Should Breastfeeding In Public Be Banned?
By Elisabeth Dale
The controversy over whether women should be able to breastfeed children in public continues. This week featured a comedian’s on-line rant about his exposure to an incident witnessed on public transportation. His beef? He admits the mother used a blanket to cover herself up; but he still found the practice disgusting. Perhaps if she had been suckling a newborn and not a “three year-old” (his assumption), it may have appeared less offensive. But he isn’t the only one speaking out against the practice. Women are asked to leave restaurants, airplanes, and even public swimming pools for daring to lactate in the open.
The response from breastfeeding advocates? They continue to stage nurse-ins, and even declared August 15th as national Public Display of Breastfeeding Day. After all, this isn’t the same as an arbitrary “no-shoes, no-service” issue. Laws have been enacted to protect a woman’s right to nurse wherever necessary, even on Boston’s MBTA. It doesn’t seem to matter whether it is legal or not, though. Those affronted by such benign displays believe that their right not to view a breastfeeding mother trumps a baby’s need to be fed. Something seems wrong with this logic.
What’s your opinion? Can negative attitudes toward public breastfeeding be changed?
Well I think the question at hand should be “Will it make a high school boy aroused?” If so (and it will) you are infringing upon someone else’s right to raise their child the way they see fit.
I’m not sure how many high school boys are aroused by breastfeeding, but it’s not an issue I’ve seen addressed in any medical study. Regardless, it is not a breastfeeding mother’s problem. Breastfeeding is not a sexual act. Parents and schools should educate their sons (and daughters) about how breasts sustain life and breast milk contributes to the better health of baby, mother, and reduces overall health care costs. In some cultures, breasts aren’t considered a secondary sexual characteristic. I think it is more a sexual fetish for a minority of men and not one that should interfere with a mother providing the breast medicine to her child. After all, we don’t tell women to cover up bare feet because a few men might have a foot fetish.
Hi Burl. Thanks for your comment. I agree that women represent the essence of life, and nothing is more feminine than sustaining life with one’s body. But I believe the issue of public breastfeeding has more to do with our notion that the breast is always sexual, and an odd notion that nursing mothers are exhibitionists. I for one never enjoyed interrupting my meal or other activities to stop and nurse in public. Even though discrete, I would rather have had private time with my child. But babies determine their own feeding schedules and their needs should come first.
The reason the feminine body is suppressed is because it is so powerful. It is the desire of the Corporate/Gov’t to take total charge of a woman’s body and hence of all of life. Thus, the suppression of the Feminine is the suppression of breast feeding (in public, but who is to say it won’t become illegal in private). Women are the foundation of fhe human race…..and indeed all creatures…..this is why women are equated to Nature….Nature means Essence, Foundation. In Woman even the Essence or Nature of God is known for in whom are we all conceived, nourished and returned? Woman = Life and the corporate gov/t wants to get it under control…be it breast feeding in public or genetic engineering. Those that are anti-femine, both body and spirit are anti life.