NationStates Jolt Archive

I pretty much agree with Jocabia. You can't help but roll your eyes. I feel like these people are sitting on their couches all day, watching MTV going uh...huh-uh. They said boob. Yeah-yeah!

It's ridiculous.

I admit, seeing a breast is seeing a breast. When a woman's breastfeeding, from what I've seen, her nipple hardens and elongates. But I really have a hard time getting my jollies watching some woman with her kid in her hand plop down on a bench and expose her breast. It's not like she's stroking and licking it.

The thing that disturbed me, however, is this:

"There have been other measures to promote breast-feeding: In December, for example, Massachusetts banned hospitals from giving new mothers gift bags with free infant formula, a practice opponents said swayed some women away from nursing."

Who do they really think they are? My wife can't produce milk. So it's criminal to give her formula on her way out of the hospital?:rolleyes:

And the next time someone orders cream for their coffee we shouldn't be surprised to see the waitress walk a cow to the table and squirt some straight from the teat. No, people at restaurants want their food prepared 'before' it is brought to the table. They want the chicken killed and cooked elsewhere, they want the cow milked at the barn. More than just paying for food, when people pay a restaurant, particularly a dress-up nice one, they are paying for atmosphere and service as much as everything else.

It doesn't matter how natural it is. Some people think you shouldn't belch a big ol' burp at the table. So when you are eating with them, you shouldn't do it. The same goes for passing gas and undressing.

(again though, I don't have a problem with breastfeeding in public, and yet even I can see that some people might object if one of the a bridesmaids at a wedding covered a baby over her breast while everyone else was taking pictures and eating their dinners and tapping their silly champaign glasses... Breastfeeding can be distracting and it does affect other people's 'atmosphere.' At some point, privacy and seclusion are simply good manners of a breastfeeding mother.)

Manners shouldn't be mandatory.

I pretty much agree with Jocabia. You can't help but roll your eyes. I feel like these people are sitting on their couches all day, watching MTV going uh...huh-uh. They said boob. Yeah-yeah!

It's ridiculous.

I admit, seeing a breast is seeing a breast. When a woman's breastfeeding, from what I've seen, her nipple hardens and elongates. But I really have a hard time getting my jollies watching some woman with her kid in her hand plop down on a bench and expose her breast. It's not like she's stroking and licking it.

The thing that disturbed me, however, is this:

"There have been other measures to promote breast-feeding: In December, for example, Massachusetts banned hospitals from giving new mothers gift bags with free infant formula, a practice opponents said swayed some women away from nursing."

Who do they really think they are? My wife can't produce milk. So it's criminal to give her formula on her way out of the hospital?:rolleyes:

when I was in the hospital with my first child, I didn't get the "formula diaper bag" because I had told them I was going to nurse, I got a diaperbag, with books about breastfeeding, and instead of the formula can, I got a little cooler for "pumped milk"

when I had my second child I was on meds that passed through my milk, so I was unable to nurse, I got the formula bag, and the Le Leche League lady came in and tried to "guilt me into breastfeeding" she didn't seem to understand my choices

1) don't take my medicine, have seizures, put baby in danger
2) take my medicine, breastfeed, put baby in danger
3) take my medicine, formula feed, safe baby, safe mom.

I think 3 was the right option.

And the next time someone orders cream for their coffee we shouldn't be surprised to see the waitress walk a cow to the table and squirt some straight from the teat. No, people at restaurants want their food prepared 'before' it is brought to the table. They want the chicken killed and cooked elsewhere, they want the cow milked at the barn. More than just paying for food, when people pay a restaurant, particularly a dress-up nice one, they are paying for atmosphere and service as much as everything else.

It doesn't matter how natural it is. Some people think you shouldn't belch a big ol' burp at the table. So when you are eating with them, you shouldn't do it. The same goes for passing gas and undressing.

(again though, I don't have a problem with breastfeeding in public, and yet even I can see that some people might object if one of the a bridesmaids at a wedding covered a baby over her breast while everyone else was taking pictures and eating their dinners and tapping their silly champaign glasses... Breastfeeding can be distracting and it does affect other people's 'atmosphere.' At some point, privacy and seclusion are simply good manners of a breastfeeding mother.)
your cow comparison is not a very good one.

Why would you limit a mother's choice on how to feed her child when it doesn't directly affect you at all no matter what the outcome of her decision is?

when I was in the hospital with my first child, I didn't get the "formula diaper bag" because I had told them I was going to nurse, I got a diaperbag, with books about breastfeeding, and instead of the formula can, I got a little cooler for "pumped milk"

when I had my second child I was on meds that passed through my milk, so I was unable to nurse, I got the formula bag, and the Le Leche League lady came in and tried to "guilt me into breastfeeding" she didn't seem to understand my choices

1) don't take my medicine, have seizures, put baby in danger
2) take my medicine, breastfeed, put baby in danger
3) take my medicine, formula feed, safe baby, safe mom.

I think 3 was the right option.

Fanatics rarely see others' points of view. That's what makes them so charming to discuss things with.

I'm gonna make like a puddle and be shallow.

Hot chicks should, but no one ugly or over 35.

I'm gonna make like a puddle and be shallow.

Hot chicks should, but no one ugly or over 35.
LOL! Only hot chicks that recently had babies should breastfeed. Let's get the legislation written up.

And the next time someone orders cream for their coffee we shouldn't be surprised to see the waitress walk a cow to the table and squirt some straight from the teat. No, people at restaurants want their food prepared 'before' it is brought to the table. They want the chicken killed and cooked elsewhere, they want the cow milked at the barn. More than just paying for food, when people pay a restaurant, particularly a dress-up nice one, they are paying for atmosphere and service as much as everything else.

It doesn't matter how natural it is. Some people think you shouldn't belch a big ol' burp at the table. So when you are eating with them, you shouldn't do it. The same goes for passing gas and undressing.

(again though, I don't have a problem with breastfeeding in public, and yet even I can see that some people might object if one of the a bridesmaids at a wedding covered a baby over her breast while everyone else was taking pictures and eating their dinners and tapping their silly champaign glasses... Breastfeeding can be distracting and it does affect other people's 'atmosphere.' At some point, privacy and seclusion are simply good manners of a breastfeeding mother.)

Yeah, because that's the exact same thing. Your arguments get more desperate with every post. Quick question, do you drink milk straight from the teat of a cow? Nope. Not even a remotely close comparison.

Meanwhile, I'll encourage women not to hide while they feed their infants when you start doing it. Deal?

...
your cow comparison is not a very good one.

Why, it's exactly the same thing. Mammary gland used for consumption at the table in a restaurant.

...
Why would you limit a mother's choice on how to feed her child when it doesn't directly affect you at all no matter what the outcome of her decision is?

Why would I limit it? Because other people find it rude, that's enough. You do it anyway simply to spite them and you make excuses for it to 'make a point.' How does that help? Did they change their minds after seeing the error of their ways? Probably not.

If I belch at the table, every single time, will it become acceptable, or will the objectors simply give up complaining and think of me as permanent slob and try not to eat with me anymore... If all I want is to 'get away’ with whatever objectionable behavior I want then I will succeed. If I want to become a part of civilized society it will require a minimal amount of effort on my part to behave in a socially acceptable manner. We call it courtesy, we use it with words like “Please” and “Thank you.”

Yeah, because that's the exact same thing. Your arguments get more desperate with every post. Quick question, do you drink milk straight from the teat of a cow? Nope. Not even a remotely close comparison.

Obviously you've never lived on a family farm...

Why, it's exactly the same thing. Mammary gland used for consumption at the table in a restaurant.
it's not the exact same thing, and you know it.



Why would I limit it? Because other people find it rude, that's enough. You do it anyway simply to spite them and you make excuses for it to 'make a point.' How does that help? Did they change their minds after seeing the error of their ways? Probably not.

If I belch at the table, every single time, will it become acceptable, or will the objectors simply give up complaining and think of me as permanent slob and try not to eat with me anymore... If all I want is to 'get away’ with whatever objectionable behavior I want then I will succeed. If I want to become a part of civilized society it will require a minimal amount of effort on my part to behave in a socially acceptable manner. We call it courtesy, we use it with words like “Please” and “Thank you.”
some people find it rude that I as a woman don't walk around in a Burka, should I wear one of those too? what? it's not more extreme than asking a woman not to feed her child.

Why, it's exactly the same thing. Mammary gland used for consumption at the table in a restaurant.



Are you saying having a woman at the table is the same thing as bringing in a heiffer? I think I'd disagree.

...
some people find it rude that I as a woman don't walk around in a Burka, should I wear one of those too? what? it's not more extreme than asking a woman not to feed her child.

Depends on what society/community you choose to go too/live in. At a nude beach club we don't have to wear any clothes at all. But if I walk into a Synagogue they will expect me to be dressed AND cover my head... According to your argument I shouldn’t have to succumb to this irrational “peer pressure” that serves no purpose that I would be well within my right to just tell them to suck it up, I'll dress the way I want to wherever I go.


[p.s., the teat at the table is the same, how is it not?]

Obviously you've never lived on a family farm...

You make assumptions that don't hold up to reality. Are you actually trying to claiming that you drink milk straight from the teat? Because we aren't talking about pumping here. We are talking about a breastfeeding infant. When was the last time you had a cow nipplin in your mouth?

Are you saying having a woman at the table is the same thing as bringing in a heiffer? I think I'd disagree.

Heifers don't have to be dirty you know, they can be washed.

You make assumptions that don't hold up to reality. Are you actually trying to claiming that you drink milk straight from the teat? Because we aren't talking about pumping here. We are talking about a breastfeeding infant. When was the last time you had a cow nipplin in your mouth?

You certainly don't see it in restaurants, so why should the baby be allowed to do it?

When's the last time you had a real argument?

Depends on what society/community you choose to go too/live in. At a nude beach club we don't have to wear any clothes at all. But if I walk into a Synagogue they will expect me to be dressed AND cover my head... According to your argument I shouldn’t have to succumb to this irrational “peer pressure” that serves no purpose that I would be well within my right to just tell them to suck it up, I'll dress the way I want to wherever I go.
I choose to live in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA where I am free to do as I wish as long as it's not against the law. Breastfeeding a child in public is 100% legal where I live, and hopefully always will be. There is no accounting for what is "rude" and what is not when it comes down to it. I think it's rude for you to try to push your opinion of "what's acceptable" onto babies. (because lets be honest that's what you are trying to do)


[p.s., the teat at the table is the same, how is it not?]
other than people don't drink straight from the cow, the fact that barn yard animals are not allowed in restraunts due to health code violations, or the fact that women and children aren't cows?
hmm.......

Heifers don't have to be dirty you know, they can be washed.
Still didnt' answer the question. Huh.

Why, it's exactly the same thing. Mammary gland used for consumption at the table in a restaurant.

Your comparison of women to livestock is insulting. The cow would not be permitted in the restaurant regardless of whether one nursed from it or not. Assuredly that is not the case with the woman.

Why would I limit it? Because other people find it rude, that's enough. You do it anyway simply to spite them and you make excuses for it to 'make a point.' How does that help? Did they change their minds after seeing the error of their ways? Probably not.

Not to spite them. To feed the baby. The fact that you can't understand that a woman's choice to feed or not feed her baby is not based on some ridiculous idea that she's going to teach everyone a lesson is sad. There is no grand plan to change the world when a woman feeds her infant. The baby is hungry. She feeds it. End of plan. Your attempts to insert some political goal into simply exposes your inability to find anything wrong with the ACTUAL event. Try making an argument without the strawman or admit you can't.


If I belch at the table, every single time, will it become acceptable, or will the objectors simply give up complaining and think of me as permanent slob and try not to eat with me anymore... If all I want is to 'get away’ with whatever objectionable behavior I want then I will succeed. If I want to become a part of civilized society it will require a minimal amount of effort on my part to behave in a socially acceptable manner. We call it courtesy, we use it with words like “Please” and “Thank you.”

Being polite in those circumstances does not inconvenience people against their will. Being rude does. Then you flip it on breastfeeding, because in the case of breastfeeding, the child is the only who cannot exert its will and the last one you are considering. If your 'civilized society' is one that puts the immediate needs of the child last, it's not one I care to partake in.

I'd like to think that civilized societies should make the care of a helpless infant among the highest of priorities. At least in any form of civilization I'd like to be a part of.

There is some amount of ridiculous comments made in this thread. First off, I've already said, I'm personally in favor of letting women breast feed in public. I'm willing that they should be able to do it is restaurants, parks, airports, public buses etc., I don't care.

However, the argument that we shouldn't be considerate to other people's sensibilities is asinine.

I don't really think anyone said this. I think they just said that the right to feed one's child overrides it. One ought to be considerate of someone else's sensibilities, but not at the detriment to a child's health. One's right to be offended (and accomodated) ends at a child's right to be healthy.

We were told earlier in this thread that being told to feed their baby in a bathroom was unacceptable, it was 'gross.

Eating in a bathroom is gross. How can that be a question?
You want to know what is gross, a total lack of regard for other peoples feelings. One has choices. Is it a surprise that the baby was hungry while at the restaurant or other public place? No it is not, the baby can be fed before they are taken to the places that the mother does not want to use the restroom or unable to discreetly feed her child directly.

No mother should use a restroom to feed her child.

Rather, the mother has choices, she can pump beforehand or bring the pump and feed the baby from a bottle (breast milk is good for five hours at room temperature, and five days in the chill of a refrigerator or on ice) or simply feed it before arriving, or prepare a place in private in advance etc. The mother (as all other guardians of the infant have to do anyway) have 'choices' they can make to be responsible adults with children when they enter the communities that do not condone such behavior. We choose to enter and live in these communities after all, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

Many infants will not eat from a bottle. They refuse any nipple other than the breast. Your child might not have, but many breastfed infants just straight out will not eat from a bottle - and most will not take a bottle when they can smell their mother's presence. They know "the real thing" is present. Should those mothers be forced to not leave the house with their children? (Young breastfed infants eat as often as every 60 minutes - the average wait for a table in a chain restaurant is 30-45 minutes.)


This is not a question of “do other’s sensibilities override the needs of a starving child?” No, of course not, however this is not that question, this is simply a matter of some adults choosing to be considerate to others by using plain forethought and preparedness in advance or choosing to be jerks and forcing 'their opinions on everyone else’ simply because they want to.

So, the people who are offended by something completely natural get to have their way? Why do their sensibilities override those who disagree with them? Why should the prudes be accomodated when they are unwilling to accomodate the breastfeeding mother? (You know, by not looking???) Isn't that forcing their opinions on everyone else???


Disclaimer: I am not a breastfeeding mother. I am a 30 year old woman who has no children, My husband and I love kids, as long as they belong to other people. I am not self-righteously annoyed, I'm just annoyed.

I almost got kicked out of a restraunt for breastfeeding once, they called the cops and the cops told the manager that I was in the right, but I had to leave anyway, because he has the "right to refuse service to anyone"

oh, well.

it's a cute picture, I don't think it's harmful in anyway.

Sue the restaurant...

You certainly don't see it in restaurants, so why should the baby be allowed to do it?

When's the last time you had a real argument?

Oh, the irony. The person comparing women to cows suggests I have no argument.

You certainly don't see cows in restaurants, now do you? But you do see women and babies in restaurants? Now, do you have a comparison of the act that relates to reality, because thus far you've only equated it to an activity that NOBODY wants to do. We don't avoiding drinking straight from the cow because it's impolite. We don't do it because no one wants to. Find me even a modest group of people that are longing for drinking straight from the teat of a cow and then you MAY have an argument as long as you can show how a woman and cow are somehow comparable.

When calfs are sitting in restaurants hungry, I certainly will allow cows to feed them. That is an exact comparison to what women are doing when they feed their infants. Your comparison however has no relation to the actual situation we are discussion.

Oh, the irony. You certainly don't see cows in restaurants, now do you? But you do see women and babies in restaurants? Now, do you have a comparison of the act that relates to reality, because thus far you've only equated it to an activity that NOBODY wants to do. We don't avoiding drinking straight from the cow because it's impolite. We don't do it because no one wants to. Find me even a modest group of people that are longing for drinking straight from the teat of a cow and then you MAY have an argument as long as you can show how a woman and cow are somehow comparable.
but women and cows are the same, they are both stupid and fat right?

just kidding.

I choose to live in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA where I am free to do as I wish as long as it's not against the law. Breastfeeding a child in public is 100% legal where I live, and hopefully always will be. There is no accounting for what is "rude" and what is not when it comes down to it. I think it's rude for you to try to push your opinion of "what's acceptable" onto babies. (because lets be honest that's what you are trying to do)

I choose to live in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA where I am free to do as I wish as long as it's not against the law. Belching as loud as I can in public is 100% legal where I live, and hopefully always will be….

There is no accounting for what is "rude" and what is not when it comes down to it. I think it's rude for you to try to push your opinion of "what's acceptable" onto babies. (because lets be honest that's what you are trying to do)

No, they are trying to describing their opinion of what’s acceptable behavior and degrees of dress codes of the adults who take their children to public places, it’s about what they can and cannot do there and still be courteous of others or rude and selfish.

They're also used to attract mates. If they only had to feed a baby, they wouldn't be as large. In fact, they would probably hardly be there at all unless a woman was nursing, if our closest simian relatives are anythign to go by..

The only reason a woman has breasts is to feed. Heterosexual women find them attractive, but that is not why they exist.

I choose to live in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA where I am free to do as I wish as long as it's not against the law. Belching as loud as I can in public is 100% legal where I live, and hopefully always will be….

Again, your comparison just shows that you believe that the child's needs have no bearing here. Is a helpless infant in need of your belches? If it is, I'll be the first trying to make sure you do it.


No, they are trying to describing their opinion of what’s acceptable behavior and degrees of dress codes of the adults who take their children to public places, it’s about what they can and cannot do there and still be courteous of others or rude and selfish.

Ha. You really need to look up selfish. The woman is selflessly meeting the needs of her infant despite embarrassing stares from people with screwed up priorities. That's pretty much the opposite of selfish. Meanwhile, you argue against breastfeeding because it offends YOU. That's pretty much the definition of selfish.

I'm going to save this argument to teach some of the children I tutor the meaning of irony.

I choose to live in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA where I am free to do as I wish as long as it's not against the law. Belching as loud as I can in public is 100% legal where I live, and hopefully always will be….



No, they are trying to describing their opinion of what’s acceptable behavior and degrees of dress codes of the adults who take their children to public places, it’s about what they can and cannot do there and still be courteous of others or rude and selfish.

I advise you to see a shrink if you dont see breastfeeding as a perfectly natural thing to do.

i think its womans right to braestfeed where they want the baby needs it and for busy mothers it seems to be unavoidable

...
We expect the food processing to be finished by the time it gets to the table at the restaurant. Your distraction is your strawman, a distraction from the point because you don't have an argument against it. People go to restaurants for atmosphere, as much as anything else, but there are different degrees of restaurants as well. I've said that all along.

What you can do at the local greasy-spoon does not necessarily apply to the rules of behavior that are expected of us when we are at a hundred dollar per plate five star cuisine French restaurant. To suggest otherwise is no different that thinking you can act however you want wherever you want. It’s a manner of manners, some of us are courteous, others are not. You advocate for a lack of courtesy, not a freedom.

i think its womans right to braestfeed where they want the baby needs it and for busy mothers it seems to be unavoidable

Apparently according to some, if people don't like that you're eating, then you should be forced to eat in the bathroom. And if you don't, YOU are the one being selfish not the people forcing you to eat in the bathroom.

It's not enough that some people find it to be rude to stop this from happening. Breastfeeding in public is becoming increasing more acceptable. The majority of people don't give a toss, mothers are even encouraged to breastfeed. With good reason too. It happens whether you like it or not, so I'm afraid that all those who object will just have to put up with it. Those that do complain I find to have very old-fashioned attitudes, finding boobs to be offensive... I suppose you want women to be covered neck to toe as well. :rolleyes:

I advise you to see a shrink if you dont see breastfeeding as a perfectly natural thing to do.

Of course it is, and so is belching. But that doesn't mean I should do either one while at a restaurant while talking to a prospective employer. Both would likely lower my chances of making a good impression. There is a proper place for all ‘natural’ things.

Of course it is, and so is belching. But that doesn't mean I should do either one while at a restaurant while talking to a prospective employer. Both would likely lower my chances of making a good impression. There is a proper place for all ‘natural’ things.

No, but you wouldn't belch or breastfeed in a job interview not in a restaurant, either. A job interview can be scheduled in a time interval to avoid a feeding. It is one specific activity, during one scheduled time slot. The variables of other public activities are not concerns.

If we could ensure a woman that she could be seated, order, eat, leave in 25 minutes - well, then maybe you'd have a point. But, since the average visit to any restaurant is about double that (fast-food being the exception) you are again presenting possibilities which are not comparable.

Of course it is, and so is belching. But that doesn't mean I should do either one while at a restaurant while talking to a prospective employer. Both would likely lower my chances of making a good impression. There is a proper place for all ‘natural’ things.
And there are proper times too …

Like breastfeeding … whenever the infant is hungry and wherever the mother is at if it is safe and hygienic.

We expect the food processing to be finished by the time it gets to the table at the restaurant.

No, actually a bit of processing is likely and even necessary on occasion in restaurants. Even seen flambe. Ever seen a waiter put pepper on. In the case of breastfeeding processing ahead of time is unhealthy. In your comparison it's not the food processing that offends us. It's the cow. That's why your comparison fails.


Your distraction is your strawman, a distraction from the point because you don't have an argument against it. People go to restaurants for atmosphere, as much as anything else, but there are different degrees of restaurants as well. I've said that all along.

How sad. You don't even know what a strawman is. I responded to your exact argument. Whether you think I am victimizing you with some other fallacy, if I use your actual argument it's not a strawman. Try again.

Meanwhile, I haven't distracted anyone from anything. I am talking about the EXACT thing and not allowing you to make bizarre comparisons that have nothing to do with what is actually occurring. Who is being distracting?

Let me teach you about debate. Arguments actually have to have some sort of support. You can't just shoot anything out there and call it an argument.

You: "Women shouldn't breastfeed because we don't allow dogs to poop on the floors of restaurants."
Me: "Um, what the hell does that have to do with anything."
You: "What's the matter? You can't address my argument."
Me: "What argument? Dogs pooping on floors is not even remotely related to breastfeeding."

Your arguments are desperate and sad. You're not convincing anyone of anything other than your inability to link logic and breastfeeding in any meaningful way.


What you can do at the local greasy-spoon does not necessarily apply to the rules of behavior that are expected of us when we are at a hundred dollar per plate five star cuisine French restaurant. To suggest otherwise is no different that thinking you can act however you want wherever you want. It’s a manner of manners, some of us are courteous, others are not. You advocate for a lack of courtesy, not a freedom.

Actually, I worked at a french restaurant exactly like the one you describe. And trust me, they are far more likely to allow breastfeeding than your local greasy spoon.

There is nothing courteous about denying an infant food. I advocate putting the needs of infants ahead of your made-up courtesies.

... Meanwhile, you argue against breastfeeding because it offends YOU. That's pretty much the definition of selfish.

Actually it does not offend me. But the truth is you like to say that because it’s your favorite strawman. The truth is we both know that it offends others, the question is what do we do with that information. I choose consideration and politeness and you choose confrontation with a sledgehammer. I choose to try and behave in the manner expected of people who are visiting when they are in fact visiting, you propose that we all act like Vandals, obeying only our own rules wherever we go disregarding the opinions of the natives (so to speak).

Actually it does not offend me. But the truth is you like to say that because it’s your favorite strawman. The truth is we both know that it offends others, the question is what do we do with that information. I choose consideration and politeness and you choose confrontation with a sledgehammer. I choose to try and behave in the manner expected of people who are visiting when they are in fact visiting, you propose that we all act like Vandals, obeying only our own rules wherever we go disregarding the opinions of the natives (so to speak).

I agree, that when it comes to situations where nobody is harmed by being considerate, it is the right thing to do. But starving a child is harmful to said child. Therefore said child's right to eat trumps other people's sensibilities.

Certainly discretion is preferred. But there are instances where discretion is impossible. In those instances, it comes down to the necessary outweighing being polite.

How is that difficult to comprehend?

Actually it does not offend me. But the truth is you like to say that because it’s your favorite strawman. The truth is we both know that it offends others, the question is what do we do with that information. I choose consideration and politeness and you choose confrontation with a sledgehammer. I choose to try and behave in the manner expected of people who are visiting when they are in fact visiting, you propose that we all act like Vandals, obeying only our own rules wherever we go disregarding the opinions of the natives (so to speak).
any number of things can offend people, why single out feeding a baby?

Of course it is, and so is belching. But that doesn't mean I should do either one while at a restaurant while talking to a prospective employer. Both would likely lower my chances of making a good impression. There is a proper place for all ‘natural’ things.

I would actually be more likely to be concerned that she brought her child with, so this is again not addressing the point. You wouldn't bring your children to a job interview at all. Breastfeeding has nothing to do with it. However, if I were to do some activity where an employee were to bring her family, I would absolutely find her breastfeeding to be acceptable.

I agree, that when it comes to situations where nobody is harmed by being considerate, it is the right thing to do. But starving a child is harmful to said child. Therefore said child's right to eat trumps other people's sensibilities.

Certainly discretion is preferred. But there are instances where discretion is impossible. In those instances, it comes down to the necessary outweighing being polite.

How is that difficult to comprehend?

It's not hard at all, it's what I've been advocating all along. One should not go to certain places 'unprepared.'

any number of things can offend people, why single out feeding a baby?

I haven't singled out breastfeeding babies. I've used all kinds of examples to show that it is no different than common courtesy to at least take into consideration other people's concerns, whether I agree with them or not. Breastfeeding is the same as knowing that someone doesn't like belching, it is manners for us to try not do it in front of them, simple enough.

Actually it does not offend me. But the truth is you like to say that because it’s your favorite strawman. The truth is we both know that it offends others, the question is what do we do with that information. I choose consideration and politeness and you choose confrontation with a sledgehammer. I choose to try and behave in the manner expected of people who are visiting when they are in fact visiting, you propose that we all act like Vandals, obeying only our own rules wherever we go disregarding the opinions of the natives (so to speak).

Uh-huh. "I'm not a racist, I'm just saying that black people are lesser people." Forgive me if I get from your arguments that breastfeeding is impolite that you find it offensive. I'm silly that way.

I know that lots of things offend others and I put practical above such things in every case.

You don't choose consideration. You aren't considering the child at all. You're not polite. You compared women to cows, breastfeeding to excreting waste, haven't mentioned the needs of the child at all. There is nothing polite nor considerate about your arguments nor your actions.

I do consider the opinions of others within reason. Requiring a women to deny the needs of her child to satisfy the opinions of others is not within reason. And all the evidence I need is in your posts, because thus far other than the complaining you don't like it, there are no reasons in your posts. The only arguments you have are to compare it to unnecessary and impractical activities that wouldn't be allowed for a plethora of other reasons none of which relate to the activity you are comparing them to.

It's not hard at all, it's what I've been advocating all along. One should not go to certain places 'unprepared.'

So, if a woman has a baby who refuses a bottle, will only eat from the breast, and who does not eat with his head covered, what does she do? (Or if she is unable to pump? Some women breastfeed perfectly fine, but get little or no volume from a breastpump. What little they produce is reserved for times when they must be away from their children.) Never leave her house?

It's not hard at all, it's what I've been advocating all along. One should not go to certain places 'unprepared.'

They are prepared. When the child is hungry, they feed it. They wear clothing that allows them to do so in as unobtrusive a way as possible. They prepared to feed their child at the moment it becomes hungry because they put the infants needs ahead of their own comfort or even their own need for food.

I haven't singled out breastfeeding babies. I've used all kinds of examples to show that it is no different than common courtesy to at least take into consideration other people's concerns, whether I agree with them or not. Breastfeeding is the same as knowing that someone doesn't like belching, it is manners for us to try not do it in front of them, simple enough.
it offends my neighbor that I speak in public, and don't wear a Burka, am I being rude to him?

it offends my mother that I wear a t-shirt and jeans when I go grocery shopping, am I being rude to her?

it bothers my children that I don't allow the TV on except between 11:00am and 11:30am and 7:00pm and 8:00pm

am I being rude to them?

....


You post nothing but pure unadulterated strawman.

I have not once said I didn't like it (I said I am in favor of it being acceptable behavior without reservation of any public places), I have not once claimed that the child's needs don't come first (I’ve addressed my posts to the choices the parents have made, not what the child needs), I have not said those things, you made it up to attack that instead of the things I have said. That's called a strawman, and you do it a lot... Perhaps there is a reason for that.

it offends my neighbor that I speak in public, and don't wear a Burka, am I being rude to him?

it offends my mother that I wear a t-shirt and jeans when I go grocery shopping, am I being rude to her?

it bothers my children that I don't allow the TV on except between 11:00am and 11:30am and 7:00pm and 8:00pm

am I being rude to them?

Worse, none of those examples actually require you to not meet the normal survival needs of anyone provided you concede. In this case, he wants you to stop 'selfishly' feeding your infant because it's offensive.

it offends my neighbor that I speak in public, and don't wear a Burka, am I being rude to him? [/quiote]

If you go out of your way and insist on talking to him then it is rude.

[QUOTE=Smunkeeville]it offends my mother that I wear a t-shirt and jeans when I go grocery shopping, am I being rude to her?

Only if you do it with her.

it bothers my children that I don't allow the TV on except between 11:00am and 11:30am and 7:00pm and 8:00pm am I being rude to them?

Nope, they are your children in your house, you make the rules of does and don’ts there. In fact, that’s where you are supposed to teach them good manners and courteousness.

If men had to breastfeed there would extended work breaks for it!

Once the woman doesn/t flaunt herself and actually puts a towel over her breast there is nothing wrong with it. I find crying children more insulting in public!

Worse, none of those examples actually require you to not meet the normal survival needs of anyone provided you concede. In this case, he wants you to stop 'selfishly' feeding your infant because it's offensive.
true. It offends my mother in law that the children can't have cheesecake because it will damage their intestines, I wonder if it is rude of them to say "no thank you" when offered, or should they eat it and suffer the consequences of pain, intestinal damage, and the higher chance of cancer later in life?

The thing that disturbed me, however, is this:

"There have been other measures to promote breast-feeding: In December, for example, Massachusetts banned hospitals from giving new mothers gift bags with free infant formula, a practice opponents said swayed some women away from nursing."

Who do they really think they are? My wife can't produce milk. So it's criminal to give her formula on her way out of the hospital?:rolleyes:

I don't think they are saying it is criminal to give mothers formula - simply that it can't be part of the standard gift bag.

When it comes down to it, the healthiest thing, if possible, is for a mother to breastfeed. In your wife's case, it isn't possible, so you go for the next best thing. I doubt there would be any problem if a hospital gave her a free sample of forumula.


And the next time someone orders cream for their coffee we shouldn't be surprised to see the waitress walk a cow to the table and squirt some straight from the teat. No, people at restaurants want their food prepared 'before' it is brought to the table.

Well, not necessarily. Hibache is pretty popular. But, if a person goes to a restaurant where food is prepared before it is brought to the table, their food will be prepared ahead of time. Of course, the restaurant is not preparing food for a nursing infant, so this really has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

You post nothing but pure unadulterated strawman.

I have not once said I didn't like it (I said I am in favor of it being acceptable behavior without reservation of any public places), I have not once claimed that the child's needs don't come first (I’ve addressed my posts to the choices the parents have made, not what the child needs), I have not said those things, you made it up to attack that instead of the things I have said. That's called a strawman, and you do it a lot... Perhaps there is a reason for that.

Ha. Actions speak louder than words. You compared it to excreting wastes - were you actually arguing that peeing in public is something you like? How about cows producing milk at the table? Again, you argued for pages upon pages how it is offensive and rude and selfish and comparable to all sorts of foul acts and you claim to like it. Forgive me if I see through your charade.

And you have openly claimed that the child's needs don't come first. You actually called putting the needs of the child first "selfish" "offensive" "rude" as well as comparing it to all sorts of foul acts. When you say that a woman should not feed the child in the healthiest way possible because you consider it rude, that is very much not putting the needs of the child first. You can't argue one way and then claim we can't mentioning that you're making that argument just because you haven't expressly stated it in so many words.

You have argued those things whether you've expressly stated them or not. Or are you unaware of what context is?

They are prepared. When the child is hungry, they feed it. They wear clothing that allows them to do so in as unobtrusive a way as possible. They prepared to feed their child at the moment it becomes hungry because they put the infants needs ahead of their own comfort or even their own need for food.

That's actually a consideration we haven't discussed. Mothers take about twenty minutes to breast feed. A busy restaurant can't have you eating and then taking another twenty minutes at the table. Be courteous. Feed the baby in the car before going in or feed the baby after you leave. (That's preparedness) Mother’s know approximately when a baby is going to be hungry, it’s one of the first things they learn (not that surprises can’t happen).

Of course it is, and so is belching. But that doesn't mean I should do either one while at a restaurant while talking to a prospective employer. Both would likely lower my chances of making a good impression. There is a proper place for all ‘natural’ things.

Restaurant is where people eat. There is nothing more natural than a baby eating there as well.
And if you put breastfeeding into same category as belching, again I advise you to see a shrink. Maybe you got some repressed memmories from childhood.

Why would I limit it? Because other people find it rude, that's enough.

Not really. Some people find some pretty silly things to be rude. You can't go through life doing nothing but trying to accomodate others - especially since accomodating some might be "rude" to others.

You do it anyway simply to spite them and you make excuses for it to 'make a point.' How does that help? Did they change their minds after seeing the error of their ways? Probably not.

Who do you think breastfeeds just to spite others?

Depends on what society/community you choose to go too/live in. At a nude beach club we don't have to wear any clothes at all. But if I walk into a Synagogue they will expect me to be dressed AND cover my head...

A Synagogue is not really a public place, and is thus irrelevant. We are talking about women who are in public - in places that they are allowed into same as anyone else. The only difference is that they need to feed their children.

where is the option for "male; yes seeing bare breasts makes me horny?"

Ha. Actions speak louder than words. You compared it to excreting wastes - were you actually arguing that peeing in public is something you like? ...

I didn't say anything about peeing. You are making more strawmen. The only waste excretion I've used in example is belching (a particularly good example here because in some societies belching is considered good while in others it is a big no-no). Consideration of other's expectations when we are the visitor is what I have been discussing since the beginning and I've repeatedly pointed that out, you make strawmen arguments to attack because you don’t have an argument against simple considerations and manners. Even your own mother was mad at you, she’s the one responsible for teaching your good manners or not, she thinks she failed with you in this regard, I agree with her.

That's actually a consideration we haven't discussed. Mothers take about twenty minutes to breast feed. A busy restaurant can't have you eating and then taking another twenty minutes at the table. Be courteous. Feed the baby in the car before going in or feed the baby after you leave. (That's preparedness) Mother’s know approximately when a baby is going to be hungry, it’s one of the first things they learn (not that surprises can’t happen).

I'm a former restaurant manager. I did not ever expect my guests to "consider that the busy restaurant might need the table". I expected them to not harrass my servers, to allow reasonable preparation times, but I would never have expected that they consider that my restaurant was busy and that I might need the table. For whatever reason they choose, those guests get to stay at that table for as long as they choose (excluding requiring the restaurant to remain open after close) and it's not rude. That's part of the service offered by a restaurant.

Restaurants are in the hospitality business. It is their #1 goal to make their guests comfortable. They don't expect their guests to do more than not assault anyone.

When one guest's comfort is in direct opposition to another, the restaurant gets to make a call. For example, if a guest complains that another guest is rowdy drunk, I had to choose which guest to "make comfortable." It was never the rowdy drunk. (And it would never have been someone rude enough to complain about another person's breastfeeding.)

where is the option for "male; yes seeing bare breasts makes me horny?"


Even if there is a baby feeding off one of them? :confused:

If you go out of your way and insist on talking to him then it is rude.

Good. Then since the woman is not going out of her way to offend people, we have no issue in the case of breastfeeding. However, if we were to compare this to your earlier arguments you would consider it rude unless she made an effort to avoid offending her neighbor, not just didn't make an effort to offend him.


Only if you do it with her.

What if other people in the grocery store are offended? Shouldn't she avoid them as well? I mean, you haven't been arguing that the woman should ask permission from the other diners at her table but all of the customers of the restaurant.


Nope, they are your children in your house, you make the rules of does and don’ts there. In fact, that’s where you are supposed to teach them good manners and courteousness.
And hopefully those manners will include putting the dietary needs of a helpless infant above the unreasonable senstivities of random people.

That's actually a consideration we haven't discussed. Mothers take about twenty minutes to breast feed. A busy restaurant can't have you eating and then taking another twenty minutes at the table. Be courteous. Feed the baby in the car before going in or feed the baby after you leave. (That's preparedness) Mother’s know approximately when a baby is going to be hungry, it’s one of the first things they learn (not that surprises can’t happen).
Why cant they? I dont know about where you live but when we go out to eat we go and enjoy the food and spend a long time just haming it up and talking after the meal.

There is no way I would go to a resteraunt that treated you like you are on an asembly line ... get in and get out. That is more of a FAST food thing

Restaurant is where people eat. There is nothing more natural than a baby eating there as well.
And if you put breastfeeding into same category as belching, again I advise you to see a shrink. Maybe you got some repressed memmories from childhood.

Belching and eating go hand in hand. Some societies say it's 'right' to do it when and after eating, other's say you should only do it very discreetly.

Perhaps you are the one that needs to see the shrink, you seem to have a fixation with the subject.

Even if there is a baby feeding off one of them? :confused:

true that soes rather counter the plus factor of the exposed breast

I'm a former restaurant manager. I did not ever expect my guests to "consider that the busy restaurant might need the table". I expected them to not harrass my servers, to allow reasonable preparation times, but I would never have expected that they consider that my restaurant was busy and that I might need the table. For whatever reason they choose, those guests get to stay at that table for as long as they choose (excluding requiring the restaurant to remain open after close) and it's not rude. That's part of the service offered by a restaurant.

Restaurants are in the hospitality business. It is their #1 goal to make their guests comfortable. They don't expect their guests to do more than not assault anyone.

When one guest's comfort is in direct opposition to another, the restaurant gets to make a call. For example, if a guest complains that another guest is rowdy drunk, I had to choose which guest to "make comfortable." It was never the rowdy drunk. (And it would never have been someone rude enough to complain about another person's breastfeeding.)

Very nice restaurant you ran. However, I know I've been asked to move to the bar (or other table etc.,) if the restaurant has people standing in line to eat and we are simply ordering more drinks...

Very nice restaurant you ran. However, I know I've been asked to move to the bar (or other table etc.,) if the restaurant has people standing in line to eat and we are simply ordering more drinks...

Well, that's a restaurant that doesn't deserve guests. That is rude.

If you go out of your way and insist on talking to him then it is rude.

Women who breastfeed in public are not "going out of their way" to do something others don't like. In fact, in many cases, avoiding doing so would be "going out of their way." As such, by your definition, it would be those who have a problem with it who are being rude, as they are inconveniencing her for their own selfish reasons.

Well, that's a restaurant that doesn't deserve guests. That is rude.

It's not rude, they take you to the new place (table or bar, customer's choice) and they should buy your party a round of drinks for the hassle.

People do make reservations and the restaurant has to use a guestimate for a reasonable amount of time that can 'expect' a party of four (for example) to be at that table before rebooking it or when rush time begins.

Very nice restaurant you ran. However, I know I've been asked to move to the bar (or other table etc.,) if the restaurant has people standing in line to eat and we are simply ordering more drinks...
I would not frequent that restaurant again … hell even big chains like applebees or olive garden has never done something that rude to me before

I didn't say anything about peeing.

Actually, I confused you with another poster because you were both arguing that infants who have more sensitivity to infection than nearly every other human should eat in the bathroom when we would consider asking any other human to do the same to be absurd.


You are making more strawmen.

I've already proven you don't know what the hell a strawman is. Make an argument and stop trying to use words you don't understand.

The only waste excretion I've used in example is belching (a particularly good example here because in some societies belching is considered good while in others it is a big no-no). Consideration of other's expectations when we are the visitor is what I have been discussing since the beginning and I've repeatedly pointed that out, you make strawmen arguments to attack because you don’t have an argument against simple considerations and manners. Even your own mother was mad at you, she’s the one responsible for teaching your good manners or not, she thinks she failed with you in this regard, I agree with her.

I am pointing out the arguments you have made and what they combine to suggest. That's not a strawman. That's an argument. I'm not claiming you outright said these things, I'm claiming you said a lot of things that clearly combine to give a very negative view of breastfeeding in public.

My mother was mad at me for teaching my sister-in-law to breastfeed in her own home without hiding away. My sister-in-law is quite happy as is the rest of her family. My mother has no say in the matter.

Meanwhile, my mother also thinks it's rude to ask for help in a grocery store and cried when I did so. She thinks it's rude to ask for directions to a gate. Comparing yourself to my mother is quite appropriate, because she basically will disservice pretty much any family member to look better to society even to the put of putting them in danger physically and financially.

Do you deny making the argument that breastfeeding is selfish? Do you deny comparing breastfeeding in public to bringing a cow into a restaurant? Do you deny suggesting women feed their children in public restrooms against all reason? Is that the normal request of behaviors you like? Do you compare behaviors you like to bringing a cow into a restaurant to squirt milk directly from the teat into coffee or to feed directly from the teat? Absurd.

It's not rude, they take you to the new place (table or bar, customer's choice) and they should buy your party a round of drinks for the hassle.

People do make reservations and the restaurant has to use a guestimate for a reasonable amount of time that can 'expect' a party of four (for example) to be at that table before rebooking it or when rush time begins.

The kinds of restaurants where you are claiming it would be rude to breastfeed would NEVER expect a party to be done in twenty minutes. In a french restaurant of the nature you mentioned, they would never move a party to the bar either. I worked at one and had I ever asked a party to leave a table when we weren't closed, it would have been the last request I made of a table in that restaurant.

Women who breastfeed in public are not "going out of their way" to do something others don't like. In fact, in many cases, avoiding doing so would be "going out of their way." As such, by your definition, it would be those who have a problem with it who are being rude, as they are inconveniencing her for their own selfish reasons.

If they don't take into consideration the places they will go and the time they will be there and the expectations of those places, they the woman IS going out of her way, by being negligent.

When things can't be helped, then they can't be helped. When emergencies happen, they happen. But what we are talking about is intentionally going to a place that we think might object and then doing it anyway because we disagree with their sensibilities even though we are the visitor. Nonsense.

I would not frequent that restaurant again … hell even big chains like applebees or olive garden has never done something that rude to me before


Then by your own admission, the breastfeeding mother shouldn't go to the places they ask her not to do it in their dinning room. But I think they can make accommodations, on both sides. The mother can feed the baby before she arrives or after she leaves (among other possibilities).

If they don't take into consideration the places they will go and the time they will be there and the expectations of those places, they the woman IS going out of her way, by being negligent.

She is taking it into consideration. The kinds of restaurants where you are suggesting breastfeeding should be disallowed often expect a diner to be there for an hour or more. We did. The woman is considerate of the child's needs so she feeds when it's hungry. If that's right before entering the restaurant and right after, great. However, it's not a schedule she gets to set with any exactness, so the child is going to need feeding when it comes.


When things can't be helped, then they can't be helped. When emergencies happen, they happen. But what we are talking about is intentionally going to a place that we think might object and then doing it anyway because we disagree with their sensibilities even though we are the visitor. Nonsense.
Again, you are asking her to go out of her way to avoid places where it might be a problem? That is far different from simply asking her not to seek out a problem. Unless you can argue that this woman is choosing the restaurant because of it's dislike for breastfeeding, then it would be more comparable to if Smunkee went someplace and ran into her neighbor or people like him.

You know what? Let's settle this debate by requiring all restaurants to post big signs saying, 'mother/child friendly zone' or 'no breastfeeding allowed'. Then we can all know which restaurants we should avoid, and which will afford us protection from the possibility of a bared breast, something we apparently just can't handle.:rolleyes:

Then by your own admission, the breastfeeding mother shouldn't go to the places they ask her not to do it in their dinning room.
He said his choice, by the offense of the restaurant. He is not suggesting that he shouldn't return to the place out of any consideration for the restaurant. You're argument is a clear and utter reversal of what he said.

The kinds of restaurants where you are claiming it would be rude to breastfeed would NEVER expect a party to be done in twenty minutes. In a french restaurant of the nature you mentioned, they would never move a party to the bar either. I worked at one and had I ever asked a party to leave a table when we weren't closed, it would have been the last request I made of a table in that restaurant.

It's not a matter of doing it in twenty minutes, it's a matter of tacking an additional twenty minutes onto the stay of however long the stay already was... Really, you really should try harder to understand what is going on before talking.

You know what? Let's settle this debate by requiring all restaurants to post big signs saying, 'mother/child friendly zone' or 'no breastfeeding allowed'. Then we can all know which restaurants we should avoid, and which will afford us protection from the possibility of a bared breast, something we apparently just can't handle.:rolleyes:

I'm all for it. And we can all vote with our dollar.

The kinds of restaurants where you are claiming it would be rude to breastfeed would NEVER expect a party to be done in twenty minutes. In a french restaurant of the nature you mentioned, they would never move a party to the bar either. I worked at one and had I ever asked a party to leave a table when we weren't closed, it would have been the last request I made of a table in that restaurant.

I worked at a restaurant and, to tell you the truth, I wasn't even allowed to ask a party to leave if we *were* closed. If they sat down at the table before closing, they received their food. Now, there was a point at which no more food or drink could be ordered, but they were allowed to sit and talk while we cleaned the restaurant if they chose to.


If they don't take into consideration the places they will go and the time they will be there and the expectations of those places, they the woman IS going out of her way, by being negligent.

There is no rational reason to believe that anyone is going to have a problem with it, any more than there is reason to believe that a restaurant is going to have a problem with it if I wear purple.

When things can't be helped, then they can't be helped. When emergencies happen, they happen. But what we are talking about is intentionally going to a place that we think might object and then doing it anyway because we disagree with their sensibilities even though we are the visitor. Nonsense.

That might be what *you* are talking about, since you have to demonize breastfeeding women to make your argument. I seriously doubt, however, that most women think to themselves, "Someone is going to be pissed if I go out to eat and feed my baby. I'm going to choose the restaurant that is likely to object, just so I can offend people. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"

You know what? Let's settle this debate by requiring all restaurants to post big signs saying, 'mother/child friendly zone' or 'no breastfeeding allowed'. Then we can all know which restaurants we should avoid, and which will afford us protection from the possibility of a bared breast, something we apparently just can't handle.:rolleyes:
works for me, and even though I don't breastfeed anymore and never will again, I can assure you that I would only eat at restraunts labeled "child friendly"

You know what? Let's settle this debate by requiring all restaurants to post big signs saying, 'mother/child friendly zone' or 'no breastfeeding allowed'. Then we can all know which restaurants we should avoid, and which will afford us protection from the possibility of a bared breast, something we apparently just can't handle.:rolleyes:

Actually that would be perfect. Like smoking and non-smoking restaurants, or children or non-children movie show times... There would be no excuse for either side to complain then. Customers that don’t like to see it wouldn’t go there or else would know that it IS acceptable there.

It's not a matter of doing it in twenty minutes, it's a matter of tacking an additional twenty minutes onto the stay of however long the stay already was... Really, you really should try harder to understand what is going on before talking.

Of course, since most people have an extra 20 minutes or so above and beyond finishing eating, there is no "extra" 20 minutes here. It 20 minutes that are part of the time they would already be there - complete with breastfeeding.

It's not rude, they take you to the new place (table or bar, customer's choice) and they should buy your party a round of drinks for the hassle.

People do make reservations and the restaurant has to use a guestimate for a reasonable amount of time that can 'expect' a party of four (for example) to be at that table before rebooking it or when rush time begins.


It is rude. Yes, a restaurant makes guesstimations of how long any one table will stay. That is necessary to the flow of business. However, if they misestimate (for any reason, including the guests' choice) that was their error. Making it the guests' problem is rude.

The people who arrived later and "need" your table are not more important than you are.

That, and doing what they do is bad business. Not only are they late on the reservation of the new guests, but they've left a bad taste in the mouths of the guests who'd arrived earlier. They've pissed off two parties instead of one.

I'm pretty forgiving of restaurants and their errors, (ie, misquote me a wait time I'm okay, be late on seating my party's reservation, I'm fine) but that's not an error. That's downright rude.

works for me, and even though I don't breastfeed anymore and never will again, I can assure you that I would only eat at restraunts labeled "child friendly"
There are already restaurants that don't allow children...if anything, we live in a very anti-child society in the US and in Canada, despite the stupid-mongering of those who claim that it is child-centred. The single, childless lifestyle is glamorised, and people constantly whine about people with children and all the 'benefits' they receive, all the 'lee-way' parents get and so on.

...
There is no rational reason to believe that anyone is going to have a problem with it, any more than there is reason to believe that a restaurant is going to have a problem with it if I wear purple.
..

But that's simply not true. You know for a fact that there are places that will object to women breastfeeding in their establishment, if this were not true, you wouldn't have had a topic to make this thread about.

What you really meant was, you don't like their expectation of behavior and you disagree with them having it, but you know it exists. Therefore there IS a rational reason to believe that someone might object (depending on where they are going).

Actually that would be perfect. Like smoking and non-smoking restaurants, or children or non-children movie show times... There would be no excuse for either side to complain then. Customers that don’t like to see it wouldn’t go there or else would know that it IS acceptable there.
Yes, while we're at it, we can segregate shopping centres, supermarkets, parks, libraries and so on, so that no one who is inconvenienced by the existence of children will have to actually come into contact with them in any conceivable way! W00T!

It's not a matter of doing it in twenty minutes, it's a matter of tacking an additional twenty minutes onto the stay of however long the stay already was... Really, you really should try harder to understand what is going on before talking.

Ha, amusing. So a woman couldn't feed her child and not slow down the progression by much? Really? I guess when I actually saw women breastfeed at the table without it affect US at all, I imagined it. Because otherwise you would be wrong about what I do and do not understand, and even have experience, which would be impossible, of course. I mean it's clear that you have a clean and cold grasp on the reality of the situation you're describing.

Obviously, the problem with having livestock in restaurants is that we don't like food preparation at the table. Obviously, I've never lived on a farm. Obviously, people drink straight from the teat of a cow on a regular basis and this is expected on a farm. Obviously, diners are more understanding of breastfeeding than French restaurants. Obviously, it's selfish to feed an infant when it's hungry if other people don't want you to. Obviously, my mother was right that it's impolite for my sister-in-law to breastfeed her child without hiding when in her own home. Obviously, women should feed their children in public restrooms. Obviously, women who breastfeed in restaurants stand up and announce it before beginning and the rude part is the breastfeeding not the anouncements. Clearly, the person who understands the situation best is you. Maybe one day if I study really hard...

Ha, amusing. So a woman couldn't feed her child and not slow down the progression by much? Really? I guess when I actually saw women breastfeed at the table without it affect US at all, I imagined it. Because otherwise you would be wrong about what I do and do not understand, and even have experience, which would be impossible, of course. I mean it's clear that you have a clean and cold grasp on the reality of the situation you're describing.

Obviously, the problem with having livestock in restaurants is that we don't like food preparation at the table. Obviously, I've never lived on a farm. Obviously, people drink straight from the teat of a cow on a regular basis and this is expected on a farm. Obviously, diners are more understanding of breastfeeding than French restaurants. Obviously, it's selfish to feed an infant when it's hungry if other people don't want you to. Obviously, my mother was right that it's impolite for my sister-in-law to breastfeed her child without hiding when in her own home. Obviously, women should feed their children in public restrooms. Obviously, women who breastfeed in restaurants stand up and announce it before beginning and the rude part is the breastfeeding not the anouncements. Clearly, the person who understands the situation best is you. Maybe one day if I study really hard...

*BOOM*

Darnit! Stupid Acme Sarcasm meters.

But that's simply not true. You know for a fact that there are places that will object to women breastfeeding in their establishment, if this were not true, you wouldn't have had a topic to make this thread about.

What you really meant was, you don't like their expectation of behavior and you disagree with them having it, but you know it exists. Therefore there IS a rational reason to believe that someone might object (depending on where they are going).

Yes, but there is no reason to believe a particular place will have a problem with it unless they actually tell you so. Most don't. I've worked at a number of restaurants from a country club to a steakhouse to a TGI Friday's to a ritzy French restaurant. None of them objected to breastfeeding in general. Only customers ever did.

Then by your own admission, the breastfeeding mother shouldn't go to the places they ask her not to do it in their dinning room. But I think they can make accommodations, on both sides. The mother can feed the baby before she arrives or after she leaves (among other possibilities).

The restaurant has no right to ask a breastfeeding mother not to feed in the dining room. Legal or MORAL. It is morally reprehensible to consider the protestations of prudes equivalent to an action which is neccessary for the health of a child.

I object to people changing diapers in dining rooms, because restrooms specifically exist for that reason. I did ask mothers to change their children in the bathroom and dispose of the diaper there - because doing so was not an inconvenience to other diners but a potential health risk.

It is not breastfeeding mothers who are impolite, but those who are bothered by that act.

Yes, while we're at it, we can segregate shopping centres, supermarkets, parks, libraries and so on, so that no one who is inconvenienced by the existence of children will have to actually come into contact with them in any conceivable way! W00T!

They DO have adult only communities. I don't want to live there, but they do exist whether I think they are needed or not the people that choose to live there seem to like them I'm sure. Not everyone has to be like you or me with 'family' values, I'm sure you know that already though.

It is rude. Yes, a restaurant makes guesstimations of how long any one table will stay. That is necessary to the flow of business. However, if they misestimate (for any reason, including the guests' choice) that was their error. Making it the guests' problem is rude.

The people who arrived later and "need" your table are not more important than you are.

That, and doing what they do is bad business. Not only are they late on the reservation of the new guests, but they've left a bad taste in the mouths of the guests who'd arrived earlier. They've pissed off two parties instead of one.

I'm pretty forgiving of restaurants and their errors, (ie, misquote me a wait time I'm okay, be late on seating my party's reservation, I'm fine) but that's not an error. That's downright rude.

Don't you know? Us people who have worked in the industry and actually seen how it works don't understand the situation. We have to have it explained to us by someone who thinks that twenty minutes is the normal expected turnaround in your average restaurant and that most people don't sit at all at tables but instead scarf down their food pay the tab and run out like they're on fire (which is approximately what a twenty minute turn around requires).

But that's simply not true. You know for a fact that there are places that will object to women breastfeeding in their establishment, if this were not true, you wouldn't have had a topic to make this thread about.

Actually, I know that there are people who object to breastfeeding. These are often the same people who can't say the word "breast" or "vagina" without giggling uncontrollably or thinking that such words are automatically offensive. In my experience, very few such people run restaurants, although they may be patrons there.

In truth, the vast majority of the people I know have no problem with breastfeeding - in public or otherwise. Thus, the default, in my circle at least, seems to be to have no problem with it.

Don't you know? Us people who have worked in the industry and actually seen how it works don't understand the situation. We have to have it explained to us by someone who thinks that twenty minutes is the normal expected turnaround in your average restaurant and that most people don't sit at all at tables but instead scarf down their food pay the tab and run out like they're on fire (which is approximately what a twenty minute turn around requires).

You know, at most restaurants, I often haven't even received my entree in 20 minutes...

There are already restaurants that don't allow children...if anything, we live in a very anti-child society in the US and in Canada, despite the stupid-mongering of those who claim that it is child-centred. The single, childless lifestyle is glamorised, and people constantly whine about people with children and all the 'benefits' they receive, all the 'lee-way' parents get and so on.

I actually have to disagree with you.

I've been labelled bitter, angry, hateful, anti-child all because I don't want to have children, despite the fact that everyone who knows me knows that I adore all of the children that my friends and family have.

I can't speak for Canada, but the US is very child-centered. If you don't want children in the US, you're a freak.

For the record, I'm all for public breastfeeding and anything that encourages our (the collective our) children to live healthy lives but I don't for one second think there is anything "glamorized" about the lives of the childless. We are portrayed as sad, unfulfilled, angry people - which is certainly not an accurate characterization of all of us.

You know, at most restaurants, I often haven't even received my entree in 20 minutes...

Shhh... no room for reason here. Twenty minutes and you're out. There is no time at the table where you are not stuffing food in your face so breastfeeding MUST increase your time at the table and therefore be rude to the restaurant.

There are already restaurants that don't allow children...

In the US this isn't allowed.

They may not have children's menus, they may not have high chairs, but they cannot refuse service to a child based on his or her age. It's simply illegal. It would be like refusing service based on someone's race or national origin.

In the US this isn't allowed.

They may not have children's menus, they may not have high chairs, but they cannot refuse service to a child based on his or her age. It's simply illegal. It would be like refusing service based on someone's race or national origin.
While I agree it is legal for bars that serve food to do so

In the US this isn't allowed.

They may not have children's menus, they may not have high chairs, but they cannot refuse service to a child based on his or her age. It's simply illegal. It would be like refusing service based on someone's race or national origin.

Actually, they probably could, if they wanna chance getting sued or something.

But that's simply not true. You know for a fact that there are places that will object to women breastfeeding in their establishment, if this were not true, you wouldn't have had a topic to make this thread about.

What you really meant was, you don't like their expectation of behavior and you disagree with them having it, but you know it exists. Therefore there IS a rational reason to believe that someone might object (depending on where they are going).


There was a time when people objected to black men marrying white women. Should people have stopped doing that so as not to offend someone else's sensibilities? Should mixed race couples have stayed home to "be polite"?

I'm going to steal a line from The Office and say... "Oh Yuck!"

Actually, they probably could, if they wanna chance getting sued or something.

True, it's not legal. Not they can't do it.

In the US this isn't allowed.

They may not have children's menus, they may not have high chairs, but they cannot refuse service to a child based on his or her age. It's simply illegal. It would be like refusing service based on someone's race or national origin.

Not where I live (GA). In fact, all restaurants have now been required to declare themselves as either 18 and over or "family restaurants." Family restaurants do not allow smoking, while the 18 and over do.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/07/27/nursing.cover.ap/index.html

This debate seems to come up again and again. So I have a few questions. Are you offended by the picture on the magazine? Do you think it would harm a child to see it? Are you offended by the idea of a woman discreetly breastfeeding in public? Is it really a sexual thing?

You'll get my answers as the discussion goes on.

I am not offended as the whole point of breasts is to feed the baby. It is natural, healthy and apparently better for the child than formula milk. Apparently breast milk also helps to prevent child obesity in later years (article) (http://www.breastfeeding.com/reading_room/bfing_equals_leaner_kids.html)

I can't understand why some people think of it as 'indecent exposure'. If you don't like what you see, DON'T STARE.

In the US this isn't allowed.

They may not have children's menus, they may not have high chairs, but they cannot refuse service to a child based on his or her age. It's simply illegal. It would be like refusing service based on someone's race or national origin.

The country club I worked at didn't allow children below a certain age. Can you offer up a link that shows any rules that say that having a childfree restaurant is illegal?

Not where I live (GA). In fact, all restaurants have now been required to declare themselves as either 18 and over or "family restaurants." Family restaurants do not allow smoking, while the 18 and over do.

That's interesting, because as I understand it, that's a violation of federal law. Has it been challenged? How old is that law?

That's interesting, because as I understand it, that's a violation of federal law. Has it been challenged? How old is that law?
How do bars get away with 18 plus after 9 pm sort of thing then? I mean plenty of the bars around here are actualy bar/resteraunts

The country club I worked at didn't allow children below a certain age. Can you offer up a link that shows any rules that say that having a childfree restaurant is illegal?

It would be age discrimination.

A private club (like a country club) would be allowed to get away with it; they can limit entrance to pretty much anyone they choose.

But, it is my understanding that any public place cannot prohibit anyone from entering based on age, unless they are a bar or an "adult" club. They can restrict children from entering without a parent, but not all together.

(If this is legal, it ought to be challenged!)

That's interesting, because as I understand it, that's a violation of federal law. Has it been challenged? How old is that law?

Can you cite the law?

Shhh... no room for reason here. Twenty minutes and you're out. There is no time at the table where you are not stuffing food in your face so breastfeeding MUST increase your time at the table and therefore be rude to the restaurant.

You never did have a real good argument, now we can see from you last few posts that you've given up entirely on even pretending to have a point and have resorted entirely to insults via misplaced ridicule. That's sad.

Perhaps that works for you, perhaps that is your 'style.' I've seen some third graders with the same sort of debating skill, but most try to out-grow it by then.

How do bars get away with 18 plus after 9 pm sort of thing then? I mean plenty of the bars around here are actualy bar/resteraunts

Because they claim not to be a restaurant after 10PM. Based on their sales at that hour, they don't sell enough food to be classified as a restaurant (or they are close to the threshhold) making them a bar. Bars are subjected to different rules because of our restrictions on places who exist primarily to serve alcohol.

It would be age discrimination.

A private club (like a country club) would be allowed to get away with it; they can limit entrance to pretty much anyone they choose.

But, it is my understanding that any public place cannot prohibit anyone from entering based on age, unless they are a bar or an "adult" club. They can restrict children from entering without a parent, but not all together.

(If this is legal, it ought to be challenged!)

Age discrimination against children is not illegal. And all restaurants are private. They are privately-owned.

Age discrimination against children is not illegal. And all restaurants are private. They are privately-owned.

I doubt that that is true. They may be privately-owned, but they cannot refuse to serve people of any race or religion.

Because they claim not to be a restaurant after 10PM. Based on their sales at that hour, they don't sell enough food to be classified as a restaurant (or they are close to the threshhold) making them a bar. Bars are subjected to different rules because of our restrictions on places who exist primarily to serve alcohol.
Interesting thanks for the info! I honestly don’t know the law in this area.

In the US this isn't allowed.

They may not have children's menus, they may not have high chairs, but they cannot refuse service to a child based on his or her age. It's simply illegal. It would be like refusing service based on someone's race or national origin.
Really? Show me where there is protection against discrimination based on age. Before Edmonton, Alberta went completely non-smoking, only those above the age of majority were allowed into restaurants where smoking was permitted. That stands for restaurants where alcohol is served as well. So if you object so terribly to going to a restaurant where children might be present, and perhaps even breast-feeding, the options are certainly there for you.

You never did have a real good argument, now we can see from you last few posts that you've given up entirely on even pretending to have a point and have resorted entirely to insults via misplaced ridicule. That's sad.

Perhaps that works for you, perhaps that is your 'style.' I've seen some third graders with the same sort of debating skill, but most try to out-grow it by then.

You stopped replying to my arguments and preferred to suggest I didn't understand the situation. That's an argument worthy of ridicule. You earned it, and I thought it would be rude to deny you.

I think it's funny that in a post complaining that I've stopped making arguments (notice, I replied TO EVERY ARGUMENT YOU MADE) that you fail to address any recent arguments by me and you call me a third-grader. Seriously, you are the king of irony.

That's interesting, because as I understand it, that's a violation of federal law. Has it been challenged? How old is that law?
Look up the federal law you're thinking of. Not as much is protected by anti-discrimination legislation as most people assume it is...I don't say that to be a smart ass, but it's something I've looked into a lot over the years, and human rights legislation is pretty scarce and specific in both the US and Canada.

You never did have a real good argument, now we can see from you last few posts that you've given up entirely on even pretending to have a point and have resorted entirely to insults via misplaced ridicule. That's sad.

Perhaps that works for you, perhaps that is your 'style.' I've seen some third graders with the same sort of debating skill, but most try to out-grow it by then.
Funny, I thought the same of your 'style'...since you aren't acutally debating, you're going the ridiculous mile to prove a hypothetical point rather than being realistic.

We're moving on, haven't you noticed? Your 15 mintues of fame is over...

I doubt that that is true. They may be privately-owned, but they cannot refuse to serve people of any race or religion.

Age discrimination against children is not illegal. I can refuse to hire a child for being to young. Refuse entrance to a child for being too young. Deny them certain products for being to young even above and beyond the law.

Age discrimination against children is not illegal. I can refuse to hire a child for being to young. Refuse entrance to a child for being too young. Deny them certain products for being to young even above and beyond the law.
Consider movie theatre age-restrictions for another example...

Age discrimination is fairly common, upheld by various labour laws (including those that require mandatory retirement ages), educational laws etc.

That's interesting, because as I understand it, that's a violation of federal law. Has it been challenged? How old is that law?

I don't know of any federal law that it violates. The concept of "age discrimination" only comes into play once the persons in question are of adult age. In other words, you couldn't say "no one over 60 can come into this restaurant." Children are generally seen by the law as having less rights - and discrimination on the basis of being a child is generally allowed.

As for the law, it's maybe a year old now. The law is actually related to smoking more than to children. Basically, any place that allows smoking in general areas must be 18 and older.

Funny, I thought the same of your 'style'...since you aren't acutally debating, you're going the ridiculous mile to prove a hypothetical point rather than being realistic.

We're moving on, haven't you noticed? Your 15 mintues of fame is over...

I haven't moved on so much as he stopped even attempting to make an argument rather relying on suggesting I don't understand how a restaurant works or I'm a third-grader or apparently the earlier comment that I don't know that people on farms are sucking milk from the teats of cows. It's amusing that he got upset that I was sarcastic when all I did was reflect his argument back at him and offer support to claims about who understands and who doesn't.

I guess suggesting someone doesn't understand is not a bad debate tactic as long as you don't prove it according to our friend.

Consider movie theatre age-restrictions for another example...

Age discrimination is fairly common, upheld by various labour laws (including those that require mandatory retirement ages), educational laws etc.

Yes, and it should be noted that those restrictions like NC-17 are volutary restrictions created by the MPAA and have nothing to do with legal requirements. They are literall private industry choosing when to allow children in and when not to.

That's all very interesting.

During an opening of a particularly child un-friendly restaurant, (think $100/person before alcohol, traditionally 6 or 7 course meals) the company lawyer insisted that we offer a child's menu and have high chairs.

That part was PR, but he was insistent that we would be violating the law if the restaurant were to forbid children. I took him at his word. (He was probably attempting to frighten - for PR sake - the owner who wasn't so glad about making the place the slightest child friendly.)

Just to question the motives of some voters here, I'd like to point out the rather large number of males who voted for breastfeeding. You sure some of you shouldn't have clicked the option below? :D

You know, the more I think about it, the more I think that the "belching" comparison has been the closest comparison PW has made.

You see, burping is going to happen. A person gets excess air in their stomach, and it is going to come out. In our society, we make an effort not to make the burping too obvious, however (unless we are purposely making a show of it - ie. burping out a song or something). Generally, we keep our mouths closed so as not to make too much sound. If a burp surprises us and it is loud, we say, "Excuse me."

Likewise, a breastfeeding mother needs to feed her infant. She will do what she can to cover it up - use a nursing bra and easily accessable blouse, cover up with a towel, etc. If, however, she accidently flashes her entire breast to all present company, she will most likely say, "Excuse me," or some equivalent.

Just to question the motives of some voters here, I'd like to point out the rather large number of males who voted for breastfeeding. You sure some of you shouldn't have clicked the option below? :D

Only your breasts make me horny and only when feeding orphaned apes.

Only your breasts make me horny and only when feeding orphaned apes.
Aww, that's so....

...wait, where did you get the pictures? I THOUGHT I'D GOT THEM ALL! :eek:

I think that complete public nudity should be legal - I find it ridiculous that there are laws prohibiting us from being in our most natural state in public. The human body is beautiful. Everybody has one, and in my opinion it's sad that we've come so far as to find seeing it offensive.

Just to question the motives of some voters here, I'd like to point out the rather large number of males who voted for breastfeeding. You sure some of you shouldn't have clicked the option below? :D

That one has "no" in front of it.

That one has "no" in front of it.

I figure you guys can say "Of course," whether it is, "Of course, I really like it," or "Of course, it's good for the baby," or any other "Of course,..."

I figure you guys can say "Of course," whether it is, "Of course, I really like it," or "Of course, it's good for the baby," or any other "Of course,..."

If a lot of the people are saying 'yes' because breastfeeding turns them on, then I'm not sure I would like to know. I prefer your poll just the way it is.

I would say the no option is a bit biased, because people can't say no without looking like pervs.

If a lot of the people are saying 'yes' because breastfeeding turns them on, then I'm not sure I would like to know. I prefer your poll just the way it is.

I would say the no option is a bit biased, because people can't say no without looking like pervs.

It wasn't intentionally biased. I was simply taking the reasoning from the article. Their reasons for not liking it were either "it's gross" or "men can't see an exposed breast without being turned on."

I figure you guys can say "Of course," whether it is, "Of course, I really like it," or "Of course, it's good for the baby," or any other "Of course,..."

Aye, seems to be what happened. I'm just telling him why we didn't pick the one below it.

What is "tasteless" about it?

Holy crap, people, we are not in goddam middle school! It's a BREAST. Showing a breast is not offensive. Showing a breast, particularly engaged in the act of feeding an infant, should be regarded as one of the most simple, natural, beautiful images in human culture. It should be regarded as such even if the breast isn't perfectly air-brushed and perky. It should be regarded as such even if *gasp* you can see a bit of nipple. It's a BREAST.


I know you were joking, but this is really kind of sick if you think about it...

"Ladies, never forget that your bodies are public property, and their primary function is to (sexually) entertain others. If you want people to let you use your breasts for the function of breast feeding, you must cover them up in public. If you don't, then you're obligated to share your body with anybody who wants it, whether you want to or not."

Now THAT is tasteless.

I have nothing against breastfeeding in public. I work in OB/GYN... breasts with babies attached to them is a very common sight at work. So much that my male colleagues never bug-eyed around them (it's kinda the mark of a newbie) We tell all our patients that breastfeeding is best for their baby, or breastfeed with formula supplement. It's part of our birthing orientation class, and we help with the first feedings after birth while they'll in our care. We heavily tout the benefits of breastfeeding. I agree that a breastfeeding mom is one of the most beautiful sights... but that picture?

It's just a breast with a child plopped on it. It's not artistic at all. It's suppose it's supposed to represent a mom and her child bonding over breastfeeding. What bonding is there? We see nothing of the mother other than the breast. We dont' see an arm wrapped around, or even the mother's face. but you don't see anything other than the breast to represent the mom. And like I said before... the baby just looks plopped on. Like, no arms holding or anything. Bonding? Not really.

Just to question the motives of some voters here, I'd like to point out the rather large number of males who voted for breastfeeding. You sure some of you shouldn't have clicked the option below?

I just voted the "yes, of course" thing. And no, no mistake there. Having a baby attached makes a breast absolutely non-sexual for me. All I can see there is a mother feeding its child, nothing else...

Didn't bother to read the whole thread, just in case I'm repeating someone...

I don't see what's wrong with breastfeeding in public. It's the most natural and healthy method to feed a kid, much healthier than bottle feeding. As long as the women try to be discreet about it (Which they do) I don't see a problem with it.

true. It offends my mother in law that the children can't have cheesecake because it will damage their intestines, I wonder if it is rude of them to say "no thank you" when offered, or should they eat it and suffer the consequences of pain, intestinal damage, and the higher chance of cancer later in life?
Your children have never enjoyed the sheer ecstacy of a freshly baked chocolate cheesecake?

Very nice restaurant you ran. However, I know I've been asked to move to the bar (or other table etc.,) if the restaurant has people standing in line to eat and we are simply ordering more drinks...
Well, that's a restaurant that doesn't deserve guests. That is rude.
It's also a pretty poor idea to inconvenience customers who are still ordering. They would probably stop ordering, leave, and never return.

In the US this isn't allowed.

They may not have children's menus, they may not have high chairs, but they cannot refuse service to a child based on his or her age. It's simply illegal. It would be like refusing service based on someone's race or national origin.
I'm pretty they are allowed, and that they are called "bars".

Your children have never enjoyed the sheer ecstacy of a freshly baked chocolate cheesecake?
no, and most likely they never will, they have never had tollhouse chocolate chip cookies, or fettucini alfredo, or chicken noodle soup, or graham crackers, or chocolate malts, or brownie sundaes.........or pizza.

I could go on for hours.

I have nothing against breastfeeding in public. I work in OB/GYN... breasts with babies attached to them is a very common sight at work. So much that my male colleagues never bug-eyed around them (it's kinda the mark of a newbie) We tell all our patients that breastfeeding is best for their baby, or breastfeed with formula supplement. It's part of our birthing orientation class, and we help with the first feedings after birth while they'll in our care. We heavily tout the benefits of breastfeeding. I agree that a breastfeeding mom is one of the most beautiful sights... but that picture?

It's just a breast with a child plopped on it. It's not artistic at all. It's suppose it's supposed to represent a mom and her child bonding over breastfeeding. What bonding is there? We see nothing of the mother other than the breast. We dont' see an arm wrapped around, or even the mother's face. but you don't see anything other than the breast to represent the mom. And like I said before... the baby just looks plopped on. Like, no arms holding or anything. Bonding? Not really.

Actually, you can see the mother's hand behind the baby's head - albeit not much of it. The photo is zoomed in a bit much to see her arms. But the way the baby is looking up at her seems to express bonding quite well.

I guess it's just a matter of opinion. =)

Actually, you can see the mother's hand behind the baby's head - albeit not much of it. The photo is zoomed in a bit much to see her arms. But the way the baby is looking up at her seems to express bonding quite well.

I guess it's just a matter of opinion. =)
I kind of figured that the baby was meant to be the focus of the picture on a cover of BABYtalk magazine. Crazy, I know...

I kind of figured that the baby was meant to be the focus of the picture on a cover of BABYtalk magazine. Crazy, I know...
You mean there is something in the picture besides a BREAST!?

no, and most likely they never will, they have never had tollhouse chocolate chip cookies, or fettucini alfredo, or chicken noodle soup, or graham crackers, or chocolate malts, or brownie sundaes.........or pizza.

I could go on for hours.

Looking at that list, what the heck could you have been ordering in that restaurant that you frequent enough to breastfeed there on more than one occasion anyway?

I can't determine the common denominator in that list of yours, unless it is flour. Is it processed foods that you avoid or non-organic foods, or anything that isn't all natural (no artificial food colors and flavors or preservatives)? Unless someone is glucose or lactose intolerant I don't understand the anti-flour and anti-dairy thing.

We do a limited Feingold diet at our house (one of the boys has allergies out the ying-yang, including a reaction to artificial coloring, and the diet helps) so I understand some of what you are talking about that way, but we can buy or make all natural products with sugar, flour and eggs etc., it’s not a problem for us.

Looking at that list, what the heck could you have been ordering in that restaurant that you frequent enough to breastfeed there on more than one occasion anyway?

I can't determine the common denominator in that list of yours, unless it is flour. Is it processed foods that you avoid or non-organic foods, or anything that isn't all natural (no artificial food colors and flavors or preservatives)? Unless someone is glucose or lactose intolerant I don't understand the anti-flour and anti-dairy thing.

We do a limited Feingold diet at our house (one of the boys has allergies out the ying-yang, including a reaction to artificial coloring, and the diet helps) so I understand some of what you are talking about that way, but we can buy or make all natural products with sugar, flour and eggs etc., it’s not a problem for us.

flour will kill us.... slowly, but we will be dead anyway, eventually.

we are gluten intolerant, no wheat, rye, barley, oats, malt, ect. The restruants I can eat at are few and far between.

flour will kill us.... slowly, but we will be dead anyway, eventually.

we are gluten intolerant, no wheat, rye, barley, oats, malt, ect. The restruants I can eat at are few and far between.

Your have my utmost sympathy, honestly, my heart goes out to you and your family. I've found it hard enough avoid the artificial colors and flavors and certain preservatives (making things like corn flakes near impossible to find without BHT or TBH's in them), and I've come across a the non-gluten offerings (what few there are) and have always been thankful that I don't have to go that far, but I've often felt-thought how hard that must be.

Your have my utmost sympathy, honestly, my heart goes out to you and your family. I've found it hard enough avoid the artificial colors and flavors and certain preservatives (making things like corn flakes near impossible to find without BHT or TBH's in them), and I've come across a the non-gluten offerings (what few there are) and have always been thankful that I don't have to go that far, but I've often felt-thought how hard that must be.
we are happy to be healthy. ;) we could live without having to pay $8 for a loaf of bread that tatses like cardboard LOL

I kind of figured that the baby was meant to be the focus of the picture on a cover of BABYtalk magazine. Crazy, I know...

bwahahaha. I'm tempted to bring this to work and my colleagues what they think. And it might be a good read. Besides, we need more English magazines (we cater to Expats here in China... not much in the way of English periodicals in the waiting room, other than "That's Shanghai" and such...)

the funniest part of the magazine cover is that it was an elbow not a breast

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/US/07/27/nursing.cover.ap/vert.breast.feeding.ap.jpg

hmm... I notice there is no "Yes, it makes me horny" option. WTF?:D

Sure, breastfeed in public. Just be discreet. No need to draw attention to yourself... just drape a scarf, napkin, etc over whatever's exposed without getting it in Junior's mouth or over his face.

If you 'knew' it was offensive to the restaurant atmosphere, you should have covered up or gone to the bathroom,

*I* don't eat where I defecate and urinate, I sure as hell don't want an infant doing the same!

Sure, breastfeed in public. Just be discreet. No need to draw attention to yourself... just drape a scarf, napkin, etc over whatever's exposed without getting it in Junior's mouth or over his face.
That's what most women do when breastfeeding anyway. It's not as if they rip their shirt and bra off and expose their boobs for all to see.

You know what I find funny? Men, can show their chest in public and the only real thing they have in common with women, visibly, is a nipple. However, most people will allow a woman to wear clothing that exposes pretty much any part of the breast EXCEPT the nipple, which looks pretty much exactly like a man's (well, sometimes). What's the deal with that? I think it should be acceptable to show thier nipples (which would make breastfeeding not a problem), but not any other part of the breasts. No more cleavage. Just nipple shirts.

You know what I find funny? Men, can show their chest in public and the only real thing they have in common with women, visibly, is a nipple. However, most people will allow a woman to wear clothing that exposes pretty much any part of the breast EXCEPT the nipple, which looks pretty much exactly like a man's (well, sometimes). What's the deal with that? I think it should be acceptable to show thier nipples (which would make breastfeeding not a problem), but not any other part of the breasts. No more cleavage. Just nipple shirts.
:confused: erm... nipple shirts?

once again...it has nothing to do with breatfeeding. Anybody can do it in a bathroom, private house, private area, etc. it has nothing to do with the welfare of children. It has to do with the same anti-public nudity laws applying no matter what the reason for the nudity was.:rolleyes:

So if you drop hydrochloric acid on your jeans, and it's eating through and burning you, you'll be arrested for public nudity because you dropped trou?

I doubt it.

So if you drop hydrochloric acid on your jeans, and it's eating through and burning you, you'll be arrested for public nudity because you dropped trou?

I doubt it.
Only if you're going commando.

So if you drop hydrochloric acid on your jeans, and it's eating through and burning you, you'll be arrested for public nudity because you dropped trou?

I doubt it.
God wouldn't let that happen to a man.

Then why are they the vocal minority?

If so many normal christians out there have no particular problem with it, then why do they remain silent, and allow nutbags like Fallwell, or Robertson to speak for them?

Why do christians like those get to speak for the same ones?

Why dont more christians have a bigger problem with that?

We do. No one listens when we denounce them, though.

We do. No one listens when we denounce them, though.

It's not interesting. Just like no one listens when people from hollywood are just saying normal things, but we all know what Tom Cruise is saying.

There are already restaurants that don't allow children...if anything, we live in a very anti-child society in the US and in Canada, despite the stupid-mongering of those who claim that it is child-centred. The single, childless lifestyle is glamorised, and people constantly whine about people with children and all the 'benefits' they receive, all the 'lee-way' parents get and so on.


One of my friends and colleagues grew up in France. According to her, dogs were welcome in restaurants (as they were trained to lay under the table and stay) while toddlers were not.

It's not interesting. Just like no one listens when people from hollywood are just saying normal things, but we all know what Tom Cruise is saying.
Agreed sensationalism draws the media