May 15, 2012, - 6:28 pm

Breastfeeding & Attachment Parenting Militants: Theirs – Jamie Lynne Grumet & “Ours” – Michelle Fraudkin (VIDEO)

By Debbie Schlussel

Well,  TIME Magazine got what it wanted–temporarily.  The magazine was at death’s door (and still is), but for the first time in ages, it got attention because it put a topless chick, Jamie Lynne Grumet, getting her breast (if you can call that a breast) sucked by a far-too-old boy.  At this rate, TIME is going to have to put a man (or woman) getting oral sex on the cover, or it’s still gonna die an ever-impending death. Check out the insane, New Age gobbledygook video, below, about Grumet, who was nursed by her mother through age SIX!  Notice what’s missing anywhere in the video:  a man.  I thought she was another one of those single moms.  But I was wrong.  She has a wimpy beta-male as an accessory and a Mr. Mom.  Brian Grumet–that guy’s testicles were checked at the door years ago.  It’s obvious.

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player


Grumet & Fraudkin: Their Militant Feminism About Breastfeeding Is All Too Similar

But, to me, the cover isn’t just about attachment parenting–that weird lifestyle being pimped by bizarros, like actress Mayim Bialik. Per this weird lifestyle, she sleeps with her six-year-old kids in the same bed, while she’s having sex with her husband (called, “co-sleeping” – new lesson: in general, whenever a normal word has “co-” incongruously slapped onto it, the perpetrators are usually liberal nutjobs who need to take their meds because they are co-insane, co-crazy, co-trashy, and just plain co-annoying). They also don’t put their babies in diapers, allowing them to pee wherever and whenever.  Her ancestor, the great Israeli writer, Chaim Nahman Bialik is turning over in his grave.

The cover is about the militant feminists who insist that we see them whipping out their breasts at whim and feeding their kids (at whatever age) in public, and that if we object to this, we are somehow backward or warring on women.  If you want to nurse your kids, do it in private.  Don’t insist on subjecting me to it.  That’s selfish.  And, attention Michelle Malkin, it’s NOT conservative.  It’s liberal, feminist, self-absorbed (all the things she is).  That Fraudkin and Grumet–both of whom are obvious egomaniacs and assume the alpha male role in their marriages–think we must see their breasts (or, in both of their cases, lack thereof) because they are too lazy and inconsiderate to go into a bathroom, is ridiculous.


Yes, a few years ago, Baba Wawa complained on ABC’s “The View” that she was forced to see a woman nursing on a plane.  And Fraudkin went nuts.  She wrote a column and a blogpost defending the La Leche League nutjobs who stage public breast-feeding sit-ins at establishments like Target.  She said she feels sympathetic to them.  On her site:  “The militancy of some of these ‘lactivists’ is  . . . understandable.” And she called people who don’t want to see her breast-feeding in public, “snobby people.”  (I’m not surprised she said that, since she also defended anti-Semitic threats against me, too.  Her sense of “understanding” is interesting, to say the least.  Only attacks on and threats to her matter because, as she says about herself, she is a “conservative woman of color.”  Hilarious.)   She said about the breastfeeding terrorists, ” I completely sympathize with their outrage.”  She also called breast-feeding “selfless.”  Um, no, being a good mom is what’s expected, Michelle.  It’s the bare minimum, Fraudkin.  It doesn’t make you a saint or selfless.  In fact, doing it in public and forcing us to see it, imposing your will on us, is selfISH.  Period.  It’s no different than people making out in front of us.  We don’t want and shouldn’t have to see it.  Get a room.  It’s only a fake conservative–who spouts liberal feminist selfishness–that will make me agree with Wawa.

And so that brings us back to the TIME cover of Jamie Lynne Grumet, feminist and alpha male of the left, just as we have our faux-conservative feminists and alpha male “chicks” of the right who aren’t very different.  Yes, one feeds her kids until four or six.  But both attachment parenting and breastfeeding in public have the same feminist militancy at their core.  And their respective left- and “right”-wing supporters are both exhibitionists and me-me-me chicks who couldn’t care less about everyone else.  And both of their husbands are mere accessories with a long-ago psychologically-castrated appendage.

And no matter what anyone tells you, that’s feminism. Radical feminism.  NOT conservatism.  Period.

We don’t want to be forced to see you breastfeeding your kid in public . . . at any age, on a magazine cover or live.

More Public Breastfeeding & Attachment Parenting Nausea-Inducement From Mayim Bialik . . .

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

65 Responses

[Debbie – … the La Leche League nutjobs …]

My best friend is a pediatrician and he calls them “breast
Feeding terrorists”.

On the other hand they are not all bad. My son was born premature and no matter who we took him to he would not breast feed. It was only after we brought in La Leche that he was able to breast feed.

I_AM_ME on May 15, 2012 at 7:26 pm

    I could make some fun alpha male responses about Carmen Electra feeling free to breastfeed in front of me, or Adrienne Barbeau in her prime, etc.

    However, really, women should just appropriately cover up while breastfeeding. No child should have to see mommy and daddy doing it while sleeping in their same bed. And sometimes women just can’t breastfeed their kids—happens, folks. And if they are on older antipsychotics or lithium, probably should happen.

    Common sense and decency are common sense and decency. Sometimes Rebekah and Isaac and Mommy and me all watch movies while lying on mommy and daddy’s bed. When Rebekah and Ike finally go to sleep, Daddy carries them to their bed, kisses them and tucks them in. What the hell is so difficult about that? Rebekah is 9, Ike is 8. I have never heard of “co-sleeping” until I read this. And I am a board certified psychiatrist who trained in Los Angeles. Damn, this gets worse and worse.

    Debbie, there are for sale houses in my neighborhood when bugout time comes.

    Occam's Tool on May 16, 2012 at 7:42 pm

Its not so much public breast-feeding I think you take issue with.

Its really the loss of good taste that once ruled our society. What’s sad is people doing anything to grace the cover of TIME.

Some people are just sheer publicity hounds. Every one needs their Andy Warhol fix. Regardless of whether or not its good for children and the public.

How many people want to become famous? Cuz the old 15 minutes isn’t enough.

NormanF on May 15, 2012 at 7:33 pm

    See my comment above about the Time cover.

    Italkit on May 16, 2012 at 3:13 am

Many of these women who breastfeed are hypocritical frauds. It was about noon. I saw this one women, very nice looking, beautiful breasts, breast feeding an 18-24 month child. I asked her if she supports public breastfeeding, and she said “Of course,” I asked her if I could join her at lunch. She said “okay” and I started to suck on her unoccupied breast.

My hearing in criminal court comes up next week. I am using the Time Magazine cover as a defense.

Jonathan E. Grant on May 15, 2012 at 7:37 pm

    Jon,
    You are going to have to pay for that free lunch after all.
    None of this surprises me because I have seen women take off all of their clothes in a grocery store and those women announce they worked at a strip club.
    Unfortunately you see more than you want to see in some grocery stores when all you came in the grocery store for was some coconuts, head lettuce, chicken.

    Confederate South on May 16, 2012 at 12:27 am

looks like Time misspelled her name, it is spelled:
a-t-t-e-n-t-i-o-n w-h-o-r-e.

Her child is an accessory, like a hollywood dimbo with a little dog in a purse. Nice to see Time can get away with child porn, corrupting a minor and the lack of basic good taste. I can see if the police came in during the photo-shoot and the photographer saying “it’s not what you think officer, it’s for a Time magazine cover”. ya right.

I like Newsweeks classy comeback to Times child porn cover, calling Obama our first Gay president. Let the liberal cover wars begin!

This also falls under the woman who will wear a low cut top, letting them hang out, then get offended when people look at them. The breastfeeders do the same thing. They pop them out then look around to see if anyone is watching so they can berate them and defend their own actions.

ender on May 15, 2012 at 7:39 pm

Not to mention how a kid that old is going to act out in his or her adult life. Crosses the incest border like a 18 wheeler going 80.

samurai on May 15, 2012 at 7:51 pm

Michelle Malkin has breasts???? I thought they were mosquito bites.

Jonathan E. Grant on May 15, 2012 at 8:15 pm

Is that her son on the cover? If not, how is that not some sort of child abuse?

Matt on May 15, 2012 at 8:46 pm

    Matt, it is called “pedophilia”.

    Pats on May 15, 2012 at 9:38 pm

If breast feeding in public is okay then I should be able to pee in public on whatever tree I find convenient. Hey, its natural, right? For those who disagree with me, please explain to me the difference between the two activities.

Hopewell on May 15, 2012 at 9:37 pm

    There are times and places where a younger baby who’s only or a bit later major form of nutrition is breast milk needs to be fed in a public domain. At that age and when seriously hungry it’s unlikely that most persons will even notice whats happening, nor seeing anything more than a baby’s booffy head , it covers all, it’s the absence of a bottle that gives the form of feeding away. Or if standing/walking by maybe an inch of skin in a few bits. At that stage and hunger, baby is prepared to feed without the preffered quiet only mummy and me set up. Additionally you choose the moment when no one is looking to let baby on, likewise when removing baby.Baby desperate doesn’t muck around coming on and off, so no exposure. Obviously one picks the least conspicuos spot, out of the way from most. Toitets etc are never an option. Following this means at a resturant you’d leave your table and move to an empty out of most persons way spot to feed, or the back corner of a foyer etc.. Older babies don’t get breastfed when out readily aside from baby feeding rooms and can be taught to settle for water/food or sometimes juice and breastfed otherwise only at home scenarios.That way baby /toddler learns where breastfeeding fits accorfding to age. I find it hard to believe breastfeeding by meeting this criteria could bother any sane person. In fact the times I had to I was complimented by the odd person who’d cued in, including an older couple. Plus I was at ease when it occured. People are supportive of necessary breastfeeding done consideratly and are aware of any restricted environmental options. It’s the lazy rude way of instant gratification in your face that is distorting the acceptability of the notion of infants breastfed in shared public spaces.
    Also if kid hasn’t weaned fully voluntarily into their 2nd year- and mum didn’t want to quit earlier- it’s time for mother decided led weaning to facilitate kids independence. Just say no more milk , it’s gone now and here’s present X(Something they really want and like) for being a big kid.It’s really that simple for normalish parents who weren’t into “fetished, whoops, meant to say attatchment parenting “

    kay peterson on November 20, 2013 at 10:48 pm

That cover, those ‘co-freaks’, they’re all messed up.

P. Aaron on May 15, 2012 at 9:44 pm

I agree with Hopewell…the idea that something is “natural” doesn’t mean it is appropriate to show in PUBLIC. The sense of PROPRIETY separates humans from the rest of the animal kingdom, since animals all have the same “natural’ biological functions. Here’s a list off the top of my head:

urination
defecation
passing intestinal gas
burping
sexual intercourse
breastfeeding
nakedness (human’s natural state)

We have bathrooms, bedrooms and clothing for PRIVACY and PROPRIETY, but self-respect and respect for others continues to degenerate in the U.S. What was viewed as deviant behavior in the past is now acceptable in the mainstream.

nailsagainsttheboard on May 15, 2012 at 9:56 pm

    I would remove burping and breastfeeding from that list.

    Miranda Rose Smith on May 16, 2012 at 6:03 am

    You are very wrong. Animals aren’t that crass. They can be very particular about where , when and what situation they will eliminate or feed.Some cats and dogs can drive one nuts if you go away with them finding something safer or more discreet. Grazing animals have the culture of being of a large group when in a safe areas to seem more open.
    Humans once wouldn’t make themselves or their young vulnerable by noisily plopping themseves anywhere amongst strangers or risk harm in that situation by accepting a nearly or ought to be weaned young pinning themselves in that situation.
    What we have now is worse than lost civilized thinking, but lost common sense, addled primitive thinking replaced by mystical mad myths of what never was or defectively wired instant gratification guided at best by narscissitic wishful thinking.
    It’s propelling people to become antagonistic to breastfeeding’s reasonable feeding needs.
    Be fair and don’t demean animals.

    kay peterson on November 20, 2013 at 11:17 pm

Amen. Liberalism is a mental disorder and these disgusting narcissists have taken it to a new hight.

These numbskulls are so narcissistic and dense they don’t realize that MORE pervs will be perving on the cover doing something that BREAST FEEDING has nothing to do with. It’s so disgusting to me and makes me wanna retch!

I saw the cover on the British papers hours before it went viral and I REFUSED to click on it because it makes me sick. I see it as child porn. It sure did go viral mere hours after I refused to look at something that makes me sick.

We are coming down to the lowest area on the limbo stick that is American culture. I am pretty sick of it. I didn’t want to see the sneaky, slippery slope in 1997 but I sure as hell see it NOW.

DS, it’s hard to want to hate Michelle Fraudkin because when I hear her she seems like one of the few Conservative bull-dogs but your proof convinces me every time. It is hard to wanna take her side when she has to answer for the things you point out. I think of them every time she makes the news. I want REAL Conservatives. I am tired of the phonies. I like what you put out there better than the phonies!

We have to push-back. When crap like this cultural filth comes out we can’t be cowed by the loopy and sicko freaks who try to pass it off as “normal” and healthy. They take more and more ground ever-so slightly and it’s not reflecting well on America!

S: On Fraudkin, you got half of it right: the bull part. She’s full of that. DS

Skunky on May 15, 2012 at 9:58 pm

    Well Skunky, I have to reach a very bad conclusion when i see overaged breast feeding and co-sleeping where junior gets to see it all. I think we are seeing the first wedge in mainstreaming incest. The unstated sexual fetish aspects of these practices is too sharp to ignore. I am sorry if this sounds gross, but I see the infiltration of this stuff as quiet scary.

    Worry on May 15, 2012 at 10:38 pm

      I agree with you Worry…incest and pedophilia. The perverts want that normalized. It’s so disturbing!

      It’s sad to see perversions normalized. It’s yet another gift of Political Correctness…the gift that keeps on rotting!

      Skunky on May 15, 2012 at 10:53 pm

I would love to see a study on the propensity of “attachment parenting” to create gay men.

Hopewell on May 15, 2012 at 10:22 pm

Michelle Milkin’

CornCoLeo on May 16, 2012 at 12:49 am

Debbie how does your bosom compare to the crazy lady on the magazine cover? I promise not to share any topless pictures you $end me and which would also salvage what has been an off year for me. I am a vault, Debbie.

A1 on May 16, 2012 at 12:55 am

I think the reason they show us their breasts is that there is nothing else about them that commands attention. Bialik is a hack actress, who disgraces her ancestor. Grumet is a total hack with nothing else about her commanding attention. Time has plummeted into being trash, and nothing else about it will command attention.

The thing that I do find somewhat irritating is that some misguided grade school and high school social studies classes still read Time every week to keep up with civics or current events, and use the magazine as a learning experience. Their teachers, assuming they have real teachers and not leftover hippies, are going to be disappointed, and will feel betrayed when this piece of trash arrives in the mail.

I was also thinking along the lines of Matt — if Sandusky is going to jail, shouldn’t Ms. Grumet also?

Little Al on May 16, 2012 at 1:10 am

As long as she pulls a shawl over the baby’s head, I don’t mind a woman nursing in public.

That Time magazine cover is bizarre, tacky, surrealist, past belief.

MRS: The point is that they are NOT doing that–putting a shawl over the baby’s head and their breast. They are full frontal. DS

Miranda Rose Smith on May 16, 2012 at 1:54 am

    MRS: The point is that they are NOT doing that–putting a shawl over the baby’s head and their breast. They are full frontal. DS

    Miranda Rose Smith on May 16, 2012 at 1:54 am

    Thanks for the clarification.

    Miranda Rose Smith on May 16, 2012 at 6:06 am

    I have to disagree with Debbie somewhat here.

    Breasts aren’t shown in a sexual context – its not porn.

    And if you want to see bare-chested women legally, there are plenty of PBS nature shows where they show them and its even “G” rated for the kids!

    NormanF on May 17, 2012 at 9:37 am

Debbie, the picture is disgusting and inappropriate to say the least but the kid is only 3.5 although they made him look older. That is NOT too old for breast feeding. Many cultures do it as a natural form of birth control, although it’s not perfect as that. My daughter usually nurses her babies, she now has 6, til they’re about 3 and it’s all about mothering not sex despite Time giving it a lurid incestuous/pederastic/erotic slant.
As for co-sleeping, what do you think most of our ancestors did? Unless yours were aristocrats or comfortable middle class at least, most families crowded into one bed for warmth and security. If parents in this situation are having sex, it’s not wild and orgiastic despite what Hollywood tells us good sex should be. It is quiet and gentle and under the covers or the kids are not present for that short time. No one every said sex had to be at night. Even in Orthodox Judaism, there are permitted ways to do it during the day e.g. black out curtains and under the covers at any rate.Anything that limits visibility and some rabbis would even say that’s not required.

I: HUH? Since when is what our ancestors did in past ages the standard? Are you living in a cave and foraging for food? This is moronic. By this logic, we should all give up toilets, running water, sanitary conditions, toilet paper, bathrooms, cars, paved roads, refrigeration, cooling and heating. Only a moron does this. The rest of us do not live by the standards of the Unabomber and the Cro-Magnon. And anyone who nurses their kids past 1 or 1.5 years has serious issues. This isn’t about Judaism or religion, which is totally irrelevant to this discussion–and is, FYI, a religion that is all about modesty, not this crap. Anyone who has sex with their children in their bad is a backward barbarian and should probably be charged with child abuse. You are warped with your absurd, sickening excuses for this crap. Get help fast. DS

Italkit on May 16, 2012 at 3:09 am

    Dear Italkit: Debbie is right. Do you really fancy living in a mud hut, heated by a fire in the middle of the floor, and with a hole in the ceiling to let the smoke out, and sharing your mud floor with pigs and goats and getting bubonic plague becuse the place is swarming with fleas and committing incest because your daughter or sister or mother is jammed so close to you and having 10 children and losing 9 of them?

    Miranda Rose Smith on May 16, 2012 at 6:00 am

      MRS –
      Think about it – that is EXACTLY what these hippies want. Most of this “green” crap is about us going back to the stone age. According to them we shouldn’t have cars, houses, pets, electricity, or toilet paper. I mean, there’s people out there wiping their butts with their hand and a bucket of lukewarm water for pete’s sake!

      Hopewell on May 16, 2012 at 11:01 am

    I subscribe fully to what Debbie wrote here. Its true leftists and Islamists want to go back to the Dark Ages and abandon the benefits of modern society.

    There are few people who want to do without the conveniences of modern life – and even in Islamic countries, highly educated people find the entire living in the caves movement to be an aberration.

    What religion teaches us is to master and control the baser impulses of human nature not to surrender to them. We have far higher expectations for life than our ancestors did.

    That’s the entire point of civilization.

    NormanF on May 17, 2012 at 9:44 am

Hopewell, et al, if public breast feeding bothers you so much, please take your Big Macs to the rest room and eat them there. I don’t want to see “special sauce and cheese” dripping down your chins. No child should have to eat in a bathroom because you’re a bunch of prudes.

EATING is not the same as relieving yourself although they are indeed both “natural.” And as I said, when families “co-sleep” the kids don’t see anything although I can think of better reasons not to do it. Come to think of it, with all the child abductions from bedrooms, maybe it’s not a bad idea. Parents can take care of business some other time.

I: Only a complete idiot would compare whipping out a woman’s breasts in public to eating a Big Mac and then defend having sex with kids in your bed. You need help, dude. DS

Italkit on May 16, 2012 at 3:17 am

    Italkit, the crap that you are defending is sick and perverse.

    I don’t subscribe to it and see it as warped.

    Skunky on May 16, 2012 at 10:48 am

My wife, who had the greatest DDs, said enough when the kids went for solids. 1.3 years old and a tuna melt over the boob? Gone.
These kids are trained to be suckers.It is kind of creepy.
Of course we lost a lot of guests, couples and males predominantly, when she packed them in.

pat on May 16, 2012 at 3:21 am

I would frankly consider it a form of child abuse akin to refusing to toilet train a child and insisting that they wear a diaper well past the time they should be wearing one. Also, for a pedophile, this is plainly sexualizing children. Public breastfeeding of older children is not about nourishment or nurturing, but plain old fashioned exhibitionism.

The natural and loving act of breastfeeding is grotesquely transformed into an act of public defiance. Is asserting one’s right to be viewed as a dairy cow really advancing women socially? Why would public urination or defacation not be equally as liberating, since these practices are just as normal and even more common than breastfeeding? Self-degradation and the humiliation of one’s own children for political reasons seem to be socially acceptable practices now..

Worry01 on May 16, 2012 at 6:42 am

Breast feeding in public doesn’t bother me. And if you want to breast feed till your twenty go ahead.

myother on May 16, 2012 at 9:17 am

Breast feeding must be natural and normal for women,they have breasts! The question of where and when has social customs of where you are. Needs of a baby,and needs of toddler are not the same. Needs of the mother come into question. Is it a time and place issue. Now is available! Is it an exhibition issue! “I can do this if I want too! If you don’t like it, don’t look!” What about the baby and the milk it is getting! Is all breast milk safe! The breast milk probably is safe,else the human race wouldn’t be doing so well(over-population-China,India,etc.). Over the years I think I’ve seen two or three moms breast feed a baby in public, each time that occured I was filled with thought, a mom, a baby, Godly act of love! That is how I never thought “Oh! look at that Hussy!, I wonder if my mom did that with me!”

williamwalter on May 16, 2012 at 9:43 am

Ultimately, this is about a man-less chick who likes having her breasts sucked. Not particular about who is doing the sucking.

JeffT on May 16, 2012 at 10:13 am

    In Saudi Arabia, Islamic clerics issued a fatwa that said its halal for Muslim women to breast-feed grown men.

    Do we really want our society to be like theirs? I don’t think so.

    NormanF on May 17, 2012 at 9:49 am

When I first saw the cover photo, I honestly thought it was a photo-shopped picture, because in no way could I imagine a mother wanting her child (or herself) to appear on the cover of a national magazine like that. I have no problem with breastfeeding at all, but damn, can we act like we have some home training here and stop putting our kids out there like that???

D. O'Nay on May 16, 2012 at 10:40 am

Let me start off with saying to Italkit. Debbie is right my friend. You need to seek help ASAP! Do not pass go and do not collect 100 dolllars. Now back to the subject at hand. Time magazine has been in the toilet for quite a while. The only way I come across that rag is when I go see my doctor/dentist. It has come down to using shock value to keep the few number of subscibers(mostly dimlibs)happy. Mizz(I don’t think she would like Mrs.)Grumet not only suffers from Debra Messing disease(noboobitis) but she is also a mentally derranged liberal looney. Now don’t get me wrong. My wife breast fed all of our children. She did however do it at home and if we were out we had the milk in bottles. These femanazis are selfish creeps with their in your face tactics. It figures that Grumet was breast fed until the age of 6 by her mom. Like nutty mother like nutty daughter. I do agree with you Skunky about Michelle Malikin. She is a pitbull when dealing with leftist bufoonery but some of her positions in recent years have left me wondering. Just like Laura Ingraham and recently Ann Coulter with her slobbering love for Chris(bigboy)Christy and Mitt Happens. Are these ladies really conservative or just faking it. Not to hawk another person’s website but yesterday Lucianne.com had a very funny alteration of the Time mag cover. It had George Clooney’s face instead of Mizz Grumet’s and Obummer was the baby. Priceless.

Ken b on May 16, 2012 at 11:56 am

I’m surprised that, DS should have to be told this, but, there’s nothing here to splash across a national circulation; all of this is merely more of “the mommy wars”; kind of comical, . . . a bru-ha-ha concerning motherhood. Sure—as TIME showcases—always, there will the in-your-face types, . . . just ignore ‘em, . . . maybe they’ll grow up, . . . if decency can be gotten by osmosis, . .. women have been a long time doing motherly things; I think that, most probably, the real mothers will continue in triumph, . . . if, even in spite of a bad influence such as TIME, . . .

But, you knock MM: Even if, the USA contingent who are of Asian extraction, did not constitute a racial minority, I don’t know why she should be forbidden styling herself as “colored”; her skin tone is a darker hue, . . . so what?

But more broadly and in actuality, whatever the race, very often, poor people are “colored” in their person and rights, . . . and for instant example, some one from the state served papers on me in OHSU hospital, and had a hearing that afternoon, taking our children; and I have no arrest record; my rights were merely “colored” in an inability to respond; almost the same thing occurred in my dad’s family, . . . I was there, . . . Maybe, in some contexts, MM feels that, by others, her rights are correctly held as “colored”, . . .

But yeah, on the mommy wars, just anything t’get some state workers on the job, . . . all of them need a pay-check, too—don’t they?

PhillipGaley on May 16, 2012 at 12:22 pm

    But yeah, sometimes, I think, we need a good war, . . . take our minds off this kind of mere stuff, . . . breasts and nursing, . . . good gosh, . . . what will they think up, next, . . .

    PhillipGaley on May 16, 2012 at 12:29 pm

The breatfeeding whores in Leleche League are out to get Nestle, et. al., and the use of baby formula. This has been going on for 30 some years that I know of.

It is a womans choice to use her breasts or use baby formula.

Breastfeeding nazis at work to get women to obey their call to action. Forward, like Obama says.

These progressive women and some men will push their goofy agenda to only breast feed, breast feed in public and now on the cover of a loser mag.

Panhandle on May 16, 2012 at 12:38 pm

Apparently, no one was reading Time which is exactly why the editors published it. It was like dumping gasoline all over a simmering fire and then throwing a match on it. We all know what you get. A hell of an explosion. And we all proved we were lemmings. Meanwhile, all of the marketing executives and editors are high fiving each other backstage. I talk about the end of my role as a lemming here:
http://www.themommypsychologist.com/2012/05/11/have-you-seen-enough-of-jamie-grumet-yet/

The Mommy Psychologist on May 16, 2012 at 1:08 pm

I have never had an issue with a woman breastfeeding in public, but the PROPER & POLITE way to do it is with a shawl covering baby’s head & her breast. If nursing women did that, I don’t think that anyone would have a problem with it

The BIG problem that I have is the insane La Lechers and their “nursing coaches”. They come in after a woman just gave birth and is tired and unsure about being a mother.
I remember that this happened to my sister with her 1st baby. She just wasn’t producing milk for some reason and the nurse made her feel like a failure as a mother for having to go to formula.
With her 2nd baby, she produced milk and nursed just fine for 6 months.

Breast feeding is the best for the baby, but I agree with many of you that nurses and other women shouldn’t make new mothers feel bad if they have problems or can’t breastfeed for some reason.

jimmyPx on May 16, 2012 at 1:10 pm

Oh and with Mayim Bialik & Jamie Grument, let’s all be honest and the guys in their marriage are the wives !!!

I am all for husbands helping their wives with the kids and helping as much as possible. BUT it has always been the female who bears and mainly raises the young. They are equipped for it physically, emotionally, and psychologically. I also don’t think that is is healthy to have a child grow up and not have strong MALE father in their life. Why do so many kids from single Mom households go off the rails in their teens ??? Maybe because teens especially needing a Dad to guide them and “correct” them when they mess up ??

I really believe that 90% of our problems in this society are caused by the destruction of the family and the total decimation of gender roles for males and females. You can’t take thousands of years of tradition and success and throw it out the window in the 1960s and not expect repercussions.

Our society today is the result and this loonet coparenting thing is a symptom.

jimmyPx on May 16, 2012 at 1:20 pm

I think that the cover pic would be really cool if the chair the kid was standing on was photoshopped out.

Grumet has a nice body. Too bad for her male partner that she thinks breasts are not sexual objects. She’s sounds and acts like a moron.

FrenchKiss on May 16, 2012 at 1:56 pm

Hobbit women stop breast feeding as soon as baby hobbits get their first teeth.
For hobbits this occurs at about 12-16 months. Breastfeeding beyond that time is considered reckless and could be painful for the mother.
These human women are weird.

BilboBaggins on May 16, 2012 at 2:20 pm

Not only have I had to endure a woman breast feeding her child on a plane with no cover up, but the kid fell asleep in mid- feed and was open to view for almost 2 hours. But that wasn’t as bad as the woman who changed her baby’s diaper in the seat next to me. The flight attendants did NOTHING! It is appalling.

Carin maher on May 16, 2012 at 2:47 pm

Debbie, I completely agree with your post.

Just because something is natural, it doesn’t mean it should be done in public for all to see. These militant nursers go on about how breasts are not sexual, and that they’re only for feeding babies. If that was the case, then why is it considered in most societies immodest for women to go around topless? If female breasts are completely non-sexual, then why are they all over men’s dirty magazines? Is it that young boys have been conditioned by the “evil patriarchy” to be sexually attracted women’s breasts? (Sarcasm intended)

So the fact that breastfeeding is natural still doesn’t mean that women shouldn’t try to cover up. After all, the making of the baby is also natural. Yet that’s not done in the open either.

Here’s a link to what I posted about the “Time” cover:

http://www.theurbangrind.net/?p=5831

Zelda on May 16, 2012 at 2:49 pm

    In the Garden Of Eden, nudity was the natural human condition. There was nothing shameful about it.

    It became a source of shame only when human beings realized the moral and ethical implications of their nakedness – and the Biblical story goes on to make the point that G-d made clothes for them.

    In certain primitive societies, life is still like in Eden and I suppose that’s why its safe for kids to watch those PBS nature shows.

    But in civilized societies, a naked body conveys a very different message. That is why we expect people to conceal themselves not to hide the human form but to show that we imitate G-d, whose true essence is hidden from view. And in love-making that essence is revealed between the lovers.

    This is different from porn that commercializes and detracts from the holiness of the human body. When religious people insist on modesty, its not that they hate what G-d created, its just there is an appropriate time and place when the glories of the flesh can be made manifest.

    The Left insists we are like animals and there is nothing special about Man. Those who are religious believe Man, who was created in G-d’s image is special and our behavior reflects this uniqueness.

    And the innocence that once accompanied us in the Garden Of Eden is lost forever and paradise upon this earth, can never be truly regained.

    NormanF on May 17, 2012 at 10:04 am

Im not even going to argue with any of you about this just know you are all idiots to think there is anything wrong with full time nursing.

Danielle on May 16, 2012 at 2:55 pm

    Bullsh Danielle! You ain’t gonna say a thing because you know what you are trumpeting is either perverted, exhibitionist or strange but because you wanna do it and damn it, we all must watch.

    Whats a matter…if you believe in something you ought to be able to defend it. I smell “special treatment”.

    And SG, I reckon it should go without saying that most people do NOT get upset at public breast-feeding IF it is done discreetly. Those of us who value modesty and other’s privacy even look away out of respect. (I was in Panera last weekend and was relieved when a Mum had a cover and did it discreetly without ANYTHING showing. I didn’t care once that was established).

    Oh, and can I say something about filthy bathrooms? If the American public didn’t treat “public” bathrooms like a dumpster, perhaps they would not be so dirty. But because people act like animals when something is not theirs, we have to put up with filth.

    Skunky on May 16, 2012 at 5:50 pm

      Skunky girlfriend you rock. I couldn’t have said it better myself.

      Ken b on May 16, 2012 at 11:00 pm

Is the issue people are having with breast feeding in public all together, or only those who do so in full exposure? I breast fed til my child was about 15 months, and on a couple rare occasions did so in public. (she was much younger than 15 months those few times, 3-7 mos) I however, made it as inconspicuous as possible. I wore a double layered nursing shirt where the under layer still covered everything when I lifted up the top layer, and I used a blanket or cover that completely covered everything else. I also would try to find the most inconspicuous out of the way location (except a public bathroom, that’s just filthy) from start to finish absolutely no skin was viewed by the public, and I’d say most people were probably not even aware of what was going on, since I made sure to have the cover in place before I even picked up the baby. I do not have a problem with people breast feeding in public because they are feeding their child, and no one should have to sit in a nasty public waste room to eat. However, I do agree it is rude and selfish to be waving your boobs around when there are specialty clothing and covers made just for breast feeding so that your not showing everyone your goods. I think in this case both ends if the spectrum are wrong. Those who think you should just be able to strip off your top and full frontal, and those who think a woman should not breast feed in public at all, regardless of how covered, careful and modest she is. Breast feeding women do have other things to do outside the home, and as long as they are considerate of those around them and use a cover instead of advertising it, then there shouldn’t be an issue. I was showing less skin than half the women walking around spilling out of their tops on the few times I had to nurse in public. My friend was in Starbucks one occasion and was in a back corner nursing her one month old, completely covered by a large blanket to where you couldn’t even see an outline of her or the baby below her neckline where she had the blanket draped. She placed the baby under the blanket before even opening her top, so nothing was seen. A women told her (while wearing a tube top showing ample amounts of cleavage) that she should go in the bathroom. My friend asked her if she would like to go sit in a public bathroom and drink her coffee while other people took a sh!t in the stall next to her. I think most people would say no, and there is nothing wrong with the way she went about nursing. If she had opened her top and plopped out one of her breasts for everyone to see and then proceeded to nurse uncovered, then I would agree that was inappropriate.

SG on May 16, 2012 at 4:36 pm

Michelle Malkin has her iews and you have yours. Not all conservatives have to fall in line with your line of thinking. I like Michelle and believe she has one a lot for conservatism including exposing Onama for whom he really I’d.

Mark D on May 17, 2012 at 12:50 am

Have you ever breastfed a child? Doesn’t sound like it. I don’t want people seeing my boobs as much as they don’t want to see them but sometimes covering up isn’t an option…like when they learn to grab and pull everything out of their way. I believe breastfeeding really isn’t a feminist thing but a choice to give your baby the best head start. I think you sound very ignorant. Sure the Time magazine was shocking, that’s what it was supposed to be. No one goes around feeding their child like this…Maybe have a child a breastfeed and then we can talk, till then keep your mouth shut on the topic because you sound like an idiot!

Morgan Dixon on May 17, 2012 at 8:26 am

    I wish I could NOT nurse in public, alas my baby won’t take a bottle and he also rips of any covers. (I still try though) BUT I would never nurse in the bathroom–it is so gross. This “blog” proves that “conservatives” are hypocrites, perverted and disgusting.

    merry on May 18, 2012 at 2:09 pm

SO I wasnt really gonna get into this but all these comments are so stupid. For one nursing a baby of any age 1-6 is not molesting them. Have any of you commenting even had kids or breastfed probably not. I have never met a women that just pulls her whole damn boob out to nurse unless at home in private. We dont want you to see them just about as much as you want to see them. So babies like to play while they nurse and so a blanket over them is a dead give away to what they are doing and you see way more nip while the baby is ripping that blanket off and laughing because you are getting upset about it. to layering is the breastfeeding mothers best friend. pull tank top down underneith get baby ready then shirt up enough to latch and very little skin is shown. As for as age goes there is nothing dirty about feeding a child the biological way they are ment to be fed. Everyone is so up in arms that it is the mother wanting to continue nursing but have any of you ever forced a child to nurse. It is not easy and impossible and to take a picture at the same time yeah freaking right. My son lets me know when he is done or is not hungry he TURNS his head away thats when he gets put down and he plays some more till he is ready to nusre. What about a toddler if they are not breastfeeding you think they would let you try. HA good luck with that. My daughter would look at me like I was crazy if I even asked her then run away. Saying she is molesting him is just stupid it is obvious they are both wanting to nurse still. I bet at home they only nurse before bed, when he wakes up, or when he asks which is usually when they are scared and need some comfort for a minute. He is eating solid food and drinks out of a cup. That is how a normal toddler nurses. To say it is not natural is just ignorant look at some of our closest relatives chimps they nurse after their young grow teeth and are able to eat solid food because they nurse until their young is ready to wean just like how we are supposed to. Yes maybe it is not as important as it used to be or as it is in third world countries, but look at how many people are obese and sick from cancer and everything else now a days. This is the most true right here in the USA and we wonder why. Maybe because we are starting our kids off on the wrong foot and then worrying about them growing up faster than they should. No more recess in school they need to meet milestones faster than their neighbors kid smarter than everyone else. Maybe if we looked at these kids as babies still which they are breastfeeding then would nt be such a problem.

(sorry for the runon mess I am on my phone and NAKing at the same time.)

Danielle on May 17, 2012 at 8:13 pm

Just wait until that boy grows up and his peers find that Time cover. He will never live that down.

Chana on May 18, 2012 at 4:06 pm

The best way to deal with a woman who breastfeeds in public is to stand in front of her and grin like a lech.
Better yet, get a group of guys to jojn you.
Stand around her and bob your heads up and down while saying things like: “….Cool….” and “….Oh, yeahhhhh….”

guitarguy on May 19, 2012 at 3:30 pm

Although attachment parenting has been controversial, the issue of whether mothers should breastfeed their children the first six months after birth (if they can, and want to) isn’t disputed by health professionals. Another big issue related to this is hospitals giving out free infant formula samples to new mothers. This practice discourages breastfeeding and costs mothers more in the end because the brands are more expensive, and mothers tend to stick with them. Hospitals should be concerning themselves with public health, not corporate profits.

http://action.citizen.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=10062

Dana on May 21, 2012 at 2:32 pm

That magazine cover is so disgusting, and with sickening, incestuous sexual overtures. Our culture has really gone to hell.

Timmy on August 23, 2012 at 12:44 am

It is appropriate time to make some plans for the future and it’s time to be happy.
I’ve read this post and if I could I wish to suggest you few interesting
things or advice. Maybe you can write next articles referring to this
article. I wish to read even more things about it!

?? ???? ?? on December 7, 2013 at 6:07 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field