Have You Seen the Attention-Grabbing New TIME Cover?

Naturally, it's impossible to have any type of close bond with your children if you fed them from a bottle. matter of fact, parents like myself are just garbage that are not even worthy of this day. When our bottle fed kids tell us that we are the best in the world and come to us to be soothed, it's really just an expression of their pity upon us and wistful desire to have known what it was like to be breast fed and have a "real" mommy. So this picture is an eloquent illustration of a proper mother who deserves the highest accolades for exhibiting what is proper for a child at any age 0-15. If any one can't detect the scathing sarcasm here, then you must not have been breast fed long enough to gain those crucial extra 5-7 IQ points that are so vital for survival on Earth. I'm sorry but the previous two posts are extremely insulting to anyone who did not or could not breastfeed their kid(s). Prime example of my point that most advocates for attachment parenting and extremist breastfeeding are insensitive to the choices and needs of other families.

reply to post by HoppedUp

I'm sorry but the previous two posts are extremely insulting to anyone who did not or could not breastfeed their kid(s).

And how did I insult parents who choose to bottle feed? I think you are a little too sensitive. I have the right to my opinion and I'm not going to censor it because it offends you. I think it's laughable you are offended considering I didn't mention you nor did the words"bottle" or "fed" appear in my post.

Hey all,
About that 3yr.old breastfeeding, My opinion is---not to bad- I say this because there is a lady / mom on YouTube who is still breastfeeding her 8yr.old yes Eight Year Old. Now that is WAY OUT there, if you ask me. Enough already. The other point I have trouble with is the exploitation of it. Pure and simple, if that's your gig and that's what you believe in because some guy named Dr.Bill said so - okay - but methinks you might have enjoyed the controversy and the exploitation. Is this the past you want someone "digging" up on your boy (going to be a man) someday.? Hmm.

reply to post by CosmicEgg

Now in my adulthood, I have food intolerance to all the normal grains people eat (wheat, rye, barley, oats, rice), to eggs, to anything with citric acid in it (check that out - wipes out practically any fresh fruits and vegetables), to soy, and to peanuts. Eating is a very precarious thing for me.

So you reckon all these "intolerances" are due to the lack of breast milk you received as a baby? I highly doubt it.

Mind you, a friend of mine recently had a baby and it actually reacts quite badly to her breast milk... It's almost like it already has intolerance to certain foods and the baby is only a couple of months old. Whether it's her milk or from foods that she is eating, who knows? But, she has had to cut out some major food groups to accommodate breast feeding her child. He still has some problems...

So, due to witnessing this, I highly doubt that food intolerance is due to a lack of breast feeding. Seems more like a genetic thing to me.

A year or so ago I saw some weird documentary or something online, and in it, there were woman breastfeeding children years older than this kid.
Super weird, and I never really thought about it, but i was shocked by how many woman were interviewed
(with their children) and they just continue to do it, year, after year, after year.
Showing 5-6+ year olds stilll breastfeeding. O_o

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by HoppedUp

 

I'm sorry but the previous two posts are extremely insulting to anyone who did not or could not breastfeed their kid(s).

And how did I insult parents who choose to bottle feed? I think you are a little too sensitive. I have the right to my opinion and I'm not going to censor it because it offends you. I think it's laughable you are offended considering I didn't mention you nor did the words"bottle" or "fed" appear in my post.

edit on 13-5-2012 by antonia because: opps

Yeah, and we know what they say about opinions, and everyone has one. I find it equally "laughable" that you can find some "anti-breastfeeding" agenda going on here in the USA, I presume? Where? I have yet to see any woman maligned for breastfeeding, even when the child can obviously eat and has a mouth full of molars. A picture like the one on Time garners every LLL devotee south of the Arctic Circle to gather round and go into attack mode in defense of something that doesn't need defense. I'm glad you won't censor your opinion because I won't censor mine either. Now, had some woman been holding her 4 year old child's hand and walking down the street while the kid sucked away on a bottle...I'm sure the Milk Militia would have all types of issues with that. But it's a defense of breastfeeding mothers everywhere that this woman on the cover has a 4 year old child sucking on her...for what? Most extended breastfeeders nurse at night or to comfort the child from what I have been privy to. This woman is making an exhibit of herself and her son. Not only that, several breastfeeders here have alluded to this woman being some saintly mother because of her pose here, and have any of them met her to know if she is a great, mediocre or terrible mother? No. But because she breastfeeds, she is automatically deemed "a good mother" and her disgraceful pose here is revered by breastfeeding extremists and attachment parenting followers because she promotes what you believe in. Read the thread from start to last page, and see what I speak of for yourself.

Speaking for myself, I do not deal in absolutes. Sorry to be cliche.

Originally posted by HoppedUp

I find it equally "laughable" that you can find some "anti-breastfeeding" agenda going on here in the USA, I presume? Where? I have yet to see any woman maligned for breastfeeding, even when the child can obviously eat and has a mouth full of molars.

Once again, the presence of teeth is not the cue to end breast feeding. Biologically humans should be breast feeding until 5 or 6 according to most research. Most kids self wean at around 3 with no issues in the west. What is the problem here is you have a magazine cover that is making a non-sexual act seem like one. You can look through this whole thread and find comparisons to child abuse and pedophilia. You are either being obtuse or you just aren't paying attention.

A picture like the one on Time garners every LLL devotee south of the Arctic Circle to gather round and go into attack mode in defense of something that doesn't need defense.

Obviously it's an issue otherwise there wouldn't be a long thread about it would there?

Now, had some woman been holding her 4 year old child's hand and walking down the street while the kid sucked away on a bottle...I'm sure the Milk Militia would have all types of issues with that.

You really need to stop projecting. It's embarrassing.

. But because she breastfeeds, she is automatically deemed "a good mother" and her disgraceful pose here is revered by breastfeeding extremists and attachment parenting followers because she promotes what you believe in.

You don't know what I believe in.

This is a long thread so I don't know if it's been posted but I'm just going to put this woo-laden analysis of the clear-cut propaganda pic here:

secretsun.blogspot.co.uk...

Space/Gods: A Mother and Child Reunion

If you scroll down and look at the right hand column, you'll come across Knowles' Law. It reads as follows: "Whenever a controversy over symbolism erupts in the media, it's usually disguising another hidden symbolic message altogether..."

Enjoy the rabbit hole ATS!

reply to post by KillerQueen

Good find
It begs the question why Jesus is never depicted as a child being breast feed
Also How long was Jesus breastfed for

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Got to agree. Its not unusual for a three year old to still be nursing though. Some women just can't let go of that. I understand that this woman breast fed until she was six, so the rumor goes. I think Time was just trying to get people to purchase their magazine. "Times" are hard you know.

Seems to be a lot of breastfeeding experts here. My babies more or less decided when it was time to wean not society.

Both my babies became distracted/uninterested around a year. They wanted to go off and play with dad and decided the sippy cup was the way to go.

If a child wants it/demands it longer how could you refuse without causing emotional upset for both mother/child. Not a battle I wanted to wage with my babies. By a year if they want it they'll pretty much undress you to get at it. What would you suggest, lessen physical contact with your child so they aren't tempted?

There weren't so many experts around when I was breastfeeding so I talked to my Dr. He'd laugh at my questions concerning the proper time to wean. He would say "don't worry about it there's no time line just relax and you both will know when it's time."

I've known a few women who weren't able to wean their babies until they were 3. Some are simply more attached. If my babies wanted it that long I would've talked to my Dr. Knowing how he felt about breastfeeding he would've advised me to keep it up as long as the child wanted it regardless of age.

So how do all you experts think you know better than the Dr. who cared for my babies? Sorry I trusted him more than society. It's simply not your call.

What's all the hullabaloo about?

A magazine is trying to make sales by sensationalizing a relatively normal parenting issue. Perhaps I'm just desensitized because I've been hearing about this issue for years and years as a mother myself?

Personally, I don't read magazines, and seeing this cover basically just makes me roll my eyes.

I feel bad for that kid, because his mother cares more about "Being AP" than about how this type of attention would affect her child for years to come.

Attachment Parenting, indeed. Hah.

If she were "Mom Enough", she wouldn't feel the need to do something like this to prove it. What a jerk.

This type of hypocrisy is all too prevalent these days, unfortunately.

Originally posted by antonia

Originally posted by HoppedUp

I find it equally "laughable" that you can find some "anti-breastfeeding" agenda going on here in the USA, I presume? Where? I have yet to see any woman maligned for breastfeeding, even when the child can obviously eat and has a mouth full of molars.

Once again, the presence of teeth is not the cue to end breast feeding. Biologically humans should be breast feeding until 5 or 6 according to most research. Most kids self wean at around 3 with no issues in the west. What is the problem here is you have a magazine cover that is making a non-sexual act seem like one. You can look through this whole thread and find comparisons to child abuse and pedophilia. You are either being obtuse or you just aren't paying attention.

A picture like the one on Time garners every LLL devotee south of the Arctic Circle to gather round and go into attack mode in defense of something that doesn't need defense.

Obviously it's an issue otherwise there wouldn't be a long thread about it would there?

Now, had some woman been holding her 4 year old child's hand and walking down the street while the kid sucked away on a bottle...I'm sure the Milk Militia would have all types of issues with that.

You really need to stop projecting. It's embarrassing.

. But because she breastfeeds, she is automatically deemed "a good mother" and her disgraceful pose here is revered by breastfeeding extremists and attachment parenting followers because she promotes what you believe in.

You don't know what I believe in.

edit on 14-5-2012 by antonia because: opps

Let's see, I share MY opinion and I have to be projecting. Projecting what exactly? It's embarrassing that you all but skipped over what I am saying in your little breakdown here on your quest to try and be some know-it-all towards me. Let me make it super simple. There is NO anti breast feeding agenda in the USA (I can only speak of what I know of) and I know it's not because they push breast feeding at every hospital and public health facility. If anything, there *is* a campaign against bottle/formula feeders. LOL A thread at ATS doesn't legitimize a subject of discussion as an issue, dear. Aliens from the Pleiades are discussed here as well, are they a serious mainstream issue too? Nowhere did *I* once criticize your choice for feeding your kid however you fed/feed it. Your business. So why are you telling me about a three year old's teeth? I have two kids of my own well past that age, I think I know about a child's teeth coming in. Just because I didn't have their mouth on my boob doesn't mean I am unaware of how a youngsters teeth grow in. I never ONCE equated breastfeeding to pedophilia, or anything sexual. Show me where. I think you are the one being "obtuse" on your little crusade. Never miss a soapbox moment, that's the Milk Militia Mantra, eh?

Originally posted by Gazrok
I don't have a problem seeing breast-feeding. Indeed, it is a very natural thing. However, once a toddler, then no, it's a pretty simple social norm to grasp.

So, to the 19yr old who lays with his mom and talks...do you then latch onto her boob? No? Why not? Because it's not socially acceptable, right? Exactly....you're too old for it, and so is this toddler. I'll bet the kid in the photo is coddled in every way imaginable, all because his mom doesn't want to let go, and realize he isn't her little baby anymore, he's a toddler.

Hopefully, some of his playmates will see him doing this soon, then razz him so bad, he realizes it isn't acceptable for a kid his age.

The article itself is about "attachment parenting". I would like to hear some thoughts about that. Is it good for the child?

No.

Is it just selfishness on the side of the parent?

Absolutely.

edit on 10-5-2012 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)

I agree with Gaz here.

I have a family member that has two sons. Her first son she stopped breastfeeding when he as early stages of 2. The younger of the two clearly is her "baby" because he's considerably small for his age. He's 3 now... and I was extremely surprised a few months ago when he came running to her, asked her for milk, and she whipped out her boob like it was a cracker or some cheerios. She treats him like he's still a baby and after about 1 hour of being with them you can clearly see that the older boy is expected to do things on his own. The younger... nope mommy does it all. Personally, I think that the older boy will be much better off as he goes through school. He was getting his own snacks at 3, while the younger runs to mommy for his "snack".

reply to post by Tripple_Helix


Your opinion is your opinion. Mine is mine. I didn't direct my comments nor my observations to anyone at all. There is no genetic history for this in my family from either side or however far you look. If it were genetic, chances are my own children would have some hints of this, would they not? My symptoms were pretty serious by the time I was nine, bad enough to send me for medical care.

Breastfeeding is not just about the nutrition, it's also quite heavy on mother-child bonding and the societal effects thereof. Look around you. Our society is crumbling. Might be time to let Nature do what she does best. Breasts are for feeding kids. That's how it works with mammals. Humans have an extended childhood.

Honestly, why would anyone want to remove a child from its mother's breast? Pretty sick society, imo.

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
Honestly, why would anyone want to remove a child from its mother's breast? Pretty sick society, imo.

Can't give you enough stars for that definitely worth repeating.

Now if this child was being forced to breastfeed against his will I'd say that could be harmful. Just look at her pose she's simply making herself available to her child's need. Breastfeeding or not isn't that what moms do?

I interpret the question "are you mom enough" to mean are you mom enough to stand up to societal pressure and follow your own heart. Let mom/child decide they know each other better than anyone.

People need to relax a bit and get back to nature. Any animal will show stress or go insane living in an unnatural setting.

reply to post by AnonymousCitizen


1. A mother breast feeding her child isn't child abuse or child pornography and is nothing even remotely close to that. Anyone thinking that it is obviously has a problem understanding the real and practical use of a woman's breast (and should probably stop watching so much porn themselves). What's actually unusual is how we've been taught to sexualize a woman's breast by mass media using them to sell things. Congratulations, you've been programmed.

2. Anyone saying that the kid is going to grow up "messed up" or be a "sissy" because his mother breast fed him until 3 years old is basing that on nothing concrete (because studies show just the opposite). Just another arm-chair opinion spouting forth dumbliness without any basis in fact.

3. Thousand of years ago human children didn't have the "luxury" of being fed supermarket cows milk or a powdered formula. Ancient peoples would think you're the weird one for thinking that breastfeeding a 3 year old child is weird (haven't you even watched Game of Thrones?). Mom's breast milk was the good stuff then. Still is.

4. Don't expect to change any set-in-stone- armchair-opinions on this but I thought a little reason was in order after reading some of the comments.

reply to post by artistpoet


Actually there are numerous depictions of Jesus breast feeding in art throughout the ages. The child is shown as anything from a tiny baby to a child of maybe 2 or 3, or even older in some eastern iconography. There are even medieval images of adult saints suckling at Mary's breast, symbolising her as our mother. These were not considered offensive because for most of our history the breast in this context purely symbolised motherhood and nurturing, with no sexual overtones. Just google "virgin mary breast feeding" - you might be surprised!

It is only relatively recently that the breast has been sexualised in western culture to the point that some people would consider an image of breast feeding a child (even an older child) as inappropriate for a depiction of Jesus - or, for that matter, inappropriate for the cover of a magazine!

Originally posted by Northghost
4. Don't expect to change any set-in-stone- armchair-opinions on this but I thought a little reason was in order after reading some of the comments.

Great points I agree with everything you said. Those set in stone often don't mind seeing breasts full of silicone yet breast milk grosses them out.

To compare breastfeeding with pedophilia would be like saying women who give birth vaginally are only doing it for sexual reasons. Just as ignorant and rude imo.

Just before the Venus Transit and their coding with El Nath the anti center star and Venus, May 5th, and the May 20th one, they are awaiting their king and this picture was brougth up online elsewhere as being coding for Isis and the new King.

schools-wikipedia.org...

The age of Aquarius. Their new religion or sungod plans.

So akin to a meme, an NLP, a spell booster.