It's okay to have boobs all over the place to advertise things in the most pervy way imaginable, but HOW DARE you use them in public for the purpose they evolved for!

That's why our society is going to hell!

That, and gays!

I mean this should be such a non-issue. I imagine in 50 years looking back on this and shaking our heads about how silly some people were.

Our bodies are awesome. No one should be ashamed about breastfeeding. If we raise our children in a culture where it's unremarkable, it will be unremarkable.

(June 11, 2017 at 6:29 pm)Nymphadora Wrote: Wasn't sure where to put this, so if it needs to be moved, by all means. 

So my brother posted something on facebook about the US being the only country that does not protect breastfeeding outside of the home. He is a huge proponent of mothers being able to breastfeed wherever and whenever they need to because their child is hungry. 

I agree with this. If a baby is hungry, a mother should be able to feed her child, no matter where she is. Others did not agree and went on to say that women should cover up their child or shouldn't "flop out their boobs" in public. 

I'd like to get a decent discussion going on this here. What are your thoughts on a mother's right to breastfeed in public and do you feel that she should have to cover up her child, even when there is a heatwave?

My first born was formula-fed, but I'm currently breastfeeding our little one, and I never realized how un-breastfeeding-friendly our society is until now.  You have the Academy telling you, "really, if you want to be a good mom, you better EXCLUSIVELY breastfeed for at LEAST a year; otherwise you're basically a failure."  But, it's almost impossible to find places in public to breastfeed unless you want to sit on a gross toilet in a public restroom somewhere.  This leads to women NOT breastfeeding because they feel isolated, and confined to their homes.  I bring my nursing cover wherever we go, and if my man gets hungry, he eats!  

---

(June 11, 2017 at 6:43 pm)Mermaid Wrote: Breasts are highly sexualized in our culture, and it's really weird. We are so afraid of a "wardrobe malfunction" but show graphic footage of people being murdered on primetime as a matter of course.

And if a drunk college chick was running down the street topless, every guy she passed would think it was the most amazing thing he'd ever seen.  But, a boob feeding an infant...THAT's disgusting!

It's not strange that breasts are viewed sexually.  Breasts are a secondary sexual characteristic, and our monkey brains (I mean men's) constantly assess women for potential fitness, in addition to various components of body shape: hip size, facial symmetry, etc.  Hips bear babies, breasts feed them, and a well-developed face shows someone who's likely fit enough to survive long enough to raise a baby.  That's probably why some muslim cultures require women to cover their faces-- because  a healthy face will give a man a hard-on, and this brings him shame.


I got the ban hammer dropped at me once because I showed an assortment of nude images, including some of naked children playing on the beach.  In this case, there was a 100% disconnect between my views of what is sexual or dirty, and those of others-- so much of a disconnect that the mods (and others) literally couldn't understand how I couldn't realize that those pictures of kids were dirty, sexual, inappropriate images; and that I couldn't understand how THEY could possibly view children, in any context at all, as sexual objects.  They felt disturbed by my view, and I felt disturbed by theirs.  

I think the breast issue is similar in a sense-- to some people, breasts in any context are so OBVIOUSLY sexual and dirty that they are not capable of getting your point; and breasts are so OBVIOUSLY non-sexual at least in the breastfeeding context that you can't really see their point.

I think in general, we are still stuck with the Victorian fascination for machinery and the consequent hatred of biology, and are still offended and embarrassed by ALL our bodily functions-- because if you shit, you're an animal, if you pee, you're an animal, and if you have sex, you're an animal.  That's why almost 100% of our curse words are body words: fuck, shit, piss, bitch, cunt, dick, asshole, etc.

The solution, in my opinion, isn't just to argue that boobs are okay when breastfeeding.  It's to completely stamp out the Victorian / Christian views of humans as special, and to see people (including ourselves) as animals.  And that includes things we consider sexual-- there's nothing WRONG with breasts. . . or penises, or vaginas or shit, piss or semen, or vaginal blood, or anything else.

To me, the only reason we shouldn't just walk around in our birthday suits, in any context, is only about hygiene: we don't want to sit on a bus where people's bodily fluids have made contact.  Women don't want to have involuntary genital contact with men while standing on a subway.  That kind of thing.

(June 11, 2017 at 7:06 pm)Nymphadora Wrote:

(June 11, 2017 at 7:02 pm)Cyberman Wrote: I was breastfed. Thing is, I was so ugly my mum would close her eyes and think of other babies.

You need to stop that. I don't think you're ugly.

I thought he was joking. Watch Twilight zone "Eye of the beholder" episode and you'll see what I think of pretty.

(June 11, 2017 at 9:46 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I got the ban hammer dropped at me once because I showed an assortment of nude images, including some of naked children playing on the beach.  In this case, there was a 100% disconnect between my views of what is sexual or dirty, and those of others-- so much of a disconnect that the mods (and others) literally couldn't understand how I couldn't realize that those pictures of kids were dirty, sexual, inappropriate images; and that I couldn't understand how THEY could possibly view children, in any context at all, as sexual objects.  They felt disturbed by my view, and I felt disturbed by theirs.  

Your repeated mischaracterization of that incident is curious, seeing as we have explained multiple times why we temp banned you.

We did not view the picture of the naked child as sexual. We viewed it as someone else's child that you hotlinked and posted a picture of---without that child's permission or the permission of the parents. We have a blanket rule that no pictures of naked children will be posted on this site, period. Rather than parse which children gave permission for their naked bodies to be displayed for a bunch of internet strangers, we decided to err on the side of caution. I understand that you don't agree with this rule. But don't try to make it out like we think children are always sexual objects.

You're a god damned adult. Act like one.

If mothers can breastfeed their babies its so good for development. Being a breastfeeding mom is exhausting, messy, sticky, but most importantly babies are happy and fed. If men or woman want to sexualize it in their own minds who gives a shit. Let moms take care of business.

My wife nursed our children in public. If/when that happened, there was usually someone with her (at least my MIL, or me, as a minimum). Nobody said anything when I was around, and if they had when only my MIL was there, neither she nor my wife would have taken any shit. And it is really funny, though kind of sick, that guys will slobber all over a gal with two band aids and a triangle of cloth at the beach, but bitch about a nursing mother. Maybe they're just pissy because it isn't their kid? I don't know, it just seems perverse to act like that. It's perfectly natural.

I do not mind it being done in public so long as it is done tactfully; meaning that she utilizes a means of keeping her breasts covered while breastfeeding in public.

(June 11, 2017 at 10:14 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: Your repeated mischaracterization of that incident is curious, seeing as we have explained multiple times why we temp banned you.

We did not view the picture of the naked child as sexual. We viewed it as someone else's child that you hotlinked and posted a picture of---without that child's permission or the permission of the parents. We have a blanket rule that no pictures of naked children will be posted on this site, period. Rather than parse which children gave permission for their naked bodies to be displayed for a bunch of internet strangers, we decided to err on the side of caution. I understand that you don't agree with this rule. But don't try to make it out like we think children are always sexual objects.

You're a god damned adult. Act like one.

?

Okay, I don't want to make this thread, or my last post, about the ban or the reasons for it.  I'm clearly mentioning it for anecdotal reasons: it's a good example of the conflict that arises when people don't see eye-to-eye on certain facets of our definitions of sexuality.

But let me attempt to save the value of the anecdote with some discussion about it. Where's the requirement for consent in the latter case?  The fact is that it's not an identity or permission issue-- it IS, in fact, an issue defined by differing views on sexuality: maybe yours personally, maybe those of the site's free hosts, or maybe those of US lawmakers, or maybe that of anglo-European christian culture. And the fact is that there's currently a big disconnect between people's views about if and when women's breast are sexual objects.


My last post pretty clearly explained why I think we have arrived at twisted views of sexuality, and what position we SHOULD take.  I think we should lift the blanket completely.  There's nothing intrinsically wrong with any human body part or function.  I think people who are against breastfeeding in public have such a distorted view of what it means to be human that it borders on insane.  Milk cows have massive, massive mammaries-- but nobody gets upset at cows walking around naked.  People are animals  too, and breasts exist for 100% the exact same reason as udders: to feed offspring.

That being said, you can google "breasts" and get almost nothing but porn.  And that's fetishism at work; and the only remedy is to stop making breasts a dirty, hidden, shameful thing.  Frankly, I think comfort is the only reason women should be required to cover their breasts at all.  That a fairly flat-chested woman might be out of line for going nude at the beach, while a 400lb man can let his double-Ds fly free and proud, is clearly a double standard. If my wife or my daughter wanted to go topless in public, I'd support them 100%. And I wouldn't worry about them being sexualized-- what some pervert thinks is his problem. What I would do is what I always do-- if anybody touches them in any way they don't accept, or threatens them for any reason or in any way, I will turn him into a red stain on the road.

---

(June 11, 2017 at 10:51 pm)Lutrinae Wrote: I do not mind it being done in public so long as it is done tactfully; meaning that she utilizes a means of keeping her breasts covered while breastfeeding in public.

Why should tact be required?

You show your neck wherever you damned well please, and your knees.  Your hair is uncovered, and your eyes are not shaded.

What is particularly special about breasts that require them to be seen as an object of shame and secrecy?