Do you object to this Time magazine cover?

[Polished]

You, as always, have your head firmly attached to your shoulders; and can see the forest for the trees without being sidetracked by sentimentality or group-think. Never afraid to state your case, and always with the goods to back it up.

I think you could take this sentence and equally apply it to yourself HollyS!

 

[ksinger]

I don't understand what ever happened to "mind your own business"?

I don't care if someone wants to breastfeed a kid until he's 16 and can drive a car. I don't care if a mother chooses never to breastfeed.

Who cares?

It's not my business and it's not my place to judge.

P.S. not directed toward any poster, just wondering why everyone is so het up.

Really? You tell me, that given all you know, you don't judge the visibly pregnant women who is having a mixed drink in a restaurant? Maybe not to the point of getting up and walking over and confronting her, but I bet you are not unaffected by the sight, nor, protests notwithstanding, do I believe would you be so nonchalant at the sight of a 16 year-old nursing in a restaurant. Most of us would be whipping out the speed-dial for DHS.

In any case, people are all het up, because underneath the surface this issue is not just about the activity of breastfeeding, it is about "GOOD MOTHERHOOD", the changing concepts of which have been central to culture and the structure of society and have been just dripping with moral baggage since humans could write about it.

Hmmm . . . thought this was about breastfeeding. I don't see the point of bringing up extraneous situations.

As for society's ideal of motherhood; I am secure in my assessment of myself as a good mother. I don't worry about what other people think.

This is what I tell my kids; Don't worry about what other people think about you. They don't do it for very long.

But this is what I get for poking my head into an emotional, multi-page thread. I won't make that mistake again.

Well, the actual Time article IS supposed to be about attachment parenting, not just breastfeeding. And the whole "Are you mom enough" title implies that anyone unwilling to do what the mom on the cover is doing, isn't "enough". So I don't see addressing the larger issue of what that cover means in terms of attitudes about good motherhood, as an "extraneous issue".

 

[ksinger]

Oh and another thing, since nothing EVER disappears from the digital world, what hells of bullying is that kid on the cover going to endure as he progresses through school, because of that photo following him around F.O.R.E.V.E.R. I can just hear the crap from other boys when he hits middle school. Boggles the mind. Mom certainly wasn't thinking THAT one through to its logical conclusion I'm thinking...

 

[HollyS]

Oh and another thing, since nothing EVER disappears from the digital world, what hells of bullying is that kid on the cover going to endure as he progresses through school, because of that photo following him around F.O.R.E.V.E.R. I can just hear the crap from other boys when he hits middle school. Boggles the mind. Mom certainly wasn't thinking THAT one through to its logical conclusion I'm thinking...

Uh huh. It will wind up on Facebook (or whatever other social media takes its place) about middle school. And his life will be a living hell.

Good job, Mom.

See? Clear evidence that it is all about her; the consequences of her actions never even gave her pause. Why, gosh, look! She gets to be the image for Super Mommy. How cool is that! What do want to bet she's patting herself on the back on her own Facebook page? Or blogging about it.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

Isn't that Danny Devito?

 

[FrekeChild]

I watched an interview with the mom and Erin Burnett last night, and she said that she certainly thought about the consequences. She said that she was breastfed until she was 6, and her mom was a huge breastfeeding advocate and pictures of them were in publications 20 years ago. She said that growing up with it wasn't a big deal, since she grew up with it and growing up surrounded by it, it was natural to her.

 

[monarch64]

I don't understand why there is an assumption that this child on the cover will be bullied. Not everyone in this country is so close-minded and there are plenty of people who teach their children to be accepting of others, and patient, and kind, and loving towards their fellow human beings. Perhaps this mom just isn't a cynical, jaded person and believes that she is bringing up her son to be a healthy and loving individual and isn't all that worried about what other people will think or say to him.

 

[Prana]

Personally, I wish that Time never ran this cover at all.

My feeling is that it shouldn't be a topic of discussion (not breastfeeding in general, just the methods behind it). It shouldn't be a topic for debate. It's nobody's business how long you decide to breastfeed, or whether you decide to breastfeed at all. It's nobody's right to tell you you are a bad mother for not breastfeeding or breastfeeding too long. It's nobody's right to tell you you are wrong for child wearing, co-sleeping etc..

The picture they used for the cover was carefully chosen to cause feelings, whether they be discomfort or pride. I understand this mother wanting to promote her beliefs, and I am a believer that extended breastfeeding is healthy, and to each their own, but I don't like the fact that it's thrown in our faces to be made into a controversy, when it's not our concern.

And I know a lot of very stable, well adjusted adults, who were well adjusted teenagers as well, who were breastfed until they were 3 or 4. From what I've seen, it's not traumatic to the child in any way shape or form. In fact, these are some of the most physically healthy people I know.

 

[Prana]

Personally, I wish that Time never ran this cover at all.

My feeling is that it shouldn't be a topic of discussion (not breastfeeding in general, just the methods behind it). It shouldn't be a topic for debate. It's nobody's business how long you decide to breastfeed, or whether you decide to breastfeed at all. It's nobody's right to tell you you are a bad mother for not breastfeeding or breastfeeding too long. It's nobody's right to tell you you are wrong for child wearing, co-sleeping etc..

The picture they used for the cover was carefully chosen to cause feelings, whether they be discomfort or pride. I understand this mother wanting to promote her beliefs, and I am a believer that extended breastfeeding is healthy, and to each their own, but I don't like the fact that it's thrown in our faces to be made into a controversy, when it's not our concern.

And I know a lot of very stable, well adjusted adults, who were well adjusted teenagers as well, who were breastfed until they were 3 or 4. From what I've seen, it's not traumatic to the child in any way shape or form. In fact, these are some of the most physically healthy people I know.

 

[Laila619]

I don't understand why there is an assumption that this child on the cover will be bullied. Not everyone in this country is so close-minded and there are plenty of people who teach their children to be accepting of others, and patient, and kind, and loving towards their fellow human beings. Perhaps this mom just isn't a cynical, jaded person and believes that she is bringing up her son to be a healthy and loving individual and isn't all that worried about what other people will think or say to him.

Well said!

 

[ksinger]

I don't understand why there is an assumption that this child on the cover will be bullied. Not everyone in this country is so close-minded and there are plenty of people who teach their children to be accepting of others, and patient, and kind, and loving towards their fellow human beings. Perhaps this mom just isn't a cynical, jaded person and believes that she is bringing up her son to be a healthy and loving individual and isn't all that worried about what other people will think or say to him.

Hanging out your whole life with only those trained from birth to be kind and tolerant is great work if you can get it. But I've not met anyone yet who pulled it off. I can't understand how anyone could be so lacking in imagination or naive as to think that just because her intentions were pure, no one would ever dare make even an unkind comment to her child about it, let alone bully him more than verbally. She may have been in "publications" but A) "publications" aren't the cover of Time magazine on every grocery store checkout newsstand in the US. They were likely low-circulation single-interest pubs 20+ years ago that did not have those images published on the web, and B) she was a female. She's not going to have her sexuality questioned the way that he probably will, and at a developmental stage - again I'm thinking jr high, which can be pretty horrible even when everything goes reasonably well - I would think that could be pretty devastating. Maybe mom doesn't worry about what people think of him or say to him, but given that getting to the point where you really truly madly deeply don't give a damn what people think of you generally doesn't happen until well into adulthood, I can pretty much guarantee that HE will care.


And apparently I'm not the only one of the jaded and cynical who have thought of this.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/11/time-magazine-cover-forget-breast-what-about-boy/

"Because she thought nothing of becoming far more famous than she ever was or ever would have been by getting naked on the cover of Time using her son as a prop—letting him, in fact, look right into the camera and be completely recognizable while sucking her nipple. He may never be better-known for anything than for being a breastfeeding 3-year-old on the cover of a national magazine.

...she’s happy enough to get naked in front of other people (which there may be nothing wrong with—for her). But that may or may not be the case for her 3-year-old boy, which seems not to have mattered to her—at all."

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2012/05/13/columns/11472003.txt

"It's shocking not for subject matter, attachment parenting and breastfeeding, but because it is yet another example of recognizable children being used as stage props without their permission.

One thing is unassailable: Youngsters who are recognizable should not be used as public evidence or as pawns in adult matters of contention. It's disrespectful and will haunt those children as adults.

Forever, Lynne Grumet's son will be hounded by the press on anniversary dates: "Do you think being on the cover of Time made your life better or worse?"

When I first saw it online, I thought it was a spoof. Have we come so far that children are simply public props?"

 

[VRBeauty]

One thing is unassailable: Youngsters who are recognizable should not be used as public evidence or as pawns in adult matters of contention. It's disrespectful and will haunt those children as adults.

When I first saw it online, I thought it was a spoof. Have we come so far that children are simply public props?"

I'm perfectly willing to admit that I'm narrow-minded and prejudiced enough to think that breast-feeding into the toddler stage is way outside of my frame of reference and comfort zone and weird. Yes I know breast milk has health benefits etc etc etc (but we all do get off it at some point, no?). A male friend's daughter was breast-fed to age four and turned out just fine as far as I know... so I guess it's not inherently harmful, but for me it's still just kind of icky. I think part of it is that I'm very independent and - based on what my mother told me - I was born that way. Before anybody flames me, please note that I am not telling nursing moms what they can and cannot do. I'm just telling you about my reaction to toddler/little kid nursing, which is exactly what Kenny and Time magazine were asking for.

I also think it's naive to think this cover won't follow this kid around for many many years. I trust his mother will do her best to inoculate him with a healthy dose of self-esteem and a few ready responses, but I still think it's reckless of her to participate in a stunt like this. For what it's worth, my local news station blurred the kids face when they showed the Time cover.

 

[Bella_mezzo]

I don't have issues per se with breastfeeding a 3-4 year old or with attachment parenting (my son joined our family through adoption when he was 2 1/3 and a year later we are still co-sleeping, sometimes babywearing, and bottle feeding in the morning); however, I have huge issues with the title and the photo. The title is intentionally divisive and the photo is purely sensationalistic, will likely have negative consequences for the child in the future, and doesn't exemplify any of the beneficial aspects of attachment parenting. There is no nurturing, no eye contact, no holding, no love exhibited, just a kid with his mom's boob in his mouth. I find that offensive not b/c nursing in public is offensive, but b/c this child is being used to make a point in a very public way and the point that is being made in no way demonstrates anything about attachment parenting.

I am a firm believer in not pushing my child to do something sensationalistic and public that he has no informed say in. If she and he want to breast feed, totally fine with me. But, putting it on the cover of TIME in a very sensationalistic way, not fine. In fact that is what I would classify as at best grave misjudgment and at worst abuse. She is deliberately manipulating him and their situation in a public way that can have lasting consequences. Bullying in high school could be an issue, but what about when he goes for a job interview and the recruiter googles his name? At a minimum if you are going to do something like that, don't use your full name and your child's name!

This is not a parent acting a loving or caring way towards their child. This is a parent trying to make a sensationalistic point and be on the cover of Time.

That is why I find this photo and title offensive.

I'd love to see Time do a cover on women trying to balance breastfeeding, short unpaid maternity leave, and returning to work; or PPD; or lack of quality, early childcare options; or the disproportionate negative impact having children can have on a women's career; or the complete and total ineffectiveness of our fostercare system and how it is failing the most vulnerable children in our society...or any of the very real issues that many women and children face, rather than trying to start a mommy war by inciting people on the outliers of either viewpoint.

I don't read Time anyway, and this article is certainly not going to get me to start!

 

[TravelingGal]

Am I "mom enough?"

Hm, I've tried to get away and be mom a little less, but apparently I'm stuck with the role.

So I guess I'm "Mom, period." And that's plenty of mom for me.

(And for the record, I could not breastfeed, as I had no milk. I'm also OK with not being juicy enough.)

 

[TravelingGal]

It is amazing how much people judge.

I don't care how other people feed their children - FF. BF, whatever - and I don't think one choice or another makes you a good or bad mother.

The vast majority of parents are trying very, very hard to make a success of it.

And yet Pandora, you also said this not too long before your above post:

"One thing I have never understood is how many people really want a baby and even go through years of difficulty to have one - and as soon as it arrives they want it to sleep in a separate bed/room, want it to sleep as much as possible (hence CIO etc) and to be off the breast as soon as possible. IMO we start pressuring our children to behave like adults almost as soon as they are born."

Really? I want my child to sleep in a different room because I think it's good for the household AND the kid. My kid easily made the transition. She wasn't breastfed, and had bottles. And she slept like a champ because we stuck with schedules and decided we really didn't need to be out and about, and for a short while, her needs would come first over our social calendar.

None of this was because we wanted her to behave like an adult. All of it was because this is what is normal and the way in our house. And because we believe that it's HEALTHY. I could say a lot about attachment parenting, or taking kids out and about everywhere because the parents believe their life doesn't stop for the kid and the kid will deal with their schedule, and blah blah blah, but guess what....

Just because *I* don't parent that way doesn't mean it's not normal. Or healthy. Or anything else.

 

[KimberlyH]

I breastfed my daugher for 16 months, coslept for the first six months of her life, "wore" her and probably a few other things that are considered attachment parenting, although it isn't because I read Sears books and aspired to be a detain kind of parent. I did what worked for us as a family, and revised and adjusted along the way as my baby grew and changed. I still "baby wear" but she sleeps happily in her own crib and weaned without shedding a tear.

I find this article offensive because it's divisive and the picture offputting because it is not at all representative of what extended breastfeeding is in my mindseye.


My friends who are parents run the gamet from attachment to traditional parenting and I can say that each and every one of them loves their children fiercely and strongly believes that their way of parenting is what is best for their children. And all of their children are quite wonderful and special.

I agree with the previous poster that stated that our focus on the extreme takes away from the real issues most mothers contend with and only serves to hurt all of us.

And two minor asides: the AAP recommends breastfeeding until one year, four to eight months later than children get their first teeth. And I couldn't have been more regimented with her routine and my girl still didn't sleep, it's not her preferred activity.

 

[sillyberry]

I finally realized what this reminds me of: I think it was A Tree Grows in Brooklyn that there was a neighborhood boy who breastfed very late in life. His mother finally weaned him by drawing a scary face on her boob, which terrified him, and from that point on he only drank black coffee.

Otherwise, I pretty much wholeheartedly agree with KSinger (and others of that ilk, she's just the one I remember most vividly). And "heh" to TravelingGal's last post.

 

[HollyS]

ksinger,

What are you doing, quoting FOX news?? Hell has indeed frozen over.

Again, I completely agree.

Ignoring the very obvious consequences this 'stunt' will have on the little guy's life is extremely thoughtless of mommy. But, yeah her! All publicity is good publicity, am I right?

 

[ksinger]

ksinger,

What are you doing, quoting FOX news?? Hell has indeed frozen over.

Again, I completely agree.

Ignoring the very obvious consequences this 'stunt' will have on the little guy's life is extremely thoughtless of mommy. But, yeah her! All publicity is good publicity, am I right?

Yes, well, even someone in thrall to Faux News has a statistical chance of saying something sensible and non-partisan from time to time. I put forth that I found it by accident, and that the guy has real credentials at least, in brain-al stuff.

I read another piece (that I can't currently dredge up) where the author, a breastfeeding-advocate mother of 4 - who still thought the mother on Time was nuts, related that her breastfed-then, now-25-year-old son said something to the effect, "God, I'm glad you never did that! MY life would have been ruined! That kid is going to be REAL pissed at his mom one day!" From a male child standpoint, HE understood the real reason to object to that picture, without any deep analysis at all.

 

[Maria D]

Anyone see this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/13/snl-time-magazine-breast-feeding-cover_n_1512753.html?ref=media

 

[TravelingGal]

Anyone see this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/13/snl-time-magazine-breast-feeding-cover_n_1512753.html?ref=media

lol, awesome.

 

[HollyS]

Anyone see this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/13/snl-time-magazine-breast-feeding-cover_n_1512753.html?ref=media

I perfect skewering. Thanks SNL.

 

[kenny]

Saturday Night Live did a funny skit on the cover.

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/weekend-update-really-time-magazine-cover/1401429

 

[Autumnovember]

http://jasongood.net/365/2012/05/from-breasts-to-boobs-and-back-again/

Anyone see this?

 

[kennedy]

http://jasongood.net/365/2012/05/from-breasts-to-boobs-and-back-again/

Anyone see this?

Loved this -- thanks for posting! And I think he's so right -- I have not heard a single compelling, fact-based argument for why nursing a toddler is harmful. It's simply a feeling people have that it's wrong or weird or creepy, but no one can actually articulate why that's the case. I suspect he's right that it has a lot to do with our culture's perception of breasts as sexual objects first and foremost. Well, that and our culture's obsession with independence.

 

[ksinger]

http://jasongood.net/365/2012/05/from-breasts-to-boobs-and-back-again/

Anyone see this?

Loved this -- thanks for posting! And I think he's so right -- I have not heard a single compelling, fact-based argument for why nursing a toddler is harmful. It's simply a feeling people have that it's wrong or weird or creepy, but no one can actually articulate why that's the case. I suspect he's right that it has a lot to do with our culture's perception of breasts as sexual objects first and foremost. Well, that and our culture's obsession with independence.

You mean that obsession with independence that has the millenials living in their parents basements? And the obsession with independence that has those same parents calling in to personnel departments to talk up their adult kids after interviews, or ream out those same personnel people, when Little Johnny gets fired? Right.

You know, everyone whines about "our culture", but you know what? It's OURS. We don't LIVE in a developing country. We live right here. And while nursing to 3, or 4, or 6, or 16, may not be physically harmful, in OUR cultural context, it's a bit dicey from a psychological standpoint, and no amount of whining about it, or calling everyone else a prude, mean bigot, is going to change that, at least not in time to save this child from the crap he's going to now endure.

Using your kid as a guinea pig and a prop to advance YOUR cause, is cruel. Being oblivious to the fact that this photo has gone worldwide, and is going to follow that child around forever, and not caring what other kids will say to him or think of him, or possibly DO to him because of it, doesn't exactly put mama in the running for Mother of The Year, IMO. Of course in one way it's brilliant, because she has all but guaranteed he's going to need her to keep him in a bubble and protect him from the unpleasant forces SHE'S unleashed. Real independence may not be in this poor young man's near OR far, future. Attachment parenting, which is the larger issue, never seems to address how Little Johnny is going to eventually DEtach from all that attachment.

And as for the wildly incorrect statement by the guy in the link that we are not sexual creature until after puberty, a friend of mine regaled me with some out-there details of a cut-very-short relationship that gave me a bit of insight into the issue of men who were nursed quite late (and remembered it ) and didn't detach properly from mama. Without those details, yes, it's extremely CREEPY.

 

[kennedy]

http://jasongood.net/365/2012/05/from-breasts-to-boobs-and-back-again/

Anyone see this?

Loved this -- thanks for posting! And I think he's so right -- I have not heard a single compelling, fact-based argument for why nursing a toddler is harmful. It's simply a feeling people have that it's wrong or weird or creepy, but no one can actually articulate why that's the case. I suspect he's right that it has a lot to do with our culture's perception of breasts as sexual objects first and foremost. Well, that and our culture's obsession with independence.

You mean that obsession with independence that has the millenials living in their parents basements? And the obsession with independence that has those same parents calling in to personnel departments to talk up their adult kids after interviews, or ream out those same personnel people, when Little Johnny gets fired? Right.

You know, everyone whines about "our culture", but you know what? It's OURS. We don't LIVE in a developing country. We live right here. And while nursing to 3, or 4, or 6, or 16, may not be physically harmful, in OUR cultural context, it's a bit dicey from a psychological standpoint, and no amount of whining about it, or calling everyone else a prude, mean bigot, is going to change that, at least not in time to save this child from the crap he's going to now endure.

Using your kid as a guinea pig and a prop to advance YOUR cause, is cruel. Being oblivious to the fact that this photo has gone worldwide, and is going to follow that child around forever, and not caring what other kids will say to him or think of him, or possibly DO to him because of it, doesn't exactly put mama in the running for Mother of The Year, IMO. Of course in one way it's brilliant, because she has all but guaranteed he's going to need her to keep him in a bubble and protect him from the unpleasant forces SHE'S unleashed. Real independence may not be in this poor young man's near OR far, future. Attachment parenting, which is the larger issue, never seems to address how Little Johnny is going to eventually DEtach from all that attachment.

And as for the wildly incorrect statement by the guy in the link that we are not sexual creature until after puberty, a friend of mine regaled me with some out-there details of a cut-very-short relationship that gave me a bit of insight into the issue of men who were nursed quite late (and remembered it ) and didn't detach properly from mama. Without those details, yes, it's extremely CREEPY.

If you're trying to suggest that breastfeeding a toddler creates dysfunctional, crippled adults, I'd sure like to see the evidence to support these claims. Are you familiar with attachment theory (and I don't mean the rather simple version popularized by Dr Sears and the like)? I am because it's part of my job -- a secure attachment early in life is critical to becoming an independent adult capable of having meaningful relationships, but it doesn't happen by age 3 for heaven's sake! And I would argue that these hypothetical basement-living adults were NOT securely attached. Now, I'm not saying that nursing into the toddler years necessarily creates a secure attachment nor does it necessarily damn a child to a life living in mom's basement! It is, however, perfectly NORMAL behavior and to suggest that nursing a 3 year old is the same as nursing a 16 year old is ridiculous hyperbole. The number of women in the US breastfeeding to 3 years is a TINY fraction of those who aren't able to make it to 3 MONTHS! That's what we should all be up in arms about. The greater social epidemic is that mothers aren't adequately supported in the early years and it seems incredibly misguided to vilify the few moms who are breastfeeding according to the guidelines set forth by most major health organizations.

As for the child on the magazine, I've never said a word about him or his mother's choice to put him on the cover of a magazine. Do I think he's going to be mercilessly teased in 10 years because of it? Um, no -- that seems rather extreme to me. Would I put my kid on the cover of a magazine? No, but this story will fade in about 15 minutes like most other sensationalistic stories these days and I somehow doubt it's going to resurface when this kid's in high school.

Um, what exactly is the problem with having a memory of breastfeeding? Again, no one can articulate what the specific psychological harm is -- is it that breasts are sexual and the child will be scarred for life having a memory of suckling at his mother's breasts? Is that it because I honestly don't get it!

Oh, regarding your comment about our culture: Yes, it's our culture and we live in it which is precisely WHY we should question, unpack, and attempt to understand the assumptions and beliefs we take for granted as true or right. Isn't that part of being a thinking member of society?

 

[crown1]

i feel the majority of americans would consider this issue to be a personal choice. it is one of those things people seem more comfortable letting folks do their own thing. most have no desire to see or hear how others choose to nourish their child, unless they are trying to make a decision on how to feed their own.

i would guess most are willing to live and let live until it is put in their face. the magazine cover sought to make it an in your face issue, with a picture i feel was meant to bring about shock and discussion. it worked famously. no matter, if you think it marvelously healthy for the child, or strange, as it is not the norm to see a child nursing in such a position, it got us looking, reading and discussing. it provided time with priceless advertising. score one for time.

although i have opinions on breast feeding, all sorts of different diets, abortion, plastic surgery and the like i keep them to myself. i don't comment unless it is brought to my attention, i feel those things are to be decided by the persons involved and their physican. these are not things that i feel should be out there for others to decide what is best for those involved.

i did vote that i objected. i felt it was attention seeking for the mother, that the child was too young to make a decision about participating in it, and that it portrayed an unnatural picture of breast feeding.

 

[packrat]

If that boy has a sibling, it *will* be brought up later in life..maybe poster sized on his dorm room wall when he walks in the first day, or shown to his first date when he's 16. It'll get brought up, oh yes. The mom will save 42 copies some place, relatives will save copies Oh look it's so and so and little Johnny, awwww! A cousin will trot it out at some family reunion and run around chasing him w/it "that's yer mom's BOOB!" Teenagers aren't going to sit down and have a rational round table discussion about it. Kids tease other kids, that's what they do and it's what they do best. And something like that picture is too "good" to pass up and to use for a long long time.

 

[mrs jam]

I have to say I would be EXTREMELY traumatized if I had memory of my mother breast-feeding me. Ick. My earliest memories of childhood go back to about when I was 3-4 years of age, so thank God I wasn't breast-fed as a toddler.

For those posters who doubt that the boy on the cover will be teased, spend some time in a middle school. I'm a reading specialist for grades 6-8, and kids this age are relentless and unmerciful with one another.