Unless you've been living under a rock lately, you've seen this image:
I haven't even taken the time to read the article, nor do I even know what it's about, past the blurb on the front.
But what I have done is listen to the chatter and backlash this is creating in the media. I'm kind of a morning-news-show junkie, and they've been all over this one. Mostly, people just seem bothered that there is a three-year-old breastfeeding.
I get it. I totally do. Before having children, the thought of nursing a three-year-old would have made me laugh out loud. It doesn't make me laugh anymore, but I still don't see it as something I'd do.
But that's not really the point here. The point is that breastfeeding is a good, healthy choice for many moms and babies. We know that, all extraneous circumstances aside, it's the best choice for the babe {this is not a forum for debating formula and breast milk}. I've had a fantastic experience nursing both my kids, and can't imagine my journey of motherhood without it.
The idea of 'extended breastfeeding' is really just an aspect of attachment parenting. I'm a huge advocate of attachment parenting, as it has worked wonderfully for my family. I'm fortunate enough to be able to spend my days with my kids, so it just seemed natural to me. I've practiced many facets of attachment parenting, including nursing on demand. I've never set my babes up on a 'feeding' schedule, and that has worked for us.
I totally get that it doesn't work for everyone, and that's okay. We all have our own ideas about what motherhood means. The thing that is just killing me here is how much scrutiny this has created. Parenting is full of gray areas. Mothers have so many choices to make every single day. There are countless 'types' of parents out there, and we choose this.
This? Really? We're going to spend hours debating extended breastfeeding? There are mothers out there who beat their children, mothers who feed their children nothing but junk, mothers who verbally and emotionally abuse their children, mothers who turn a blind eye to sexual abuse, and mothers who ignore their children's needs. There are so many children out there who need a voice, and we're gonna spend our time yapping on about extended breastfeeding?
Can we not just accept the fact that every mother makes different choices? Why are we debating something that is good? One interviewee I saw made an excellent point, though I can't remember his name or his credentials {that's life with two young kids, I tell ya}. He pointed out that while children who practice attachment parenting might have their own issues or transitions to make, these are not the children who grow up to be bullies. These are not the children who grow up to bring guns to school.
So why can't we just grow up and give those children a voice? Three-year-olds who are breastfeeding don't need an advocate; they clearly have one. Let's just get over it, give these mommas a break, and spend our time debating something a little more meaningful.
7 comments:
I have not read the article either and honestly, I probably won't. No reason except for lack of time, I guess. I did not breastfeed either of my children. Breastfeeding is not a common practice in my family. I had no strong feelings toward or against it so I went with the easiest option for us. Since I am a mom that works full-time outside of the home, I needed to have other people be able to feed my girls, and have my girls accept it. I know there are ways to do so, but like you said, this isn't about breast vs. bottle. Getting back on track, the thing that bothered me most about the cover was the title, "Are you mom enough?" Again, having not read the article, this feels like a shot to me and other bottle moms, telling us that we aren't "mom enough" because we didn't breastfeed our babies (or our toddlers). Honestly, I think that TIME wanted to start controversy and ultimately, sell more magazines. I think that the cover was not done tastefully, no matter the subject.
It was also irresponsible of TIME to choose the smallest mother they could find with one of the biggest looking 3 year olds I've ever seen. They did it for shock value; so stupid. Moms have enough crap to deal with whether you BF or not. I BF each child for 6 weeks (and hated every minute of it) until I dried up. Who cares?
Like Shannon said, I was offended by the article because of the title, "Are you Mom enough?" which implies that I'm not a good enough mother if I don't breastfeed my child until he's three. I need (and choose) to work outside the home. We are in a society that forces mothers to compete and judge one another. You, for example, made those awesome snacks for your daughter's class. That is so great but I'm left with the guilt because I don't have time to make that. Time just threw more fuel to the "Mom Competition" as I call it.
i dont have a problem with the article, i just don't think it is appropriate to put such a precious moment (and partial nudity) on the cover of a magazine. but i seem to be the only one with that concern o well.
seriously. i'm sick of it too. it's too bad time went for shock value instead of showing a normal woman cuddling-nursing their baby/child. nobody feeds their kid like that no matter how old they are. attachment parenting took a step back for this one...
what bothers me is that the moms interviewed for this article - one of whom i know via blogging - and attachment parenting are getting the flack. they didn't know how this was going to be spun when they were interviewed. i don't think they would have agreed to the interviews if they knew that. this falls squarely on time. they wanted shock value so they created a crappy headline, a crappy photo, and twisted what AP is all about.
I like the points you make. I wish the media circus would let this die and choose a better topic to get hyped up about.
Post a Comment