I think that if cafe owners start discussing the business of the day all over the internet, they will lose customers.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:14 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Belatucadros wrote:

How can bringing a problem that women face daily to the public eye be absurd?
That shows you know little about the problem and wish that people were not outspoken against wrongs happenning.
That is what is really absurd, because you do not change opinions by being a quite little mouse, but being open and publicly supporting the right of women to breasrfeed their children. She wanted to send a message of support to all the women her breastfeed their children, and to those who would harras them. She then a clear message of support for the woman and rightly so.

Your second point about explaining is now very much subjective and I could easily argue you are making poor excuses for him.
Seriously, what is there not to understand, the cafe allows women to breastfeed?
Breastfeeding friendly means just that, to show how welcome the cafe is to breastfeeding mothers, where the reality is and faced by such mothers, they have and are asked to cover up in other places., even though they should not have to..
Again you look to defend him by making an even worse absurd notion as to how and what tone he spoke to the mother. That is irrelevant, its still harrasment no matter how poorly you try down play his poor actions. He had no right to speak to her about covering up.

She wasn't being a mouse - she dealt with the situation at the time, so there was no need for her to make a fuss in the press and on the internet.

Of course the cafe is welcoming to breastfeeding women - it's against the law for it not to be.

You are now harassing me for my opinion. No wonder you support all this attention-seeking all over the press and the internet.

I am not saying she is being a mouse, what you advocate is being a mouse.
There is every right to make a fuss when women are wrongly harrasesed and its that sort of attitudce that thinks people should be silengt on wrongs done, which in effect allow them to continue. Things do not progress from, being silent on them, but from being very vocal.
So your last point is now you deflecting the argument and playing the victim card, where you are attempting to seek a spat.
That is you being illogical again and showing that because you have no point you now play the victim, where this is a debate forum, of which we are having a debate. There is no rules stating must stop replying to you, because you are debating poorly.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:15 am

Shady wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:Yeah, because knowing what real life is all about means being against a woman feeding her child.

Here's you.

Here's actual perspective.

How quaint...an attempt at humour.

You forgot to come out with your usual tirade of racist,bigot,Muslim hater etc.

This from the man who compares breast milk to shit.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:17 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Shady wrote:

Good post Raggs.I agree with you.

And cases like this breast feeding debacle is heaven sent for the nutters who spend their entire lives living on the internet.They can introduce all the things in life that they otherwise don't experience.....hate..death threats...evil....moral outrage etc.

Their very persona's become entwined in platforms like Twitter & Facebook to such an extent that they cannot differentiate between the forums & real life.

This site is a good example & I love observing it.

Thank you Shady.

I think that if cafe owners start discussing the business of the day all over the internet, they will lose customers.

Serves them right & serves them right also for being so narrow minded.But that's looney lefties for you.....over reacting....causing damage & being OUTRAGED!

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:17 am

There was an incident here where staff at Tesco were talking about customers in Facebook. They didn't name anyone of course, but they were criticising customers generally. The management took a very dim view of that. On the one hand, I think that retail staff do need to vent sometimes, but putting it out there in public is a bit of a no-no.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:17 am

Shady wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Thank you Shady.

I think that if cafe owners start discussing the business of the day all over the internet, they will lose customers.

Serves them right & serves them right also for being so narrow minded.But that's looney lefties for you.....over reacting....causing damage & being OUTRAGED!

Man Who Complained About Breastfeeding Mother Gets Thrown Out Of Cafe - Page 3 Only-child-problems-sharing

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:18 am

Shady wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Thank you Shady.

I think that if cafe owners start discussing the business of the day all over the internet, they will lose customers.

Serves them right & serves them right also for being so narrow minded.But that's looney lefties for you.....over reacting....causing damage & being OUTRAGED!

Yes. If I had a disagreement with a cafe owner, and they told me to leave, that's one thing, but if they then put it on the internet or spoke to the press about it, that's quite another thing.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:19 am

Shady wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:Yeah, because knowing what real life is all about means being against a woman feeding her child.

Here's you.

Here's actual perspective.

How quaint...an attempt at humour.

You forgot to come out with your usual tirade of racist,bigot,Muslim hater etc.

PS......Nearly forgot.I am not against a woman feeding her child.Please get your facts rights before you attempt communication with me.

Not only do you not understand irony, you can't even avert your gaze if you're so offended at the sight of a baby breastfeeding?

Remind me again how tolerant you are, I seem to have forgotten.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:20 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:Yeah, because knowing what real life is all about means being against a woman feeding her child.

Here's you.

Here's actual perspective.

What do you expect from a troll?
He thinks its okay to harras women.
He also thinks its acceptable to ask women if they sexually abuse their children and if they enjoy it.
That is all you need to know and understand in regrads to such a bigot.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:20 am

At least, as an idiot, he comes by it honestly ...

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:21 am

Oh dear..I see that Ben & Didge are still pissed.

Maybe if they spent a little less time on the internet.............being OUTRAGED!!

HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR!!

Must go losers as I intend to spend the day learning how to become OUTRAGED!

HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR!!

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:21 am

Now Didge and Ben are harassing Shady.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:21 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:At least, as an idiot, he comes by it honestly ...

Oh please stop the tag-teaming. This is the sort of thing which puts people off forums - the forum owner tag-teaming against one member.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:22 am

Raggamuffin wrote:Now Didge and Ben are harassing Shady.

Wow, I truly apologize for ruffling such a delicate FUCKING flower ... Rolling Eyes

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:22 am

Raggamuffin wrote:Now Didge and Ben are harassing Shady.

Lol Shady being harrassed? He does it daily and is quite the clown.

The worst part about shady is he thinks he is clever.

Poor child that he is.

Do you speck out when he harrasses others then Rags?

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:23 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:Now Didge and Ben are harassing Shady.

Wow, I truly apologize for ruffling such a delicate FUCKING flower ...

Shady hasn't complained, but I am. I find it offensive that you consistently do this kind of thing to anyone who you disagree with.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:23 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:At least, as an idiot, he comes by it honestly ...

Oh please stop the tag-teaming. This is the sort of thing which puts people off forums - the forum owner tag-teaming against one member.

I don't own this place! I am here to make Forumotion ad money at the expense of putting up with nonsense, didn't you get the memo?

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:23 am

Raggamuffin wrote:Now Didge and Ben are harassing Shady.

Just made me snort me coffee. As Shady would say HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR. Harrass? Shady? Oh lor, that did make me giggle.

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:23 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:Now Didge and Ben are harassing Shady.

Wow, I truly apologize for ruffling such a delicate FUCKING flower ...

by Raggamuffin Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:24 am

You can't disagree with Didge on here without being harassed. Crying or Very sad

by Guest Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:24 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:

Wow, I truly apologize for ruffling such a delicate FUCKING flower ...

Shady hasn't complained, but I am. I find it offensive that you consistently do this kind of thing to anyone who you disagree with.

Do you speak out to him when he does the same, as happy to bring up where he does?
Or does it only work when you agree with a poster and show up your complete hypocrisy Rags?

lol

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 03, 2015 9:25 am

I think Shady could do with a little harassment, give him something to wake up for in the morning ...

by Sponsored content