Why I really dislike the Time nursing cover

[cali]

This says it all for me:

Hint: it's not the breast-feeding -- it's the contempt
By Mary Elizabeth Williams

<snip>

In case you thought, nay, hoped, that the barrel-bottom had been fully scraped last week when the New York Times asked, in a query straight out of the Onion, “Has women’s obsession with being the perfect mother destroyed feminism?,” now Time magazine has upped the ante with a cover story brazenly challenging “Are You Mom Enough?”

It’s accompanied, by the way, by a picture of a hot blonde and her 3-year-old son standing on a chair to suckle her breast. Yo, take THAT, Room for Debate page! I guess Time felt it really had to bring it after uber-troll Katie Roiphe’s piece last month on why feminists just want a good spanking.

<snip>

On Time’s blog, photographer Martin Schoeller explains of the shot of Grumet, along with similar images of three other breast-feeding mothers, that “I liked the idea of having the kids standing up to underline the point that this was an uncommon situation.” Fair enough. And though my personal feelings on Barry Sears are ambivalent at best, I am all for promoting breast-feeding. I will be first in line to applaud images of mothers feeding their children, both in real life and advertising, and to cry foul when those images are suppressed. But I call massive, massive BS here.

First of all, why, when a breast-feeding mother makes the cover of a national magazine, is it a thin, young one in a tank top? Grumet’s image is so obviously sexualized it’s not even trying to pretend otherwise. But the real problem with the cover story is its obvious, dripping disdain. This is not just an attention-getting MILF shot. It’s a picture of a woman “driven” to an “extreme.”

<snip>
http://www.salon.com/2012/05/10/why_times_cover_shocks/singleton/

[bigtree]

1. that's creepy

just ignorant and absurd. Why put ANY reasoning behind such a ridiculously staged shot?

[JustAnotherGen]

2. Because

They want to take American Womens' attention away from the WAR being raged on them by the Right.


Convenient eh?

[bigtree]

4. ha!

I think it just makes the editors look stupid. 'They're' really stretching the limits of their pinheaded imagination.

[JustAnotherGen]

7. Except

Paul Ryan was a runner up their person of the year last December. . .

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2101745_2102133_2102332-3,00.html



What's going to be their next cover? Gay Married Mommies waging war against Single Hindy Mommies?

Sorry to be sarcastic here - but all of a sudden we went from a very open and fresh dialogue about the liberty of women being trampled by Right Wing Legislation (periods are abortion- oh my freaking lord! :lmao: ) to -

Women are at War with each other.

I'm not drinking this Kool-Aid - no woman in this country should.

[seabeyond]

8. ya.... but, it will be in a mud pit of wrestling with torn clothes.... gotta keep it real for the

guys.

[JustAnotherGen]

11. I luuuurv

You!

[seabeyond]

12. back atcha, woman. nt

[madokie]

79. Spot on

[MadrasT]

3. Saw a comment at the Washington Post that summed it up for me:

Tampamom1
5/10/2012 11:03 PM EDT

So that's a natural breastfeeding pose? Boy on a chair, arms limply by his side, while he mom strikes a pose and stares down the camera?

It's all a matter of what you think this photo 'represents' I guess. For me, this does not represent attachment parenting OR extended breastfeeding. It represents the Mommy-blog culture having jumped the shark. "Oooh please! Make me famous for my oh so risque parenting!"

^^^ This ^^^

It was a comment on this article: Time cover milks shocking image

[seabeyond]

5. right. along with calis OP. so into breatfeeding and the nature of it all. keep your fuckin hands

off and leave it alone. but the sexualization and manipulation with times role and the pitting against, pitting against always pitting against is what the message is from this cover and articles. or headline anyway.

[Quantess]

6. They just want to sell more magazines,

*get people's attention
*make people notice, pick up the magazine, and buy it
*have everyone talking about their magazine

Looks like they succeeded.

[RZM]

30. There it is

Stated perfectly

[magical thyme]

91. you got it.

And, for some reason, the cover doesn't bother me.

All I feel when I look at it is a twinge of envy. I had the body at that age, but never the face. Or I might have ended up married and a mother.

On the other hand, I've got my freedom.

And in a way, I think the cover is funny because it's getting so many people's panties in a bunch. It's just an effing 'zine cover. This too shall pass. Some other made up controversy will take over. And I don't think the kid's life will be ruined by this. Shit happens. It's what you do with it that matters. Makes great fertilizer, i.e. food for growth.

[Arkana]

9. That kid is going to spend the rest of his life with that image following him.

Seriously, his mother just ruined him.

That and she named him "Aram".

[seabeyond]

10. as a mom that sees a higher in all things, even things that are not good... i can easily see

how a parent can take this into a good place for a kid and can be very healthy, grounding and balancing for a child. evolved. so i dont like to put your burden on a child. the other side of this, a parent that chooses to do this, putting this out to cause the initial issue clues me in the mom may not have the ability or desire or insight to do that.

again, ambivalent on that.

[FedUpWithIt All]

16. The kid is going to be fine.

To him, this will be the normal.

The "ruin" lies at the foot of the parents who raise their children to mistreat others for doing things differently.

Much better a mother who sees no shame in nursing her child, even an older child, than a parent who teaches her child to abuse and hate others for being different or doing things they themselves wouldn't do.

[laundry_queen]

22. +1000000 nt

[blueamy66]

82. No, he is gonna be f***ed up.

Really?

You typed 2 extremes. Not gonna happen.

[FedUpWithIt All]

85. Sorry, not following you. n/t

[HappyMe]

13. If a mom wants to breast feed

until the kid is 5, I don't care. I'm not going to criticize. At the same time, I don't want to be criticized and maligned because I didn't breast feed. Live and let live.
What really pisses me off about the cover is the "Are You Mom Enough?" Really? Is that supposed to make me feel bad or inferior? Am I any less of a mom because I had to work? The boys were not attached to me 24/7. This did not lessen the bond between us in the least.
As far as what the woman on the cover looks like - that IS what she looks like. They did not choose a model, pack on the eye make-up, and slap her in a slinky dress. If you are going to breast feed, wouldn't a tank top (if it's warm enough outside) just be practical?
The jeans she has on are stretchy and comfortable. I have a pair myself. It's like wearing pajama pants. I don't think they are sexualizing the mom at all.
Women come in all shapes and sizes. Some of us are small and thin. It's the way I have always been.

[cali]

14. LOL!! that is unintentionally funny

Of course they picked her. Are you suggesting a model thin, perfectly coiffed and made up mom, striking a glamor pose was the ONLY frickin' nursing mother of a three year old that Time could find for its cover. That is beyond ridiculous.

Of course they're sexualizing mom to the max. Do you know anything at all about Glamor shots.

And when I was 26 I was thinner than she was. (runs in my family) this isn't about that.
This is as fucked up and sexualized a cover as you could come up with. The pose, the kid's pose, the clothing, the makeup, etc.

[seabeyond]

17. you need to add this link. an understanding the choices they had for a cover, and why.....

http://lightbox.time.com/2012/05/10/parenting/#2

some may think it was for the titillation.

[LadyHawkAZ]

26. The shot of her with the little boy actually in her arms

would have made a lot more sense and been more realistic.

A chair? Seriously? Bad posing. I think they're trying to make the child look bigger and older, and the whole thing look dirty and incestuous.

[seabeyond]

29. that is what i posted just now, below. that picture showed attachment. this is detached "attachment"

the first thread on this... there have only been five or six.... i didnt scroll down. all i saw was a boy on a breast. that really took me back. then scrolled down and saw the chair. breathe, ok. i get it now.

sigh

[LadyHawkAZ]

54. yeah

The pose is deliberately unnatural. Very unnatural. It's irritating that they had much better shots available and chose to use that one just to stir up drama.

[seabeyond]

56. stir up drama.

i dont know which thread, but one poster said

with the hand on hip, positioning of body, the looking into the camera, and the kids faced turned, all we need is the kid to be flipping us off. i thought that was an accurate feel. i hadnt thought of it, but, ya

[Bake]

18. If that kid was 3, then I'm 22.

And believe me, I'm not. That kid was old enough to sit at the dinner table and ask, "Pass the potatos, please."

Bake

[TwilightGardener]

21. Yeah, he looks like a first-grader. And uncomfortable with the pose.

[gkhouston]

42. One of our neighbor's kids was that tall at 3. And my own daughter wasn't far behind. n/t

[Son of Gob]

49. He drinks a lot of milk.

[Luminous Animal]

65. The kid is 3. I heard that crap all of my daughter's life. She is full grown now at age 22

and 6'1".

At every age people expected her to be, based on her height, smarter than her age and thus, assumed she was slow... i.e., dimwitted.

And my daughter at age 1.5 to asked, "Booby, please." And then done with one boob would say, "Other booby, please."

[ScreamingMeemie]

67. Thank YOU!

People always thought my daughter was older as well. Again, calling her a "moose", thinking her to be "slow" because she liked to do 3 year old things at...3.

[cali]

73. actually the kid will be four very shortly.

My son was big too. He's 6'4 now. He was always smart for his age so people expected him to be more mature than he was.

[blueamy66]

78. Really? She said that?

time to stop when they can talk

[Luminous Animal]

94. That would have been stupid. She was talking at 9 months.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

76. Not only that, some moms CAN'T breast feed.

And that's fine, too. Our society has this movement within it that breastfeeding is best and if you don't do it you're selfish and don't love your babies. Fuck them. While it is good for the baby, Doing it for more than a year is overkill and it just creeps me the fuck out to see a kid who has teeth and can walk and go to the bathroom for himself sucking on his mommy's titty. It seems like there is something incestuous about it and it seems icky. Everyone in my family breast fed their babies when I was little. It was natural to see a cousin or an aunt sitting with a blanket over their shoulder and the baby's head, occasionally burping and readjusting. I watched. They let me because I was curious. I had a few cousins who couldn't breast feed, and no one said a thing.
This whole mom movement is fine, but it's rigid and rude. My best friend didn't have a lot of milk. She had to supplement with formula, but she did what she could with my goddaughter for a year. Her husband and I did nearly had to throw down because he said she just wasn't a good enough mother. I almost drove myself to St Louis and knocked his teeth out. He was in the room when she told me about it on the phone and he could hear me screaming for ten minutes. He was super careful for months after that and didn't make the mistake of hurting her feelings like that again. I'm a big girl. I may not be strong, but I'd have sat on that asshat and he'd have gotten the point.
Stay out of other people's houses. We are not the GOP. It's none of anyone's business, unless of course it's your best friend and her husband is a total patriarchal asshat.

[blueamy66]

81. Yep! You got it!

As I have posted before, I was adopted....no breastfeeding for me. No illness, hospitalizations, surgeries, etc......my Mom probably fed me whole milk when I was an infant back in the 60s

My niece kicked the breastfeeding nazis out of her hospital room after 5 seconds.

If you wanna breastfeed, fine.....just mind your own business, don't announce it to the world and do your thing.....

I have 6 great nieces and nephews....all healthy and happy...some breastfed a bit, some only on formula....

The cover of Time is f**king ridiculous. That mother is nuts. But hey, she got to be on the Today Show.....

[FedUpWithIt All]

15. I completely disagree

This is a young woman dressed in typical daily wear worn by the average young woman.

I think the real problem is that people see sex where they want to see sex and then when they see what they want to see, they act all indignant about it.

I, personally, can't even contort my brain enough to try and see sex when i look at that picture. I see a mother and her boy. I see a boy who has the same facial expression as my 4 yr old son does when he sucks on the corner of his "blankie"

I understood the point of the standing as soon as i saw the picture. The point was about the way some choose to see this vrs the way it actually is.

Silly hand wringing, if you ask me.

[laundry_queen]

23. I agree.

I think a big part of the problem is people AREN'T used to seeing toddlers nurse so it is instantly sexual in their mind because it involves breasts. The whole point of this is to get people USED to seeing this as a part of a normal use of breasts. The public needs to be desensitized to the breasts=sex societal view.

[seabeyond]

27. i listened to NPR on this. a list of women involved in promoting breastfeeding and all had issue

with cover. all along the way, they were promoting the ideas you are. but all had issue with the cover. and the words... are you mom enough... or whatever. all thought they did the cover in a manner that was least conducive to promoting breast feeding for toddlers.

i was thinking while listen, and it is a promotion of attachment parenting. this cover is a detached visual of breastfeeding promoting attachment.

if you look at the other pictures to choose from, they more promoted what you are. this is the least connected picture of them all. i have a link in the post above here. she was sitting, with the child on her lap and that was more welcoming.

i did enjoy the NPR program.

[laundry_queen]

33. Oh yeah, the 'are you mom enough' stuff

is crap.

I belonged...once upon a long time ago...to a message board that was full of attachment parenting women that were ALL about the contest as to who could be the BEST attachment parent. They pissed off a lot of people and a lot of women ended up leaving and forming more supportive message boards because of the competition aspect of it. So I really disagree with the 'competition' implication that the title has.

But I don't know...I get what you are saying about the picture, but having seen 3 year olds run up to their moms, lift their shirts, have a quick drink while standing up and leave to go play, I also know breastfeeding/attachment parenting isn't always about some kind of virtuous mothering goddess smothering her nursing child with snuggles.

[Dorian Gray]

80. I agree

with your assessment and I read some arguments by women promoting breast feeding as to why this is confrontational. It's definitely aggressive and I think it immediately puts people on the defensive. It's not conducive to sparking conversation. It's meant to be shocking.

[cr8tvlde]

31. Toddlers? Clearly you never taught preschool.

It's not the "public's" job to get used to a boy (or girl) that stands above his mother's waist hoisting up or down her shirt to "nurse". There are a number of appropriate personal acts ... and one can use one's imagination here ... that are inappropriate in public or private...at least to some folk.

What if it were a feminine mom in a nice skirt and blouse and a blonde, ringleted, innocent-looking little girl in a crinoline dress?

[seabeyond]

34. What if it were a feminine mom in a nice skirt and blouse and a blonde, ringleted, innocent-looking

What if it were a feminine mom in a nice skirt and blouse and a blonde, ringleted, innocent-looking little girl in a crinoline dress?

what if??? what is the point. i dont get the picture you are drawing and why

[laundry_queen]

35. Um, yeah it is their job.

That's what breasts were made for and people all over the world nurse their kids in terms of years. It's just American society that seems to have this hang up and it's not beneficial to American society as a whole. And I don't get your preschool comment? I have 4 kids, I'm well aware of the difference between toddlers and preschoolers and you know what? it's not that much difference. And I also don't get why it would be different if it were a girl in crinoline? Please. Educate me.

[cr8tvlde]

50. Well, there is a difference...

A waist high girl (crinoline or Levis) being photographed sucking on her mother's teat is just plain silly and would never make Time Magazine.

And, breasts, like other female parts or male parts for that matter, are not JUST for One Purpose.

I did La Leche and all the "in" things decades ago before it was "cool" and it is natural for mother and child to wean each other long before the child can nurse from a stepstool. I just hope she saves some of her photoshoot income for that little boy...he's going to need it.

[seabeyond]

55. so you are saying it is better that we are seeing the son breast feed than a daughter?

that if a daughter was to breast feed it would just be "silly"

see, the issue here, is exactly where you are placing this. you are saying that they are only able to put this on time because it is a male as opposed to a female. wow

wow wow wow

[cr8tvlde]

59. Yes, because the sexual tension would not be there

with a girl. It would not have happened. It would not have "worked". I think the mother (and father if there is one in his life) is an idiot, regardless of the sex of the involved child, but the global photo and the income from the photoshoot would never have happened with a girl.

[FedUpWithIt All]

87. There is no sexual tension "there" The sexual tension is with "you",

the reader, who is projecting issues onto the mother and her child.

The people having issue with this are the ones who are seeing what they want to see. The are projecting their twisted notions. Their projections are not the reality though. The reality is simply a mother feeding and nurturing her child.

The picture was brilliant in that it actually reflects the projection rather than the reality and it clearly has hit the mark.

[FedUpWithIt All]

47. "What if it were a feminine mom in a nice skirt and blouse and a blonde, ringleted, innocent-looking

little girl in a crinoline dress? "

So what if it was? And why should those of us who are NOT offended be forced to comply with the societal preferences of those who place false meaning on an innocent act?

[FedUpWithIt All]

46. I'll be glad when people stop acting like an exposed breast

is tantamount to graphic pornography. I have real trouble with nudity being confused with sexuality. Nudity can be INVOLVED in sexuality but to suggest all nudity is sexual is an incredibly unsophisticated view.

[cr8tvlde]

62. Take the "toddler" out of it and she can strip to naked...it's not about boobies or "nip slips"

or crotch shots. Good lord adults and kids alike can see them every day on tv and the movies and advertisements and watch live porn on the internet...just that it wouldn't have made the cover of Time or even Hustler or Playboy. Non-event. Took the male child to make it edgy. The new Madonna. I'll say it then I'm done ... soft kiddie porn.

[seabeyond]

68. the boy toddlers does not make it edgy.... that is the stupid. jeezus....

[laundry_queen]

72. Kiddie porn?!?

Lord love a duck.

Yes, please be done. You obviously don't get it.

[FedUpWithIt All]

88. It's disturbing that you are determined to see sex and abuse

in this image of a woman breastfeeding her child.

Those issues are a little deep for a message board post so i will wish you well and say goodbye.

[blueamy66]

83. That's a toddler?

Really??????

[NYC_SKP]

19. The Young Boy Does NOT Look Happy to Be There. I Suspect it's Deliberate.

The postures of each represent, to me, a forced situation.

It looks like child abuse from the body language, and I don't think its an accident.
.
.

[DevonRex]

20. Uh, he looks big enough to tackle her.

I'm just kinda thinking that if he's big enough to chase me around the house and tackle me for some milk then just maybe he can drink out of a glass. But that's just me.

[cr8tvlde]

24. Yep. Thinking this poor kid isn't going to have a lot of "play dates"

Also, where's Dad?

[DevonRex]

25. Seriously. That picture is online now. It'll NEVER go away.

Unlike magazines that people get rid of after awhile. This will follow him for evah. One of those parents should have thought about that, wouldn't you think?

[ScreamingMeemie]

43. Why does Dad's location matter?

[cr8tvlde]

51. Whoa. Are you serious? Dad doesn't matter?

Makes sense now.

[ScreamingMeemie]

52. What "makes sense now"? I happen to have a problem with this cover.

However, the mother may have had artificial insemination, the father may have ditched, or might not want to have taken part. My question is why does the father need to be involved in the decision?

[uppityperson]

53. Why does a dad's location matter when breastfeeding?

What makes sense now? That a photo of a mom and child breastfeeding is ok without Dad being in the photo also? What?

[laundry_queen]

36. My second child would've been at least that big at 3 years old.

She was REALLY big for her age. She was wearing size 3X when she was 1. She weaned herself when she was 2.5, but I can see a 3 year old being that big. Kids come in all sizes. My now 5-year old is smaller than her sister was at 3. So that kid on the cover is big, but not abnormally so.

Oh, and teachable moment here: When you do extended breastfeeding, it doesn't mean you don't offer the child anything but the breast. My toddlers who breastfed all had sippy cups and regular cups for water, juice, and even milk. Breastfeeding is about more than just feeding. My kids, for instance, NEVER had a blankie, a paci or a teddy bear that they were so severely attached to they couldn't go to sleep without it. Breastfeeding was THEIR comfort. I've seen more than one 3 or 4 year old walking around with a bottle, and at least several 5 year olds sucking their thumbs or using a paci. Some kids just have that need to suck for comfort until they are a bit older.

[DevonRex]

66. I nursed both my boys. They stopped nursing on their own.

The older one stopped before he turned one. Just wasn't interested anymore. The younger one nursed quite a bit longer, until he was closer 1-1/2. So, I do know all about breastfeeding.

[aquart]

28. Publicly breastfeeding a three-year-old. We have a family story about that.

Russia. Early 1900s. Great grandfather arrested, police came to search the house. My grandmother's stepmother talked them into letting her pull everything out of the the closets so they wouldn't get messed up. But when she reached up what she grabbed was a gun, stuck it under her skirt and flopped down grabbing her three-year-old "OMG, I forgot Maischel is hungry!" And kept the long-weaned child there until the house had been searched.

After which the last cop out leaned over to her and said, "Get rid of the gun."

[CaliforniaPeggy]

32. Good for her! What great quick thinking!

And the cop, even though he knew what was going on, did not interfere. Good for him.

Thanks for telling us this wonderful story.

[laundry_queen]

37. :)

Pretty common I think for that culture. My grandmother, whose parents had come to Canada before she was born, but settled in an all-Ukrainian town, nursed all her kids (in the 1950's!) until they were 2-3 years old. It was just what was done in the 'old country'.

[BillyJack]

38. Time posted this right before "Mother's Day" too ??????

What a bunch of twisted/sick f*cks.

Male. Insecure.Rich.Fucks(and your f*ck isn't all that good even with a "bag of chips&quot lol

When you LOVE someone.....REALLY love someone. THAT is being rich.....really rich.

[laundry_queen]

39. Interesting tidbit.

I just saw on CTV here in Canada that the woman who is featured on the cover was herself breastfed until she was 6 years old. So for her, it's something more than making a statement, it's a way of life, a kind of normal for her and the way she was raised. I thought that was interesting.

[morningfog]

40. This is why I like it and dislike it. It got attention.

I spurned multiple articles and conversations on breast-feeding, motherhood and feminism. It got a reaction, it was effective in getting us talking.

[seabeyond]

41. yes. by once again, pitting women against women. nothing new there. but hey....

we are talking the issues.

[morningfog]

45. And that is another issue that can be explored.

Edit to add: I do take offense at the headline.

[ScreamingMeemie]

44. Here's my problem with this cover. I bottle fed one of my kids and breastfed the other.

Both grew (are growing) up to be fine young people. So I guess I was "Mom Enough" to raise them in the way I saw fit. My other problem is that I do not remember once nursing my child (in public or private) while glaring out at the world, daring someone to take issue with me. I spent the time glorying in what a beautiful little boy I had and bonding. If this cover had been an actual shot depicting a mother and child (no matter the age) bonding over what IS a natural act, it would have been beautiful and I would be applauding Time today.

[bhikkhu]

48. I look at it as actual art, in the best sense of the word

...designed to make you look and think and feel a little uncomfortable and talk, and perhaps grow a little. I think much of the objections to it are by design, and if I were the artist I'd be smiling in satisfaction. The key is that the individuals are real, and the situations is real - why should it bother us to see?

[cr8tvlde]

57. There is nothing "real" or "artsy" about having a photo of a young boy and his mother

with her breast bared and him sucking on her teat sent around the globe and in the public realm for eternity. Sorry. Normal kids are apalled by the more innocent private photos of their earlier years.

This is a real child, with a silly name and a narcisstic mother and somewhere surely there is a father ... who will really grow up and be mortified...it's not a cute sociological experiment.

I challenge anyone to put themselves or their own children in his position going into, say, first or second grade. Kids (and their parents) are merciless as it is, let alone with this travesty.

[bhikkhu]

58. Because society is so cold and closed and intolerant

? How do you change or challenge that?

[cr8tvlde]

61. Why would a parent use their child as a sociological experiment?

Narcisicm and money. Mom is pretty with a good figure, but she couldn't strip and get on the cover of Time. There are other venues for that and likely pay much less. I read on here somewhere she was breastfed until she was 6???? First/second grade and still lifting her Mommy's shirt at will? I'm not a psychologist, but this is pretty screwed up.

[bhikkhu]

64. Why are people so put out by breastfeeding

...is the better question. Its not a sociological experiment, its just breastfeeding. All the rest is in your head - and that's the art of it.

[FedUpWithIt All]

86. ++++++++ n/t

[laundry_queen]

70. It's only screwed up in America. nt

[cr8tvlde]

89. That may be, regardless, this is where he must grow up...it's reality

and knowing how the bullying is in schools, and that's mostly in America, too ... he's the one that will pay.

[laundry_queen]

93. Kids will always find something to bully about.

I suppose we should all name our kids Bob or Jane, dress them nicely and stylishly, make sure they have the latest toys and gadgets, make sure they don't have 'weird' interests like science or math, make sure that as parents we aren't fat or too stylish, that we look like a 'soccer mom' (whatever that is), that we drive the appropriate vehicles, that we only teach kids the values that will make sure they won't be teased - don't teach them to stand up for themselves ever, teach them to be followers, teach them to never question authority, make sure they are good at sports, etc etc.

See how ridiculous your assertion is? I'll be damned if I compromise my deepest held convictions on child rearing because there's a chance my kid might be bullied about it.
Sounds like my ex, who, when I asserted that maybe buying Barbies for my daughters wasn't such a good idea, that Barbies perpetuated a warped sense of body image and beauty, said, "My kids will have Barbies, I won't have them bullied at school because they are the losers that don't have Barbies because of some stupid tree hugger crap." At the time, being very subservient, I allowed my girls to have Barbies. Guess what? Their friends that didn't have them weren't bullied or made fun of. Nor did my kids give a crap when they went over to their friends' house and didn't play with Barbies - there were plenty of other things to do. Looking back it's totally ridiculous to make parenting decisions on whether or not your child MAY be bullied. If the bullies are allowed to bully, they will find SOMETHING.

[seabeyond]

95. one of the niftiest about husband, that to this day i value and appreciate. 3 yr old. never saying

the 3 yr old MUST grow up. allowing my boys to travel the path that was right for them, than what he thought as a MAN a boy should travel. forever and always i am so appreciative my husbands manliness did not dictate his parenting.

[laundry_queen]

96. :) He sounds like a great guy. nt

[joshcryer]

60. I wonder how "extended breast-feeders" feel about kids with bottles at 3-7 years old.

Let's say the bottles are even filled with breast milk.

[laundry_queen]

71. I'd have no issue with it.

I've had friends who bottlefed and put their kids to bed with a bottle till they were 3 or 4 (yes, I know it's not recommended to put a baby to bed with a bottle but I knew TONS of people who did it, it's the only way their child would sleep). A few even had pacis at night until school age. Usually those kids quit because the parents made them. I have more issues with people who force the kids off the bottle at 9 months and stick them on a sippy cup because the bottle is 'gross' to them and think 'the kid needs to grow up sometime.' But that's just me

[Warren DeMontague]

63. "make him fly, mother!"

I can't take credit for that one. Pz Myers got there first.

[white_wolf]

69. Grr. I hate that little brat. He's one step below Joffery on my list of characters who need to die.

He's just as annoying in the books too. I want to see him fly.

[boppers]

75. Don't worry.

Unlike Rowling, Martin has no problem killing off characters.

Sweetsleep FTW!

(For those not following: http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Robert_Arryn )

[Vinca]

74. Check back at 16 . . . I bet the kid's still there.

Putting it on the cover makes it clear the whole thing is about mom, not the kid. If it wasn't, the little boy wouldn't have this cover following him around for the rest of his life. At least he won't be in school with Mitt Romney.

[Fla_Democrat]

77. That's a kid?

I thought it was Jason "Wee-man" Acuña in a promo poster for Jackass 4.

[Cairycat]

84. Time wanted to sensationalize the issue and sell magazines

Certainly this cover will accomplish that. Why this mother agreed to that, I don't know. Surely she knew that's how it would be presented - it is how longer-than-customary-in-our-society breastfeeding is always presented in the mainstream media.

But it truly isn't the reality for most families who practice what I would call "sustained" breastfeeding, breastfeeding for a physiologically normal length of time. Nursing a toddler or preschooler, despite hyped-up magazine covers, isn't about sex. It's about a way of comforting and caring for a child, one not often chosen in our culture, but a valid one nonetheless.

I've seen lots of families who have children who were nursed this long, and thus I've seen these children grow up from little ones who were lucky enough to be able to have the familiar comfort of nursing as needed in those swiftly-passing early years - to mature, poised teens and young adults. My own children, in their teens and early twenties, know that they were nursed (between 2 and 4.5 years), and are not ashamed of it. They are all smart, extremely healthy and confident individuals. While nursing wasn't the only factor in that happening, it cannot be denied as one contributing factor.

So, no, I don't care if a child goes to bed with a bottle or pacifier until school age or whatever. Whatever is comforting for the child and gets the most people the most sleep is a good thing, IMO. Although with a bottle containing anything but water, you do have to worry about dental issues. Night nursing at that age can also lead to cavity problems, though the act of suckling is a little better for the teeth than the unrestricted flow from a bottle.

[alarimer]

90. The whole attachment parenting things creeps me out and makes me worry about the future

If it is as widespread as it appears to be. Or maybe it just gets a lot of attention.

I never had kids and don't want them but one of the reasons is that our country has gone completely batshit insane on the subject of kids. There are so many judgmental parenting nazis out there that I know they would drive me nuts.

I have seen parents drive their kids to the bus stop, that was just a couple of blocks away. WTF? Walk with them, maybe, but drive when there is a perfectly good sidewalk?

[Prometheus Bound]

92. Time has changed the cover picture.

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-19-11/too-big-wean