I didn't catch Bill Maher's "comic" tirade against breastfeeding the first time around, but thank goodness for YouTube.
You know, you have to love guys who really don't want to think of breasts as anything other than sexual body parts for their own ogling. And I appreciate that there are a million frat boy jokes to be made at the idea of "boobs being sucked on!", but come on now.
While Maher falls back on some predictable quips ("They say it's natural--so is masturbating, but I generally don't do that at Applebees!") it's the jokes-that-aren't-jokes that are truly insulting.
"Look there's no principle at work here other than being too lazy to either plan ahead or cover up...t's not fighting for a right, it's fighting for the spotlight."
I don't have a kid, so I'll defer to Kelly Mills at Babble:
There he totally hit the nail on the head, didn't he? I mean, I had no desire to actually get out of the house or anything when I ate in restaurants; I just wanted a little attention. In fact, that's why I chose to feed my baby with my exposed tits in the first place. I mean, yes, it's recommended by every doctor ever and it's good for the kid, but of course that was secondary to my desire to have total strangers jump in my face and say, "Good job on the procreation!" Why, I know that when I walked into restaurants people looked thrilled to see me and my infant, and I'd hoist her onto my shoulders, whip out my boobs, and say, "Gimme some sugar, folks!"
This totally reminds me of a post Amanda did a while back on a column giving advice to married women to not breastfeed in front of their husbands (lest they be turned off by lactating):
The erotic nature of a wife’s body is one of the principal elements of attraction in marriage. When a husband ceases to see his wife as a woman, and begins to see her as “the mother of his children,� a negative trend has begun in his mind that can only subvert his erotic interest.
I have a feeling this is what's at work with Maher and a lot of men who take issue with public breastfeeding. They resent that a woman's public body--her exposed or partially exposed breast--could be there for someone other then them, for something other than sexual consumption. After all, if a woman is exposed in public it's supposed to be because she's flashing her tits for beads or taking money in a g-string--not for feeding babies. Because that's unsexual, and therefore unacceptable.
UPDATE: By the way, we have a great piece from writer Sarah Thyre on this whole debacle after the jump. Check it out!
Don’t Suck My Tits, Bill Maher; Just Ignore Them, Thank You
By Sarah Thyre
I’m a fan of Real Time with Bill Maher. To my knowledge, there aren’t a lot of liberal-thinking, atheist talk show hosts on TV, so I stick with him. Friday night I watched the show and, as usual, enjoyed it. That is, up until Bill’s customary “New Rules� ending rant. He went on an anti-breastfeeding screed, telling women they shouldn’t be "too lazy to plan ahead" so they don't have to breastfeed in public, that he's not opposed to exposed tits in public as long as he's paying for it, and tits and food “only go together at Hooters.�
Well, it made me so mad I yelled this at the TV:
"FUCK YOU, YOU FUCKING CHILDLESS FUCKER!!!!"
There’s a rather smarmy notion amongst the child-free: they think all us parents want them to pay attention to our children. No thank you, non-parents! Feel free to stop looking at me and my children! This attitude crosses party lines. That supposed bastion of liberalism, The New York Times, is one of the worst offenders: Bob Morris and Guy Trebay always writing about the tyranny of wailing infants on airplanes, etc. It all boils down to people being uncomfortable with neediness, and what's more needy than a hungry baby? Well, guess what? That baby doesn’t need YOU, it needs me. So mind your own fucking business while I feed my child, creeps.
What Maher said is like male politicians telling women they can't have abortions. I was surprised, because Bill's always saying America needs to be more European and get over its puritanical shit. Hey Bill: not being able to see a boob outside of a sexual context is so American. Not being able to ignore a boob is so puritanical.
In the interests of full disclosure, I should mention that last Spring during my book tour, I was pre-interviewed to be a guest on Real Time. The show's segment producer called me and we chatted for at least a half hour. She was a really nice lady. We ended up talking about motherhood and children and she said, "Well, Bill really doesn't care about any of this." And I said, "Yeah, I know." They didn't book me on the show, perhaps because I didn't have a surprise conservative stance on anything (the producer kept asking if I did). I was actually relieved. I pictured myself cramming, walled in by stacks of the Wall Street Journal, National Review, and The Economist. I couldn’t pretend to be a policy wonk! Moreover, I didn't want to be the dumb actor-type on the panel (you know who they are). I was happy to remain a viewer, to keep the show an enjoyable thing for myself. Sort the same reason I dropped out of a Masters’ program in Literary Theory: so I could stop deconstructing books, and simply read them.
I breastfed both of my babies when they were hungry, which could be every two hours, or every two minutes (so much for “planning ahead�). I did it in public, and neither of them was tolerant of a blanket over their head. Believe me, I tried covering up. I didn’t think whipping out a bare boob was an act of
civil disobedience. I didn’t enjoy people staring, or looking away red-faced, or muttering, or – sorry, sensitive guys! – being overly supportive. When my firstborn was three weeks’ old, on the subway in New York, the man sitting next to us asked me, “Tell me, are you breastfeeding him?� “Yes,� I answered. The dude leaned in close and panted, “Oh, how wonderful. It’s the best thing, you know.� I wasn’t breastfeeding my son right that minute, and there was something unnerving about his interest. I immediately wondered if he was the same guy who’d been calling up women all over Manhattan, asking if they were pregnant. If they said yes, he then attempted to initiate phone sex. It was the first indicator that men were going to have something to say about yet another thing – breastfeeding – that really has nothing to do with them.
A few months later, on a transcontinental flight with my son in my lap, nursing off and on – and not crying, by the way – the flight attendant completely ignored me. We were in first class, where usually they’re tempting you with all sorts of amuse-bouches and aperitifs, practically force-feeding you a three-course meal, topping you off with cookies and an ice cream sundae. I would’ve at least liked some
potable water, but in retrospect, perhaps I was lucky. Better to be ignored than be encouraged to dope my son with Benadryl, or have the flight attendant pulverizing some of his personal stash of Xanax and
sprinkling it on my nipples.
That flight brought me to Canada, where I lived for almost two months. I got spoiled there. The Canadian government protects a woman’s right to breastfeed, and areas are provided in public places to do so. Imagine: Canadians, more enlightened than we? Hmmmmmmm… gun control, anyone?
Like I said, I’m a fan. I watch Real Time religiously, if you’ll pardon the expression. I know Bill abhors traditional marriage and thinks having kids is an exercise in egotism. But, craving a cultural voice that somewhat approximates my own, I still watch his show. It’s an uneasy alliance, sort of like relying on Ted Kennedy to lead the fight for women’s rights in the Senate.
I watch enough to know that Bill’s always railing against junk food and the obesity epidemic in this country. Would it change his mind about breastfeeding to know that it’s a proven deterrent to obesity in both kids and adults? Them Canadians seemed pretty svelte to me.
Bill made a point of reminding mothers that making a baby isn’t anything special, because it’s “something a dog can do.� I watch enough Real Time to know Bill’s an animal rights’ activist, and on the board of PETA. Should animals stop nursing their young in public, too, lest their little canine and feline nips give the innocent beastiality practitioner an unwelcome stiffy?
I watch enough to know Bill enjoys himself a fine lady or two, or ten. What I think really gets Bill’s goat is the DE-sexualizing of the breast, for food purposes rather than titillation (I wonder if that word came from tit, or the other way around). Though he did equate breastfeeding with masturbating… Were that the case, I think you’d see a lot more women doing it.
Though I suppose it can be to some, I don’t think breastfeeding is particularly sexy. I accepted my husband’s saying so, even if I didn’t believe him. Breastfeeding’s a slavering, slurping, spraying thing. If I had my druthers, I would’ve done it in only the most sumptuous and private surroundings, preferably modeled after the inside of Jeannie’s bottle.
I’ve tolerated his snideness in the past, but this time, Bill stepped over the bottom line: breastfeeding sustains a baby, and a mother who’s nursing will stop at nothing to do it, nor should she. To suggest we do it for attention and praise is just astoundingly ignorant, and hints more at his own motives than ours.
Oh well. At least I’ve still got Howard Stern. He’s an atheist, supports gay rights, and is against the war in Iraq. Every once in a while, he’ll invite a female guest to strip naked and ride the Sybian, a real-life Orgasmatron. Howard’ll ogle her bouncing boobies, narrating for his radio audience the woman’s
journey toward a climax so earth-shattering she can barely walk afterwards. He also happens to be an outspoken supporter of breastfeeding. He’s enlightened enough to know the difference.
I’m a fan.
Sarah Thyre is an actor and the author of Dark at the Roots: A Memoir. Her website is www.sarahthyre.com.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Bill Maher: Boobies mine!.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/6006
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
Amy and I were watching Bill Maher on Friday night, and when he went on this tirade. we just looked at each other and asked "why'd he have to go and ruin a perfectly decent show with this crap?" The worst part now is that I don't even remember any of the rest of the show, though I have the vague impression that it didn't suck as much as the ending did.
I had to turn it off once he got to the part where he was openly mocking the idea that there are breastfeeding activists. He talked about being nauseated by seeing someone breastfeed her baby--this from a man who is well-known for loving strip clubs and parties at the Playboy mansion. Generally I like his show because he talks about issues that the mainstream press is ignoring (Jena 6, for example). But every so often he goes off on a ridiculous tangent that's more about him than anything else, and it's irritating.
You know, I was hoping to see this posted here. While I was appalled at Maher's comments, I generally find him to be a misogynistic tool, so take his rants with a grain of salt.
What truly disturbed me was the comments I saw posted on Jezebel in relation to this, with one commenter going so far as to say that breastfeeding a child past 18 months was "creepy and molestor-like."
I get that not everyone likes or feels comfortable with a mother breastfeeding her child in public. I've always been discreet and now that my son is 2.5, there's never really any reason to nurse outside the house (he doesn't really need to, for one, and GOD, can you imagine the looks of disgust THAT would garner.) What bothers me is that women I would normally view as progressive, forward thinking, feminist women buy into the idea that using your breasts in their biological function is somehow disgusting and wrong, but showing them off in a low-cut shirt or bikini or even by going topless is liberating and empowering.
My breast are both functional and sexual. I can use them to feed my child, or during foreplay. One does not necessarily cancel out the other. It truly bothers me that so many women have problems understanding that, and being supportive of women who choose to breastfeed, whether for 6 days, 6 weeks, 6 months, or....well, OK, 6 years is a little much to ask, but I'm sure you get my point.
Feminism to me is about attaining equality and the right to choose that which brings you happiness and joy so long as it isn't detrimental to the progress of womankind as a whole. Breastfeeding should not even be an issue within the feminist ranks, and yet it is, and it will continue to be as long as there are women who subscribe to the ideal that their breasts exist solely for their sexual possibilities.
It is difficult enough to try and get men to understand this point - it saddens me that we have to educate so many women about it as well.
Wait — Let me be sure I understand Maher's position on this.
Public breastfeeding: bad, shameful grandstanding.
Displaying a boob the size of a man's head feeding a happy baby the size of a torso on TV: appropriate, amusing, and tasteful, as long as the purpose is to shame breastfeeding.
Bill Maher is living proof that just opposing the Iraq War is not enough to make a guy enlightened. What a misogynist bore.
I know several women who were involved in the "nurse-in" this weekend--women from my church's "Mom's Group" and our minister was interviewed regarding the subject (I'm in Kentucky, and the woman who was originally harassed at Applebees was in Kentucky). I'm proud to know these women.
There's about a 1000 things wrong with Maher's commentary, but one I'd like to point out is his assertion that our causes have become parochial (shallow in a sense). This could be launched at anyone's cause that does not directly impact Maher on a daily basis. For example, you know where we got the term "Tree Hugger?" It was from literal tree-hugging protests in India in the 1970's in which corporations were clear-cutting in forests that villagers depended on for survival and to help protect the top-soil from washing away. I've read some of the accounts of those protests in which men, women, and children risked their lives before bulldozers and chainsaws by hugging trees--they are awe inspiring.
Now, of course, today to be called a "Tree Hugger" is supposed to represent a great insult because you're not an even-minded environmentalist who expresses his/her concern from a rational perspective, but rather "a tree hugger" someone who is acting irrationally, someone who perhaps is putting trees before people. The fact that the trees in the actual case of the tree-huggers provided for the people, that it was only a few who would profit in a limited, one-time clear cut and who would not have to live in the area with the real and damaging results of such a clear cut has been hidden--deliberately obfuscated--from the cultural imagination is a crime.
For Maher, something like the reality of the Tree Huggers of India is so removed that I could easily imagine him dismissing their concerns as "parochial" or "silly" because he is limited in his ability to think beyond his own experiences. Breast feeding is vital to mother and to child--and the mechanics of breast feeding often make it difficult and uncomfortable to try to do so when "covering up"--how would you like to eat under a smothering blanket?
It's so frustrating because he can be fairly intelligent when talking about any other subject. When women come up he reverts to 'tool' mode and this kind of bullshit spews out of his mouth. I love people who staunchly defend civil liberties until women want some too.
Fuck you, Maher.
Oh this really pisses me off. Breasts are for ogling, not feeding! I’m sure he’d have had no complaints if the woman was simply eating her own dinner while wearing a low-cut top. But a breast with a baby attached?! EW! That selfish baby is blocking Bill’s view!
THAT is what this is all about. Men’s entitlement to women’s bodies and their assumption that they get to dictate when and how we use them for their biological purpose.
And no, Bill, breastfeeding in public is nothing like pissing or shitting in public. Breastmilk is not excrement. Breasts have never hurt anyone.
Those who oppose public breastfeeding need to think REAL HARD about what, exactly, is so offensive about it. Our society’s fucked-up views re: sexuality and women’s bodies is at fault. But you’ve got to acknowledge that and attempt to change how you treat breastfeeding women, and ALL women for that matter.
Breasts don’t wage war or commit violence. They’re not used as weapons against other people like some other (male) body parts. Save the outrage for something that really causes harm in the world.
Two Points:
1) Congratulations to mothers with babies who will eat under a blanket. My baby will pull the blanket off, while he unlatches himself and leans back to look up at me in disbelief that I'm trying it, thus exposing me much more than I would be if I'd just let him eat normally.
2) Sometimes I wish seeing me breastfeed would make my husband see me as less of a sex object. I mean, I have a baby who doesn't sleep through the night. My husband losing a little libido wouldn't be the worst thing in the world for me. However, knowing that I'm using my body to sustain our child is not, as it turns out, a turn-off. Cause he's not a completely selfish prick.
Ok, three points.
3) Would everyone in the restaurant really have preferred that she let the kid get fussy and scream? One of my favorite things about breastfeeding is that I can soothe the baby at a moment's notice, and thus save everyone else from dealing with his misery.
SarahMC, that is another point I meant to make in my original comment. With all the things that are wrong in this world - all the injustices, all the violence, all the oppression - why the hell would anyone pick BREASTFEEDING to get outraged about? It boggles the mind.
I couldn't watch the rest of the video after he said something about how women are so 'proud that they made a baby...something a dog can do.' I don't plan on having children, but that totally disgusted me. What a complete and utter asshole. Get the facts on breastfeeding and parenting before you spew your ill-informed opinions, you tool.
Just proves my view that "liberal" men are just as capable of misogynistic assholery as conservative ones. Hence, my choice of dating a feminist libertarian.
Anyone willing to guess how many posts on the breastfeeding topic we need to free Fluffy the Hamster this time?
Also, having just watched this idiot video again : breastfeeding is NOT an intimate act any more than feeding a child with a bottle is an intimate act. It is FEEDING a child. It just goes to show you how sexualized the breast has become - feeding out of a bottle is fine because a bottle isn't a sex object in the same way a boob is meant to be.
I've always found him to be a big asshole, even though he is supposedly "liberal" whatever THAT means anymore.
I really think that it is interesting that so many men are uncomfortable with breast-feeding. That they are SO repulsed by this says a lot, I think. They can't stand seeing a breast that isn't for them. They don't want to think about what breasts are even for, other than for their own pleasure.
I think part of it is disgust with motherhood too. Like men who think it is gross to have sex with a pregnant woman, or a mom. Men who make comments about how mom's are all stretched out, or something.
Is it something territorial too? Like, hey, those boobs are for ME, not that baby!! That woman's body is supposed to be for ME, not anyone else.
Very disturbing. I have to agree with the poster who says this is a crazy thing to get all worked up over! Breastfeeding? Seeing a teensy glimpse of breast? Fucking get OVER IT BILL!!
"breastfeeding is NOT an intimate act any more than feeding a child with a bottle is an intimate act. It is FEEDING a child. It just goes to show you how sexualized the breast has become - feeding out of a bottle is fine because a bottle isn't a sex object in the same way a boob is meant to be."
SUCH a good point!!!
And a big fat "fuck you!" to Bill Maher. I've never thought he was funny in the first place, although my ex sure did. He's too self-absorbed for my taste.
"Planning"? Spoken by a man whom we know is childless!
Dear Bill: you CANNOT PLAN for the hunger patterns of an infant. It would be ridiculous even to try. You have to be "at the ready" anytime,anywhere.
Perhaps since Maher was raised in the 1950's when virtually no one was breastfed, he thinks you can 'schedule" breast feedings the way bottle feedings used to be scheduled. But this is contrary to today's science. Bottle feeding, with its rigid quantity mandates and high sugar content, is strongly suspected of being a factor in today's epidemics of obesity and diabetes. Thank god so many women are going back to nursing. And we should encourage them by making it as easy and social-friendly as possible.
By the way, as if you didn't know:
This isn't an issue ANYWHERE but the USA and the UK, the two most tightassed places on earth.
What is it that makes so many icons of the left - Maher, Olbermann - such blatant misogynists?
Just one more reason why I think feminism would be better served by being its own independent ideology, as opposed to being just another wholly owned subsidiary of the left.
I think by "plan" Bill means "stay at home."
I find a woman breastfeeding to be one of the most disgusting sites on earth.
However, unlike Billyboy, I always assumed that that was because there was something wrong with ME. Not something wrong with the woman doing what is natural and right for her child.
"Just proves my view that "liberal" men are just as capable of misogynistic assholery as conservative ones. Hence, my choice of dating a feminist libertarian."
Actually, Maher describes himself as a libertarian, not a liberal. He's only considered a liberal because he doesn't support the Bush administration.
DrkEyedCajn:
If you don't care about the breastfeeding issue, fair enough. But that Fluffy the Hamster stuff really frosts me. Think of an issue you feel passionate about and then imagine how pissed you would be if someone obviously outside the issue made flippant remarks about your concern and the concern of other posters. This is how it reads: "Oh, how cute. The little women all have their panties in a twist. Ha ha ha! Hey, reasonable people... Let's make side bets about how upset they get. Ha ha ha! What morons they all are."
I realize that you might not have intended to say all of that, but that is the message you are sending out. Believe me.
I promise that I won't dismiss and diminish the concerns you find of utmost importance if you try to offer me the same respect.
Thanks.
i couldn't find this the last time breast feeding came up, but i think this hits the nail on the head.
http://mamamojo.wordpress.com/2007/09/12/breastfeeding-in-public-warning-offensive-content/
Urthlvr, that was awesome
Urthlvr, those pictures of blissful babies are so cute, I think my ovaries just jumped up and smacked me. "Babies now!"
Ow, my ovaries.
"Bottle feeding, with its rigid quantity mandates and high sugar content, is strongly suspected of being a factor in today's epidemics of obesity and diabetes."
Since breastmilk is often fed to babies in bottles, it might be helpful to use the term "formula feeding" instead of "bottle feeding." Just a suggestion.
Bill Maher equates both breastfeeding and nudity as indecent exposure. He is WRONG ON BOTH ACCOUNTS!!! Breastfeeding and nudity are civil rights issues and I take great offense to anyone who wants to make public nudity and breastfeeding illegal. Oakland, California is the only place here in the United States that has any common sense whatsoever and it is a disgrace.
New Rule: Bill Maher only gets to talk about subjects he knows. Which is why he’s brilliant talking about other self-absorbed men like Bush and Cheney and embarrassingly ignorant talking about women and children. It’s like listening to Bush trying to go off the talking points. Stick with what you do best, Bill.
What an arsehole!
Most of my exposure Maher has been through YouTube clips posted on blogs, and I thought he was a pretty funny bloke, but this was idiotic and extremely offensive. I had been somewhat what prepared for the offensiveness by reading Jessica's post, but comparing women to dogs, and childbirth to a beastial act, was... uhg!
Comparing childbirth to a beastial act, I don't have a problem with. However, I am incensed over Maher's comparison of women to dogs.
"Even dogs can do it" translates "it's a piece of cake!"
That's what's offensive to me.
That Maher and other misogynist liberal dudes think pregnancy involves nothing more than carrying a few extra pounds around for 9 months. The privilege is astounding.
Shiftercat, if it helps, when looking at those blissful babies, remember that they get teeth before they stop nursing. It might help your ovaries behave.
i agree with almost everyone here...
and also wtf is up with them saying that britney spears is what vanessa hudgens is going to look like in the future...i'm sorry, DREW CAREY (who was laughing it up), when was the last time YOU looked good in a bra and underwear?
I've visited this site for a while, but I've never commented before. I want to thank everyone involved in making this site happen, including all the other commenters.
Now that that's taken care of, WTF? Bill Maher is obviously so pleased with himself here (as usual). It must certainly be the mark of elightenment when a middle-aged misogynist compares the procreation of the human race to something that dogs do.
Also, Maher thinks American women should give birth like Chinese women do-"on their lunch break". Actually, I've heard it's traditional for Chinese women to remain in bed with their child for a month. What audacity!
You know if men gave birth they'd expect Sainthood afterwards, meanwhile mothers just want to be able to feed their child.
Wow, his mother must be so proud.
sgzax, I apologize for the offense. I really intended none. Please refer to the last breastfeeding thread, in re Applebee's, in which I expressed my wholehearted support of public breastfeeding.
My mother breastfed me. I think my fantastically good health is a direct result of that.
In fact, I think in some of my comments on that thread I was speaking directly to you. So really, there's no need to pick a fight.
If there was any doubt that Bill Maher hates women as much as this administration, this clarifies it, specifically the line:
"Oooh, you made a baby - something a DOG can do" [emphasis his]
Truly, a misogynist with no interest in children is a misogynist par excellence.
I don't really care for lactivists, if America can't have topless beaches, covering breastfeeding shouldn't be offensive (uncovering it shouldn't be offensive either, but then, who's launching the lawsuit?).
And because I still don't think I've explained myself: I was expecting this thread to draw out the same "ew omgz boobiez 4 eating!" posters that went wild on the last thread. I'm pleasantly surprised to see they're taking the day off.
I can't dowload YouTube plugins, so I can't watch the Maher scene... but I do think that Amanda misconstrued the Rabbi's column. The crucial part of it was:
Their sex life had died completely, and one of the main causes was the mother's obsession with breast-feeding well into the child's eleventh month. The baby was attached to his mother like a limb, and he even slept with her every night, consigning her husband to a different bedroom.
Yes, when you kick your husband out of bed (and can't even sleep beside him) and remove marital intimacy, there is a PROBLEM.
Not being a mother, I will not enter the pro v. con breastfeeding debate except to say this:
I am surprised that when scientists discuss all the benefits of breast-feeding, they neglect its most negative consequence. If breast-feeding gets in the way of the marriage—if it means that a husband and wife never go out on dates, or that the mother is so tired from always waking up with the baby that she has no energy to ever be intimate with her husband—the child will probably end up worse off, however many colds or bouts with diarrhea he now avoids.
That is a good point. I got shredded for DARING to suggest that women might have legitimate reasons to NOT breast-feed. I missed the part where women are mandated to do this, when there is a perfectly acceptable alternative. I mean, honestly, I'm a vegetarian. I've lost count of the number of busybodies who have asked me if I would eat meat if I became pregnant, because it might be marginally better for the child. "Do no harm" is a massively different thing from "do the best, and we'll berate you into doing it."
I am surprised that when scientists discuss all the benefits of breast-feeding, they neglect its most negative consequence. If breast-feeding gets in the way of the marriage—if it means that a husband and wife never go out on dates, or that the mother is so tired from always waking up with the baby that she has no energy to ever be intimate with her husband—the child will probably end up worse off, however many colds or bouts with diarrhea he now avoids.
That is a good point.
What point? Mothers that bottle-feed still have to get up in the middle of the night to feed an infant (esp a newborn). MOST mothers have no energy when caring for an infant 24/7, breastfeeding or not. Not to mention the ridiculous assertion that a child with a physical ailment/illness doesn’t have it as bad as a child whose father isn’t sexual gratified. Asinine.
oenophile: I don’t think the issue here is the of breastfeeding benefits vs. bottle-feeding benefits. What a woman chooses is a solely up to her, but BOTH choices should be respected EQUALLY. We don’t ask bottle-feeding Moms to go to the bathroom or cover-up, therefore, we shouldn’t ask this of breastfeeding Moms. It’s as simple as that.
I don't really care for lactivists, if America can't have topless beaches, covering breastfeeding shouldn't be offensive (uncovering it shouldn't be offensive either, but then, who's launching the lawsuit?)
Well, there are topless beaches in America, just not public ones. And, where I live it is legal for a woman to go topless. But neither of those things is the point. The point is that when I'm feeding my child it's not sexual. Right now, at this time of my life, the purpose of my breasts is to feed my child. It's nice that my husband likes them, but they don't exist to titillate others. They exist to give my child comfort and nutrition. And it's not about my right to feed my child, it's about my child's right to eat. He should be allowed to eat wherever he is - even if it's in a public restaurant. He shouldn't have to hide in a bathroom to eat (that's unsanitary), he shouldn't have to eat under a blanket (that's uncomfortable), and he shouldn't have to go out to the car to eat (that takes too long). He should just be allowed to eat when he needs to eat.
Which is, at it happens, his legal right in many states, including Kentucky (where the Applebee's is), where it's illegal to interfere with a breastfeeding mother.
"I am surprised that when scientists discuss all the benefits of breast-feeding, they neglect its most negative consequence. If breast-feeding gets in the way of the marriage—if it means that a husband and wife never go out on dates, or that the mother is so tired from always waking up with the baby that she has no energy to ever be intimate with her husband—the child will probably end up worse off, however many colds or bouts with diarrhea he now avoids.
That is a good point.
What point? Mothers that bottle-feed still have to get up in the middle of the night to feed an infant (esp a newborn). MOST mothers have no energy when caring for an infant 24/7, breastfeeding or not. Not to mention the ridiculous assertion that a child with a physical ailment/illness doesn’t have it as bad as a child whose father isn’t sexual gratified. Asinine."
erm... this is how i read the first paragraph: "If mommy is spending all of her time with baby, sleeping with baby and NOT EVER sleeping with daddy, and ignoring daddy for a year and so... then that kid is gonna end up kinda messed up, as mommy and daddy get a divorce and daddy blames mommy AND baby, because without baby he wouldn't have been kicked out of his own marriage"
don't get me wrong here, folks, i'm all about the fact that my boyfriend does housework with me, and has stated when we have kids he takes over half the feedings (i cant have kids, so adoption, so no way to breastfeed anyway...)
but sometimes, SOMETIMES, someone other than baby can be allowed attention, kay? i don't care if you are 30 days or 30 years; if the most important person in your life (mom or wife) suddenly shuts you out, its gonna screw you uy. there is a BALANCE needed, here as in everything.
(waiting for the arrows...)
Sorry, Bill, we are not all strippers. To be so fucking self centered to think any woman breastfeeding is doing it so he and other men can gawk at their breasts, not because of the health and personal benefits, is ridiculous. It's not always about men. I wonder if that is why all mammals nurse their young? So Bill Maher can get off?
I have heard that BS argument about dads not being attracted to the mom anymore as a reason to not have them attend the birth of their children. Again, not everything is about men's sexual appetites.
Danelian, no arrows...but also, I think what cheeses most women off is not the fact that a nursing mom has to decide at some point when to wean her child, but that some people think she should also bend over backwards to cater to her husband while also caring for a baby.
And you know what? There are lots of times and places to have sex that don't involved bedtime...or beds, for that matter. The only good response to make is 1) the husband needs to try harder to find times/places to be with his wife, (and maybe help her out now and then, for god's sake) for the both of them, or 2), if they are having real intimacy issues, then they need counseling...instead of just scolding the woman and judging her mothering decisions from afar, which is what the rabbi does. Because he is taking the traditional road of assuming that the man's sexual fulfillment is somehow wholly the woman's job. Her fulfillment, her issues, her struggles are barely even considered.
Which brings me back to Maher, who has a similar paleolithic outlook, possibly because it makes him feel manly to mock women, since he runs the risk of being called a pussy for not wanting to keep bombing Iraq. Typical insecure bullshit.
Wow, as if I didn't hate Bill Maher enough already. I'm really tired of people calling him liberal, he's not. He's just an opinionated moron that's sometimes less conservative than Bill O'Reily.
"I have heard that BS argument about dads not being attracted to the mom anymore as a reason to not have them attend the birth of their children. Again, not everything is about men's sexual appetites."
yeah...how strange that humans and all other mammal species managed to have sex, give birth, feed their young and then have more sex for thousands of years, but we're all supposed to worry that one or two idiots really can't handle it. do you think cavemen never saw their wives feed kids? how did the species go on?
where's the worry that going through the incredible pain of childbirth will make a woman see her husband's penis as the "thing that put me through those 9 months and 6 hours of labor?"
also can't get over the irony that someone who has his own television show just to air his opinions on whatever he deems important would accuse people off fighting for attention by reproducing. baby...tv show...hmmm...which one do you think would really get me noticed?
Denelian, balance! Thank you for recognizing its importance. Only arrows of agreement here. I do think that when people have a child, both parents need to put the child's needs before their own, but there is always room for balance.
In general, personally I've never been offended by public breast feeding and I don't understand people who are. Regarding Maher, he can be a jackass, and this clip is a prime example. He isn't a moron though, just ignorant of the female perspective. The best way to prevent the next generation of liberal males from being ignorant of the female perspective is to include us in feminist discussion.
-A typical male asshole tool of the patriarchy (or so I'm told)
I'm sorry, DrkEyedCajn, I think I wasn't entirely fair going off like that. I was tweaked by the Hamster thing in the last thread... really annoyed, actually... when it was brought up by someone else as a joke at the expense of people who felt pretty strongly about the subject. The response above is mostly to that, and it came out when I saw the Hamster come back out here.
Denelian... I breastfed for fourteen months and still have a strong marriage. There is a middle path.
I can be incredibly outspoken on the subject of a woman's right to breastfeed whenever it needs to be done, but I don't think anybody here has ever said, "Your child should take precedence over all things." By all means, parents need to take stock of what a baby needs and then see how that fits into their lives without driving them crazy or making them miserable. Because babies don't benefit from crazy or miserable parents.
My position has always been... have children or don't, breastfeed or don't. Do it in public or don't. And don't try to control where, when, or how other people feed their babies. I think it's a non-controversial position for a feminist to take.
emjaybee: while everything that yoou are saying is true - the specific case that was quote (that you complained about, which is what got me to drop in) is an extreme case, where the wife refused to give any attention AT ALL - not just sex - to her husband. thats bound to screw up a marriage, and was one of the points.
women are in that hard place right now - we know what we want, but the two goals (motherhood and equality in qork/politics/life) are so often in conflict, that most of us just sorta jump on anyone who says that its hard to do both and keep your marriage too.
i was just pointing out that what you jumped on oenophile for was listing some of the negatives of breastfeeding. and while its wonderfully bonding and very very very good for the child, there ARE negatives - and not all of them are specifically social. heres one, that us poor people get; milk STAINS, you cant always get it out of you bras. and pumps HURT, if you wanna take time AWAY from the rappacious parasitical pooh maker (sorry, that was very tongue-in-cheek ;)
i don't care if a woman breastfeeds in public, other than a vague sorta "oh yeah, rub it in that i can't" bit of feeling. on the OTHER hand - in places were it is illegal to go topless, i think no breastfeeding in public is fair (and smart - who wants to get arrested for indecent exposre, even if you cant see anything,erm, "naughty"), and places where you CAN be topless (like here in Columbus, OH) go for it
emjaybee: while everything that yoou are saying is true - the specific case that was quote (that you complained about, which is what got me to drop in) is an extreme case, where the wife refused to give any attention AT ALL - not just sex - to her husband. thats bound to screw up a marriage, and was one of the points.
women are in that hard place right now - we know what we want, but the two goals (motherhood and equality in qork/politics/life) are so often in conflict, that most of us just sorta jump on anyone who says that its hard to do both and keep your marriage too.
i was just pointing out that what you jumped on oenophile for was listing some of the negatives of breastfeeding. and while its wonderfully bonding and very very very good for the child, there ARE negatives - and not all of them are specifically social. heres one, that us poor people get; milk STAINS, you cant always get it out of you bras. and pumps HURT, if you wanna take time AWAY from the rappacious parasitical pooh maker (sorry, that was very tongue-in-cheek ;)
i don't care if a woman breastfeeds in public, other than a vague sorta "oh yeah, rub it in that i can't" bit of feeling. on the OTHER hand - in places were it is illegal to go topless, i think no breastfeeding in public is fair (and smart - who wants to get arrested for indecent exposre, even if you cant see anything,erm, "naughty"), and places where you CAN be topless (like here in Columbus, OH) go for it
emjaybee: while everything that yoou are saying is true - the specific case that was quote (that you complained about, which is what got me to drop in) is an extreme case, where the wife refused to give any attention AT ALL - not just sex - to her husband. thats bound to screw up a marriage, and was one of the points.
women are in that hard place right now - we know what we want, but the two goals (motherhood and equality in qork/politics/life) are so often in conflict, that most of us just sorta jump on anyone who says that its hard to do both and keep your marriage too.
i was just pointing out that what you jumped on oenophile for was listing some of the negatives of breastfeeding. and while its wonderfully bonding and very very very good for the child, there ARE negatives - and not all of them are specifically social. heres one, that us poor people get; milk STAINS, you cant always get it out of you bras. and pumps HURT, if you wanna take time AWAY from the rappacious parasitical pooh maker (sorry, that was very tongue-in-cheek ;)
i don't care if a woman breastfeeds in public, other than a vague sorta "oh yeah, rub it in that i can't" bit of feeling. on the OTHER hand - in places were it is illegal to go topless, i think no breastfeeding in public is fair (and smart - who wants to get arrested for indecent exposre, even if you cant see anything,erm, "naughty"), and places where you CAN be topless (like here in Columbus, OH) go for it
wow, how the hell did that post THREE times? some very nice mod, can we whittle it down to one post instead onf three? thanx!\
~Liz
For you people who claim to be regular watchers, why do you act surprised?! There is not a show that goes by where he doesn't proudly display his misogyny (which is why he's a good fit for woman-hating HBO)! Did you really not notice it until an entire piece was focused on it?
I criticized him on youtube awhile ago, but I had to delete my account because the misogynist commenters' attacks were so vicious, and they started "following" me around the net via my old username.
Denelian: i was just pointing out that what you jumped on oenophile for was listing some of the negatives of breastfeeding.
Who was jumping on oenophile? I believe I am the only one that addressed oenophile's post (emjaybee only addressed your post and did so politely, I might add). I did jump on the author of the column for making ridiculous assertions. I also pointed out that this is not a thread about bottle-feeding vs. breastfeeding. I'm sure they both have positives and negatives and there are plenty of blogs/threads to argue the benefits of one way over the other, but this isn't one of them.
This is about a woman being able to feed her child in the manner she has chosen at the time and place she needs/wants without backlash from misogynistic asshats. The points about the negatives of breastfeeding may indeed be valid; they are just not relevant to this post.
Wow. This 'daddy is jealous of baby' thing is so ingrained in western culture that this is an ad for shaving cream, entitled "Fight for Kisses" that I found on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuSBCIV1zuQ&feature=dir
That this is an ad scares me. What the fuck? Babies and fathers have to fight in order to compete for Mommy's attention?
Let's bet a man came up with this disturbing piece of marketing. Just...wow.
"in places were it is illegal to go topless, i think no breastfeeding in public is fair (and smart - who wants to get arrested for indecent exposre, even if you cant see anything,erm, "naughty"), and places where you CAN be topless (like here in Columbus, OH) go for it"
Oh, no. Breastfeeding is all about FEEDING BABIES, not "going topless".
ShelbyWoo - thank you, i had the wrong person :) and while you are correct, the negative issues of breastfeeding had little to do with Bill-y-boy and his stupid clip, i had actually gotten the impression [from the rest of the thread] that the discussion was also a bit more general.
Flyinfur:
i grant we live in a repressed, mysogonistic, totally fucked up country. people bitch all day that Britney Spears is now "fat" (at a what, size 4? with muscle?!?!?!) and i hear more about Condeleeza Rice's BOOTS than about her political positions...
and so on.
the thing is, there is a line between "right" and "rights". i dont always know where it goes. its damn blurry in way too many places. one the one had, you have the "rights" of an infant to feed, on the best thing (mother's milk) in the best way (not suffocating). on the other hand, there is the "rights" of everyone around said infant to not be subjected to something they find offensive. and i don't know any two people who think the same things are offensive. i personally don't care if i see THIRTY women breastfeeding all at once - but i can see where others are coming from. and its all about dialogue, right? understand the "opponent", and maybe a compromise is possible. i hear that women should be more than sex objects and mothers - and i agree! i am more than my uterus - but the argument over breastfeeding in public... look at it. women are arguing that they need to breastfeed everywhere. because we are MORE than just mothers, right? i think thats why i get very tongue-in-cheek about the whole thing
I'm lucky to live in a state where nursing is legally protected and it's illegal to interfere. When we make it moms responsibility to nurse 'modestly' we get gray fast. Is a blanket enough? What if kiddy is a bit of an exhibitionist? Is accidental exposure the same as going topless? (no)
Nursing has health benefits for both, or rather formula has health detriments for both mom and baby. IQ, reduced risk of female cancers, etc. Putting public squeemishness above the welfare of the parties involved is inherently antichild and antiwoman. Nursing advocacy was actually my first feminist cause.
Ill agree it aint no picnic. I went through over supply, under supply, milk blisters, thrush... About everything that could go wrong did but I fought like hell and gave my son 18 months of the food he was built for. That makes me rock in my book.
Breasts - Not just for selling cars and beer anymore!
Amen. But please tell me you were just being sarcastic when you said "at least I still have Howard Stern." Please?