Man Who Complained About Breastfeeding Mother Gets Thrown Out Of Cafe

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.

Belatucadros wrote:There is nothing wrong with breastfeeding in public.
Those who have issues's are the problem themselves because they are in fact sexualizing the act, through the breast being laid bare.
So what you really have to ask is why some here are at odds to a baby naturally feeding off its mothers breast. The only reason is the sexualiztion of the breast being a turn on and even worse in this case they are getting hot and bothered by a baby feeding off a breast.
They may want to look at how warped that is that they do.

In your opinion, if someone has a problem with it then in these times of equality they should be allowed to stress their opinion.

It might not be about sexualising it, it could be about a level of nudity, that is why i said in how it is done..

you are a nazi for imposing your sensibilities upon others.

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm not sexualising anyone, and nobody is getting hot and bothered about it. It's just a discussion.

So what is your reason if youi are to be against the breastfeeding?
If the breast is laid bare, clearly this is the reason and it is around the breast being viewed sexually as wrong to be laid bare by some outdated moral beliefs. It has everything to do with the sexualization of the breast, as what else is the issue here?

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:There is nothing wrong with breastfeeding in public.
Those who have issues's are the problem themselves because they are in fact sexualizing the act, through the breast being laid bare.
So what you really have to ask is why some here are at odds to a baby naturally feeding off its mothers breast. The only reason is the sexualiztion of the breast being a turn on and even worse in this case they are getting hot and bothered by a baby feeding off a breast.
They may want to look at how warped that is that they do.

In your opinion, if someone has a problem with it then in these times of equality they should be allowed to stress their opinion.

It might not be about sexualising it, it could be about a level of nudity, that is why i said in how it is done..

you are a nazi for imposing your sensibilities upon others.

There you go, that is sexualizing.


So being for women being able to feed her child in public is Nazism.

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
In your opinion, if someone has a problem with it then in these times of equality they should be allowed to stress their opinion.

It might not be about sexualising it, it could be about a level of nudity, that is why i said in how it is done..

you are a nazi for imposing your sensibilities upon others.

There you go, that is sexualizing.


So being for women being able to feed her child in public is Nazism.

is nudity sexualising??? or do some not want to see a naked body not through fear of arousal but decency...

You are a nazi you would push your opinions and beliefs on others and make them feel wrong for not agreeing, just like any bigot or militant queer would..

Belatucadros wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm not sexualising anyone, and nobody is getting hot and bothered about it. It's just a discussion.

So what is your reason if youi are to be against the breastfeeding?
If the breast is laid bare, clearly this is the reason and it is around the breast being viewed sexually as wrong to be laid bare by some outdated moral beliefs. It has everything to do with the sexualization of the breast, as what else is the issue here?

Maybe I'm just a bit squeamish.

As I said, I wouldn't complain or anything - it's no big deal.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

So what is your reason if youi are to be against the breastfeeding?
If the breast is laid bare, clearly this is the reason and it is around the breast being viewed sexually as wrong to be laid bare by some outdated moral beliefs. It has everything to do with the sexualization of the breast, as what else is the issue here?

Maybe I'm just a bit squeamish.

As I said, I wouldn't complain or anything - it's no big deal.

There you go Rags, you are not concered. So you have no issue then, though squeamish?
lol that did make me chuckle

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


There you go, that is sexualizing.


So being for women being able to feed her child in public is Nazism.

is nudity sexualising??? or do some not want to see a naked body not through fear of arousal but decency...

You are a nazi you would push your opinions and beliefs on others and make them feel wrong for not agreeing, just like any bigot or militant queer would..

There you go again, as what is wrong with nudity in your eyes unless you are sexualizing this?
One more stupid accusation and you are going on ignore.
You have been warned.

Belatucadros wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Maybe I'm just a bit squeamish.

As I said, I wouldn't complain or anything - it's no big deal.

There you go Rags, you are not concered. So you have no issue then, though squeamish?
lol that did make me chuckle

I get squeamish when people touch their eyes and poke around in them too.

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
is nudity sexualising??? or do some not want to see a naked body not through fear of arousal but decency...

You are a nazi you would push your opinions and beliefs on others and make them feel wrong for not agreeing, just like any bigot or militant queer would..

There you go again, as what is wrong with nudity in your eyes unless you are sexualizing this?
One more stupid accusation and you are going on ignore.
You have been warned.

do you read the answers, I said is all nudity sexual, some people are offended on decency grounds...

if you put everyone who disagrees with you on ignore you will be very lonely..lol

deal with people who disagree it is the adult thig to do..


if the person was offended by breast feeding by equality it is his right to expect the law to do something..

Raggamuffin wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

There you go Rags, you are not concered. So you have no issue then, though squeamish?
lol that did make me chuckle

I get squeamish when people touch their eyes and poke around in them too.

Mammophobia 

Does the article actually say she had her breast exposed, because I very much doubt she did. Most feeding mothers use a shawl or the clothes to partially cover themselves, and the baby does the rest. What this is, is a man seeing it in a sexual context where there is nothing sexual about it. 'Squeamish' about a mother feeding her child? Would you be squeamish is she was feeding the baby a bottle Rags? And a bottle contains milk that is not meant for babies and has been adapted and is not nearly as good for them as their mothers milk, which contains all sorts of things to help healthy development. The more women that do it, the more healthy children we will have. It's about time men (with the exception of the ones who have supported her) bloody well grew up and realised that this is for the baby, not for them.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

There you go again, as what is wrong with nudity in your eyes unless you are sexualizing this?
One more stupid accusation and you are going on ignore.
You have been warned.

do you read the answers, I said is all nudity sexual, some people are offended on decency grounds...

if you put everyone who disagrees with you on ignore you will be very lonely..lol

deal with people who disagree it is the adult thig to do..


if the person was offended by breast feeding by equality it is his right to expect the law to do something..

Decency, how is a child breastfeeding indecent?
Again indecent is based around sex.

indecentadjective
1.not conforming with generally accepted standards of behaviour, especially in relation to sexual matters.


As I say the problem stems from your backward sexualizing view of the breasts, which means you are the issue, not the mother feeding her child.

I think some people are just not used to seeing it, that's all. Most women do it very discreetly anyway.

Had a lady feeding her baby on the next table to us in restaurant, she had chosen a corner seat, her husband sat in front on her and she ate with a fork while feeding, I doubt hardly anyone noticed.

Belatucadros wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
do you read the answers, I said is all nudity sexual, some people are offended on decency grounds...

if you put everyone who disagrees with you on ignore you will be very lonely..lol

deal with people who disagree it is the adult thig to do..


if the person was offended by breast feeding by equality it is his right to expect the law to do something..

Decency, how is a child breastfeeding indecent?
Again indecent is based around sex.

indecentadjective
1.not conforming with generally accepted standards of behaviour, especially in relation to sexual matters.


As I say the problem stems from your backward sexualizing view of the breasts, which means you are the issue, not the mother feeding her child.

if the breast is showing even a little that would be indecent to some people and that by equality is their right...

decency does not have to be sexual, it can be but it is not forced to be..

risingsun wrote:Had a lady feeding her baby on the next table to us in restaurant, she had chosen a corner seat, her husband sat in front on her and she ate with a fork while feeding, I doubt hardly anyone noticed.

precisely why i said it is how it is done...

risingsun wrote:Had a lady feeding her baby on the next table to us in restaurant, she had chosen a corner seat, her husband sat in front on her and she ate with a fork while feeding, I doubt hardly anyone noticed.

Yes. A friend of mine was doing it whilst I was talking to her, and I didn't notice for ages.

Raggamuffin wrote:I think some people are just not used to seeing it, that's all. Most women do it very discreetly anyway.

Absolutely, most women tend to cover themselves and feeding a baby is the most natural thing in the world.............it's the older kids I worry about

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:




Decency, how is a child breastfeeding indecent?
Again indecent is based around sex.

indecentadjective
1.not conforming with generally accepted standards of behaviour, especially in relation to sexual matters.


As I say the problem stems from your backward sexualizing view of the breasts, which means you are the issue, not the mother feeding her child.

if the breast is showing even a little that would be indecent to some people and that by equality is their right...

decency does not have to be sexual, it can be but it is not forced to be..

That is you sexualizing the breast again, hence your backward view to feed a chilkd naturally is indecent to you.
You fail to see you are the issue, not the mother feeding her child.
Again you need to understand words, which clearly you do not and everything about your view is based around sex b y claiming indecency.
Where you keep coming out with equality is nothing short of absurd.
What you are saying is you cannot overt your eyes to the situation of a mother feeding her child. You can of course always leave, if you are that hot and bothered by a child naturally feeding. Again it is you that has the issue, where again a premises has no problem with breastfeeding.

feelthelove wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I think some people are just not used to seeing it, that's all. Most women do it very discreetly anyway.

Absolutely, most women tend to cover themselves and feeding a baby is the most natural thing in the world.............it's the older kids I worry about

Eeeeek!

I love that sketch it is so funny...

Why can't I look?


Why should some woman flopping her tit out have control over me and where I can and can't look when in a public place?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Why can't I look?


Why should some woman flopping her tit out have control over me and where I can and can't look when in a public place?

Where did anyone say you cannot look?
The question is, why are you wanting to?
Even more to a child feeding?

I support the Free the Nipple campaign.

It's not about me wanting to look, it's about me being expected not to look and therefore restricting my freedom and putting me under pressure.


If it's a public display and perfectly acceptable to be seen then I am also free to look without being made to feel anything for looking.


No doubt it would be the woman who would be complaining and claiming it was me in the wrong for looking and making her feel uncomfortable and I would be branded a pervert or some rubbish...

Tommy Monk wrote:It's not about me wanting to look, it's about me being expected not to look and therefore restricting my freedom and putting me under pressure. If it's a public display and perfectly acceptable to be seen then I am also free to look without being made to feel anything for looking. No doubt it would be the woman who would be complaining and claiming it was me in the wrong for looking and making her feel uncomfortable and I would be branded a pervert or some rubbish...

Yep you are talking a load of Tosh. If you want to look you can, the point more here is why you would want to look, not that you should not look, as who again is expecting this off you.
Which points to the view why you need to oggle at a child feeding.

Oh do get over yourself Tommy, the woman would be looking at her baby, not at you.   And the only thing you should be thinking about is the beauty of a mother and baby bonding and how that it going to make the child's life so much better.   Think there is something seriously wrong with some men, talk about skewered priorities.

So now I'm oggling...?


See how quickly I'm being made to feel like I am in the wrong for sitting in a public place and just looking around as normal...


I am not going to be averting my eyes and why should I?

Who said you were ogling. I said that if you see it you should marvel at it, something so natural and so beautiful and so good for the child, instead of whinging away and talking about 'obscene'.

Tommy Monk wrote:So now I'm oggling...?


See how quickly I'm being made to feel like I am in the wrong for sitting in a public place and just looking around as normal...


I am not going to be averting my eyes and why should I?

Again nobody says you should overt your eyes.
You though feel the need you do need to watch so it begs the question as to why.
Maybe you get your kicks from dressing up in a nappy, each to their own I guess.
Anyway its a very inane point and you clearly are bored with nothing else to debate on.

risingsun wrote:Who said you were ogling.   I said that if you see it you should marvel at it, something so natural and so beautiful and so good for the child, instead of whinging away and talking about 'obscene'.

I brought up ogling Sassy, because lets face it would Tommy being viewing this as something so beautiful or natural?

Belatucadros wrote:

risingsun wrote:Who said you were ogling.   I said that if you see it you should marvel at it, something so natural and so beautiful and so good for the child, instead of whinging away and talking about 'obscene'.

I brought up ogling Sassy, because lets face it would Tommy being viewing this as something so beautiful or natural?

OK, didn't notice it, but really the attitudes of some men on this thread shows them in an extremely bad light.

risingsun wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

I brought up ogling Sassy, because lets face it would Tommy being viewing this as something so beautiful or natural?

OK, didn't notice it, but really the attitudes of some men on this thread shows them in an extremely bad light.

Outdated views based on Victorian morality is what some of the men back here.

Laters

I've got no problem with it as long as I'm not expected to avert my eyes...


If it's something that can be done in a public place then it is something that can be looked at.


That's all I'm saying... I don't want to have to feel that I have to not look in case of causing offence.


That's all I'm saying... I know it's a subtle point but do try to understand it.


In a public place I can look at everything I want... if somebody is doing something that they don't want people to look at then that says to me that they shouldn't be doing it... not just doing it anyway and forcing their control over others not to look.

risingsun wrote:Who said you were ogling.   I said that if you see it you should marvel at it, something so natural and so beautiful and so good for the child, instead of whinging away and talking about 'obscene'.

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".

Raggamuffin wrote:

risingsun wrote:Who said you were ogling.   I said that if you see it you should marvel at it, something so natural and so beautiful and so good for the child, instead of whinging away and talking about 'obscene'.

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 agree with you Raggs.It's just a baby sucking a tit for Pete's.

Going for a shit is natural but I've never seen or heard of anyone marveling at the process.......porno films excepted.

Sure it's nice & sweet to see a baby suckling it's mother,but all this false outrage.....& feeling deeeeeply offended because someone didn't particularly want to see a womans tits in the middle of a pub.

People make it up as they go along & the next outrage will be mum's bottle feeding babies.And half the time,these things kick off just so they can boost their Twitter & Facebook postings.

Next the looney left will be outraged because paedophiles are not allowed to rape children in public.

There you have it Shody equates having a shit to a child drinking milk.
One act is unhealthy in an eating establishment, which is why they provide a toilet, where the waste can be disposed of hygienically. It seems shody is confusing hygene over a baby needing to eat, over his backward Victorian views on morality.
Such a RW extremist such as Shody clearly is living in the wrong century.
I mean shody may want to deficate on a table or the floor of a cafe, where I am sure not only would everyone leave but he would be arrested.
Maybe Shody can show me the many people demanding that they be able to have a shit in the middle of a cafe.
I am sure not many businesses would be able to remain open of course due to hygiene risk and would be shut down, but then Shody has about as much intelligence it seems as a turd itself.

Belatucadros wrote:There you have it Shody equates having a shit to a child drinking milk.
One act is unhealthy in an eating establishment, which is why they provide a toilet, where the waste can be disposed of hygienically. It seems shody is confusing hygene over a baby needing to eat, over his backward Victorian views on morality.
Such a RW extremist such as Shody clearly is living in the wrong century.
I mean shidy may want to deficate on a table or the floor of a cafe, where I am sure not only would everyone leave but he would be arrested.
Maybe Shody can show me the many people demanding that they be able to have a shit in the middle of a cafe.
I am sure not many businesses would be able tol remain open of course, but then Shody has about as mauch intelligence it seems as a turd itself.

Oh dear,you really are upset at Eilzel speaking to me.

Shady wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:There you have it Shody equates having a shit to a child drinking milk.
One act is unhealthy in an eating establishment, which is why they provide a toilet, where the waste can be disposed of hygienically. It seems shody is confusing hygene over a baby needing to eat, over his backward Victorian views on morality.
Such a RW extremist such as Shody clearly is living in the wrong century.
I mean shidy may want to deficate on a table or the floor of a cafe, where I am sure not only would everyone leave but he would be arrested.
Maybe Shody can show me the many people demanding that they be able to have a shit in the middle of a cafe.
I am sure not many businesses would be able tol remain open of course, but then Shody has about as mauch intelligence it seems as a turd itself.

Oh dear,you really are upset at Eilzel speaking to me.

I am just showing how very ignorant you are, which does not take much to point out.
As seen your argument was idiotic, a tad like yourself really.
Now because I did make you look a complete idiot, you seek to deflect the thread again.
Need a hug darling?

Belatucadros wrote:

Shady wrote:

Oh dear,you really are upset at Eilzel speaking to me.

I am just showing how very ignorant you are, which does not take much to point out.
As seen your argument was idiotic, a tad like yourself really.
Now because I did make you look a complete idiot, you seek to deflect the thread again.
Need a hug darling?

No thanks.I've got Eilzel to keep me warm.

Shady wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:

I am just showing how very ignorant you are, which does not take much to point out.
As seen your argument was idiotic, a tad like yourself really.
Now because I did make you look a complete idiot, you seek to deflect the thread again.
Need a hug darling?

No thanks.I've got Eilzel to keep me warm.

That is nice for you. So you have nothing to counter just more of your usual drivel and poor attempts to derail threads.
Funny that it backfired on you mind ha ha ha

Belatucadros wrote:

Shady wrote:

No thanks.I've got Eilzel to keep me warm.

That is nice for you. So you have nothing to counter just more of your usual drivel and poor attempts to derail threads.
Funny that it backfired on you mind ha ha ha

Of course darling.And make sure you get that final post in.

Raggamuffin wrote:

risingsun wrote:Who said you were ogling.   I said that if you see it you should marvel at it, something so natural and so beautiful and so good for the child, instead of whinging away and talking about 'obscene'.

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?

Mmmmm... mammary gland embedded in fat...!

Tommy Monk wrote:Mmmmm... mammary gland embedded in fat...!

Tommy...perhaps you are hungry?!

Just doing my homer simson impersonation.

Is it really against the law to approach someone and ask them to stop breast feeding? The customer apparently asked the women to do so, but I don't think he broke the law.

Raggamuffin wrote:Is it really against the law to approach someone and ask them to stop breast feeding? The customer apparently asked the women to do so, but I don't think he broke the law.

Well, I don't know in every jurisdiction, somewhere, there might be one such law. But it would seem to be an infringement on someone's freedom in some sense...maybe freedom to express yourself.

What I don't get is, why is it offensive? In both male and female, they come with the same equipment...some variations, of course, but those are minor. But the male and female are the same in general. How come it is offensive with the female, but not with the male?

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Is it really against the law to approach someone and ask them to stop breast feeding? The customer apparently asked the women to do so, but I don't think he broke the law.

Well, I don't know in every jurisdiction, somewhere, there might be one such law.  But it would seem to be an infringement on someone's freedom in some sense...maybe freedom to express yourself.

What I don't get is, why is it offensive?  In both male and female, they come with the same equipment...some variations, of course, but those are minor.  But the male and female are the same in general.  How come it is offensive with the female, but not with the male?

I don't know - because they're bigger in women?

There should be a law forbidding people to expose their naked fat stomachs in public.

Men usually get asked to cover up if walking into a pub or shop without a top on.