"Breastfeeding Moms Protest H&M"

1…6791112…24

Comments

  • comebackwoman
    comebackwoman Posts: 7,271
    Collin wrote:
    It's the same process, yes. But animals are not humans. If your argument is that breastfeeding should be 'accepted' because it happens in the animal world as well and because it's natural... I cannot agree.
    fair enough :) Just not understanding why people get so disturbed by it. It baffles me.
    There's a light when my baby's in my arms :)
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    Brain of J.Lo wrote:
    It's not just a coincidence that we feed our young the same way that some animals do. We are animals too.

    So?

    This 'animal/natural' argument is the worst argument I ever heard for breastfeeding. Seriously. It's insane.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    Brain of J.Lo wrote:
    It's not just a coincidence that we feed our young the same way that some animals do. We are animals too.
    So walk around naked all the time then. Until you do that, this argument is stupid. You are a human being with opposable thumbs and a brain to match. We live in a society, not a jungle. We are civilized, not wild animals.
  • comebackwoman
    comebackwoman Posts: 7,271
    Collin wrote:
    So?

    This 'animal/natural' argument is the worst argument I ever heard for breastfeeding. Seriously. It's insane.
    It's babies feeding...the way they are designed to feed. I don't understand what is offensive about that.
    There's a light when my baby's in my arms :)
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    Brain of J.Lo wrote:
    So-called "private parts" are considered private because of their assocation with sexuality.
    That the human race in the part of the world we live in has made it that way. There is no turning back and pretending like they are not sexual objects now.
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    aNiMaL wrote:
    So walk around naked all the time then. Until you do that, this argument is stupid. You are a human being with opposable thumbs and a brain to match. We live in a society, not a jungle. We are civilized, not wild animals.

    Exactly. Thanks aNiMaL :D
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • Brain of J.Lo
    Brain of J.Lo Posts: 3,259
    Collin wrote:
    So?

    This 'animal/natural' argument is the worst argument I ever heard for breastfeeding. Seriously. It's insane.

    I was simply responding to your apparent refusal to accept that humans are animals who are meant to feed their children with human milk.

    Do you think they aren't?
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    comebackgirl wrote:
    fair enough :) Just not understanding why people get so disturbed by it. It baffles me.
    For the same reason we don't walk around naked. It is OUR culture - we wear clothes.
  • comebackwoman
    comebackwoman Posts: 7,271
    aNiMaL wrote:
    For the same reason we don't walk around naked. It is OUR culture - we wear clothes.
    and we feed babies when they need to be fed...
    There's a light when my baby's in my arms :)
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    Brain of J.Lo wrote:
    So-called "private parts" are considered private because of their assocation with sexuality.

    Anyone who assocates the private parts of children with sex is seriously disturbed. Children cannot have sex, it's nature. So I hope all the mothers here who use "it's natural" as an argument will let their children roam freely and in the nude. It's natural.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    Brain of J.Lo wrote:
    I was simply responding to your apparent refusal to accept that humans are animals who are meant to feed their children with human milk.

    Do you think they aren't?
    Stop twisting this argument J Lo! No one has ever taken the position that breast milk is bad for infants.
  • norm
    norm Posts: 31,146
    boobs!! :p
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    comebackgirl wrote:
    and we feed babies when they need to be fed...
    With clothes on, like a civilized person. Not like a wild animal in the jungle. Duh!
  • comebackwoman
    comebackwoman Posts: 7,271
    cutback wrote:
    boobs!! :p
    they're everywhere! :eek:
    There's a light when my baby's in my arms :)
  • comebackwoman
    comebackwoman Posts: 7,271
    aNiMaL wrote:
    With clothes on, like a civilized person. Not like a wild animal in the jungle. Duh!
    wait - the women are undressing while feeding their babies? Now this I have to see! :D
    There's a light when my baby's in my arms :)
  • Brain of J.Lo
    Brain of J.Lo Posts: 3,259
    aNiMaL wrote:
    That the human race in the part of the world we live in has made it that way. There is no turning back and pretending like they are not sexual objects now.

    Outside the U.S. (aside from, apparently Canada...which is basically America Jr.), breastfeeding is accepted as the norm and encouraged wholeheartedly. Therefore decision to make breasts private has nothing to do with "evolution" and it has everything to do with culture.

    I never said that breasts must be exclusively sexual or exclusively functional. However, there is nothing remotely sexual about breasts being used to feed a child.
  • Brain of J.Lo
    Brain of J.Lo Posts: 3,259
    aNiMaL wrote:
    Stop twisting this argument J Lo! No one has ever taken the position that breast milk is bad for infants.

    I didn't twist the argument. Collin seemed to be trying to make a point that saying breastfeeding is natural isn't a good enough reason to do it. I didn't understand why he was trying to make that point and wanted him to clarify.
  • comebackwoman
    comebackwoman Posts: 7,271
    Collin wrote:
    Anyone who assocates the private parts of children with sex is seriously disturbed. Children cannot have sex, it's nature. So I hope all the mothers here who use "it's natural" as an argument will let their children roam freely and in the nude. It's natural.
    you lost me. We're talking about the woman's breast used to feed the child, right? Being used to feed...not for a sexual purposed. I don't think she mentioned anything about children's sexual organs
    There's a light when my baby's in my arms :)
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    comebackgirl wrote:
    It's babies feeding...the way they are designed to feed. I don't understand what is offensive about that.

    I don't think it's offensive. I don't want to see it so I turn my head. It's fairly simple.

    However, it's natural is not a good argument because many things are natural. Walking around naked is natural, animals do it. Taking a shit when you feel like it is natural (hey, we could even have our own human waste baggies, like we have for dog poo). Sex is natural, we should all screw whenever we're horny.

    That's the "it's nature" argument. All these things are perfectly natural. Every human has to take a crap. It's normal. But we are human and we use discretion. That's all we ask for breastfeeding too. And I think most women are pretty discrete when they breastfeed.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • aNiMaL
    aNiMaL Posts: 7,117
    Brain of J.Lo wrote:
    Outside the U.S. (aside from, apparently Canada...which is basically America Jr.), breastfeeding is accepted as the norm and encouraged wholeheartedly. Therefore decision to make breasts private has nothing to do with "evolution" and it has everything to do with culture.

    I never said that breasts must be exclusively sexual or exclusively functional. However, there is nothing remotely sexual about breasts being used to feed a child.
    Yeah, culture - evolution; our culture has evolved in North America. That is the way it is. My point remains the same.

Categories