‘Breast’ cover gets mixed reaction
Friday, July 28, 2006 at 08:26amWTF? People offended by a photo of a baby breastfeeding? On the cover of a parenting magazine? It’s just a boob, people. I don’t understand the commotion. The way we pretend that certain things don’t happen - menstruating, breast-feeding, pooping, etc. - is effing ridiculous. “Gross, I am sick of seeing a baby attached to a boob,” wrote Lauren, a mother of a 4-month-old. That makes me sad.
GeekBoy on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 8:51 am
Wow. These people don’t understand the first thing about basic human psychology, do they?
Lesson #1: Human beings desire that which is forbidden. Taking away the ability to see boobs in a natural light just makes men want to see them even MORE, and removes any chance that a man will ever think of boobs (and women) in a non-sexual way. You’re better off letting your son see you breastfeeding a few times when he’s young, so that he doesn’t become completely breast-obsessed when he’s an adult.
Put the cookie jar on top of the refrigerator, and your kids will crave cookies and do anything to get one. Make a big commotion about boobs like this, and boys are more likely to be fascinated by them for the rest of their lives. And they’ll either act on this by visiting strip clubs and buying copious porn … or they’ll repress their feelings and end up being a woman-hating serial rapist, killer, or really creepy accountant who eats Twinkies for breakfast and doesn’t shower a lot.
Dumbasses.
sara on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 9:00 am
The woman who shredded the cover because she didn’t want her 13-year old to see it really has no clue what goes on in schools these days. She had the perfect opportunity to explain to him that breasts are not just a sexual thing. We have them for a reason.
ivon on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 9:05 am
“Men are very visual,” says Wheatley, 40, of Amarillo, Texas. “When they see a woman’s breast, they see a breast — regardless of what it’s being used for.”
That’s BS. If a baby is blocking the view, we *do* notice.
ivon on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 9:10 am
Here’s the same story with a picture of the magazine cover:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14065706/
Not even half the boob is visible.
Chips o'Toole on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 9:14 am
if “a breast is a breast - it’s a sexual thing” then she feels that the cover is sexually explicit? wow. talk about problems. She must get out of the shower, see herself in the mirror, and be shocked. I can’t even adequately express the issues in this reaction. wow.
freakgirl on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 9:15 am
Ivon, you have got to be kidding me! That’s what people are getting upset about?
What a bunch of puritans. Bleh. Also, “baby blocking the view?” Funny!
freakgirl on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 9:16 am
Also, insinuating that the cover is “sexually explicit” means that some people have some really fucked-up sexual urges, no?
Rona on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 9:30 am
I’m glad you posted the picture, Ivon. I get that magazine, and it didn’t even occur to me that there’d be an uproar, since in my opinion it’s not explicit or graphic or whatever.
When I stared reading the linked article, I thought people were responding to this article…http://www.newyorkmetro.com/news/features/17668/index.html?imw=Y
That’s an image that threw me when I first saw it!
What’s funny is that the Babytalk article was about the reasons women don’t breastfeed as long as they used to, and one of the reasons was b/c of the reaction of strangers when they’re in public.
freakgirl on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 9:33 am
That photo IS kind of odd, Rona.
I don’t get the whole uproar over breastfeeding. People act like it’s shameful and should be hidden. Bleh. Whatever.
Chuck on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 9:57 am
OH MY GOD HUMAN FLESH!!! HUUUUUMAN FLEEEESH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Chuck on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 10:04 am
Sorry everyone - seeing that photo of the baby being nurtered got me SO F**KING HOT, I had to run from my desk and look for something to stick my pee-pee in - I couldn’t find a woman breastfeeding ANYWHERE, so I ran to the nearest telephone pole and grinded on it for a few minutes. I thought that had done it for me, then I got the image of the feeding baby in my head again - so I ran from my building, screaming I MUST STICK MY PEE-PEE IN SOMETHING FAST!!! I spied a gopher hole in the grass in front of my office and new this was my big chance - I dove on it and had sex with it for a good 17 or 18 seconds and PPRZRZRZFZFZZFTTFFFFTTTTT!!! Whew - that was a close one. Now cover up those sin bags before someone gets hurt.
Janet on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 10:05 am
If “a breast is a breast - it’s a sexual thing†does that mean I’m having sex everytime I get a professional breast exam? My sex life stats just drastically improved!
freakgirl on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 10:08 am
Chuck - wow.
Michael on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 10:11 am
I’m a breast man (or was, I guess), but when I see a woman breastfeeding her baby I just feel a little jealous. Of both of them.
Chuck on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 10:16 am
Sorry - David Cross temporarily invaded my body.
Michael on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 10:35 am
I thought “LET ME PUT IT IN!!!!!!!!!” was a fun little twist on your classic “DON’T LET IT IN!!!!!!!”
freakgirl on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 10:41 am
Ha!
jon on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 11:34 am
Does that come in a poster?
jon on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 11:36 am
And boy am I glad they went with breast-feeding and not the menstruating or pooping story for the cover.
freakgirl on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 11:36 am
Oh, jon.
Maggie on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 12:11 pm
I am sputtering my coffee all over my keyboard. I can’t fucking believe this! It’s just so fucked up. I don’t even know what to say. I just can’t believe the comments of some of these people, about breasts having solely a sexual function or that women should hide while they feed their babies. That is demented beyond all belief.
Chuck, Ivon, HA! You guys made me laugh.
I didn’t breastfeed my son; it didn’t work out for us for a number of reasons. But I still thought/think breastfeeding is best, and I’m appalled by the reaction of PARENTS who SUBSCRIBE to a baby/parenting magazine! Fucked UP.
El Gato on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 12:12 pm
Anybody who gets turned on by that picture has a problem. Anybody who worries about people getting turned on by the picture has a far worse problem.
brigita on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 12:59 pm
I’m ashamed to say that I’m married to someone that thinks that breastfeeding should be kept hidden behind closed [all too often, bathroom] doors. In his defense, we don’t have kids and his mother didn’t nurse him (grr), but every time he makes a comment, it’s all I can do to not fly into a rage-y rant.
To compound the issue, he doesn’t understand why I’m so passionate about my intentions to nurse our kids someday, despite his knowing full well that I (1) am a nutrition nazi and (b) had a breast reduction so my ability to do so is a big question mark at this stage in the game.
brigita on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 1:04 pm
Oh and PS, I don’t understand why some men don’t get the fact that the primary purpose of our boobs is *not* their entertainment.
Michael on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 1:42 pm
This reminds me of that “Will and Grace” scene:
KAREN: [LOOKING OFF SCREEN] Oh, you like that do ya? Well, maybe you’d like a little of this, huh? [KAREN PULLS DOWN HER BLOUSE, EXPOSING CLEAVAGE] Yeah, you do, don’t ya? Huh, huh?
GRACE: Karen, what are you do– Are you– Are you flashing that woman?!
KAREN: She started it.
GRACE: She’s nursing.
KAREN: Hmm. That explains the little bald man.
James Calder on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 4:26 pm
They’re not entertainment? I guess we’ll stop thinking they’re entertainment when women stop wearing low cut tops and tight V neck sweaters.
James Calder on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 4:28 pm
For something that’s not supposed to be entertaiment, they put up for show an awful lot. I suppose tube tops were meant to make them that much more accessable for the breast feeding child?
James Calder on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 4:33 pm
I mean hey, what’s the deal with breast implants anyway?
Jane on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 4:36 pm
Michael, that scene is hilarious.
My boobs are used to catch the food that doesn’t make it to my mouth. They’re utilitarian, not entertainment.
GeekBoy on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 4:38 pm
James, I believe the operative phrase in Brigita’s comment was “the primary purpose”. It didn’t sound to me like she was discounting any other possible purposes … if showing boobs off even counts as a “purpose” so much as a beneficial side effect. Women also put bright lipstick on their mouths, but this doesn’t diminish the female mouth’s primary purpose …
[INSERT YOUR OWN JOKE HERE]
James on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 7:51 pm
Nagging?
James on Friday, July 28, 2006 at 7:55 pm
Did I just say that? I’m so dead.
freakgirl on Saturday, July 29, 2006 at 12:42 am
Totally. You’re dead to us.
If it wasn’t for that BREAST CANCER thing you’re involved with…