Breastfeeding Mother Embarrassed on UA Flight
Mar 12, 2015, 9:27 pm
#46
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 816
True, but I don't think anyone here is suggesting otherwise. There are other 'natural' processes that us as humans will not object to other humans doing so far they are done discreetly or out of view like passing wind, relieving ones self, procreating etc.
I'm not endorsing the view that breast feeding should not be done in public, but rather pointing out the argument against it is not about its value to the baby or the oft quoted 'naturalness' of breast feeding.
I'm not endorsing the view that breast feeding should not be done in public, but rather pointing out the argument against it is not about its value to the baby or the oft quoted 'naturalness' of breast feeding.
Mar 12, 2015, 10:06 pm
#47
Join Date: Sep 2010
Programs: HHonors Diamond; My Mom's Favorite Kid
Posts: 3,929
Honestly I see teenage girls flash more boob in Wal-Mart than I see breast feeding mothers flash. The baby's head covers most of it. I get that people might feel uncomfortable but just look away. Smoking is incredibly offensive but I just turn and walk the other way. At least breast feeding doesn't cause cancer (studies show it actually reduces breast cancer in breast feeding mothers).
Anyone who thinks a baby should eat in a bathroom or under a cover needs to eat every meal like that for the rest of their lives. Covers are hot and actually can cause rebreathing if not thin enough. Many babies won't tolerate them one they figure out they can do something about it.
So I guess we breast feeders should let our babies starve and cry horrifically on a plane just so Pervy Pete (no offense to the non-prevy Pete's out there) can stare at us like a total creeper without seeing a little top or side boob.
Passengers and FA should worship the ground breast feeders walk on. The boobs have the power to fix all things. Hungry? Boob. Thirsty? Boob. Crying? Boob. Ouch-y? Boob. Sad? Boob. Angry? Boob. Tired? Boob. A breast fed baby will the be quietest, best behaved passenger on the flight when given unrestricted access to the boob.
Anyone who thinks a baby should eat in a bathroom or under a cover needs to eat every meal like that for the rest of their lives. Covers are hot and actually can cause rebreathing if not thin enough. Many babies won't tolerate them one they figure out they can do something about it.
So I guess we breast feeders should let our babies starve and cry horrifically on a plane just so Pervy Pete (no offense to the non-prevy Pete's out there) can stare at us like a total creeper without seeing a little top or side boob.
Passengers and FA should worship the ground breast feeders walk on. The boobs have the power to fix all things. Hungry? Boob. Thirsty? Boob. Crying? Boob. Ouch-y? Boob. Sad? Boob. Angry? Boob. Tired? Boob. A breast fed baby will the be quietest, best behaved passenger on the flight when given unrestricted access to the boob.
Mar 12, 2015, 10:55 pm
#48
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,187
True, but I don't think anyone here is suggesting otherwise. There are other 'natural' processes that us as humans will not object to other humans doing so far they are done discreetly or out of view like passing wind, relieving ones self, procreating etc.
I'm not endorsing the view that breast feeding should not be done in public, but rather pointing out the argument against it is not about its value to the baby or the oft quoted 'naturalness' of breast feeding.
I'm not endorsing the view that breast feeding should not be done in public, but rather pointing out the argument against it is not about its value to the baby or the oft quoted 'naturalness' of breast feeding.
Breasts - both male and female - are natural. Other than producing milk, there is no difference between a male and female breast. Indeed, many men have larger breasts than many women. And the breast is not a sexual organ either, something recognized by many courts.
More to the point why should any man tell any woman how she ought behave, either in feeding or dressing? And why should any FA be terse to a passenger, male or female, who is making no disturbance - she wasn't yelling, punching her fellow passengers, trying to open the door, etc?
Only in Victorian America are we so obsessed with hiding the dangerous human body.
Mar 13, 2015, 7:37 am
#49
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: EWR
Programs: AA, Delta, NWA,HHonors, Hyatt BF
Posts: 1,762
Wow, talk about stereotyped gendered assumptions creeping into one's communications... It was clearly stated that the FA was male and now we have gendered her into being "her."
So much talk about the naturalness of breast feeding. Which is true, but it misses the real point: why should the FA (or any person) react negatively to the sight of a female breast as if it is something to be feared.
Breasts - both male and female - are natural. Other than producing milk, there is no difference between a male and female breast. Indeed, many men have larger breasts than many women. And the breast is not a sexual organ either, something recognized by many courts.
More to the point why should any man tell any woman how she ought behave, either in feeding or dressing? And why should any FA be terse to a passenger, male or female, who is making no disturbance - she wasn't yelling, punching her fellow passengers, trying to open the door, etc?
Only in Victorian America are we so obsessed with hiding the dangerous human body.
So much talk about the naturalness of breast feeding. Which is true, but it misses the real point: why should the FA (or any person) react negatively to the sight of a female breast as if it is something to be feared.
Breasts - both male and female - are natural. Other than producing milk, there is no difference between a male and female breast. Indeed, many men have larger breasts than many women. And the breast is not a sexual organ either, something recognized by many courts.
More to the point why should any man tell any woman how she ought behave, either in feeding or dressing? And why should any FA be terse to a passenger, male or female, who is making no disturbance - she wasn't yelling, punching her fellow passengers, trying to open the door, etc?
Only in Victorian America are we so obsessed with hiding the dangerous human body.
^^
Mar 13, 2015, 12:37 pm
#50
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,731
Passengers and FA should worship the ground breast feeders walk on. The boobs have the power to fix all things. Hungry? Boob. Thirsty? Boob. Crying? Boob. Ouch-y? Boob. Sad? Boob. Angry? Boob. Tired? Boob. A breast fed baby will the be quietest, best behaved passenger on the flight when given unrestricted access to the boob.
Mar 13, 2015, 5:18 pm
#52
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,187
Most notably, in New York State and Ontario, women generally have the right to not cover their breasts.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I92_0160.htm
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc...anlii1119.html
See http://gotopless.org/news.php?item.3.1 for other legal cases on the subject.
Those rulings only apply to state prohibition. An airline might well argue that it is not the state and that it can make its own rules regarding who it accommodates.
Mar 13, 2015, 9:41 pm
#54
Join Date: Sep 2010
Programs: HHonors Diamond; My Mom's Favorite Kid
Posts: 3,929
And, seriously, the amount boob that shows when you are breast feeding a baby is often less than you see on women with low cut tops. You'd have to be standing right over a women to see much of anything as the baby's had covers all but the top inch or so of breast. I have tops and formal dresses that show more boob than I do when feeding the kiddo.
No. The problem is the breasts aren't being used in a sexual way and that offends people because they only see breasts as objects of sex. This is because entire generations have never seen breast feeding. Until very recently breast feeding is what poor people did. Now breast feeding is becoming mainstream. My son's generation will be much more open to nursing in public and breasts not being sex objects because they will have seen breast feeding modeled their entire lives.
Mar 14, 2015, 5:59 am
#55
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,042
It is true that many people might not really be comfortable with it but they mind their own business. Mostly public breast feeding makes the news when somebody goes to an extreme. Either the mother is militantly making a show to force a reaction, or on the other side some busybody makes an issue of it.
Mar 14, 2015, 7:43 am
#56
Join Date: Sep 2010
Programs: HHonors Diamond; My Mom's Favorite Kid
Posts: 3,929
It is true that many people might not really be comfortable with it but they mind their own business. Mostly public breast feeding makes the news when somebody goes to an extreme. Either the mother is militantly making a show to force a reaction, or on the other side some busybody makes an issue of it.
Mar 14, 2015, 10:47 am
#58
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: msp
Programs: DL Plat, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 798
Passengers and FA should worship the ground breast feeders walk on. The boobs have the power to fix all things. Hungry? Boob. Thirsty? Boob. Crying? Boob. Ouch-y? Boob. Sad? Boob. Angry? Boob. Tired? Boob. A breast fed baby will the be quietest, best behaved passenger on the flight when given unrestricted access to the boob.
Mar 14, 2015, 11:12 am
#60
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,735
Most woman are able to accomplish it with an open button or two, a lifted shirt hem, a discreet slit in the shirt or similar accommodation. Maybe you get the occasional "flaunter" where an observer (and why were you watching, anyway?) could briefly see the whole nipple area, but generally that only happens when the baby has difficulty latching on, and sticking a blanket over the kid's head only makes the problem worse.
Breast feeding is an activity now protected by law in many places. Don't like that? Too bad for you, 'cause that legal protection shows your claim "not considered to be acceptable" to be the worthless bias it really is.