Breastfeeding: the next civil right?

[Dr Strangelove]

Breast feeding is definitely a movement whose time has come and gone. I doubt that more than one in ten moms in this area try to breast feed.

[St Leo]

The antibodies in human milk are quite useful in building up an infant's immune system. Eh.

[Velociryx]

Does that ONLY work on infants?



-=Vel=-

[Flubber]

Originally posted by JohnT
Heh-heh. Just y'all wait. When you have kids, you'll realize that one of the biggest "Nazi's" (ala Seinfelds Soup Nazi) in modern society is the breast-feeding Nazi, the sort of person whom, when seeing a child being fed formula, goes to their mothers and start berating them in public. This happened to my wife a couple of times, but even more common was the disparaging stares and the overly loud "tsk-tsk's".

Common sense says "why is this even an issue? The kid needs to eat.", but the less rational part of me says "Stick it to those bltches!"

The health care institutions really really really promote breastfeeding to the point of getting in your face about it.

Little Flub was usually Breastfed, but we also supplemented with formula and usually used that method in public. We never faced the interfering sort on that point though.

We had a line prepared though . .. " We would LOVE to breastfeed but her double mastectomy kind of prevents it. But thank you for your arrogance."

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Breast feeding is definitely a movement whose time has come and gone. I doubt that more than one in ten moms in this area try to breast feed.

Really? I don't have any numbers, but breatfeeding surely is the normal thing to do where I come from.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Breast feeding is definitely a movement whose time has come and gone. I doubt that more than one in ten moms in this area try to breast feed.

here most moms try.-- In our baby group of six, they all tried but one failed almost immediately ( as her doctor had advised might happen due to a previous surgery). Two more gave up after about 3 months. he last 3 made it more than 6 months.

Mrs Flubber actually went the longest at about 13 months, which suprised us both since she wasn't fanatic about the idea or anything. Its just that once she got past the difficult first month, it worked pretty well.

Now little Flub takes everything from a plastic cup (he's proud when he does this but wastes a lot) or a variety of sippy cups.

Our experience with breastfeeding was mixed but we will try it again on any future child. The science about the health benefits is pretty solid and once its working its actually more convenient than lugging around stuff.

[Dis]

I support exposing breasts.

nothing more needs to be said.

[JohnT]

Laura tried breastfeeding Sophie, but the kid was just too hungry and would be attached to that thing for 30, 45 minutes at a time. We finally switched to formula as to give Mommy a rest, and that's when we found out: Sophie has a BIG appetite. While the books would say that a 4 month old should be eating about 24 ounces of formula a day, Sophie was beating that by twice the amount. (Not sure if numbers are correct, but the proportions are. Sophie just ate a lot, more than mom could support.)

[Dis]

Re: Breastfeeding: the next civil right?

Originally posted by The diplomat
So where do people come down on this issue?

-------
On Breastfeeding, Rights, and Good Manners

Wednesday, August 25, 2004

By Wendy McElroy

On Aug. 7 and 8, over two dozen mothers staged a "nurse-in" at a Maryland Starbucks to protest its breastfeeding policy: namely, nursing mothers must cover up or use the bathroom.

A week later, on Aug. 16, in Illinois, Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich signed the Right to Breastfeed Act, which allows women to breastfeed "in any location, public or private, where the mother is otherwise authorized to be, irrespective of whether the nipple of the mother's breast is uncovered during or incidental to the breastfeeding."

Breastfeeding is becoming a front in the culture war.

At one extreme, breastfeeding advocates claim a civil right to nurse in both public and private locations without a modesty requirement— that is, without requiring the use of an inconspicuous area or concealment of the breast. At the other extreme, critics say breastfeeding constitutes offensive public nudity and should be conducted in private.

"Public" and "private" are key terms. The nearly 40 states that have breastfeeding legislation deal with those terms in widely divergent ways. Some, like California, give women the right to breastfeed "in any location, public or private, except the private home … of another"; the mother may sue if breastfeeding is denied. Others, like Virginia, allow breastfeeding on "property owned, leased or controlled" by the state — that is, public property— but do not legislate private property. And, then, there is Rhode Island, which merely says breastfeeding in public does not violate criminal statutes.

The case for breastfeeding on public property is stronger than on private property. Public venues are not governed by clear ownership rules. Thus, the argument that breastfeeding is natural and healthy may sway whatever process determines that property's use.

In 1999, President Clinton found the argument compelling enough to sign the "Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act" into which Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., had inserted language that legalized breastfeeding on federal property.

By contrast, private property has clear ownership rules; the owner should determine what is acceptable behavior by customers or visitors. That's why there are "No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service" signs. Control of access comes with ownership and it applies no less to a business than it does to a home.

Some breastfeeding advocates make an end-run around property rights by claiming that nursing is a civil right. For example, H.R. 2790 introduced in 2003 by Rep. Maloney attempts to "amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect breastfeeding by new mothers." It is currently before the Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations.

Private property has been under attack for decades by those who claim that owner who "inappropriately" denies access to his property is violating civil rights. For example, an owner who refuses to serve women customers is said to violate their "right" to non-discrimination.

But no valid civil right entitles anyone to benefit from another person's possessions, from another person's time and labor. No one has a civil right to access someone else's property without the owner's consent. To demand such a "right" is an uncivil act that strips away one of the main protections of a peaceful society: namely, the line dividing what is mine from what is yours.

Nursing mothers have no right of access to a private business that says "no." And even sympathetic owners might find it prudent to object. For example, a restaurateur who operated on the margin might need those customers who would prefer not to dine next to conspicuous breastfeeding. He might need "the family trade" that includes parents who don't want their children to view bare breasts.

The issue of nudity applies to breastfeeding on public property as well. Some states, like Missouri, provide that women have a right to publicly breastfeed "...with as much discretion as possible." The question here is of good manners and common sense, which, like property rights, are also protections that make a peaceful society more probable.

Fortunately, most nursing mothers are not likely to protest reasonable rules that ask them to breastfeed in a discreet area or to cover the breast. In fact, they are likely to welcome the privacy.

Unfortunately, some breastfeeding advocates want society to do more than reasonably accommodate a woman's choice in how, when, and where to feed her baby. They seem to want people to accept and applaud her choice by insisting on her "right" to expose them to it on her terms. Thus La Leche League, one of the largest advocacy organizations, rejects Missouri's "discretion" requirement.

LLL writes, "This restrictive language requiring discretion does not promote breastfeeding, and should not be copied by other states."

People who do not embrace the sight of breastfeeding are deemed to be anti-mother or anti-baby when they may be simply anti-rudeness.

Breastfeeding is natural and our society undoubtedly overreacts to naked breasts. But the winner-take-all approach of extreme advocates only acts to polarize society on a problem for which reasonable solutions can evolve. When done with some discretion, public breastfeeding is becoming socially acceptable with many businesses accommodating the shift.

Breastfeeding need not devolve into cultural warfare. The issue will yield to courtesy, common sense and a bit of respect for the other person's rights.

Wendy McElroy is the editor of ifeminists.com and a research fellow for The Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. She is the author and editor of many books and articles, including the new book, "Liberty for Women: Freedom and Feminism in the 21st Century" (Ivan R. Dee/Independent Institute, 2002). She lives with her husband in Canada.
-------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,129908,00.html

this wendy girls is a conservative whack job.

by denying breastfeeding you are denying humans the ability to nourish themselves. It should be allowed anywhere.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Patroklos


Actually you said that, you got some issues to work on.

And everyone should breast feed in private, not just the unattractive. Besides the fact it is a text book case of public nudity, and thus constututionaly banned by the most concrete obsenity laws in existance. Unless of course you want all the strip joints back in your neighboorhoods for your 4 year old to enjoy.

And we can always mount the urinals outside the bathroom, and toilets for that matter, right next to your table.

this is not the same!

penis and vagina are sex organs, breasts are not.

[Spiffor]

She actually seems to have quite her head on her shoulders, IMHO. I don't agree with everything (in particular, with the idea that it is justified for parents not to want their kids to see a naked breast), but she bears much more moderation than a conservative whackjob. If you want a conservative whackjob, see Patrokolos. Not the same tone IMHO.

[Dis]

Originally posted by The diplomat


I am not sure about that. As someone who experienced a lot of female toplessness on French beaches, I can testify that not all toplessness is good. Some people should definitely cover up.

how hard is it to look away?

[Dis]

Originally posted by Arrian
That's a bit of a stretch, Fabulous.

Anyway, if women want to breastfeed in public, that's fine by me. Most of them will be modest enough to cover themselves most of the way anyway. The others... I can look away (and should - after all, who the hell stares at a woman who is breastfeeding her kid?).

-Arrian

I would

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Dissident
how hard is it to look away?

It's very difficult not to stare at them, you know

[Dis]

come on! I'm the biggest pervert at Apolyton, but even I can easily look away from them. At strip clubs I spend more time looking at my beer than at the boobs. I love beer