Desicritics Comments on The Facebook Breast Feeding Controversy

Comment by Sandeep

Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:57:14 EST

If I go by logic that - masturbation is sexual and breast feeding is not and hence breastfeeding pics should be allowed on facebook... then with same logic pics of pissing should be allowed too; its natural and non sexual and hey guess what- everyone does it. I wont be suprised if tomorrow people would upload their homevideos on facebook and youtube about delivering their kids. where do we draw the line??/ Now talking about sensitizing people about public breastfeeding by flaunting naked breast on facebook....who r you kidding I have nothing against breastfeeding. It does not bother me if I see a mother (not woman) feeding her kid in public, but the whole facebook farce is overrated and I stand in support of facebook. I dont thing the issue is whether breastfeeding is obscene or sexual or whether there is need to sensitize general public towards the issue. people are sane and tolerant and they do respect a mother's choice to feed her baby in public. We give little credit to people. Today, freedom of speech and expression is the most abused privilege, people forget that with freedom comes responsibility. If the people supporting the forum took one hard look at the responsibilty instead of racking their lungs, life would become much more easier.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Tue, 6 Jan 2009 12:58:18 EST

but aditi, facebook is the medium that some people have! I mean, OK, it might not be the one of choice for you or me, but other people operate differently. It is a social networking platform, and it might be the only place that some of these women, particularly some housewives with not a lot of time, have a chance to speak up. I think you've forgotten that not everyone thinks or acts in the same way, or thinks things out into perfectly logical steps. Not everything breaks down that way. I am telling you what is, not how it should be. I have a number of friends in the group, and they have all joined for the reason I stated, which is why I brought it up.

Comment by Aditi N

Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:50:42 EST

SS: Firstly, Facebook is hardly a platform for taking a stand on social issues. Social acceptability and cyber-accetability have a long way to go before they intersect. Even if Facebook were to allow the pictures, it stil would not make life any easier for breastfeeding mothers. But more importantly, when it comes to online censorship, the reason why one is posting something is not really important, the issue is if it is allowed then what else would the website be making way for. We have to be aware that not all women posting the pictures may be doing so for the reasons you state and taking down a policy would mean allowing everyone to do so indiscriminately.

Comment by Simple solution

Tue, 6 Jan 2009 02:23:55 EST

The solution is simple. Anyone who cannot stand the site of a breast should gouge their eyes out with a fork. Problem solved.

Comment by commonsense

Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:53:14 EST

SS: "kerty, you totally bastardized my argument into something I no longer recognize or agree with." How very unusual!!I agree. Kerty the source of all ratinality and logical thought has not quite been himself for a few weeks. Not sure why. Possibly because other retailers of wisdom, rationality etc. such as Man Singh, Sanjay etc. seem to wandering in the wilderness and poor Kerty has to do double/triple duty. SS, go easy on him. He can barely understand what he himself writes. To expect him to make sense of what others write is a tall order, even for a prophet such as him.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:14:57 EST

aditi, while some people on the thread have missed the point, I have gone there with a purpose. they are connected. the mothers on FB posting the pictures are doing so in part because of the backlash against public breastfeeding.

Comment by kerty

Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:51:02 EST

Aditi Your article is about breast-feeding pictures on facebook. The breast-feeding in public is also a closely related issue. Both deal with our attitudes and responses towards breast-feeding when exposed in public.

Comment by blokesablogin

Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:49:07 EST

when I first read the heading of the article, I thought there was a "forum" on facebook that got people to breast feed just as they have all those "little patched" of gardens where u exchange plants etc!LOL! Little did I realize that there were mothers putting up pictures of themselves feeding their babies! I indeed think it is bizarre. Breast feeding is an intimate experience between mother and child- not meant for "public consumption". My mother and grandmother tutored me in how I needed to have a meditative mind and do some japa (chanting) during feeding the baby so that the child is calm of mind as well satiated in body. They emphasized how sacred the act of feeding the child was and how it is a "secret"- modern day breast pumps demystify how much milk comes. But the traditionalist will never agree to the pump. How much milk is produced, the "quality" of the milk- everything is based on the requirements of the baby for that day. In the Indian cutural context, the reason for the upper garment for the girl is to cover her breasts. Be it a duppatta (chunni for a lehanga) or a sari, the idea is to cover the torso when teen age dawns. There was an idea of sanctity associated with the body and its parts. These "exhibitions" (sometimes in the name of information) devolves the mind from a higher state of consciousness to a lower. Sex is natural, obsession with it is unnatural.

Comment by Vinod Joseph

Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:10:57 EST

Breast-feeding on Facebook and actually breast-feeding a baby are indeed two different things. However, displaying breast-feeding pictures on facebook goes a long way in convincing the Western public that breast-feeding babies in public ought to be tolerated.

Comment by Aditi N

Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:04:22 EST

It is really bizarre that people would think that putting up pictures of breast-feeding on Facebook and actually breast-feeding a baby are one and the same. The article is not even about breastfeeding in general and whether it is socially acceptable or not. Have some of you read the title at the very least?

Comment by kerty

Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:00:12 EST

Vinod "There is an urgent need in the West (UK & USA) to get the general public to accept that breastfeeding is a normal activity." Breast-feeding is a normal activity. But it faces a major disconnect with the prevailing culture. In India, breast feeding does not even raise any eyebrows. Woman simply cover herself and the baby up under a sari and go at it. So the disconnect in the west is entirely cultural. So the issue boils down to - How do we get the culture to de-sexualize breast-feeding? Can it really de-sexualize breast-feeding without de-sexualizing the remaining culture? In absence of any resolve or viable ways to de-sexualize culture at large, the quick and convenient response has been to close the eyes, ban it from our eyes.

Comment by Vinod Joseph

Mon, 5 Jan 2009 12:34:06 EST

I agree with Small Squirrel. In the UK, breastfeeding in public is illegal though there are moves afoot to legalise it. There is an urgent need in the West (UK & USA) to get the general public to accept that breastfeeding is a normal activity. I don't think breastfeeding should be compared with shitting or pissing or masturbating. Instead, think of it as feeding a baby. How'd the general public like it if there is a total ban on eating in public? You make a 5 hour journey by train and cannot eat during the etire trip. How'd you like that? I have a friend who once went to Singapore and got fined for eating a burger while travelling on the metro. He cribbed about it for months afterwards. I applaud the few brave women who have willing put up their (breastfeeding)pictures on facebook in order to make this point.

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 20:15:33 EST

SS: ""and just give them premade shit that is not really food so much as chemicals pressed into food form)."" that's funny!!! reminds me of a cartoon, about somebody consuming "mystery on a bun". But that was some time back. Now even it could be "mystery on mystery"

Comment by kerty

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 19:10:41 EST

We like to give this super human qualities to parents and hold only them accountable for what kids become or not become. As if only parents have exclusive monopoly on what gets to go inside a kid's mind and kid's cultural orientation. Most parents are ordinary folks, struggling at their best to raise their kids, and only small part of child's mental and cultural formation. Child learns from environment and parents are vital but only small cog of that environment. Unless the whole environment takes collective responsibility to clean up their own respective acts, parents alone can not do it - most parents will fail and so their kids. As Hillary would say, it takes a village. Cultural orientation is always a communal project.

Comment by kaffir

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 18:44:07 EST

I know this sounds very conservative coming from a known liberal like me [..] SS, it's totally fine to have a "liberal" stance on some issues and "conservative" on others. These labels are not meant to be adhered to blindly, except by ideologues.

Comment by kaffir

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 18:40:10 EST

I honestly feel that in the US this problem is more prevalent because of the "everything goes" attitude people (parents/ society) have taken. Aditi, but is it really "everything goes" in the US? There are all kinds of age-limits on when one can drink, and taboos on marijuana use and so on - which of course, lead to rebellion and acting out. Comparing European societies to American ones should give us an idea. I have a feeling that even though there's more permissiveness in some (many?) European countries regarding nudity, sex and sexuality; they do not have the same problems pertaining to these issues as in the US. Contrary to what we may want to believe, USA is a very conservative society/country in many ways.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 18:07:07 EST

I agree there is a big cultural component. and it all goes back to parenting. a majority of parents here in the US are shitty parents and do not give a flying rat's ass what thier children are up to. they are too lazy to actually parent and leave it to the computer and TV and video games and teachers to do it for them. they allow their children to watch TV shows and movies that are wildly inappropriate for their age group, and they let their teen girls dress like whores and their teen boys act like rap stars. I know this sounds very conservative coming from a known liberal like me, but I honestly think that parents need to PARENT. Teens in this country are obsessed with sex because they watch it on TV from age 4, and by 12 they are eager to have a go, stoked up by hormones that have been unnaturally triggered by all the chemicals in the processed food they eat (also because their parents are too damned lazy to actually cook and just give them premade shit that is not really food so much as chemicals pressed into food form). Are all americans like this, no. But a lot are. And really parents needs to watch what their kids do online. If your 13 year old becomes a sex-crazed maniac because of the side-view of a breast, that is on the parents. And I say that AS A PARENT!!!

Comment by Aditi N

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 17:56:15 EST

SS: I wonder if its a cultural difference here, or maybe just an individual one but I would have trouble making peace with a 13 yr old engaging in voyeurism as far as breastfeeding is concerned. And no, I don't think teens necessarily sexualize everything. Conditioning likely matters. I honestly feel that in the US this problem is more prevalent because of the "everything goes" attitude people (parents/ society) have taken. In India, some people have an opposite problem where everything is hush-hush and taboo that kids do things just out of curiosity. I will note however that growing up in India, for example, at 13 we weren't thinking about sex ALL the time. Were we curious, yes. Did kids do stuff that had sexual undertones? Sure. But when I see a majority of 13 yr olds here in the US I am very shocked. Sex seems to be ALL they can think of. It is all consuming and controls everything they do! And it is sad that kids would have to be so consumed by a subject that even adults have issues with. It must be too much for their young psyches. I wonder if it is after all the level of exposure that contributes to this. But that's a topic for another post I guess :) Coming back to your comment, I think we can all acknowledge that parents simply cannot be everywhere at all times. As for who is responsible for what the kid does, teachers, Facebook, websites, video game manufacturers or parents, that sure is a lifelong debate.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 17:53:13 EST

no kerty, you simply warped my words.... it's not that I am immune to logic, it is that you are immune to reason.

Comment by kaffir

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 17:06:37 EST

kerty, whenever this issue of breast-feeding has been discussed, I jokingly comment that these women should simply place a bottle of beer next to them while they are breast-feeding - that should satisfy those who are offended. :) And yes, I'm familiar with the other point you mentioned, about men holding hands or being affectionate. It's a loss of Indian culture by looking at Indian cultural practices through a Western lens. There must be a fancy term for it - maybe Anamika can enlighten us.

Comment by kerty

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 16:52:54 EST

Kaffir "I find the intolerant attitude some Americans have towards women breast-feeding in public very puzzling." During my college years in India, I had a Jamaican friend who felt very embarrassed and offended anytime any Indian would touch him casually. Indian men are so used to holding hands, placing arms around shoulders, touching thighs or hands for no reasons. They are highly de-sexualized gestures among male friends. Not until I came to America did I understand why my friend was so embarrassed about any kind of same-sex touching. American culture has sexualized every part of human anatomy and every kind of physical contact among humans. You can't touch anybody without sending a wrong signal to that person.

Comment by kaffir

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 16:32:47 EST

I agree with the points Aditi raised regarding breast-feeding images on Facebook, though I also agree with smallsquirrel on the attitudes in America over public breast-feeding. I find the intolerant attitude some Americans have towards women breast-feeding in public very puzzling.

Comment by kerty

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 16:30:21 EST

SS "kerty, you totally bastardized my argument into something I no longer recognize or agree with.: Compartmentalization can create argumentative shelter and immuity from logical fallout, but not escape from consequences in real world. Consequences happen, weather one recognizes or agrees or not.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 16:13:01 EST

aditi... a 13 year old sexualizes EVERYTHING, so I am not sure we make them the gold standard for what is acceptable or not. Also, if the parents are gonna get worked up maybe they should spend more time monitoring their child's online (and other)habits. kerty, you totally bastardized my argument into something I no longer recognize or agree with.

Comment by Aditi N

Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:18:30 EST

Dee: I think I may not have been clear on this one. So to clarify: I did not mean to suggest that a 13 yr old has not seen a bare boob. I'm sure kids have other means of looking at naked women and exposed body parts. That's not my concern here. The concern is about how a 13 yr old would view a breastfeeding picture. I do not think that a 13 yr old's mind is prepared yet to see the difference between a nursing breast and a Playboy breast. This kid is likelier to indulge in voyeurism when viewing breastfeeding as sexual content. And while I may not find anything too disturbing about it, as I mention in my article, somewhere in sue-happy America a mom can and will find lawsuit-worthy emotional scarring of her 13 yr old. My article is not about what I personally find upsetting or obscene but about how the website could be held responsible for making such allowances.