Posting photos of nursing babies online

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-08-2001
Posting photos of nursing babies online
1029
Wed, 09-05-2007 - 10:52am

On another board, a poster has a long siggy that includes a slideshow of nursing babies from her playgroup. Another poster took offense at it and there has been quite the debate over the appropriateness of the siggy. I posted a message inviting people here to discuss that issue, and I hope that one of the posters from that particular playgroup comes here, at least so we can see what the siggy looks like. I'm having a hard time forming coherent thoughts today, LOL! So don't worry if I don't come back to debate the issue with you, I'm trying to get out of the office so I can go home & sleep.


As "Linda Richmond" (aka Mike Myers) from SNL would say, "talk amongst yourselves."

Mary


Mom to Kevin 11/04/2003


CL, Breast vs. Bottle Debate

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2004
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 10:53am

Post #32 to this thread? It only says "thanks". I checked, LOL! I'm not sure what you mean about it.

ETA: I think you meant #632. Maybe the difference was the link to urbandictionary? Whatever the reason, I'm glad to see a reduction in that kind of language however it occurs.




Edited 9/9/2007 11:00 am ET by thistlemchays
Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 10:57am

>>I dismiss the whole "Formula companies are evil because they advertise" argument also.<<

IMO placing corporate profit ahead of infant lives IS evil.

Article by a former Nestle rep in Pakistan.
http://www.supportaamirraza.org/mycause.htm
(Includes heart wrenching photo of Pakistani twins)

>>The worldwide decline in breastfeeding and the subsequent increase of artificial feeding with infant formula is an issue of major public concern. International criticism of the unethical marketing practices by the infant formula industry led to the development of the World Health Organization’s International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes in 1981 and the subsequent relevant resolutions of the World Health Assembly. The International Code is designed to curb the marketing of infant formulas and related products in order to protect breastfeeding. Despite this, infant food manufacturers continue to promote their products... It is estimated that over 1.5 million children die annually and many millions are malnourished because they were not breastfed.<<
http://www.infactcanada.ca/

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 11:07am
Yeah, I meant #632, something about "sometimes the term fits". Maybe iV only delete them when a violation is reported?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2004
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 11:12am
That could be it. I really don't know! Maybe a CM happened to come by. I'm a CL on another board, but I really have no idea how that stuff works.
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Lilypie 2nd Birthday Ticker








Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 1:00pm

"BTW, it was used without problems in the "Admit" thread"

Actually, I believe someone pointed out in that thread that the term was considered inappropriate.

"I posted the definition of the term, and thought that in itself proved my point. I am not very fond of the N word myself, but sometimes it suits."

How does it suit? BTW, I went back to look at the link again, and your post was deleted.

When breastfeeders start discriminating against formula feeders, denying them basic rights and freedoms, segregating them and killing them, blowing up formula factories or gunning down women when they enter the formula aisle... then it might be appropriate.

Promoting, educating and supporting women throught breastfeeding is hardly appropriate.

Cathie

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2004
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 1:43pm

<<>>

Very well said, Cathie.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Lilypie 2nd Birthday Ticker








Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-05-2007
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 1:50pm

I reviewed these things, and I decided to first of all check it against ingredient lists on formula, and then check the source of the information. I checked this list against 3 different kinds of formula, and each only had 2 or 3 of these things in it, or less. The "water, may contain fluoride" depends completely on the parent. I've never actually seen anyone make formula with tap water, but I recognize that's purely anecdotal. The MSG claim is interesting, but I doubt it completely.

>>Corn syrup: Contains glucose. Mother's milk contains lactose as the main carbohydrate. Not all brands of formula contain lactose.<<

This sentence is what makes me think the entire article is bull. Lactose contains glucose. Glucose is good, not bad. Lactose is a disaccharide, half of which is glucose, the other half is galactose. It makes me wonder about the rest of the article... if a supposed pediatrician tried to pretend that glucose is a bad thing, how accurate is anything else she said? Wouldn't she have said the corn syrup contains *fructose*?

On top of that, her article references no peer reviewed studies, or really, any sources whatsoever. I'm not saying that this stuff definitely isn't true, only that I can't agree that this article is reliable in any way. I have access through my school to peer reviewed studies, I'm going to try and find info there. (I'm actually going to look for proof that formula is harmful.)

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-22-2004
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 1:56pm

I have gone through 481 posts and have not found my reason why I don't like the pictures.

I would like to say that I am not offended by it, rather I just don't like it. I really don't see the point to the pics of nursing babies. If there is a picture of a baby, I want to be able to see the baby, not obscured by the boob (I forced myself to look at all of the pics and many are obscured by the boob). On the other side of this if there is a picture of a boob, my husband doesn't want to see it obscured by the baby (I made him look at it too, and those were his comments...pig, yes he can be!!!). I personally would never contribute to a phototag like this one because I would not want my child to be at all included with the negativity that has come from it (also because I ff so that would be kind of weird to have a dried up boob in my kids mouth). I would never really have complained about this tag, as when it comes up I just jump by it, but personally I don't really care for it. I also realize that there are tags with the babies separate from the breastfeeding one, which I enjoy because I get to see all of the cute babies! I would also not enjoy looking at babies with bottles in their mouth, due to the bottle obscuring the baby.

My other issue with this tag is the lack of modesty for a few of the pictures. Most of them are done well and tasteful, however some of them are just letting it all hang out. A pp mentioned that the only way to get this view would be to crane your neck while someone else was bf (not an exact quote, as I don't feel like looking for it...so sorry if a bit misquoted). I have to agree that the angle of these shots does tend to show a bit more than if it were irl. However, I do not think it entirely inappropriate because this is posted on a message board for pregnant women and mommies, and if you are comfortable enough with your body to show that much skin then go ahead, and I will avert my eyes. However, if this entire lack of modesty was shown while nip that would be a different story. I do not think that a baby should have to have a blanket over their head or go in a bathroom to eat, however I believe that the mother should show as much modesty as possible while still making it a comfortable and enjoyable experience for mother and child without drawing unnecessary negative attention, thus ruining the experience for mother and baby. I believe that this mutual respect for others while still providing comfort, nutrition and a positive bonding experience with your child will do a lot to further the cause of nursing mothers.

Kerri

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-08-2006
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 2:34pm

<>


Exactly!


Pattie


Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
  

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Sun, 09-09-2007 - 2:35pm

"I would like to say that I am not offended by it, rather I just don't like it."

Your perrogative.

"I really don't see the point to the pics of nursing babies. If there is a picture of a baby, I want to be able to see the baby, not obscured by the boob (I forced myself to look at all of the pics and many are obscured by the boob). On the other side of this if there is a picture of a boob, my husband doesn't want to see it obscured by the baby (I made him look at it too, and those were his comments...pig, yes he can be!!!). "

I don't think the point was to show simply a picture of a baby OR a picture of a boob. It was to show a baby nursing, and to do that you really need both in the picture. You looked at the baby - great! What did you see? I'll bet you didn't see the full face on view that you normally like in baby pictures, but did you look at the expression on these babies faces?? There was a commercial on TV (pampers perhaps) where they had a nursing baby and all DH caught was a glimpse. All that registered was the expression. And we rewound it to be sure - the expression that he saw belonged to a "nursing" baby. Have a look again.

The point to ME would be that is shows encouragement to other moms who might be wondering if they are alone still nursing their 7mo. Most babies by then are being bottle fed. These are babies who are starting to cut teeth, and many people still beleive you can't nurse a baby with teeth. It SHOWS you can and offers mutual support to those who are. It also normalizes the idea that 7mos still nurse. Like I said, most breastfeeding moms would be weaning now, maybe because they really don't know that there are normal babies still nursing.

"My other issue with this tag is the lack of modesty for a few of the pictures. "

Modesty is very subjective. I would never wear a bikini because of the lack of modesty it conveys, or even a low cut shirt. Perhaps *I* would not take a picture of myself nursing because of my own personal modesty issues. But these photos are all in good taste, and I personally don't have issues with other's people's confidence in their bodies simply because I lack.

"A pp mentioned that the only way to get this view would be to crane your neck while someone else was bf (not an exact quote, as I don't feel like looking for it...so sorry if a bit misquoted). I have to agree that the angle of these shots does tend to show a bit more than if it were irl."

I don't think pictures are always meant to show things as they would be head in IRL. That's the beauty of art. Showing something from another perspective is an ADVANTAGE of photography. In fact, this angle lets you see how YOUR baby would look at you if YOU were nursing. If you shoose to think of it that way, I guess.

"I believe that the mother should show as much modesty as possible while still making it a comfortable and enjoyable experience for mother and child without drawing unnecessary negative attention, thus ruining the experience for mother and baby. I"

While NIP, I think MOST mothers do. I've never seen an exhibitionist mom nursing her child in public. And like you mentioned, these photos are NOT from the same perspective as you would see IRL.

Cathie

Pages