Magazine's Nursing Baby Cover Sparks Outrage In The Conserva

babsi

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2005
Messages
663
Reaction score
0
capt.jpg


Readers of a US parenting magazine are crying foul over the publication's latest cover depicting a woman breastfeeding, with some calling the photo offensive and disgusting.

"I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine," one woman from Kansas wrote in reaction to the picture in Babytalk, a free magazine that caters to young mothers. "I was offended and it made my husband very uncomfortable when I left the magazine on the coffee table." Her reaction was part of some 5,000 letters the magazine has received in response to a poll to gage reader sentiment about Babytalk's August cover photo, which shows a baby nursing.

Several readers said they were "embarrassed" or "offended" by the Babytalk photo and one woman from Nevada said she "immediately turned the magazine face down" when she saw the photo.

"Gross, I am sick of seeing a baby attached to a boob," the mother of a four-month-old said.

Another reader said she was "horrified" when she received the magazine and hoped that her husband hadn't laid eyes on it.

"I had to rip off the cover since I didn't want it laying around the house," she said.

A national television program also ran a segment on the controversy, interviewing several people in New York who expressed disgust over the cover photo.

The picture in Babytalk was aimed at illustrating the controversy surrounding breastfeeding in the United States, where a national survey by the American Dietetic Association found that 57 percent of those polled are opposed to women breastfeeding in public and 72 percent think it is inappropriate to show a woman breastfeeding on television programs.

Babytalk executive editor Lisa Moran said though most of those who responded to the poll about the cover photo gave the magazine a thumbs up, she was surprised that some 25 percent expressed outrage.

"There is a real puritanical streak in America," Moran told AFP. "You see celebrities practically baring their breasts all the time and no one seems to mind in this sort of sexual context.

"But in this very natural context of feeding your child, a lot of Americans are very uncomfortable with it."

She said the controversy is all the more surprising in light of concerted efforts by the US government and health professionals to encourage women to breastfeed.

"Everyone is saying that breastfeeding is best for baby but there is so little support for it in public," Moran said.

She said the Babytalk cover photo marks the first time a major parenting magazine in the United States dares to break the taboo about showing a woman's breast and the outrage it has prompted is not about to discourage editors from doing it again.

"This hasn't scared us off at all," Moran said. "We're thrilled and hopefully this will help women get more support for nursing."



Sorry, don't have a link to the article. Hope this is in the right forum
 
OMG How pathetic? You can't see any nipple and I don't think it's offensive at all. But then I am a breastfeeder! :lol:

Really can't believe the attitudes of some people! :wall:
 
personally i think the photo is beautifull!!! its a mother caring for her child, whats wrong with that?if it was a bottle sticking out its mouth no1 would give a damn so i dont c the problem!!!!!
 
Trust the Yanks.....I need the biggest rolly eye smiley the world has EVER seen.
 
Couldn't find a rolling eyes one, have a breastfeeding one instead ;)

BAC1breastfeeding03.gif
 
that's a beautiful photo though... can't see why people would be offended by this when they'll easily tolerate page 3 girls.... there's something WRONG here...
 
I'm on another forum where I'm a mod, and it's mostly americans on there. We were having a big discussion about that magazine a few days ago. There were actually some people saying that they found it inappopriate!

This was what I said in that thread:

I honestly don't see anything wrong with the picture...maybe I'm strange but I don't even think I would find anything wrong with it if the nipple WERE showing!

Why do people have to associate breasts and nipples with sex all the time? You don't see bulls wandering around meadows thinking "my god, that cow over there has a fine set of udders!"

Maybe I'm just strange, but I don't even know what breasts have got to do with sex....okay they get fondled during sex....but so do arms, legs, back etc. The breasts THEMSELVES don't do anything. They just sit there looking breast-like!

Genetalia, yes, obviously that's sexual...that's what is used during sex (by the way I'm sorry if this is getting a little too explicit, I'm trying to be as tame as possible), but breasts....WHY are they seen as sexual things?

Is it just a western thing? I believe in some parts of Africa (I think), breasts aren't seen as sexual things at all...it's the bottom that is focused on.

To me, breasts were designed to feed babies. In fact, no, not just to me....
FACT: breasts were designed to feed babies.

Breasts are not actually there to have any other function OTHER than feeding babies! That is their sole purpose! Any implication of them being sexual is something that has been pretty much invented!! Maybe it was invented hundreds of years ago...I don't know when it was invented...but it was.

Look back in way-yon-when (I dunno when exactly), but you know, a long time ago, it was seen as completely inappropriate for women to show their ankles. The ankles were seen as sexual. It seems totally laughable now, but it was very serious back then.
If that, to us, is ridiculous, then why isn't the concept of breasts being seen as sexual also ridiculous?

*shrugs* I just genuinely don't get it.

I breastfed Lydia (for as long as I could) when she was hungry...if I happened to be out at the time, so be it. Yes, I preferred it when I was at home or somewhere discreet, not because I thought it was inappropriate of me to breastfeed her in public, but because it got rather tedious having people glare at me with disapproving looks. I tried to ignore it, but it still gets to you, if you know what I mean. I still stand by my view though that they are the ones that have narrow minded attitudes, and that I was doing nothing wrong or shameful.

As for the whole bit about not wanting teenage boys or men to see a woman breastfeeding her child, well that's ridiculous. That's just, IMO, encouraging them to view women's breasts in a purely sexual way, which is bizarre because, as I said, I don't even know why they are viewed that way in the first place, and to see breastfeeding almost as a dirty thing, when it really is the most natural thing in the world.

And as for the cover of the magazine, it's a PARENTING magazine with a photo of a feeding baby...a baby feeding the way nature intended it to feed! Perfectly normal if you ask me!

Right...little rant over...disclaimer...I mean no offense to anyone who thinks it's inappropriate. I just happen to totally disagree with you, but you're entitled to your opinions.


If anyone wants the link to that thread on that forum, out of sheer interest perhaps, let me know and I'll pm you the link.
 
I am totally bemused by the initial negative response over the coverpage! What a beautiful photo - I would love to get something like that with Oscar and I! I'll be very proud of it.

I think anyone with a negative attitude towards something so natural, should simply be return to pre-school to be educated and at the same time, re-evaluate their lives.

On one hand the yanks can be reasonably forward thinking, but on the other hand, they don't surprise me with their issues! Perhaps it's like that in many other countries - I don't know.
However, it was nice to see the responses that Xena posted! There's hope yet!

Emilia xx
 
As a non-breastfeeder (although not through choice) I think that is a beautiful photo, and one which women should be proud of if they can do it.

Seems though everything is wrong these days,if you're open about breastfeeding you get slated for being too 'public' about it.
If you bottle feed you get slated for not breastfeeding, even if you had to give up, you're made to feel you shouldn't have.

I think women should be ENCOURAGED to breastfeed. It's this kind of crap which makes women give up through feeling uncomfortable in public, and then feel rubbish for not doing as nature intended. It's discracful :evil:

Rant over...sorry.
 
I think that the picture is lovely, stupid bloody yanks (no offence menat to any on here!!) and you can bet them silly bloody women who said i hope my OH didn't see it, don't know about the huge stash of porn there hubbies have !!!!!!

Oh i am sooo cross about this, that is the most natural picture ever, after all thats what boobs are for!!!!
 
It's fine for a man to ogle tits on the TV when they are advertising beer or on a bilboard poster, but to see her breastfeeding. I asked Mark and he says it's a lovely picture - nothing sexual about it. He said if her nipple was showng it might be different because they don't show nipples on TV, but otherwise it's a good picture.

Stupid people :wall:
 
it doesn't make sense! it's not ok to show a woman breastfeeding on a magazine cover (done in the most classy way) but it's ok to have naked women in men's magazines and half naked men in teenage magazines!! :roll:
 
Thing is I bet there were less complaints when Britney Spears was naked on the cover of Rolling Stones magazine..... :roll:
 
what a beautiful picture. I have a few of Seren feeding and they are my favourites :D
 
I think this is a beautiful picture and I fully encourage any women to breastfeed her children.
I'm all for extended BF for as long as the child wants it (within reason of course)
How can the look of love in that babies eyes gazing up to his/her mother cause offence to anyone? That's outrageous not the picture.
The most ironic thing is that the US is responsible of most of the internet if not the worlds hard core porn so why do they choose a mother feeding her child to get insulted over.
It seems they have sexualized the breast so completely now that they find it hard to see breasts in any other way.
They don't seem to have any problem with women putting silicone into their breasts either because that goes hand in hand with how they view them.
Those US women are disgusting for thinking such a beautiful picture as sexual in any way, shape or form.

Here is the article the picture was advisting for btw its interesting.
http://www.parenting.com/parenting/baby ... 18,00.html
 
Many moms are overwhelmed by how much effort goes into breastfeeding: Nearly half of respondents to Babytalk's survey said that they didn't feel prepared for the time commitment. A newborn nurses 8 to 12 times a day; by the time the baby has been fed, burped, and changed, it's time to start the cycle all over again. "It really is a shock to women how much time is involved, at least initially," says health psychologist and international board-certified lactation consultant Kathleen Kendall-Tackett.

Totally agree with this as I was not prepared for how much Ella would feed in the initial weeks. Don't agree with the combo feeding though (breast and formula) as that's what stopped my milk from settling properly for the first 10 weeks (I topped up a handful of times when Ella was teeny on the advice of HV).
 
I dunno i've seen my friends bottle and the amount of preparation, Sterilization and warming that goes into feeding their children seem a lot harder to me than just sticking tit into their mouth on demand.
 
TipsyDipsy said:
I dunno i've seen my friends bottle and the amount of preparation, Sterilization and warming that goes into feeding their children seem a lot harder to me than just sticking tit into their mouth on demand.

nah, I've done both breast and bottle feeding. Breast feeding is much more taxing.
 
I agree with that - especially when Ella woke in the night for a feed. So much easier to lift her out and feed! When DH did a few night feeds with EBM he used to have to go down, warm the bottle up etc then by that time Ella would be frantic!
 
I agree with you Xena on the taxing bit, especially emotionally and physically, but sterilising etc is such a lot of faffing about!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
473,573
Messages
4,654,637
Members
110,019
Latest member
laurenl27
Back
Top