I have a lot of friends on Facebook, and lately a lot of them have been furious at the latest privacy rulings. Facebook decided that photographs of mothers nursing their babies were obscene (some were even labeled sexually explicit) and removed them from the site. Some of the support groups for nursing mothers were banned and one woman had her account frozen 30 times.
In retaliation groups of mothers held “nurse ins” outside Facebook offices in California and some accounts and photographs have been reinstated.
It’s not just Facebook that nursing moms have been angry at lately, Target stores found themselves at the center of a similar protest after asking a customer to stop nursing her baby in one of their stores.
Why all the hoopla? Women are constantly told that breastfeeding is best for babies. After you deliver in hospital, nurses are trained to help new moms get their baby to latch on and nurse effectively. Those moms having difficulty may even get help from a lactation consultant. So you would think we would have public support for doing something not only healthy but natural. Right?
Why is it then that women feel compelled to hide when nursing in public? They either resort to using public bathrooms or draping a blanket over the baby so no-one catches a glimpse of bare flesh.
Sixteen years ago when I first moved to Connecticut, a woman was arrested for nursing her baby in car at the mall parking lot. After a public backlash, it is now illegal to harass a nursing mother in public. How sad that we have to make this a law and you can’t trust people to leave moms alone to do what comes naturally; feeding their child the way nature intended.
The American Academy of Pediatrics and the World Health Organization both recommend exclusive Breastfeeding for 6 months, and the APA recommends bfing to a year, the WHO says a minimum of 2 years. In fact, the WHO recommends Breastfeeding as a first option, followed by bottle feeding the mother's expressed milk, then a wet nurse or milk from a donor, then formula as a last option when no human milk is available. I'm not saying formula is bad, but it is NOT what reliable medical sources recommend as best for newborns.
http://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/baby/breastfeeding/pages/How-to-Tell-if-Baby-is-Getting-Enough-Milk.aspx
To the PUBLIC breastfeeding issue, which is 100% subjective. Some people may be uncomfortable with it, which is their right to feel that way. It is NOT their right, however, to dictate that others should conform to that personal opinion. If we all got to prohibit everything we find offensive, there would be nothing left. Just because nursing mothers are a minority doesn't mean they should feel restricted by the personal beliefs of others (especially when those others, I'll wager, have likely never had to breastfeed an infant ,anywhere). I completely agree with you that we should show common courtesy, and in this case that includes courtesy to nursing mothers and their babies. Live and let live. I've never seen a nursing mother waving it in anyone's face (no pun intended), so it's hardly intrusive. If it makes someone uncomfortable, they could always just walk on by, not stare, and leave them be. That, my good doctor, would be courteous. "It's about how others (including children) IN PUBLIC are affected by it" - Now really Doctor, do you think anyone is being traumatized by this or suffering psychological damage? The only adverse effect might be vertigo as they climb onto their high horse.
I think you make some good points but your statements are general bold and sweeping but not necessarily correct. To say that a minority of people think this way is only your opinion.... not a fact. But if what you said is true... we are a nation that takes into consideration the opinion and the concerns of the minority. Is that true always... or only when it's convienent to use it to win an argument? We live in a society today where secular laws and civil liberties overshadow morality, prudence, politeness, tolerant, reason, tact, wisdom, common sense, sound judgement and decency, These comments are NOT directed to, for or against breastfeeding mothers. I think it reflects the sad state of affairs we are in as a nation. Everything we do or fail to do make up who we are. No one thing will destroy us as a society but just look around and see if you don't see something wrong with the level of permissiveness that exists today. Moms... breastfeed in public if you wish, I only ask you to consider "the minority" of people who may not agree with you.
There is a quote in the Bilble that reads that "one should be slow to anger and quick to reconcile." The next time you lash out in anger because someone doesn't agree with you.... take a deep breath, keep your mouth closed and listen to what is being said... you might even learn something.
I think we all agree that we can have different opinions on public breastfeeding, or any other topic for that matter. That is healthy and productive. But remember how this column started - Facebook and Target didn't just HAVE opinions, they decided their opinion was right, everyone else was wrong, and FORCED their opinions on others. That's when it becomes unhealthy. And illegal. Thankfully, we have "secular laws" to prevent such subjective discrimination. We should just live and let live! There are too many people infused with trumped-up morality who arrogantly think they are the arbiters of morality and conduct for everyone else. Just what gives them this right I wonder?
Facebook and target holding policy does NOT force their opinions on anyone. As a private company they are allowed to create their own guidelines and as a consumer you have the right to choose not to support such a company. To me it's simple. Public nudity is not allowed in most states and in most states nudity equals showing nipples and/or labia major or pubic hair for women, showing pubic hair or penis and testicles for men, and buttocks for both. This is not opinion - this is law. You can argue this law, but you can't go after a company that is following a law that the government also enforced. This isn't against breast feeding. This is against openly displaying an entirely bare breast to the public, which is agains the law - no matter what you are doing with this breast. Personally, I don't see why it's so hard to use a blanket or any other fabric to cover just a little. It doesn't harm the mother or baby and ultimately makes you a law abiding citizen. If you don't like the laws here in CT, go to NYC where it is completely legal for a woman to walk around in public topless.
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-40w (2001) requires employers to provide a reasonable amount of time each day to an employee who needs to express breast milk for her infant child and to provide accommodations where an employee can express her milk in private. (HF 5656) Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46a-64 (1997) prohibits places of public accommodation, resort or amusement from restricting or limiting the right of a mother to breastfeed her child. (1997 Conn. Acts, P.A. 210) Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 53-34b provides that no person may restrict or limit the right of a mother to breastfeed her child There is no mention of whether or not a nipple (which is essential to breastfeed) is prohibited
Fact - Facebook did not say they will remove every photo of breast feeding from their server. Instead they removed photos that included nipple. Again, showing nipple is a widely accepted definition of nudity. Just because one law allows breast feeding doesn't negate another. Not to mention that law has to do to public accommodation businesses. Not a photo sharing business. So not applicable. Target - again, they only asked a woman who was breast feeding with an entirely bare breast. Again, target does not fall under this definition of an accommodation business and therefore these laws are again, not applicable. Even if it were, one law defines the ability to allow breast feeding and probably purposely doesn't define the nudity topic because another law covers the topic on nudity. The existence of one law does not negate the other because of exclusion of the topic. Laws work together. Nipple is essential to breast feeding but a completely openly bare breast in public is not. Again, until someone shows me that a blanket or other piece of fabric for modesty causes harm, there is nothing necessary about showing full bare breast and therefor the laws work together.
It's because of the children and for the safety of women. Men are conditioned to look at breasts as a STRONG sexual precursor. It's engrained in them. It's not the same for men's nipples with women.
The law is simple and clean cut. Women can not show nipples. Women can breast feed in public but must also follow additional laws which require a woman to cover her nipple. Again, covering the nipple while breast feeding does not harm mother or child and results in following the law of public nudity. The law goes for everyone - they are not going to make an exception for breast feeding mothers because there is literally no real purpose to other than breast feeding moms WANT it.
Most times when a woman breastfeeds, the babies face covers the nipple anyway. If I was breastfeeding I would most likely wear button down shirts so I wouldn't have to sit there topless based on my preference. I really don't see a need to have a blanket draping since I see breastfeeding as a natural event and not a sexual one. Of course women who breast feed want a law protecting their rights to nourish their children. As with anything in life laws are always requested by the people they directly effect so I could see why nursing mothers would want to make sure they had the opportunity to do so when the need arose. If men feel a sexual urge after seeing a woman breastfeed that's a control issue. There are men sexually attracted to legs and even feet - maybe us women should dress like it's 1800 as not to sexually arouse women.