Breast feeding in public?

We don't allow nudity in public, so why whould we allow breast feeding? I don't really care either way, I just don't like that there is an exeption to the rule just because a baby is involved.

We don't allow nudity in public, so why whould we allow breat feeding? I don't really care either way, I just don't like that there is an exeption to the rule just because a baby is involved.

redstorm72

A guy can walk around shirtless and he wont get arrested....

[QUOTE="redstorm72"]

We don't allow nudity in public, so why whould we allow breat feeding? I don't really care either way, I just don't like that there is an exeption to the rule just because a baby is involved.

DroidPhysX

A guy can walk around shirtless and he wont get arrested....

That's because he doesn't have breasts. Breasts are considered a "sexual" organ (thus the reason I get charged with sexual assualt if I touch one) while a males chest is not. A dude can't walk around with his penis hanging out.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="redstorm72"]

We don't allow nudity in public, so why whould we allow breat feeding? I don't really care either way, I just don't like that there is an exeption to the rule just because a baby is involved.

redstorm72

A guy can walk around shirtless and he wont get arrested....

That's because he doesn't have breasts. Breasts are considered a "sexual" organ (thus the reason I get charged with sexual assualt if I touch one) while a males chest is not. A dude can't walk around with his penis hanging out.

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="redstorm72"]

We don't allow nudity in public, so why whould we allow breat feeding? I don't really care either way, I just don't like that there is an exeption to the rule just because a baby is involved.

redstorm72

A guy can walk around shirtless and he wont get arrested....

That's because he doesn't have breasts. Breasts are considered a "sexual" organ (thus the reason I get charged with sexual assualt if I touch one) while a males chest is not. A dude can't walk around with his penis hanging out.

Guys do have breasts. Some of them even have breasts larger than most girls I've seen.

I don't have a personal problem with it as it's just a natural function and since it's generally the law in the U.S. that you can't prohibit such activity there's no reason to ever get worked up about it.

We don't allow nudity in public, so why whould we allow breast feeding? I don't really care either way, I just don't like that there is an exeption to the rule just because a baby is involved.

redstorm72

[QUOTE="redstorm72"]

We don't allow nudity in public, so why whould we allow breat feeding? I don't really care either way, I just don't like that there is an exeption to the rule just because a baby is involved.

DroidPhysX

A guy can walk around shirtless and he wont get arrested....

Until the people that own the department store, restaurant, bar, mall, court house, funeral home, museum, auto dealership, or theater tell me to put my shirt back on, and I give them the finger. Then I get arrested. Lame.

[QUOTE="redstorm72"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

A guy can walk around shirtless and he wont get arrested....

worlock77

That's because he doesn't have breasts. Breasts are considered a "sexual" organ (thus the reason I get charged with sexual assualt if I touch one) while a males chest is not. A dude can't walk around with his penis hanging out.

Guys do have breasts. Some of them even have breasts larger than most girls I've seen.

Thats a disease it's called ginecomastia, where men develop large breasts but again it is not a sexual organ is either because of fat or genetics but since is not a sexual organ if they decide to walk shirtless I believe they wouldn't be breaking any law except for common sense.

[QUOTE="redstorm72"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

A guy can walk around shirtless and he wont get arrested....

worlock77

That's because he doesn't have breasts. Breasts are considered a "sexual" organ (thus the reason I get charged with sexual assualt if I touch one) while a males chest is not. A dude can't walk around with his penis hanging out.

Guys do have breasts. Some of them even have breasts larger than most girls I've seen.

*sigh*

You know what I meant. Males chests are not considered "sexual" organs, female chests are. I didn't make this rule up, it's just what our society thinks.

But, as we have said before, breasts are sexual toys... Sure, not being tolerant enough is close-minded, but isn't being too tolerant just as bad?

Personally, I don't mind, I would just look the other way, but I can understand how it makes some people unconfortable, and for good reasons.

bloodling

It is not the mother's fault if immature people cannot get over the dual-functionality of breasts. In CDRom's argument about breasts being sexual toys due to evolutionary processes, the reason for the appeal of breasts in males is because they see virile women able to care for and feed their offspring, just because we now live in a society where breasts are available readily everywhere mainly as a sexual aide doesn't mean that their original purpose is somehow negated.

A baby needs to feed approximately 6 - 8 times a day, when they are hungry they are hungry, forcing the baby to wait for up to half an hour while I mother finds an 'acceptable' place to hide herself away is cruel and entirely selfish. And completely narrow-minded, as I said.

[QUOTE="cd_rom"]

[QUOTE="da-big-girl007"]

Yes and I feel sorry for those women.

da-big-girl007

There not toys because part of the human body, and they produce nourishment for another person.

But I know you guys are just trolling so what ever.

[QUOTE="bloodling"]But, as we have said before, breasts are sexual toys... Sure, not being tolerant enough is close-minded, but isn't being too tolerant just as bad?

Personally, I don't mind, I would just look the other way, but I can understand how it makes some people unconfortable, and for good reasons.

MissLibrarian

It is not the mother's fault if immature people cannot get over the dual-functionality of breasts. In CDRom's argument about breasts being sexual toys due to evolutionary processes, the reason for the appeal of breasts in males is because they see virile women able to care for and feed their offspring, just because we now live in a society where breasts are available readily everywhere mainly as a sexual aide doesn't mean that their original purpose is somehow negated.

A baby needs to feed approximately 6 - 8 times a day, when they are hungry they are hungry, forcing the baby to wait for up to half an hour while I mother finds an 'acceptable' place to hide herself away is cruel and entirely selfish. And completely narrow-minded, as I said.

[QUOTE="TacticalDesire"]

Only if the women in question is under the age of 30 and has an amazing rack. Personally though, I'd ask your brother's opinion on the matter;)

No offense but if you get any kind ofsexual amusementwhile seeing a women breast feeding her child, you need help. Womens breasts are NOT sexual toys like many men see them as.

It is not the mother's fault if immature people cannot get over the dual-functionality of breasts. In CDRom's argument about breasts being sexual toys due to evolutionary processes, the reason for the appeal of breasts in males is because they see virile women able to care for and feed their offspring, just because we now live in a society where breasts are available readily everywhere mainly as a sexual aide doesn't mean that their original purpose is somehow negated.

A baby needs to feed approximately 6 - 8 times a day, when they are hungry they are hungry, forcing the baby to wait for up to half an hour while I mother finds an 'acceptable' place to hide herself away is cruel and entirely selfish. And completely narrow-minded, as I said.

MissLibrarian

Well first of all I hate it when people bring babies in restaurants and such, I consider it disrespectful.

Back to the point: a man's genitals also have another functionality, which is to pee. When we need to pee, we go to the bathroom. We don't just pee in public. I think women should at least cover their breasts when breast feeding, not necessarily leave and go elsewhere.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="da-big-girl007"]

No offense but if you get any kind of sexualamusementwhile seeing a women breast feeding her child, you need help. Womens breasts are NOT sexual toys like many men see them as.

Yes and I feel sorry for those women.

[QUOTE="cd_rom"]

[QUOTE="da-big-girl007"]

Yes and I feel sorry for those women.

There not toys because part of the human body, and they produce nourishment for another person.

But I know you guys are just trolling so what ever.

Well first of all I hate it when people bring babies in restaurants and such, I consider it disrespectful.

Back to the point: a man's genitals also have another functionality, which is to pee. When we need to pee, we go to the bathroom. We don't just pee in public. I think women should at least cover their breasts when breast feeding, not necessarily leave and go elsewhere.

bloodling

Babies in restaurants etc. is another debate, but I generally agree with you, unless it's a 'family'-themed restaurant or something.

The fact is you are looking at this from an adult POV rather than the baby's. When a baby needs to pee, it pees. When it needs to poop, it poops. When it needs to feed, it should be allowed to feed. If the baby was a full grown adult it would OBVIOUSLY adhere to the rules of society (going to the toilet rather than peeing in the street), but as it is it doesn't give a damn, it just knows it needs what it needs when it needs it.

Granted the mother should have the common decency to cover herself up somewhat, I don't disagree with that (as an adult she should understand that for whatever reason whipping your chesticles out in public is seen as inherently 'wrong' I suppose), but I have have a major issue with people saying she should be at home or locked in a disgusting public toilet cubicle or something when she could be sitting on a sunny park bench or whatever.

Do you think its okay to breastfeed in public? Personally I don't care as long as their covering it up with a towel or something.

da-big-girl007

I don't see a problem with that. They are just nursing their baby. Nothing wrong with that. Think of it this way. Would you rather have to deal with a screaming crying baby who is hungry OR one which is fed, quiet & happy? Yeah..... that's what I thought.

Also, if you don't like it, all you have to do is turn around & walk away. No one is forcing you by pointing a gun to your head & making you watch it.

I think it's okay, as long as I'm allowed to stare. ;)

BluRayHiDef

Indeed :lol:

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="redstorm72"]

That's because he doesn't have breasts. Breasts are considered a "sexual" organ (thus the reason I get charged with sexual assualt if I touch one) while a males chest is not. A dude can't walk around with his penis hanging out.

Darthkaiser

Guys do have breasts. Some of them even have breasts larger than most girls I've seen.

Thats a disease it's called ginecomastia, where men develop large breasts but again it is not a sexual organ is either because of fat or genetics but since is not a sexual organ if they decide to walk shirtless I believe they wouldn't be breaking any law except for common sense.

Men still have breasts. You seem to be confusing the size of breasts with the existance of breasts. Just as some men have large breasts there are some women, sexually mature women, who are as flat as a 13 year-old boy.

It be to hard for men to look down at a woman an stare..Im a gentleman but even id have a hard time not to take a gander..If her breast where a perfect c cup ya no the handful type..Any man dont care who you are going to take a peek..Even woman would just to see what he or she compares em to..As others said it should stay in the bedroom..If a woman catches you lookin than shes embarrassed...Its like a woman dresses with a low top an a man takes a peek..Than the lady tries to cover up..Well you dress like that so we do peek..Than blush to cover up wtf is that all about???

I don't think it's an issue so long as they keep it covered. However, it has never been and never will be socially acceptable to whip the ladies out in public, and I think that should still apply weather they're breastfeeding or not. Also, I think that would be embarrassing. Like, hello; everyone can see. Most women wouldn't walk around topless, and so most women wouldn't indiscreetly breastfeed in public.

I dont really care either way but why not just give the baby formula? Because when you breast feed your child arent they more prone to anything you might have thus the risk of getting the child sick?

killblade37

I don't think it's an issue so long as they keep it covered. However, it has never been and never will be socially acceptable to whip the ladies out in public, and I think that should still apply weather they're breastfeeding or not. Also, I think that would be embarrassing. Like, hello; everyone can see. Most women wouldn't walk around topless, and so most women wouldn't indiscreetly breastfeed in public.

SkyHalcyon

Actually in earlier western societies it was perfectly acceptable for women to bare their breasts, regardless of whether they even had an infant. And in some countries today they don't think anything of it. It is not inconceivable that we might one day overcome this stigma ourselves.

there's nothing wrong with it in public. it's a parent feeding an infant.

[QUOTE="wretch0101"]

What would you think if you saw a man breast feeding a child?

worlock77

I'd think that he was daft. I'd wonder if he maybe had some mental issue.

(yes, it is possible for a man to lactate)

Of course they should it is a natural thing, why should they have to feel the need to be hidden away and not do it in public

But this is coming from someone that hates PDArawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]But this is coming from someone that hates PDAMissLibrarian

It is always unexpected...my mind will suddenly figure out what is going on and then their is an instant gag reflexrawsavon

You have the right to hold hands...just don't be upset when I come and slap them apart. ...f***ing heathens I don't know why. But seeing people mug down is just so unappealing. It is usually the shock of seeing a mom breast feed that gets me. It is always unexpected...my mind will suddenly figure out what is going on and then their is an instant gag reflexrawsavon

Ah so *that's* why you kept slapping my hand away when we were married :P

I can understand the shock thing - I still get it every time, especially when I'm doing 'Bounce and Rhyme' with the babies (it's a weekly music session for all those who might, for some reason, want to make a sick sexual joke about that) at the library, I always double-take when I notice a mum doing it =\

Still I wouldn't dream of saying anything about it, any more then I would say something about a gay couple out in the street or whatever (not that I am at all homophobic but just as an example), I FIRMLY believe in 'live and let live'. Even if I didn't like babies I wouldn't want one to starve for my selfish benefit, my being squeamish is MY problem, not theirs.

Several things ITT: 1. I think they should have the right to do it

2. I think it is f***ing disgusting To all those saying it is natural, well so it taking a dump. I don't want to see that either. But this is coming from someone that hates PDA and also hates babies...so w/e

3. To those saying they want to look -most breasts don't end up so great after breast feeding a kid...just saying

4. I agree with some users saying that it is rude to bring babies out to eat, to the movies, etc. IMO you sacrifice certain rights when you have a kid...get a babysitter or stay home (restaurants and movies are not necessities) -the mom will say it is only fair she still gets to do those things -I will say it is only fair you don't f*** up other people's experience that they paid for as well In the end, I think people should have that right. But I also think society should be free to speak their mind and ridicule themrawsavon

1. No arguement.

2, What exactly is disgusting about it? And the taking a dump analogy fails. We can hold it. Babies can't hold their hunger.

3. It's a bit of a stupid comment to make, but I agree with your rebuttal to it.

4. How is it rude to take a baby out to a restaurant? If they're crying, I agree. But if the baby is behaving, why shouldn't he be able to go with his parents to eat out?

[QUOTE="rawsavon"] You have the right to hold hands...just don't be upset when I come and slap them apart. ...f***ing heathens I don't know why. But seeing people mug down is just so unappealing. It is usually the shock of seeing a mom breast feed that gets me. It is always unexpected...my mind will suddenly figure out what is going on and then their is an instant gag reflexMissLibrarian

Ah so *that's* why you kept slapping my hand away when we were married :P

I can understand the shock thing - I still get it every time, especially when I'm doing 'Bounce and Rhyme' with the babies (it's a weekly music session for all those who might, for some reason, want to make a sick sexual joke about that) at the library, I always double-take when I notice a mum doing it =\

Still I wouldn't dream of saying anything about it, any more then I would say something about a gay couple out in the street or whatever (not that I am at all homophobic but just as an example), I FIRMLY believe in 'live and let live'. Even if I didn't like babies I wouldn't want one to starve for my selfish benefit, my being squeamish is MY problem, not theirs.

thats hot... Id stare at it...... just saying

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Several things ITT: 1. I think they should have the right to do it

2. I think it is f***ing disgusting To all those saying it is natural, well so it taking a dump. I don't want to see that either. But this is coming from someone that hates PDA and also hates babies...so w/e

3. To those saying they want to look -most breasts don't end up so great after breast feeding a kid...just saying

4. I agree with some users saying that it is rude to bring babies out to eat, to the movies, etc. IMO you sacrifice certain rights when you have a kid...get a babysitter or stay home (restaurants and movies are not necessities) -the mom will say it is only fair she still gets to do those things -I will say it is only fair you don't f*** up other people's experience that they paid for as well In the end, I think people should have that right. But I also think society should be free to speak their mind and ridicule themBuryMe

1. No arguement.

2, What exactly is disgusting about it? ANd the taking a dump analogy fails. We can hold it. Babies can't hold their hunger.

3. It's a bit of a stupid comment to make, but I agree with your rebuttal to it.

4. How is it rude to take a baby out to a restaurant? If they're crying, I agree. But if the baby is behaving, why shouldn't he be able to go with his parents to eat out?

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Several things ITT: 1. I think they should have the right to do it

2. I think it is f***ing disgusting To all those saying it is natural, well so it taking a dump. I don't want to see that either. But this is coming from someone that hates PDA and also hates babies...so w/e

3. To those saying they want to look -most breasts don't end up so great after breast feeding a kid...just saying

4. I agree with some users saying that it is rude to bring babies out to eat, to the movies, etc. IMO you sacrifice certain rights when you have a kid...get a babysitter or stay home (restaurants and movies are not necessities) -the mom will say it is only fair she still gets to do those things -I will say it is only fair you don't f*** up other people's experience that they paid for as well In the end, I think people should have that right. But I also think society should be free to speak their mind and ridicule themrawsavon

1. No arguement.

2, What exactly is disgusting about it? ANd the taking a dump analogy fails. We can hold it. Babies can't hold their hunger.

3. It's a bit of a stupid comment to make, but I agree with your rebuttal to it.

4. How is it rude to take a baby out to a restaurant? If they're crying, I agree. But if the baby is behaving, why shouldn't he be able to go with his parents to eat out?

Who the hell stares at a mom breast feeding an infant while eating at a restaurant?

The only time I will say something is when something 'disgusting' is happening in a restaurant or when there is someone (baby, kid, adult, w/e) in a movie being loud ...it is at those points that I feel someone is infringing on my rightsrawsavon

'Disgusting' is relevant of course, but I still think you should speak to someone if you find a mother feeding her baby actually physically disturbing, enough to put you off your food =\ Something not right there. However unless you're in an Applebees (sp?) or somewhere kids shouldn't be allowed in restaurants imo. Not posh adult ones anyway.

And anyone has a right to be annoyed at something being loud and annoying during a film, baby or no. My local cinema has special viewings on Weds morning for mums with babies, where crying is acceptable since everyone there is either a parent or a baby, and they play the movie quieter as well so the babies can sleep and things. Unless it's something like that, I have NO IDEA why anyone would take a baby to the cinema.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="BuryMe"]

1. No arguement.

2, What exactly is disgusting about it? ANd the taking a dump analogy fails. We can hold it. Babies can't hold their hunger.

3. It's a bit of a stupid comment to make, but I agree with your rebuttal to it.

4. How is it rude to take a baby out to a restaurant? If they're crying, I agree. But if the baby is behaving, why shouldn't he be able to go with his parents to eat out?

DroidPhysX

Who the hell stares at a mom breast feeding an infant while eating at a restaurant?

...and now we are delving into my aversion to babies...and that will be enough of that :Prawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]...and now we are delving into my aversion to babies...and that will be enough of that :PMissLibrarian