It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Have You Seen the Attention-Grabbing New TIME Cover?

page: 14
31
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Hawkmoon1972
 


Own parenting experience has taught me that attachment parenting is the better choice, not the easier choice of slapping and punishing. So I completely disagree with your view. Children that grow up with restrictive parents are less mature when it comes to self-awareness and showing empathy towards others.




posted on May, 11 2012 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7
So, the blaze runs an article complaining about the 'attention-grabbing' cover, which they then run as ... wait for it... an attention grabbing image!

I hope you all do indeed note the irony. Or is it hypocrisy?


I would call it Ironic hypocrisy!

Tbh it is a strange image and article but I want call it what the OP is insinuating.

ALS



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:02 AM
link   
I voted for it - I see I'm in the minority - but I love it! I posted it on my FB too with the caption...

1 reason men love their moms!



+ BTW, I was breast fed for about 3 weeks. THEN the stupid Dr told my mom to start me on formula. It caused a pelorics stenosis (stomach clog) and I almost died. I had a life-saving operation at 29 days old.
edit on 5/11/2012 by reitze because: +



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by paradox
People care too much about what other people do.

Big freaking deal. It's not your kid. YOU are the ones who need to grow up.
edit on 5-10-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:07 AM
link   
It's a form of socialistic symbolism that TPTB are trying to slam down our throats and it's giving us a glimpse of things to come.
The young mom represents the government, or dare I say, Obama himself, and the child represents the American citizens suckling on that ever expanding government breast.



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:24 AM
link   



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen
It would probably be against the terms of service (TOS) here to actually post the image of the latest Time Magazine cover. It shows a boy, clearly too old to be breastfeeding, sucking on the breast of a woman, who is presumably the boys mother.

To me, this seem like child abuse and is clearly inappropriate. The mother, photographer and publisher should be held accountable, but I'm sure they won't be.

www.theblaze.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit: Oh, sorry forget. Child pornography is now legal in NY.
edit on 5/10/12 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)


edit 2: And yes, there's blame for the Blaze too, for sensationalizing an already sensationalized cover. (Thanks for that, stanguilles7.)
edit on 5/10/12 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)


Well it may be photoshopped



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   
If you ask me, I would say that it is the mother who has some kind of issue and wanting her child to be so attached to her. She needs to feel that he needs her as much as she needs him.
Sadly, mothers will never admit this, though.



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
reply to post by seeker11
 


The kid according to the article is 3 years old.

He is over half her height and she is a model.

To me he looks to be around 6-7.


I have to agree with you. The child in the picture looks to be at least 5 or 6 years old. Even if both his parents are super tall, boys tend to stay short as toddlers and do most of their growing in their mid teens.

That being said, this picture is gross and perverted. While it may not be child pornography, it is indecent and truly disgusting!!

There is a big difference between breast milk and breast feeding. Children older than 2 or 3 do not need to breast feed in order to be fed breast milk. No sugar coating, this woman is a pervert.

USE A FREAKING BREAST PUMP !!!



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:52 AM
link   
If you guys are up in arms over this, wait till you see the fathers day edition.




posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:54 AM
link   
Some of the comments on here are just nasty. Abuse? Sexual? C'mon people it's OK to show a picture of a dead, covered in blood terrorist but half a boobie - oh noes!!!

Although i have to admit this is an attention grabbing picture, made to shock people more than it is a true representation. Children that age eat solids and drink water from a cup it is only sometimes, mostly at night, when they feel sad or tired or need that special intimacy and bonding with mommy (that they remember from early months) when they want to breastfeed again. They also know they are getting too old and often feel ashamed if someone sees it but hey, it feels good



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by MaryStillToe
There is a big difference between breast milk and breast feeding. Children older than 2 or 3 do not need to breast feed in order to be fed breast milk. No sugar coating, this woman is a pervert.

USE A FREAKING BREAST PUMP !!!

Nope, i'm pretty sure you are the Pervert having perverted thoughts about a 3 year old boy latching on a breast...think about it.

Breastfeeding is not just food for children, it is about feeling secure and loved ( hormones of happiness and tranquility flow from one human being to another, that's science talking) and a breast pump or a plastic bottle is neither.



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by starseedflower
 





Children that grow up with restrictive parents are less mature when it comes to self-awareness and showing empathy towards others.


I must be an exception to your rule. My mother just could not breast feed me, it hurt. She used a pump. Maybe that is why I am not so dependent on her and I am a very independent person in general.

Also, my parents were very restrictive and quite strict. Major rules. Not saying this to blow my own horn, but I am an extremely empathetic person. Maybe just because I'm female? I don't know, but it feels to me that either I was just born that way or... I became that way because of how I was raised.

Who knows. Your view might apply to you, but do not generalize. Because in my opinion, from experience and what I have witnessed in my life, children who are so attached to mom, are usually less mature and have trouble accepting authority from anyone except mommy. In cases like these (that I have witnessed myself) the father hardly has a say in any matter and is usually disrespected and disregarded by the child. They have problems at school and are introverted because mommy made them that way. Mommy must do everything for them and fix all their problems. Moms like this Love it though....



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Infi8nity

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen
It would probably be against the terms of service (TOS) here to actually post the image of the latest Time Magazine cover. It shows a boy, clearly too old to be breastfeeding, sucking on the breast of a woman, who is presumably the boys mother.

To me, this seem like child abuse and is clearly inappropriate. The mother, photographer and publisher should be held accountable, but I'm sure they won't be.

www.theblaze.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit: Oh, sorry forget. Child pornography is now legal in NY.
edit on 5/10/12 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)


edit 2: And yes, there's blame for the Blaze too, for sensationalizing an already sensationalized cover. (Thanks for that, stanguilles7.)
edit on 5/10/12 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)


Child abuse? Really? I would have LOVED to be that kid.


What he said ^ ^

....


No really!



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by AnonymousCitizen
 


Have You Seen a TIME Cover NOT Attention-Grabbing?



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:13 AM
link   
It's weird and it's uncomfortable to look at.
I didn't read her reasons.

I have known mothers who do this though, I dare say are usually less civilized types, where everything must ba natural.
Some say it's for financial reasons as well, as the milk is free.

Other reasons to do it are for birth control. If you continue the breast feeding without interruption of the schedule, it's a form of birth control, albeit not a very reliable one. The menstrual cycle wont resume during this phase. Once you stop, the breasts discontinue producing milk. Menstrual cycle resumes. You can get pregnant again.

There are other reasons a woman may want to and even need to be breast feeding for her own health benefits after child birth. I forgot what they are. Might be to help shrink the uterus that was enlarged by carrying the child to term.

Often though it's because the mothers believe breast milk is healthier and if the mother believes that's best for her child, she is a very good mother in that respect I say in that respect, because it's only beneficial to physical health, without consideration to the emotional harm it must cause. It just isn't normal. If its done for attachment reasons. Then she is a terrible mother, who is harming her child. There are ignorant questions that arise like does she enjoy it in a sexual way? Will he later on be confused sexually and have issues? I'm imagining him doing things like just going up to her & pulling her shirt open when he wants a drink ( babies attempt this, instinctively with their mouths).
He should be opening a fridge door at that age, not a blouse.



Even cats know when it's time to keep pushing away the last kitten who keeps latching onto her. They know this isn't right.
edit on 11-5-2012 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-5-2012 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-5-2012 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:36 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


If you read the article, they state that it's a real mother and her three year old son. It's not photoshopped, though some may wish it was. It's a bit disturbing simply because the child is three years old. A three year old should not still be breast feeding.



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Infi8nity

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen
It would probably be against the terms of service (TOS) here to actually post the image of the latest Time Magazine cover. It shows a boy, clearly too old to be breastfeeding, sucking on the breast of a woman, who is presumably the boys mother.

To me, this seem like child abuse and is clearly inappropriate. The mother, photographer and publisher should be held accountable, but I'm sure they won't be.

www.theblaze.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit: Oh, sorry forget. Child pornography is now legal in NY.
edit on 5/10/12 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)


edit 2: And yes, there's blame for the Blaze too, for sensationalizing an already sensationalized cover. (Thanks for that, stanguilles7.)
edit on 5/10/12 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)


Child abuse? Really? I would have LOVED to be that kid.


You want to breast feed from your mum when you were 3? ........ooooookk

I think you're confusing the child with a model. thats her kid. So if you were the kid that would be your mum...

Now on the other hand if i was that kids mate and I was over on a play date and she had a spare lying around ......well then you know.....



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Infi8nity

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen
It would probably be against the terms of service (TOS) here to actually post the image of the latest Time Magazine cover. It shows a boy, clearly too old to be breastfeeding, sucking on the breast of a woman, who is presumably the boys mother.

To me, this seem like child abuse and is clearly inappropriate. The mother, photographer and publisher should be held accountable, but I'm sure they won't be.

www.theblaze.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit: Oh, sorry forget. Child pornography is now legal in NY.
edit on 5/10/12 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)


edit 2: And yes, there's blame for the Blaze too, for sensationalizing an already sensationalized cover. (Thanks for that, stanguilles7.)
edit on 5/10/12 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)


Child abuse? Really? I would have LOVED to be that kid.



you would have loved to be pictured hanging off your mum's tit when aged 3 and put on the cover of a magazine



What a ridiculous image and it is borderline unacceptable, I'm not sure, but I am siding on the unacceptable side of things



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
So?

There are actually many mothers that nurse their children up to school age.

And it harms what exactly?


I agree - What harm is it doing - In fact the opposite as it is seen as beneficial for the developing immune system
But to put it on the front of this glossy rag begs a reaction which plenty of you have worryingly expressed.
Which shows how out of touch with the Natural World we have become.
Perfectly Natural only thing needing looking at here is the reactions given.
Why are people shocked at such things which we all have done and will continue to do
What if it was an image of of some one going to do their toilet business in a wood - Yes somethings should be private but it does not make them wrong.
So by the push your button reactions next step - Public Outrage - New Law for age limit on breastfeeding.
Most of the reactions posted feed into a mindset that is all too prevalent.
By just saying Sick Child Abuse ETC holds up a mirror to how unnatural we have become
Christ grow up and stop condemning all you can not understand.

edit on 11-5-2012 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-5-2012 by artistpoet because: typo




top topics



 
31
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join