Somebody just sent me the following review from Amazon:
"Stop feeding your baby after 10-15 minutes a side? My baby is a slow eater. Why would I deprive him of food? And what's the problem with allowing him some non-nutritive sucking after he's done eating? Breastfeeding is about more than just calories. You have to meet their emotional needs too."
Their emotional needs? Really? Or the sexual needs of an unfulfilled mother who can't get a grown man to suck on her nipples, so she utilizes a poor baby for this purpose? Of course, it's all presented like it's about the baby's needs. It's the baby who enjoys on an emotional level sucking on her nipples. Because the baby told her so.
It's scary to see how people would do anything they please to their children and then justify it all by saying that it's for the children's good.
11 comments:
First, I want to take issue with strict separation of emotional and physical needs. For obvious reasons I am not a breastfeeding expert... However, I do have a cat, and sometimes take care of neighbors' cat while neighbors are away. Even grown-up cats, who are supposed to be very independent, like physical contact. And I can swear their needs are emotional as well as physical. And I like that contact on both physical and emotional level too. Hope you will not suspect me in repressed subconscious sexual attraction to cats? :) Thus, I would not discount a possibility of human baby's emotional need for physical contact, including contact with the breast. After all, breast is not only sexual organ...
Second, the author of the review in question said that she has been breastfeeding for a coupe of months. Months, not years. I think it is too early to suspect her in a wish to prolong breastfeeding for her own sexual gratification.
V.
If we follow this line of reasoning to its logical consequences, then why shouldn't the daddy be able to give his nipples for the baby to suck on? Who's to say that fathers can't provide for their babies' emotional needs just as well? Only, I have a feeling that poeple wouldn't react all that well to daddies doing this. I wonder why that is.
Maybe I'm just cranky because I'm feeling sick today, I don't know. But this review sounded very scary to me.
I agree with V. And the reason fathers can't provide is because of the shape of the breast. The female breast, enlarged while breastfeeding, is easier to suckle on and conducive to a baby's needs whereas a male's is not.
You should go to the swimming pool more. :-) You'll see some men whose breasts are bigger than mine. :-)
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar... :)
V.
That's my thesis director's favorite phrase. :-)
You should read that review again when you're not sick and cranky -- maybe you'll realize that what this mom is saying is perfectly reasonable. It's the rare mother who gets off on nursing her baby. Breastfeeding is indeed about meeting the baby's needs, as well as the mother's health.
Sally Wendkos Olds
author, THE COMPLETE BOOK OF BREASTFEEDING
Nice to have you here, Sally.
I reread the comment and it still sounds disturbing.
Since you are a specialist in these things, how long do you think it's the best to breastfeed a child?
You are far off the mark on this one.
For those who don't think babies need to suck even when they're not hungry, consider this: do you think it's normal to offer a pacifier? A pacifier is just a breast substitute. Babies who don't get pacifiers suck their thumbs. It is a very strong instinct to suck on things.
As a previous commenter said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Reading something different into it all the time is just sick.
breastfeeding is not pedophilia! I've never seen your blog before, but this post is absolute ignorance. Breastfeeding toddlers and young children is common in natural societies not influenced by popular media, formula companies and religion. Breasts are objects of sexuality, but objects or nourishment and nurturing.
Post a Comment