Time magazine cover

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
$10 says the European edition of this week's magazine is about an actual, important news story.
yep: TIME Magazine Cover: Bonjour, Angela - May 21, 2012 - French President Francois Holland - Angela Merkel - Germany - Euro - Europe

though the magazine has the same contents, they just picked a less scandalous cover. i'm kinda like ashley in that i wasn't breastfed (gave me colic) so i don't really have any personal experiences to share. i do know though that while it's been said moms stop breastfeeding too early these days, but feeding until they're four, five, etc. is over-the-top. like anitram said, as they get to the point where they start to socialise with other kids, stuff like this can ostracise them. and all this just to, what? give the mom just a teensy bit more bonding time with her kid? it just seems overly clingy to me when it gets to the point where it can affect a child's emotional development.

to over-simplify it, once a kid can walk up to their mother and go "mommy, i'm hungry", it's time for them to be weaned and start eating real food.
 
This thread keeps reminding me of Grapes of Wrath (which I hated far more than the TIME cover).

"Come on, now ... you got to!" said Rose Of Sharon.

(I was tempted to pull my copy of the book from my shelves, but I think that's pretty close. :lol: )


It's not even about scandalous, it's about putting things that apparently sell better than actual news on the cover. Americans don't want to know about it, apparently. The Daily Show recently had a bit on this comparing multiple issues from US and international.

Europe: ECONOMIC SHIT IS GOING DOWN, SON

America: Don't Worry About Being Worried, You Guys! Anxiety is Good For You!

I, uh, may have paraphrased a bit.
 
That's what I was thinking...Just in general, why are they still breast-FEEDING? I may not understand the process well enough (my mother couldn't breast-feed so I've never really been around it), but once they get to an age where they're that big and can feed themselves, couldn't they just pump?

I think it's important for children to learn to feed themselves and not be reliant on their mothers, though there aren't necessarily any medical disadvantages to breastfeeding for prolonged periods of time. Breast feeding can be an emotional thing for the mother, but most of what I've seen is that once a kid is going to pre-school or day care, they're weaned to the bottle or a cup instead. It's just not practical to continue on when your kid is away from you for multiple hours a day and there's no reason for it in today's society.

My mom didn't breast feed either, but that was because she was a smoker.
 
Yes, it must be some kind of emotional attachment thing. If it's for the nutrition, they could just pump and not have their lives (and their child's life) dictated by a feeding schedule. If it's supposedly more "natural" to breastfeed indefinitely....well I beg to differ, I don't see animals feeding their young indefinitely just because they can. Most of the dog litters I've dealt with the mother wants nothing to do with beyond 6 weeks or so! I used to raise guinea pigs (though didn't breed them) and they are born with their eyes open and a full set of teeth.
 
The more my peers are having babies and acting like they are the first woman ever to birth and raise a child, the more I feel like a *lot* of parenting practices these days are incredibly narcissistic.
 
The more my peers are having babies and acting like they are the first woman ever to birth and raise a child, the more I feel like a *lot* of parenting practices these days are incredibly narcissistic.

Exact same thing with a number of people that I know. Glad I'm not the only one, was beginning to think that *I* was crazy, not them.
 
Phil and I are keeping a running list of "annoying shit we are NOT going to do/say/act like when we have kids". I think for us it helps raising several dogs that already come with a bad rap. I already know what it feels like to have to assume that everyone around us does *not* like my dog, does not find him cute or handsome, wants nothing to do with him. I won't be expecting that the entire world thinks my baby is the cutest most precious thing ever even if I think so.
 
Phil and I are keeping a running list of "annoying shit we are NOT going to do/say/act like when we have kids". I think for us it helps raising several dogs that already come with a bad rap. I already know what it feels like to have to assume that everyone around us does *not* like my dog, does not find him cute or handsome, wants nothing to do with him. I won't be expecting that the entire world thinks my baby is the cutest most precious thing ever even if I think so.

It's good to know more people actually think like I do!

The more my peers are having babies and acting like they are the first woman ever to birth and raise a child, the more I feel like a *lot* of parenting practices these days are incredibly narcissistic.

I couldn't agree more. It's one of the reasons I want to adopt. Too many parents think that just because they gave birth suddenly their kid is God's gift to the world. People who upload 300 pictures of a single baby to facebook, and can't fathom why someone wouldn't want them to bring their kid to a party/wedding because their kid is precious and everybody must love it the way they do. There's this new "attachment parenting" fad where mothers believe their kids should sleep with them continuously for years and believe that all sitters are a bad thing and won't be separated from their child.
 
Phil and I are keeping a running list of "annoying shit we are NOT going to do/say/act like when we have kids".

I have such a mental list going too!

The last one that I can think of that really annoyed me was when I was visiting a friend who had just had a baby a month earlier. She told me that I won't ever understand what it means to be tired until I've had a baby. Mind you this is when I was still working at my old firm, clocking about 80-90 hours a week, all year, and that particular week I had two days when I had shown up to work at 8 am and stayed until 3 am, gone home to sleep for 2 hours and was back the next day. AND I drove 2.5 hrs (in each direction) to go and see her on the afternoon of the one day I wasn't in the office. I mean, really. :coocoo:
 
What really annoys me is when someone who other than having one baby has had very little if any experience with kids or babies trying to tell me this or that as if their child is absolutely unique in some common aspect, especially people that for years insisted that they didn't like kids and were never having them so completely avoided them until changing their mind. I am perfectly comfortable caring for an infant and don't need a five hour lecture, thanks. I used to be a nanny all day for four kids (and that was just ONE of dozens of jobs). I've taken care of several babies on and off starting as young as three weeks old. I don't need to read some mommy blog or baby manual to know what it's like to get peed on, deal with severe reflux (had two of those babies), how NOT to prepare a formula bottle, using cloth diapers and pins, infant vs. child CPR, etc. Heck I've even helped with a baby that wore a heart monitor and another baby that had giardia. I actually like babies quite a bit but have babies in the family and friend network I've never even held because their parents apparently can't accept that I'm not going to drop their spawn on his head and happen to already have practiced more baby holding positions than there are words in this post.

Not everyone is like this though. I do have some friends that can't wait to pass off their babies/kids to anyone willing to hold and coo at them (and then there are the ones that require a Level 3 lab detox before you can get within 15 feet).
 
I know what you're saying Liesje. A friend of mine and his wife just had a child nearly two years ago.

Being a single guy myself (and one who will never have children), I am constantly hearing how difficult it is, how much work it takes, how it strains the relationship.

While I will not deny that raising a child is tough (an old ex of mine had a 2 year old when I got involved, and it was work, and she only had her daughter 1/2 time), if it really was the most difficult thing ever, why have we been so successful as a species in reproducing from one generation to another?

And now that the child is getting closer to his two's, I'm hearing about how this kid will be skiing at age 4, out on the links by age 6, and playing soccer by age 8. They should be thankful he doesn't appear to have any major health issues.


Since these people are my friends I just go along with it, but every ounce of me doesn't give one shit.

Seems like human nature to be proud of your offspring and wanting to share that with everyone else. I would like to think it's not intentional, but more something that just comes with having children.
 
I also think a lot of new parents get more worked up than they need to be as far as the baby supposedly being disruptive. I was with someone for several days and at the time it was her first baby. Any time the baby made any noise she would leap up and come over and start fussing over him. She kept sighing and apologizing for the baby being "fussy" and honestly I never even heard him. Babies cry, gurgle, fuss...they're babies. I don't even notice it because that's what babies do. If I'm riding in a car next to a baby I expect there to be whining and crying and slobber and toys thrown at my face and my eyes poked and my hair pulled. But grown adults constantly pacing around, getting anxious over every little coo, apologizing to me for every noise or gesture that baby makes...now that drives me bonkers!
 
Babies are supposed to cry and make noise. That's just how they are. If you respond to your kid every time they so much as hiccup your kid is going to end up crying every time it wants something and you'll end up with a spoiled baby. My parents vacuumed around my crib and didn't care if I screamed, and that's what some people I know are doing with their kids as well. I have a lot of experience with babies, though not nearly as much as you, Lies, and I had one friend hovering over me ready to pounce me for fear that I might just drop her baby onto the ground. The best part? I was sitting down. On a couch.

One of my friends has a four-year-old now that I spent the first two years of his life babysitting. I watched every phase, saw him learning to walk, talk, etc. I volunteered at the nursery around church for several years (several years of spending four hours every Sunday with a bunch of toddlers and infants). I was a counselor at a summer camp. As a favor to my neighbors I'll walk their six-year-old home from the bus stop and hang out with him for a bit if his mom is running late (it's usually only an hour tops). I absolutely love children. They have a sense of humor and their own little world that most adults completely miss out on and I think it's a great thing to be a part of. Just don't expect me to believe your two-year-old is the next Einstein because he knows how to fit a square block into a square hole.
 
Babies are supposed to cry and make noise. That's just how they are. If you respond to your kid every time they so much as hiccup your kid is going to end up crying every time it wants something and you'll end up with a spoiled baby. My parents vacuumed around my crib and didn't care if I screamed, and that's what some people I know are doing with their kids as well. I have a lot of experience with babies, though not nearly as much as you, Lies, and I had one friend hovering over me ready to pounce me for fear that I might just drop her baby onto the ground. The best part? I was sitting down. On a couch.

One of my friends has a four-year-old now that I spent the first two years of his life babysitting. I watched every phase, saw him learning to walk, talk, etc. I volunteered at the nursery around church for several years (several years of spending four hours every Sunday with a bunch of toddlers and infants). I was a counselor at a summer camp. As a favor to my neighbors I'll walk their six-year-old home from the bus stop and hang out with him for a bit if his mom is running late (it's usually only an hour tops). I absolutely love children. They have a sense of humor and their own little world that most adults completely miss out on and I think it's a great thing to be a part of. Just don't expect me to believe your two-year-old is the next Einstein because he knows how to fit a square block into a square hole.

Tell them to not be helicopter parents or this is in their future..

tumblr_lex7wvCfX61qg1j1no1_500.png
 
breastfeedingmoms3-jpg_221940.jpg



yahoo.com


At a time when breastfeeding in public is already controversial, pictures of two military moms doing so while wearing their uniforms is sparking outrage.

The photo is part of a local breastfeeding awareness campaign by Mom2Mom of Fairchild Air Force Base, a support group launched in January by Crystal Scott, a military spouse and mother of three. Among the intimate close-ups of smiling young mothers cuddling their adorable babies, the images of the two airmen stand out.

"People are comparing breastfeeding in uniform to urinating and defecating in uniform. They're comparing it to the woman who posed in "Playboy" in uniform [in 2007]" Scott told Yahoo! Shine in an interview. "We never expected it to be like this."

"I'm an X-ray tech and I breastfeed in my uniform all the time," Scott says. "Granted they're scrubs. But people do it all the time in their uniforms. If you have a hungry baby, why would you take the time to change completely?"

Terran Echegoyen-McCabe, a member of the Air National Guard who was photographed in uniform nursing her 10-month-old twin daughters, says that she's surprised by the reaction to the photos.

"I have breastfed in our lobby, in my car, in the park ... and I pump, usually in the locker room," she told the "Today" show, adding that she usually nurses her babies while on her lunch break during drill weekends. "I'm proud to be wearing a uniform while breast-feeding. I'm proud of the photo and I hope it encourages other women to know they can breastfeed whether they're active duty, guard or civilian."

All of the women in the photos volunteered to appear in the awareness campaign, and Echegoyen-McCabe is featured -- wearing civilian clothing -- in a few of the other candid shots. None of the photos are posed; the women are simply feeding their babies the way they usually do. But even though some of the other photographs are just as revealing, only the ones of Echegoyen-McCabe and her friend Christina Luna in uniform have been criticized.

"The Air Force has never endorsed these photos," the photographer, Brynja Sigurdardottir points out on her website, where she posted several other photos from the Mom2Mom campaign. "These women just happen to be in the Air Force, in their uniform, breastfeeding their babies."

When it comes to talking about breastfeeding in public, comparing it to other bodily functions -- and even sex -- is common, in spite of the fact that breastfeeding is legal and protected while defecating or having sex in public is not. But the fact that two of the moms are shown breastfeeding in public while wearing military uniforms makes the entire controversy more complicated. The Army, for example, didn't even come up with a combat uniform for women until 2010, so accepting the idea of a uniformed soldier breastfeeding a baby may be especially jarring. And the uniforms themselves come with their own sets of rules.

According to Military Spouse Central, public displays of affection -- even something as innocuous as holding hands -- are not allowed while wearing a military uniform. Also forbidden while in uniform: eating, drinking, or talking on a cell phone while walking, carrying an umbrella that's not black, and (in some cases) smoking or even chewing gum. While there is no policy that addresses breastfeeding in uniform, Air Force spokesperson Captain Rose Richeson told MSNBC: "Airmen should be mindful of their dress and appearance and present a professional image at all times while in uniform." Military moms who are still breastfeeding are encouraged to pump and bottle-feed their babies while they're in uniform.

Scott suggests that the issue might have less to do with the uniform and more to do with our own internal conflicts. "I think a lot of people think that you can't be a mom and be a soldier," she says. "This is not something that's out of norm for them. They breastfeed in uniform all the time -- it's just not something that's usually captured on film."
 

In my opinion, this is totally inappropriate and the TIME magazine cover was also inappropriate, if not borderline vulgar.

Sure breastfeeding is beautiful and natural......and so is having sex - when will we see couples having sex on the cover of "Field and Stream"? Where will it end?

Where's the modesty? Why can't the mothers drape a towel or blanket over themselves to cover up? It wasn't necessary for them to be vulgar to make a point.
 
At a time when breastfeeding in public is already controversial, pictures of two military moms doing so while wearing their uniforms is sparking outrage.

I find is harder than ever to be "outraged" by a few people bending/breaking the rules in the name of desperately wanting attention. I think "moderately annoyed" is a better term.


Scott told Yahoo! Shine in an interview. "We never expected it to be like this."

She's either: A) Lying or B) dumb as a rock. Anyone with half a brain would know exactly what type of response this would elicit.
 
In my opinion, this is totally inappropriate and the TIME magazine cover was also inappropriate, if not borderline vulgar.

Sure breastfeeding is beautiful and natural......and so is having sex - when will we see couples having sex on the cover of "Field and Stream"? Where will it end?

Where's the modesty? Why can't the mothers drape a towel or blanket over themselves to cover up? It wasn't necessary for them to be vulgar to make a point.

Excuse me, what? Breasts are not sexual. Comparing that to public sex is ridiculous because unlike sex, breast feeding is actually hygienic. The logical reasoning behind banning sex in public is because it is unsanitary (along with social feelings of disgust towards sexuality). However, there is nothing unsanitary about feeding your baby in public. Nor is there anything wrong or "immodest" about showing your breasts in public.

News flash: men technically have breasts too, they're just shaped differently.
 
Breasts are not sexual.

This always comes up with this topic. I guess it's difficult for women to understand, but breasts most certainly are sexual to a man. They might not be primary sexual organs, but they are definitely secondary. A man's testicles aren't sexual in the same sense, but we wouldn't expect to see them hanging out all over the place either
 
This always comes up with this topic. I guess it's difficult for women to understand, but breasts most certainly are sexual to a man. They might not be primary sexual organs, but they are definitely secondary. A man's testicles aren't sexual in the same sense, but we wouldn't expect to see them hanging out all over the place either

The equivalent to testicles are ovaries, not breasts. There are tribes in Africa where the women walk around shirtless all the time and it's not a problem. As far as I know, those men aren't walking around controlled by or tempted by lust. Breasts are only sexual if you make them sexual, and there are many cultures in which they are not considered as such. Many people have fetishes and consider feet to be sexual too. Guess we should be hiding those then, eh?

The fact is that in America toplessness was fine and dandy until the Christians arrived. Religion is the reason it has become a forbidden fruit, not actual modesty or sexuality.
 
The equivalent to testicles are ovaries, not breasts.

on a strictly functional level, yes. But on an visually anatomical, nonfunctional level, there is no equivalent of either in the opposite sex. Men and women are different. It's not a big deal and it should be embraced.
And our culture, which we base every other aspect of our lives on, deems breasts to be sexual. There's no point bringing up other cultures. We are our own culture. It doesn't make one right and the other wrong. They're just different. Breasts are absolutely sexual in our culture. And that's ok. Other cultures walk around with their dicks hanging out, but I don't see anyone fighting for that
 
The fact is that in America toplessness was fine and dandy until the Christians arrived. Religion is the reason it has become a forbidden fruit, not actual modesty or sexuality.

You couldn't find a less religious person than me. I've got no problem with breastfeeding in public, but it should be discreet (ie, not in a restaurant). It makes other people feel uncomfortable.

But that's a separate issue from the sexual nature of breasts
 
Back
Top Bottom