Extreme breast feeding erm wut?

[Nexxo]

So using your mouth for the perfectly natural bodily function of eating and drinking is offensive too?

It is cultural. In China burping and slurping at the table is just fine, even a compliment. In certain African and South American tribes women go topless (and breast feed in public). Even in the West breast feeding was no biggie until the Victorian age. In medieval times people shared mixed-sex public baths and nakedness was OK --in fact covering up all the time was considered suspect as you might be hiding signs of disease.

Nowadays we are removing ourselves more and more from what is natural. We don't do death and dying --people get two days of compassionate leave when their parent dies. We don't do ageing. We don't do decent food anymore. We are made to feel ashamed of our imperfect bodies and females are sexualised at an ever younger age. We don't do intimacy; we do sex. Now we don't do breast feeding because we cannot accept that breasts might have a perfectly natural function that is not about arousing men? We can't bear to see a mother and child in the natural act of bonding and feeding? This society is so ****ed up.

[TheBlackSwordsMan]

Our twisted mind, twisted the world and It's too late to back off.

[theshadow2001]

Originally Posted by Nexxo

So using your mouth for the perfectly natural bodily function of eating and drinking is offensive too?

No. Because...

Originally Posted by Nexxo

It is cultural.

Exactly. Not necessarily sexual repression.

Originally Posted by Nexxo

Nowadays we are removing ourselves more and more from what is natural. We don't do death and dying --people get two days of compassionate leave when their parent dies. We don't do ageing. We don't do decent food anymore. We are made to feel ashamed of our imperfect bodies and females are sexualised at an ever younger age. We don't do intimacy; we do sex. Now we don't do breast feeding because we cannot accept that breasts might have a perfectly natural function that is not about arousing men? We can't bear to see a mother and child in the natural act of bonding and feeding? This society is so ****ed up.

There are many things which are natural and acceptable in public like carrots and many things which are natural and not acceptable like brawling. Because something is natural does not inherently mean its good. It also doesn't mean its inherently bad. Natural is an ambiguous state, not an argument.

[Shirty]

Originally Posted by Nexxo

So using your mouth for the perfectly natural bodily function of eating and drinking is offensive too?

It is cultural. In China burping and slurping at the table is just fine, even a compliment. In certain African and South American tribes women go topless (and breast feed in public). Even in the West breast feeding was no biggie until the Victorian age. In medieval times people shared mixed-sex public baths and nakedness was OK --in fact covering up all the time was considered suspect as you might be hiding signs of disease.

Nowadays we are removing ourselves more and more from what is natural. We don't do death and dying --people get two days of compassionate leave when their parent dies. We don't do ageing. We don't do decent food anymore. We are made to feel ashamed of our imperfect bodies and females are sexualised at an ever younger age. We don't do intimacy; we do sex. Now we don't do breast feeding because we cannot accept that breasts might have a perfectly natural function that is not about arousing men? We can't bear to see a mother and child in the natural act of bonding and feeding? This society is so ****ed up.

Don't you hate it when the way things should be makes so much sense, but the way things are stopped making sense a long time ago?

[Nexxo]

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

Exactly. Not necessarily sexual repression.

Sexual repression is often cultural.

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

There are many things which are natural and acceptable in public like carrots and many things which are natural and not acceptable like brawling. Because something is natural does not inherently mean its good. It also doesn't mean its inherently bad. Natural is an ambiguous state, not an argument.

It does mean that it is part of what we are and how we function (including the brawling); we cannot pretend otherwise or deny it. Therefore we have to manage it wisely. You know, like adults. And what is the adult attitude towards a woman breast feeding in public?

[theshadow2001]

Originally Posted by Nexxo

Sexual repression is often cultural.

Yes of course there is a connection between the two. But a dislike of bodily functions isn't necessarily because of a presence of sexual repression within that culture. You see the involvement of breasts and assume that the dislike of breast feeding is due to sexual repression. I see that the process for observer and participants is asexual and therefore is likely to be disliked for similar reasons that other bodily functions involving non sex organs are disliked.

Originally Posted by Nexxo

It does mean that it is part of what we are and how we function (including the brawling); we cannot pretend otherwise or deny it. Therefore we have to manage it wisely. You know, like adults. And what is the adult attitude towards a woman breast feeding in public?

Most of this confuses me to be honest. As for the attitude, well its quite varied if this thread is anything to go by.

[Nexxo]

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

Yes of course there is a connection between the two. But a dislike of bodily functions isn't necessarily because of a presence of sexual repression within that culture. You see the involvement of breasts and assume that the dislike of breast feeding is due to sexual repression. I see that the process for observer and participants is asexual and therefore is likely to be disliked for similar reasons that other bodily functions involving non sex organs are disliked.

Like eating?

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

Most of this confuses me to be honest. As for the attitude, well its quite varied if this thread is anything to go by.

Yup, but arguably not all wise or adult.

What I'm saying is that natural processes cannot be ignored or denied. They have to be managed in an adult, mature fashion. All people past puberty want sex, but we have to be adult about it. We all feel like punching someone in the face at times, but we have to be adult about it. Women breast feed, and we have to be adult about it.

[TheBlackSwordsMan]

The adult argument, really ?

[theshadow2001]

Originally Posted by Nexxo

Like eating?

ok

Some bodily functions are accepted when performed publicly(such as eating), some are not(such as pooping). The reasoning behind those that are not can be attributed to various cultural tendencies. Sexual repression is an element of a culture. But it cannot be attributed to every attitude or stance a society takes. There is more to culture than any one single element. There are some bodily functions (but not all) which are disliked when done publicly. Of this sub group of bodily functions that are disliked when performed publicly not all are based around sexual organs. Therefore dislike of these functions cannot be attributed to repressed sexuality. Since I perceive breast feeding as asexual for observer and participants, I think that you cannot jump to repressed sexuality as to the reason why people are offended buy it, especially when there are obviously other culture influences on our perception of other asexual bodily functions such as picking your nose.

Originally Posted by Nexxo

Yup, but arguably not all wise or adult.

What I'm saying is that natural processes cannot be ignored or denied. They have to be managed in an adult, mature fashion. All people past puberty want sex, but we have to be adult about it. We all feel like punching someone in the face at times, but we have to be adult about it. Women breast feed, and we have to be adult about it.

Definitely normal body functions cannot be ignored or denied. I'm presenting the argument that because something is natural it is often touted as good, the qualifier of natural is neither good nor bad it is simply a state. "Im just doing something perfectly natural" is not an argument for doing it. "By doing this natural thing my baby will stfu and there will be peace all around" is an argument for doing it.

Interestingly you say that when we feel like punching someone in the face we have to be an adult about it. Which is in fact showing restraint and not doing so. It could be argued that the woman breast feeding should be the one to offer restraint, bring formula if your going to a restaurant or just a stock of premilked breast milk. Wait till the baby is fed before going to the restaurant or hold off for 5 minutes until you get off the bus etc. Just as the person that is in the vicinity of a breast feeder could show some restraint and not get all fussed up about it.

[eddie543]

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

ok



Interestingly you say that when we feel like punching someone in the face we have to be an adult about it. Which is in fact showing restraint and not doing so. It could be argued that the woman breast feeding should be the one to offer restraint, bring formula if your going to a restaurant or just a stock of premilked breast milk. Wait till the baby is fed before going to the restaurant or hold off for 5 minutes until you get off the bus etc. Just as the person that is in the vicinity of a breast feeder could show some restraint and not get all fussed up about it.

Young babies feed every three to four hours, infact some clusterfeed. you try getting out the house with a baby to a restraunt, order meal, eat meal wait for bill without that baby wanting another feed.

Even still babies choose when they feed. Its an arguement that it is generallly the best and cheapest way to feed a baby. It should be as convenient as posible to breast feed for women and seriously its just boobs.

[Nexxo]

Originally Posted by TheBlackSwordsMan

The adult argument, really ?

Adult as in: emotionally mature and rational, yes. Is there a better stance to approach life from?

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

ok

Some bodily functions are accepted when performed publicly(such as eating), some are not(such as pooping). The reasoning behind those that are not can be attributed to various cultural tendencies. Sexual repression is an element of a culture. But it cannot be attributed to every attitude or stance a society takes. There is more to culture than any one single element. There are some bodily functions (but not all) which are disliked when done publicly. Of this sub group of bodily functions that are disliked when performed publicly not all are based around sexual organs. Therefore dislike of these functions cannot be attributed to repressed sexuality. Since I perceive breast feeding as asexual for observer and participants, I think that you cannot jump to repressed sexuality as to the reason why people are offended buy it, especially when there are obviously other culture influences on our perception of other asexual bodily functions such as picking your nose.

That is a valid argument, but breast feeding in public appears more acceptable in cultures that have less of a problem with exposing breasts. Moreover you assume that the breast is perceived in an asexual context by the observer because it is involved in an asexual activity, and this does not necessarily follow. The offense is not taken at seeing a baby feed (a bottle is deemed acceptable) nor at the idea of a breast lactating (the bottle can contain breast milk). The offense is taken at seeing an exposed breast. And that is very much in the eye of the beholder.

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

Definitely normal body functions cannot be ignored or denied. I'm presenting the argument that because something is natural it is often touted as good, the qualifier of natural is neither good nor bad it is simply a state. "Im just doing something perfectly natural" is not an argument for doing it. "By doing this natural thing my baby will stfu and there will be peace all around" is an argument for doing it.

Interestingly you say that when we feel like punching someone in the face we have to be an adult about it. Which is in fact showing restraint and not doing so. It could be argued that the woman breast feeding should be the one to offer restraint, bring formula if your going to a restaurant or just a stock of premilked breast milk. Wait till the baby is fed before going to the restaurant or hold off for 5 minutes until you get off the bus etc. Just as the person that is in the vicinity of a breast feeder could show some restraint and not get all fussed up about it.

There is no logical argument for fussing with bottles when mother's milk is already stored in (relatively) easy to carry, sterile pouches which keep it fresh and at the right temperature. Fussing with bottles is uncomfortable for the mother and an infection and contamination risk for the baby. All because some people can't handle the sight of a breast (while they may happily check out Debbie on page three)? Please. Let's be adults about it.

[Da_Rude_Baboon]

I agree with Nexxo but I just want to point out that human breasts are sexual objects and have evolved into the shape they are to attract a mate. The fact that we as a society can not differentiate between the sexy bit and the practical use bit is our failing but it's wrong to argue that they are solely there for feeding babies.

[walle]

Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon

I agree with Nexxo but I just want to point out that human breasts are sexual objects and have evolved into the shape they are to attract a mate. The fact that we as a society can not differentiate between the sexy bit and the practical use bit is our failing but it's wrong to argue that they are solely there for feeding babies.

Female breasts are sexual objects for men and designed to attract men, yes, but when a woman breast feeds that is in a non sexual situation, it is not a situation (or setting) which tells the man that he should A: get sexually aroused and B: mount the women. A normal and healthy male would not look at a womans breasts as sexual objects when she's breast feeding her child, or become aroused.

Media seems to try their best to pervert, sexualize, and turn the intimacy and beauty between a mother and her child into something filthy, I find that rather disturbing.

[Tribble]

Originally Posted by Shirty

But Nexxo, I thought the human race was only 6000 years old. Only six days younger than the earth itself. Was I wrong to assume this?

Would it not be only evolution for women's breasts to devolve as they are not being used, will women breasts get smaller and smaller as they have no further function, maybe in a 1,000 years this will be the downfall of man.

Notes breast milk is proven better for an infants brain development.

http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/bre...righter-brains

Bottle feeding is pretty gross and certainly not best for baby, i do believe bottle feeding leads to a higher risk for cot death, no breast fed baby goes the hours sleeping that a bottle fed does, new borns need little and often i was regularly feeding every hour at least, then you have the higher incidence of infection of non breast fed babies because breast feeding also protects against infections, i could go on, bottle feed at your own risk, my friend lost her first baby and she was bottle feeding, never again did she bottle feed.

I couldn't give a **** who saw me breast feeding, ****ing grow up, any man that is against breast feeding whether in public or not is not a man in my eyes.

Men should be supporting women to breast feed, if you want what is really best for your future children.

[Tribble]

Originally Posted by Shirty

I have no objection to breastfeeding at all, even in public, but it does surprise me that more mums don't go hybrid - formula for out and about and breast at home.

You know nothing about breast feeding do you, because it is to do with supply and demand, topping up with formula is not a good thing for a woman's milk supply that is the way to kill it and formula is not good for a breast fed baby, now i used to freeze milk because i would express after feeds sometimes, then you can do that if you want to go out in the evening.

[Shirty]

Nope, we went formula all the way and our little girl is beautiful and healthy, so I'm certainly not an authority on breastfeeding in any way.

I'm just pro-choice

[walle]

Originally Posted by Tribble

Men should be supporting women to breast feed, if you want what is really best for your future children.

We do, we dont' question the importance and benefits of breast feeding.

[TheBlackSwordsMan]

An adult (the civilized attude) will deal with his beliefs in silence, it doesnt mean he have to like it or the person is immature. Nobody is talking about not allowing a mother to feed her infant or yelling at her, that would be the imbecile attitude..

[Nexxo]

Basically. People are free to decide if they don't like it, but they will have to deal with their own feelings about it; that's the adult thing to do. The breast feeding mother is not hurting anybody.

[theshadow2001]

Originally Posted by Nexxo

That is a valid argument, but breast feeding in public appears more acceptable in cultures that have less of a problem with exposing breasts.

Without knowing the attitude of these nameless cultures towards other bodily functions or how sexually liberal or repressed they are all that this statement can tell us is that other cultures have different attitudes towards different things. It does nothing to further the argument that the dislike of public breast feeding is due to sexual repression.

Originally Posted by Nexxo

Moreover you assume that the breast is perceived in an asexual context by the observer because it is involved in an asexual activity, and this does not necessarily follow. The offence is not taken at seeing a baby feed (a bottle is deemed acceptable) nor at the idea of a breast lactating (the bottle can contain breast milk). The offence is taken at seeing an exposed breast. And that is very much in the eye of the beholder.

I believe it does flow since perceived sexual attractiveness of something can be influenced by the context within which it is contained. For example I may enjoy the view of a nice round bottom. However any sexual gratification I may gain from that view could be spoiled by that nice round bottom performing its natural bodily function.

Further more when someone is breast feeding there is very little exposed breast since usually there's a massive baby head in front of it. The baby is held close to the mothers body further obstructing any view with her arms and the rest of the baby and usually mothers do exercise some discretion.

You say the bottle could contain breast milk therefore the person cannot be offended by the idea of a woman lactating. This is a leap in logic since the mother is not secreting milk whilst the baby is feeding from a bottle. The bottle could contain any white liquid from an observers point of view. Cows milk, mothers milk, formula. Ignorance is bliss and all that. Again it comes back to context. There is a simple experiment one can perform: Gather a large amount of saliva in your mouth. Then swallow it. No problem. Place a glass on a table. Now gather a large amount of saliva in your mouth and spit it into the glass. Pick up the glass and swallow the saliva. For whatever reason the second incidence is perceived as more disgusting than the first. All that has changed is the container has gone from your mouth to a glass. They both contain exactly the same substance. All this demonstrates is that the same substance can seen to be fine to be ingested in one instance and offensive to ingest in another.

With very little on show, the asexual nature of breastfeeding, and the requirement for a suitable context in order to actually sexualise something. Adding to that, the fact that offence can be taken by body functions which do not involve sexy body bits (belching) and that something deemed ok can be made to be offensive simply by changing its context (spitting in the glass) then I think its difficult to support the idea that sexual repression is the cause of people's dislike of public breastfeeding.

Originally Posted by Nexxo

There is no logical argument for fussing with bottles when mother's milk is already stored in (relatively) easy to carry, sterile pouches which keep it fresh and at the right temperature. Fussing with bottles is uncomfortable for the mother and an infection and contamination risk for the baby. All because some people can't handle the sight of a breast (while they may happily check out Debbie on page three)? Please. Let's be adults about it.

I'm sure there is plenty of medical maladies which are reason enough to be fussing with bottles. Perhaps there is no sociological reason, but those that are offended by breastfeeding might disagree.