In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Apologizing for being right

Today’s Dear Prudie has some doozies, but this is my favorite:

When Grandpa Says the ___ Word: Over Thanksgiving my conservative ornery father used a number of racial and sexually oriented slurs. My college age daughter heard him use one, and she called him on it. She said, “Grandpa, those words are offensive, and when you use them, you sound ignorant and bigoted.” My dad blew up at her and kicked her out of the house. This resulted in my family and my brother’s family leaving. My sister and her family stayed. Unfortunately, based on the slurry of emails that have began circling over the weekend, I think this will be a divisive family issue. My sister’s family essentially agree with my daughter but feel that she should have been more respectful. My brother’s family and mine are embarrassed that it took a girl more than half our age to call out our father’s unacceptable terminology. Do you think anything can be done to heal this situation, and who do you think did the right thing?

A: It’s promising that everyone agrees with your daughter. Brava to her for calling out Grandpa. But it would have been more effective if she’d said, “Grandpa, those words are offensive and when you use them it makes me want to leave the room.” That way she would have been drawing attention to the effect of his bigotry on her, not calling him names. Since your daughter sounds like a brave young woman, she might consider being the one to address this issue. She could contact your father and say that while she stands by her objection to use of racial and sexual language, she apologizes for the way she phrased it. That gives Grandpa a chance to lick his wounds and change his ways. And then the whole family can open a discussion about making Christmas a slur-free holiday.

Ah yes, if she had only just phrased it nicer! Nope. That does not work. And actually, the way the daughter phrased her objections were pretty darn generous. She didn’t call anyone a bigot; she said the use of those words make one sound like a bigot. And that is actually true. I know Grandpa is old, but plenty of old folks aren’t n-word-using assholes who kick their grandchildren out of the house for objecting to racist language.

And then!

Breastfeeding a Big Kid: Four months ago my brother got married to a woman who has a 5-year-old son from a previous relationship. Since they had a private ceremony, we did not meet his new wife and stepson until Dad’s 80th birthday, when they flew over to see us. Things were going well until my new nephew walked over to where the adults were eating dessert and told my SIL that he was thirsty. She whipped out her breast at the dining table and proceeded to breastfeed her son. Although nobody said anything, she sensed we were shocked and casually explained her son had allergies and this was the only healthy milk option for him. Since our mom is not around, my other brothers and Dad are urging me to intervene. My brother, the one who married her, does not seem to care much. Should I say anything to her? How do I start such a conversation?

A: I’m trying to imagine the shiver that might go through your entire family if your brother ever hosts a brunch at his home and his new wife passes around the cream for the coffee. At the risk of bringing down the wrath of La Leche League, 5 years old is way too old to still be on mommy’s breast. By the time the kid can say, “Mom, you’ve been eating too much garlic and it’s upsetting my stomach,” you know it’s time to throw away the nursing bra. Showing too much cleavage to your new husband’s family would be ill-advised the first time you all met. Lactating at the dessert table takes inappropriate to a new level. You say your brother “does not seem to care much” about this, which doesn’t make clear what kind of conversation you’ve had with him. You need to say, “Bro, we’re so happy you’ve found Fiona. We’re sorry her son has food allergies, but we need to let you know we all have a dairy allergy. That is, we’d appreciate if you’d ask her to breast feed in private.” If he won’t take action, then at the next gathering, as she starts to unbutton, all of you should feel free to stampede away from the table. Let’s hope for her son’s sake she finds him a milk substitute. It would be bad for him socially if she had to come and give him nourishment to get him through his SATs.

I can see how breastfeeding a five-year-old makes other people… uncomfortable. We aren’t used to seeing kindergarteners breastfeed. And clearly the parents here need to think of some other healthy milk options, since the breast isn’t going to be an option for the rest of this kid’s life. But beyond that… so what? I mean, the idea of breastfeeding a child until the age of 5 makes my nipples chafe and is not something that I think I would ever do in a million years, but if some other lady is cool with it, then what’s the big deal? That said, maybe the dinner table isn’t the most appropriate place for it (yes, it’s milk and the kid deserves to eat, but if he’s five he is obviously eating other things and can participate in the meal. I can understand an objection to body fluids in close proximity to food, even though it’s not an objection that I would personally make). But surely if she was just sitting on the couch or something it wouldn’t be a big deal? Unless the objection is to a woman “whipping her breast out” (why always with the “whipping”?), which I suspect is the real issue here. To which I basically think, “get over it.”

Posted in Uncategorized

664 thoughts on Apologizing for being right

  1. I guess I don’t get why the kid needs a “milk option” at all. There are other ways to get calcium.

    And yeah, the whole Lysa Arryn act is creepy, but I guess they get to decide how to raise their own kids? I hope, for the son’s sake, that they wean him soon. If nothing else, it’s going to make him feel awkward and embarrassed when he realizes how atypical his experience was.

  2. I hate “whipping”. I hate this, along with “squeezing”, as in “out children”, along with the couple hundred other words that reduce women’s reproductive capabilities to scat play and potty humor.

    Can a boob whip?

  3. it’s kind of funny actually. if the daughter actually HAD said “Grandpa, those words are offensive and when you use them it makes me want to leave the room” dear old grandpa (and everyone else most likely) would have just laughed her off as being too “sensitive” and “PC” and “hippy-dippy” and told her to grow a thicker skin. yeesh.

    anyway i really hope she isn’t made to apologise. and that she doesn’t.

  4. My forty-two-year-old boobs could probably have a go at whipping, but when I was nursing they were shaped somewhat differently. I would say it’s possible for a boob to whip, but probably not a milk-engorged one. Even if it could, ouch.

  5. Grandpa is a jackass who needed a comeuppance, and the granddaughter was right.

    Yes, always the “whipping” of the breast. That said, given that the kid is old enough to read a label and go into the fridge himself, I would think that pumping and a sippy cup might be a better option for social occasions.

  6. I guess I don’t get why the kid needs a “milk option” at all.

    I dunno, maybe cuz he’s a…young mammal? And because it’s perfectly biologically normal for a 5-year-old to be nursing? And because all of the hemming and hawing and social norms in the world don’t change that biological fact?

    I’m still nursing a kid that’s two and a half years old, and at the rate we’re going, I could see it continuing another couple years. People were shocked and horrified when I nursed her at 3 months, 13 months, and 23 months, so I’m not convinced that the concern trolling has anything to do with what people actually know or assume is normal about the parent-child nursing relationship at any particular age, because people – including family – have been shitty and staring and rude and making loud comments ever since she was tiny, well before she was able to ask for her milk using full sentences.

    So I expect to get more shitty attitudes and totally fake concern if we’re still at it when she’s 33, 43, or 53 months old. Fortunately I’m more or less used to it, so I just say fuck ’em all and then feed my kid anyway.

  7. Yeah, what’s with this “whipping” out of boobs? Mine don’t “whip”, and they especially didn’t whip when they were engorged with milk. I prefer “brandishing” boobs instead; sounds more villainous.

    I don’t see how the daughter could have soft-pedaled her response to Grandpa any more than she did; she *didn’t* call him a bigot, and put the focus on *his behavior*. Putting the emphasis on *her feelings* (as Prudie recommends) is ineffective—Grandpa was already demonstrating via his behavior that he isn’t sensitive to others’ feelings. His is sensitive about his own ego though (again, demonstrated by his response to her statement), which is why she put the emphasis on *his image* (the only likely motivator for him to change his behavior). Granddaughter has nothing to apologize for.

  8. Questions for people who support extended breasfeeding…

    1) I was under the assumption that “extended breastfeeding” meant breastfeeding until around age 3, instead of the US norm of stopping breastfeeding around 6-10 months?

    2) At what point would super-extended breastfeeding (as in the breastfed 5 year old letter) turn into something reeeaaaallly inappropriate and borderline abusive?

    Because I will be honest… if I knew someone was regularly breastfeeding their school aged kid, I would be letting CPS know that they might want to take a look at what is going on in that family….

  9. tmc: I dunno, maybe cuz he’s a…young mammal? And because it’s perfectly biologically normal for a 5-year-old to be nursing? And because all of the hemming and hawing and social norms in the world don’t change that biological fact?

    I guess I don’t know what’s meant by “biologically normal” here. Is it like, in the state of nature, or in cave man times, most kids would be nursing at five? I also see why it shouldn’t matter either way, and why mother’s and children’s choices shouldn’t be stigmatized. At the same time, I do see something to be said against it. Raising a child is the process of gradually helping them to mature, to become less dependent on their parents for all kinds of things. It does seem like allowing a child to remain dependent on the mother’s body for sustenance long, long past the time when the child’s capable of consuming solid food might hinder development of other kinds of independence–or might indicate a preference on the mother’s part to delay that independence.

    Then again, maybe not. Regardless, it is a choice to be made in the family, and mothers and children shouldn’t be shamed for whatever choice they make.

  10. Kara: Because I will be honest… if I knew someone was regularly breastfeeding their school aged kid, I would be letting CPS know that they might want to take a look at what is going on in that family….

    Well, congratulations, you are not alone. CPS has indeed removed children for breastfeeding too long. No, there wasn’t any abuse, the judge found, but the mother was “putting her own emotional needs ahead of her child.” Good grief. If they start removing every kid from every house where the parents are putting their own emotional needs first, then well over half of all kids will be in foster care. I’m sure it was much less traumatic to be placed in foster care than for the mother to find a way to wean at the right time for her. So … go ahead and place that call.

    And I say this as someone who does think it’s not developmentally ideal for a child that old to be breastfeeding at all, not to mention what most extended nursers call “nursing etiquette” of not asking at the table.

  11. Anon21: It does seem like allowing a child to remain dependent on the mother’s body for sustenance long, long past the time when the child’s capable of consuming solid food might hinder development of other kinds of independence–or might indicate a preference on the mother’s part to delay that independence.

    He’s not “dependent on his mother’s body for sustenance.” He eats solid food. He’s getting a nip every now and then. I actually agree with your larger point, but I see this ALL THE TIME in discussions of extended breastfeeding – this totally false assumption that the child is only getting milk.

  12. It does seem like allowing a child to remain dependent on the mother’s body for sustenance long, long past the time when the child’s capable of consuming solid food might hinder development of other kinds of independence–or might indicate a preference on the mother’s part to delay that independence.

    See, people say stuff like that, but there’s no actual scientific basis for that assumption. And in fact both the World Health Organization and the American Academy of Pediatrics both explicity say that there is no upper limit for a breastfeeding relationship, and there is no evidence to suggest that full term breastfeeding is harmful to a child either mentally, emotionally, phsyically, sexually, or in any other kind of way. Yet people continue to assume that it must be harmful in some way despite the fact that there is ZERO evidence to support that.

    “Biologically normal” basically comes from taking a good hard look a variety of factors, such as what other closely related mammals of our size (apes, natch) are doing when it comes to weaning their young, the development of the human immune system, etc. Biologically normal ranges from a minimum of 2.5 to 7 years. There is a fantastic chapter called “A Time to Wean” in the book “Breastfeeding: Biocultural Perspectives” by Katherine Dettwyler. The entire book is great, but that particular chapter is my favorite, and it goes into all the fun sciencey shit in depth. I highly recommended it if you want to learn more about the intersections of sociology and biology when it comes to breastfeeding.

  13. I find the logic of “my kid has milk allergies, therefore must have breast milk” weird. Kids don’t need to drink milk once they’re eating solid foods. Most of the people in Asia consume hardly any milk, for instance, despite being mammals.

    I also think it’s polite to follow other people’s social norms when breast milk is obviously not this kid’s main or even secondary source of sustenance. I think it’s annoying and expensive to have to bring some useless gift when staying with my in-laws, but i know they think it’s important, so I do it. My parents don’t wear shoes in the house even though they like to because that’s our custom. If people feel uncomfortable with someone breast feeding a five-year-old in their house, they should also feel comfortable telling the couple about it.

  14. @chingona: Good point. Nonetheless, I think the fact that the dependence is partial or incidental (as, by analogy, with a college student who both works a part time job and receives some money from her parents for living expenses) doesn’t entirely invalidate the point that the child’s maturation could be slowed by extremely extended breastfeeding.

  15. Anon21: Is it like, in the state of nature, or in cave man times, most kids would be nursing at five?

    Based on studies of other apes given the average infant development rate and gestational rate of humans babies should probably breast feed for about 3-6 years.

    Kara: Because I will be honest… if I knew someone was regularly breastfeeding their school aged kid, I would be letting CPS know that they might want to take a look at what is going on in that family….

    Hey, my professor did a survey and there was a case of a woman breast feeding her 10 year old. And plenty of people do try and take the kids away or use breast feeding in custody disputes, and by people I mean assholes.

  16. I would ask what is normal within the extended breastfeeding community. By that age, typically the child is able to get full nutrition on non-breastmilk foods and the extended breastfeeding is a night-time, comfort-nursing type of activity.

    My concern is not that there is any sort of outright abuse happening, but that the child isn’t being encouraged to develop abilities outside of the mother’s circle of care. It’s one of the things that concerns me about “child-led” and “attachment” parenting. One of the functions of parenting is setting limits and pushing (gently) the child out of the nest, so to speak. Parents that can’t or won’t set limits or say no aren’t doing their children any favors.

    1. My concern is not that there is any sort of outright abuse happening, but that the child isn’t being encouraged to develop abilities outside of the mother’s circle of care. It’s one of the things that concerns me about “child-led” and “attachment” parenting. One of the functions of parenting is setting limits and pushing (gently) the child out of the nest, so to speak. Parents that can’t or won’t set limits or say no aren’t doing their children any favors.

      Yes. If someone is breast-feeding their child until the kid is 10, I think that’s maybe an indication that the parent needs to set some limits. Obviously it’s not reason to remove the kid from the household, but it’s not ideal.

  17. Also, looking at other mammals for “what is natural” is silly. Humans have much shorter periods between gestation in the “natural” environment than apes do, or most other closely related mammal species. Chimps have babies every 5 to 6 years. Gorillas every 4 to 5 years. In the wild it’s pretty unlikely a 5-year-old would still be breastfeeding because the mom would have had another kid (if not two) by that point.

    If a woman wants to breastfeed her school-aged kid, that’s her business. I don’t think it does much harm although I’d argue it does very little good either. But I hate all these faux-claims that superextended breast feeding is somehow natural, and therefore exempt from our notions of politeness/hospitality.

  18. The ten year old is just the stand out story that gets told (constantly, I took a bunch of classes with that prof. and her focus was on breast feeding),

  19. Letter Number 1: Screw Grandpa. She WAS respectful in the way she called him out. Plus, would it not be better to be called out by a family member than a stranger on the street?

    Letter Number 2: I’m torn.. on one hand, if mom, dad and kid are all cool with the kid nursing at five, then settle down… at least he’s not being neglected. But at the same time, it’s not the same as a little baby, and if you’re at someone’s house if a kid is old enough to understand things like manners.. like ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ then I don’t see the big deal in excusing yourself from the table to nurse.

  20. Also, looking at other mammals for “what is natural” is silly. Humans have much shorter periods between gestation in the “natural” environment than apes do, or most other closely related mammal species. Chimps have babies every 5 to 6 years. Gorillas every 4 to 5 years. In the wild it’s pretty unlikely a 5-year-old would still be breastfeeding because the mom would have had another kid (if not two) by that point.

    Oh cool, thanks for that totally legit and thorough analysis.

  21. Robotile: Ifindthelogicof“mykidhasmilkallergies,thereforemusthavebreastmilk”weird..

    My aunt was told by her pediatrician to continue breastfeeding her youngest for as long as possible because he had so many food allergies – it would make sure he was getting proper nutrition with minimal allergen contamination. I think he was 4+ when she finally stopped and this was during the 80s even though his allergies continued

    also “5” is a weird age. a young five, a middle five and an almost 6 year old are three completely different animals. we dont know the age of this five year old. also, we dont know with what speech this child said this. was this said in a tired voice – “mama, i tirsty”? adults tend to mature and correct the speech of children when relating dialogue and anecdotes to other adults. speaking of nursing ettiquette, is “thirsty” the code word for wanting to nurse? we dont know this.

    @ florence

    would you be concerned an older child who sucks their thumb or worries on a security blanket to be abused? for many older nursers, nursing at the breast is the equivalent to these things

  22. I’m a big believer in honesty. People being honest is what I like to see as the baseline for social interaction. So, I mean, if that guy’s granddaughter is sorry about what she said then I think she should apologize; if she’s not sorry about what she said then I think she should not apologize. She could also try the backhanded apology, as in: “I’m sorry you’re an asshole and totally overreacted to some honest feedback” or something along those lines.

  23. I don’t understand her first answer at all. My grandparents on both sides are in their mid-80s and from Southern and Midwestern areas where racism, sexism, and homophobia were (and in some cases still are) extremely prevalent. Despite this, they’ve all managed to move the fuck past it and they interact with people of different races, genders, and orientations on a regular basis in a respectful manner. Being old isn’t a viable excuse for being a fucking bigot, and bigots deserve to be called on it. I thought the woman in question should be applauded; it sounds like she did an excellent job: she focused on the words spoken, not the person, and called out inappropriate behavior in a clear, focused manner. It reminds me of the Jay Smooth video where he talks about how to tell someone they sound racist.

  24. but if some other lady is cool with it, then what’s the big deal? That said, maybe the dinner table isn’t the most appropriate place for it

    I think that’s sort of the crux of it. Kindergartner-breast-feeder-lady might be cool with it, but odds are 999 billion to 1 that no one else is.

    And if there’s one place where social norms ought to have some sway, it’s the damn dinner table. Keep your shirt on if it all possible, don’t smell actively awful, generally avoid bodily emissions, etc.

    I get breast-feeding an infant at the table – it’s a baby! It doesn’t have options! But a 5 year-old? Please.

    Also, kind of disagree that “there’s no provable harm” in breastfeeding that late. Even just hand-feeding a kid, rather than letting her/him use a spoon or fork, I’ve seen that build a cycle of dependency with kids I know where the kid just assumes he’ll be fed rather than learning to do it his own self, which makes the kid less independent, wears out the parents, etc. Breastfeeding a kid who can walk is like that many times over. If you can clean yourself up in the bathroom, you need to learn to feed yourself too…for EVERYONE’s sake.

  25. I am one of those people who breastfed until they were five, and all I have to say is that anyone who would call CPS on a family because of too much breastfeeding is a fucking asshole. Seriously, that is a terrible terrible thing to do. Don’t do it.

  26. Jill: Yes. If someone is breast-feeding their child until the kid is 10, I think that’s maybe an indication that the parent needs to set some limits.

    Right, exactly. My second thought is that if the extended breastfeeding is political, it’s perhaps not in an older child’s best interest to be the political flag that mom waves because she wants to take a public, intellectual stand on breastfeeding. Otherwise, I think it’s perfectly acceptable to continue breastfeeding for comfort (the nutritional benefits dwindle after the first couple of years) while letting the child know that it’s appropriate for certain times and places but not others, like in public, or at the dinner table. If a child is old enough, it’s perfectly fine to have an ongoing conversation with them about weaning and what that means and why (we had to do this for my thumb-sucker, which is different, but the process is similar).

    Grandpa, however. My dad is like this — he likes to pick on our politics to piss us off, then acts all scandalized when it works. I live nearer to the parents than my sisters and thus have more interaction with the parents, so I’ve learned to tell him, “Fuck you, old man,” and happily go back to my business. At first he was shocked that I did it, but now he takes a little pleasure in the combat. I love that crotchety old fucker but he’s a bear.

  27. Robotile: But I hate all these faux-claims that superextended breast feeding is somehow natural, and therefore exempt from our notions of politeness/hospitality.

    That’s why the gap is so big between the stated ages, 3-6 has a wide margin. Because the difference between developmental stages and gestation. Human infants develop at slower rates than other apes, leading to longer breast feeding, however the gestation is shorter than expected (based on size) leading to a smaller amount of time breastfeeding. In ideal circumstances about 5 years is the gap between human infants, and breast feeding is a great way to separate pregnancies.
    And I’ll let the fields of evolutionary biology and anthropology know that you have deemed them silly. I expect they will stop their non-sense post haste.

  28. jillian: @ florence

    would you be concerned an older child who sucks their thumb or worries on a security blanket to be abused? for many older nursers, nursing at the breast is the equivalent to these things

    Ha! I accidentally answered this question before I read it.

  29. Robotile: Also, looking at other mammals for “what is natural” is silly. Humans have much shorter periods between gestation in the “natural” environment than apes do, or most other closely related mammal species. Chimps have babies every 5 to 6 years. Gorillas every 4 to 5 years. In the wild it’s pretty unlikely a 5-year-old would still be breastfeeding because the mom would have had another kid (if not two) by that point.

    That is totally the quote I meant.

  30. librarygoose: Because the difference between developmental stages and gestation. Human infants develop at slower rates than other apes, leading to longer breast feeding, however the gestation is shorter than expected (based on size) leading to a smaller amount of time breastfeeding. In ideal circumstances about 5 years is the gap between human infants, and breast feeding is a great way to separate pregnancies.
    And I’ll let the fields of evolutionary biology and anthropology know that you have deemed them silly.

    Just going to throw this out there. As feminists, a lot of our politics evolve from the (correct, I think) viewpoint that biology is not destiny.

  31. Extended breastfeeding is also used as a means of contraception in some cultures, but not really necessary in the contemporary US for the most part.

    This really isn’t a question about breastfeeding, it’s a question about manners. The only thing this LW should raise with the brother is the appropriateness of breastfeeding a child that old at the table. Babies don’t have options, but a child old enough to verbalize a request does not have to be fed right away. Nor, really, is there any reason for the child to get the breast rather than a cup when at someone else’s house.

  32. Wow, I hate Prudence’s answer to letter #1 SO much. Apologize for the words used, really? That girl did a wonderful job of addressing her grandfather’s bigoted language and was clearly more respectful than he deserved. The fact that he blew up and kicked her out of the house shows he’s a controlling ass. Who treats his grand daughter that way? If she were my daughter, I’d make it very clear to Dad that until he learns to respect my children and keep his bigotry to himself, we are done with family gatherings. Same goes for the sister who stayed.

  33. We did the “grandpa, you’re a bigot” thing when I was 13. I didn’t take the edge off it like the woman in the OP; I was a teenager spoiling for a fight. I was right, and he was a drunk, abusive piece of shit until the day he died. It produced a pretty spectacular shouting match; the adults made something of a show of defending him on grounds of seniority and all, but it was all bluster, because everyone knew I was right.

  34. As feminists, a lot of our politics evolve from the (correct, I think) viewpoint that biology is not destiny.

    Who in the world is talking about destiny? This is not about people mandating that others breastfeed their kids into toddlerhood and beyond, at all. It’s about quite the opposite sceniario, in fact.

  35. Florence: Just going to throw this out there. As feminists, a lot of our politics evolve from the (correct, I think) viewpoint that biology is not destiny.

    Just throwing this out there, but I never said it was. I said that when compared with other similar apes (people are apes) human babies could naturally breast feed from 3-6 years. Culture is a huge part of what makes the human species unique, but it doesn’t dispel the fact that we are animals.
    Seriously though, I never wanted to imply every woman has to breast feed for 10 years because it’s “natural”.

  36. See, when my daughter was 4 months old, and people started pressuring me about giving her “real” food, it was because they were oh-so-concerned about XYZ and for her own good blahblahblah. They were full of it. They didn’t listen when I told them the stats, the facts, the recommendations, anything. They couldn’t hear a goddamn word that I said because they already had their minds made up that breastfeeding was icky and inferior and why do I have to do that anyway?

    And…it hasn’t stopped. It’s not like people were magically awesome and understanding and respected what I chose to do with my body and my child when she was a tiny baby, and then became jerks when she grew into a toddler. People have been jerks about this from the very beginning, and it’s ALWAYS because they are “concerned.” And the burden of proof was always ALWAYS on me to show that I wasn’t being abusive, or too permissive, or letting her control me, or blahfuckingblah. And I was always expected to make excuses and give explanations for every tiny nuance of our nursing relationship. Even when she was tiny.

    So now that she’s running and jumping and trying to do handstands and karate kicks, and all these people are still saying the SAME OLD SHIT about how it’s icky and inferior and abusive or permissive or blahMOREfuckingblah…I just. Can’t. Give a fuck. After two and a half years I’ve gotten a zillion dirty looks and rude comments and inappropriate requests (from guys wanting to “taste test”) and people making nasty underhanded comments about my parenting, and even though I TOTALLY BELIEVE* all you people who claim that you’re only doing it because you’re oh-so-CONCERNED about the well-being of my child…I just don’t give a fuck.

    So the next time you look at a woman breastfeeding and are just DYING to say something shitty about it or about her parenting? Save it. She’s already heard it a dozen fucking times that day, I can assure you.

    *This is a lie. I honestly cannot tell the difference between the people who were shitty about my breastfeeding when she was an infant, and the people who are shitty about my breastfeeding her as a toddler. It all comes from the same place as far as I can tell.

  37. RE: Breastfeeding – So, what IS the cut off for dinner table appropriate nursing? 3 months? 6 months? 12 months? When a child is walking? Or can ask for it? If 5 is “too old”, then what age is still young enough?

    The problem I have with this is twofold. 1.) It sends a message to breastfeeding moms that they are welcome to breastfeed ONLY if those around them are not made uncomfortable by the act of breastfeeding. 2.) It suggests that those experiencing the discomfort are in a better position to determine acceptability than the parities involved: mom, child, and any co-parent who might be involved.

  38. @Robotile

    Honestly I think you have it in reverse. It’s not that chimps have such a long period of time between pregnancies therefore they supply milk to their young for such a long period of time. It’s that they supply milk for so long that it suppresses their estrus cycles.

    If more women started exclusively breast feeding and took part in extended breast feeding the amount of children born 12 to 24 months apart would probably drop drastically.

    The other difference is our diet is much more calorific and higher in fat than our primate relatives and has been for thousands of years now. This has pushed our fertility drastically higher, hence 7 billion humans and under 100,000 lowland gorillas. If you started feeding a similar diet to other primates you would likely increase their reproductive rate as well. However just because our menstrual cycle has been thrown into hyperdrive by a surplus of food and increased health that doesn’t mean the needs of our infants and other young children have changed when it comes to the benefits of breast milk.

  39. Maehemsez:
    RE:Breastfeeding– so what is the cutoff {comment went all weird-format so I clipped}

    This is trivially simple: When the child is old enough to eat on its own.

    Problem solved!!!

  40. I sympathize with the first letter writer; my Grandma’s recently had some medical issues, which, among other things, leads her to pick on my mom, an ICC nurse. No matter how many times she hears it, she can’t seem to get that my mom is doing useful work. I’d tell Grandma off, but she’d forget it in five minutes; so the whole family tries to keep Grandma out of Mom’s way. Also, what’s with the assumption that everyone over 70 is a bigot? Grandpa took my dad out of the Cub Scouts because the local troop refused to integrate. (1960s Maryland, go fig.)
    As to the second one.. no, just no. Three years old seems a little long, but acceptable, but five is beyond the pale. Doesn’t the kid have to go to kindergarten in a year?
    I can think of three milk substitutes off the top of my head, and none of them involve bodily fluids from anything.
    Also, I’ve always thought of thumb-sucking as just a nervous gesture like nail-biting. Some kids just do it, whether or not they’re nursing. Along with carrying a stuffed animal *everywhere* for the first seven or so years of life.

  41. Dear FSM…breastfeeding and racist grandpas. We just need dogs in funny hats (the long promised photo of Chi in a fascinator) to make this a debacle.

    Sad to see Prudie get everything wrong all at once. For the sake of family unity, they should all tell grandpa he isn’t welcome to family events unless he apologizes and refrains from future abusive behavior.

    As for breastfeeding, that entire category goes into the box of things people other than the parent and child should not have any say about. Maybe around puberty it may become inappropriately sexualized, but breastfeeding is typically non-sexualized (although of course I don’t see anything problematic for people who engage in adult breastfeeding as a sexual activity). Otherwise people do all sorts of things with food at the dinner table that I might personally not enjoy. I mean there are people who put ketchup on hot dogs for godsake…where is the general outcry for that?

    Also, whipping a boob out sounds like it would result in stretch marks. I don’t think that is patriarchy approved.

  42. librarygoose: Just throwing this out there, but I never said it was. I said that when compared with other similar apes (people are apes) human babies could naturally breast feed from 3-6 years. Culture is a huge part of what makes the human species unique, but it doesn’t dispel the fact that we are animals.
    Seriously though, I never wanted to imply every woman has to breast feed for 10 years because it’s “natural”.

    Not saying you did. But I think the tautology that natural is good because it’s natural can and should be challenged, especially when it comes to women’s roles in parenting. Your argument was that the scientific and cultural explanations for this breastfeeding scenario are in conflict, and you insinuate that the scientific explanation takes precedence because we’re apes. As a feminist human mother, I’m not an ape, and my parenting habits, norms, and expectations regarding breastfeeding and any other parenting activity are extremely divergent from a-political ape mothers’ (i.e. biology is not destiny). Cultural conflicts can not be understated. What apes do is besides the point in a conversation about human cultural values regarding parenting practices, which this is.

  43. In the wild it’s pretty unlikely a 5-year-old would still be breastfeeding because the mom would have had another kid (if not two) by that point.

    I actually wonder about this. Isn’t it true that you generally don’t ovulate as long as you’re nursing? I think you can nurse for an extended period of time as a form of birth control. But maybe if you don’t nurse as much as the kid gets older, it wouldn’t work that way.

  44. The Grandpa-related advice struck me as being almost creepily similar to the way in which people are advised to discuss things with their romantic partners. Shudder.

    On the five-year-old, I’m squarely with with Ms Jill – perhaps not at the dinner table, but I suspect that a large majority of people would be delighted to contract for that as the worst moment of the holiday gathering. My personal knowledge of what’s normal for age five is nil – at that age, I won the New York Lower Elementary Chess Championship. I mention this mainly because it was then that I saw through a lot of sexist prejudice. After winning my first four games, I had a girl as my next opponent. Somehow, I had picked up on Bobby Fischer’s prejudiced comment that women couldn’t play chess really well. Instead of a usual opening, I tried for a cheap quickie checkmate, appropriately fell behind in the game, and had to struggle to escape with a draw. I’ve remembered that game more times than I can count ever since when I’ve encountered the attitude of women not being as good as men at… you name it.

  45. tmc– I so hear that! I was surprised at how eager people were to encourage solids. Even before the pediatrician recommended starting solids. Then folks would ask if we still nursed, even though they never actually saw us nursing. I couldn’t figure out why anyone cared? But a kid who can eat most solid foods is also in a better place developmentally to b able to delay nursing to a more convenient time. Before that it’s biologically impossible.

    For us, by about a year, my kids were eating enough solid food that we mostly nursed after waking, bedtime, around naptimes, and other times we were home. So the whole “nursing in public” thing became less of an issue. My kids both self-weaned as toddlers, and personally, I can’t quite imagine nursing a 5 year old– but I also can’t imagine it hurts any of these kids in any way.

    I agree, though, that for a 5 year old– who is nearing school-aged or at school– this is more of a manners issue. My two year old kids were learning to sometimes wait to get something they wanted, etc. By 5 (probably as much for my own comfort level) I would likely expect a child to have water in social settings and keep the nursing time more private.

  46. Florence: As a feminist human mother, I’m not an ape

    You are an ape. Sorry to tell you. And trying to understand culture and biology and their inter-play is a great area to study, I am so for it that I chose it as a career. My point was you can’t rule out biology, it often influences culture, to the point that the common prevailing thought is that culture is a biological part of being human. Because you choose as a human feminist mother not to breast feed past the recommended 6 months (not saying that you personally did) doesn’t make you better than a woman who chooses to breast feed her kid till she sends him off on the school bus. And it doesn’t make that breast feeding 5 year old any less part of the human species.

  47. @hmm

    it all depends (dont it always?). exclusive nursing on demand (usually meaning to nurse at night every 2-3 hours, no pacifiers or bottles, etc.) can suppress ovulation. Lactational Amenorrhea Method is a method of natural child spacing, but some women can still get their period in a few weeks or months after birth even if theyre nursing up a storm. some nursing duos can slow down as the child gets older and nurses less often but periods/ovulation are still suppressed for a year or more.

    but nursing through a pregnancy happens a lot, depending on the age of the child, it may be for comfort or for nutrition. an older child may stop if the milk changes or supply decreases. or they may stick to it and get the reward of a recharged supply after their younger sibling is born.

  48. Michelle:

    Yeah, when it got to be too much (being asked “So when are you gonna start weaning?” about every 5 minutes), I started giving answers like “Oh I dunno, maybe 17? 23? Definitely before grad school, any longer and that would be just weird.” They got the hint and everyone who knows me has stopped asking.

  49. I actually wonder about this. Isn’t it true that you generally don’t ovulate as long as you’re nursing? I think you can nurse for an extended period of time as a form of birth control.

    A friend of mine made that assumption. Her youngest two children have an eleven month age difference. But you are correct that in certain nomadic cultures long-term breastfeeding has been used as a reasonably reliable form of birth control, with nursing continuing for @3 years until the child no longer needs to be carried during travel. The story about the five-year-old reminds me of a different friend who nursed until her daughter was four, and would have been happy to continue but for her daughter’s loud, angry, grocery store tantrum at being told she would have to wait to nurse.

    Unless the spouse described in the original letter was not from the U.S. (and even then…) it’s difficult to imagine that she didn’t know that at a minimum she would surprise her husband’s relatives, and that it was reasonable to expect that some would be offended. Whether or not society should respond differently isn’t really the point – this is the society we live in. The spouse’s actions suggest boundary issues, and those boundary issues may be playing a role in why she is continuing to breastfeed a five year old.

  50. @DouglasG re your first paragraph: oh, you’re so right. Ew.

    I just tried whipping with a breast. It failed. Now I have a sad face.

    People, breastfeeding until 5 years is, again, in the WHO guidelines. Particularly in countries contexts in which nutritional availability isn’t fantastic, breastfeeding until five is a good plan. In any case, just because it makes you uncomfortable doesn’t make it wrong, and it’s clearly right for a lot of families. Complaining because someone is eating their meal at the dinner table like everyone else is just rude if your objection is “not normative” or “boobies”. We need to change the social stigma around this. (Particularly when it comes from medical professionals, as happened to a friend of mine the other day…!)

  51. librarygoose: My point was you can’t rule out biology, it often influences culture, to the point that the common prevailing thought is that culture is a biological part of being human.

    The crux of my statement was not humans versus apes, but biology versus culture. Historically, when we elevate biology above culture, oppressed classes of people get the shit end of the stick.

    That’s all. It’s a slippery slope. And as a human mother, what apes do in the jungle really doesn’t affect or apply to me or my children except on a chemical level.

  52. Florence: Fixed. Still a weird phrase.

    It was right the first time. Mothers was plural. Apolitical ape mothers. An apolitical ape mother. But definitely not “an apolitical ape mothers.”

    But we’re all apes. We don’t have to do what other apes do, but we’re still apes.

  53. While breastfeeding a child who’s walking still seems odd to me, my best friend in all the world breastfed her kid until he went to kindergarten. She probably would have stopped much earlier, but the kid didn’t want to give it up. Many children (including one of mine) hang onto a bottle until kindergarten, yet many people don’t find that weird.

    Her kid (and my kids) are grown now. They’re all full functioning adults who have jobs and live on their own. People are way too hard on moms. No matter what a mom does, or how she does it, she’s always wrong. Time for that to stop.

  54. I guess what I’m trying to say is, yes, it can seem odd to you, but if you must assume something, then assume the mom is doing what’s right for her and her child when it comes to differences of opinion in things like this.

  55. Florence: The crux of my statement was not humans versus apes, but biology versus culture. Historically, when we elevate biology above culture, oppressed classes of people get the shit end of the stick.

    I am not elevating biology. I am stating they are interconnected and you can’t just ignore either. People were talking about the cultural part of breast feeding, I threw in some biology. Because culture is not the whole story.

  56. So the people arguing that breast feeding can never be inappropriate (it’s no one’s business but the mother and child’s): what about age 10? What about age 15? If the child is getting sustenance then it’s fine? Forget the likely harm to the child, why is this still appropriate in public? Is someone really going to claim that no one can be shocked or squicked out at any age?

    And if so, please differentiate this from adult sex play? Yes, I know, boobs are non sexual and I’m a victim of the patriarchy. The point is that manners are based on somewhat arbitrary distinctions. These distinctions have been and are oppressive to marginalized groups (breast feeding is private/gross). But removing those oppressive practices doesn’t mean removing all practices. We can yawn at the dinner table but you are not supposed to fart. And you can breastfeed a baby but not a full grown child.

  57. My coworker’s personal phone calls on speaker phone had always been a major nuisance. She’d spend hours chatting with her mother-in-law or husband and even sang lullabies to her children before naps if they were upset. But we didn’t sit near any partners and since I didn’t have to work directly with her I saw no need to confront her or rat her out.

    I finally lost it the day her first grader got on the phone throwing a tantrum and announced “Momma, I wanna nurse!!!” My astonished “What the Fuck?!?” echoed down the hallway and was returned with open laughter from the suite of HR staff across the hall. No one was at their most professional that day.

    Even so, I’m usually too busy judging her for vocally not vaccinating her kids to care about how she keeps them from starving.

  58. Chally: People, breastfeeding until 5 years is, again, in the WHO guidelines.

    I personally feel the need to point out that the WHO is a political entity whose primary interest is on women and children in developing countries, and whose breastfeeding guidelines are based on the assumption that food and clean water are not or only intermittently available.

    Chally: I just tried whipping with a breast. It failed. Now I have a sad face.

    Do other body parts get whipped around, or is it only boobs and dicks? I can not for the life of me think of another linguistic construction where a non-boob or a non-dick body part are “whipped” out or around.

  59. Jodie– That. If it’s not how long (or whether) you nurse, moms get judged for whether their kids are picky, what they eat, how long they use a bottle, a pacifier, a sippy cup, a blanket, how long they suck their thumbs, how long it takes to potty train…. a million things that as parents, we can influence, yes, but not entirely control.

  60. Okay, I want to clarify some things:
    1. Breastfeeding only suppresses ovulation while it is done exclusively. Once there are spaces of over 6 hours between feeds the hormones start to go back to normal. So, extended breastfeeding is not a way to control fertility. Folks, don’t try this!
    2. Ever heard of tandem feeding? Many women breastfeed a baby and the baby’s older sibling. Again, nothing to do with spacing babies.
    3. Breastfeeding is not about nutrition alone. I am still breastfeeding my 2 1/2 year old. She is fine without it when I’m away from home so it isn’t about food. It is often about closeness. Kids have different ways of getting closeness from their parents. If it makes her feel secure that’s what matters. Attachment theory (the prevailing theory on infant development) emphasises that when children feel securely attached they are more able to develop independence (not less able).
    4. As for biology – while as an adult I can choose how much I want biology to dictate my life I don’t think the same goes for a child. Children are much closer to their instincts and their needs are more basic. If my child needs my body and I can give it then why not?

  61. From the AAP:

    There is no upper limit to the duration of breastfeeding and no evidence of psychologic or developmental harm from breastfeeding into the third year of life or longer.

    From the WHO:

    Exclusive breastfeeding is recommended up to 6 months of age, with continued breastfeeding along with appropriate complementary foods up to two years of age or beyond.

    Yet despite this, in this very thread we’ve had people continue to insist that full term breastfeeding is:

    “creepy”
    “inappropriate”
    “borderline abusive”
    “hinders independence” in the child
    “the child’s maturation could be slowed”
    keeps the child from being “encouraged to develop abilities outside of the mother’s circle of care”
    “builds a cycle of dependency”
    suggests that the mother has “boundary issues”

    And at least one person thinks that getting CPS involved and having the children taken away is preferrable to full term nursing.

    Um, okay.

    Can we at least drop the pretense that any of these concerns are fact-based and admit that these are based on people just having the ickies when it comes to full term nursing?

  62. Exactly tmc. Plus, the reference to breast milk as a ‘bodily fluid’, like it’s equivalent to pus or something. Really, so drinking human milk is weirder than drinking milk from other animals?

    It’s about the mode of delivery. Boobies are for sexytimes only folks.

  63. I saw a youtube video of a mother breastfeeding her 8-10 year old daughter. I wonder what would happen if this continued until her son was 8? With the way people sexualize breasts (and no kidding I have heard heterosexual women say they would feel “funny” about breastfeeding their daughter but not their sons) would there be some inference of sexual assault on the boy?

    Either way, bodily fluids near my food is gross. I dont even share my drink, if you take a sip the rest is yours. breastfed and think breastfeeding is a huge sacrifice and totally awesome but I dont want anyone’s breastmilk near my dessert. Other than that, breastfeeding openly is her business.

    The grandfather IS a bigoted asshole.

  64. Two things:

    1) I have no issue with the phrase “whipped it out” when used affectionately. I have used it often to describe my mother’s family as I was growing up. One or another of my many aunt (or my mother – she had four kids) was always whipping one of her boobs out to nurse (described by the women in that language), and that was just fine. As a young girl the thing I knew most about my arriving breasts was that my baby cousins would claw at them to try to suck. I didn’t think of my breasts as sexual at all, but as future baby feeding machines. But it was still “whipping it out.”

    2) I think the post is missing something by focusing on Prudie’s reaction to nursing the five year old. Later in the thread she basically said that it would also be rude to nurse a 2 month old child at table as well. I am shy, and would personally probably use a nursing blanket myself. But my aunts sure weren’t shy. Prudie’s is just plain wrong in a way that has nothing to do with a debate over extended nursing. (not that she was right about that, but that her wrongness transcends that issue)

  65. I agree that the breastfeeding incident is an etiquette issue. I am agnostic whether it should be okay etiquette-wise to breastfeed your five-year-old during dessert time with your new in-laws. But I do feel strongly that it would be terrible manners to tell my new sister-in-law (either through an intermediary or directly) that she shouldn’t breastfeed during dessert.

    Her choice to breastfeed her 5 year old over dessert might be mildly squicky to me, but polite people gracefully tolerate mildly squicky behaviors. Even if the sister-in-law’s breastfeeding at the table could be said to be a lapse in etiquette, it is a far worse sin to point out the siter-in-law’s lapse. Surely, nurturing a positive relationship with one’s new sister-in-law is far more important than avoiding being a little squicked out.

    (This, by the way, is different than say, tolerating grandpa’s racist remarks. If grandpa makes a racist remark at dinner, it implicates everyone present, because silence can be considered aquiescence to rude, dehumanizing and damaging statements about others. Therefore, in that instance, it is clearly appropriate to protest.)

  66. Maehemsz–when is it inappropriate for people to breastfeed at (other) people’s dining room tables? Easy. When the kid is not getting his/her nutrition primarily from breastfeeding. Then breastfeeding is no longer a meal, it’s a comfort activity, and whether it’s appropriate or not should be dictated by whose house you are in.

    Tamara:

    As for biology – while as an adult I can choose how much I want biology to dictate my life I don’t think the same goes for a child. Children are much closer to their instincts and their needs are more basic. If my child needs my body and I can give it then why not?

    This thinking scares me because it’s a slippery slope to “women and their bodies dont’ belong to themselves, but to their children” I am pregnant, and I would like to think there are lots of ways in which my child may want some piece of my body but that I choose, for whatever reason, not to give it. For instance, I plan to work, thus depriving my potential child of my physical presence and sustenance for 8 hours a day. I doubt I will breastfeed for various reasons–is this a need I am depriving my kid of? Should I be expected to just do all these things because I can give my body to my child? Am I a bad parent if I don’t?

  67. @tms: Yet despite this, in this very thread we’ve had people continue to insist that full term breastfeeding is… suggests that the mother has “boundary issues”

    Please try to be more accurate in your accusations about others, as you are misrepresenting what I said. I stated, “it’s difficult to imagine that she didn’t know that at a minimum she would surprise her husband’s relatives, and that it was reasonable to expect that some would be offended”, the behavior suggestive of boundary issues, which is not what you’re representing. I passed absolutely no judgment on the act of breastfeeding, and in specific relation to the breastfeeding stated that “boundary issues may be playing a role in why she is continuing to breastfeed”.

    Do you truly see nothing in the scenario that suggests boundary issues?

    Would you concede that behavior that is healthy in one context can be unhealthy in another? Are you of the opinion that breastfeeding a five-year-old can never be harmful, no matter what the context?

  68. I think the granddaughter was perfect in her response to her grandfather. Too bad the rest of the family doesn’t get it, but I suppose the habit of obeying him goes deep. Some habits are worth breaking.

    As for breastfeeding, I’m trying to picture a physically comfortable way to breastfeed a 5 year old at a crowded family dinner table and failing. That just seems really difficult. I never liked breastfeeding my infants at a table, even a less crowded one, because it was so uncomfortable physically. Not enough space.

    @tmc
    I got so much of that stuff about breastfeeding from my MIL. She had been told when she had her kids that formula was superior, and breastfeeding was something one simply shouldn’t do. I heard from her about breastfeeding past 6 weeks, 6 months, etc. By a year she was frustrated enough to be mostly quiet about it, then my oldest self weaned at 18 months.

    But I got it again with my youngest, who continued past age 2. Weaning finally happened at about 2.5 years, and I heard plenty about how relieved people were that we had finally done it.

    Thank goodness my mother had already learned about current views of breastfeeding, although I don’t think she ever had much trouble with it. Sisters having kids first really made life easier for me.

  69. First off, breastfeeding is a mutual relationship, and has to work for BOTH mama and baby. We are lucky to have alternative food sources when the BF relationship doesn’t work FOR WHATEVER REASON. That said, nothing produced commercially works quite like breast milk, nor adapts to growing human’s needs the same way.

    Comparative Evolution data: Mammals have evolved to nurse until adult teeth show up. Adult teeth start showing up in human primates ~5yrs. The WHO official statement for duration of BF is ““Breastfeeding should be continued for at least the first year of life and beyond for as long as mutually desired by mother and child”. I have been unable to find credible data on harm to the child from bf extending past 5yrs. Calling such “extended” breastfeeding abuse is completely unsubstantiated and fucked up.

    And to anyone who thinks you can breast feed a kid who doesn’t want it, all I have to say is AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *snerf* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA Just FUCKEN TRY, I double-dog-dare ya. You can have my collection of Fluevogs if you can do it. Kids are active agents in the nursing tandem, and if they still want to at 5, it’s NOT b/c mom is “doing something wrong”.

    Actually, the UK, US, and CA can be said to be practicing “foreshortened breastfeeding”, as the REST of the globe BFs to around 3yrs. Foreshortened breast feeding is an artifact of the last 100yrs, and weaning ~6m an artifact of the post-WWII era. By 1970 the “norm” for weaning was 3mo. Thankfully, we’re seeing that go back up. (I believe that with better support for nursing tandems, BF WOULD be done more often for longer. Without judgment on any person who used formula from the get go, or weaned so-called “early”, a SYSTEM that encourages, sometimes even enforces, weaning at 3mo is a fucked up system.)

    Even with bf into toddler years, solid foods get worked in as soon as baby is interested and physically capable; ~1yr breast milk ceases to be a primary food source. Breast feeding a toddler is a far different thing from an infant. The primary reasons are no longer strictly nutritional but emotional (bonding, comfort, attachment) as well as for improved immune protection and other benefits of breast milk. True-fax: I nursed until 4.5yrs. During that time we avoided at least 2 trips to the pediatric ER for dehydration – a bout of Fifths disease ~1yr and a bout of lysteria at 3.5yrs – because he was able to nurse and get fluids. The pediatrician also said he recovered quicker than she expected. So these are not only “developing world” type benefits.

    Toddlers and preschoolers don’t nurse all day – usually more like 1 or 2x /day – and milk production at that point is not such that expressing and bottle or sippy-cup feeding is really doable (assuming only the one nursing kid).

    In the case of the LW in the OP, I do have to wonder at the representation of the incident. Since it’s clear the LW was horrified, it’s more than likely that it didn’t go down as represented. That said, I completely agree that the problem here is not the breast-feeding, or the age of the child, but the social boundaries. Babies need on-demand feeding; a preK/K kid needs appropriate social boundaries. If there is a cultural issue (is wife from a family/culture/country where 5yrs is more common?) besides the milk allergy problem, hubby should explain the different expectations. An alternative would be to politely support SILs nursing by pointing out a nice private room she can use during the next social visit.

  70. I actually wonder about this. Isn’t it true that you generally don’t ovulate as long as you’re nursing? I think you can nurse for an extended period of time as a form of birth control. But maybe if you don’t nurse as much as the kid gets older, it wouldn’t work that way.

    No, that is not true, and I know at least three kids who were born because their parents thought it was true.

  71. Aaron: Would you concede that behavior that is healthy in one context can be unhealthy in another? Are you of the opinion that breastfeeding a five-year-old can never be harmful, no matter what the context?

    yes, WHAT IF THE HOUSE IS ON FIRE?? or maybe the mother is secretly Hilter?? Should this secret fire-bug Hitler really be breast feeding? Abuse says I!!

  72. Do you truly see nothing in the scenario that suggests boundary issues?

    Um, no. Not even a little. The boy asked for milk, his mother said sure. Nothing about that screams “boundary issues zomg!!” to me.

    you concede that behavior that is healthy in one context can be unhealthy in another? Are you of the opinion that breastfeeding a five-year-old can never be harmful, no matter what the context?

    I am honestly so annoyed by this question that I barely even know what to say. If a woman eats rat poison, she probably shouldn’t nurse her kid. If she’s getting radiation therapy, she probably shouldn’t nurse her kid. If she just shot herself full of heroine, she probably shouldn’t nurse her kid. What is your point?

  73. I actually learned a lot from all the comments…evolutionary biology, anthropology, breastfeeding philosophies, etc.

    But maybe it could be said that this dialogue has gone into the mysogynistic wayside? Women fighting women over (what could be deemed) an arbitrary right or wrong.

    “Sisterhood aint easy” i know, but how about focusing on the largest issues here: a sexist media is promoting sexist (and devisive!) messages from a writer who has internalized a lot of isms in our culture and is then making arbitraty (and judgmental and shame-inducing and misogynistic) statements about what women should or should not do with their bodies in the guise of empowering advice. I think this is the real issue here: prudie, dear, dear prudie is another mouthpiece of “white supremacist capitalist patriarchy” that is co-opting feminism, convincing everyone that this is women’s empowerment.

  74. OK, specifics aside, I wanted to point out the similarity in tone of the original letters by once and for all calling bullshit on the whole “When you’re under my roof, you will live/think/breathe according to my rules” mentality. This only works if the people in question (namely, those violated by progressive grand-daughters and evil, breastfeeding mothers) in turn respect this rule themselves. Would Bigot Grandpa respect the values of his grand-daughter when visiting her? Would he put his own racist/sexist feelings aside and engage her in a discussion of feminist theory over beer and chocolate cake at her table? PROBABLY NOT. I have experienced this same thing NUMEROUS times in my own life, where I have been as “respectful” (by which I mean silent) as I possibly can in the homes of my respective parents/siblings during some of the most offensive racist and sexist diatribes I have ever heard. After noticing that this “favour” was not returned when these same people came into my home, all bets were most definitely off. It has resulted in some explosive and heated arguments, but at least the people involved are engaged in dialogue, as opposed to a few people making hateful comments while everyone else submissively/silently respects the so-called sanctity of their dinner table.

  75. @Robotile – not at all, I mean it is each mother’s choice of course. I won’t comment on the choices you will make in your parenting. How you feel about each of those choices is also not my business. But I do think it is unreasonable to expect that infants and children have the same perspective as adults about those choices. I just felt the whole “I am not an animal and neither are my children” position a bit unrealistic. Children are a lot “closer to nature” than we are.

    My 4 year old and her friends were running around the back yard naked the other day, and peeing. It’s pretty acceptable for kids that age but I would never do this myself. I’m pretty confident that she’ll grow out of it. Our culture’s messages are strong enough to overcome lots of instinctive attitudes.

  76. librarygoose: Based on studies of other apes given the average infant development rate and gestational rate of humans babies should probably breast feed for about 3-6 years.

    Is there a source for this?

  77. chingona: Well,congratulations,youarenotalone.CPShasindeedremovedchildrenforbreastfeedingtoolong.No,therewasn’tanyabuse,thejudgefound,butthemotherwas“puttingherownemotionalneedsaheadofherchild.”Goodgrief.Iftheystartremovingeverykidfromeveryhousewheretheparentsareputtingtheirownemotionalneedsfirst,thenwelloverhalfofallkidswillbeinfostercare.I’msureitwasmuchlesstraumatictobeplacedinfostercarethanforthemothertofindawaytoweanattherighttimeforher.So…goaheadandplacethatcall.

    AndIsaythisassomeonewhodoesthinkit’snotdevelopmentallyidealforachildthatoldtobebreastfeedingatall,nottomentionwhatmostextendednurserscall“nursingetiquette”ofnotaskingatthetable.

    This happened in my state (New York) only because the mother said she extended breastfeeding because it sexually aroused her. There were other reasons for the household being questioned and the child was returned later.

  78. Robotile: This thinking scares me because it’s a slippery slope to “women and their bodies dont’ belong to themselves, but to their children” I am pregnant, and I would like to think there are lots of ways in which my child may want some piece of my body but that I choose, for whatever reason, not to give it.

    This is a reason why I don’t think feminism and breastfeeding advocacy (emphasis on advocacy) (also “attachment parenting” which is different from attachment theory) can exist hand-in-hand. Women still fight daily to achieve bodily autonomy in a variety of situations, and I find it perturbing that breastfeeding advocates want to create the rhetorical and practical space to make an exception around breastfeeding, where women have bodily autonomy except when it comes to breastfeeding, wherein breast is always best. There is some overlap certainly, and there are many ways that feminism can speak to the challenges that breastfeeding mothers face especially in regards to publicity, misogyny and the body. But in practice, while there is a lot of cultural nastiness about the practice of breastfeeding, there is also a lot of ire among breastfeeding advocates aimed at women who don’t tow the line or who choose to formula feed unless they hit a certain number of tried-but-failed bullet points. In a feminist space where respect for mothers is already historically fraught, the push to enforce more and longer breastfeeding practices butts up not only against the feminist ideal of bodily autonomy but also up against the need for women to be good mothers in a world that devalues mothers overall. It reinforces rules of perfect motherhood in the name of feminist politics, and makes one position more moral despite not giving mothers the cultural, economic, or structural support to meet these goals, so I think it’s dangerous. Moreover, pointing out these problems with the breastfeeding rhetoric (that formula fed children are fat, sick, stupid, and maladjusted, as insinuated by many, many breastfeeding periodicals) is seen as advocating an anti-breastfeeding agenda instead of demanding levity, or better science, or better options, or more support, or whatever. That’s not fair to women or the kids they’re trying to make choices about.

    Robotile, if you’re fraught on this, check out the Fearless Formula Feeder blog. It takes a realist, pro-science POV on the debate that does not demonize mothers regardless of choice or fret over the choice to formula feed. It does provide a space for women who are exasperated at cherry-picked science being thrown at us like Dr. Sears’s law of parenting. For some of us, breastfeeding isn’t an option. It doesn’t matter what the reasons are. You don’t have to explain yourself to anyone. Also, remember that this debate encompasses one facet of one tenth of your time as a parent with your dependent in the home. So, again, levity rules.

  79. I might call CPS if I saw a woman breastfeeding a 5 year old. I also might not. To many other factors at play. If I had reason to believe she was doing it for her gratification (sexual or otherwise), then yes, I would call CPS. If the relationship between mother and child seemed perfectly healthy, I would chalk it up to ‘to each their own’ and let it be.

    My kid self-weaned at about 9 months, though I had every intention towards breastfeeding until around 2. He got a taste of solid foods though, and there was no stopping him. My niece didn’t take to the boob at all and needed the bottle. My nephew breastfeed until he was two and a half and possibly would have continued had my sister not become ill and in need of medication that precluded breastfeeding. All kids are different, with different needs and desires. There is no magic one size fits all method of parenting.

    My mom freaks out that my kid has his own pocket-knife and has difficulty coping with the fact that we intend to follow my husband’s family tradition of presenting a rifle or shotgun as a tenth birthday gift. I think the fact she enrolls my niece and nephew in a billion different ‘structured’ after school activities is just ridiculous. But the kids in question are all happy, well-adjusted, and as satisfied with their lives as children get, so obviously, we are doing something right.

    That said, if the breastfeeding could reasonably make other people uncomfortable – kid that makes particularly loud sucking sounds, much older than normal child, kid that spits up when feeding generating that sour milk smell – then it is better to breastfeed in private. Otherwise, other people just need to shut their pie holes and accept that breasts have a purpose other than sexual playthings and kids gotta eat.

  80. zuzu: The idea of breastfeeding a child with teeth kind of gets me.

    Kids get teeth way before they’re ready to wean. My daughter had her first tooth at four months. Honestly, you don’t really feel it if they are nursing. Most babies, a firm no and taking them off the breast once or twice gets the message across that if you want to nurse, you don’t bite.

  81. I had the same thing happen at last year’s (year before last?) Christmas Dinner — grandfather said the n-word. There’s no nice way to respond to that kind of hate.

  82. Everything Jodie, tmc, librarygoose said. And MiZ and others. Hearts, you guys.

    Some of the comments on this thread, and Prudie’s response, have me gnawing the furniture. Okay, so the kid can eat grown-up food at 5. But that doesn’t mean the child doesn’t want the comfort of nursing after dinner. Why do you want to deny this child comfort?

    If the mom wants privacy, that’s her call. But if not, why should she be exiled from the other adults so she can nurse? Nursing is not like passing gas at the table, ok? Breasts are for sexytimes, yes. Breasts are also for the feeding, nourishment and comfort of children. So the kid is 5. So what?

    It sounds like there was once a 10 year old who still nursed in the literature. Ok, I buy that. But for the vast vast majority, at some point the little kid is nomming adult food and loses interest in breastfeeding, if the mom doesn’t wean hir first. And thus nursing ends. Just like co-sleeping, fear-mongering aside, these things simply don’t last until the kid’s ready for college.

    To be honest the specters of “the woman who wants to nurse extra long for political reasons” or “the woman who is nursing for sexual pleasure” come across to me like the specters of “the women who get abortions as birth control” and “the welfare queens who squeeze out babies to get more welfare.” Do these women exist? Well, definitely in the minds of those who want to police women’s bodies. Better call CPS and maybe get someone’s kid taken away and put in foster care for suspicious nursing. That’s some real great feminism there.

    I don’t know when I’m going to wean my baby (who as I write this is eating mushed banana). Whenever she’s ready I hope. I hope not to have to wean her before that. It pisses me off that because of these sorts of attitudes I may feel like I need to hide a healthy and loving breastfeeding relationship.

  83. I’m going to come right out and admit I’ve only read the first part of these comments, but I see the same old extended breastfeeding debate unfolding the way it always has, and I just want to make this point:

    The discomfort registered in the original letter and the discomfort expressed by many commenters here, whether it is expressed this way or not, is because Western culture sexualises breasts and divorces them from their biological context. People get uncomfortable about older children breastfeeding and being part of an ‘inappropriate’ relationship because it is presumed that as children get older, they will become indoctrinated by society to see breasts as serving a primarily sexualised function. Therefore extended breastfeeding becomes a sort of sexual abuse.

    Obviously, I call absolute BS on that. Reducing breasts to a sexualised function, even in your subtext, objectifies women’s bodies and reinforces the heterosexist idea that women’s bodies primarily serve men’s sexual needs.

  84. Sandy: If the mom wants privacy, that’s her call. But if not, why should she be exiled from the other adults so she can nurse?

    Because it’s not her house. The woman wasn’t in a public space or at a business where she’s paying money to be served. If the homeowners want her to go in another room, that’s their call. Frankly, I couldn’t care less how old the kid is. But if she doesn’t want to respect their wishes in their own home, then bye.

  85. Angel H.: Because it’s not her house. The woman wasn’t in a public space or at a business where she’s paying money to be served. If the homeowners want her to go in another room, that’s their call. Frankly, I couldn’t care less how old the kid is. But if she doesn’t want to respect their wishes in their own home, then bye.

    None of them said anything. They looked at her, she gave a casual explanation, nobody stated any wishes or asked her not to. They are now talking about “intervening” after the fact, which sounds to me like having someone talk to her about the fact that she is still nursing at all.

  86. As much as I don’t want to judge breastfeeding, here I am.

    I mean, is that his only source of food? If not, I can imagine that the kid can wait until after dinner? Does she really nurse every time he’s “thirsty”?

    Anyway, obviously a lot of this awkwardness comes from this being a first meeting.

  87. As much as I don’t want to judge breastfeeding, here I am.

    I mean, is that his only source of food? If not, I can imagine that the kid can wait until after dinner? Does she really nurse every time he’s “thirsty”? He’s not exactly an infant who needs to nurse every 2 hours.

    Anyway, obviously a lot of this awkwardness comes from this being a first meeting.

  88. Addie: Is there a source for this?

    http://www.kathydettwyler.org/detwean.html

    If you want some good info I suggest Dr. Detwyller as a source. For a good look across culture and not more biologically try Hrdy, she’s good for looking at childhood and development from a cross cultural view.
    Be warned though, Detwyller is a sarcastic breast feeding advocate and she can be caustic.

  89. Angel H.: Because it’s not her house. The woman wasn’t in a public space or at a business where she’s paying money to be served. If the homeowners want her to go in another room, that’s their call. Frankly, I couldn’t care less how old the kid is. But if she doesn’t want to respect their wishes in their own home, then bye.

    After being begrudgingly invited to a family holiday dinner, Kristen and I were asked not to hold hands or “touch” in her new step family’s home because the kids “might get the wrong idea.” People often have bigotted opinions about what may or may not occur in their homes. Had we known we would not have gone to dinner, but that doesn’t make their behavior any less racist.

  90. Sandy, you’re probably right that the LW was more concerned about her nursing a 5 year-old at the table rather than just nursing at the table. However, my comment was actually in response to you saying that she should openly nurse in someone else’s home even at the expense of the homeowner’s feelings. (“why should she be exiled from the other adults so she can nurse?”) Even if someone approaches her after the fact and says “Please, don’t do it again” she should respect their wishes.

  91. librarygoose: http://www.kathydettwyler.org/detwean.html

    If you want some good info I suggest Dr. Detwyller as a source. For a good look across culture and not more biologically try Hrdy, she’s good for looking at childhood and development from a cross cultural view.
    Be warned though, Detwyller is a sarcastic breast feeding advocate and she can be caustic.

    Interesting read, thanks!

  92. Mr. Kristen J.: People often have bigotted opinions about what may or may not occur in their homes. Had we known we would not have gone to dinner, but that doesn’t make their behavior any less racist.

    True. But like you said, had you known you wouldn’t have gone. And now you know.

    If I’m invited to someone’s home and I know I’m going to be uncomfortable for whatever reason, I just don’t go. If I do go and find out that they some weird house rules or if they start to act ugly, then I don’t return. I may not like what they’re doing; I may not think it’s right. I might even call them out on it. But would I expect them to accomodate me? Why? I’m not the one paying the rent or mortgage. It’s their roof. So, let them keep their bigoted household. They just shouldn’t expect me over for dinner anytime soon.

  93. I’m generally with the ‘not really my body, not really my decision’ on choices when to breastfeed. Maybe it’s because The Slap just screened in Australia, which has a 4 year old who breastfeeds, and the breastfeeding was nowhere near the most harmful behaviour adults were exhibiting around their kids.

  94. Case in point, this:

    Mr. Kristen J.: After being begrudgingly invited to a family holiday dinner, Kristen and I were asked not to hold hands or “touch” in her new step family’s home because the kids “might get the wrong idea.” People often have bigotted opinions about what may or may not occur in their homes. Had we known we would not have gone to dinner, but that doesn’t make their behavior any less racist.

  95. Angel H.: However, my comment was actually in response to you saying that she should openly nurse in someone else’s home even at the expense of the homeowner’s feelings. (“why should she be exiled from the other adults so she can nurse?”)

    Oh… no, I was saying I do not think a nursing mother should ever feel obligated right off the bat to go nurse in private to avoid potentially offending someone. If you’re in a person’s house and they are squicked out by you nursing your child, whether 5 months or 5 years, and they say so, by the most basic bits of etiquette you are pretty much obligated to leave or stop. Personally, I would leave.

  96. I was excited to see this blog had mentioned yesterday’s trainwreck Prudie column but I am disappointed to see the comments are mostly about the stupid breastfeeding letter (which I think was exaggerated/faked in a pretty obvious way) and nothing about the horrible, HORRIBLE shaming of the sexual abuse survivor wife. That one really upset me a lot.

  97. “Oh I dunno, maybe 17? 23? Definitely before grad school, any longer and that would be just weird.”

    Why would that be less appropriate than nursing a 5-year-old?

  98. The idea of breastfeeding a child with teeth kind of gets me.

    And that’s not even permanent teeth. Ow.

    The teeth are quite sharp when they first come in. That said, if they’re biting they’re not nursing, and if they’re nursing they’re not biting. Usually taking them off the breast if they bite works (and about six months is average for a first tooth, I believe, so not nursing after a tooth comes in would seriously restrict nursing). We had one biter and one non-biter. Also, by the time that tooth shows up, the nipples have toughened up quite a bit. The most uncomfortable part of nursing for me was not after the teeth came, but just starting out with each baby.

  99. Mr. Kristen J.: People often have bigotted opinions about what may or may not occur in their homes. Had we known we would not have gone to dinner, but that doesn’t make their behavior any less racist.

    fffff. Well said. Completely awful, also 🙁

  100. I’ve kind of re-thought my opinion on the breastfeeding issue. Basically what gets people riled up is the whole breast=sexytimes.. as much as people want to say it’s about a kid having boundaries and such, let me ask.. would there be the same boundary issue if a five year old said “Mommy I’m thirsty!” and climbed up in her lap and took a big old drink out of mom’s glass of milk and cuddled with her at the table?

    I’m inclined to think that most people (while some would still consider it rude, yes) would give this an okay.. very similar act, but one has a noted absense of whipped-out boobs.

  101. Anonoregonian: I was excited to see this blog had mentioned yesterday’s trainwreck Prudie column but I am disappointed to see the comments are mostly about the stupid breastfeeding letter (which I think was exaggerated/faked in a pretty obvious way) and nothing about the horrible, HORRIBLE shaming of the sexual abuse survivor wife. That one really upset me a lot.

    I had to go back and read that letter a few times after I saw “It’s terrible that your wife was abused by her father (let’s assume that is true).” I was looking for something in the man’s letter to indicate that he didn’t believe his wife, and found nothing. So, why the FUCK did she include that?

  102. PrettyAmiable: Nipples get tough after breast-feeding? I am never having a child of my own.

    Haha, wee derail incoming. I will verify this. My nipples got super tender, painfully dry, and itchy by turns. I was constantly dabbing on lanolin gel. My mom told me when I complained that if I continued nursing my nipples would toughen up–those exact words. And they did. They are still soft and feel the same as my pre-breastfeeding nipples. They didn’t get callused or anything, they’re just not easily irritated.

    That’s right, eventually it takes a deep raking from tiny fingernails to hurt them. On that note, formula also makes a perfectly happy baby.

    Joking aside, I really am disturbed by the idea that anyone would report a nursing mother if they suspected she was doing extended nursing for sexual gratification. I’m having trouble letting that go. Breastfeeding certainly does have the potential to be sexually stimulating, because there’s a mouth on your nipple. But there are a lot of wonderful things about breastfeeding, like the closeness and cuddles and the love hormones that swoosh through your brain and my personal favorite, not having to wash bottles. So what if a woman likes the feeling, yes, sexually, of that mouth on her nipple? If the child and mother wish to continue the breastfeeding relationship, where is the harm? If you have other reasons to suspect abuse, fine, but nursing by itself is not abuse. And whatever a woman’s private reasons for wanting to breastfeed (or formula feed for that matter), they are really none of your business.

  103. @tmc: “You beat me to the snark and did much better than I did. Brava!”

    So we’re on the same page – I’m trying to discuss the facts and issues, and you’re snarking. Thanks for clearing that up.

  104. Aaron: So we’re on the same page – I’m trying to discuss the facts and issues, and you’re snarking. Thanks for clearing that up.

    We’re a team! Go Team Issues!! *claps*

  105. Anonoregonian:
    Iwasexcitedtoseethisbloghadmentionedyesterday’strainwreckPrudiecolumnbutIamdisappointedtoseethecommentsaremostlyaboutthestupidbreastfeedingletter(whichIthinkwasexaggerated/fakedinaprettyobviousway)andnothingaboutthehorrible,HORRIBLEshamingofthesexualabusesurvivorwife.Thatonereallyupsetmealot.

    Yeah, I agree with you. If I recall correctly, there was even a suggestion that the woman might have been lying about the abuse, and it certainly seemed to be taken as given that the LW’s wife was withholding sex to be manipulative, rather than… you know, actually being a traumatized human being with some issues to work through.

  106. 1. You don’t get to correct other people in their own home. Ever. I understand the need to say something, but if granddaughter wants to keep in contact with her grandfather, and be allowed at his house, “I’d prefer you not talk like that around me, it makes me uncomfortable” is the best way. Who gives a fuck if they mock you for being PC? That isn’t something to cry about.

    If you want to have a relationship with your family (or simply keep peace) that’s what you have to do. Granddaugther and grandma need to sort this out without mom or dad interfering.

    2. This woman is freakish. “Hmm, I want to make an impression on my husband’s . I KNOW! I’ll do something COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY that most people find bizarre and alarming, engage in it for several minutes while they stare at me in horror, then act like nothing’s wrong! Why, if I get my son in on it and put my husband in the middle, it’ll be the perfect Hello!”

    They just to tell the husband it weirds them out, have him nicely pass along the message, and forget about the whole thing.

    As a wider discussion, though, American society demands very high levels of physical independence from children (and adults, why we’re so disability unfriendly/hostile) and I’d be concerned if I saw someone engaging in behavior that undermined that. If the breastfeeding is the only thing, that’s fine, but if there’s a pattern of infantilizing… Junior might need a kind aunt or uncle to take him for the weekend and gently nurture independence.

  107. T/W

    @ Sandy

    Joking aside, I really am disturbed by the idea that anyone would report a nursing mother if they suspected she was doing extended nursing for sexual gratification. I’m having trouble letting that go. Breastfeeding certainly does have the potential to be sexually stimulating, because there’s a mouth on your nipple. But there are a lot of wonderful things about breastfeeding, like the closeness and cuddles and the love hormones that swoosh through your brain and my personal favorite, not having to wash bottles. So what if a woman likes the feeling, yes, sexually, of that mouth on her nipple? If the child and mother wish to continue the breastfeeding relationship, where is the harm? If you have other reasons to suspect abuse, fine, but nursing by itself is not abuse. And whatever a woman’s private reasons for wanting to breastfeed (or formula feed for that matter), they are really none of your business.

    Yeah… no.

    It’s fine for parents to bathe with children. A father can bathe with his baby girl: fine. If a father bathes with a 12 year old girl, fine. If a father bathes with a 12 year old child and then tells someone he is continuing to bath with her for sexual gratification, er fine?

    If you think so, with the greatest respect: what the fuck is the matter with you? It’s WRONG for a parent to do things with their children to bring themselves sexual gratification (I can’t believe I have to say this on a feminist website). It’s 100% always wrong. A side effect of something necessary, fine. You orgasm giving birth, good for you. But if you are initiating activities with your child in order TO BRING YOURSELF SEXUAL PLEASURE, you are a child abuser. How is this controversial? It doesn’t matter if the child is aware or not aware. A father masturbating to his daughter in the bath is fine as long as she’s not paying attention? Good god.

  108. Quick! Give me the definitive answer as to when every single woman should stop breastfeeding! Because, you know, people don’t want to have to look at a woman’s breast feeing a child. Is it 4 years old? 4 years, 11 months? 3 months? 6 weeks?

    I’m happpy to see that nobody here believes in policing other women for what they do with their bodies.

  109. @ Sandy

    So what if a woman likes the feeling, yes, sexually, of that mouth on her nipple? If the child and mother wish to continue the breastfeeding relationship, where is the harm?

    Sorry to post again but just read this closely. I’m trying not to get angry but this line just sent me over the edge. You just implied a CONSENSUAL SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP between a child and a parent because the child “wishes to continue”. That’s right. Children are asking for it from their abusers because they don’t tell them no. You just implied that the child is GIVING CONSENT to the SEXUAL ELEMENT of this action.

    What is the baby supposed to say; “mom, I really enjoy breast feeding but I want to just make sure – this isn’t sexual, right? You enjoy this platonically? Great. Pass over your left boob?”

    I don’t know what to say to the question of what the harm is because my brain just exploded.

  110. This is a reason why I don’t think feminism and breastfeeding advocacy (emphasis on advocacy) (also “attachment parenting” which is different from attachment theory) can exist hand-in-hand. Women still fight daily to achieve bodily autonomy in a variety of situations, and I find it perturbing that breastfeeding advocates want to create the rhetorical and practical space to make an exception around breastfeeding, where women have bodily autonomy except when it comes to breastfeeding, wherein breast is always best.

    After recently meeting my friend’s new baby in a coffee shop, I thought pretty much this exact thought. My friend’s baby gets both formula and breast milk, and in the coffee shop my friend fed her formula. I didn’t ask for reasons (it’s not my freaking business anyway!), but it’s entirely possible that she’s uncomfortable nursing in public. And if that is the case, that’s her right and she deserves no less respect as a mother than those who do nurse in public. As feminists, we wouldn’t dream of demonizing a woman who is uncomfortable doing anything else in public, so why is breastfeeding different just because children are involved? Extreme formula advocates often use the “formula kills” scare, and that has merit in areas where only dirty water is available to mix formula, but in the privileged communities that we are usually discussing in these debates babies are not dying from formula use.

    Now for the woman who was breastfeeding her five year old…My personal opinion is that it’s reasonable for a five year old to wait until they get home if he still wants to breastfeed. I also think five years is overdoing it–Yes, there’s the biological arguments that little primates should breastfeed until they’re five or six, and I’m sure it had benefit in prehistoric times when food was scarce, as well as places now without food security. But in the modern developed privileged communities where food is abundant, it’s not necessary. The cubs have to find their own food sometime (my mom said this; she let me breastfeed until I was 3 and then she had enough–I have suffered no ill effects from this and she’s an excellent mother!). HOWEVER, I think it’s in bad form to say anything to the dinner guest in the letter. Because either mothers have the right to breastfeed whereever they are or they don’t. I think it’s silly to breastfeed a five year old on demand, but it doesn’t actively harm anyone, so it’s not worth it to shame the mother. I think if the host is so uncomfortable with the breastfeeding, the best thing to do is just not invite her again until the kid is weaned.

  111. @Huh?

    So, enjoying the physical feelings that nursing produces = a man jerking off into his daughter’s bath? Wow.

  112. ^^

    Why don’t you learn to read, Hattie? Sandy was clear that it wasn’t just pleasure it was sexual pleasure AND that if this was the reason, it couldn’t be criticized because no reason a women ever does anything can be criticized.

    I don’t get why people would be willing to disregard children’s rights so blithely. It’s like no one matters but women. Children are vulnerable and need protection. I’m a Feminist but it’s like you are all on another planet.

  113. randiradio: I think if the host is so uncomfortable with the breastfeeding, the best thing to do is just not invite her again until the kid is weaned.

    Or talk to the mother and manage to not frame it as “Why are you abusing your son?” because it’s not abuse. A mother feeding her infant formula is not abuse, a mother breast feeding her kid past when you’re comfortable is not abuse.

  114. Oh, and I’m a woman who was sexually abused by a woman when a younger child. But I suppose if she got her Special Feminist Approved Lady Sexual Pleasure out of it then that’s fine.

    Still waiting for substantive analysis rather than snark about why Lady Sexual Pleasure is different but I’m guessing you have nothing intelligent to say.

  115. karak:
    1.You don’t get to correct other people in their own home. Ever.

    Why?
    Why should someone not be held accountable for what they say/do just because it happens within the confines of their chosen place of residence? If someone says something that another person considers hateful or offensive, how does where it happened determine whether or not you’re allowed to open a discussion about it?
    And since when does “keeping the peace” trump expressing disagreement with someone’s hateful views?

  116. Sandy: Joking aside, I really am disturbed by the idea that anyone would report a nursing mother if they suspected she was doing extended nursing for sexual gratification. I’m having trouble letting that go. Breastfeeding certainly does have the potential to be sexually stimulating, because there’s a mouth on your nipple. But there are a lot of wonderful things about breastfeeding, like the closeness and cuddles and the love hormones that swoosh through your brain and my personal favorite, not having to wash bottles. So what if a woman likes the feeling, yes, sexually, of that mouth on her nipple? If the child and mother wish to continue the breastfeeding relationship, where is the harm? If you have other reasons to suspect abuse, fine, but nursing by itself is not abuse. And whatever a woman’s private reasons for wanting to breastfeed (or formula feed for that matter), they are really none of your business.

    I think it would be useful to separate two scenarios out here:

    1. A mother is sexually stimulated by breastfeeding. She recognizes this, but doesn’t allow that factor to affect her judgment about frequency of breastfeeding, breastfeeding technique, or when to wean her child.

    2. A mother is sexually stimulated by breastfeeding. She begins to alter her patterns and techniques of breastfeeding in order to maximize the sexual pleasure from the experience, or delays weaning her child in order to keep getting sexual stimulation from the activity.

    I think scenario 1 is basically benign. The mother can’t control how breastfeeding makes her feel, and she is not really using her child to get sexual satisfaction–she just isn’t allowing the presence of sexual feelings to alter her behavior.

    I think scenario 2 is sick and abusive. Even if the child doesn’t know what’s happening, even if you can’t point to awareness or specific psychological harm, it’s wrong to involve a minor, and especially one’s own child, in one’s sex life.

    However, I would guess that the incidence of cases that resemble scenario 2 are probably vanishingly rare. Certainly the mere practice of extended breastfeeding doesn’t bear on it, except maybe in the utterly bizarre extremes where the child continues breastfeeding into puberty. So the idea (which has perhaps been lurking in the background in this discussion thread) that breastfeeding a child of 5 is wrong or harmful because there’s something inherently sexual about it has no basis.

  117. As a minor aside, it can happen that a baby with new teeth may decide to try them out and latch on hard so that it’s impossible to just pull them off the breast. In which case pinching their nose shut works to make them open up in about 2 seconds. (Seriously, my eldest managed to draw significant blood doing this. Pulling him off would have cost me a good chunk of nipple.) That said, a child with teeth learns very quickly that biting is incompatible with nursing.

    I was flabbergasted with my kids to find out how many people feel they have a perfect right to have their opinion on child-rearing taken absolutely seriously. Frankly, a nursing relationship, by itself, would never strike me as something I ought to have an opinion on. Can it be part of a wider abusive pattern? Sure, but so can anything else. I’ve seen healthy food, regular bedtimes and playing outside used as part of wider abusive patterns. If signs of abuse are present, focus on those. The breastfeeding is simple – unless someone is trying to feed you breast milk, or nurse off of your boobs, it’s decidedly none of your business. If they are, then you get to have an opinion on the matter.

  118. Cows milk has been treated, a breastfeeding mother’s milk fresh from the source is not treated. I breastfed TWO babies so I dont have an issue with breastfeeding but breastmil isnt some superior exception to bodily fluids around my food. Period.

    But I think part of the reason people are so uncomfortable with breasteeding is that they’ve either sucked a woman;s breast and the act caused sensations that were sexually arousing OR their breasts have been sucked (by an adult) and they’ve experienced sexual arousal and certain sensations.

    As a former breastfeeding mother, I NEVER knew wtf anyone was talking about when they said it felt good, my sons had gums of steel and nothing about it felt good physically or made me feel anything remotely arousing. It felt good emotionally to be able to provide the healthiest form of nutrition for my babies but the pump was my friend til the end.

    On the other hand I know women who said it physically felt good and I could see why someone would be uncomfortable with a woman who was physically enjoying her 5 year old sucking on her breasts being uncomfortable with it, at 5 the breast is not necessary it isnt about nutrition its about bonding. That can teeter on the line for some people.

    But anyway, it all goes back to people and their assumptions. Some mothers dont feel anything physically.

  119. Anon21: Ithinkitwouldbeusefultoseparatetwoscenariosouthere:

    1.Amotherissexuallystimulatedbybreastfeeding.Sherecognizesthis,butdoesn’tallowthatfactortoaffectherjudgmentaboutfrequencyofbreastfeeding,breastfeedingtechnique,orwhentoweanherchild.

    2.Amotherissexuallystimulatedbybreastfeeding.Shebeginstoalterherpatternsandtechniquesofbreastfeedinginordertomaximizethesexualpleasurefromtheexperience,ordelaysweaningherchildinordertokeepgettingsexualstimulationfromtheactivity.

    Ithinkscenario1isbasicallybenign.Themothercan’tcontrolhowbreastfeedingmakesherfeel,andsheisnotreallyusingherchildtogetsexualsatisfaction–shejustisn’tallowingthepresenceofsexualfeelingstoalterherbehavior.

    Ithinkscenario2issickandabusive.Evenifthechilddoesn’tknowwhat’shappening,evenifyoucan’tpointtoawarenessorspecificpsychologicalharm,it’swrongtoinvolveaminor,andespeciallyone’sownchild,inone’ssexlife.

    However,Iwouldguessthattheincidenceofcasesthatresemblescenario2areprobablyvanishinglyrare.Certainlythemerepracticeofextendedbreastfeedingdoesn’tbearonit,exceptmaybeintheutterlybizarreextremeswherethechildcontinuesbreastfeedingintopuberty.Sotheidea(whichhasperhapsbeenlurkinginthebackgroundinthisdiscussionthread)thatbreastfeedingachildof5iswrongorharmfulbecausethere’ssomethinginherentlysexualaboutithasnobasis.

    The answer to scenario one would be pumping. I cant imagine me doing something with my child that felt good to me sexually. I just cant fathom that ever.

  120. Azalea: The answer to scenario one would be pumping. I cant imagineme doing something with my child that felt good to me sexually. I just cant fathom that ever.

    Yeah, I was sort of straining at the bit not to be judgey about it, particularly since I have no idea how common it is for nursing mothers to get mild feelings of pleasure, whether sexual or otherwise, from breastfeeding. I guess my thought process was that if it’s common and not something mothers are in control of, there’s maybe no need to dictate any particular response to it so long as the sexual feelings are never a motivating factor in the mother’s decisions. But I would guess that most parents’ instincts run in the same direction as yours, which is why I found Sandy’s post surprising.

  121. So what if a woman likes the feeling, yes, sexually, of that mouth on her nipple? If the child and mother wish to continue the breastfeeding relationship, where is the harm? If you have other reasons to suspect abuse, fine, but nursing by itself is not abuse. And whatever a woman’s private reasons for wanting to breastfeed (or formula feed for that matter), they are really none of your business.

    Seconding the WHAT THE FUCKING WHAT? Sexual abuse of children is cool on Feministe, now? Getting sexual oral stimulation from your young child is alright because the mom decided she liked it? Good fucking lord I hope you don’t have children. I wouldn’t be able to dial CPS fast enough.

  122. Ugh, ugh, ugh. I can’t get over this. And apparently this person has a kid.

    Breastfeeding certainly does have the potential to be sexually stimulating, because there’s a mouth on your nipple. But there are a lot of wonderful things about breastfeeding, like the closeness and cuddles and the love hormones that swoosh through your brain and my personal favorite, not having to wash bottles. So what if a woman likes the feeling, yes, sexually, of that mouth on her nipple?

    I thought we kicked the pedos off this site a while ago? Does it not count if the kid is literally to young to say “no”, or does it count as consent if the kid’s mouth is too full maybe? -_- If you are getting off sexually on your child you are a sick sick predator. That is disgusting and abusive.

  123. Anon21: I have no idea how common it is for nursing mothers to get mild feelings of pleasure, whether sexual or otherwise, from breastfeeding.

    I used to volunteer at a midwifery center, and I’ve done a lot of research about pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding. From what I have read and what the people I’ve spoken with have told me, it is very, very, very, very, very, very common to feel a bit of sexual pleasure from breastfeeding, because somebody is sucking on your nipple, and it is even more common to feel a lot of non-sexual pleasure. It is a pretty intense connection, I am told.

    And I’m not sure why anybody would get judgey at a woman for experiencing some sexual pleasure when her nipple is being sucked on–how is she supposed to control that? And provided, obviously, that she never uses the child for sexual gratification, where’s the harm?

    I mean, how far does this “no experiencing sexual pleasure while doing something with your child” thing go? When I was a young teenager, my mother took me to see Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, and I know for a fact that she had a big crush on Kevin Costner at the time. I suspect she may even have felt some sexual pleasure from watching him in the movie, maybe even entertained some sexual thoughts/fantasies with me right there next to her, watching the very same movie. But since she kept them to herself, beyond acknowledging that indeed, she did think that Costner was very attractive, I seem to come have come out relatively unscathed.

    karak: You don’t get to correct other people in their own home. Ever.

    Why not? Asshole behavior is asshole behavior wherever it takes place. And so is inaccuracy. I’ll correct both, if I feel the need to, even if the asshole or incorrect person is in his/her very own home. This is not a game of tag, and home is not base, or safe, or whatever the kids are calling it these days.

  124. A mother is sexually stimulated by breastfeeding. She recognizes this, but doesn’t allow that factor to affect her judgment about frequency of breastfeeding, breastfeeding technique, or when to wean her child.

    Maybe she should let it affect her judgment by stopping doing things with her child that give her sexual pleasure. Unless this is a life-and-death scenario, and the only options are “get off sexually on your kid” or “let your kid die”, I’m not seeing any justification for sexually abusing a toddler. There are ways to nourish and bond with your child that don’t involve molestation.

  125. Bagelsan: If you are getting off sexually on your child you are a sick sick predator. That is disgusting and abusive.

    Bagelsan, there is a difference between “getting off sexually on your child” and experiencing feelings of sexual pleasure while breastfeeding. So, sure, if the mother decides she’s feeling horny, pulls the baby over, attaches him/her to her boob while using the vibrator, then sure, that is disgusting and abusive. But she’s a sick, sick predator for feeling some arousal when her nipple is being sucked on, which is incredibly common? It’s…a nipple. It’s not like the sexual-feeling aspect of it has an on/off switch that she can flip.

    There are lots and lots of reasons to breastfeed, and if, along with all the other good things that come out of it, a woman feels some sexual stimulation that does not have an impact on her decisions regarding the kid’s eating habits and needs…well, what’s it to anybody else?

  126. Bagelsan: Maybe she should let it affect her judgment by stopping doing things with her child that give her sexual pleasure. Unless this is a life-and-death scenario, and the only options are “get off sexually on your kid” or “let your kid die”, I’m not seeing any justification for sexually abusing a toddler. There are ways to nourish and bond with your child that don’t involve molestation.

    But how is this molestation? How is she getting off? Why should she end the positive aspects of breastfeeding because other people are freaked out about her being slightly aroused? How is the toddler being hurt?

  127. I’m a bit confused about the breast = sexytime & thus unwarranted awkwardness argument. People who are uncomfortable with breastfeeding because of breast sensuality… their opinions are sort of… null and void. Who cares what they think? What IS awkward is bodily fluids in the location of food consumption. If men were the ones to nurse, and they did so with, say, their own genital areas (stay with me, here)… that activity is NOT going to fly at the dinner table. There’s a certain level of cleanliness that I like to — and I think most humans prefer to, also, — adhere to when eating. I don’t want someone drooling, pooping, throwing up, peeing, bleeding, cumming, lactating, or having a runny nose near my food. Period.

    As for a five-year old breast-feeding… to each his own, I suppose. Though I can only speak as a woman, a person, who would be severely scarred if I could remember my own breastfeeding experience as a child. There’s a point where kids start to develop permanent memories, and even the innocent ones I have, personally, of showering with my parents affect me, now, negatively. Thank god I can’t remember breast-feeding.

  128. Honestly, this is reading like people calling a father a sick predator and sexually abusive and molesting for gently stroking his daughter’s vulva and/or tush with a warm cloth…when what he was doing was changing a poopy diaper. Should grown men, by and large, be touching toddlers’ genital areas? No. On the other hand, you can’t let your daughter sit around in her own feces, either. It’s a normal part of childcare. Breastfeeding is a normal part of childcare. Sure, in general, having your kid suck on your nipple would be abusive and molest-y…but she is breastfeeding the baby. That’s how it’s done.

  129. http://www.babycenter.com/404_is-it-normal-to-feel-aroused-when-im-breastfeeding_8927.bc

    Maybe not the most scholastic source, but it does help answer some questions. Mothers can feel some pleasure because of the sensation and the hormones being released. They’re not abusive freaks. Now I agree that if a mother prolongs breastfeeding because it gives her sexual pleasure, and uses her child to that end, it’s fucking wrong. But I also think that scenario is very very unlikely.

  130. Honestly, this is reading like people calling a father a sick predator and sexually abusive and molesting for gently stroking his daughter’s vulva and/or tush with a warm cloth…

    Well, is he getting sexual pleasure from it? Then yeah, still fucked up.

  131. Meh. Don’t invite families into your home if you can’t handle parents taking care of their kids. This is going to be an issue with young children, whether it’s getting into things, language, asking impertinent questions, force feeding/not force feeding kids, spanking, ect. I admit 5 is a borderline age. In most cases a five year old can behave in a socially acceptable way, but sometimes they don’t. Little kids are disruptive and inconvenient. Parents have to engage in some intensive hands on parenting most of the time with kids this age, if this parenting offends homeowners I think the home owner is more in the wrong for expecting the parent to ignore the problem or being offended that their preferences aren’t respected. Part of being a host is caring for guests and parents need to raise their young children, expecting parents to raise their kid your way because they are in your house is much ruder than nursing a five year old in my opinion.

    Also the argument that walking, talking, and getting nutrition has anything to do with a child’s need for breast milk is just plain stupid. Most toddlers are walking, and talking, most babies get nutrition from other sources. Walking at ten months isn’t unusual. My cousin was talking in complex conceptual sentences at 8 months old (assuming sign language counts as talking). The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends nursing for a minimum of 1 year, and the World Health Organization recommends nursing for a minimum of 2 years. Almost all babies walk, get nutrition from other sources, (and sign if taught) before one year, and talk before 2 years. Children double their body weight several times between birth and 2 years old. Most brain development occurs before 2 years old. Children need a lot of essential fatty acids and proteins to do this. The natural diet of humans is basically vegetarian and won’t provide enough nutrition for a child growing this quickly. Breast milk also provides antibodies and children need these antibodies until they have developed resistance to the local diseases and the fecal bacteria in the local water supply. Where I live in the US for example, there is a whooping cough epidemic, even if the baby is vaccinated at 2 months old the baby’s immune system isn’t mature enough to benefit from the vaccine until 6 months old. In Malaria prone areas it takes a child five years to develop the same level of resistance as an older child or an adult. The natural consequence of weaning to soon is kwashiorkor.
    http://www.medicinemd.com/Med_articles/Kwashiorkor_en.html

  132. I was perfectly okay with the concept of extended breastfeeding, right up until the point where a co-worker’s three year old tried to take my shirt off to get to mine. Something about her daughter being able to make that connection, that she could feed off any boob and not just mommy’s, did give me a squick.

    Do whatever you want with your kid and your breasts, but leave my boobs out of it.

  133. I have experienced sexual pleasure/arousal while seeing a physiotherapist, even though I had no sexual interest in them whatsoever. I have friends who experienced sexual arousal while being sexually assaulted. Sexual pleasure is actually kind of unavoidable in physically intimate or stimulating situations, regardless of whether or not it’s desired. I think it’s fucked up to tell women that they can’t breastfeed because of an uncontrollable physical reaction to their kid sucking on their nipples. Sexual arousal =/= sex or sexual action.

  134. “I was perfectly okay with the concept of extended breastfeeding, right up until the point where a co-worker’s three year old tried to take my shirt off to get to mine. Something about her daughter being able to make that connection, that she could feed off any boob and not just mommy’s, did give me a squick.”

    Yes, it’s squicky and invasive. And would be to me, too. But lots of things toddlers do can be squicky and invasive. I hope your coworker was dealing with and not permitting or facilitating the situation. I’m not sure that’s an argument for her not extendedly breastfeeding her kid any more than toddlers’ delightful ability at spreading germs is a reason to keep them out of restaurants.

    Anyway, it seems to me that babies make the boobs-is-boobs connection pretty early, don’t they?

  135. Read up on it – many, many women feel sexual feelings while nursing. Unless the child is being used as a specific masturbatory aide for a sick, twisted mother, breastfeeding is not sexual abuse. Even if it happens to feel good in a slightly sexual way.

    For crying out loud.

  136. Chally:
    @DouglasGreyourfirstparagraph:oh,you’resoright.Ew.

    I just tried whipping with a breast. It failed. Now I have a sad face.

    Try again after 5 years of constant breastfeeding. 🙂

  137. tinfoil hattie:
    I’m happpy to see that nobody here believes in policing other women for what they do with their bodies.

    Last time I checked, there’s two bodies involved in brestfeeding.

  138. Seriously, y’all, reread Sandy’s comment at 115:

    Joking aside, I really am disturbed by the idea that anyone would report a nursing mother if they suspected she was doing extended nursing for sexual gratification. I’m having trouble letting that go.

    She says she is cool with extended nursing for sexual gratification, and that it should not be reported. This is the comment that we’ve been responding to, for the most part, not to some hypothetical woman who puts up with occasional stimulation during nursing. For sexual gratification. There is no way that’s appropriate.

  139. “I was perfectly okay with the concept of extended breastfeeding, right up until the point where a co-worker’s three year old tried to take my shirt off to get to mine. Something about her daughter being able to make that connection, that she could feed off any boob and not just mommy’s, did give me a squick.”

    A friend’s five month old did this to me. I picked her up, she went right for the boobs. I thought it was funny. I don’t think your anecdote is a good basis for making decisions on the benefits of extended breastfeeding.

  140. Bagelsan: This is the comment that we’ve been responding to, for the most part, not to some hypothetical woman who puts up with occasional stimulation during nursing.

    Oh yes, I forgot, we’re supposed to pretend we’re “putting up” with occasional stimulation during nursing. Gotta pretend we don’t like it, or switch to formula, gotcha.

    Yeah, I have a kid. Way to go on the personal attacks. So we are clear. I do not think any mother nurses for extended sexual gratification. I am saying that I am disgusted that anyone would see a mother nursing a 5 year old or whatever and think the woman is extending the nursing for sexual reasons. I don’t think any do, or if it/when happens, it happens incredibly rarely, and there would probably be many other signs of abuse.. But y’know, thanks for calling me a pedo.

    EG: Why should she end the positive aspects of breastfeeding because other people are freaked out about her being slightly aroused? How is the toddler being hurt?

    Li: Sexual arousal =/= sex or sexual action.

    This and this.

  141. This fixation on “ZOMG WHAT IF THE MOM IS A PEDO” reminds me all too strongly of pro-lifers fixating on the supposed huge population of 9-month pregnant women who are aborting left and right just for shits and giggles and because they love love LOVE late term abortions.

    Is it possible that such women (the super late term aborters and women who breastfeed just to get off on it) exist? Sure, with a global population of 3.5 billion, almost anything is possible. But are such cases so common that they should in any way be representative of the millions of women who do abort or breastfeed past infancy? Not even close. So why are we fixating on this like it’s such a widespread and awful problem?

    Oh, that’s right. This concern trolling has little basis in reality and certainly nothing to do with the welfare of children. Fixating on the lactating child molesters is a way to make up an excuse after the fact for why we just feel so icky about full term breastfeeding and why we shouldn’t feel bad for shaming these women and calling them names like FREAK for doing something that is almost always normal and healthy and okay.

  142. The global population of 3.5 billion I mentioned is in reference to the women of the world, for clarification.

  143. Bagelsan: Well, is he getting sexual pleasure from it? Then yeah, still fucked up.

    If it necessarily involved somebody sucking on his penis when he did it, how would he not get sexual pleasure from it? What if the kid gets sexual pleasure from it (not unlikely, I suspect)?

    Feeling sexual pleasure as a by-product of somebody sucking on your nipple is not fucked up. It is normal.

    PeggyLuWho: I was perfectly okay with the concept of extended breastfeeding, right up until the point where a co-worker’s three year old tried to take my shirt off to get to mine. Something about her daughter being able to make that connection, that she could feed off any boob and not just mommy’s, did give me a squick.

    Meh. Kids aren’t perfectly socialized; that’s kind of the point of raising them. They make mistakes. It doesn’t seem that squicky, just something that you can stop and say “No, sweetie. My breasts are private.”

    Mandolin: Anyway, it seems to me that babies make the boobs-is-boobs connection pretty early, don’t they?

    In my experience, yes. I had a three-month-old try to nurse off my breasts when she was hungry. It’s a fairly instinctual thing to do, for obvious reasons.

    Bagelsan: She says she is cool with extended nursing for sexual gratification, and that it should not be reported. This is the comment that we’ve been responding to, for the most part, not to some hypothetical woman who puts up with occasional stimulation during nursing. For sexual gratification. There is no way that’s appropriate.

    No, that’s not what she said. What she said was that she was disturbed that somebody would report a woman for extended breastfeeding because they suspected that she was doing it for sexual gratification. That’s not about a mother using a kid as a masturbatory aid; that’s about busybodies thinking they know a mother’s motivations for doing what she’s doing, and feeling like they have the right to report her to CPS for doing it, based on their own feelings of squick. And this is not theoretical. Some years ago, when I was more involved in the natural childbirth/breastfeeding world, I ended up reading a long article about a young mother who called a breastfeeding information hotline in order to ask if it was normal to feel somewhat sexually aroused during breast feeding (answer: yes). The operator at the hotline called CPS, who came into the mother’s home and took her baby away (this was an article I was reading well before the internet had become a Thing, so I can’t link). CPS has taken kids because a photo developer developed a picture of a twelve-month-old nursing and deemed it sexual. CPS has been called when strangers have decided that the kid nursing is too old to be nursing. Women have lost custody because of breastfeeding. Strangers on the street feeling squicked is not a good basis for putting people through that.

    Also…”putting up with”? Look, women who have just had babies, “put up with” chapped, or sometimes even cracked and bleeding, nipples. They put up with stitches in the vagina. They put up with not getting to sleep more than three hours at a stretch. They put up with any number of things. God forbid the woman feel some slight sexual arousal, though, and even–horrors!–realize it’s normal, relax about it, and allow herself to enjoy it, though, I suppose.

    This mythical mother who nurses for sexual gratification doesn’t exist, Bagelsan. Or if she does, she’s probably the older sister of the woman who decides not to breastfeed because she doesn’t want to ruin her tennis game. This was an actual thing a friend said once as an example of a “bad reason” women choose to formula feed. When pressed, he had to admit that he’d never met, or even heard of an actual woman actually doing that. This is not a thing that happens. Kids have been sexually abused in all kinds of horrible ways. Being breastfed–by itself, with no other accompanying harmful actions, words, or manipulation–is just not one of them.

  144. Sandy, I don’t want to pick on you but because it’s your comment that was pulled out for scrutiny… We’ve got to remember that there are a lot of women reading here that are assault survivors. It’s no small thing in a space like this to laugh at people for being viscerally disgusted at the idea of a woman getting any sexual gratification from breastfeeding BECAUSE of the rates of sexual assault among us. In my experience, and from what research I’ve read, it’s not uncommon at ALL for sexual assault survivors to wholly avoid breastfeeding when they have children because of the legacy of sexual abuse. They find it physically disgusting. It’s really not a chuckle, har-har matter. It’s one of those points of intersection where feminism can tell us a lot about women’s choice (or not) to breastfeed, IF the breastfeeding advocates will back down long enough to hear shit about breastfeeding that isn’t rainbows and unicorns.

    C’mon, guys. We’re talking about a smidge of a child’s life and one small aspect of what a mother deals with in the raising of a child. And this isn’t black and white. Make space for the gray area.

  145. tmc: This fixation on “ZOMG WHAT IF THE MOM IS A PEDO” reminds me all too strongly of pro-lifers fixating on the supposed huge population of 9-month pregnant women who are aborting left and right just for shits and giggles and because they love love LOVE late term abortions.

    Seconded.

  146. Bagelsan:
    She says she is cool with extended nursing for sexual gratification, and that it should not be reported. This is the comment that we’ve been responding to, for the most part, not to some hypothetical woman who puts up with occasional stimulation during nursing.

    Actually, she said:

    I really am disturbed by the idea that anyone would report a nursing mother if they suspected she was doing extended nursing for sexual gratification.

    (Emphasis mine)
    I think the “suspected” is the pertinent issue here. Sandy isn’t saying, “You know someone who’s intentionally getting off by breastfeeding her child and THAT’S why she’s doing it, and you report her that’s disturbing”. She’s saying if someone sees extended breastfeeding and assumes or suspects without any sort of proof that it is about the sexual gratification of the mother and reports, that’s wrong.

    And I have to say, I agree. Reporting someone for child-rearing practices you would not engage in is disturbing. Reporting someone for child-rearing practices you assume with no proof could be harmful is disturbing. Reporting someone for child-rearing practices that actually harm a child or is actively about the mother’s sexual gratification and you know that is acceptable.

  147. Proof that no thread about parenting, no matter how reasonable the OP, can avoid turning into a polarized and far-fetched collecting of opposing rants and scare scenarios.

    What does this say about us?

  148. Florence: IF the breastfeeding advocates will back down long enough to hear shit about breastfeeding that isn’t rainbows and unicorns.

    Except Sandy did not say “breastfeeding is always the best way for every mother to go.” She said “what on earth is wrong with feeling sexually stimulated when somebody is sucking on your nipple, it’s perfectly normal and no big” and Bagelsan called her a pedophile. We’re talking about strangers feeling as though they have the right to make judgment calls about when breastfeeding is appropriate and when it’s not for other people. I absolutely support any mother’s decision to formula feed for any reason whatsoever. And I support any mother’s decision to breastfeed for any reason whatsoever. Real women do not make these decisions based on their tennis games or on sexual stimulation, unless, for the latter, there are other signs of actual, y’know, abuse.

  149. tmc: This fixation on “ZOMG WHAT IF THE MOM IS A PEDO” reminds me all too strongly of pro-lifers fixating on the supposed huge population of 9-month pregnant women who are aborting left and right just for shits and giggles and because they love love LOVE late term abortions.

    Is it possible that such women (the super late term aborters and women who breastfeed just to get off on it) exist? Sure, with a global population of 3.5 billion, almost anything is possible. But are such cases so common that they should in any way be representative of the millions of women who do abort or breastfeed past infancy? Not even close. So why are we fixating on this like it’s such a widespread and awful problem?

    Oh, that’s right. This concern trolling has little basis in reality and certainly nothing to do with the welfare of children. Fixating on the lactating child molesters is a way to make up an excuse after the fact for why we just feel so icky about full term breastfeeding and why we shouldn’t feel bad for shaming these women and calling them names like FREAK for doing something that is almost always normal and healthy and okay.

    Quoted for so much truth.

    Me too. I find it really disheartening. I hope my babe doesn’t want to nurse past two or so at most, because then this kind of concern trolling to deal with.

    Bagelsan, I doubt you realize how much your “I couldn’t call CPS fast enough” statement upsets me. I hope you’ll read the Babycenter link librarygoose provided. Not all women experience sexual arousal during nursing but plenty do. It’s totally normal.

  150. EG: She said “what on earth is wrong with feeling sexually stimulated when somebody is sucking on your nipple, it’s perfectly normal and no big” and Bagelsan called her a pedophile.

    Quote the first half of that sentence of mine. Put this conversation in context. If not, be cool with arbitrary divisions and shallow arguments on complicated issues.

  151. I think the people freaking out about sexual arousal during breastfeeding might be a little confused about how it all works. Babies eat when they are hungry. Newborns and tired or just-fell-and-banged themselves older babies will and do nurse for comfort. But regardless of what’s motivating the *child* you can’t really *make* a baby or toddler nurse who doesn’t want to nurse. It’s really the child driving the whole thing, and then you kind of feel whatever it is that you feel.

    It’s also important to understand that a boob, biologically speaking, is no different than an udder. It exists to feed babies. Incidentally, it also gives many human women sexual pleasure and people who are attracted to women like to look at them. Yay for that! But that’s just a happy accident. To think that a woman breastfeeds *for* sexual gratification has it completely backward.

    Lastly, it’s kind of funny that some people are all “Breastfeeding makes your nipples tough????!!!! I’m not doing that!” and then others are all “Breastfeeding doesn’t kill all sensation in your nipples???!!!! I’m not doing that!”

    (For the record, I usually feel nothing at all other then a slight tugging sensation when I’m nursing. I feel bad that I feel like I have to write that, but we now have people calling breastfeeding women “pedos” so I feel like I need to protect myself.)

  152. Florence: We’ve got to remember that there are a lot of women reading here that are assault survivors. It’s no small thing in a space like this to laugh at people for being viscerally disgusted at the idea of a woman getting any sexual gratification from breastfeeding BECAUSE of the rates of sexual assault among us. In my experience, and from what research I’ve read, it’s not uncommon at ALL for sexual assault survivors to wholly avoid breastfeeding when they have children because of the legacy of sexual abuse. They find it physically disgusting. It’s really not a chuckle, har-har matter.

    This is not funny to me. If sexual assault survivors want to avoid breastfeeding that is entirely their business. If they want to formula feed that is entirely their business. It becomes my business when they say they want to call CPS and have my baby taken away because they’re disgusted by my admitting to sexual arousal sometimes when nursing her. Again, I do not think any of this is funny, and I may have been sarcastic but I’m certainly not laughing.

    EG: I absolutely support any mother’s decision to formula feed for any reason whatsoever. And I support any mother’s decision to breastfeed for any reason whatsoever. Real women do not make these decisions based on their tennis games or on sexual stimulation, unless, for the latter, there are other signs of actual, y’know, abuse.

    Thank you, EG.

  153. Florence, you keep making these backhanded comments about breastfeeding advocates and how they can’t coexist with feminism, etc. But this thread is not about whether or not women should formula feed. It’s not about judging moms who don’t breastfeed. Literally NO ONE ON THIS THREAD is arguing about whether formula feeding is wrong and NO ONE has said “Women have to breastfeed or else they suck as mothers.” Many MANY commenters have said, essentially, “Do what you want, just give me the same courtesy.”

    You are trying to start an argument that does not exist in this thread, and for the life of me, I can’t undersand why. This is not a formula feeder versus breastfeeder thread. Your continued attempts to derail are confusing and frustrating as hell.

    We’re talking about a smidge of a child’s life and one small aspect of what a mother deals with in the raising of a child.

    As has been mentioned several times, families have been destroyed because of the stigma agaisnt full term breastfeeding. It’s a big fucking deal, and actually speaking up and saying “Hey, it’s okay to breastfeed” makes a difference because it lets women know that they are normal and okay, and it lets assholes know that their frothy viciousness has no basis in reality. It’s a stigma worth fighting because it really fucking hurts women and babies.

  154. umami: “I was perfectly okay with the concept of extended breastfeeding, right up until the point where a co-worker’s three year old tried to take my shirt off to get to mine. Something about her daughter being able to make that connection, that she could feed off any boob and not just mommy’s, did give me a squick.”

    I certainly believe you that this happened, but my experience is that the older the baby, the less likely they are to try and nurse from someone who isn’t their mother. Newborns will “root” on just about anything because they’re acting entirely out of instinct. Babies around two or three months will root on any woman, but usually not on men. Sometime soon after that, they figure out that there’s only one lady who’s going to help them out with that particular need/want. And certainly, parents should work on the whole boundaries/private parts thing with their kids, but at three, and even beyond, most kids are a work in progress on that front. If a kid did it to me, I would probably laugh, but I would also be embarrassed if my non-baby kid did it to someone else, and I can see how it would feel upsetting/violating to someone who wasn’t expecting it.

  155. Florence: Quote the first half of that sentence of mine. Put this conversation in context. If not, be cool with arbitrary divisions and shallow arguments on complicated issues.

    I just reread your comment. I don’t see how the part I quoted misrepresented what you were saying at all. Just like everybody else, abuse survivors can choose to breastfeed or not as they please; they certainly have a right to any visceral feelings of disgust they may have, as does everybody else. What they do not have the right to do is to make the assumption that their visceral feelings of disgust are an accurate representation of the situation at hand. Having a feeling doesn’t make that feeling true. As to the bit about “being laughed at”–I just don’t see where Sandy did that. Or where I did that. Pointing out that what somebody is saying makes no sense is not mockery. It’s a reality check.

  156. I’m surprised no one has invoked my favorite extended breastfeeding trufax – it is said that Genghis Khan nursed until he was seven years old. and, you know, he was a shy, clingy, overly-dependent, socially-backward mama’s boy who never moved out of his parents’ yurt…

    also see: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/07/breastfeeding-in-land-of-genghis-khan.html

    I don’t think I would have nursed my kids as long as I have if I didn’t get some occasional physical pleasure out of it – if nothing else, to compensate for the occasional excruciating agony…

    it’s really easy to label ALL physical pleasure as strictly sexual in nature, but that doesn’t really describe the nature of physical pleasure from breastfeeding. Breastfeeding involves nipple stimulation, sure, but it also causes uterine contractions. so it features some of the same body parts as sexual pleasure does, but it’s in a completely different context.

    it’s intense, but I don’t think admitting that nursing feels good is the same as going “yeah! pedophiles REPRESENT!”

    I can also say that my personal experience nursing a toddler (now preschooler) and an infant in tandem – the older a child gets, the less pleasurable nursing is. the shape of the mouth changes, they don’t latch like they used to – it’s just not the same, and that feeling of bodily pleasure for me diminished rapidly after he was about 2 and a half. I don’t know if my experience is textbook or unique, but I imagine that the danger of mama having falling orgasmic ecstasies while nursing an older child is somewhat overstated.

  157. antiprincess: it is said that Genghis Khan nursed until he was seven years old. and, you know, he was a shy, clingy, overly-dependent, socially-backward mama’s boy who never moved out of his parents’ yurt…

    Well, shit. My favorite line about extended breastfeeding is, “Everyone knows our prisons are full of men who were breastfed until they were five.” But if Genghis Khan were doing his thing in our society without going through the proper political channels, he *would* be in prison. Confusing!

  158. antiprincess: Breastfeeding involves nipple stimulation, sure, but it also causes uterine contractions. so it features some of the same body parts as sexual pleasure does, but it’s in a completely different context.

    Yeah, you know what, I’ve heard that childbirth causes uterine contractions too–ZOMG, what if somewhere, some woman finds childbirth sexually pleasurable! Won’t somebody think of the babiez! (Actually, apparently, this is a thing, though I’ve never met a woman who has actually experienced it herself: http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/orgasms-during-childbirth/)

    There you go, Florence. Now that’s making fun of or laughing at a reaction.

  159. just fyi, chingona, you have attributed the quote from the person I was responding to, to me. I don’t disagree with your point.

  160. Sorry. I knew that. I was too lazy to go back and find the quote in the original comment, so I used the quote function on your comment without thinking about how it would then attribute the quote to you.

  161. EG: Yeah, you know what, I’ve heard that childbirth causes uterine contractions too–ZOMG, what if somewhere, some woman finds childbirth sexually pleasurable! Won’t somebody think of the babiez!

    Believe it or not, I have actually seen this argument made. Yes, some people think it’s child abuse to experience orgasm during childbirth. it was on a website frequented by a large population of misogynist asshole gay men. I thought about trying to argue with the people saying this, but instead I just fantasised about hitting them all over the head with a very large mallet and let it go. Not worth it.

  162. But if Genghis Khan were doing his thing in our society without going through the proper political channels, he *would* be in prison. Confusing!

    well, no one can say he lacked independence!

  163. tmc: Florence, you keep making these backhanded comments about breastfeeding advocates and how they can’t coexist with feminism, etc. But this thread is not about whether or not women should formula feed.

    Nothing I say on this thread is backhanded. There’s no snark to what I’m saying here at all. The only formula feeding comment I made was directly to a pregnant woman who was having reservations about breastfeeding she expressed on this thread. Otherwise I see a pro-breastfeeding party that’s wiping out the questions and reservations of people who aren’t gung-ho about it (or the situation in the OP that started all this), which is a common observation that is made about breastfeeding advocates in general. I’m not pro- or anti-. I do think the topic is more complicated than “breast is best!” and that beating that drum is a disservice to women, especially in regards to whole family health.

    Sandy: This is not funny to me. If sexual assault survivors want to avoid breastfeeding that is entirely their business. If they want to formula feed that is entirely their business. It becomes my business when they say they want to call CPS and have my baby taken away because they’re disgusted by my admitting to sexual arousal sometimes when nursing her. Again, I do not think any of this is funny, and I may have been sarcastic but I’m certainly not laughing.

    Again, didn’t want to call you out personally. And I don’t want to be the snark police, but c’mon. I don’t think anyone’s horror here is feigned or based in misogyny because it’s coming from people who participate in this space daily and in good faith. Look, the OP is talking about the etiquette of breastfeeding a child old enough to be an outlier. A basic google search shows me that extended breastfeeding rates worldwide show that extended breastfeeding tends to drop off by four years of age. This is one of those anomalies that invites scrutiny because it’s so uncommon, not just in the developed world, but at all. This has little to do with regular breastfeeding practices and pretending like this is all about generalized anti-breastfeeding rhetoric in this context is weird.

    On a side note, it’s striking that the feminist parenting thread where we’re arguing about whether or not children have the right to be in public at all are consistently overrun with people who argue that “seen and not heard” is an optimal way to treat children. But throw breastfeeding into it and suddenly it’s Feminist Child Rights Fest 2011.

  164. PeggyLuWho: Something about her daughter being able to make that connection, that she could feed off any boob and not just mommy’s, did give me a squick.

    Lots of babies make that connection, though. I was holding my friend’s three month old the other day, and she was trying to latch.

  165. Florence: I do think the topic is more complicated than “breast is best!” and that beating that drum is a disservice to women, especially in regards to whole family health.

    Except no one in this thread is making a “breast is best!” argument. This is exactly what tmc was talking about. If people are oversimplifying it – and I think a few people are – it’s because they don’t want to judge how someone else raises their kids, not because they think formula sucks.

  166. It’s one of those points of intersection where feminism can tell us a lot about women’s choice (or not) to breastfeed, IF the breastfeeding advocates will back down long enough to hear shit about breastfeeding that isn’t rainbows and unicorns.

    “Rainbows and unicorns” is not snark? C’mon.

    You’re conflating breastfeeding advocates being vicious towards non-breastfeeders (which is totally a problem, but also completely off-topic for this thread) or being overly zealous with the actual breastfeeding women in this thread who keep saying “Leave us alone, let us feed our kids in peace and for God’s sake don’t call CPS about this shit, okay?” That is not the same as chanting “BREAST IS BEST!” at all.

    It’s not about people not being able to stand to hear something negative about breastfeeding because they’re just so sensitive. It’s about people who are being baselessly accused of being clingy, abusive, pedophiliac, freakish titty monsters. It’s about people who are afraid that their children may be taken away if the wrong busybody finds out that they’re breastfeeding. It’s about people who hate to be told “breastfeeding is awesome” and “but make sure you hide it like a dirty shameful secret and only do it for the exact right reasons and for the exact right amount of time and in the exact right places” by the same damn person.

    Dismissing everyone in this thread who has said “Fuck, this shit hurts and it sucks and it scares me” by boiling it all down to some kind of rabid religious zeal for BREAST IS BEST is wholly inaccurate and entirely unfair.

  167. Florence: I don’t think anyone’s horror here is feigned or based in misogyny because it’s coming from people who participate in this space daily and in good faith.

    Just because someone is a feminist doesn’t mean they don’t have complicated and sometimes slightly irrational views about how women use their bodies. Lots of feminists seem to have a problem with breastfeeding (not saying this is you!) because they see it as totally self-abnegating on the part of the woman who does it, and they seem not able to hear the voices of women who don’t feel that way about it. Lots of feminists have problems with sex work and porn that go beyond generic leftists concerns about working conditions and terms. Lots of feminists have problems with BDSM. Just because someone is a feminist and participating in good faith doesn’t mean they aren’t bringing their own baggage to the conversation.

  168. Florence: I see a pro-breastfeeding party that’s wiping out the questions and reservations of people who aren’t gung-ho about it

    But the “questions and reservations” in this case aren’t coming from formula feeding moms. The questions and reservations are coming from people concern-trolling mothers who breastfeed with bullshit accusations that it’s creepy, inappropriate, gross, bad for the child, a symptom that the mother is sick, worthy of calling CPS on, etc.

    I’m sorry, but women have every right to wipe out THOSE particular objections.

  169. umami: Believe it or not, I have actually seen this argument made. Yes, some people think it’s child abuse to experience orgasm during childbirth.

    And that’s not even touching on the depraved, disgusting parents who have sex in the very same bedroom they share with their infant, who is asleep in a crib! What if that four-month-old wakes up? Then what? SCARRED FOR LIFE is what.

  170. This has little to do with regular breastfeeding practices and pretending like this is all about generalized anti-breastfeeding rhetoric in this context is weird.

    Personally, I can’t separate the two because, as I mentioned way upthread, it’s not like people were all “you go girl!” in the beginning and then started acting shitty to me once she started walking and talking. People started making shitty derogatory comments about my breastfeeding her when she was months old, and it has NEVER STOPPED or gotten better and the nature of the comments have NOT CHANGED AT ALL. The arguments people make now (she’ll be too dependant, she needs real food, etc) are the exact same arguments that they were making when she was 60 fucking days old. It wasn’t about what was best for her then, and it’s not about what’s best for her now; it’s just about their personal discomfort when it comes to breastfeeding. Period.

    1. I was excited to see this blog had mentioned yesterday’s trainwreck Prudie column but I am disappointed to see the comments are mostly about the stupid breastfeeding letter (which I think was exaggerated/faked in a pretty obvious way) and nothing about the horrible, HORRIBLE shaming of the sexual abuse survivor wife. That one really upset me a lot.

      Going back upthread a little, yeah, I thought Prudie’s suggestion that the wife might be lying was totally fucked up. But otherwise I’m not sure her advice was actually that horrible. I mean, if you marry someone you are of course entitled to refuse to have sex for three years, which is what the wife did. But the husband isn’t obligated to stay married to someone who gave no indication that upon marriage she would stop having sex entirely, and gives no indication that she’ll ever be interested in having sex with him again. I would honestly be filing for divorce if my partner would not have sex with me for three years, as soon as we got married. That doesn’t make the wife a bad or manipulative person (although the whole waiting until marriage to bring this up and then start refusing to have sex thing seems a little odd to me), but it does mean that the husband is allowed to have needs too. And if his needs are not being met, he’s allowed to leave.

  171. I am totally cool with breastfeeding until x age, but the author is right. Does he really need a milk option? My kids drink water with meals, so there really isn’t a justification for him needing to have milk RIGHT THEN.

    There is a point of being reasonable. Yes, they should breastfeed as long as wanted, but there is a point where not breastfeeding at the table is also reasonable.

  172. That first letter makes me glad my poppop is either terse or sarcastic in conversation. Our conversations consist of him asking if I’m doing good in school, I remind him I graduated, and he offers me sugar free gum. Good times.

  173. chingona: Just because someone is a feminist doesn’t mean they don’t have complicated and sometimes slightly irrational views about how women use their bodies. Lots of feminists seem to have a problem with breastfeeding (not saying this is you!) because they see it as totally self-abnegating on the part of the woman who does it, and they seem not able to hear the voices of women who don’t feel that way about it. Lots of feminists have problems with sex work and porn that go beyond generic leftists concerns about working conditions and terms. Lots of feminists have problems with BDSM. Just because someone is a feminist and participating in good faith doesn’t mean they aren’t bringing their own baggage to the conversation.

    Totally fair, and I agree. But in my perfect world, we could address that cultural baggage within the community directly with good faith. Like I tried to say above, there are a lot of legitimate reasons why someone wouldn’t be gung-ho about breastfeeding (or breastfeeding a five year old at the dinner table the first time you’re meeting your in-laws). Demonizing that reservation can be actively harmful. As harmful, I’d argue, as demonizing the act of breastfeeding.

    mary: But the “questions and reservations” in this case aren’t coming from formula feeding moms. The questions and reservations are coming from people concern-trolling mothers who breastfeed with bullshit accusations that it’s creepy, inappropriate, gross, bad for the child, a symptom that the mother is sick, worthy of calling CPS on, etc.

    The only formula-related comment I made was directly addressing a pregnant mother who has reservations about breastfeeding. The questions and reservations I’m referring to appear to be from people who had questions about the details of the OP, misconceptions about breastfeeding etiquette and practice in general, and people who were uncomfortable with what they thought was a blurring of the line between sexual arousal and sexual exploitation. I think these things are pretty straightforward and deserve answers.

    tmc: You’re conflating breastfeeding advocates being vicious towards non-breastfeeders (which is totally a problem, but also completely off-topic for this thread) or being overly zealous with the actual breastfeeding women in this thread who keep saying “Leave us alone, let us feed our kids in peace and for God’s sake don’t call CPS about this shit, okay?” That is not the same as chanting “BREAST IS BEST!” at all.

    Genuinely not trying to conflate the two or appear like some kind of zealot. I’m being critical of breastfeeding advocates being snarky towards people who aren’t educated on breastfeeding on this thread. The “breast is best!” stuff that I’m referring to is stuff like the quotation of statistics and organizations that aren’t straightforward, settled science, or that don’t allow for interpretation of the overall agenda (WHO). Or, the conflation of “full term” breastfeeding and “extended breastfeeding”, which are considered two different things and are terms that have political meaning, for example. The acceptance of woo-woo science and fuzzy terminology tends to be accepted in the lactivist community because there is the fear that acceptance of criticism will undermine efforts to promote breastfeeding. Instead we want to talk about what apes do and what women do “in the wild” (which is… ugh). I have a hard time letting that go in the name of feminism because it undermines women’s individual efforts to make choices about breastfeeding in their meat-space lives, or to develop reasonable applications of this information offline. Also because lactivist movements are not inherently feminist movements, and some promote distinctly anti-feminist ideals. This is a pretty complicated topic that is timely and has cultural relevancy (especially since we’re experiencing a cultural trend toward “natural lifestyle” parenting and green living) and making it about whether or not one can snark better than the next person is kind of a shame.

  174. I am flabbergasted by this entire thread and where it has gone.

    Florence– We are not all “breastfeeding advocates.” Some of us are just women who have breastfed children. Sometimes there isn’t an agenda. The issue was not what should the feminist perspective be on breastfeeding in general, but it was addressing an advice column that was a bit of an epic fail. We can raise a whole bunch of issues about what’s done in other countries, by other mammals, in various communities, and those are fair to discuss.

    But then there seems to be a desire to come out to a “right” way to breastfeed, and that strikes me as incredibly harmful to women; and to me in particular as a woman who has breastfed children and intends to do so again. My children self-weaned as toddlers. If someone had told me the right way to nurse was to stop nursing at 9 months, whether or not they were ready, I would have been horrified. If someone had told me I had to continue nursing until they were 5, whether or not I or the child in question wanted to, I would have been horrified. At some point– like anything else in feminism– I fall back to the side of TRUSTING WOMEN. It seems that the “squick” factor that some folks feel about breastfeeding lets them feel entitled to not trust that we are all doing our best to make good decisions for our kids.

  175. Michelle: I am flabbergasted by this entire thread and where it has gone.

    Florence– We are not all “breastfeeding advocates.” Some of us are just women who have breastfed children. Sometimes there isn’t an agenda. The issue was not what should the feminist perspective be on breastfeeding in general, but it was addressing an advice column that was a bit of an epic fail. We can raise a whole bunch of issues about what’s done in other countries, by other mammals, in various communities, and those are fair to discuss.

    Me too! Especially since I have no issues with extended breastfeeding, as stated at the top of this thread, I’m surprised to be the bad guy. (For the record, I personally think breastfeeding a 5yo is as weird as bottle feeding a 5yo, in that I’d be surprised and a little scandalized if I saw it, especially at the in-laws dinner table at a getting-to-know-you dinner, because 5yos are typically onto silverware and cups by that point in their development, but to each their own.) I’m an advocate of the Trust Women edict, but I also think it’s fine to have parenting ideals that run contrary to attachment parenting, especially since so much of it relies on the physical and menial work of women, work that gets trivialized and minimized because it’s “for the children”.

  176. Last note on this, the benefits of extended reastfeeding isn’t about the milk, its about the bonding.

    People getting a little unnerved about a special bonding session that involves an adult experiencing sexual arousing from an activity with a child is not some horrible reaction in and of itself. It is very diffcult to understand why a parent would *elect* to do something with their child, in the name of bonding, that gives them sexual gratification FROM their child. This wasn’t about nursing a newborn or infant or even a small toddler, we’re talking about doing this special bonding with a pre school aged child. There is a need for leeway on both sides of the argument to explain 1) what it is exactly that makes some people so uneasy about seeing a 5 year old sucking on their mother’s nipples thus sexually arousing her and 2)why that act isn’t as sexual as it seems and what exactly the benefits are that hugs, kisses and cuddling couldn’t suffice o take the place of.

    We’re having a massive misunderstanding here. I’ll admit to not understanding what feels good about breastfeeding, the pump didn’t feel so great either but I could pump 8 oz in 30 minutes, it would take an hour to fill my then infants (30 min on each breast). My mother was my cheerleading in nursing but even she said it looked painful because it looked like my sons “meant business.”

    Also simply sucking on the nipple will not create a gush of milk, if she’s empty she’s empty. Before pacifiers were created, there was a nipple. I would look a little unnerved about seeing a 5 year old with a pacifier. I wouldnt call CPS though.

  177. My wording was poor and I in no way intended to accuse you of zealotry. It should have read more like this: “You’re conflating breastfeeding advocates being…overly zealous with the actual breastfeeding women in this thread.” I was talking about breastfeeding advocates, not you.

    And honestly? The science we have in regards to breastfeeding norms is a hell of a lot more sound than what people are basing their “ew, that’s fucked, what a pedo” reactions on – i.e., stigma and complete and utter misinformation. If you have better science to offer as an argument, then by all means bring it. But no one has done that, no one has gone beyond “ew yuck I’m sure that’s bad in some way, lemme think of something quick!”

    I have zero guilt over being snarky to people who are shitty to me and my kid. It allows me to blow off steam in a way that is overall pretty damn harmless. It’s not like I’m threatening to call CPS on anyone in here.

    I’m not in this thread because I want everyone to breastfeed. I’m in this thread because I want everyone to be able to choose to breastfeed or not, and for how long if at all, and because I want to directly confront the stigma that threatens my relationship with my child. I’m not a feminist, I’m not a lactivist, I’m not an attachment parent, I’m not into woo. I’m just a woman with a child, and I want the freedom to raise my child as I see fit without threat of harm to either of us.

  178. Florence: Instead we want to talk about what apes do and what women do “in the wild” (which is… ugh).

    I seriously have no fucking clue why I can’t include some evolutionary biology without you assuming I want you to squat in some field and give birth. People have pants so we never again get to include some info about why men also have nipples? We all have to ignore our relationship to other apes because it makes you sad to imagine that BREASTS ARE FOR FEEDING BABIES. I am not saying you have to use them for that, but that is their basic fucking function. I was saying that for people, based on science, what the average age to wean probably would/could be. I wasn’t implying you strap your kid to your back and we all head out to the savannah so you can forage for fruits, tubers, and hunt small game.

    I do admit to snarking.

  179. Andie: let me ask.. would there be the same boundary issue if a five year old said “Mommy I’m thirsty!” and climbed up in her lap and took a big old drink out of mom’s glass of milk and cuddled with her at the table?

    No, because that’s actually fairly normal behavior for a five year old. Breast feeding at five is very abnormal. Allow me to corner the ‘yes, buts’ for a minute.
    Lactose allergy: Lots of different options here. Coconut milk, almond milk and soy milk. There are also a number of non-milky foods that contain calcium. If all else fails, there are commercially available calcium supplies available.
    Extended breastfeeding in the past: the past also had lots of malnutrition, droughts, and transport issues. In the case of Genghis Khan: Well, Mongolia’s basically a desert. I suspect that breastfeeding was very extended among nomadic people who had an unpredictable food supply.
    Comfort: Five year olds will do just fine with cuddles or some time in a rocking chair. If they need more than that, it might be a time to take a close look at what else is going on in their life.
    Medical issues: A very good reason, actually. If a kid can only handle non-solid food, breast milk would be a reasonable option.

  180. tmc: The science we have in regards to breastfeeding norms is a hell of a lot more sound than what people are basing their “ew, that’s fucked, what a pedo” reactions on – i.e., stigma and complete and utter misinformation. If you have better science to offer as an argument, then by all means bring it. But no one has done that, no one has gone beyond “ew yuck I’m sure that’s bad in some way, lemme think of something quick!”

    I agree. The science is not great however, because there isn’t a way to ethically control for variables and test whether or not the benefits of breastfeeding are as represented or are over- or under-stated. That said, my zeal to try and temper some of the claims above (that squickiness is always about misogyny and fear of the female body, that the behaviors of other mammals should inform our cultural and practical feeding patterns) appears to be disruptive, so I’ll bow out.

  181. Politicalguineapig– But we’re back to you (or someone like you) deciding that because a kid falls outside the mean it is therefore somehow “wrong.” No one has said anywhere in this thread that there is no other way a 5 year old could get nutrition. Does that mean this mother & child are wrong to nurse at that age? No. Totally different questions.

    Florence– I guess that’s where I’m stuck. I agree that there’s no “ideal” of attachment parenting we need to push women to practice. I also agree that avoiding attachment parenting is somehow ideal. But we aren’t discussing ideal parenting practices here. Just parenting practices that are permitted to the point that the state won’t be called to come take your kids away. When it comes to ideal, I’m happy to live and let live. When people start talking about intervening because they believe me being “outside the norm” means I would harm my kids, that raises my hackles. I suspect I’m not the only one.

    Can I just throw out there another anecdata point? I nursed two babies. As described in that lovely link above, there are good bonding hormones released when you nurse. I experienced that as an easier ability to drift off to sleep and a relaxed state with both my newborns. While some women *may* experience something they code as sexual, I have seen nothing that indicates that women are “getting off” on nursing. I believe we’ve all seen that information that hugs release oxytocin too. Should we not hug our kids? It gets kind of ridiculous to get from “this may feel good” to “OMG gross!” (I can add that not everyone gets cracked nipples or pain, and nipples that adjust to nursing are not necessarily “tough” like leather. Like every other dang thing out there, everyone is different.)

  182. Er…. I’d also agree that we don’t need to push women into avoiding attachment parenting. Glitch there!

  183. Thomas @ 160

    Proof that no thread about parenting, no matter how reasonable the OP, can avoid turning into a polarized and far-fetched collecting of opposing rants and scare scenarios. What does this say about us?

    That we’re interesting? All the fun conversations happen at the margins, after the moderates leave the room.

    I read a novel, I think it was 100 Years of Solitude, where a woman described breastfeeding as having a direct channel to the inside of your clitoris that gets tugged with every latch. I read that in high school, so I didn’t think too much of it a few years ago when a friend (who was always able to orgasm from nipple stimulation) told me that she “accidentally” had an orgasm while breastfeeding. She told me this while she was breastfeeding. It only happened once, during the first few magical, unreal weeks after birthing a baby when everything is amazing, and after that breastfeeding became routine and she didn’t pay much attention to it. I took a class from a midwife who said she’s had two women have an orgasm while birthing. Apparently, these babies would be safer in a foster home where no one had to use their bodies to create them, feed them, and bond with them?

    Then again, when you cuddle a baby, you feel an overall sense of physical pleasure and closeness and affection. Maybe robots should raise our babies so that our meat-flesh bodies don’t get in the way?

  184. librarygoose: I seriously have no fucking clue why I can’t include some evolutionary biology without you assuming I want you to squat in some field and give birth. People have pants so we never again get to include some info about why men also have nipples? We all have to ignore our relationship to other apes because it makes you sad to imagine that BREASTS ARE FOR FEEDING BABIES. I am not saying you have to use them for that, but that is their basic fucking function.

    What I said directly to you, which you ignored then and now, is that your apes are people argument in this context sounds a lot like “biology is destiny,” which is something that women actively have to fight against every. damn. day. Soemthing you should find kind of appalling and dangerous instead of snarking on me like I’m a tool instead of someone who is arguing in good faith and has a dog in this fight. Like I said above, these biological narratives that are meant to explain human behavior have a habit of ultimately explaining why oppressed people should shut up and accept their lot. Are you cool with that? I’m not cool with that. On the left, these explanations are used for a lot of back to the land philosophies that encourage women to “strap your kid to your back and …head out to the savannah so you can forage for fruits, tubers, and hunt small game.” On the conservative side, this narrative is used to explain why women belong in the home, and not in the workforce or the public eye. If you have beef with this interpretation and think it’s untrue, say so. But twisting my arguments and yelling at me that I don’t know what breasts are for to demean me into backing down from this argument makes me think you’re a bully.

  185. Shoshie: Lots of babies make that connection, though. I was holding my friend’s three month old the other day, and she was trying to latch.

    Three months =/= three years.

  186. “This is a reason why I don’t think feminism and breastfeeding advocacy (emphasis on advocacy) (also “attachment parenting” which is different from attachment theory) can exist hand-in-hand. Women still fight daily to achieve bodily autonomy in a variety of situations, and I find it perturbing that breastfeeding advocates want to create the rhetorical and practical space to make an exception around breastfeeding, where women have bodily autonomy except when it comes to breastfeeding, wherein breast is always best.”

    Wow, I completely disagree that feminism and breastfeeding advocacy can’t exist hand in hand as you put it.

    Florence, I think you may be coming at this backwards. In my mind, the feminist argument is that a woman’s choice to breastfeed should not be stigmatized for any reason (because it’s undeniable that western culture does still stigmatize it for wide variety of uninformed and idiotic reasons.) Pointing out that the post-partum woman’s biology creates milk to nourish her child and that there are many benefits to breastfeeding does not have to turn into a zero sum game of all women must breastfeed or else. It simply offers support for the feminist position that sexist cultural prejudices against breastfeeding should no longer stand in the way of women making the informed choice of whether or not to breastfeed their own children.

    I live in the midwest, a place that is still all too often not terribly progressive when it comes to issues like this, and I have received far more stigmatization as a breastfeeding woman than I have support for it. If the feminist community doesn’t think it should have my back and the back of other mothers on this issue than I just don’t know how to respond.

    It’s important to remember that while “breastfeeding advocacy” has gotten some traction in some corners of this country (especially on both coasts,) the vast majority of this country still has a terribly long way to go wrt to progress on this issue. Too often in this country women are actively discouraged from breastfeeding their children (from bad advice given post-partum by medical staff, to active discouragement family members and friends, and employers refusing to make any accomodations for pumping mothers, to name just a few,) and that must stop.

  187. Florence: Like I said above, these biological narratives that are meant to explain human behavior have a habit of ultimately explaining why oppressed people should shut up and accept their lot.

    Speaking of assuming everyone hear is arguing in good faith. Ahem.

    When it was brought up initially, it was pretty clear that the context was what is developmentally within the normal range for a human child. Instead of accepting that in good faith, you turned it into … something … I’m not sure what.

  188. Just because something is evolutionarily adaptive to one environment (for example, for nomads on a savanah without agriculture or infrastructure) doesn’t mean that it is adaptive for any of the many conditions that people live in now. So while evolution may explain why we work certain ways, one cannot derive a “should” from it. Otherwise intelligent people claim to get this all the time, and then often demonstrate that they don’t, slipping casually into a naturalistic fallacy to support whatever it is they’re in favor of.

  189. Florence: What I said directly to you, which you ignored then and now, is that your apes are people argument in this context sounds a lot like “biology is destiny,” which is something that women actively have to fight against every. damn. day.

    I did address it, I said that I was simply stating a fact. People are apes. We are, there is no denying it. The fun thing about people is we have culture. which makes us able to do things that would just not be possible without it. Living in deserts or severely cold climates are examples. But to say that culture is in no way effected by biology is just ridiculous. I was trying to say that they are intimately linked. And the extremely primal (I say primal, but don’t really like this word) relationship of mother and child is even more so. That breast feeding could last for 3-6 years doesn’t mean every woman has to do it, we have formula now and better diets. But a woman who chooses to extend her breast feeding is not a freak. Her child may not have weaned yet because people were animals way before we were people. What I find appalling is the idea that women must deny any ancient history as a human to fully be human by today’s standards.

    Florence: But twisting my arguments and yelling at me that I don’t know what breasts are for to demean me into backing down from this argument makes me think you’re a bully.

    Sorry about the tone, I really am. But I am tired of denying the very real history of our species because links to animals make people uncomfortable. I tend to get frustrated and sarcastic.

  190. Politicalguineapig: No, because that’s actually fairly normal behavior for a five year old. Breast feeding at five is very abnormal.

    Abnormal, yes, as in not commonly done. But does abnormal or uncommon equate to wrong or harmful? I go back to saying that because our society views breasts as inherently sexual this is where the issue comes into play..

    From a child’s perspective I can’t see much of a difference between the two acts.

  191. zuzu: Three months =/= three years.

    Well obviously. That was my point. The person who posted the comment I responded to said that when the child was old enough to know that milk comes from boobs, enough was enough! No more breastfeeding! It’s too weird! But…babies figure that our really early on. Sometimes really strong babies actually pull boobs out of shirts. It’s rare but happens. But I don’t think that’s a good reason to stop breastfeeding, just to set boundaries about privacy and touch, if the child is old enough to understand.

  192. Shoshie: Well obviously. That was my point. The person who posted the comment I responded to said that when the child was old enough to know that milk comes from boobs, enough was enough! No more breastfeeding! It’s too weird! But…babies figure that our really early on. Sometimes really strong babies actually pull boobs out of shirts. It’s rare but happens. But I don’t think that’s a good reason to stop breastfeeding, just to set boundaries about privacy and touch, if the child is old enough to understand.

    I do think the original person went a bit overboard with concluding that because a strange three-year-old lifted her shirt, that invalidated breastfeeding kids until that age. What I was reacting to were the counterexamples given — not just you, but someone else who gave the example of a five-month-old.

    A preverbal infant seeking to nurse on any available breast is one thing. A three-year-old lifting up the shirt of a stranger is quite another. But what that is is a child who hasn’t been taught boundaries.

  193. A three-year-old lifting up the shirt of a stranger is quite another. But what that is is a child who hasn’t been taught boundaries.

    That’s one reason. Another reason might be that the kid is part of a community that with a couple breastfeeding mothers and nursing kids and that’s perfectly acceptable to … share, for lack of a better word.

  194. And yet a three-year-old in that sort of community should still be taught a) to ask rather than just start lifting up shirts; b) that not every woman is available for their use at any moment.

    That’s not really that difficult. Even in a community that shares in that way, women retain bodily autonomy.

  195. In my friend’s circle of friends, sometimes the kids asked, sometimes they grabbed, sometimes the women corrected behavior, sometimes they just let the kid lift and latch. Some kids were assholes about it, some mothers were bitches about it. Sometimes I had kids throw temper tantrums because I wouldn’t let them “try” mine.

    “Should” is a pretty heft word. 3 year olds don’t have manners, and they certainly aren’t quite ready to understand “women aren’t available at my beck and call,” primarily because that’s 100% not true. Have you ever seen a toddler try to touch a hot stove or pull down a tablecloth or something? You have three women shouting “No!” and grabbing them away.

  196. Michelle: the kid is five years old. Normal five year olds don’t need to nurse, and honestly, they shouldn’t be wanting to. At that point, both the parent and the child should be trying to find alternatives to nursing. At -1 through 2, children are just beginning to develop their personalities, and don’t distinguish between themselves and other people. At five, children should have a working understanding of social boundaries, and they should be trying to be independent. The fact that this boy is not trying to be independent is a huge red flag.

    Andie: How do you not see the difference? Laps belong to both sexes, and it isn’t a huge imposition for a kid to want affection, but breastfeeding at five is an imposition on both: the kid is forcing their mother to do something, and the mother isn’t allowing her child to grow up.

  197. Rodeo: “Should” is a pretty heft word. 3 year olds don’t have manners, and they certainly aren’t quite ready to understand “women aren’t available at my beck and call,” primarily because that’s 100% not true. Have you ever seen a toddler try to touch a hot stove or pull down a tablecloth or something? You have three women shouting “No!” and grabbing them away.

    Three year olds are amenable to boundaries and are old enough to begin learning that there are different rules in different locations. You can yell in a park but not in a library, for example. They will learn and practice these rules imperfectly, which is expected and fine, but no one should be expected to tolerate a strange child’s attempts to milk them on demand because it might thwart the child’s breastfeeding relationship.

  198. Primarily by becoming so offended that a being as dominated by their own self-interest as a toddler doesn’t give a shit about someone else’s privacy that they hit/smacked/spanked the kid (whatever euphemism for “became violent with a person that’s about 3 feet tall and weighing 50 pounds” we want to use). And then got huffy because the kids refused to hug them good-bye. And then even more huffy because the kids’ mothers didn’t force them to.

  199. Rodeo:
    Primarily by becoming so offended that a being as dominated by their own self-interest as a toddler doesn’t give a shit about someone else’s privacy that they hit/smacked/spanked the kid (whatever euphemism for “became violent with a person that’s about 3 feet tall and weighing 50 pounds” we want to use). And then got huffy because the kids refused to hug them good-bye. And then even more huffy because the kids’ mothers didn’t force them to.

    While the reaction in terms of hitting the kid is definitely inappropriate, not to mention the whole hug goodbye thing, I’m rather weirded out that you characterize wanting to be left bodily alone or having privacy as “being offended.”

    Also, it sounds like not everyone in your perfect hippie commune of shared nursing responsibilities was perfectly on board with being available at all times to all comers!

  200. but no one should be expected to tolerate a strange child’s attempts to milk them on demand because it might thwart the child’s breastfeeding relationship.

    Was anyone saying otherwise? I’m offering an alternative explanation to why a kid might do that without blaming the mother for failing to raise her kid according to other people’s “should”. Rather than believe that the woman in question is shitt mother, I prefer to believe that the kid is rarely taken to a place where trying to nurse from strangers is a social don’t, so explaining such a boundary is probably not a priority for a woman who’s already trying to teach a toddler how to eat with a fork and say “please.” Why waste time on a lesson that doesn’t come up that often?

  201. Lauren: but no one should be expected to tolerate a strange child’s attempts to milk them on demand because it might thwart the child’s breastfeeding relationship.

    I don’t think that is what Rodeo meant. I think the point was children are imperfect, they will act in ways that make others uncomfortable, but that in itself is not an argument against extended breast feeding. Tell the kid no, but don’t assume that it’s the feeding making the kid act inappropriate.

  202. Rodeo: That’s one reason. Another reason might be that the kid is part of a community that with a couple breastfeeding mothers and nursing kids and that’s perfectly acceptable to … share, for lack of a better word.

    I’ve heard of this and always found it kinda fascinating. I’m not sure I could “share” or let my kid…it’d be nice to have a community close enough for that kind of relationship. I’d like to think I’d share.

  203. Yes, I do think it’s ridiculous for people who are in the vicinity of kids to expect to be left alone and have their bodily integrity respected. Kids don’t give a shit about you or what you want, and their mothers aren’t particularly concerned about what some asshole who isn’t trying to raise the kid thinks they “should” do.

    There are ways to deal with asshole behavior without assuming the world is intentionally trying to victimize you. But if you want to go through life in a perpetually cranky mood, assuming everyone else is doing it wrong just to annoy you is a good place to start

  204. Librarygoose, I assume it started because a few of them traded baby-sitting hours for each other, and since they all breastfed it made sense to breastfeed each others’ baby. After a few years of second and third pregnancies and kids growing up, they all more or less share tit duty. Except for the one or two women who feel that kids who can ask for it are old enough to be hit, instead.

    The oldest kid is almost four, and I’m a bit concerned how she’ll get weaned before it gets to that squicky period. But I’m sure as shit not about to bring up that concern.

  205. 5 years old…not an outlier, globally, but quite an outlier in the U.S. Ideally, since there’s no harm brought to parent or child from extended breastfeeding, it wouldn’t be a big deal. But since it is, and since a 5 year old is old enough to (benefit? certainly not be harmed by) from being told to wait an hour or three until you’re at home…why not, for the sake of manners?

    It’s a balancing act–you have to decide what is worth making a statement about, and what is just getting in people’s faces for the sake of making them uncomfortable. Throw holiday meals and other people’s homes into the mix and it’s a rather disastrous cocktail.

    I don’t know that I would have the balls to breastfeed a child of any age at an in-laws table whom I knew it made uncomfortable. Refuse to go outside or in the bathroom, hell yes. But I’d bend on the “at the table” issue, although I object to marginalizing a nursing mother from social interaction. There’s always the “comment on fact that their request is problematic while graciously assenting to move your tits and implying that if problematic behavior continues grandchild will no longer arrive to said holiday” option.

  206. This makes me think of when my niece was potty training. She was pretty adamant that she wanted to see me use the potty, she had seen her mother and father use it, and she wanted to see me too. My sister told me it was fine, that she was just curious allowing my niece on a trip to the potty to see how I go was cool. It really wasn’t with me. I had no inclination to take her with me, and told her so. It took reinforcement, she’s a toddler. But it stuck and her mom never pushed it. I never blamed my sister for potty training her or allowing her to see her mommy go potty. Because kids are kids and sometimes they utterly ignore personal space because they want something.

  207. Politicalguineapig: Andie: How do you not see the difference? Laps belong to both sexes, and it isn’t a huge imposition for a kid to want affection, but breastfeeding at five is an imposition on both: the kid is forcing their mother to do something, and the mother isn’t allowing her child to grow up.

    Sure I see the difference. One is drinking from a cup, the other a breast. I’m challenging someone to come up with a reasonable argument why one is inherently worse than the other that doesn’t come down to OMGZ BOOBIES

    How is the child forcing anything on the mother by asking? Mom can say no. One could argue that simply by letting the kid climb up and cuddle she’s ‘not letting them grow up’ or ‘encouraging independence’…

  208. Rodeo: Yes, I do think it’s ridiculous for people who are in the vicinity of kids to expect to be left alone and have their bodily integrity respected. Kids don’t give a shit about you or what you want, and their mothers aren’t particularly concerned about what some asshole who isn’t trying to raise the kid thinks they “should” do.

    Mothers who consider people having a right to their own bodily autonomy to be assholes are rather assholish themselves.

  209. Rodeo: Yes, I do think it’s ridiculous for people who are in the vicinity of kids to expect to be left alone and have their bodily integrity respected. Kids don’t give a shit about you or what you want…

    I’m assuming your experience with kids is limited because saying that kids “don’t give a shit about you or what you want” is patently untrue. Kids are very tuned in to what the people around them want from about a year old onward, which is why it’s encouraged to gently and kindly teach them rules about their environments. Pulling the dog’s tail is a no-no. Touching the stove is a no-no. Throwing your cup is a no-no. Pulling up a strange lady’s shirt is a no-no. I don’t see what the problem is here. Children are capable of learning and our expectations need to rely on their abilities to learn and follow rules regardless of their breastfeeding habits.

  210. For what it’s worth, three year olds are also really good at testing boundaries. Do I get a big reaction when I talk about going potty in my pants? New favorite topic! There are a ton of things I have taught my kid– and she has mastered– only to temporarily un-master and test to see if the same boundary exists. Yep. We don’t hit. Just like we didn’t hit last week, or month, or year.

    No one should be expected to be thrilled at a random kid trying to “milk” you. But all you have to say to a three year old is, “My breasts are private and I really don’t want you to touch them.” Most kids I’ve seen will back off. Same as the idea of kids wanting to watch adults in the bathroom. It’s interesting to read the assumption that because a kid tests a boundary once in public that must mean that no one has ever taught the kid that boundary. Kids are little boundary-testing machines. Hopefully the parent helps enforce (probably for the thousandth time) that boundary as well at the time.

  211. I can’t stand being around kids so yes, my experience is pretty limited. Thanks for that reminder. I know that they want to be good, I certainly believe that, but the amount of effort it takes to help them figure out how to do it until they entirely (?) quit doing inappropriate things is ridiculous. I really have no idea how mothers do it at all. I mean, I’ve been part of my friend’s kids life for almost four years, and she still tries to nurse from me. Hilariously, I’m pretty sure she feels bad for me, like I’m a defective model or something.

  212. Politicalguineapig– I hear you. I really do. But saying something the kid does is “not normal” in terms of standard is a far leap from harmful. A kid could be on the very slow end of normal development, and not be harmed by that. A very late walker or talker is going to develop that skill later than his/her peers. It’s also nearly impossible to distinguish the late walker or talker from the early ones by the time they are 17. It’s something to be careful about, but not necessarily harmful to the kid long-term. As others have pointed out– you can’t force any kid to nurse. Just because 99% of the kids don’t do that doesn’t mean that last 1% of kids is being mistreated.

  213. Michelle: No one should be expected to be thrilled at a random kid trying to “milk” you. But all you have to say to a three year old is, “My breasts are private and I really don’t want you to touch them.” Most kids I’ve seen will back off. Same as the idea of kids wanting to watch adults in the bathroom. It’s interesting to read the assumption that because a kid tests a boundary once in public that must mean that no one has ever taught the kid that boundary. Kids are little boundary-testing machines. Hopefully the parent helps enforce (probably for the thousandth time) that boundary as well at the time.

    Ha. I remember my boy at about this age consistently trying to look under the bathroom stalls. And I’m sitting there peeing, my pants around my ankles, trying not to piss all over my shoes while getting to him, all like, “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO” in slow motion. I swear it happened half a dozen times before he got the point. Everyone who saw him trying to get a peek was mostly gracious about it, but still. PRIVACY, kid.

  214. Last time I checked, there’s two bodies involved in brestfeeding.

    Sounds like the argument pro-lifers use about pregnancy.

  215. Florence: I don’t think anyone’s horror here is feigned or based in misogyny because it’s coming from people who participate in this space daily and in good faith.

    When people are so horrified they want to break up families, mine included apparently, I am forced to care less about where their horror is coming from and more about what its harmful real-life effects might be on people like me. I appreciate that everyone always has baggage they bring to discussions, but if a person’s baggage informs an opinion that a healthy, happy kid should be taken away from its family and given to someone more deserving, who would avoid nursing it or promise not to enjoy nursing it too much or the wrong way or too long, I have trouble caring where that person might be coming from with that opinion. Cause that right there? Bears little resemblance to respecting women or trusting women to do what is best for them and their families. You don’t have to start out with misogyny to end up with something misogynistic. If you suspect physical, sexual or emotional abuse in a family that’s one thing, and maybe nursing could be a part of that… as someone said, billions of people in the world. But wanting a baby taken away from its mother because you happen to think their nursing is squicky and thus it must be child abuse is a shameful policing of women’s bodies. It’s a misogynistic conclusion to come to, in my opinion, however that person came by it. As tmc said, this is not theoretical. It harms women and families.

    (Totally generic ‘you’ there when used. Too tired to edit.)

    tmc: I’m in this thread because I want everyone to be able to choose to breastfeed or not, and for how long if at all, and because I want to directly confront the stigma that threatens my relationship with my child.

    Beautifully put.

    I think this will be my last comment. This thread has had some wonderful thoughts and sound points, but some of it has been really depressing and, whether I worry too much or not, also a bit frightening to me.

  216. 1) what it is exactly that makes some people so uneasy about seeing a 5 year old sucking on their mother’s nipples thus sexually arousing her

    Wow. This is a leap. Not all women who nurse 5-year-olds get sexually aroused, by any means. Just because someone observing thinks “My GOD! That MUST be sexually arousing to the MOTHER!” doesn’t make it true. Hence suspecting a woman is breastfeeding for her own sexual gratification is sick and presumptive. Unless you observe a woman moaning with obvious sexual pleasure while nursing her kindergartener, or telling you, “I gotta get my kid on the tit; I haven’t had an orgasm all day!” there’s no reason to believe any of that is going on.

    Yikes.

  217. Wow, I went home to my family and bed, come back in to the office and look what’s happened to this thread!

    Breastfeeding often sexually stimulating in my experience. It also made me feel pleasantly spacey and loving towards everyone in the vicinity. Unfortunately it only lasted while the babies were exclusively breastfeed. Only a temporary pedo then.

    Makes complete sense when you understand that breastfeeding releases oxytocin, just like sex does. They call it the bonding hormone. Good thing too, it helps the development of the nursing relationship. In fact, it almost seems like an adaptation to promote nursing.

    One other thing, why does still breastfeeding necessarily = not independent? I think it begs the question. It seems pretty arbitrary to me. What if the child is otherwise completely independent as appropriate for their age?

  218. Andie: Missed the point again. Sitting on Mom or Dad’s lap and drinking from their cup is fairly developmentally appropriate for a five-year-old. Nursing at five isn’t developmentally appropriate. And given the situation, it seems like the mother either has no idea what’s appropriate, or is trying to drive a wedge between her husband and his family.

    Michelle: I get that kids are going to develop very differently. I’ve seen it in my own siblings. But I still think that in Western society, barring medical reasons like being unable to ingest solid food, breastfeeding a five year old just makes very little sense. They can get their nutrition other ways, and they can be comforted other ways too. It just seems to me that something’s a bit off here, and that at the very least, the mother could have told the kid to wait.

  219. Okay, at what age would you all consider a kid too old to breastfeed? 6 years? 10 years? Puberty? Obviously you must have a cutoff in mind somewhere, so where? If it’s purely about affectionate child-parent bonding, would it be appropriate for a kid to get home from college for their spring break, say “hi, mom!” and latch onto a tit for old times’ sake? That’s affectionate. :p

    And obviously a lot of people are cool with parents engaging in behaviors with their toddlers that sexually arouse the parents to some extent, and are in fact offended at any suggestion that sexually arousing acts with a 4 or 5-year-old might be wrong, so where’s the cutoff for when the parent is too aroused for it to be appropriate? Is there one? Or are we pretending that mothers are incapable of sexually abusing their children, now, because we must trust mothers to do what’s best no matter what to keep our feminist cred?

    If you saw a small child encouraged to suck on their father’s nipples, and the father expressed that he found this sexually stimulating, would anyone have a problem with that? Or is that still totally healthy bonding? Is the trust that we feminists must put in parents so inviolate that anything goes as long as the child doesn’t actively object?

  220. tinfoil hattie: Last time I checked, there’s two bodies involved in brestfeeding.

    Sounds like the argument pro-lifers use about pregnancy.

    I thought the general consensus was that a fetus is part of a woman’s body, and therefore it is the woman’s choice what to do with it, but once the child is born, it is its own person.

    I have no problem with a mother breastfeeding her child up to whatever age the kid wants to do so. (Though, as has been said, few kids will want to after 5 or so, so I think that a kid who wants to nurse at 10 or 15 or whatever probably DOES need to be checked out). But the important part there IS that it’s a two-person deal, nurser and nursed.

    You wouldn’t use the “women shouldn’t be policed for what they do with their bodies” argument to justify hitting a 5 year old child. So don’t use it to justify breastfeeding one.

  221. They call it the bonding hormone. Good thing too, it helps the development of the nursing relationship. In fact, it almost seems like an adaptation to promote nursing.

    Yep, that’s why babies that don’t breastfeed don’t bond with their parents. It’s also the reason that sluts can’t have happy marriages! Wait, sorry, that last one was the wrong woo…

  222. I will be upfront and admit that I probably only read about 150 comments.
    That said, I want to mention something that (up until the point that I read) has not been touched on. That IN THIS CULTURE with our SEXIFIED BOOBS, it seems to me that breastfeeding past the point where the child develops a long-term memory could have some weird effects on them- I realize there may not be any science asserting this, but considering the lack of focus on this topic in this thread, it is feasible to me that it has also not been focused on in science.

    (P.S. I GET that peoples creeped out-ness is because of the sexualization of lady’s boobs, and the fact that someone not still a babe in arms sucking on a boob seems pedo-y to lots of people- what Im looking at is the other angle, that a kid comes to realize the sexy-times implications of boob sucking later on)

    Just follow me on this logic train: Boobs are sexualized. Sucking on boobies is sexualized. Kids eventually learn that boobies and sucking on boobies can be sexual, usually before they have hit puberty. Doesn’t it seem reasonable to suspect that some kids who willingly breastfed ‘late’ into their lives (meaning 5-6 years old) would come to realize that by our social standards, its a little weird, and then feel weird about it (after the fact)?
    I’m just thinking that maybe, just because kids don’t want to stop, doesn’t mean they might be retroactively affected from not being weaned… After all, even though it is the sexualization of boobies that seems to make people squicked out about the whole thing-that makes this issue complicated from the perspective of the mother, it also complicates it from the perspective of the child- I guess I am asking, do children become affected by remembering breast feeding late in life, and realizing that many of his/her peers would see that as sexual, when the feeder is not a little teeny bebe?

    I just think that for the very reason that society is the way it is, it might be better not to breastfeed a kid that long, so that they won’t come to see what they did as messed up (since obviously a good part of society does)> ESPECIALLY since it seems to be completely NOT HARMFUL to just wean your child at a ‘socially acceptable’ age?

    I guess because Im not a breastfeeding mom, i just can’t understand why you WOULD breastfeed on and on past the time when your kid can eat solids? Why go through that when neither mother or child stand to be harmed from it? I understand the desire to not wean a kid, but it is as benign (and maybe moreso) than continuing to breastfeed the child. Why keep on doing it? Just to start a staring fest at the dinner table? I don’t know-

    I firmly believe women have the right to do what they want with their bodies, and parent how they want, providing obviously that its not abusive- and I dont see anything abusive about breastfeeding your kid until they are kindergartners. I would not personally give any dirty looks or say anything to a woman breastfeeding an older child, but I WOULD be grossed out.

    also I think the question of manners needs to be addressed- Just like I don’t think it would be appropriate for a child to bring their blanky to the table, I really don’t think a kid needs to be breastfeeding at the table when it is simply for comfort. Manners is about consideration for other people, which is why, if someone DOES start breastfeeding their five year old at the table, you don’t say anything- but I would say its certainly a bit rude to do so, because I think its fairly common knowledge that most people are a bit squicked out by that.

  223. Bagelsan, it isn’t as clear a line as you’d like it to be.
    I have heard plenty of women say that they get sexual/pleasurable sensations from breastfeeding, which they then ignore, take care of in an appropriate fashion with an adult later, or otherwise handle without putting that feeling onto the child. You’re making strawnipples right and left here.

    Aside from which, plenty of cultures in the world nurse 5 and 6 year olds. It isn’t as ludicrous as you’re making it out to be. I don’t think I would do it myself in U.S.ian culture, because of the risk of social judgement rebounding on the child. But YMMV.

    Bagelsan:
    Okay,atwhatagewouldyouallconsiderakidtoooldtobreastfeed?6years?10years?Puberty?Obviouslyyoumusthaveacutoffinmindsomewhere,sowhere?Ifit’spurelyaboutaffectionatechild-parentbonding,woulditbeappropriateforakidtogethomefromcollegefortheirspringbreak,say“hi,mom!”andlatchontoatitforoldtimes’sake?That’saffectionate.:p

    Andobviouslyalotofpeoplearecoolwithparentsengaginginbehaviorswiththeirtoddlersthatsexuallyarousetheparentstosomeextent,andareinfactoffendedatanysuggestionthatsexuallyarousingactswitha4or5-year-oldmightbewrong,sowhere’sthecutoffforwhentheparentistooarousedforittobeappropriate?Isthereone?Orarewepretendingthatmothersareincapableofsexuallyabusingtheirchildren,now,becausewemusttrustmotherstodowhat’sbestnomatterwhattokeepourfeministcred?

    Ifyousawasmallchildencouragedtosuckontheirfather’snipples,andthefatherexpressedthathefoundthissexuallystimulating,wouldanyonehaveaproblemwiththat?Oristhatstilltotallyhealthybonding?Isthetrustthatwefeministsmustputinparentssoinviolatethatanythinggoesaslongasthechilddoesn’tactivelyobject?

  224. Um, says who? Again, I get the USian culture doesn’t like it (although really, we don’t like any child over 3 months old bf-ding), but “not developmentally appropriate”? The average age for weaning worldwide is something like 4 or 5. Since many women in Western Europe and the US don’t bf at all, I assume that means in other parts of the world, the average age skews towards 6 or 7.

    Politicalguineapig:
    Andie:Missedthepointagain.SittingonMomorDad’slapanddrinkingfromtheircupisfairlydevelopmentallyappropriateforafive-year-old.Nursingatfiveisn’tdevelopmentallyappropriate

  225. Bagelsan: Or are we pretending that mothers are incapable of sexually abusing their children, now, because we must trust mothers to do what’s best no matter what to keep our feminist cred?

    If you saw a small child encouraged to suck on their father’s nipples, and the father expressed that he found this sexually stimulating, would anyone have a problem with that? Or is that still totally healthy bonding? Is the trust that we feminists must put in parents so inviolate that anything goes as long as the child doesn’t actively object?

    Yes, thank you for this. I am always highly suspicious of admonitions for feminists to turn off our critical brains, just because the object of criticism is female. ‘Trust women’ is a provocative slogan for pro-choice political action, but your intellectual engagement should not end there. At the end of the day I don’t ‘trust women’ with decisions that affect other people. I don’t trust anybody. People make moronic parenting decisions all the time.

    Further, I do see the potential for harm in breastfeeding that extends past the age of five. Maybe in a magical hippie utopia of the future it wouldn’t matter, but in the world we live in right now that is such a violation of social norms that any breast-fed school age child will have hell to pay in terms of bullying and other cruelty. (And seriously, you can’t expect that shit to not get out on the playground.) Yes, that means the blame lies in the shit-tacular bullying rather than the mother, but if you would rather make a point about breastfeeding than take reasonable steps to protect your child from large-scale humiliation then your priorities are fucking screwed. Your kid’s mental well-being trumps political point-scoring any day. Kids are traumatized by bullying all the time. Nobody was ever harmed by weaning before kindergarten. FFS. Is this the hill you want to die on? Your kid to die on?

  226. “I just think that for the very reason that society is the way it is, it might be better not to breastfeed a kid that long, so that they won’t come to see what they did as messed up (since obviously a good part of society does)> ESPECIALLY since it seems to be completely NOT HARMFUL to just wean your child at a ‘socially acceptable’ age?

    I’m really, really trying to not resort to namecalling here, but this is just patently absurd. The only way our western society will change its outmoded, sexist, and frankly ridiculous prejudices against breastfeedinng is if women refuse to bend to those prejudices in the first place. Telling women that they should wean when society deems it socially acceptable is pretty meaningless anyway, since so many people still think women should not even breastfeed at all, or should stop at 3 months or 6 months or 1 year or any number of other arbitrary ages or stages.

    I can’t believe in a feminist space like this there is anyone arguing that women should change what they do with their lives so that they don’t suffer societal scorn or dissaproval. Seriously, perhaps we should raise our children to not be affectionate with members of the same sex past the age of 4 or so lest anyone conclude they are gay, or discourage them from being friends with those outside their race past that age as well lest they get involved in an inter-racial coupling in their adulthood, you know, because so many people in our culture still dissaprove of such things.

  227. Bagelsan, it isn’t as clear a line as you’d like it to be.

    I’m not the one trying to make it a clear line. There are many people here who are basically saying “well of course X amount of sexual arousal from breastfeeding is fine!” or “well of course nursing a kid age Y is fine!” and that seems to be based on some clear line in their heads about what is appropriate. I’m honestly trying to understand where that line is for people, ’cause it’s clearly way out past what I’m comfortable with.

    Is there a level of parental sexual arousal and/or child’s age at which people are no longer comfortable with breastfeeding? What is it? Is there any nursing behavior a parent could engage in that people might think was actually too sexual, or is the person with the nipple the sole arbiter of that?

  228. Lolagirl: I’m really, really trying to not resort to namecalling here, but this is just patently absurd. The only way our western society will change its outmoded, sexist, and frankly ridiculous prejudices against breastfeedinng is if women refuse to bend to those prejudices in the first place. Telling women that they should wean when society deems it socially acceptable is pretty meaningless anyway, since so many people still think women should not even breastfeed at all, or should stop at 3 months or 6 months or 1 year or any number of other arbitrary ages or stages.

    I would agree with you if we were talking about breastfeeding at all. But we’re talking about a case where the health benefits of breastfeeding have completely dried up. It’s fairly pointless to blaze this trail, because the net benefits do not outweigh the emotional costs to the children being deployed as political tools.

    I also do not believe we should passively accept current social norms re: breastfeeding. But that doesn’t mean that any and all attempts to set a reccommended weaning time are pointless. All we need to do is look at the data and study the age at which breastfeeding stops leading to better outcomes for the kids.

  229. In my view, the “too sexual” line isn’t defined by sensation, but by how you handle that sensation. If you’re using your child for sexual gratification, there’s a problem. In any case, I’m not really interested parsing out the straw-nipple arguments of “what if she has an orgasm *every time*? What about then?” because I just don’t think it happens to 99.99 percent of the population. Breasts serve a sexual function, they serve a nurturing function. These states can coexist; there isn’t necessarily a magic on/off switch between them.

    As far as how old is “too old,” I would go with 6ish, and would honestly raise an eyebrow past 4ish. I would start to be concerned about what was going on with the parents or the child past that age, not from a perspective of sexual abuse as much as one of extremely permissive boundary setting/potentially pressured and uncomfortable child/ramifications later in life/etc.

    Bagelsan: I’mnottheonetryingtomakeitaclearline.Therearemanypeopleherewhoarebasicallysaying“wellofcourseXamountofsexualarousalfrombreastfeedingisfine!”or“wellofcoursenursingakidageYisfine!”andthatseemstobebasedonsomeclearlineintheirheadsaboutwhatisappropriate.I’mhonestlytryingtounderstandwherethatlineisforpeople,’causeit’sclearlywayoutpastwhatI’mcomfortablewith.

    Istherealevelofparentalsexualarousaland/orchild’sageatwhichpeoplearenolongercomfortablewithbreastfeeding?Whatisit?Isthereanynursingbehavioraparentcouldengageinthatpeoplemightthinkwasactuallytoosexual,oristhepersonwiththenipplethesolearbiterofthat?

  230. igglanova: All we need to do is look at the data and study the age at which breastfeeding stops leading to better outcomes for the kids.

    Well, some of our commenters don’t think breastfeeding leads to ANY improvement in outcome – it’s all other factors confounding the data. By that metric, no one should breastfeed at all.

    Anyway, this stuff has been studied. American Academy of Pediatrics recommends AT LEAST one year and as long thereafter as mutually desired by mother and child. World Health Organization recommends AT LEAST two years and as long thereafter as mutually desired by mother and child.

  231. JRoo: Just like I don’t think it would be appropriate for a child to bring their blanky to the table, I really don’t think a kid needs to be breastfeeding at the table when it is simply for comfort.
    Weirdly enough, that issue came up at my house with a stuffed bear. I think my little sis was allowed to keep him around as long as it was just family at the table.

    Chava: I did give a nod to non-Western societies in an earlier comment. If the food supply is uncertain, I can understand why breast-feeding would be extended. Otherwise, no, I just can’t understand why anyone would breast feed a child that’s old enough to be in school.

  232. chingona: Well, some of our commenters don’t think breastfeeding leads to ANY improvement in outcome – it’s all other factors confounding the data. By that metric, no one should breastfeed at all.

    Thankfully, being a doctor or a researcher requires more rigorous credentials than having an opinion on Feministe. 😛 If the data is unsatisfactory then that doesn’t mean we just give up. It means we gather more, and better data.

  233. Brian Schlosser, thanks for the mansplanation, but breastfeeding is not the same thing as child abuse, even if your manly wisdom tells you it is.. I’ll also thank you NOT to tell me what to say or not say, especially about somethimg you, personally, have no experience with.

  234. Back atcha, Bagelsan: Women who feel stirrings of sexual feeling while nursing, when oxytocin is released, and the uterus contracts, should stop nursing, according to you.

    You do realize that most of these feelings occur early on, with very young infants? When hormone levels are very high? So, expert: You tell me. When should every single woman on earth stop breastfeeding? Two months? Six? A year? Two years, three, four? At the first slight feeling of sexuality?

    You are the one accusing women who have completely natural, expected physical feelings of being pedophiles. That is a horrible, unscientific, anti-woman, anti-feminist stance.

    Also, women who do not breastfeed certainly bond with their babies. Oxytocin is at work in their bodies. It’s a function of oxytocin to encourage bonding and connection. Going from that to “How dare you say parents who bottle-feed don’t bond with their babies!” is really a load of straw.

  235. “Or are we pretending that mothers are incapable of sexually abusing their children, now, because we must trust mothers to do what’s best no matter what to keep our feminist cred?”

    I’m pretty sure we are pointing out that mothers who sexually abuse their children are probably going to do so whether or not breastfeeding arouses them, and that women who are not sexually abusive towards their children are not going to become sexually abusive simply because breastfeeding causes a certain amount of arousal. Which I’m pretty sure fits nicely with the feminist theory that sexual abuse is about power and not being overcome with arousal.

    What I don’t understand is why you can’t seem to see that the most likely scenario – given that our culture considers taboo the topics of both women’s sexual pleasure and the actual realities of caring for small children – is that bystanders tend to freak out and read all kinds of stuff into what is said when women talk about becoming aroused while nursing. Rather than there being a remarkable number of women who sexually abuse their children in this manner.

  236. I remember being 5. Specifically, I remember this being the age at which I started to realize I liked boys, and to start thinking about what one might do with boys one liked. (I’ve got the diary entries to prove it.) If I was thinking about kissing boys at age 5, I think it’s highly probable some boys are thinking about breasts in at least a proto-sexual manner at age 5.

    So I’m not sure I care what other primates do vis-a-vis weaning, because other primates don’t have the complex social/cultural issues surrounding sex that we do.

    Now, would I call CPS? I abso-fuckin-lutely would NOT. That is total bullshit. But if a close friend of mine were breastfeeding for that long, I would probably talk to her about it, because it would trouble me somewhat.

    And, to the extent that it troubles me as a person-who-remembers-being-5, I would probably not want to witness it happening. I think that’s a fair compromise, considering that the child’s welfare isn’t dependent on breastfeeding right this very moment.

  237. Sorry, that was terribly heteronormative of me. I should’ve said “some kids are thinking about breasts in at least a proto-sexual manner at age 5.” No need to make assumptions about their gender and/or sexuality.

  238. Marissa, did you know what “sex” was when you were 5? Did you connect sex and kissing? Did you connect sex or kissing with breasts?

    My guess is, if a kid were moving on to that level of knowledge, s/he might stop breastfeeding.

    Also, you are assuming you, an outsider, know whether or not someone else’s child’s welfare depends on breastfeeding at any given moment. I think this is about you projecting your sexual feelings and judgment onto a breastfeedong mother.

  239. Politicalguineapig: At -1 through 2, children are just beginning to develop their personalities, and don’t distinguish between themselves and other people.

    Not true, and pretty thoroughly discredited by contemporary infant development research. 1-2-year-olds are very capable of understanding the difference between themselves and other people. I suspect, from experience, that it happens well before that, actually.

    Bagelsan: Okay, at what age would you all consider a kid too old to breastfeed? 6 years? 10 years? Puberty? Obviously you must have a cutoff in mind somewhere, so where?

    Um…whenever the kid and/or mom decide to wean? I just don’t consider this a pressing issue because coming back from college to nurse is not something that happens. I weaned myself at two. Other kids wean themselves at four. A few outliers may or may not go as far as six. What’s the big deal? Given that ten-year-olds have pretty active school and social lives, I suspect that unless stimulated by regular pumping or a new baby, the milk supply is going to dry up, and given ten-year-olds’ horror of being embarrassed in front of their friends or of doing anything that might mark them as unusual, I just can’t get too excited about the possibility of a nursing ten-year-old out there. Just as I’m not too worried about women in the eighth month of pregnancy deciding to get an abortion because, wow, they totally didn’t realize that they weren’t going to be able to fit into that pretty new dress they saw. This could be distressing if it were something that happened. Since it is not, I’m not concerned.

    Bagelsan: Or are we pretending that mothers are incapable of sexually abusing their children, now, because we must trust mothers to do what’s best no matter what to keep our feminist cred?

    No. We are noting that breastfeeding your children, even if it causes sexual stimulation, as it does in a great number of women, is not in and of itself sexual abuse.

    Bagelsan: If you saw a small child encouraged to suck on their father’s nipples, and the father expressed that he found this sexually stimulating, would anyone have a problem with that?

    See, fathers don’t breastfeed, by and large. So again, a small child sucking on its father’s nipples has an extraordinarily different context than a small child nursing. This is a fact. The female body has a number of reproductive functions that just have no equivalent in the male body. There is no male equivalent of gestation; there is no male equivalent of childbirth; there is no male equivalent of breastfeeding. So, just as an infant being between its father’s legs while he has an orgasm is a radically different even than a mother orgasming while giving birth, so too is a small child sucking on its father’s nipples radically different from a small child nursing.

    Bagelsan: Yep, that’s why babies that don’t breastfeed don’t bond with their parents

    What does this have to do with the fact that breastfeeding releases specific hormones that encourage and catalyze bonding? Women should eschew this experience because you find it squicky and because there are other ways to bond?

    jROO: breastfeeding past the point where the child develops a long-term memory could have some weird effects on them

    Different kids develop long-term memory at different points. There’s no common cut-off for that. I have a friend who has memories from prior to her first birthday. I, however, don’t really have any memories before…oh…four? Maybe just before four. Does that mean it would have been all right to nurse me until four, but my friend should have been cut off at six months?

    jROO: I guess because Im not a breastfeeding mom, i just can’t understand why you WOULD breastfeed on and on past the time when your kid can eat solids? Why go through that when neither mother or child stand to be harmed from it? I understand the desire to not wean a kid, but it is as benign (and maybe moreso) than continuing to breastfeed the child. Why keep on doing it?

    Well, kids start on solids at around four months or so. They can probably go completely on solids at…say…twelve months? (I’m not entirely sure about that one.) That’s not particularly late in the breastfeeding game. Weaning before either party is ready is not as or more benign than continuing to breastfeed. It’s upsetting.

    jROO: Just like I don’t think it would be appropriate for a child to bring their blanky to the table

    Why not? I’m not being snarky, I genuinely don’t understand. What would be inappropriate about a five-year-old having a transitional object at the table?

    igglanova: the world we live in right now that is such a violation of social norms that any breast-fed school age child will have hell to pay in terms of bullying and other cruelty.

    That’s true, but this is true for any number of socially unusual characteristics as well, and how many of them would we suggest a mother dispense with to spare the kiddo bullying? And how do we decide which ones are disposable and which ones are essential?

    igglanova: if you would rather make a point about breastfeeding than take reasonable steps to protect your child from large-scale humiliation then your priorities are fucking screwed. Your kid’s mental well-being trumps political point-scoring any day. Kids are traumatized by bullying all the time. Nobody was ever harmed by weaning before kindergarten.

    I agree. In fact, in the US, it’s so unusual, that I would bet cash money that for the rare child who isn’t weaned before kindergarten, something so unusual is going on that it cannot be accurately characterized as “scoring political points.” Especially if the mother isn’t secretive or furtive about it. Now, the unusual thing could be a rare medical condition that the mother doesn’t feel like discussing constantly with every damn person who gives her the side-eye, or the unusual thing could be some kind of weirdo attention-seeking behavior thingy. Since the letter-writer seems to have no context whatsoever for the incident, it’s hard to tell in this particular case.

  240. Marissa: So I’m not sure I care what other primates do vis-a-vis weaning, because other primates don’t have the complex social/cultural issues surrounding sex that we do.

    Once again, developmentally, your culture has fuck all to do with your baby. Babies have no culture.

  241. I’m just having trouble thinking of a reason to be breast feeding a 5 year old. If you’re concerned about nutrition that’s totally valid, but can’t you just pump instead then? If it’s comfort you’re looking for, there are a million other ways of finding a sense of comfort and connection with your child, and is it really necessary to be doing that at the dinner table when it’s only a comfort thing? I just feel like breast feeding when your kid is 5 seems like its more for yourself than for the kid. If your child is old enough to verbally ask for it and say “I’m thirsty”, then they are waaay too old. Would people be a bit alarmed at seeing a 5 year old with a pacifier?

    Kids are very curious about sex, and we often forget how young we were when we first started thinking about sex. I remember being around 4 and knowing instinctively that sex was a thing (though I didn’t know the actual mechanics of it obviously) and I knew that breasts had two functions, one of them being a sexual function.

    Also I’m so fucking grossed out by Sandy’s earlier comment. Anything that you do with your child, for the purposes of your own sexual gratification is so wrong and I can’t believe that even needs to be said.

  242. L: If your child is old enough to verbally ask for it and say “I’m thirsty”, then they are waaay too old.

    I started talking at somewhere between seven and nine months. So did my sister. Many children, more likely girls than boys, because girls tend to talk earlier, are perfectly capable of making simple needs like “I’m thirsty/hungry” known by ten or eleven months, and for a baby who’s being nursed it is not going to be too difficult to make the leap from “I’m thirsty/hungry” to “Want milk, Mommy.” That is not too old for breastfeeding.

  243. I wouldn’t be comfortable nursing a five-year-old myself, in this cultural context. It’s strange enough that I strongly suspect there’s something going on that this letter-writer is not aware of, as the milk allergy thing just transparently doesn’t make much sense. Whether that something is necessarily abusive…eh. I’m not sure about that. The letter-writer mentions that the brother and his new wife “flew” to see them, and that they hadn’t met the new wife before, which makes me wonder if the brother is perhaps living somewhere far enough away that his new wife is operating within a rather different cultural context. Just not enough info to go on in the letter.

    Actually, the part of the letter that bugs me is the assumption that because the letter-writer is a woman (I’m assuming), her brothers and father think it should be her responsibility to talk to the new sister-in-law, whom presumably she doesn’t know any better than they do. Is there a reason the dad and/or brothers can’t call up or pull aside newly-married brother and say “Dude…you know how your wife is breastfeeding her five-year-old? That’s kind of weird, is there a reason for that?” And then Newly-Married Brother can say “Yeah, in her culture, it’s very normal to breastfeed until five or six,” or “It is weird, but the pediatrician says that it’s the best way to go,” or “Yeah, I don’t really care, and it’s not really your business.” And then Dad or Other Brothers can say “Well, that’s fair enough, but it really squicks us out. Would it be possible for her not to do it at the dinner table?”

    I mean, what, the letter writer has boobies, so it’s her responsibility to police everybody else’s boobies too? If something is making Dad and Brothers feel uncomfortable, let them deal with it.

  244. Asking a nursing mother to stop feeding her child because it makes YOU uncomfortable tells me you’re the one with the problem. This “offense” is cited all along, no matter the age of the child. So, again I say: Tell me EXACTLY under what circumstances every woman in the world should stop breastfeeding. Since many people here know way better than any given mother when this should occur.

  245. Asking a nursing mother to stop feeding her child because it makes YOU uncomfortable tells me you’re the one with the problem. This “offense” is cited all along, no matter the age of the child. So, again I say: Tell me EXACTLY under what circumstances every woman in the world should stop breastfeeding. Since many people here know way better than any given mother when this should occur.

    Well, I’d suggest when it’s completely unnecessary, deeply socially inappropriate, and culturally condemned might be time to consider not breastfeeding your five year old at the table.

    If you still want to breastfeed till age 5, and all other things being equal, you’re more than welcome to do so, and good on your for undertaking a somewhat grueling commitment. But it’s damn weird to do it to a talking, walking, completely independent child at the table. In a stranger’s house. Whom you have just met. And is your husband’s family. When a child is old enough to understand delayed gratification, then that’s the time where you delay the child’s gratification to stop social awkwardness.

    The woman in this letter is either completely clueless or outright deliberately obnoxious. I’m hoping that, as some above stated, she might from a non-USian culture and doesn’t understand the way people feel about the issue here. A kind soul should inform so she can make the decision about whether or not to buck social norms. But if she knows it’s discomforting for others, then that’s just rude

    It is objectively rude to enter someone else’s home and engage in behavior they find upsetting. It is ALWAYS rude, even if they’re judgemental, bigoted, assholes. If you find their demands on your behavior unacceptable then you either need to not go to their house or try and negotiate a middle ground. That’s what responsible, respectful adults do.

  246. I’m having a problem with the “it’s not NECESSARY” framing people are giving this. Look, strictly speaking, breastfeeding at ALL is not necessary. Formula does a damn good job. Yes, you can argue benefits of bf all day–when when it comes down to it, a formula fed baby will do just. fine.

    So to wail that this mother should not bf because “it is totally unnecessary! it serves no purpose!” seems just more of the same mother-shaming crap that causes people to say “god, you could just pump, you know. Or use formula. In a modern Western society I do not need to be seeing your boobies do that!”

    We shouldn’t have the right to bf because its “necessary,” we should have the right to feed our children however we wish, whenever we wish—be it formula or bf. The “necessary” argument should have nothing to do with the ways in which this mother showcased her lack of manners in her new in-laws home.

  247. I was more getting at the fact that there is nothing innately “developmentally inappropriate,” as you said, to a 5 year old breastfeeding. Usually when you talk about child development the same rough biological milestones hold across cultures, Western or no.

    Also, it’s fine that you can’t understand it. I don’t really understand it either. But I don’t think not grokking the “why” of it gives ppl the right to condemn it. Condemn this lady of having horrible manners, or on not setting boundaries around when the kid can have an evening drink. She could have broached the subject with her new in-laws when not at the table, or since kid will most likely stop nursing in the next six months, avoided the issue alltogether.

    Politicalguineapig:
    JRoo:JustlikeIdon’tthinkitwouldbeappropriateforachildtobringtheirblankytothetable,Ireallydon’tthinkakidneedstobebreastfeedingatthetablewhenitissimplyforcomfort.
    Weirdlyenough,thatissuecameupatmyhousewithastuffedbear.Ithinkmylittlesiswasallowedtokeephimaroundaslongasitwasjustfamilyatthetable.

    Chava:Ididgiveanodtonon-Westernsocietiesinanearliercomment.Ifthefoodsupplyisuncertain,Icanunderstandwhybreast-feedingwouldbeextended.Otherwise,no,Ijustcan’tunderstandwhyanyonewouldbreastfeedachildthat’soldenoughtobeinschool.

  248. L: Also I’m so fucking grossed out by

    Sandy’s earlier comment. Anything that you do with your child, for the purposes of your own sexual gratification is so wrong and I can’t believe that even needs to be said.

    Sandy: I do not think any mother nurses for extended sexual gratification.

    We (and as the above quote highlights, Sandy) have covered this before. This is a straw argument based on wilfully misreading what Sandy wrote.

  249. tinfoil hattie:
    Last time I checked, there’s two bodies involved in brestfeeding.

    Sounds like the argument pro-lifers use about pregnancy.

    TH, I know you love a good strawman argument and a proper derailing way too much, so I let this one slip.

    I’d be happy to discuss my stance on abortion when it’s actually the subject of a blog post.
    Thanks.

  250. Chava: With babies, one has fairly limited options. It’s either formula or breast milk. And infants do derive health benefits from being breastfed. However, by five, children have a wide range of food options (barring allergies, famine or medical conditions) and the health benefits from breast-feeding are non-existent at that point. Breast feeding at that point stops being about the kid, and more about some degree of manipulation in the parent-child relationship.

  251. Politicalguineapig: Breast feeding at that point stops being about the kid, and more about some degree of manipulation in the parent-child relationship.

    On what authority do you make this statement? Do you have telepathic powers? How can you presume to make such a broad judgment? I’m not crazy about the idea of breastfeeding a five-year-old, but the automatic assumption of moms having nefarious motives when they breastfeed under circumstances when you wouldn’t do it, is really blowing my mind.

  252. EG, I caught that too about it evidently being the (presumably female) letter writer’s job to handle this. It squicked me out far more than, OMG BOOBIES!!

  253. Marcie
    (Quote this comment?)

    278 Politicalguineapig 12.1.2011 at 9:58 am
    Chava: With babies, one has fairly limited options. It’s either formula or breast milk. And infants do derive health benefits from being breastfed. However, by five, children have a wide range of food options (barring allergies, famine or medical conditions) and the health benefits from breast-feeding are non-existent at that point. Breast feeding at that point stops being about the kid, and more about some degree of manipulation in the parent-child relationship.

    Politicalguineapig
    (Quote this comment?)

    Why does everyone keep insisting that there are no health benefits to breastmilk after a certain age? It’s not like it turns to water after age 2 for fuck’s sake, it’s still full of antibodies and fats and nutrients and immunoglobulins and it’s easy on the stomach. My daughter was hospitalized after contracting a nasty virus and she couldn’t keep ANYTHING down – not bland foods, not Pedialyte, not water, not anything – except for breastmilk. And every attempt that the nurses made to put an IV into her for fluids failed miserably. I nursed her round the clock to keep her hydrated, fed, and to comfort her since she was scared, hurt (from all the failed sticking), and unwell. And she recovered, and rather quickly.

    Like anyone, I get sick sometimes, and when I am sick, I nurse my daughter much more frequently than otherwise, because I know that by doing so I’m providing her with my antibodies. And even when illness makes its rounds around the household, my daughter is almost always the only one who does not get sick, or if she does, she gets a much milder version and recovers more quickly than anyone else. This despite the fact that she is the only child in the house and has the most immature immune system. Non-existant benefits, my ass.

    Which do you honestly think has greater health benefits to a kindergartner, breastmilk or sugary juices? Yet somehow I don’t see any outrage about people “unnecessarily” giving their kids fucking juice with their lunch.

  254. We (and as the above quote highlights, Sandy) have covered this before. This is a straw argument based on wilfully misreading what Sandy wrote.

    No one “willfully” misread it. Several people have been genuinely upset by it. Most charitably, maybe Sandy’s just a terrible communicator and should take more care when talking about getting turned on by physical interactions with her children if she doesn’t want to freak people the fuck out.

  255. Mary: Nefarious motives and manipulation run both ways. I didn’t say that the mother was in control.

  256. See, fathers don’t breastfeed, by and large. So again, a small child sucking on its father’s nipples has an extraordinarily different context than a small child nursing. This is a fact.

    In Western culture, mothers don’t breastfeed their 5-year-olds by and large. Again, how is one acceptable bonding while the other is questionable?

  257. Breast feeding at that point stops being about the kid, and more about some degree of manipulation in the parent-child relationship.

    see, I disagree. I think breast feeding at that point is STILL as much about the kid and hir needs, if not strictly nutritional than certainly emotional. an emotional need is just as real as a physical one.

    why is it such a crime for people (even — especially? little people) to need comfort?

  258. “We shouldn’t have the right to bf because its “necessary,” we should have the right to feed our children however we wish, whenever we wish—be it formula or bf. The “necessary” argument should have nothing to do with the ways in which this mother showcased her lack of manners in her new in-laws home.”

    Amen to this, Chava.

    The longer this conversation goes on the more apparent it becomes that some commenters here are still holding on to the anti-breastfeeding sentiment that is so utterly ingrained in our western culture.

    Here’s the bottom line, the breastfeeding relationship between a woman and her child needn’t stop because it makes other people uncomfortable. This parsing out of at what point am I justified from a politico-feminist point of view of being squicked out by a woman continuing to breastfeed her child (age 1, 2, 4 10, etc.) is still setting upstraw mommies and as a result missing the point entirely. Just because a child can get his or her nutrition from a source other than their mother’s milk does not mean that you, or society or my MIL or whoever gets to tell me (or any other mother for that matter) that we should or must stop nursing our child. It’s not as though breastmilk somehow looses it’s nutritional value past a certain point, it’s still a nutritious source of sustenance for a child.

    So at what point should a woman stop nursing her child? The answer to that is for her and her child to decide, and when it no longer continues to be a mutually beneficial relationship then it should stop.

  259. Politicalguineapig: Mary: Nefarious motives and manipulation run both ways. I didn’t say that the mother was in control.

    …which still doesn’t answer the question of how you can presume to baldly state that about every instance of a child breastfeeding past whatever your personal cutoff is.

  260. my son is three, rocking the ragged edge of four. he nurses like he’s on a mission. it’s painful at times, and occasionaly socially awkward, but here’s the thing. he doesn’t know OR CARE about the complicated cultural tangle going on that makes mom says “no, kiddo, not on the bus!” and how am I to explain it? he’s not going to be able to understand that breasts are sexual without first understanding there’s something called “sex” in the first place.

    I hate that I can’t just nurse on the bus like we used to. aside from the fact that he’s getting kind of big for my lap, it’s just people who automatically assume there’s something WRONG, either with him or with me, that get in my way and make me feel like a freak. I often wish I had the courage to say “ok”.

    I mean, the kid just wants his mom. how complicated is that?

    right now, Little Boy is of the opinion that nursing makes EVERYONE feel better — him, me, random bus passengers he might happen to notice. I assume this is because he doesn’t know or care that sexual intercourse (in its infinite variety) exists. or something. who knows. he’s three.

  261. I don’t think that there’s anything intrinsically wrong or harmful with continuing to breast feed a five year old, but I do think by that age breast feeding should be a private activity, not something you do at the dinner table in front of the whole family. Not because boobies or breast feeding are gross, but because it’s just not… socially acceptable. It would be like if you allowed your five year old to go around and talk to other people with a big pacifier in his mouth, or with nothing but a diaper on. You may not be bothered by it, and it may not be objectively wrong, but it’s bound to put other people off and even annoy them. When we interact with other people in a certain cultural context, there are definitely social codes and behaviours that everyone is expected to adhere to. People won’t mind if a 3 year doesn’t always use a fork or knife, but they will probably mind if a 13 year old doesn’t. People expect and tolerate screaming or random outbursts if babies or young children are at the table, but they would get extremely uncomfortable if the same behaviours were coming from a teenager or an adult. Most people don’t mind if a mother breast feeds a baby at the table, but will probably be extremely thrown off if she breast feeds a school aged child, someone old enough to be expected to sit by himself, drink all his liquid from a cup, and use a fork. It’s not bigoted to expect these things, it’s just what people in Canadian and USian culture expect when they’re interacting with other people. This family would be wrong to condemn this woman’s decision to continue breast feeding, but I don’t think that they would be at all out of line to ask that she not do it in front of them, especially at the dinner table.

  262. Bagelsan: No one “willfully” misread it. Several people have been genuinely upset by it. Most charitably, maybe Sandy’s just a terrible communicator and should take more care when talking about getting turned on by physical interactions with her children if she doesn’t want to freak people the fuck out.

    Maybe if Sandy hadn’t repeatedly clarified the one comment that people now insist on taking out of context this would be relevant. However, since this reading relies on ignoring what Sandy said in several subsequent comments, I have trouble giving sympathy to people who keep repeating it at this point in the conversation. Look, your body may be theoretically and politically pure, but the rest of us have to live in bodies that aren’t quite so up to scratch at not having complex, human reactions to different physical and emotional stimuli. The fact that you’re unwilling to parse that isn’t a problem with Sandy’s communication skills.

  263. Most people don’t mind if a mother breast feeds a baby at the table

    As a woman who has breastfed a baby, that has not been my experience AT ALL. Even with a newborn, many many people aren’t happy unless I’m hiding in a dark room somewhere huddled with my child under a blanket. And even after that, they don’t want me to mention that it ever happened, and God forbid I should leak a little milk through my shirt. Imagine the look of HORROR that would cross people’s faces because there would be evidence – right in front of them – that I just put my breasts into a child’s mouth, and that’s just gross!

    All of the things that people are saying about breastfeeding 5-year-olds – that it’s unnecessary, needs to be hidden, shows a weakness or neediness on the mom’s part, etc – are things that people said to me when I was nursing a newborn. ALL of these things. So since I’m damned if I nurse a toddler and damned if I nurse a baby…well, fuck it. Me and my little one will just do what works for us and to hell with anyone who has a problem with it.

  264. Ughh. Hi, back. Because some of these posts are so freaking painful.

    igglanova: ‘Trust women’ is a provocative slogan for pro-choice political action, but your intellectual engagement should not end there. At the end of the day I don’t ‘trust women’ with decisions that affect other people. I don’t trust anybody. People make moronic parenting decisions all the time.

    I agree there’s always a place for intellectual engagement but then… wtf? Okay, so we can trust women to decide for themselves whether to end or continue a pregnancy, but not to decide when is the best time to wean their children if they carry them to term? Unbelievable. People definitely make parenting decisions you disagree with, that much is clear. So uh. Did you then want to license people to become parents, give kids to the government to raise, just pass a lot of laws like no breastfeeding after the age of 4?

    Bagelsan: I’m not the one trying to make it a clear line.

    Yes, you ask for a clear line right here:

    Bagelsan: Okay, at what age would you all consider a kid too old to breastfeed? 6 years? 10 years? Puberty? Obviously you must have a cutoff in mind somewhere, so where?

    Either you haven’t read half the stuff upthread or you are missing the point that’s been made again and again. Most of us here are NOT going to say “3 months” or “a year” or “4 years” or “5 years” because the understanding is that the mother and her child are best suited to determine when.

    No one nurses at puberty. That is why the guidelines for nursing place no upward limit on breastfeeding. (Again, barring signs of abuse, have said this like three times now) children stop when they are ready, or when their mothers are ready.

    Bagelsan: No one “willfully” misread it.

    Bagelsan: In Western culture, mothers don’t breastfeed their 5-year-olds by and large. Again, how is one acceptable bonding while the other is questionable?

    When you say you are not willfully misreading but then continually come out brandishing straw men and completely missing the point, it does beg the question. Children do not suckle their fathers’ nipples because fathers (with the possible exception of trans people) do not breastfeed. Nursing is analogous to gestating a baby and giving birth. There is no male equivalent. This was all said already. Funny, it’s like you haven’t read a big chunk of the comments upthread, don’t want to, or are willfully misreading. And all of your posts come off like you are trying to pervert and sully one of the most innocuous, loving and wonderful things a woman can do with her child. I’m sure you’re going to throw that back at me, but whatever. Willfully. Misreading. Or skipping half the posts.

    L: Anything that you do with your child, for the purposes of your own sexual gratification is so wrong and I can’t believe that even needs to be said.

    I completely agree with that statement. Because as I said, I do not think anyone nurses for the sole purpose of the sexual arousal that can accompany breastfeeding. Nursing is wonderful for a hundred and one reasons. People who do extended nursing do it because their child wants to do it and they are okay with that.

    Brian Schlosser: You wouldn’t use the “women shouldn’t be policed for what they do with their bodies” argument to justify hitting a 5 year old child. So don’t use it to justify breastfeeding one.

    Hattie already pointed out to you the error of your mistake, but I have to add a giant WTF to this analogy of nursing and violence. Seriously, what the fuck is that.

    There is so much bad faith here it’s unreal.

  265. tinfoil hattie:
    Last time I checked, there’s two bodies involved in brestfeeding.

    Sounds like the argument pro-lifers use about pregnancy.

    How in the hell is that even remot3ely the same?!!!! A BORN child is NOT a fetus in any stretch of the imagination so how is acknoeldging that the mother is not the only human being involved in breastfeeding the same as saying there are two human beings in a pregnancy that is about to be aborted? How, please tell us all how either 1) a breastfeeding child is a fetus or 2) a fetus has as much personhood as a breastfeeding child.

  266. Sandy: People definitely make parenting decisions you disagree with, that much is clear. So uh. Did you then want to license people to become parents, give kids to the government to raise, just pass a lot of laws like no breastfeeding after the age of 4?

    Why do people always assume I want my opinions to be turned into law? Yes, because I don’t trust that parents automatically know best just because they are parents, that obviously means I want to turn my country into an Orwellian hellhole.

  267. @tmc: You are I must have very different families and communities, because I’m the oldest of 8 siblings and cousins and no one has ever given my mother or aunt shit for nursing a baby in full view of everyone else. Sometimes they used a blanket, sometimes they didn’t, but it never made a difference. They didn’t usually nurse at the table because they wanted to be able to eat their dinner comfortably, but they didn’t remove themselves from everyone else when the time came to breast feed. But nursing a five year old in front of the family is like bringing a five year old to a family function wearing nothing a t-shirt and a diaper; it’s fine for a baby, but not for a school aged child. It’s fine to do in your own home or in your own room because sometimes five year olds still need night time pull-ups, but not when you’re out in public. There’s a difference between being anti-breast feeding and never wanting to see a mother nurse a baby, and simply expecting that breast feeding become private once the child gets older, just like we usually start teaching children to go to the bathroom in private by about the age of 2 and we no longer change their diapers in public or around other people, like we would if they were still a baby.

  268. antiprincess:
    my son is three, rocking the ragged ed of four. he nurses like he’s on a mission. it’s painful at times, and occasionaly socially awkward, but here’s the thing. he doesn’t know OR CARE about the complicated cultural tangle going on that makes mom says “no, kiddo, not on the bus!” and how am I to explain it?

    I mean, the kid just wants his mom. how complicated is that?

    Does this mean you never tell him no? That if he wants to nurse you are therefore obligated to nurse on his demand, whenever, whereever because you’re not allowed to say no?
    Why does there need to be an explaination aside from not right now? or wait?

  269. She said she DOESNT nurse him on the bus, and she DOES tell him no. Just that the having to hide it because people assume a) she’s a perv or b) he’s overly attached/fucked up in some way is…frustrating and illogical.

    Azalea: Doesthismeanyounevertellhimno?Thatifhewantstonurseyouarethereforeobligatedtonurseonhisdemand,whenever,whereeverbecauseyou’renotallowedtosayno?Whydoesthereneedtobeanexplainationasidefromnotrightnow?orwait?

  270. Azalea: Does this mean you never tell him no? That if he wants to nurse you are therefore obligated to nurse on his demand, whenever, whereever because you’re not allowed to say no?

    What IS it with these straw men???

  271. Huh…it reads to me like people may be conflating sexual arousal and sexual desire. All sorts of things may be inadvertently arousing, an autonomic response, but not the product of sexual desire. Many women experience arousal while breastfeeding, but I suspect a only small portion of women experience sexual desire for their children and act on that desire by breastfeeding. The latter would clearly be abuse, but bears no resemblance to the former.

  272. Azalea: How in the hell is that even remot3ely the same?!!!!

    It’s not the same, and she didn’t say it was the same. The point is that this argument that “there are two people here and the needs and rights of one are getting ignored omg” is totally off base. Because in all these scenarios we’re talking about here, A) the child wants to nurse and B) the mother is okay with that. A few people keep darting in to insist that there are sinister pedo moms out there who must be forcing their toddlers to nurse when the kids don’t want to. It’s a bogus misguided argument that reminds some of us of the women who love late-term abortions sooo much they have them all the time. It’s an argument for a problem that doesn’t exist. And it’s an argument that starts off with a bad faith assessment of other women.

  273. Sandy: it’s an argument that starts off with a bad faith assessment of other women.

    ie that they cannot be trusted to determine what is best for themselves and their children.

  274. Sandy: fathers (with the possible exception of trans people) do not breastfeed.

    Just as a point of fact, a trans man who considers himself his baby’s father is entirely capable of breastfeeding, as he is of giving birth. Trans women with children can certainly still identify as fathers even after transition, and I know of trans women who lactate, but that typically signals something unusual going on with prolactin levels, pituitary gland issues, etc., and in any event it’s my understanding that the milk isn’t sufficiently nutritious to feed a baby.

  275. I don’t know what your family or community is like, but I live in a large city in America, and most of my family is poor, black, and largely uneducated or undereducated. Breastfeeding rarely goes on longer than a few months in my family, and more often than not it doesn’t happen at all. My immediate family lives in a majority white middle class suburb where breastfeeding is more common but still rarely goes past a year. And regardless of whether I’m at home in my well-educated suburb or visiting family in the ghetto that I grew up in, I’ve gotten the same shitty attitudes from people. The vocabulary may differ but the sentiment is the same.

    Peeing in private =/= nursing, regardless of age. The expectations that I should hide the fact that I breastfeed started when she was born – what made those expectations illegitimate when she was an infant and suddenly super legitimate now? As far as I’m concerned it’s all bullshit.

  276. Politicalguineapig: Breast feeding at that point stops being about the kid, and more about some degree of manipulation in the parent-child relationship.

    And you know this how? Through your vast experience as a lactation consultant and family therapist, I suppose?

    Bagelsan: In Western culture, mothers don’t breastfeed their 5-year-olds by and large. Again, how is one acceptable bonding while the other is questionable?

    Because in no culture whatsoever do small children suck on their father’s nipples. There is no reason in any culture why a practice of small children sucking their father’s nipples would occur. That’s not an issue of cultural relativity. It’s an issue of biology. Whereas given that there is no culture in which babies and small children don’t breastfeed, because if that hadn’t been part of all cultures the cultures it was not a part of would have died out pretty damn quickly, there is no particular reason to demand a universal cut-off to which everybody must adhere.

    What makes you the arbiter of what the appropriate breastfeeding cut-off age is, rather than the person doing the actual breastfeeding? I know it goes against every single Western custom and practice to defer to any mother’s sense of what’s best in her particular situation, because women are weak and emotional and untrustworthy, and mothers are responsible for all social and personal ills, and also are just lying in wait for an opportunity to abuse their children through excessive breastfeeding–I mean, I don’t even know why we let these people take care of kids in the first place, we should just take them away as soon as they’re born and place them with an appropriate non-lactating person–but it is actually possible, if you make a great effort, to consider the idea that the breastfeeding mother may actually have a better sense of what’s good for her child than random people on the internet, or even well-intentioned new in-laws who have never before met her.

    Azalea: Does this mean you never tell him no? That if he wants to nurse you are therefore obligated to nurse on his demand, whenever, whereever because you’re not allowed to say no?

    Yes, obviously, that’s what it means. She is but a slave, no, an appendage to her child. This has nothing to do with her own desires at all, because mothers never ever want to do anything that could help their children feel better. Her toddler is a tyrant, determining what to do with her breasts at all times. It’s obviously a proto-master-slave BDSM dynamic.

    Were you trying to misread what she was saying so bizarrely, or did it just come naturally?

    Azalea: Why does there need to be an explaination aside from not right now?

    Why shouldn’t there be an explanation? Kids deserve to understand the reasons why things are happening as much as any other human being does. Personally, I don’t want to raise kids who obey authority unthinkingly without questioning the reasons behind its dictums.

  277. “@tmc: You are I must have very different families and communities, because I’m the oldest of 8 siblings and cousins and no one has ever given my mother or aunt shit for nursing a baby in full view of everyone else.”

    Simply proof that folks in Canada Land are often more progressive than they are here in the U.S. (especially once you get into flyover country as others here have already pointed out.)

    That’s great for you Girl from Ontario that your family and social group doesn’t get so het up about breastfeeding or nursing in public. But again, that is not the experience that many others have found to be their daily reality. Which is way lactivism can still be such an important thing, and why it isn’t (nor should it be considered as) divorced from the mission of feminism to give women the right to make their own life choices without society stepping in and making those decision for them.

  278. This is completely and utterly off-topic but I am following this thread on Internet Explorer 6.0 (yes, the one that was released in fucking 2001!!) and can’t see 90% of the comments on this page (I have to copy and paste into Notepad to read anything and to type my responses, then paste back into the comment box, which is just getting smaller and smaller as the thread grows) and I just can’t fucking WAIT until the browsers here at work get updated. This shit is driving me BONKERS. FFS!

  279. tmc:
    Thisiscompletelyandutterlyoff-topicbutIamfollowingthisthreadonInternetExplorer6.0(yes,theonethatwasreleasedinfucking2001!!)andcan’tsee90%ofthecommentsonthispage(IhavetocopyandpasteintoNotepadtoreadanythingandtotypemyresponses,thenpastebackintothecommentbox,whichisjustgettingsmallerandsmallerasthethreadgrows)andIjustcan’tfuckingWAITuntilthebrowsershereatworkgetupdated.ThisshitisdrivingmeBONKERS.FFS!

    Heh. The blogger Ta-Nehisi Coates uses threaded comments for that reason. He says that when the argument goes “in the margins” it’s time for the commenters to stop arguing. I’ve seen people keep going until the text is 1 character per line. 😀

  280. Anti-princess: There are plenty of ways to comfort a kid without breast-feeding them. If you read my earlier comment, I did say that kids occasionally need comforting, but in older kids it’s considered more appropriate to rock them gently, kiss the odd boo-boo, or let them haul around a stuffed animal or a blanket everywhere.
    Mary: Again, read my comments. I did cite a few instances where breastfeeding a child past 4 would be reasonable, but I still think that in the case of the five-year-old, it’s a textbook case of regression.
    EG: I’m not either of those things, but I think reasonable people would agree that something’s waaay off here.

  281. Politicalguineapig: I think reasonable people would agree that something’s waaay off here.

    So, in other words, you don’t actually have anything to back you up on this judgment that breastfeeding at five years old is automatically a case of manipulation. I see.

  282. Heh. The blogger Ta-Nehisi Coates uses threaded comments for that reason. He says that when the argument goes “in the margins” it’s time for the commenters to stop arguing. I’ve seen people keep going until the text is 1 character per line. 😀

    That is kind of genius, actually (the reason for the threaded comments, not the 1 character per line comments)!

  283. Politicalguineapig: I did cite a few instances where breastfeeding a child past 4 would be reasonable, but I still think that in the case of the five-year-old, it’s a textbook case of regression.

    So what makes it magically non-regressive for a five-year-old to be nursed due to allergies or lack of available food?

    You just are not providing any basis for your accusation of manipulative behavior other than “well, I think it’s that way.”

  284. Kristen J.: Men can and sometimes do. There are cultures where men nurse. /derail

    Yeah, I know that male lactation is possible. It’s just so vanishingly rare that I rounded down.

    Are you sure there are cultures where men nurse? Wikipedia doesn’t list any (which is why this a genuine question, because while they’re usually good on basic info, they’re hardly the last word on anything), and notes that male mammals lactate “under unusual or pathogenic conditions such as extreme stress, feeding castrated animals with phytoestrogens or animals with pituitary tumors.” And this article, about male lactation (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=strange-but-true-males-can-lactate&sc=rss) cites several reliable accounts of male lactation, but all were under conditions of extreme stress in which mothers for whatever reason were unable to nurse. It doesn’t mention anything about it being normalized in any culture.

  285. Again, read my comments. I did cite a few instances where breastfeeding a child past 4 would be reasonable, but I still think that in the case of the five-year-old, it’s a textbook case of regression.

    American Academy of Pediatrics: There is no upper limit to the duration of breastfeeding and no evidence of psychologic or developmental harm from breastfeeding into the third year of life or longer.

    Weird, it’s almost as if you’re playing armchair psychologist AND completely making things up as you go along.

  286. “There are plenty of ways to comfort a kid without breast-feeding them.”

    Says you, and that makes you the expert on someone else’s child how, exactly?

    “I did say that kids occasionally need comforting, but in older kids it’s considered more appropriate to rock them gently, kiss the odd boo-boo, or let them haul around a stuffed animal or a blanket everywhere.”

    Considered more appropraite by whom, exactly, and for what reason(s)? Because society as a whole says so, or just because you’re personal ick factor says so? And why exactly does society say so, because that opinion is backed up by actual, hard science (because it doesn’t, by the way) or because society’s collective ick factor says so?

    Once again, I feel it is crucially important to point out that until recently there were a whole host of things our society/culture deemed inappropriate and has since come around to realize was total, bigoted/racist/idiotic nonsense. In my opinion, the issue of breastfeeding, extended or otherwise. is just another one those stupid societal prejudices that must be overcome in order to stop the continued oppression of women as a class.

  287. Again, sorry for the typos. Gasp, I’m trying to nurse a noob as I’m typing this stuff.

    Avert your eyeballs. internets!

  288. Lolagirl: Considered more appropraite by whom, exactly, and for what reason(s)? Because society as a whole says so, or just because you’re personal ick factor says so? And why exactly does society say so, because that opinion is backed up by actual, hard science (because it doesn’t, by the way) or because society’s collective ick factor says so?

    It is amazing to me how much of the anti-full term breastfeeding argument here (the stuff that isn’t pertaining to sexual arousal) comes back to the “inappropriateness” of nursing in public. When Jill called for new and creative anti-breastfeeding-in-public arguments recently, I believe “but it’s so inappropriate!!!!” was #5 or 6 of the boring, overused, and bullshit complaints. This argument stinks like old cheese, and I’m dismayed to see this much of it in a place like Feministe. Especially after how much fun that thread was. Remember “People don’t want to see that?” “Well I DON’T WANT TO SEE YOUR FACE.” I’m probably misquoting, but that was fun, and now this.

  289. Sandy: ie that they cannot be trusted to determine what is best for themselves and their children.

    History tells us there are plenty of women in the world who can’t be tusted with their own children, they’ve killed them, raped them, tortured them, maimed them, injured them, neglected them, Being a mom doesn’t mean she’s some untouchable saint so yes, questioning something that a woman who happens to be a mother does with her child is simply not trusting that the act is ok.

    The crux of the discomfort isnt even breastmilk, there are PUMPS, it isnt bonding with your child, because non breastfeeding moms have strong bonds with their children , breastfeeding moms who stopped long before one year or even 5 years STILL maintain incredibly close bonds with their children the discomfort is the idea that one parent will do something with their child that sexually arouses them that is not necessary to do for the safety well being nor bonding of their relationship. It is merely an option at that point, an option which sexually arouses the mother. That is very disturbing for people who think sexual arousal has no business between a parent and their pre school aged child.

    EG:

    Why shouldn’t there be an explanation?Kids deserve to understand the reasons why things are happening as much as any other human being does. Personally, I don’t want to raise kids who obey authority unthinkingly without questioning the reasons behind its dictums.

    Because nobody needs to give a fucking explaination on why another person cant suck on their nipples, period. Breastfeeding a child doesnt give them carte blanche rights to your body, being a mother doesnt mean your body is at the mercy of your child until he or she determines it to no longer be useful. Come on! We’re not saying NO you cant go out and play, you’re saying NO you cant suck on my nipples whenever you feel like it. Why isnt that already established prior to this child being 5?

    So you want to raise sons who will demand to know why they cant suck on someone’s nipples in public? They have a right to know why the dictator wont give them access to the breasts they so rightfully deserve?

    This is simple, its her breast, she can say no it doesn’t matter why she says no, no means no. Period.

  290. Li: We (and as the above quote highlights, Sandy) have covered this before. This is a straw argument based on wilfully misreading what Sandy wrote.

    No, I know what I read. Now you’re just backpedaling. She said there was nothing wrong with extending the breastfeeding relationship because of sexual arousal felt by the mother. Then defended herself by saying “but no one does that anyway”.

  291. Thank you, Azalea! There is in fact a middle ground between trusting all mothers in all situations to do anything they want, and wresting all babies from their crying mothers to be cared for by robots. One can disagree with the former without advocating the latter. :p

    No, I know what I read. Now you’re just backpedaling. She said there was nothing wrong with extending the breastfeeding relationship because of sexual arousal felt by the mother. Then defended herself by saying “but no one does that anyway”.

    Yup, like I said the most charitable reading is that she’s just a bad communicator. The less charitable reading is that she’s backpedaling like whoa because she suddenly realized that people were not universally cool with children as a source of sexual pleasure. If mothers who do this are a strawman, then they are Sandy’s strawman because she introduced them in order to defend them.

    But I love all the people whining that “but men don’t laaaactate” as if that’s the final word. Isn’t the main point of nursing at age 5 that it’s a comfort/bonding thing? Why are (cis, non-lactating) men excluded from this, if this extended nursing is non-sexual and not a major source of nutrition? It’s almost like, by saying that this would only be creepy for a man, we’re pretending that men have a monopoly on creepy behavior with children — a sexist notion if I ever heard one. -_-

  292. Azalea: because non breastfeeding moms have strong bonds with their children

    Yes, we’ve established that you don’t need to breastfeed to bond with a child. Should women then not breastfeed at all, because they don’t need to? Or they should, just not past the point it might make people uncomfortable?

    Azalea: one parent will do something with their child that sexually arouses them

    You say this like it’s everyone. We have established that it is not everyone. Furthermore why are you assuming that the the one single reason this parent wants to nurse is feeling sexual arousal? That is a creepy assumption, plus, as has been said, the oxytocin and uterine contractions that may produce such feelings are closer to birth, with a newborn. Not with an older child who eats food most of the time and nurses in a complementary fashion. Someone even mentioned the shape of the child’s mouth changes, and the sensation is not the same as it is when the kid is a baby.

    Azalea: History tells us there are plenty of women in the world who can’t be tusted with their own children, they’ve killed them, raped them, tortured them, maimed them, injured them, neglected them,

    Very true. But can you please cite some cases or incidences in which a toddler or adult person has been harmed by full term nursing? I’ve seen many straw men in this discussion, many baseless objections, expressions of discomfort and accusations of inappropriateness and regression and what have you, but no actual data or any kind of supporting information to back up their arguments. When there’s not so much as an anecdote it’s obvious that this is not about women harming children by nursing them. Which makes me think it’s still really about squeamishness.

    Azalea: Breastfeeding a child doesnt give them carte blanche rights to your body, being a mother doesnt mean your body is at the mercy of your child until he or she determines it to no longer be useful.

    Obviously it doesn’t, but how much of an explanation to give is entirely the mother’s decision and at her discretion. This idea that if she always nurses on demand a son will grow up to become a man who thinks he has a right to all the breasts in the world strikes me as out of left field and totally baseless. Maybe if she always nursed him on demand AND didn’t teach him respect for other human beings, then yes, that might happen. Is there anything more solid to be had here?

    L: She said there was nothing wrong with extending the breastfeeding relationship because of sexual arousal felt by the mother.

    If you are going to ignore my clarifications and conflate things I did say with things I didn’t say, then either you are willfully misreading or no, you don’t know what you read.

  293. But hey, I’m liking the sequel we got going to “The Open Source Boob Project: Son of the Open Source Boobs”! Teaching toddlers that they deserve free access to a tit at any moment could never go wrong; god knows we already socialize older boys and men to believe that. :p

  294. \\

    L: No, I know what I read. Now you’re just backpedaling. She said there was nothing wrong with extending the breastfeeding relationship because of sexual arousal felt by the mother. Then defended herself by saying “but no one does that anyway”.

    Where did she say that, specifically? Because I cannot find a single one of her comments in which she said that. And, yet, I give you:

    Sandy: To be honest the specters of “the woman who wants to nurse extra long for political reasons” or “the woman who is nursing for sexual pleasure” come across to me like the specters of “the women who get abortions as birth control” and “the welfare queens who squeeze out babies to get more welfare.” Do these women exist? Well, definitely in the minds of those who want to police women’s bodies.

    Comment suggesting that women who nurse for sexual pleasure are a myth (at 92, her first comment on this thread). Preemptive backpedaling perhaps?


    Sandy
    : Breastfeeding certainly does have the potential to be sexually stimulating, because there’s a mouth on your nipple. But there are a lot of wonderful things about breastfeeding, like the closeness and cuddles and the love hormones that swoosh through your brain and my personal favorite, not having to wash bottles. So what if a woman likes the feeling, yes, sexually, of that mouth on her nipple? If the child and mother wish to continue the breastfeeding relationship, where is the harm? If you have other reasons to suspect abuse, fine, but nursing by itself is not abuse.

    Comment stating that there are many things involved in breastfeeding, and that whether or not a woman enjoys the feeling of a mouth on her nipple is not relevant to whether or not they should continue breastfeeding if both mother and child wish to continue.

    Sandy:

    Yeah, I have a kid. Way to go on the personal attacks. So we are clear. I do not think any mother nurses for extended sexual gratification. I am saying that I am disgusted that anyone would see a mother nursing a 5 year old or whatever and think the woman is extending the nursing for sexual reasons. I don’t think any do, or if it/when happens, it happens incredibly rarely, and there would probably be many other signs of abuse.. But y’know, thanks for calling me a pedo.

    Comment stating again (and lets note that this is repeating something Sandy has already said during her very first comment in this discussion) that she doesn’t think that women extend nursing for sexual reasons.

    Sandy: I completely agree with that statement. Because as I said, I do not think anyone nurses for the sole purpose of the sexual arousal that can accompany breastfeeding. Nursing is wonderful for a hundred and one reasons. People who do extended nursing do it because their child wants to do it and they are okay with that.

    And again.

    Now, you may know what you read, but I sure as hell don’t, because Sandy has been making exactly the same argument from comment number 92 up. So unless you’d like to invite the rest of us back to the parallel universe you appear to be getting your quotes from, maybe stop with the misrepresentation.

  295. Bagelsan: Yup, like I said the most charitable reading is that she’s just a bad communicator. The less charitable reading is that she’s backpedaling like whoa because she suddenly realized that people were not universally cool with children as a source of sexual pleasure. If mothers who do this are a strawman, then they are Sandy’s strawman because she introduced them in order to defend them.

    I hear that if she floats it means she’s a witch.

  296. Sandy, it’s hilarious that I shared a story of how my friend ORGASMED WHILE BREASTFEEDING and continues to breastfeed even as the kid is pushing 4, and yet you’re being rip to shreds because you pointed out that not all people feel revulsion to neutrality when their nipples are sucked. Hilarious.

    Breastfeeding a child doesnt give them carte blanche rights to your body, being a mother doesnt mean your body is at the mercy of your child until he or she determines it to no longer be useful. Come on! We’re not saying NO you cant go out and play, you’re saying NO you cant suck on my nipples whenever you feel like it. Why isnt that already established prior to this child being 5?

    I know a ton of mothers who completely disagree with every statement here. They believe that being a mother DOES mean that their bodies are at the mercies of their kids, and it makes them happy to be able to provide that for them.

    In spite of the fact that those kids are pretty well-adjusted in public, they’re probably being raped by their mothers every night and should be removed from their care and placed with a houseful of strangers who only take them because they’re paid by the government to do so.

  297. Azalea: History tells us there are plenty of women in the world who can’t be tusted with their own children, they’ve killed them, raped them, tortured them, maimed them, injured them, neglected them

    Indeed. How many of those mothers harmed their children by breastfeeding them? What is being argued about here is the assertion that breastfeeding in and of itself is harmful to a child of whatever age makes the person making the assertion uncomfortable. Nowhere have I seen even one commenter point to a single instance, however, of an actual child actually experiencing actual harm due to being breastfed.

    Tell me, what’s the upper age limit at which a mother should be present while her child takes a bath? Should every mother who falls too far on one side or another be classed with rapists and maimers as well? Or in that case, is it acceptable to give the benefit of the doubt and presume that in the absence of any actual harmful actions, the mother has a better idea of what is best in her kid’s particular situation than you do?

    Azalea: the discomfort is the idea that one parent will do something with their child that sexually arouses them that is not necessary to do for the safety well being nor bonding of their relationship. It is merely an option at that point, an option which sexually arouses the mother.

    And again…an instance in which a mother has prolonged breastfeeding specifically due to the sexual pleasure it brings her? We get that you would feel better if she bonded with the child some other way and/or got it nutrition some other way. I know it may be hard to process, but not everybody feels your discomfort. Why should every mother have to cater to it? Especially when you have not actually presented any evidence that breastfeeding is harmful.

    Azalea: Because nobody needs to give a fucking explaination on why another person cant suck on their nipples, period.

    Did you read the same comment I did? She does want to breastfeed, and she does want to give an explanation for what to her seems a nonsensical social rule. This is what she wrote: “I hate that I can’t just nurse on the bus like we used to. aside from the fact that he’s getting kind of big for my lap, it’s just people who automatically assume there’s something WRONG, either with him or with me, that get in my way and make me feel like a freak. I often wish I had the courage to say “ok”.” She wants to nurse him; she feels like she can’t due to the social opprobrium of people who think that calling CPS would be a good response, and she doesn’t see how she can explain that to her son, because it makes no sense. Are you reading some other comment in which a woman is saying that she hates nursing her son but doesn’t feel that she can stop unless she gives him a good reason?

    Kristen J.: The Aka Tribe. I learned about it from a class years ago, but here’s an article about it from the Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/jun/15/childrensservices.familyandrelationships

    That’s a fascinating article and an awesome society, but it doesn’t say that the men lactate, just that babes suck at their nipples for comfort. I’ve heard that sufficient continuous nipple stimulation is one of the things necessary for male lactation, but it’s not a sure thing.

    Bagelsan: But I love all the people whining that “but men don’t laaaactate” as if that’s the final word. Isn’t the main point of nursing at age 5 that it’s a comfort/bonding thing?

    The point is that it wouldn’t be comforting or bonding for a five-year-old unless he/she had been nursing from his/her father’s chest all along. Again, that is such a vanishingly rare situation in any culture outside of the one Kristen J. pointed me to, not because of western social norms, but because there’s no instinctual reason for babies to do that, because, as I’ve noted, men do not lactate. So sure, if you run across an Aka father with his five-year-old, and the kiddo is suckling on his nipples, I don’t see the harm.

    Bagelsan: Teaching toddlers that they deserve free access to a tit at any moment could never go wrong; god knows we already socialize older boys and men to believe that.

    Am I the only one who read the comment from the woman who discussed nursing on the bus? She wants to nurse him on the bus. She feels like she can’t because of all the judgmental assholes who will accuse her of abusing her son. I can’t imagine where she would get the idea that such people exist, but apparently she has. This makes her unhappy.

    I seriously doubt that the problem with rapists is that they were breastfed for too long.

  298. EG: I seriously doubt that the problem with rapists is that they were breastfed for too long.

    (This is a quotation from a post I made in response to Bagelsan that is still in moderation.)

    Although, now that I think about it, it’s been a long time since we’ve had a good round of mommy-blaming. This one, though, is kind of old-fashioned. Wasn’t it the Freudians or the Kleinians who blamed neuroses on not being breastfed long enough? Just flipping it around and saying that teaching toddlers that they can have access to their mothers’ breasts for nursing is just! like! teaching boys and men that they don’t have to respect any woman’s boundaries is kind of unimaginative. I’m sure we can do better.

  299. Li: Ihearthatifshefloatsitmeansshe’sawitch.

    rofl.

    Thank you, Li.

    Rodeo: Sandy, it’s hilarious that I shared a story of how my friend ORGASMED WHILE BREASTFEEDING and continues to breastfeed even as the kid is pushing 4, and yet you’re being rip to shreds because you pointed out that not all people feel revulsion to neutrality when their nipples are sucked. Hilarious.

    Yeah, it kinda is. I’m sure if she had been on this board and stated it herself, she would have had her ears blistered. But she wasn’t and you probably didn’t seem horrified enough to properly relay the message that she’s a vile child abuser. I’ve never been called a pedo before, or a predator, new and flabbergasting experience.

  300. @Marcie: Guffaw! Yes, I do love a good strawman, if by that you mean, “often disagrees with the popular viewpoint.”

    The abortion analogy fits. YOU are the one policing women, telling them what to do with their bodies, and deciding what is best for them and their babies.

    @Azalea, your! outrage! while amusing! is entirely bullshit. Quit telling women what to do with our bodies. Quit with the misogyny of “knowing” that what a given woman is doing is WRONG! Because eeeeyeeew, gross, breasts! and toddlers! If you wouldn’t presume to tell a woman what to do about a pregnancy, STFU about how she is raising her “post-born fetus'” unlessyou have a evidence of child abuse or neglect.

  301. Am I the only one who read the comment from the woman who discussed nursing on the bus?

    Was responding to some of the stupid crap Rodeo said, actually, but sure whatever floats your boat. Far be it for me to deprive someone of a good baseless rant! Also liked the “rapist” touch, because it makes it super clear that you would obviously totally never create a strawman in this discussion. ^^

  302. @EG

    Well, as I recall from the original research so do, but its not my point. This culture supports nursing by men. There is nothing wrong with that. There’s enormous stigma about in the west which is sad given that apparently a growing number of men would like to have that connection with their child. I think it would be good to support that desire so I’m trying to dispel the myth that it doesn’t happen and that there would be no good reason for it.

  303. EG: Am I the only one who read the comment from the woman who discussed nursing on the bus? She wants to nurse him on the bus. She feels like she can’t because of all the judgmental assholes who will accuse her of abusing her son. I can’t imagine where she would get the idea that such people exist, but apparently she has. This makes her unhappy.

    fff I didn’t read that closely enough. That is sad.

    Again, these shitty attitudes, hurting real women and babies. Not theoretical. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

  304. FashionablyEvil 11.29.2011 at 2:14 pm

    I think a spoof of Whip My Hair called “Whip My Boobs” would be pretty funny.

    Hence your nym, I suppose. Now I have that song in my head and it will not go away. I agree it would be funny but can’t imagine how you’d keep the video on youtube for more than 10 seconds.

    I’ve played the “stop the bigotry or I will not see you” game with one relative, and by what I like to call “mutual agreement” we don’t see each other any more. For the daughter above that may not be an option, and family pressure may mean she has to apologise. In her place I’d fauxpologising as much as possible, ideally via the “I’m sorry you’re such an arsehole that being called on your bigotry upsets you” route. It’s something I’d support of my younger relatives were in that position (which may be why I don’t get asked to babysit 🙂

    The breastfeeding thing I’m on the politeness side. If it makes your hosts uncomfortable it’d better be a really important thing for you if you do it anyway. And FWIW, …-ist bigotry counts.

  305. Sandy, tmc, Li, EG, Rodeo – whom did I miss? – y’all are AWESOME. Thanks for maintaining sanity in the face of all manner of ugly, shocking, misogynist attacks.

    All of you who keep insisting you know what the childer of internet strangers need, better than they do? You don’t. I know it’s a hard thing to hear, but you’re just wrong.

  306. Because people think they’re being harmed when they see women breastfeeding beyond the age they think the kid should nurse? 3 days, 6 weeks, couple months, handful of years. Doesn’t matter. They don’t think you should do it because it’s gross/abusive/inappropriate. Granted, researchers and anthropologists and mothers and their babies have the exact opposite opinion, of course. Hell, you could even say that they have facts and rigorous scientific research to back them up.

    Come to think of it, I’ll bet those studies are faulty because they forgot to include the question of how people like Azalea and Bagelsan feel about it. Unless you’re taking their opinions about how you raise your kid into consideration, you’re probably a shitty parent and the kid would be better off in foster care.

    Wait, what’s the abuse rate in foster care again? 3-4 times that of the general population? At least they aren’t getting breastfed at inappropriate ages!

  307. I get a weird vibe when the mother talks about how emotionally attached to and possessive of her breasts her children are. Maybe it’s not abusive but it does not seem healthy for child development at all.

    Don’t get me wrong, creeps me out as well. There’s a 101 reasons why I don’t want kids and why I don’t like being around them, and their completely narcissistic and selfish worldview is one of those reasons (I know it’s age-appropriate. I still don’t like it in large doses).

    But, as people here have said, nursing at older ages tends to be about comfort and bonding. Lord knows my sister and I at those ages could not have our dolls or teddy bears out of our sight at those ages without losing our shits. Makes sense that they’d be as attached to their mom’s boobs. Squicky as I think it is.

    For that matter, I’m also pretty sure that I didn’t really respect my mother as a person at that age either. If she had breastfed into those ages, I wouldn’t think twice about thinking that I’m entitled to her breasts whenever I wanted them. Hell, I’m pushing middle age and I still get annoyed when my mother won’t drop everything and do what I want her to. That’s the nature of motherhood, I hear. Forever being needed by another person.

  308. Yes, breastfeeding toddlers and/or expecting adults not to freak out on or hit a child who tries to touch them inappropriately is the reason we have abusive “older boys and men.”

    FML.

    Bagelsan:
    Buthey,I’mlikingthesequelwegotgoingto“TheOpenSourceBoobProject:SonoftheOpenSourceBoobs”!Teachingtoddlersthattheydeservefreeaccesstoatitatanymomentcouldnevergowrong;godknowswealreadysocializeolderboysandmentobelievethat.:p

  309. Rodeo: I know a ton of mothers who completely disagree with every statement here. They believe that being a mother DOES mean that their bodies are at the mercies of their kids, and it makes them happy to be able to provide that for them.

    Then they subscribe to some fucked-up, antifeminist notions about bodily autonomy, then. Especially if they think that every woman should feel the same way — even when it’s not their kid who wants to nurse on them.

  310. “History tells us there are plenty of women in the world who can’t be tusted with their own children, they’ve killed them, raped them, tortured them, maimed them, injured them, neglected them,”

    What on earth are you getting at here, that just because some women have done these awful things that all women should be subject to heightened scrutiny and presumed to be sociopathic, murderous criminals unless they prove themselves to be otherwise to you? Do you not see how this line of logic has historically been used to further a misogynistic agenda to discredit and keep women under the thumb of men and society for hundreds and even thousands of years?

    What utter and outrageous nonsense.

    “So you want to raise sons who will demand to know why they cant suck on someone’s nipples in public? They have a right to know why the dictator wont give them access to the breasts they so rightfully deserve?”

    This sounds like a close cousin to the old song that boys shouldn’t be breastfed because it will turn them teh gay. I happen to have four sons, and none of them think that they have carte blanche to do whatever they want whenever they want to me or anyone else. Each of the first 4 were breastfed for a year, and they are all doing well, thanks though for the faux concern trolling. What I’m sure is far more likely to be the outcome of their being breastfed is a better appreciation and understanding of the biological reality that the sole purpose of breasts is not for the sexual titillation and enjoyment of men.

    But you go on assuming that all breastfeeding mothers are pervs and that all of their sons will turn out to be misogynistic, domineering creeps. Because you seem utterly insistent upon thinking so despite what others here havesaid here to the contrary, Azalea.

  311. Then they subscribe to some fucked-up, antifeminist notions about bodily autonomy, then. Especially if they think that every woman should feel the same way — even when it’s not their kid who wants to nurse on them.

    Or maybe they just disagree with you about how they want to mother their kids? Is that maybe an option?

    Honestly zuzu. I have a hard time taking you seriously when you take a value or opinion that’s different from your own and run screaming down the slippery slope of “anti-feminist, backwards woman who wants to force all other women to agree with them.”

    Does feminism really not have enough room to welcome women who really honestly genuinely seem to be affirmed and valued by the belief that their bodies can provide everything their kid needs? I know a couple of sexual assault survivors who found such a thing to be an extremely valuable way to reclaim their bodies and find beauty in them. Doesn’t work for everyone, but I love knowing that it works for some.

  312. You know, that is what this all seems to be about. Your “weird vibe.” We get it. You find it squicky. Stop trying to pretend you have any proof extended breastfeeding, seemingly defined here as “the age that squicks Bagelsan,” is harmful to this nebulous goalpost of “child development” you keep bringing up.

    Children often feel they have ownership of the maternal body, whether or not they are still breastfed. I was only breastfed until 3 months, but my mother assures me I viewed her lap/hugs as my personal property at 5, 6, 7. Teaching empathy and respect for the body of others is a long process, ffs.

    Anyway, I’ve seen that vid you linked to. Yeah, that mother is….odd, and that footage squicks me out too. And those kids could use some kicking out of the nest. But the the breastfeeding seems to be just part and parcel of the strange whole. Further, one woman’s anecdote, so off it was put in a *documentary* does NOT say anything about the children or habits of women in general who breastfeed past infancy. (She ended by bf-ding them until 10 and 7, IIRC, and had them in a later documentary.)

    Bagelsan:
    Wellhere’saninterestingvideowheretheytalktotwogirlswhowerebreastfeduntilage5and7.http://open2it.com/videos/59-controversial-behavior/122-extended-breast-feeding.html

    Saywhatyouwill,butIgetaweirdvibewhenthemothertalksabouthowemotionallyattachedtoandpossessiveofherbreastsherchildrenare.Maybeit’snotabusivebutitdoesnotseemhealthyforchilddevelopmentatall.

  313. Bagelsan: Also liked the “rapist” touch, because it makes it super clear that you would obviously totally never create a strawman in this discussion. ^^

    Actually the bizarre strawman there was Azalea’s, who posited that boy children who are allowed to nurse on demand will undoubtedly grow up to believe all the boobies in the world are belong to them. If that were true, yes, those men would undoubtedly be rapists.

    zuzu: Especially if they think that every woman should feel the same way

    Rodeo said nothing about them expecting or wanting all other women to feel or behave the same way. The same cannot be said for the anti-full term nursing people here, who are saying they know better then individual women when breastfeeding should stop or when it becomes “creepy.”

    tinfoil hattie: Sandy, tmc, Li, EG, Rodeo – whom did I miss? – y’all are AWESOME. Thanks for maintaining sanity in the face of all manner of ugly, shocking, misogynist attacks.

    This. I’m very grateful to all of you guys as well. The accusations and insults flung have really shocked and flustered me. As if these terrible destructive attitudes on a feminist forum weren’t enough.

  314. Rodeo: Does feminism really not have enough room to welcome women who really honestly genuinely seem to be affirmed and valued by the belief that their bodies can provide everything their kid needs?

    Believing that your body can provide everything your kid needs is a far cry from believing that you and every woman around you must then make your bodies available to any child on demand at all times because those bodies can sustain children.

    Women who enjoy that can enjoy it without generalizing it to “because I am a mother, I must do this.” Or, as you argued earlier, that any woman who objected to a strange toddler lifting up her shirt was being a bitch.

    You’re being awfully disingenuous.

  315. Sandy: Rodeo said nothing about them expecting or wanting all other women to feel or behave the same way. The same cannot be said for the anti-full term nursing people here, who are saying they know better then individual women when breastfeeding should stop or when it becomes “creepy.”

    Actually, Rodeo has in fact said that some women in her circle get awfully peeved when another woman objects to her privacy being invaded by a child looking to nurse. “Bitch” was the term used.

    By the way, you keep talking about “full-term” nursing, but I haven’t seen that term explained. I have seen WHO figures of anywhere from 1-6 years being recommended. What do you mean when you talk about “full-term” nursing?

  316. I’M being disingenuous?!?!?! Wow.

    I have respected your opinion for years, zuzu, but lately you have gone off the rails. I mean, I could connect these extremely easy to find dots for you (mothers who like keeping their bodies available to their kids =! hating on bitchy women who hit kids), but I know you’re smarter than that. I can only assume that you’re intentionally sounding an idiot in order to pick fights with low-hanging fruit.

  317. Actually, Rodeo has in fact said that some women in her circle get awfully peeved when another woman objects to her privacy being invaded by a child looking to nurse.

    Thanks for providing more evidence for my suspicion that you’re intentionally trying to sound like an idiot who can’t read or make inferences.

  318. Rodeo: I can only assume that you’re intentionally sounding an idiot in order to pick fights with low-hanging fruit.

    Low-hanging fruit indeed.

    Again, you seem to be unable to grasp that there is a distinction between “I like being able to nurse my child at all times” and “I am a mother, and mothers have no privacy because their bodies sustain their children.” You seem to be unable to understand just what I’m objecting to. I mean, you didn’t call those women bitches just because they hit kids; you called them bitches because you believed they were just a little too into their privacy. It wasn’t until you were asked to explain that you revealed the hitting bit.

    Of course, you’re an expert on the behavior of young children even though you can’t stand to be around them, so there we go.

  319. I have a genuinely hard time believing that everyone on this thread believes that continuing breastfeeding indefinitely is great and has nothing to say about the child’s development. But evidenced by the reluctance of anyone to say what stage of development at which extended breastfeeding might be a sign of maladjustment. I don’t particularly care what your bigoted mother-in-law thinks, I want to know what the breastfeeding majority who is pro extended breastfeeding thinks is a reasonable time to cut off a kid who would be perfectly happy to keep going.

    I’ll start. To me, a 4-5 year old is capable of finding alternative ways of soothing that don’t require my tit, if they haven’t already decided they’re independent already. I look sideways at kids that age that still use bottles and pacifiers at that age a majority of the time too, because to me it’s more a sign that the parents can’t set limits or parameters for their use.

  320. librarygoose: Onceagain,developmentally,yourculturehasfuckalltodowithyourbaby.Babieshavenoculture.

    We’re talking about a 5-year old, who absolutely is acculturated. A baby is not, I agree.

    I understand there have been a lot of harsh words exchanged in this thread, but I’ve been polite, and I hope you will, too. The point of my post was that it’s reasonable to ask a woman breastfeeding a 5-year-old to do so in private, and I stand by that point.

  321. “But evidenced by the reluctance of anyone to say what stage of development at which extended breastfeeding might be a sign of maladjustment, that could be the case.”

    There. Whoops.

  322. There is some obvious cart-before-the-horse going on here.

    There is no reason *related to sex* for breasts to produce pleasurable sensations when sucked. The process by which sperm is transferred into a woman’s reproductive tract to fertilize an egg does not require the use of breasts at *all*.

    The only biological reason why sucking on breasts feels good is that sex and breastfeeding are *both* part of reproduction, and people who experience pleasure at doing things necessary for reproduction are more likely to reproduce.

    In other words, women do not get sexual pleasure out of breastfeeding a baby, they get nursing pleasure out of having an adult sexual partner suck their nipples during sex. The pleasure some women experience some of the time when they nurse is *designed* to be experienced while nursing. It is not designed to be experienced during sex; that’s just a happy side effect, just like we weren’t *designed* to be able to use our nifty opposable thumbs and dextrous fingers to give ourselves sexual gratification, but opposable thumbs and dextrous fingers are damn useful for many applications outside masturbating and just happen to be useful for masturbating as well.

    When we say “I feel uncomfortable with the notion of women breastfeeding because they might be getting sexual pleasure out of it”, we’re saying “The use of breasts in sex, which was not their primary design, is more important and valuable for consideration than the use of breasts in nursing, which is what they were designed for.” And since most women are having sex with men, it seems once again to be emphasizng the parts of female reproduction and pleasure that are important to men, rather than the parts that are important to women.

    I breastfed my kids until they were 2. I found that it produced a pleasure that was, mostly, relaxing and sweet, not intense and exciting. I also found that if I nursed my child right after having had an orgasm (which was easy for me to do because my baby slept in my bedroom, and while they had their own crib to go to, I often had them sleep in my bed so I could nurse them without losing much sleep), the afterglow was so mind-boggling good that I could *feel* my brain drugging me with opiates. This does not mean I ever experienced sexual arousal on looking at my child, nor did I ever feel any desire to touch my children’s genitals or have them touch mine. The pleasure a woman feels when breastfeeding does *not* work, psychologically, the same way that sexual pleasure does, even if the sensations are objectively identical; women can become aroused from looking at a sexual partner who they have either enjoyed sex with in the past, or imagine enjoying sex with in the future, but women don’t become *aroused* from looking at their babies (not unless they actually are pedophiles, and statistics suggest that the female pedo population is incredibly low. There are a lot more female hebephiles, women who prey on teenagers who are biologically capable of sex but are psychologically at such a severe disadvantage that they can’t give meaningful consent, than female pedophiles, women who are actually attracted to pre-adolescent children.)

    Breastfeeding was biologically designed to be pleasurable for women because otherwise women would be less likely to do it. It isn’t pleasurable for all women because social pressure and the fact that we’re smart enough to know that not breastfeeding our baby will kill them (before the invention of formula) and the fact that we’re capable of getting other women to do the work for us means that women who do not enjoy breastfeeding are still passing on genes, just maybe not as many in aggregate as women who do. (In comparison, men who do not enjoy ejaculation simply don’t reproduce, so the percentage of men who can’t or don’t want to experience orgasms is really, really tiny.)

    There is nothing inappropriate, ever, about allowing a child who wants to nurse to do so, even if you have *orgasms* from nursing. You’re *designed* to like it. If you don’t, this does not make you defective — the natural human range includes many women who don’t — but if you do, this means that your breasts are doing exactly what breasts are supposed to do. People who perceive a woman’s pleasure in nursing as pedophilia have it totally goddamn backwards; pleasure in nursing isn’t about sex, it’s about nursing, no matter how much of the wiring it shares with sex and no matter how much a sexual partner can trigger it during sex.

    Now, forcing a child to nurse because it gives you pleasure would be coercive, abusive and would probably fuck the child up. But it’s not really easy to force a child to nurse. Little kids do what they want when they want to. It’s a concern if a ten year old is nursing because a ten year old can be pressured by parents into doing something they don’t really want to more easily than a small child — you can drag small children around and manhandle them by force, but you can’t get them to do something *they* have to initiate unless they want to, which is why you can demand that a ten year old urinate RIGHT NOW but you cannot do the same to a three year old, and why it is easier to get your ten year old to eat vegetables.

  323. You know, that is what this all seems to be about. Your “weird vibe.” We get it. You find it squicky.

    Or you could in fact read some of the actual reasons I’ve given for why super extended breastfeeding is questionable, especially when the only benefit to the child could be easily replicated without treating women like chew toys. But nah, let’s pretend I’m sceered of boobs instead (my own chest is a thing of terror, of course.)

    When a woman is getting her self-esteem boosted by her 8-year-old child suckling on/naming/drawing/grabbing for her breasts, and when her 8-year-old is literally upset when her mom puts on a bra, then yeah I find that squicky. At 8 a lot of girls are starting to develop their own breasts, and definitely starting to understand that breast stimulation can be a source of sexual pleasure. If a child is touching their parent in a way that they know can — and in fact sometimes does — bring the parent sexual pleasure (or maybe in a way that is bringing the child sexual pleasure herself) then I think that that touching can bare a little more examination than just yelling “OMG stop judging women!!!” :p

    C’mon, at least admit that letting your pubescent kid suck on your nipples is somewhat different than having a baby or toddler nurse from them. Disapproval of the former does not mean disapproval of the latter. And frankly, if you think that acknowledging the existence of child abuse — and the possibility of it being done by a mother — threatens to destroy breastfeeding entirely then maybe you should take a breather and go have a liedown.

  324. I want to know what the breastfeeding majority who is pro extended breastfeeding thinks is a reasonable time to cut off a kid who would be perfectly happy to keep going.

    Yup, I’m still waiting on that one too. A lot of the pro-extended breastfeeding sites I’ve glanced at say “breastfeed forever! It’s amazing!” and some mothers are quoted saying “even until he’s a teen” so really I have no idea if there’s any reasonable cutoff in some peoples’ minds.

  325. Bagelsan: Also liked the “rapist” touch, because it makes it super clear that you would obviously totally never create a strawman in this discussion. ^^

    So you’re claiming that your reference to teaching teenage boys and grown men that they can have access to any woman’s body at any point they want wasn’t a reference to rapists and rape culture? What was it a reference to, pray tell?

    Bagelsan: I get a weird vibe when the mother talks about how emotionally attached to and possessive of her breasts her children are. Maybe it’s not abusive but it does not seem healthy for child development at all.

    Well, then, if Someone on the Internet gets a “weird vibe” and thinks it’s not healthy for child development, what more need be said? Certainly nothing can trump the “weird vibe” a random internet person gets from a youtube video when it comes to assessing child development.

    zuzu: Or, as you argued earlier, that any woman who objected to a strange toddler lifting up her shirt was being a bitch.

    She said that any woman who hit the kid and then demanded a hug from the kid and then got huffy when the kid’s mother wouldn’t make the kid give the hug was a bitch, (and I agree; what, your boobs and body are private, but you get to go around demanding that kids hug you? Fuck that noise. You don’t want to nurse? Fine. That’s your right. Hitting is not, and if the kid doesn’t want to hug, that’s her right.). That’s a pretty far cry from just “objecting” to a toddler lifting up her shirt.

    Lauren: I want to know what the breastfeeding majority who is pro extended breastfeeding thinks is a reasonable time to cut off a kid who would be perfectly happy to keep going.

    I answered this question. When either party involved in the breast-feeding wants to, for whatever reason she wants to. Want to stop breastfeeding your baby at two months? Go ahead. Want to go on breastfeeding for four years? Go ahead. Your kid is twelve months old and now that she’s able to get her hands on homemade chicken soup, she is completely bored with and uninterested in your boob? Sounds to me like it’s time to stop. Since nobody has actually produced any evidence of harm, despite calling breastfeeding moms pedophiles and allying them with rapists of children, I don’t see any reason to set up some kind of universal cut-off.

    Human beings are not mass produced to be completely identical in some kind of factory setting. We have different needs and desires and preferences and cultures, and all those things come into play when making a personal decision about childcare.

    Bagelsan: Or you could in fact read some of the actual reasons I’ve given for why super extended breastfeeding is questionable, especially when the only benefit to the child could be easily replicated without treating women like chew toys.

    You’ve given suppositions, not reasons. Reasons would involve showing that your suppositions happen in real life and cause harm. And really? A child breastfeeding consensually from its mother is treating her like a chew toy? How do you figure?

  326. Oh, before we go any further, can we stop with the oxytocin thing? Wasn’t that invented by Republicans? I am very surprised to see the ‘oxytocin wahhh’ woo here, on an ostensibly liberal blog.

  327. EG: I answered this question. When either party involved in the breast-feeding wants to, for whatever reason she wants to. Want to stop breastfeeding your baby at two months? Go ahead. Want to go on breastfeeding for four years? Go ahead. Your kid is twelve months old and now that she’s able to get her hands on homemade chicken soup, she is completely bored with and uninterested in your boob? Sounds to me like it’s time to stop. Since nobody has actually produced any evidence of harm, despite calling breastfeeding moms pedophiles and allying them with rapists of children, I don’t see any reason to set up some kind of universal cut-off.

    Human beings are not mass produced to be completely identical in some kind of factory setting. We have different needs and desires and preferences and cultures, and all those things come into play when making a personal decision about childcare.

    No, but guidelines are commonly advised.

    The thing is, your examples here are all within the common guidelines for weaning now. Those of us who find this a little unbelievable are all referring to a breastfeeding relationship in the OP that appears to be quite beyond those guidelines.

    “Want to stop breastfeeding your baby at two months? Go ahead. Want to go on breastfeeding for four years? Go ahead.”

    Want to keep going until your child is in kindergarten? Go ahead. First grade? Go ahead. Third grade? Go ahead. Junior high? Go ahead. Since nobody has actually produced any evidence of harm, I don’t see any reason to set up some kind of universal cut-off. None of these examples raise any red flags whatsoever, including the OP, where a woman breastfed her five year old at the dinner table at her in-laws during their first introduction, which is neither an issue of boundaries nor etiquette. There is nothing specific to say about any of it, because breastfeeding is benign, positive, and always awesome for everyone no matter what because feminism.

  328. Okay? If it’s that important to everyone, I’ll share. I think breastfeeding past 4 years is squicky. Here are a list of things I will do about it if someone breastfeeds past the age of 4 in my presence: make sure the mother is comfortable, tell anyone who has a problem with it that they can look away, and if anyone calls me out because the micro-expressions on my face are showing my squickiness, I’ll apologize and explain that I feel squicky but I respect her breastfeeding relationship.

    Then I’ll call the cops and get the bitch carted off to jail and the kid sent into a foster home with strangers.

    Zuzu, I can’t even …… wow. Look, re-read what I’ve already written on the topic and ask an honest question if you’re confused. In the long term, I suggest developing some level of self-confidence that allows you hear a disagreement about opinion or value without assuming that they’re either a total asshole who hasn’t reached your level of feminist zen self-awareness or that their entire reason for living their lives according to their own values is to piss you off.

  329. Want to keep going until your child is in kindergarten? Go ahead. First grade? Go ahead. Third grade? Go ahead. Junior high? Go ahead. Since nobody has actually produced any evidence of harm, I don’t see any reason to set up some kind of universal cut-off.

    I’ve had a few friends who are comfortable with nudity around their parents. As in they and their parents saw no problem walking through the house naked after getting a shower. Or walking half-naked from their room to the laundry room to get a pair of underwear. Or whatever. Doesn’t everyone think of sex when they see their dad naked or when they nurse from their mother? I hate it when families that I’m not part of run their households different from the way mine do.

  330. Rodeo, I’m pretty certain that zuzu isn’t operating from some level of confusion or idiocy, but is frustrated with the lines of argumentation from people that are really reluctant to get specific or are quick to hyperbolize (which isn’t a word, but let’s go with it). I don’t think zuzu has a problem with breastfeeding, but does have a problem with others telling her that her breasts are not her own, what they’re “meant” for, and ignoring that this is more of an etiquette issue than a breastfeeding issue. If you go all the way back up the thread, she makes that extremely clear. So yes, you’re being disingenuous.

    I personally have a problem with someone whose interest in children is admittedly and openly little arguing with mothers about how they should feel about their children, breastfeeding, and their bodily autonomy. If your expertise is limited to “my friend says”, this may not be the hill you fight on.

  331. Alara Rogers: It is not designed to be experienced during sex; that’s just a happy side effect, just like we weren’t *designed* to be able to use our nifty opposable thumbs and dextrous fingers to give ourselves sexual gratification

    Just out of curiosity, do you really see evolution in terms of “design”? As if there’s some kind of intent behind it? In any event, how are you so sure what any given multi-purposed bodily sensation or capability was “designed” for? Were you there when the first being with opposable thumbs first grabbed something, to see what it was?

  332. Right, but no one has told zuzu that her breasts are not her own, and if she has a problem with being a mammal who has breasts solely to breastfeed, well, I can’t help but mock a person who refuses to accept what they are.

    I’m not sure I have been arguing with mothers about breastfeeding, unless you and Azalea speak for all mothers, which would probably come as a surprise to the majority of mothers in this thread and in my own life. Sucks that you have a problem with the fact that I have an interest in protecting children’s/mothers’ rights even though I don’t like being around kids. Must be pretty hard for you.

  333. Rodeo: Right, but no one has told zuzu that her breasts are not her own, and if she has a problem with being a mammal who has breasts solely to breastfeed, well, I can’t help but mock a person who refuses to accept what they are.

    Breasts are not “solely” for breastfeeding. As sentient beings, women define their breasts, as well as the rest of their bodies, along a great many planes. Most feminists fight to make sure that women aren’t solely defined by their reproductive capabilities. This line of argument is curiously anti-feminist.

    Sure, no one said that “her breasts are not her own”, but you did state that we shouldn’t expect children to respect other people’s boundaries, which is false and runs completely contrary to 100% of parenting advice out there, both good and bad. Also 100% contrary to what children are capable of from about 1 year old onward. Children are imperfect and behave imperfectly when it comes to any set of rules, but it’s completely normal and recommended that we teach children to understand bodily autonomy.

    I also get the impression that she was a little piqued by your freedom with throwing around gendered slurs in this space, because I was as well.

    Rodeo: I’m not sure I have been arguing with mothers about breastfeeding, unless you and Azalea speak for all mothers, which would probably come as a surprise to the majority of mothers in this thread and in my own life. Sucks that you have a problem with the fact that I have an interest in protecting children’s/mothers’ rights even though I don’t like being around kids. Must be pretty hard for you.

    I have no problem with you or your intent, but I do think your advocacy is warped since your interest in children is nil and your understanding of children’s development is demonstrably limited. You don’t appear to be amenable to correcting these limitations either.

  334. I can’t help it. I’ve been thinking about those Little Britain sketches for this entire thread:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGVfVyyP-Jg

    Not that there’s anything wrong with the sort of bonding depicted, of course.

    In all seriousness, I do understand very well the fear of people thinking that being close to your children is inappropriate. It’s not like I ever advertised the fact that when my son was as old as 10 or 11, I often used to have to lie down in his bed with him until he fell asleep, especially after my ex and I first separated. And he still used to come in to my room in the middle of the night to sleep in my bed when he was even older than that. And I certainly didn’t want to advertise the fact that I didn’t completely hate it! (He’s 21 now, and it still does my heart good to watch him sleep sometimes when he’s home.)

  335. Alara Rogers @356: Thank you for the explanation of the hormonal effects of breastfeeding and how they affect the mother. I wasn’t comfortable with the way that this “sexual gratification/arousal” beef was going, but I think people were struggling to explain these effects, which are completely normal, in a way that makes sense. Especially this:

    Now, forcing a child to nurse because it gives you pleasure would be coercive, abusive and would probably fuck the child up. But it’s not really easy to force a child to nurse. Little kids do what they want when they want to. It’s a concern if a ten year old is nursing because a ten year old can be pressured by parents into doing something they don’t really want to more easily than a small child — you can drag small children around and manhandle them by force, but you can’t get them to do something *they* have to initiate unless they want to, which is why you can demand that a ten year old urinate RIGHT NOW but you cannot do the same to a three year old, and why it is easier to get your ten year old to eat vegetables.

    One of the reasons, personally, that this conversation has gone totally off the rails is that our definitions are skewed. We still haven’t decided what “full term” breastfeeding is compared to “extended breastfeeding”, and a lot of people are really reluctant, for whatever reason, to agree that the relationship should not continue indefinitely. Personally, defining what we mean when we say “child” would be helpful. In my line of work, a “child” is a dependent between the ages of birth and 21. It seems like some people here are talking past one another because of the fungibility of the terminology getting thrown around.

  336. @Lolagirl–

    If a child can’t self-comfort by the age of 5, or breastfeeding is the only form of comfort, then the kid’s a social mutant and the mom probably is too. People to be checked off the guest list, for sure.

    For me, the issue isn’t about boobs, it’s about a child and mother publicly engaging in a behavior that’s largely reserved for infants and toddlers. If she gave him a pacifier I’d be equally creeped out. If she changed his diaper on the floor, I’d be concerned. If she had to feed him with a spoon in a high-chair, I’d be worried (assuming he’s able-bodied and neurotypical, of course).

    The other thing is that the mom can MAKE the choice to buck social norms and breastfeed in public till age 5. At age 5 a person has some right to be in charge of their own image. The job of a parents is to help teach a child to be aware of social norms. When I was five I went through a stage where I wore dresses with sweatshirts over them and jeans. And my mom said, “Honey, people think that’s weird.”
    “I don’t care.”
    “You sure? They might make fun of you.”
    “I like my dress.”
    “Okay then. If you like it, you can wear it.”

  337. Also: if Rodeo really thinks that most 3-year olds are “toddlers,” it’s obvious that she truly doesn’t know much about child development. Any of the self-respecting 3-year olds I ever spent time with when my son was around that age would have been furious if anyone referred to them as a toddler — or if anyone thought they were incapable of listening to other people or “giving a shit” about people think.

  338. EG: She said that any woman who hit the kid and then demanded a hug from the kid and then got huffy when the kid’s mother wouldn’t make the kid give the hug was a bitch

    Actually, first she described the women in her circle who weren’t down with sharing their breasts whenever as bitches, and it wasn’t until I asked her what she meant by that that she revealed the hitting/hugging. And yes, that’s fucked up. But so is being disdainful of women’s right to be free of prying toddler hands just because toddlers associate breasts with food.

  339. Bagelsan: if you think that acknowledging the existence of child abuse — and the possibility of it being done by a mother — threatens to destroy breastfeeding entirely then maybe you should take a breather and go have a liedown.

    No one is saying it threatens to destroy breastfeeding. No one is denying mothers are capable of committing child abuse. We’re saying this fixation you have on extended nursing as potential child abuse serves to oppress women. Women like me and antiprincess. Not that I’m doing full-term nursing at the moment but since you’ve said you’d like my kid taken away, yup, I’m going to put myself down there as a woman you are helping oppress. I don’t know if you’re scared of breasts and I don’t care, whatever the reason you have spent this whole thread heavily concern trolling and perpetuating stigma.

    Alara Rogers: In other words, women do not get sexual pleasure out of breastfeeding a baby, they get nursing pleasure out of having an adult sexual partner suck their nipples during sex.

    Alara, your whole post was thoughtful and informative but I especially liked this bit of context and perspective.

    Lauren: I want to know what the breastfeeding majority who is pro extended breastfeeding thinks is a reasonable time to cut off a kid who would be perfectly happy to keep going.

    Lauren: But evidenced by the reluctance of anyone to say what stage of development at which extended breastfeeding might be a sign of maladjustment.

    Random people being lighthearted on breastfeeding sites aside, who nurses teenagers? C’mon, be real. No one here has produced any evidence of nursing ever being harmful. No one has any evidence of a woman ever abusively pressuring a child to continue breastfeeding. No one has evidence of full-term nursing ever presenting as a sign or symptom of maladjustment, but if it were to, and I’ll give the benefit of the doubt that somewhere, sometime it might, that would have to be such a deeply fucked up situation I have no doubt there would be a whole cloud of issues and signals of problems around it.

    But again, every expert and group cited here supports more breastfeeding, not less. So by continuing to belabor the “But when does it become baaaad?” question, we’re trying to address a problem that doesn’t really exist. Maybe we would do better to focus on actual problems, like kids being removed from their families because the wrong busybody sees an older toddler nursing and flips out.

    Rodeo: Right, but no one has told zuzu that her breasts are not her own,

    This. What is the confusion here? Nowhere did Rodeo claim to be an expert on children, either.

    The phrase “full term nursing:” afaik, full-term nursing is synonymous with extended nursing, without the outside-the-norm quality implied by the word extended.

    Lauren: Also 100% contrary to what children are capable of from about 1 year old onward.

    I sincerely hope to instill a profound respect for other people’s boundaries in my daughter, but … 1? Really? I have no firsthand experience but my instinct is that it’s going to take a lot longer than that, and be a fairly sprawling, nuanced, ongoing process.

  340. Rodeo: Zuzu, I can’t even …… wow. Look, re-read what I’ve already written on the topic and ask an honest question if you’re confused. In the long term, I suggest developing some level of self-confidence that allows you hear a disagreement about opinion or value without assuming that they’re either a total asshole who hasn’t reached your level of feminist zen self-awareness or that their entire reason for living their lives according to their own values is to piss you off.

    Bless your heart.

  341. Lauren: We still haven’t decided what “full term” breastfeeding is compared to “extended breastfeeding”,

    I responded to this, actually, my post is in moderation. They are no different.

  342. Rodeo: Right, but no one has told zuzu that her breasts are not her own, and if she has a problem with being a mammal who has breasts solely to breastfeed, well, I can’t help but mock a person who refuses to accept what they are.

    O_o

    Oh, really. Bless your heart.

    Low hanging fruit, indeed.

  343. Sandy: The phrase “full term nursing:” afaik, full-term nursing is synonymous with extended nursing, without the outside-the-norm quality implied by the word extended.

    That’s tautological. If full term nursing = extended nursing, what does extended nursing mean? When you use words like “full term” or “extended,” they connote some fixed period of time. What are those periods of time, is what we’re trying to get at.

  344. Lauren: No, but guidelines are commonly advised.

    Not by the AAP or the WHO, two groups that issue, whaddaya know, guidelines for nursing.

    Lauren: Since nobody has actually produced any evidence of harm, I don’t see any reason to set up some kind of universal cut-off. None of these examples raise any red flags whatsoever, including the OP, where a woman breastfed her five year old at the dinner table at her in-laws during their first introduction, which is neither an issue of boundaries nor etiquette.

    Etiquette is debatable. Boundaries? You really don’t think that should be up to the mother to decide? Also remember that no one else in the situation attempted to set any boundaries for themselves by telling her they were uncomfortable with it.

    Don’t you think there should be evidence of harm for us to seek to police what women do with their bodies? How women raise their children?

  345. zuzu: they connote some fixed period of time. What are those periods of time, is what we’re trying to get at.

    Do they? I would have simply said they mean “longer than average.”

  346. Sure, no one said that “her breasts are not her own”, but you did state that we shouldn’t expect children to respect other people’s boundaries, which is false and runs completely contrary to 100% of parenting advice out there, both good and bad. Also 100% contrary to what children are capable of from about 1 year old onward. Children are imperfect and behave imperfectly when it comes to any set of rules, but it’s completely normal and recommended that we teach children to understand bodily autonomy.

    I know, endorse, and agree with all of the above, and any indication that I didn’t was pure shitty communication on my part. Mostly because I know that kids know about bodily autonomy, they just don’t seem to remember and/or care and that’s usually the behavior that I’m dealing with. (Which is fine by me, I expect nothing less from that age.)

    your understanding of children’s development is demonstrably limited.

    I work for kids/mothers; I know quite a bit about children’s/mothers’ development. If it doesn’t come off in the comment section of Feministe that I do, well, I’ll be sure to avoid a wholesale copy/paste of my comments the next time I write a policy analysis.

    I think another barrier in this conversation is that some people come from a biocultural perspective of human society that investigates the role that biology and evolution plays in how we relate to kids, and others are speaking from a purely social/cultural one. Breasts exist to breastfeed only. That this offends people is pretty worrisome to me. But yes, of course, duh, each woman is going to feel differently about her own special snowflake-y personal breasts. I’m not begrudging that, though we all seem to know a few kids who do, since, as Librarygoose said, kids are running mostly on biology, not culture/social norms.

    At age 5 a person has some right to be in charge of their own image. The job of a parents is to help teach a child to be aware of social norms.

    Karak, I think this is quite a fair point.

  347. Sandy: Also remember that no one else in the situation attempted to set any boundaries for themselves by telling her they were uncomfortable with it.

    And yet she realized they were uncomfortable with it, because they were all shocked and she explained the allergy thing. You do realize it’s considered rude to point out these sorts of faux pas? And just because someone is too gobsmacked to say anything doesn’t mean they weren’t uncomfortable or failed to police their own boundaries. Who would expect that?

  348. Sandy: Do they? I would have simply said they mean “longer than average.”

    A “full term” pregnancy is not “longer than average.” An “extended” edition DVD is not “longer than an average” DVD, it’s longer than the theatrical cut.

    But again, if something is “longer than average,” there’s an average. What’s the average? What determines that? You keep using terms you don’t want to define.

  349. Lauren: I’ll start. To me, a 4-5 year old is capable of finding alternative ways of soothing that don’t require my tit, if they haven’t already decided they’re independent already. I look sideways at kids that age that still use bottles and pacifiers at that age a majority of the time too, because to me it’s more a sign that the parents can’t set limits or parameters for their use.

    THIS.

  350. Rodeo: Breasts exist to breastfeed only. That this offends people is pretty worrisome to me.

    In other words, you’re back to saying that our breasts are not our own and that they exist solely for the use of infants and children. If we refuse to accept this, we’re just being offensive special snowflakey prima donnas.

    Really, I’d love to see the source for this “the sole reason for your breasts to exist is to breastfeed” statement.

    I find it worrisome that you don’t see how glaringly antifeminist that is.

    1. Breasts exist to breastfeed only. That this offends people is pretty worrisome to me.

      Yeah, what? Breasts do not exist solely to breastfeed. That is one of their purposes, but they are also sources of sexual pleasure for a lot of women. And have others have said, human beings weren’t simply POOF created with each body part serving a particular purpose. The purposes of various body parts are often complex and not solely for One Thing Only.

  351. zuzu: And yet she realized they were uncomfortable with it, because they were all shocked and she explained the allergy thing.

    We don’t know how much she realized. For all we know she registered their gazes as interest. We have no way of knowing how perceptive or saavy this woman is, although given the stigma against extended nursing you’re probably right, she likely had at least an inkling. However, we do know that they said nothing and now (at least to me it sounds like) want to get her to stop nursing. I really hope they mean in front of the family rather then full stop.

    I’ve been poking about for terminology and the one definition I’ve found for full term nursing/extended nursing is “longer than two years.” So, no defined upward limit that I have seen.

  352. Sandy: Etiquette is debatable. Boundaries? You really don’t think that should be up to the mother to decide? Also remember that no one else in the situation attempted to set any boundaries for themselves by telling her they were uncomfortable with it.

    Don’t you think there should be evidence of harm for us to seek to police what women do with their bodies? How women raise their children?

    I absolutely think this was an issue of boundaries and etiquette. I think the mother in the OP as it was described (which is one-sided) was acting outside of normal breastfeeding etiquette. I also think that the family handled this poorly and should have made their boundaries clear once it was clear there was discomfort so that the mother could make decisions accordingly about how and whether she wanted to interact with them in the future, if at all.

    My personal feeling is that the AAP and WHO recommendations are understandably designed to increase the rates and longevity of breastfeeding when it comes to the developed world, and that until breastfeeding becomes the norm (which it won’t until our culture decides that motherhood is important, etc etc) that these kinds of open-ended encouragements to breastfeed will be the standard. But I do think mothers are interested in mothering well, and that there is a desire for more complete information on parenting issues, especially in baby’s early years, that can get squidgy when there are a lot of politically motivated and woo-woo cottage industries out there solely designed to prey on mothers’ anxiety. Breastfeeding groups have some difficulty admitting to problems that women may face when it comes to breastfeeding, like minimizing the learning curve of nursing for example, because they fear that women will be discouraged out of the gate and not even try at all. Also, that medical groups have a demonstrated history of providing information to mothers that are based on trends and that are sometimes politically motivated, and that these interests can and do compete.

    So, “police”? No. “Provide reasonable guidelines for”, yes. And I do think there should be guidelines about, perhaps, gently encouraging a child to wean if they hit a certain point and haven’t been taught ways to self-soothe other than suckling, whether that be on a breast, a pacifier, or a bottle. We have guidelines for formula-fed babies on when they should be learning to go off of the bottle, for example. It shouldn’t be a stretch to assume that there be developmentally appropriate guidelines for weaning off the breast as well. It’s not about not trusting women, but about giving women the information necessary to make decisions about how they parent instead of just trusting their instincts and going with the flow. If you work with kids enough, it’s evident that sometimes people’s parental instincts need some help.

    Sandy: I sincerely hope to instill a profound respect for other people’s boundaries in my daughter, but … 1? Really? I have no firsthand experience but my instinct is that it’s going to take a lot longer than that, and be a fairly sprawling, nuanced, ongoing process.

    Oh, it will be. But I don’t see any difference between this and teaching your 1yo not to bite or hit and eventually keep their hands to themselves. Yes, it’s an ongoing, complicated process, but it’s also a completely reasonable idea that children are capable of learning from a very early age.

    Rodeo: I think another barrier in this conversation is that some people come from a biocultural perspective of human society that investigates the role that biology and evolution plays in how we relate to kids, and others are speaking from a purely social/cultural one.

    Agreed.

  353. Sandy, from the LW:

    Although nobody said anything, she sensed we were shocked

    As for your definition, if “longer than two years” is the definition of “extended nursing,” then that implies that two years is pretty well the norm, doesn’t it?

  354. Citation? How about Female of the Species by … forget who. Woman: an Intimate Geography by Natalie Angier. Any goddamn thing by Sarah Hrdy.

    Brace yourself sweetie. You might also learn that the sole reason you have hips is to carry a pregnancy.

    1. Brace yourself sweetie. You might also learn that the sole reason you have hips is to carry a pregnancy.

      Ah. So men don’t have hips now?

  355. I see, Rodeo.

    My hips serve no purpose other than to carry a pregnancy.

    Must be why I have to be carted around on a dolly everywhere like Hannibal Lecter.

  356. Rodeo: Brace yourself sweetie. You might also learn that the sole reason you have hips is to carry a pregnancy.

    What if I don’t really have child bearing hips? Am I not allowed to have kids? K but on a serious note, the notion that the only purpose for breasts is feeding babies is fucked up. My breasts are mine, not my hypothetical future kids’. What do you make of women who never make use of the apparently only function of their breasts?

  357. I also just want to interject with the anecdote that parenting advice changes so often and so quickly for babies based on trends, research, and politics that the advice you get for one kid won’t even apply to the next. My family tends to spread out their children by quite a few years. My sisters and I were born in three different decades with the same parents. One of my sisters has four kids that range from 19 to 3, and there are twelve years between my two children. Breastfeeding was not even suggested to me when my first was born in 1999, not through the pregnancy or in the hospital, but was automatically assumed when my daughter was born this summer. My sister has this funny story about the worry over keeping the baby in the room after the baby is born. For her first two kids, the nurses shuttled the babies away to the nursery so my sister could get some sleep after her c-section (@ early to mid 90s). When the third was born (about 2003), she asked the nurses to take the baby for a night so she could rest and was told that the hospital got rid of the nursery to encourage co-sleeping. By the time her three year old was born, the nurses were offering to take him to the nursery that had apparently reopened because co-sleeping was no longer so strongly encouraged by the doctors. Same hospital! I daresay we have awesome kids even though the parenting methods suggested for them were completely different.

    So my side thought is that for all the arguing and stat-quoting and whatnot, none of the anxiety about these issues really means much anyway.

  358. Jill: Yeah, what? Breasts do not exist solely to breastfeed. That is one of their purposes, but they are also sources of sexual pleasure for a lot of women.

    Mine are quite effective for holding a bowl of popcorn. NOM NOM

  359. And I do think there should be guidelines about, perhaps, gently encouraging a child to wean if they hit a certain point and haven’t been taught ways to self-soothe other than suckling, whether that be on a breast, a pacifier, or a bottle.

    I like this. My understanding is that long-term breastfeeding (I’m defining that as past age 3-4) happens because both parties don’t have a problem with it and it works to comfort/soothe/bond with a kid. But, going back to Karak said about parents teaching kids about social norms, suggesting alternative ways to comfort in addition to the boob could be a good idea. That said, my belief is still that mothers prefer to do what works and causes the least amount of stress in the their/the kid’s life. Maybe some kid just cannot handle the idea of not nursing in the same way that some kids need to cling to a stuffed animal until ages 7-8. But having that knowledge out there on how to teach kids to soothe would probably help.

    Ah. So men don’t have hips now?

    Good god. I honestly have no idea if you are literally unaware that women have wider hips than men do or if you’re arguing in bad faith because that’s the type of dick behavior lawyers are accustomed to or if you’re calling me out for failing to be precise to a ridiculous degree with my language because Feministe expects academic standards when one comments.

    Hmmm ….. come to think of it, this is the same bullshit that zuzu’s pulling and she’s a lawyer as well.

    1. Rodeo, I understand that women generally have wider-set hip bones than men. And jesus, I wasn’t trying to come in here to get involved in all this ridiculous shit-slinging, but I pointed out the hips thing only after you got snarky because people pushed back on your assertion that breasts exist solely for breastfeeding. So cool it with the accusations of “dick behavior” and “calling you out for failing to be precise to a ridiculous degree.” You made a comment about breastfeeding that I flatly disagreed with, and then you got sarcastic and rude in your response and you’re now offended when I responded (not even) in kind. But sure, I’m just being a dickhead lawyer because that’s what I do.

  360. Rodeo: I honestly have no idea if you are literally unaware that women have wider hips than men do or if you’re arguing in bad faith

    Okay….but seriously my hips are NOT wider than a man’s. So…

  361. Interesting you should mention Angier. I happen to have a copy of Woman: An Intimate Geography right here. Here’s what she says about the purpose of breasts:

    Still, I will argue that breasts fundamentally are here by accident. They are sensory exploiters. They say little or nothing about a woman’s health, quality, or fecundity. They are accouterments. If we go looking for breasts and for ways to enhance and display our breasts, to make them stand out like unnatural, almost farcical Barbie-doll missile heads, then we are doing what breasts have always done, which is to appeal to an irrational aesthetic sense that has no function but that begs to be amused. . . . [T]he aesthetic breast that is subject to such wide variation in scale is not the mammalian breast gland that ranks as an organ, a necessary piece of anatomy. On the contrary, the aesthetic breast is nonfunctional to the point of being counterfunctional, which is why it strikes us as so beautiful.

    Later, she discusses the mammary gland:

    As mammary glands, human breasts follow the standard mammalian pattern. A mammary gland is a modified sweat gland, and milk is highly enriched sweat.

  362. Rodeo: Good god. I honestly have no idea if you are literally unaware that women have wider hips than men do or if you’re arguing in bad faith because that’s the type of dick behavior lawyers are accustomed to or if you’re calling me out for failing to be precise to a ridiculous degree with my language because Feministe expects academic standards when one comments.

    Hmmm ….. come to think of it, this is the same bullshit that zuzu’s pulling and she’s a lawyer as well.

    Aw. You’re special, Rodeo.

    Do you really have no idea why people are mocking you right now?

  363. zuzu: You keep using terms you don’t want to define.

    You’re right. I, Sandy, Random Feministe Commenter, shall define these terms for us! What’s more, I shall then set out a reasonable limit regarding what age or developmental stage breastfeeding should stop. Yeah, I know the experts so far have not defined these terms or set these limits, but I am so awesome, and I have thought about it a lot, and what do they know, anyway. 😛

    Honestly, I have not thought about the definition a lot, and all I got in a quick search was “longer than two years.” I don’t think it’s a bad definition. I could research more and better tomorrow, but I doubt I find anything suggesting putting an upper limit on there.

    zuzu: Sandy, from the LW:

    Although nobody said anything, she sensed we were shocked

    As for your definition, if “longer than two years” is the definition of “extended nursing,” then that implies that two years is pretty well the norm, doesn’t it?

    Ah, I missed that. Shock was sensed. I stand corrected.

    It could be seen to imply that two years is the norm, but I severely doubt it was intended to suggest as much. Nursing for two years is absolutely not the average duration of nursing in the US. The average is considerably less than that.

    @Lauren: your last couple of posts are interesting, and I will ponder them and probably respond in the morning when I am not so sleepy.

  364. Zuzu, thanks so much for quoting Natalie Angier to refute the nonsense that’s being spewed here about breasts, hips, and other body parts existing for — or having been “designed for” — one “purpose” only. I was trying to get at this with my question earlier, but I guess I was too subtle. If there’s been any misogyny on this thread, it’s reflected in this sort of intentionalist rhetoric. It’s uncomfortably close to what one hears from religious fundamentalists; it’s gender essentialist; and perhaps Rodeo doesn’t realize that it smacks of both homophobia and transphobia as well.

  365. Sandy: You’re right. I, Sandy, Random Feministe Commenter, shall define these terms for us!

    Sandy, you’re the one who’s using the terms and getting all shirty with people who are, as you keep maintaining, against full-term/extended breastfeeding. Which you say is harmful to you and to others here. It’s hardly an attack on you to request that you define the terms you are using to declare that others are being intolerant of mothers who engage in them.

  366. The reason why there aren’t guidelines about when to stop breastfeeding is that a) the number of women who breastfeed past six months in the U.S. is vanishingly small, and b) society pressures them to stop as soon as possible anyway. While simultaneously pressuring them to keep going.

    So no, I don’t want to play the “let’s, as a society, name an age to start yelling at women!” game. Besides, I already mentioned my personal comfort levels upthread.

  367. I’ve heard people say full-term, I’ve heard people say extended. Tends to mean the same thing, generally with the “full term” people wanting to emphasize that they won’t purposefully wean the kid, and to normalize breastfeeding until the child decides to quit as “full term.”

    zuzu: Sandy,you’retheonewho’susingthetermsandgettingallshirtywithpeoplewhoare,asyoukeepmaintaining,againstfull-term/extendedbreastfeeding.Whichyousayisharmfultoyouandtoothershere.It’shardlyanattackonyoutorequestthatyoudefinethetermsyouareusingtodeclarethatothersarebeingintolerantofmotherswhoengageinthem.

  368. Hey: we pedophilic, ill-mannered, sexually abusive, non-autonomous, overly enmeshed, boundary-free slaves to our children’s demands on our bodies except when we are forcing our teenagers to breastfeed us to orgasm get that most of the “feminists” posting here do NOT want us to use our breasts for a primary biological function. We are not stupid; we get that you demand to tell us what to do with our breasts while simultaneously insisting that YOUR breasts are your OWN, and nobody’s gonna tell YOU what they’re for or what to do with them, dammit! You’re coming through loud and clear: your right not to feel grossed out by a mother feeding her child trumps every given mother’s right to decide how and when to feed her child.

    So are we done yet, or do you need to browbeat marginalized women some more?

    And: Really, Jill? RODEO is being rude? Have you read some of the vile things being flung at breastfeeding mothers here? I think people have been remarkably restrained. Even Rodeo, who, after all, was given full Lord-of-the-Flies treatment for daring to advocate for mothers and kids when she herself doesn’t even have any! The monster! Who does she think she is, a feminist advocating for women! Whatta bitch, amirite?

  369. tinfoil hattie:
    @Marcie: Guffaw! Yes, I do love a good strawman, if by that you mean, “often disagrees with the popular viewpoint.”

    The abortion analogy fits. YOU are the one policing women, telling them what to do with their bodies, and deciding what is best for them and their babies.

    Well, since you got it all figured out, I won’t try and mansplain you out of it.

  370. I was going to demand a pic of Hairless Angry Pussy nursing, but sure, flouncing works too.
    We really must name that cat, she’s so versatile.

    Lara Emily Foley:
    Thisthreadlacksanyflouncing.Idemandflouncing.

  371. May I interject on the phrase “whipping out”? It just means to get something out very quickly. One can whip out a wallet, a pen, a penis, or yes, even a breast. I don’t think there are any implied negative connotations at all.

  372. Lauren: Want to keep going until your child is in kindergarten? Go ahead. First grade? Go ahead. Third grade? Go ahead. Junior high? Go ahead. Since nobody has actually produced any evidence of harm, I don’t see any reason to set up some kind of universal cut-off. None of these examples raise any red flags whatsoever,

    It’s not an issue of red flags; as you may have noted, this thread has seen people claim that the appropriate response to seeing a woman breastfeed her six-year-old is to call CPS for that alone. If you see a woman breastfeed her six-year-old and you think “Hmm, that’s odd. Very odd. I think I’ll keep an eye on that, ’cause it could be a red flag, and see if there is actually any other evidence whatsoever of a problem. Maybe I’ll even ask her what’s up with that,” that’s a very different thing than “That woman is clearly a pedophile who should have her kids taken away and I am calling CPS immediately.”

    Guidelines for what women should do vis-a-vis their kids change routinely. They changed in between me and my sister, eight years younger. That doesn’t mean that it would have been right to call CPS on my mom for breastfeeding me when I was two, but eight years later, when the pediatricians gave her the thumbs-up, it magically became OK for her to nurse my sister at two. It means that you might want to allow for some flexibility in these guidelines instead of inventing straw-mommies who are sending their college-age children care packages of breast milk.

    Sandy: But again, every expert and group cited here supports more breastfeeding, not less. So by continuing to belabor the “But when does it become baaaad?” question, we’re trying to address a problem that doesn’t really exist.

    Yes. This is precisely what I find bizarre about this whole discussion. “Hey, in a letter to an advice columnist, some woman was totally squicked by this thing her brand new sister-in-law whom she had never met before did. She has no real insight into or details about the specific situation beyond the fact that it’s unusual. She hasn’t seen any evidence of anybody being hurt by it, but it certainly is odd. OMG DEFCON 3! EVIL PEDOPHILE MOMMIES ABUSING THEIR CHILDREN UNDER COVER OF EXTENDED BREASTFEEDING! WHERE WILL IT ALL END?”

    Surely there are actual problems out there to worry about? Things that actually threaten and/or harm children that are supported by the state? If we have reached a stage of child welfare where the odd mother breastfeeding a five-year-old is where it’s at in terms of harm and abuse, then surely we can declare a national holiday and give all social workers the day off to celebrate or something.

    zuzu: An “extended” edition DVD is not “longer than an average” DVD, it’s longer than the theatrical cut.

    While I take your point about the language we use to describe breastfeeding vs. pregnancy, this just seems specious to me. Why on earth should the use of “extended” to describe breastfeeding have anything to do with the euphemisms the movie industry uses to describe versions of movies that could best be described as “so damn long they’re boring”?

    zuzu: But again, if something is “longer than average,” there’s an average. What’s the average? What determines that?

    Average? The average would technically be the mean, but in this context I’m going to go ahead and say that it’s the mode of how long breastfeeding usually runs in any given culture. “Average” is not a term that’s so wildly vague that it should need defining. If I say that I’ve had fewer or more sexual partners in my life than is average for somebody my age in my circumstances, is there really that much confusion about what I mean?

    L: What do you make of women who never make use of the apparently only function of their breasts?

    Pretty much the same thing I think of women who never make use of their uteruses to carry a pregnancy to term: lucky for them, and for all of us, really, that we live in an era when that choice is possible.

    I actually don’t much understand the resistance to the observation that breasts exist to breastfeed, biologically. My ears exist to hear things. That doesn’t mean that it’s wrong of me to punch holes in the lobe part and hang pretty things there, or that if someone I’m making out with touches or strokes or kisses them (hopefully long enough after the hole-punching that it doesn’t cause me pain), I’m doing it wrong. It just means that I can do things with my body that don’t much matter evolutionarily. Any part of the body can give someone, somewhere, sexual pleasure. That’s less a function of individual body parts than it is a function of the nervous system entire.

    I use my hair for dying it bright colors, and my fingers for typing, and my brain for analyzing literature, but I highly doubt that that’s even slightly their evolutionary function, unless you construe evolutionarily functions so broadly as to make them almost meaningless (right, the evolutionary function of the brain is to think, probably, but I don’t see how being particularly good at analyzing motifs in Angela Carter’s short stories provides me with any survival/reproductive advantages at all).

    L: Okay….but seriously my hips are NOT wider than a man’s. So…

    So individuals do not always and without fail match each and every characteristic that can be noted as generally true about the groups to which they belong. That doesn’t make those characteristics irrelevant or pointless. The reason most women have evolved to have hips wider than most men’s is because it makes childbearing easier. It’s not just some weirdo chance accident, or that God thinks women are prettier that way, or whatever.

    zuzu: [T]he aesthetic breast that is subject to such wide variation in scale is not the mammalian breast gland that ranks as an organ, a necessary piece of anatomy. On the contrary, the aesthetic breast is nonfunctional to the point of being counterfunctional, which is why it strikes us as so beautiful.

    Right, but note she’s specifying “the aesthetic breast,” not the breast on its own. As I recall, the question she’s dealing with is why, unlike those of other mammals, human women’s breasts protrude all the time, not just when lactating. That’s a very different question than why we have breasts at all.

    tinfoil hattie: we get that you demand to tell us what to do with our breasts while simultaneously insisting that YOUR breasts are your OWN, and nobody’s gonna tell YOU what they’re for or what to do with them, dammit!

    Seriously. “My breasts are my own and I get to decide what they’re for but if you think that yours are for feeding a kid who’s older than I’m comfortable with her being, you are a disgusting child abuser.” Ok, then.

    tinfoil hattie: Really, Jill? RODEO is being rude? Have you read some of the vile things being flung at breastfeeding mothers here?

    Yeah, I’ve got to second this as well. Bagelsan called Sandy a pedophile. Azalea compared women who nurse longer than she’s comfortable with to mothers who rape, maim, torture, and otherwise abuse their children. But Rodeo gets snippy and that’s rudeness worth commenting on? That does seem like a remarkably odd time to start drawing the rudeness boundary.

    John: May I interject on the phrase “whipping out”? It just means to get something out very quickly. One can whip out a wallet, a pen, a penis, or yes, even a breast. I don’t think there are any implied negative connotations at all.

    Gee, really? Is that what it means? I had no idea! I’d never seen it used before. Now so many things make more sense to me. Thanks, John!

    So, just a coincidence that whenever somebody is complaining about a woman breastfeeding in a manner that makes them uncomfortable–in too public a place, for too old a child, without sufficient cringing–“whipping it out” is the phrase used? Thanks for coming in and clearing that up for us.

    Lauren: So my side thought is that for all the arguing and stat-quoting and whatnot, none of the anxiety about these issues really means much anyway.

    That’s pretty much exactly how I feel. So why all the fuss about what the upper limit of breastfeeding must be?

  373. chava: I’ve heard people say full-term, I’ve heard people say extended. Tends to mean the same thing, generally with the “full term” people wanting to emphasize that they won’t purposefully wean the kid, and to normalize breastfeeding until the child decides to quit as “full term.”

    That sounds like an excellent definition to me. One that encompasses and respects all mothers’ choices.

    If we really need some flouncing? I am fully capable. I can whip ’em out first too for extra effect.

  374. ruminations on the idea of “independence” and children –

    we carry on vociferously defending the idea that children should develop independence at an early age – how fast are you weaning? how early are you potty-training? how successful are you at evicting your kid from your bed, your lap, etc.? and earlier “independence” is seen as evidence of having a smarter, better kid.

    and then, when the child rocks the ragged edge of 12 or 13, and starts doing exactly as s/he pleases, with no regard for parental guidance – we have flailing hysterics about “kids today” and how they have no respect or connection to family, and behaving as though they don’t “need” parents is seen as evidence of having a naughty, disrespectful kids.

  375. EG: That’s pretty much exactly how I feel. So why all the fuss about what the upper limit of breastfeeding must be?

    Well, what I was trying to get at above is that this is a major hole in the information available to moms, and that these kinds of holes in the information are acceptable and even to some degree encouraged in breastfeeding advocacy and natural parenting lifestyle groups (“…recommendations are understandably designed to increase the rates and longevity of breastfeeding when it comes to the developed world, and that until breastfeeding becomes the norm (which it won’t until our culture decides that motherhood is important, etc etc) that these kinds of open-ended encouragements to breastfeed will be the standard. But I do think mothers are interested in mothering well, and that there is a desire for more complete information on parenting issues, especially in baby’s early years, that can get squidgy when there are a lot of politically motivated and woo-woo cottage industries out there solely designed to prey on mothers’ anxiety. Breastfeeding groups have some difficulty admitting to problems that women may face when it comes to breastfeeding, like minimizing the learning curve of nursing for example, because they fear that women will be discouraged out of the gate and not even try at all.”)

    We have recommended guidelines for literally every other facet of parenting whether or not harm is indicated. The AAP bends over backwards to try to provide normative information on child development to moms. The guidelines are so simple as to say that if your child is not doing this or that by such and such an age (turning toward the sounds of your voice by four months, pulling their hands towards their mouths by four months, thing I can think of off the top of my head since I have a three 1/2 month old) that you should probably consult with your doctor. If, for example, my son had been unable to learn his alphabet by 7-8 years old, I should be consulting with experts. Why? Because that’s way outside of the norm. There is no upper limit on learning the alphabet, but there is a norm, and when my child is out of that norm, it’s responsible for our medical advisory groups to give me enough information to take action on it if necessary. Alphabet-learning and breastfeeding are not one and the same, but regardless, this lack of information is glaring considering the vast swaths of information available on every other parenting topic. I’m uncomfortable accepting these holes in information just because we want more women to breastfeed — we are smart enough to handle it.

    1. And: Really, Jill? RODEO is being rude? Have you read some of the vile things being flung at breastfeeding mothers here? I think people have been remarkably restrained. Even Rodeo, who, after all, was given full Lord-of-the-Flies treatment for daring to advocate for mothers and kids when she herself doesn’t even have any! The monster! Who does she think she is, a feminist advocating for women! Whatta bitch, amirite?

      Oh don’t worry, plenty of people have been rude on this thread. But only one of them has called me a dick for making a one-line comment. But yes, clearly the reason I have a problem with being called a dick is because I hate women and people who advocate for them. That seems reasonable.

  376. Lauren: The guidelines are so simple as to say that if your child is not doing this or that by such and such an age (turning toward the sounds of your voice by four months, pulling their hands towards their mouths by four months, thing I can think of off the top of my head since I have a three 1/2 month old) that you should probably consult with your doctor.

    That’s because failing to do those things can indicate some significant developmental problems with the kid–not always, of course, because sometimes it just means that your kid walks or talks late, or whatever the developmental milestone is, but often enough that it’s worth consulting a doctor. But failure to wean hasn’t, as far as I know, been identified as a sign of any such thing. If that’s the concern, though, that mothers might not recognize a failure to wean or a late weaning as indicative of a larger-scale problem that needs treatment, asking breastfeeding supporters or commenters on a feminist website for their gut feelings about how old is too old isn’t going to address that issue. That would be something that would need to be researched and addressed by child-development specialists by going over medical histories of late weaners, first to see if late weaning is actually associated with any developmental problems, and, if so, to see at what point that association begins.

    However, given the comments on this thread calling late nursers child molesters and lumping them with women who rape and abuse their kids and when it’s appropriate to call CPS, I think it’s a little disingenuous to say that the concern over there being no specified upper limit is similar to the concern about a child who doesn’t recognize its mother’s voice by however many months, especially because the vast majority of babies are born recognizing their mothers’ voices. Until your comment, nobody but nobody has phrased this in terms of not providing needed info to mothers so that they can monitor their child’s developmental progress. It’s been phrased in terms of protecting innocent children from their abusive breastfeeding mommies, with a side dish of if toddlers don’t learn that they can’t access their mommies’ breasts when they want to, they will never be able to have respect for women’s boundaries.

    Jill: But only one of them has called me a dick for making a one-line comment.

    I dunno, Jill, she said that your comment was a “dick move.” That’s not calling you a dick. Everyone makes dick moves from time to time. It is insulting, but no more so than the usual run of things, in my opinion.

  377. EG: However, given the comments on this thread calling late nursers child molesters and lumping them with women who rape and abuse their kids and when it’s appropriate to call CPS, I think it’s a little disingenuous to say that the concern over there being no specified upper limit is similar to the concern about a child who doesn’t recognize its mother’s voice by however many months, especially because the vast majority of babies are born recognizing their mothers’ voices. Until your comment, nobody but nobody has phrased this in terms of not providing needed info to mothers so that they can monitor their child’s developmental progress. It’s been phrased in terms of protecting innocent children from their abusive breastfeeding mommies, with a side dish of if toddlers don’t learn that they can’t access their mommies’ breasts when they want to, they will never be able to have respect for women’s boundaries.

    I think that characterization is dishonest. The whole thread has been people trying to figure out what’s developmentally appropriate, starting within the first ten comments. That we disagree, or that some people are uneducated about breastfeeding, or that some people took it to places it shouldn’t have gone, does not mean that everyone participating here was concern-trolling because bewbs are weird.

  378. I disagree, Lauren. The first few comments seem mostly to be making fun of the “whipping it out” nonsense and addressing the bigoted grandpa issue. But at number 9, you get this:

    Kara: At what point would super-extended breastfeeding (as in the breastfed 5 year old letter) turn into something reeeaaaallly inappropriate and borderline abusive?

    Because I will be honest… if I knew someone was regularly breastfeeding their school aged kid, I would be letting CPS know that they might want to take a look at what is going on in that family….

    It started that early. And I think that I’m not reading “appropriate” the same way you are. In the kinds of developmental milestones you were talking about, it’s not about whether or not it’s “appropriate” for your kid to be able to hold her own head up by three months, or whenever; it’s about whether or not it indicates a medical problem requiring intervention and treatment. Nobody but you has raised this concern with regard to breastfeeding. It’s been about what’s “appropriate” rather than abusive.

    By comment 69, the language we had is this:

    tmc: “creepy”
    “inappropriate”
    “borderline abusive”
    “hinders independence” in the child
    “the child’s maturation could be slowed”
    keeps the child from being “encouraged to develop abilities outside of the mother’s circle of care”
    “builds a cycle of dependency”
    suggests that the mother has “boundary issues”

    I suppose that “the child’s maturation could be slowed” could refer to a developmental problem rather than a bad act by mommy, but in context, I don’t think so.

    Within ten comments of that, Azalea had brought out the “sexual assault” idea and somebody else, I forget who, was saying “harmful.” So, no, I have to disagree and say that my assessment of the general mood of the thread is accurate.

  379. EG: It’s been about what’s “appropriate” rather than abusive.

    Ugh. Reverse those, please, for the sentence to make sense with the rest of the paragraph.

  380. Good grief, try to walk away from this discussion to get some sleep just to find that this thread has gotten even crazier and more inflammatory in the meanwhile.

    “Seriously. “My breasts are my own and I get to decide what they’re for but if you think that yours are for feeding a kid who’s older than I’m comfortable with her being, you are a disgusting child abuser.” Ok, then.”

    I couldn’t agree more.

    What some of the posters here like Zuzu don’t seem to be understanding (is this just missing the point by accident or willfully refusing to understand, I’m curious btw?) is that breastfeeding mothers face so much stigma about breastfeeding specifically because our society sees breasts as primarily a sexual organ. Thus people can not wrap their minds around a woman using her breasts to feed her child instead of using them to amuse and arouse her husband and/or all of the other men in the world.*

    Which is why women who do opt to breastfeed (and hopefully those feminists who realize it isn’t anathema to the mission of feminism to support us) realize the importance of pointing out that it is neither the sole nor primary purpose of breasts to turn guys on and for them to use as toys for their sexual enjoyment and gratification. As Alara Rodgers already pointed out, the fact that breasts can be used for pleasure is part of a woman’s biology, but this capacity for experiencing pleasure related to one’s breasts does not make a woman a pedo if she finds it at all pleasant or pleasurable to breastfeed her child. It may be a side effect, sure, but not a disgusting, horrible thing that must be stopped.

    So, of course you personally can use your breasts for whatever purpose you want, I and others really and truly don’t care. But stop trying to tell us we are wrong or pedophiles or sexist misogynists for opting to use our breasts for one of their biological functions by breastfeeding our children.

    (*Yes, I realize this is heterosexist language, welcome to the reality of so many women like myself.)

  381. Since there seems to be genuine confusion as to why X body part exists for Y purpose is offensive:

    First, the corrollary of the idea that my breasts exist for nursing children is that no using breasts for that purpose is a failure on my part. Indeed the concept of my biological “purpose” is most often used to make that specific argument. In other contexts, telling someone that X exists for Y purpose is an argument that a person *should* use X for Y purpose. I.e., these boots were made for walking.

    Second, ascribing purpose to my body that is contrary to the purpose that I’ve chosen for myself is a violation of my bodily autonomy. This idea suggests that some force external to me determines my reason for existing or that my body is separate from my consciousness or will. Both concepts have been routinely used to oppress women who chose a purpose contrary to “nature” or “God”.

    Note: In some contexts X evolved to do Y is a factual statement. But here it has been employed as a rationale for Y being natural where natural = good. That’s a moral argument not a factual statement.

    1. Also? I don’t think anyone is pushing back on the idea that breasts exist for nursing. Of course they do! I don’t take issue with the fact that breasts, biologically, exist for nursing.

      I do take issue with the idea that breasts exist solely for nursing. Taking bodily autonomy and culture out of it, that isn’t even biologically true.

  382. Lauren: We have recommended guidelines for literally every other facet of parenting whether or not harm is indicated.

    I didn’t do child-led weaning myself, but just about every person I’ve known who did it ended up with a child who weaned between 2 1/2 and 3 1/2 years of age. Weaning at that age strikes me as consistent with a lot of the other developmental milestones that most kids hit at that age, and it’s consistent with the ages that kids wean in many, many cultures where extended breastfeeding is the norm.

    What is the impact of breastfeeding beyond that? I don’t think there are enough people who nurse beyond that to do any kind of statistically rigorous studies. And if studies of the benefits of breastmilk for newborns are confounded by all sorts of socioeconomic factors, the effect would be exponential in older children, who have had so many other influences in their lives.

    I’ll admit (as I did in my first comment on this thread) that I think five is a bit old to be breastfeeding, but the number of kids who are breastfed that long is so miniscule that devoting extensive research to the exact ideal age to wean when the studies would be very difficult to conduct seems like a waste of resources, as well as a solution in search of a problem.

    Yes, people are interested in parenting well, and it’s worthwhile to collect data, but at the end of the day, people adopt parenting approaches that fit their values. People who do child-led weaning usually are acting on pretty deeply held beliefs about child development, attachment and autonomy that are genuinely not subject to scientific verification. You might as well study what’s the right amount of hugs to give a kid or how much a parent should actively play with their kid.

    As a bit of a postscript, I’ll add that most of the people I know who do child-led weaning look for opportunities to reduce nursing as it seems to them that the child is outgrowing the emotional need for it – like offering a snack or a cuddle with a book when an active three-year-old asks to nurse. I would suspect that someone who is still nursing a 5 year old did not do that – that is, did not try to move the process along. If that didn’t happen because the mother didn’t know how to do that, then she could use more information. If she didn’t do that because she believes really strongly in the idea that the child will know when to stop and that there’s no reason for her to move it along because she believes very strongly in the child’s autonomy, well, you can’t disprove that. Even if you found that the child was less independent in other ways, you would have to look at the child 20 years later, and even then, with a sample size of, like, 10 or 20 kids, you would never be able to show what effect the extended breastfeeding has. It’s not that we can’t handle it. It’s more a matter of “What’s the point?”

    Everything that has been brought up by other commenters – that kids with teeth shouldn’t breastfeed, that kids who can talk shouldn’t breastfeed, that kids who walk shouldn’t breastfeed, that kids who can ask for it shouldn’t breastfeed, that kids who eat other food shouldn’t breastfeed – can easily apply to a 1-year-old or even younger, and breastfeeding for AT LEAST a year is considered ideal and beyond one year is extremely normal from a developmental standpoint. On that, we do have research, and that’s what it shows.

  383. Kristen J.: First, the corrollary of the idea that my breasts exist for nursing children is that no using breasts for that purpose is a failure on my part.

    No. It’s not. The context of this conversation is a bunch of self-identified feminists who already believe in women’s bodily autonomy.

    And in this context, it’s not “natural=good.” It’s “natural=not bad.” All the criticism is being directed at women who breastfeed. No one is saying women *should* breastfeed. They’re saying women who breastfeed aren’t bad.

  384. There are no broadly disseminated (or even agreed-upon) guidelines for when to stop breastfeeding because “breastfeeding too long” isn’t a medical, psychological, or social problem that exists.

    Yes, some women presumably incorporate breastfeeding into bad parenting, but that doesn’t make their breastfeeding the source of their bad parenting or mean that if they were coerced into stopping breastfeeding they would become better parents — or even that their kids would benefit. It just means that anything a person can do, they can do in an uncool way.

    That’s why nobody wants to answer the “when should women stop breastfeeding” question with anything more concrete than “when mom and/or kid want to stop.” Because that answer WORKS, and any other answer is an arbitrarily mom-shaming “solution” to a non-existent dilemma.

  385. Kristen J.: the corrollary of the idea that my breasts exist for nursing children is that no using breasts for that purpose is a failure on my part.

    I fundamentally don’t understand the logical leap that’s being made there. Uteruses have evolved to gestate babies. That doesn’t mean that not using a uterus for gestating a baby is a failure. It means you’ve decided not to gestate a baby. That’s not a moral judgment when it’s coming from a feminist.

    Kristen J.: it has been employed as a rationale for Y being natural where natural = good. That’s a moral argument not a factual statement.

    It’s being deployed that way, though, not in a context of haranguing non-breastfeeding women into breastfeeding, but in a context of people accusing breastfeeding women of child abuse. In that context, the valance of “good” changes from an implicit “…and you’re bad if you don’t” to an implicit “…so stop saying that I’m bad.”

  386. Angus Johnston: Yes, some women presumably incorporate breastfeeding into bad parenting, but that doesn’t make their breastfeeding the source of their bad parenting or mean that if they were coerced into stopping breastfeeding they would become better parents — or even that their kids would benefit. It just means that anything a person can do, they can do in an uncool way.

    This is nicely put. Thank you.

  387. Jill: I don’t think anyone is pushing back on the idea that breasts exist for nursing. Of course they do! I don’t take issue with the fact that breasts, biologically, exist for nursing.

    Here’s how I followed the evolution (or devolution?) of this conversation. Some people heard that some women experience sexual arousal while nursing and flipped out. The people defending extended nursing and/or nursing even in the face of occasional sexual arousal said that feeding babies is what breasts are for and the sexual arousal is a side effect. And then the creeped out by sexual arousal people said “Breasts are too for sexual arousal.” With the apparent corollary being that women need to be awfully careful about using them to feed their babies. Some other people who just don’t like biological determinism also jumped on the “breasts are for feeding babies” thing without remembering that no one here is in favor of biological determinism.

  388. So what’s the official feminist line on the oxytocin bullcrap? I’m still waiting for an answer.
    Antiprincess: At twelve and thirteen, kids need to start seperating from the family unit. That’s just a normal part of development.

  389. @Chingona & EG,

    Please re-read Rodeo’s comment again. The key word there is “solely.”. And women who do not accept that the sole purpose of their breasts is breastfeeding are wrong.

    The sole purpose of a book is to be read. => No other purpose is correct. => Using a book to prop up your coffee table is wrong.

    Using evolution as defining purpose contains the presumption that nature = good/correct. If I say that my magic 8 ball provides the defining purpose of things then my premise is that my magic 8 ball is correct.

    I agree that a person should breastfeed for as long as they believe its in their child’s best interest (with consent once the child can consent) but not because nature says so. Because nature says so is a flawed argument that will be used 10 minutes from now to say that breastfeeding is wrong and harmful and has historically been used to oppress women.

  390. EG: And I think that I’m not reading “appropriate” the same way you are. In the kinds of developmental milestones you were talking about, it’s not about whether or not it’s “appropriate” for your kid to be able to hold her own head up by three months, or whenever; it’s about whether or not it indicates a medical problem requiring intervention and treatment. Nobody but you has raised this concern with regard to breastfeeding. It’s been about what’s “appropriate” rather than abusive.

    I think you’re unnecessarily dividing emotional and physical development here. People were indeed trying to figure out whether or not it’s developmentally appropriate for a five year old to breastfeed and coming to vastly difference conclusions based on their levels of knowledge of biological, social, and psychological development. Some people were obviously shooting from the hip. I see why it’s alluring to keep with this “breastfeeders are totes pedos” narrative, especially with the confusion around the idea of sexual arousal/gratification. But people have this confusion because we aren’t adequately educated about breastfeeding as a society in general (and I’m going to stretch and say that I’ll bet a number of people commenting on this thread are young enough or reflexively uninterested in children enough to have never even considered the possibility of breastfeeding, hence the general ignorance) (also there seems to be a contingency on this blog that is hyper-reactive to the possibility of child abuse — acting like it’s all about breastfeeding would be passable if it weren’t obvious that so many of us are regulars). I suppose it’s no one else’s job to educate other people on breastfeeding, but then I wouldn’t jump to get offended when people don’t get it.

    That said, if breastfeeding groups want women to make informed decisions about their bodies, they need to be willing to answer questions from women who are looking into it with complete and straightforward. Some background as to why I’m not super-excited about the push to breastfeed: As a sexual assault survivor who was reluctant to dip a toe into that world when I was pregnant last year, I got bowled over by people who told me what my breasts were for and how I should feel about them, and who told me to ignore the bad feelings I had about breastfeeding because they were silly and would go away because of my love for my daughter. When I expressed concern about the anti-depression medication I was taking that was contraindicated with nursing, I was told to “just” switch it or stop taking it. I was told that if I didn’t breastfeed, that my body would react as though my baby had died (imagine being pregnant and someone telling you to do X or “dead baby”). I was told that if I didn’t breastfeed that my midwife would “worry” about my mental health. I’m not talking about breastfeeding ignorant doctors, these statements came from feminist midwives and doulas.

    Of course I also got some anti-breastfeeding stuff from coworkers and strangers, but the willingness for these supposedly feminist, pro-woman sources to sweep facts, science, and my personal reservations under the rug in order to meet their initiation stats was shocking and disappointing. I was so shocked, especially since I’d chosen this route to have more feminist healthcare than with my prior birth, that I took my concerns online and found that these issues are common and encouraged by breastfeeding advocacy groups. Some of this reluctance is present on this thread, which is unfortunate because it took, for example, 350 comments for anyone to adequately crystallize what “sexual arousal” means in a breastfeeding relationship, or establish that full term and extended breastfeeding are one and the same, except in political intent.

    So basically, my push here to make people understand why “guidelines” are necessary is a challenge for advocates speaking on behalf of breastfeeding as a movement — and a feminist movement — is to do so ethically with good science, responsible rhetoric, a commitment to complete and accurate information, and without the scare mongering about dead babies and post-partum depression. In this thread, the assertion that breastfeeding moms always know best is absurd, not because of breastfeeding, but because this kind of essentialism is by itself absurd.

  391. I think people are getting hung up on ‘purpose.’ Breasts don’t have a purpose because they weren’t designed with any goal in mind. They do have several functions, one of which is to sustain an infant. We probably shouldn’t waste any ink on whether that is the ‘primary’ function of breasts because that honestly varies with each person. I can tell you it’s never going to be a primary function of MY tits, though.

    We could have avoided this shit-quagmire if we’d just agree on unambiguous terminology.

  392. Lauren: When I expressed concern about the anti-depression medication I was taking that was contraindicated with nursing, I was told to “just” switch it or stop taking it. I was told that if I didn’t breastfeed, that my body would react as though my baby had died (imagine being pregnant and someone telling you to do X or “dead baby”).

    Holy fucking shit that is awful. Not to mention the absurdity of acting like human bodies have a sort of ‘dead baby program’ that runs when you stop breastfeeding for whatever reason. Jesus.

  393. I have NOT had enough coffee today.

    chingona: What is the impact of breastfeeding beyond that? I don’t think there are enough people who nurse beyond that to do any kind of statistically rigorous studies. And if studies of the benefits of breastmilk for newborns are confounded by all sorts of socioeconomic factors, the effect would be exponential in older children, who have had so many other influences in their lives.

    I’ll admit (as I did in my first comment on this thread) that I think five is a bit old to be breastfeeding, but the number of kids who are breastfed that long is so miniscule that devoting extensive research to the exact ideal age to wean when the studies would be very difficult to conduct seems like a waste of resources, as well as a solution in search of a problem.

    Heh. Totally fair and I agree.

    Also just wanted to point out that there are in fact quite a few studies on the right amount of hugs to give a kid or how much a parent should actively play with their kid. In these cases, minimum amounts are usually the threshold for study (Answer: LOTS & at least 15 minutes of uninterrupted quality time per child per day), which on reflecting is a lot like the breastfeeding info, which is telling. I’ll think more on that.

  394. Most mammals manage to breasfeed perfectly well without any organs a human would recognize as a breast. So even setting aside the false teleology of “designed” and its various synonyms, breastfeeding isn’t “why” humans have breasts. Nipples, yes. Mammary glands, yes. Breasts, no.

  395. And Lauren, I’m sorry for your experience, and it’s absolutely true that some breastfeeding advocates just don’t want to see or acknowledge that certain barriers are real or that “overcoming” them would do more harm than the benefits of breastfeeding or that some women have all the information in the world and just don’t want to do it. In particular, some people have a real blind spot about medications for mental health conditions, and that really sucks.

    I just don’t see the extended breastfeeding thing really as part of that. If anything, the idea that a child might breastfeed until they were five would be a huge turn off for someone who was hesitant about trying it to begin with.

    Lauren: In these cases, minimum amounts are usually the threshold for study (Answer: LOTS & at least 15 minutes of uninterrupted quality time per child per day), which on reflecting is a lot like the breastfeeding info, which is telling. I’ll think more on that.

    So that’s actually a really good example. I am happy to play with my son if it’s a puzzle or legos or kicking around a ball, and I’m happy to read him a book, but I really, really don’t like playing “let’s pretend we’re tigers.” And to him, that’s the best way of playing. Sometimes, because it makes him happy, I will play that way. I usually keep some eye on the time so I can feel like I’m not being too mean by calling it quits. But if some other mother got down on the floor and played tigers for two hours a day, is that bad? I would be seriously hating life if I did that and I think I’m well within my rights not to and still be a good parent, but is it actually bad to play that much? Are you indulging the child too much? Does he see the mother as his playmate or, worse, plaything, if she does that? Those aren’t illegitimate questions, but I think it’s very hard to come up with one right answer and even harder to study objectively.

  396. Angus Johnston: Nipples, yes. Mammary glands, yes. Breasts, no.

    Sure, but the nipple and mammary gland are attached to/inside/part of the aesthetic breast. Which creates a real bind for women who are being told they shouldn’t breastfeed if they feel arousal.

  397. EG: While I take your point about the language we use to describe breastfeeding vs. pregnancy, this just seems specious to me. Why on earth should the use of “extended” to describe breastfeeding have anything to do with the euphemisms the movie industry uses to describe versions of movies that could best be described as “so damn long they’re boring”?

    Well, why on earth should “extended” be used with breastfeeding at all? Which is *exactly* what I was trying to get the person who was the one using that term — and using that term to criticize others who didn’t support such breastfeeding to her liking — to expand upon.

    I mean, if you’re going to use a term, and you’re asked to define it, you don’t get to hide behind “Well, it doesn’t really mean anything and there’s no agreement and you’re mean for asking me.” If your argument is that people who criticize extended/full-term breastfeeding are awful people, maybe we should agree on our terms, yes?

  398. Lolagirl: What some of the posters here like Zuzu don’t seem to be understanding (is this just missing the point by accident or willfully refusing to understand, I’m curious btw?) is that breastfeeding mothers face so much stigma about breastfeeding specifically because our society sees breasts as primarily a sexual organ. Thus people can not wrap their minds around a woman using her breasts to feed her child instead of using them to amuse and arouse her husband and/or all of the other men in the world.*

    Oh, bless your heart.

    You really think I don’t understand that breasts provide nutrition to children? Do you really, really think that I don’t understand that they don’t exist soley for the menz?

    What I object to, incredibly strongly, is the idea, which Rodeo made explicit and which you appear to be signing onto here, that the sole purpose of breasts is to provide nutrition — as well as the related idea that because it’s too much trouble to teach kids boundaries, any woman should take any child grabbing at her breasts with good humor because that’s what breasts are “for.” That’s just gender essentialist bullshit that doesn’t even evidence an understanding of human anatomy (we won’t go into the whole hips business — because I do wonder how hipless snakes manage to produce young if the only reason women have hips is to bear children).

    As the quote I posted from Natalie Angier makes clear, “breasts” in humans are not limited to the mammary gland. The mammary gland’s sole purpose, yes, is milk production; this is common to all mammals. But that doesn’t mean the mammary gland is the entirety of the breast in humans. Breasts also provide pleasure to the bearer and to others — whether that pleasure is sexual, visual or tactile. They’re useful as well for propping up your popcorn bowl.

    But just because something has a unique purpose does not mean that any given person is obligated to fulfill that purpose. If I have a child, my mammary gland will start producing milk if everything runs in its usual course. That doesn’t mean I have to feed my child with it, or anyone else’s kid with it, either.

    And if I do decide to feed my kid with my mammary glands, that doesn’t mean I have to do it for as long as the kid wants to unless I decide that’s what I choose to do. I don’t have to do it on the bus when he’s four years old just because he wants to. I don’t have to do it when meeting my in-laws when he’s five and more than capable of waiting until we get back to the hotel room for some privacy.

    You know, it’s kind of like sex — just because you have sex with someone once, or you’re in a relationship, it doesn’t give that person or any other person blanket permission to access your body for all time as long as they want it.

  399. Lolagirl: Which is why women who do opt to breastfeed (and hopefully those feminists who realize it isn’t anathema to the mission of feminism to support us) realize the importance of pointing out that it is neither the sole nor primary purpose of breasts to turn guys on and for them to use as toys for their sexual enjoyment and gratification.

    Who’s saying this, Lolagirl? If you think I’m saying it, you better blockquote that shit.

  400. chingona: the nipple and mammary gland are attached to/inside/part of the aesthetic breast. Which creates a real bind for women who are being told they shouldn’t breastfeed if they feel arousal.

    Absolutely. I was just responding to the various “breasts are designed for breastfeeding because SCIENCE” comments.

  401. Quoted for truth.

    Just because breasts evolved with a structure that can feed infants does not mean they were designed that way, that that is their “purpose,” or what have you. Jesus but I hate just-so evobio arguments.

    And as far as the hips thing? No one who was born biologically female has the hips of a man. You just don’t. The female pelvis, it is different, yo. (yes, I realize the “my hips are narrower than a man’s!” comments were in response to the BABIEZ ARE THE REASON FER YER HIPS, WENCHES stuff. But still)

    igglanova:
    I think people are getting hung upon ‘purpose.
    ’Breastsdon’thaveapurposebecausetheyweren’tdesignedwithanygoalinmind.

    Wecouldhaveavoidedthisshit-quagmireifwe’djustagreeonunambiguousterminology.

  402. zuzu: I mean, if you’re going to use a term, and you’re asked to define it, you don’t get to hide behind “Well, it doesn’t really mean anything and there’s no agreement and you’re mean for asking me.” If your argument is that people who criticize extended/full-term breastfeeding are awful people, maybe we should agree on our terms, yes?

    FFS I am so sick of people putting words in my mouth.

    I have not been hiding behind anything. I was honest that I didn’t have a good definition of the phrase “full term nursing” to hand. Someone else did, and now we have an operating definition. More importantly, why the fuck does it matter? What women do with their breasts is their own goddamn business.

    Jill: I don’t think anyone is pushing back on the idea that breasts exist for nursing.

    Only when the kid is too old and OMG IT SQUICKS ME, or when the woman feels something I don’t think she should feel and OMG SHE’S A PEDO. Yeah, only then.

    1. Only when the kid is too old and OMG IT SQUICKS ME, or when the woman feels something I don’t think she should feel and OMG SHE’S A PEDO. Yeah, only then.

      Christ. We’re having a few different conversations here, obviously.

  403. chava: Just because breasts evolved with a structure that can feed infants does not mean they were designed that way, that that is their “purpose,” or what have you. Jesus but I hate just-so evobio arguments.

    And as far as the hips thing? No one who was born biologically female has the hips of a man. You just don’t. The female pelvis, it is different, yo. (yes, I realize the “my hips are narrower than a man’s!” comments were in response to the BABIEZ ARE THE REASON FER YER HIPS, WENCHES stuff. But still)

    You really want to erase the “solely” from those statements, don’t you?

    Breasts are not “solely” for feeding children. Hips are not “solely” for bearing children. Personally, my breasts have other functions than milk production, and my hips? Allow my legs to move so I can walk, and bend.

    Now, you can say that one of the purposes of the breast is to produce milk, and that the reason for the structure of the female pelvis/tendency to accumulate fat in the hips in women is to accommodate childbearing. But you can’t say that the SOLE purpose of breast or hip is for children and not get laughed at.

  404. What part of it doesnt work well in a way that specifically neglects women’s very common needs while fulfilling even uncommon desires of men is hard to understand?

  405. zuzu: You really want to erase the “solely” from those statements, don’t you?

    Actually, I’m sorry. That was misdirected. I AM A BIT HET UP.

  406. That said, if breastfeeding groups want women to make informed decisions about their bodies, they need to be willing to answer questions from women who are looking into it with complete and straightforward

    Except that the commenters here supposedly asking questions about breastfeeding, have, for the most part, framed it is something disgusting and sexually abusive that should be stopped the instant it might feel good to the mother. They did not start this thread by saying, “Gee, that’s sort of weird to me. Anyone here breastfeed that long, and if so, why, and am I going to have to breastfeed that long if I ever do it, and what are your thoughts? The divide started when someone said s/he’d seriously consider calling CPS if s/he saw a woman breastfeeding a 5- or 6-year-old.

    Some background as to why I’m not super-excited about the push to breastfeed:

    Not being pushed here. Actually being defended because it has been conflated with the most egregious child abuse imaginable.

  407. zuzu: And if I do decide to feed my kid with my mammary glands, that doesn’t mean I have to do it for as long as the kid wants to unless I decide that’s what I choose to do. I don’t have to do it on the bus when he’s four years old just because he wants to. I don’t have to do it when meeting my in-laws when he’s five and more than capable of waiting until we get back to the hotel room for some privacy.

    zuzu, maybe you should “blockquote that shit” because I don’t see anyone on this thread arguing that mothers should be enslaved to their children’s demands for the tit at all times.

    I have seen the argument that breastfeeding should end when the child wants it to end, but that is NOT the same thing as saying mothers are obligated to continue for as long as the child wants it to continue. If the mother is OK with breastfeeding until the child weans him/herself, even if that weaning occurs later than you or anybody else is comfortable with, she should be permitted to make that call without a bunch of shaming and CPS-callers coming down on her.

    If you want to keep up the sex analogy, the activity continues until one party has withdrawn consent. Whether the mother or child withdraws consent to breastfeed first, it should be respected. But if neither party has withdrawn consent, it’s no one’s place to make that call for them. This may sound like a very obvious statement of fact but breastfeeding mothers take this kind of shit from society all the time, and when their children are far younger than 5 years of age. That is a very real form of oppression against women.

  408. mary: I have seen the argument that breastfeeding should end when the child wants it to end, but that is NOT the same thing as saying mothers are obligated to continue for as long as the child wants it to continue. If the mother is OK with breastfeeding until the child weans him/herself, even if that weaning occurs later than you or anybody else is comfortable with, she should be permitted to make that call without a bunch of shaming and CPS-callers coming down on her.

    I don’t recall making any statements about CPS, or about the proper age for weaning, mary. I’ll invite you to find those if you think they exist.

    I have said that I think it was rude of the LW’s sister-in-law to breastfeed a kid who was old enough for delayed gratification at the table at her in-laws’ house on the first meeting.

    I have pushed back, strongly, on the idea that women should just suck it up when a stranger’s three-year-old lifts up her shirt looking for a meal, and on the idea that women’s breasts are “solely” for providing nutrition to babies and serve no other purpose. I’ve also pushed back on the idea that kids seeking to nurse in public must be accommodated at all times, at all ages, under all circumstances because you don’t want to tell them why it might not be convenient (such as when the kid is 4, and you’re on the bus).

    I’ve said nothing about breastfeeding being inappropriate, or the sole purpose of breasts being sexual, nor have I said anything about breastfeeding being abusive at any time.

    But I will not let breathtakingly gender-essentialist bullshit in the name of what’s “natural” go unchallenged. My hips are for making my legs move and allowing me to bend; they may be wider than a man’s in order to accommodate childbearing, but they don’t exist solely to bear children. My breasts are not solely for producing milk and otherwise as useless as tits on a bull. Nor are they solely for the fun and visual stimulation of men; they are mine, and mine alone, and I get to decide what to do with them and how to feel about them.

    It does suck that breastfeeding is not more supported in the West, but do you really think the way to increase support, especially among feminists, is to promote the idea that biology is destiny, and ignore all of the bodily-autonomy issues that lactation activism raises?

  409. tinfoil hattie: Some background as to why I’m not super-excited about the push to breastfeed:

    Not being pushed here. Actually being defended because it has been conflated with the most egregious child abuse imaginable.

    The push to breastfeed generally.

  410. tinfoil hattie: Except that the commenters here supposedly asking questions about breastfeeding, have, for the most part, framed it is something disgusting and sexually abusive that should be stopped the instant it might feel good to the mother.

    Also, I’m pretty sure no one here is representing a breastfeeding group. But if they are it would be great if they disclosed.

  411. Sandy: Azalea

    Can you cite a source where a 2 or 3 year old sucking on some body part of an adult who is recieving sexual pleasure from it while they bond damaged the child? If NO ONE says “this was sexual assault” if there are groups who do this same thing and they fiercely defend their right to do it, where would the child suffer? What child is going to say it hurt them to do something they enjoyed doing, that doesn’t stop it from being wrong.

    My point was this: I wasnt the one who said women nurse for sexual gratification, SANDY said so what if she does and I, like a few others said, well whoa that’s enough to rationally unnerve quite a few people and those people would have questions, rightfully so. It isn’t *just* her body because the child is involved, children who cant consent to giving anyone sexual pleasure are doing so, HAPPILY but that doesn’t make it the end of the story.

    My point was this: there are other ways to bond with your child, breastmilk ceases to be the best option after a while because after a while fruits, veggies, meat, poultry and bread/rice/pasta become the big issue. So when you take out the whole nourishing your child element (not to mention the fact that just because a child WANTS to nurse, doesnt mean you’re going to actually have milk ready at that exact time, especially as the child gets older, they have to suck for a while to get the milk flowing if at all at that moment) and all is left is bonding and using mother’s nipple as a pacifier, you’re talking about bonding with your child in a sexually gratifying way and saying SO WHAT ITS MY BOOB and MY CHILD and people are asking to understand why not pump? Why not bond another way IF you’re getting sexual arousal from *this* particular mode of bonding?

    Uterine contractions dont sexually arouse every woman, they hurt me. Not every woman enjoys the nipple suction. I am not talking about oh well this doesnt hurt so, lets go for it, Im talking about THIS FEELS SEXUALLY GOOD, yay my child doesnt want to stop! Some people cant understand why that is ok

  412. Azalea: Can you cite a source where a 2 or 3 year old sucking on some body part of an adult

    Nursing is unique. The breast, used for feeding a child, is like no other body part. Sorry. It’s just not like sucking on a penis, much as you seem to want to see it that way.

    Azalea: Why not bond another way IF you’re getting sexual arousal from *this* particular mode of bonding?

    Because sexual arousal =|= sexual gratification. Because the sexual feelings that may arise in nursing are in a completely different context then sex, and it’s not the same. It is in the context of bonding with a child. Some of the same body structures, some of the same hormones, totally different context.

    And the breasts belong to their owner. And the child wants to nurse. So it’s not your call. Just like I don’t get to say, “Hey, you need to make some babies and use your breasts to feed them” you don’t get to say, “Hey, you’re experiencing nursing in a way I’m not comfortable with, so stop.”

    Azalea: Im talking about THIS FEELS SEXUALLY GOOD, yay my child doesnt want to stop! Some people cant understand why that is ok

    And I’m saying nobody does that. I do not think any woman makes the decision to continue nursing in a vacuum of sexual desire like what you’re describing here.

    Some relevant points for review:

    Alara Rogers: When we say “I feel uncomfortable with the notion of women breastfeeding because they might be getting sexual pleasure out of it”, we’re saying “The use of breasts in sex, which was not their primary design, is more important and valuable for consideration than the use of breasts in nursing, which is what they were designed for.” And since most women are having sex with men, it seems once again to be emphasizng the parts of female reproduction and pleasure that are important to men, rather than the parts that are important to women.

    Kristen J.: Huh…it reads to me like people may be conflating sexual arousal and sexual desire. All sorts of things may be inadvertently arousing, an autonomic response, but not the product of sexual desire. Many women experience arousal while breastfeeding, but I suspect a only small portion of women experience sexual desire for their children and act on that desire by breastfeeding. The latter would clearly be abuse, but bears no resemblance to the former.

    tmc: Which do you honestly think has greater health benefits to a kindergartner, breastmilk or sugary juices? Yet somehow I don’t see any outrage about people “unnecessarily” giving their kids fucking juice with their lunch.

    jennygadget: I’m pretty sure we are pointing out that mothers who sexually abuse their children are probably going to do so whether or not breastfeeding arouses them, and that women who are not sexually abusive towards their children are not going to become sexually abusive simply because breastfeeding causes a certain amount of arousal. Which I’m pretty sure fits nicely with the feminist theory that sexual abuse is about power and not being overcome with arousal.

    What I don’t understand is why you can’t seem to see that the most likely scenario – given that our culture considers taboo the topics of both women’s sexual pleasure and the actual realities of caring for small children – is that bystanders tend to freak out and read all kinds of stuff into what is said when women talk about becoming aroused while nursing. Rather than there being a remarkable number of women who sexually abuse their children in this manner.

    Michelle: While some women *may* experience something they code as sexual, I have seen nothing that indicates that women are “getting off” on nursing. I believe we’ve all seen that information that hugs release oxytocin too. Should we not hug our kids? It gets kind of ridiculous to get from “this may feel good” to “OMG gross!”

    Lolagirl: The longer this conversation goes on the more apparent it becomes that some commenters here are still holding on to the anti-breastfeeding sentiment that is so utterly ingrained in our western culture.

  413. Most of the ideas you are pushing back hard on, zuzu, are one-time comments here. One person has said that breasts exist solely for feeding. I don’t know who said that women’s hips exist solely for childbearing.

    Where you’re being anti-feminist and and anti-woman, in MY opinion, is when you are pushing back hard on the idea that breastfeeding should be accommodated in public at all times. It damn well SHOULD be accommodated, and to “push back hard” against that is decidedly anti-mother and anti-feminist.

    Azalea, your disgusting insistence that pleasurable breastfeeding = child sexual abuse is egregiously offensive, and I respectfully request you STOP conflating breastfeeding with sexual abuse. Your comments are vile, and I feel ill just reading them.

  414. I feel this excellent comment bears repeating since we can’t seem to shake this idea that enjoyable breastfeeding = sexual desire for children:

    tinfoil hattie: Hey: we pedophilic, ill-mannered, sexually abusive, non-autonomous, overly enmeshed, boundary-free slaves to our children’s demands on our bodies except when we are forcing our teenagers to breastfeed us to orgasm get that most of the “feminists” posting here do NOT want us to use our breasts for a primary biological function. We are not stupid; we get that you demand to tell us what to do with our breasts while simultaneously insisting that YOUR breasts are your OWN, and nobody’s gonna tell YOU what they’re for or what to do with them, dammit! You’re coming through loud and clear: your right not to feel grossed out by a mother feeding her child trumps every given mother’s right to decide how and when to feed her child.

    So are we done yet, or do you need to browbeat marginalized women some more?

  415. tinfoil hattie: Where you’re being anti-feminist and and anti-woman, in MY opinion, is when you are pushing back hard on the idea that breastfeeding should be accommodated in public at all times. It damn well SHOULD be accommodated, and to “push back hard” against that is decidedly anti-mother and anti-feminist.

    Actually, I said that the *child* did not need to be accommodated at all times just because they want to nurse, and I stand by that. If the mother doesn’t feel comfortable, she does not have to nurse a four-year-old on the bus even if he’s insisting. Women do not have to laugh off having their shirts lifted up by strange children looking to nurse, lest someone think they’re not sufficiently in touch with their womanhood and the purpose of their breasts. Please enlighten me on what’s anti-mother or anti-feminist about that. Because as I see it, it’s neither anti-mother nor anti-feminist to remind mothers that their bodies are their own even if they’re the source of nutrition for their children, and they get to decide the time and place for accommodating their children’s wishes.

    And I do think that there are times when it’s rude to do things in public or in someone else’s home that you would do in your own. I mean, if someone came to your home, took off their shoes, and put their bare feet on your furniture the first time they met you, would you feel okay with it? What if they pulled out toenail clippers on the bus? Hell, it’s considered rude to bring wine to a dinner party because it indicates you don’t trust the host to choose properly.

    The age of the child also makes a difference, because there’s a big difference between an infant or young toddler whose primary source of nutrition is breast milk, and a five-year-old who’s just been sitting at the table eating off a plate.

  416. I mean- It’s upsetting at the time perhaps, but I don’t know anyone who is worse off for it. I just wonder if maybe breastfeeding late in the game has more to do with the mother’s emotional needs than the child’S. Which, by the way, I dont see as problematic. But since it seems to trouble society so much, cause so much headache for the breastfeeding mother, and potentially peer-meanness for the child in the future– and more importantly, since it doesn’t seem harmful to wean children early on, I don’t see why there is this need to persist with the breastfeeding…

    I really just don’t understand it. I’m sort of at a loss because i know I personally don’t really care- (i would find it a bit rude if someone breastfed -unnecessarily- at the table)- but I know that in general its a very uncomfortable thing for a lot of people to be around and so I just don’t see the reasoning behind breastfeeding so late.

  417. [The sole purpose of a book is to be read. => No other purpose is correct. => Using a book to prop up your coffee table is wrong.]

    Ms Kristen, you have given me the idea for a new game. I was going to ask if this depended on the author of the book, and the format just came to me:

    “The sole purpose of a book written by [blank] is [blank].”

    As I have just had the idea, it’s still very sketchy, but it might be comparative if one has a group of people present capable of forming consensus about whose example is most topical or funniest without causing World War Seventeen. Or it might be cumulative, in that one would to repeat the previous statements and then add one’s own.

    I provide an example (warning for leftward political bias):

    The sole purpose of a book written by Rush Limbaugh is to prop up the kitchen table you can’t afford to replace because Mr Limbaugh convinced the Republicans in Congress that they had to let all your tax cuts expire in order to invent new ones for the “job creators”.

    Please feel free to suggest improvements. This is right off the top of my head.

  418. Despite all the hubbub, the OP was an etiquette question, essentially, and the bottom line is, not at the dinner table. It’s not that breastfeeding a 5-year-old is an Evil Thing That Must Be Stopped. It’s that it’s not an activity to do in public (that includes the house of people who are near-perfect strangers).

    All bets are off when it comes to babies and toddlers. They don’t have a private/public divide. They urinate and defecate in public. They will touch their own private parts and those of other people without knowledge they’re doing anything wrong. And they need to eat when they need to eat, and we feed them whenever, whatever they need to eat, without worrying about where we are.

    But starting around age 3 or 4, they start getting it. My 4-y.o. neighbor, who’s got a mischievous streak, will touch women’s breasts to see what happens when she breaks the rules. She knows she is pushing boundaries, and I and her mother have to be stern with her: that is a private part, and you may not touch someone’s breasts without permission. She has recently started closing the door when she uses the toilet. She understands public versus private, and if she were breastfeeding, there would be no reason she wouldn’t be able to put breastfeeding firmly in the “private” category.

    Once kids start to realize that there are actions we do only in private, and parts of our bodies we bare only in private, that is the point where it is okay to tell them, “You have to wait to nurse until we are in private.”

    Clearly there are people in this thread who don’t agree that breastfeeding should evolve into a private activity once the kid is old enough to understand privacy. I don’t think these people are arguing in bad faith; I think they, by and large, have seen horrible behavior towards breastfeeding mothers in general, and are very leery of any restrictions on breastfeeding mothers. I don’t know if I agree or disagree that this is an aspect of our culture that needs to change. All I can say for sure is, it is an aspect of our culture, and there doesn’t seem to me to be a compelling reason to violate that cultural norm when the child’s basic welfare is in no way at stake. And, in the positive effects category, the child learns delayed gratification (a hugely beneficial skill, if it can be learned young), and begins to understand one more piece of the huge cultural puzzle.

    I mean, you could make a similar case for not teaching that touching one’s own private parts is an activity only to be done in private. I’m not implying that breastfeeding has a sexual gratification component. But children often like to touch their own genitalia to self-soothe and make themselves feel good. But as soon as they understand privacy, we teach them that this is an activity to be done in private only. This isn’t anti-masturbation; it’s just properly acculturating our kids.

  419. Breastfeeding is not like masturbating. Breastfeeding is not like putting your bare feet on someone’s coffee table. Breastfeeding is not like shitting, or pissing, or ejaculating.

    Good heavens, people. What the HELL is all this about? Feminism? No.

  420. Despite all the hubbub, the OP was an etiquette question, essentially, and the bottom line is, not at the dinner table.

    Or, rather, not at some dinner tables. It’s perfectly welcome at mine. The etiquette here is that if someone’s breastfeeding, I offer to bring them a cool beverage; or, in some cases, offer to cut their food for them so they can eat one-handed; or, in some cases (usually with younger children), offer a pillow or cushion.

    Clearly there are people in this thread who don’t agree that breastfeeding should evolve into a private activity once the kid is old enough to understand privacy. I don’t think these people are arguing in bad faith; I think they, by and large, have seen horrible behavior towards breastfeeding mothers in general, and are very leery of any restrictions on breastfeeding mothers.

    And/or they really don’t care if someone chooses to breastfeed at their dinner table, or anywhere else.

    I don’t know if I agree or disagree that this is an aspect of our culture that needs to change.

    I think you’re on tenuous ground with that “our”. Not everyone here shares your culture.

    (In case you’re interested? I’m white Anglo suburban Australian. Didn’t breastfeed till age five; some friends have breastfed past toddlerhood, including in my house; think the world would be a much, much better place if no-one turned a hair.)

  421. Kristen J.: The sole purpose of a book is to be read. => No other purpose is correct. => Using a book to prop up your coffee table is wrong.

    I don’t agree with this. Just because propping up the coffee table isn’t the book’s purpose doesn’t mean that it’s wrong. I think you’re conflating “purpose” and “function.” The sole purpose of a book may be to be read, but that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have other functions, or that exploiting those other functions is “wrong.” It just means that those other functions aren’t its purpose. Like I said, decorating my ears with metal isn’t wrong, but nor is it my ears’ purpose.

    Lauren: I think you’re unnecessarily dividing emotional and physical development here. People were indeed trying to figure out whether or not it’s developmentally appropriate for a five year old to breastfeed and coming to vastly difference conclusions based on their levels of knowledge of biological, social, and psychological development.

    I don’t think I am. Emotional milestones are important to reach as well. If your child hasn’t smiled by a certain point (8 weeks, maybe?), doesn’t display separation anxiety at around 8 or 9 months, isn’t interacting emotionally by returning kisses or whatever, isn’t displaying basic empathy by whenever, then yes, that indicates a serious developmental problem. But again, I went back and reread the comments. People aren’t saying that if a kid doesn’t want to wean by a given age, that suggests an important emotional milestone isn’t being reached and that’s something you might want to see a specialist about. People are saying that this is something bad that’s being done to the child. And that popped up beginning at comment #9. What you are suggesting is a much more interesting discussion. It’s one that I wish we had a 400+ comment thread about. But we don’t.

    Lauren: (also there seems to be a contingency on this blog that is hyper-reactive to the possibility of child abuse — acting like it’s all about breastfeeding would be passable if it weren’t obvious that so many of us are regulars). I suppose it’s no one else’s job to educate other people on breastfeeding, but then I wouldn’t jump to get offended when people don’t get it.

    I don’t quite understand what you mean here. In this thread, people have conflated breastfeeding with child abuse. Certainly this is a blog in which people get appropriately outraged and upset about child abuse, but I can’t think of a topic in the last few months in which a completely normal sensation during a completely normal activity has been attacked as evidence of pedophilia. And lots of people have tried to do some educating about breastfeeding. I first made an informational post about it being extremely common to feel sexual stimulation when breastfeeding. Sandy made an informational post about breastfeeding. Alara did as well (Alara’s posts are always thoughtful and informational, I think). The fact that after that, posters continued to insist that it was child abuse is all the more obnoxious if the excuse is that they’re young and don’t know much about breastfeeding. Well, OK. I’m older and I know some things about it. So…maybe take my word for it.

    Lauren: I’m not talking about breastfeeding ignorant doctors, these statements came from feminist midwives and doulas.

    Right. There are assholes in every profession and walk of life. That’s not unique to breastfeeding advocates or natural childbirth advocates, and sadly, feminism is no insulation against it. But nobody in this thread is pushing breastfeeding. We’re responding to it being attacked in pretty offensive ways.

    Lauren: In this thread, the assertion that breastfeeding moms always know best is absurd, not because of breastfeeding, but because this kind of essentialism is by itself absurd.

    But nobody has said this. What I have said, repeatedly, is that when it comes to individual situations and decisions, the mothers–the people in these situations–are, on the whole, going to be making better-informed and more accurate choices than random strangers on the internet or new in-laws about when and for how long breastfeeding is appropriate for them. That’s not at all the same thing as “breastfeeding moms always know best.” For one thing, what I have said is not limited to breastfeeding moms–you can go check out the recent thread about Jessica Valenti’s use of formula. I would trust a woman’s decision to use formula from the git-go far more than I would trust the condemnation of it by a bunch of strangers who don’t know jack about her circumstances. For another “usually much better than a bunch of internet strangers or random in-laws” is not the same thing as “best.” I’d be completely on-board with a bunch of lactation consultants and family therapists and child psychologists working out a study to trace the effects of breastfeeding across several years of children’s and mother’s lives. But that’s not what’s been suggested here, and in the absence of such a study, I certainly don’t think “oooh, that makes me feel squicky and gives me a weird vibe” is an adequate substitute. I’ll go with “usually best to leave that decision to the people involved in it” over “squicky weird vibe” any day.

    Lauren: Also just wanted to point out that there are in fact quite a few studies on the right amount of hugs to give a kid or how much a parent should actively play with their kid. In these cases, minimum amounts are usually the threshold for study (Answer: LOTS & at least 15 minutes of uninterrupted quality time per child per day), which on reflecting is a lot like the breastfeeding info, which is telling. I’ll think more on that.

    Jeez, I hate those studies with a passion. I really do. I find it to be part of a whole culture of “scientists having to counter the stupid shit their predecessors did because their predecessors didn’t think women could possibly be decent mothers without their completely counter-intuitive advice.” Like that horrible “monkeys don’t develop as well if their mother is replaced with a mother-shaped object made of barbed wire” study. Great, good to know. I’ll make a note of that: barbed wire is not an adequate substitution for mothering. Or the study that my cousin was given a pamphlet about when she left the hospital after giving birth, citing a study demonstrating that babies develop better when their parent cuddle them, as opposed to when their parents just make eye contact with them. Studies like that just make me want to go pound my head against a wall. Hug children and play with them, you say? Amazing. Thank you, scientists.

    zuzu: I mean, if you’re going to use a term, and you’re asked to define it, you don’t get to hide behind “Well, it doesn’t really mean anything and there’s no agreement and you’re mean for asking me.” If your argument is that people who criticize extended/full-term breastfeeding are awful people, maybe we should agree on our terms, yes?

    But…Sandy did define it. She said it was longer than average. You then asked what she meant by average, which seems really disingenuous to me, because average is not a term that’s so unusual as to require defining. It means “normal in whatever social grouping you’re a part of.”

    zuzu: we won’t go into the whole hips business — because I do wonder how hipless snakes manage to produce young if the only reason women have hips is to bear children

    Snakes aren’t even mammals. Their reproductive processes are not like ours. That’s just a bizarre comparison. Amoebae don’t have hips either. Or clams.

    zuzu: But just because something has a unique purpose does not mean that any given person is obligated to fulfill that purpose…

    The two paragraphs of your comment that begin with this sentence don’t seem to belong to this thread. Nobody here has made any argument that anybody has to use their breasts for breastfeeding unless they want to. You are arguing against a position that nobody here is advocating. The breastfeeding on a bus issue was brought up by a woman who wanted to nurse her three-year-old on the bus but felt unable to do so due to social disapproval. Nobody here has said that anybody has to breastfeed for any amount of time whatsoever. That hasn’t been the issue at hand. The issue at hand has been people deciding when other women should not be breastfeeding, lest they be on the receiving end of a CPS visit.

    zuzu: I have pushed back, strongly, on the idea that women should just suck it up when a stranger’s three-year-old lifts up her shirt looking for a meal,

    Nobody said this. I believe that I said that I don’t think flipping out is the best response, nor is it a good argument for not breastfeeding a three-year-old. But nobody said “just suck it up” or “laugh it off” or whatever. You even noted that Rodeo clarified why she used the word “bitch,” and her clarification made it pretty clear that it had nothing to do with setting boundaries or not being cool with it; it had to do with hitting and generally being a jerk.

    zuzu: I’ve also pushed back on the idea that kids seeking to nurse in public must be accommodated at all times, at all ages, under all circumstances because you don’t want to tell them why it might not be convenient (such as when the kid is 4, and you’re on the bus).

    Again, nobody has said that they must be accommodated. I and others have said that if the mother is willing, they shouldn’t have to be denied just because it makes some other people, who are perfectly capable of averting their eyes, uncomfortable.

    zuzu: If the mother doesn’t feel comfortable, she does not have to nurse a four-year-old on the bus even if he’s insisting.

    Nobody has argued otherwise. What are you fighting against?

    zuzu: Hell, it’s considered rude to bring wine to a dinner party because it indicates you don’t trust the host to choose properly.

    It…is? See, not only have I never heard of this, but apparently my parents never heard of it, their friends never heard of it, my friends never heard of it–in my social circle, it’s considered kind of rude to show up for a dinner party without a bottle of wine or a box of chocolates or a bunch of flowers or something to contribute. Etiquette rules are obviously not set in stone, even within a given country, or a given city (am I recalling correctly, zuzu, that you live in NYC?).

    My personal experience tells me that the scourge of people clipping their nails on public transportation is far more widespread than that of mothers breastfeeding 5-year-olds. Or any other age, for that matter. I would prefer the breastfeeding of the 5-year-old. Unlike nail-clipping, breastfeeding doesn’t shoot or leave bits of your body all over the place.

    lauredhel: Or, rather, not at some dinner tables. It’s perfectly welcome at mine. The etiquette here is that if someone’s breastfeeding, I offer to bring them a cool beverage; or, in some cases, offer to cut their food for them so they can eat one-handed; or, in some cases (usually with younger children), offer a pillow or cushion.

    Word. I’d probably be a bit surprised if someone I didn’t know started breastfeeding a five-year-old at my dinner table, but that’s no reason not be kind to them.

  422. In this thread, the assertion that breastfeeding moms always know best is absurd, not because of breastfeeding, but because this kind of essentialism is by itself absurd.

    This is potentially wildly off topic and possibly not really what you were addressing, but I think it might be helpful to some people, so here goes:

    One of the things that I have had to deal with a lot as a childless (and younger looking) woman who provides educational services to children is assertion that I cannot possibly know as much as about children as mothers. (Usually when I am asking elementary age children to not run in the library – but that’s another post.)

    Now on a certain level, this is true. I do not have the day to day experience of caring for an infant, toddler, etc. I also do not know parents’ own children anywhere close to as well as they do.

    I do, however, have a lot of experience in dealing with a wide range of children. I also have had a decent amount of training on how to do this effectively, both formally from my employers and schooling, and informally from the other women that I know that have similar professions – and are often mothers themselves. This is experience that most of the parents I encounter do not have – at least not to the extent that I have it.

    One of the things my own mother crystalized for me, after a particularly frustrating day at work, was that I have knowledge and experience in what is best for children in general, while the parents I encounter have knowledge and experience in what is best for their children in particular. These are not the same things. And the fact that I cannot decipher.

    Jane’s toddler speak as well as her parents can does not mean that I do not know a lot about how children acquire language. Likewise, the fact that Jane’s parents may not have this knowledge about how children acquire language does not mean that they have not done a fantastic job of providing a language rich environment for her.

    I think when we talk about children and what is best for them we tend to forget this distinction. In no small part because of the gendered division between who (usually) cares for young children and who is considered rational and full of wisdom. So we have a tendency to collapse down “women are the best people to make decisions for themselves…and their families” to “mothers know what is best for their children” because it fits with “mothers know best” yet rejects the idea that “male = authority on every topic.”

    But knowing the most and being the best person to make the decision are not same things…and acting as though they are makes it difficult for everyone to share useful information in a non-condescending and non-anxiety inducing that helps women make the best decisions for their children and themselves.

  423. gah! sorry for all the missing words and bad formatting. That will teach me to write long comments when I am sleepy.

  424. Well, sure, but jennygadget, you’re neither a random person on the internet nor a newly-met in-law. You are someone who’s done a fair bit of research and has her own experience to draw on. Despite Lauren’s mistaken characterization of what I said, it was never “mothers know best.” It was “mothers are in a better position to judge what’s right for them and their kids than people on the internet or well-meaning in-laws who clearly don’t know much about the situation, let alone strangers on the bus who think calling CPS is a good move.” I would absolutely trust the opinions of lactation consultants, pediatricians, family therapists, child psychologists, etc. on any concerns that extended breastfeeding might entail. But no group composed of such people has issued a statement, most likely because there isn’t any research, for all the reasons that Angus cited. So there isn’t any other kind of expertise to be had beyond that of the people involved in the situation.

  425. jennygadget @471:

    One of the things my own mother crystalized for me, after a particularly frustrating day at work, was that I have knowledge and experience in what is best for children in general, while the parents I encounter have knowledge and experience in what is best for their children in particular. These are not the same things.

    Actually, this is how I think of therapy, when I go to therapy: they are the experts on brains, and I am the expert on my brain.

  426. EG

    The “mothers know best” wasn’t a characterization of anything you have said. At least it wasn’t mean to be, and I’m sorry if it came across that way.

    It’s more that…

    …I have to admit my first introductions to the breastfeeding advocates was through my sister, when she was a new mother. And let’s just say…she wasn’t always the most respectful of other mother’s situations.

    While ideally, breastfeeding advocates and experts would themselves understand the difference between “children” and “children I care for” – and I think a lot of them do (bluemilk comes to mind, I adore her posts on parenthood, motherhood, and breastfeeding) – unfortunately I think it’s also really easy for everyone – breastfeeding advocates included – to slide into that lack of distinction. Simply because there aren’t a whole lot of healthy examples of trusting women to be rational actors in our culture, and there is a lot of pressure to trust male experts over women’s experiences.

    So you get women like my sister, who don’t really subscribe to feminism at all, but have read all the studies, and then translate that into lecturing other women rather than conversing with them, because that’s what culture trains us to do.* But you also get women like bluemilk, whose advocacy is very grounded in feminism acknowledging nuance. And of, course, everyone in between. Unfortunately, the lecturing tends to be what culture reinforces. It’s also more memorable and traumatic.

    I’m not trying to say that anyone in particular on this thread – on either side – has been this way (although it’s possible, it’s been a long thread and omg there was some serious craziness in the arousal = abuse convo) just that…

    Lauren’s comment got me thinking about all this, and how this lack of understanding the distinction makes not just certain advocates not as good at what they do but also pressures women into both second guessing their decisions and taking super seriously the advice they are given.

    Because that’s part of what I have to figure out how to do to, how to get parents to listen without taking what I say as the gospel truth. How to explain to parents how their first grader is learning to read, and how that translates to helping them choose reading material…without making them think their previous assumptions are ignorant and/or super harmful to their children.**

    And I just wanted to say that in case saying all that out loud helped anyone see that distinction themselves. Whether they are advocates or mothers or both or neither.

    *I am probably being much too harsh on her, I just remember thinking that a lot of her scorn for some of the women she was arguing with online was very classist and not taking into account how insecure and defensive they may be about their own choices as mothers – or lack of access to choices.

    **Which seems like it would be a really simple thing to do, but with the push to get kids reading younger and younger – even if it means skipping over the language skills that help comprehension and sentence structure and the like – it’s really not always easy at all. I get mothers coming to me that are uber concerned about whether their toddler is showing print awareness, but they don’t even know what to call it – or what age most kids are when they start demonstrating that skill. Cuz really, who actually knows that kind of stuff besides teachers and librarians and the like? And yet the pressure is there to have the kids learning to read, and they do know that recognizing letters is part of that…So, yeah. It’s just a really crappy set up. And we don’t seem to have a lot of models for teaching people to analyze the information they are given, or giving a wide variety of information to choose from, rather than just telling them what to do. That’s actually one of my favorite parts of working in a library, is passing on those skills.

  427. This thread is amazing.

    We’ve got gendered insults (bitches and dicks)
    Accusations of sexual abuse and pedophilia
    Evolutionary and Biological determinism
    A whole lot of people yelling over top of each other
    Jill getting yelled at (it’s not a real thread unless some calls out Jill for something)
    A lot of You’re Anti-Feminist! No You’re Anti-Feminist!
    Some talk of 3 year olds being purely instinctual beings without any capability for reason or understanding
    and much much more, this thread is a gift that keeps on giving.

    But damnit still no flouncing! Come on people flounce for me! Please?

  428. I would absolutely trust the opinions of lactation consultants, pediatricians, family therapists, child psychologists, etc. on any concerns that extended breastfeeding might entail.

    But wouldn’t CPS also be a resource to try and determine if the child is being harmed? Like, Sandy’s insistence that I apparently want to kidnap or nuke or whatever her babies aside, wouldn’t calling CPS be an appropriate action by someone who suspected (even wrongly) that the child was not being cared for properly/abused? In previous instances I’ve read about where CPS was called about extended nursing they generally did not remove the child after assessing the situation — save for one time, when the child reportedly told them that he had told his mother he wanted to stop nursing and she ignored him, and there were also concerns about her co-sleeping with him naked (and he was returned to her soon after anyways.)

    It’s not like all calls to CPS are malicious. And if someone is genuinely concerned about abuse (sexual or otherwise) encouraging them to either “just walk away, moms know best always, ignore red flags” or to try and analyze the situation themselves (are laymen trained in detecting child abuse, now? :p) both sound like godawful pieces of advice. Calling CPS would be calling on many of the people listed as trustworthy sources, which seems like a better move for someone who suspects mistreatment than just ignoring it.

  429. Still curious about the dad-nipple question, too — would people find that an appropriate pacifier for a kid of any age, like a mom-nipple apparently is? Or is there some sort of hand-waving gender-essentialist bullshit reason why suddenly boob-based baby bonding can only happen with mommies because blah blah breasts blah oxycontin.

  430. Bagelsan: Like, Sandy’s insistence that I apparently want to kidnap or nuke or whatever her babies aside

    Bagelsan: Sexual abuse of children is cool on Feministe, now? Getting sexual oral stimulation from your young child is alright because the mom decided she liked it? Good fucking lord I hope you don’t have children. I wouldn’t be able to dial CPS fast enough.

    Bagelsan: Ugh, ugh, ugh. I can’t get over this. And apparently this person has a kid. … I thought we kicked the pedos off this site a while ago?

    Let’s look at the blockquotes here. You called me a pedo and said you couldn’t call CPS fast enough. Or did you think I’m one pedophile and predator who should be allowed to keep her children? If you’ve changed your mind about the accusations you’ve hurled at me, super. Otherwise, own your goddamn words and stop the snide insults. I can’t believe this weaseling and obnoxiousness from you.

    Bagelsan: where CPS was called about extended nursing they generally did not remove the child after assessing the situation

    My understanding is that when the suspicion is of something as bad as sexual abuse, which is what you have been alleging in this thread, CPS first removes the child from the home, then commences with an investigation. A situation traumatic for both mother and child when nothing is actually amiss. Maybe you’d report the “inappropriate breastfeeding” more delicately then your words have been here in this thread. Somehow I doubt it though.

    Seconding everything in 471, and especially this:

    EG: People aren’t saying that if a kid doesn’t want to wean by a given age, that suggests an important emotional milestone isn’t being reached and that’s something you might want to see a specialist about. People are saying that this is something bad that’s being done to the child. And that popped up beginning at comment #9. What you are suggesting is a much more interesting discussion. It’s one that I wish we had a 400+ comment thread about. But we don’t.

  431. I fail to see why the idea of comfort nursing bothers you so much. Breastfeeding is not solely a food delivery system, for Pete’s sake. And no one has advocated it for a kid “of any age,” just pointed out that pretty much nobody in the U.S. breastfeeds past 2 or 3 anyway–and that maybe the rare few who continue to kindergarten-age shouldn’t be tarred and feathered.

    A pacifier (or a thumb) is functioning as a replacement nipple. I don’t see you freaking out about 2-5 year olds using those.

    As for the weird-ass “what if they were sucking their FATHER’S NIPPLES” thing….there is no reason for a child to *start* sucking their father’s nipples. Therefore there is no continuum in the child’s mind associating nipple=food=comfort=love, and no reason to continue that practice when the child can feed themselves. Aside from which, a male nipple would make a shitty pacifier (too small, for one thing). If we lived in the culture Kristin mentioned where children were routinely given a male nipple as a paci when the mother wasn’t around, then I don’t really see an issue with it. I would be suspicious of a man who suckled his kid in the U.S., because why would a man go through the inconvenience and discomfort of using his nipples that way if he wasn’t seriously cracked. Men don’t get a hormonal rush from it, they can’t feed their children with it, no one expects them to do it, etc etc.

    I suppose you could say that there is no reason for a child to ever start sucking on a woman’s nipples, either, given the presence of formula. And if a woman doesn’t want that contact, for whatever reason, that’s totally fine. But if we’re going with your “ITS JUST LIKE A BABY ON A MAN’S TEAT” analogy, I don’t see why a woman breastfeeding an infant is less unheimleich than a woman breastfeeding a toddler or young child.

    Breastfeeding an older child (2-5, say) is *convenient* for the women I know who do it. It gets the kid down for a nap ASAP, it takes care of common infections fast, and it assures you that the kid who won’t eat anything not-brown that week is getting some balanced nutrition in them.

    Bagelsan:
    Stillcuriousaboutthedad-nipplequestion,too—wouldpeoplefindthatanappropriatepacifierforakidofanyage,likeamom-nippleapparentlyis?Oristheresomesortofhand-wavinggender-essentialistbullshitreasonwhysuddenlyboob-basedbabybondingcanonlyhappenwithmommiesbecauseblahblahbreastsblahoxycontin.

  432. You have a lot of fucking faith in CPS.

    It would be WONDERFUL if that was how the system worked. But, you know what? IT DOESN’T. So no, you shouldn’t call CPS lightly. Sometimes it is absolutely warranted. But because you think a kid is being breastfed too long? HELL NO.

    If you think a child is being beaten, if the parents are high all the damn time, if you know they are left home alone in a house with loaded guns—THESE are the kinds of reasons you bring the State into people’s homes. Not because you’re uncomfortable with a woman breastfeeding a five year old. Jesus.

    Bagelsan: Butwouldn’tCPSalsobearesourcetotryanddetermineifthechildisbeingharmed?Like,Sandy’sinsistencethatIapparentlywanttokidnapornukeorwhateverherbabiesaside,wouldn’tcallingCPSbeanappropriateactionbysomeonewhosuspected(evenwrongly)thatthechildwasnotbeingcaredforproperly/abused?InpreviousinstancesI’vereadaboutwhereCPSwascalledaboutextendednursingtheygenerallydidnotremovethechildafterassessingthesituation—saveforonetime,whenthechildreportedlytoldthemthathehadtoldhismotherhewantedtostopnursingandsheignoredhim,andtherewerealsoconcernsaboutherco-sleepingwithhimnaked(andhewasreturnedtohersoonafteranyways.)

    It’snotlikeallcallstoCPSaremalicious.Andifsomeoneisgenuinelyconcernedaboutabuse(sexualorotherwise)encouragingthemtoeither“justwalkaway,momsknowbestalways,ignoreredflags”ortotryandanalyzethesituationthemselves(arelaymentrainedindetectingchildabuse,now?:p)bothsoundlikegodawfulpiecesofadvice.CallingCPSwouldbecallingonmanyofthepeoplelistedastrustworthysources,whichseemslikeabettermoveforsomeonewhosuspectsmistreatmentthanjustignoringit.

  433. Okay, I’m not going to derail further on male nursing, but could we please not continue to use it as a red herring particularly with erroneous information.

  434. Hm. I read the article you linked–is it not the case that the men use their nipples as pacifiers when the mothers are not present? Seemed to be the idea…

    This is interesting, in the context of this thread:
    “But back to that male breastfeeding: Jack O’Sullivan of Fathers Direct says he was invited on chat show after chat show on Monday in the wake of the report going public, and faced a mixture of horror, consternation and support. “Some fathers phoned in to say they’d let their child suck their nipples – often it had just happened when the baby was lying on their chest in bed,” he says. But some people were disgusted: the words “child abuse” came up more than once, which points up interesting cultural differences when you think that, to Aka folk, much of the way we raise our kids would count as child abuse to them (babies being left to sleep alone in a different room from their parents, for example).”

    Kristen J.:
    Okay,I’mnotgoingtoderailfurtheronmalenursing,butcouldwepleasenotcontinuetouseitasaredherringparticularlywitherroneousinformation.

  435. Bagelsan: It’s not like all calls to CPS are malicious. And if someone is genuinely concerned about abuse (sexual or otherwise) encouraging them to either “just walk away, moms know best always, ignore red flags” or to try and analyze the situation themselves (are laymen trained in detecting child abuse, now? :p) both sound like godawful pieces of advice. Calling CPS would be calling on many of the people listed as trustworthy sources, which seems like a better move for someone who suspects mistreatment than just ignoring it.

    Do…you know anything about how CPS works? If you call and accuse someone of sexually abusing children, and that person is not very wealthy and connected, CPS will come take the child away. This is a horrific and traumatic experience for both mother and child and is not something that should be done lightly. And no, CPS is not going to kick every report to a lactation consultant, child development specialist, pediatrician, and/or family therapist. The call is going to go to one overworked, underpaid, underappreciated, and overwhelmed caseworker who may or may not have an MSW. The case will go into her already overloaded case file, which contains two or three times the number of cases that a full-time caseworker can be expected to handle responsibly. And God knows when she’ll get to it for review, once the child has been removed from the “immediate harm” of being breastfed.

    Congratulations. You’ve saved a kid.

    Bagelsan: and he was returned to her soon after anyways.

    Gee, well, that’s OK then. I’m sure that since he was returned home “soon after,” the trauma of being forcibly removed from his home and placed with strangers–the rate of abuse in the foster care system is shocking, by the way–was no big. Sure, what could go wrong there?

    Bagelsan: Still curious about the dad-nipple question, too — would people find that an appropriate pacifier for a kid of any age, like a mom-nipple apparently is? Or is there some sort of hand-waving gender-essentialist bullshit reason why suddenly boob-based baby bonding can only happen with mommies because blah blah breasts blah oxycontin.

    I answered that already, with the exact answer Chava used as well. A child would only turn to sucking on its father’s nipples for comfort if the child had been used to doing so all along and gaining comfort from it. Since that’s not a thing that happens in our culture, there’s no reason for a US dad to be suckling a kid–this is another Thing That Does Not Happen, like the evil mommy who breastfeeds for her own sexual satisfaction and the evil woman who aborts in the third trimester just for the hell of it. But as I said, if a five-year-old is sucking on its dad’s nipples and they are of Aka heritage, then what’s the harm?

    I’m not sure why the existence of oxytocin is bullshit to you. It’s a chemical that is strongly associated with emotional bonding. One of the times it’s released very powerfully is during breastfeeding. The abstinence-only people aren’t wrong that oxytocin exists; they’re wrong in their implication that somehow women have a limited supply, and so must conserve all they have for their husband. Oxytocin is released at a number of times, including sex, the dilation of the cervix, uterine contractions, etc. (oh no! the same affection-stimulating hormone is released during sex, childbirth, and breastfeeding! abuse alert! the human endocrine system is programmed to abuse children!). Because I’m an atheist, I don’t hold with mystical religious woo explanations for our emotions. A biochemical one seems about right to me.

  436. Also, why on earth would calling CPS because a mother is breastfeeding a five-year-old be an appropriate thing to do when neither you nor anybody else has produced any evidence whatsoever that breastfeeding at that age causes a child harm?

  437. Not everything that feels good is of a sexual nature. Hugs feel good, and and a lot they are platonic hugs. Same thing with kisses. I kissed my four year old daughter on the mouth all the damn time, she would kiss me back, and we still hug now that she is thirteen. (I blow her kisses, too, but she has been “blocking” those for years, so it’s mostly to torment her). We have affection for each other, a lot of times we express it physically, and it isn’t sexual for crying out loud.

    And that’s true of breastfeeding. When I was breastfeeding her, it felt good to me, it felt good to her, so it was an enjoyable activity for the both of us. I was sad when I had to wean her, not only because my easy fix to her distress was gone, but because it was a decision that was being foisted on us, for I had to go on meds that would go into my milk. I nursed her until she was two and a half, and I would have kept going until one of us was truly sick of it.

  438. @Chava,

    Some of the men in that tribe lactate, but more to the point there is a growing number of men in the “West” that are starting to nurse their children. Some of these men are the primary care givers to their children (some of them are gay men). Others want to bond with their kids. The men who nurse often say they experience a similar sense of calm and joy when nursing but there hasn’t been sufficient research on the chemical reaction phenomenon because there is such enormous stigma.

    I think feminism should be highly supportive of any efforts by men to take a more active role in child care and for me that includes being supportive of men nursing for either comfort or nutrition. Its not inappropriate. Its not gross. Its not child molestation. Its freaking awesome.

  439. EG: I consider Oxytocin to be bullshit because 1) it was only discovered recently and 2) I first heard of it when the abstinence crowd was crowing about it. At this point, if a Republican said the sky was blue, I’d have to have at least two other people confirm it.
    Although I’ve recently confirmed that apparently it’s officially considered to exist by the medical community, they also considered hysteria to be a thing too.
    I think you’ve hit the nail on the head about milestones, and got to what I was failing to articulate. I do think that on some level, breast-feeding at, say 4 or 5 suggests that either mother or child are reluctant to acknowledge that the child isn’t an infant anymore. (And, yes, at 4 and 5, from what I’ve observed, kids at that age want, more than anything, to be seen as big kids.
    Chava: The thumbsucking is usually just a nervous habit, a carryover from babyhood. It’s got f-all to do with nursing.

  440. lauredhel:
    Ithinkyou’reontenuousgroundwiththat“our”.Noteveryoneheresharesyourculture.

    (Incaseyou’reinterested?I’mwhiteAnglosuburbanAustralian.Didn’tbreastfeedtillagefive;somefriendshavebreastfedpasttoddlerhood,includinginmyhouse;thinktheworldwouldbeamuch,muchbetterplaceifno-oneturnedahair.)

    Apologies. Prudie’s an American who writes for an American website, so I unthinkingly said “our” to mean “American.” But Feministe has commenters from all over the globe, of course.

    Let me rephrase: I would say most — 95%? — of Americans would agree that breastfeeding a preschooler or older isn’t an activity that is acceptable in public, at least in American culture.

  441. zuzu: Hell, it’s considered rude to bring wine to a dinner party because it indicates you don’t trust the host to choose properly.

    This sentence, for me, really crystallizes the issue. What is rude changes from place to place and circumstance to circumstance. I went to a friend’s house for dinner last night. I guess it could be considered a “dinner party” in that we sat at a table, drank wine, were all relatively dressed up, there were two additional couples there, etc. We felt incredibly stupid because we realized that we forgot a bottle of wine to bring. It’s completely standard in my community that you bring dessert, wine, or bread when you’re invited for dinner.

    Likewise, what people consider rude changes from location to location and circumstance to circumstance. One of feminism’s jobs is to change what is considered “appropriate” to help women. I feel like making breastfeeding a more acceptable practice in more places and circumstances can only help women. Not that women shouldn’t be able to choose not to breastfeed (evidently I bit a lot and so my mom didn’t breastfeed me. Oops). I don’t think anyone here has made any argument that women must have children and must breastfeed those children. But that women who choose to have children and choose to breastfeed those children should be given an easier break than they currently have it.

    Also, just to add, my parents have CPS called on them when I was an infant because a babysitter thought that I wasn’t being fed. I was just a really skinny baby. 25 years later, my parents still describe this as one of the scariest times in their lives.

  442. tinfoil hattie: Azalea

    You’re laughable seriously you make NO FUCKING SENSE BECAUSE I FUCKING BREASTFED MY CHILDREN!!! If you STFU for a second and actually read what I said you’d know that 1) Im not saying all breastfeeding mothers are horrible people 2) that , as a mother who has breastfed and when I have my third child WILL breastfeed again is not eeked out by breasts how the FUCK could I be eeked out by breasts?!! FUCKING SERIOUSLY!!!??? 3) Just because a mother does something doesnt make it ok

    Now seriously, if you think being SEXUALLY AROUSED by your child using your nipples as a pacifier and/or getting a little milk here and there is acceptable then that is YOUR thinking, I’m not going to agree with that, I wouldnt do it but I wouldnt say arrest all breastfeeding moms who are breastfeeding tots because you have no way of knowing for sure unless she self reports. THAT still doesn’t make this something that everyone should say “oh its HER body its cool” because HER body is receiving sexual gratification from HER SMALL CHILD through an activity that is wholly optional. Breastfeeding is wonderful but if you’re getting off on it and your child doesn’t need the milk from you and they are old enough for you to bond in other ways that are just as meaningful YEAH there are goingto be people who wonder WHY outside of the obvious SEXUAL GRATIFICATION you continue to do so. When you add SEXUAL ACTIVITY with CHILDREN there is going to be outrage, as there should be, there is going to be an inquiry AS THERE SHOULD BE. And spare me the ” what harm does it cause my child to sexually please me?” BS

    NOBODY called YOU a pedophile unless you’re saying YOU breastfeed because it turns you on. If that is not the case with you WTF are you defending it? THAT is what this thread has gotten into a fuss about, whether or not its ok to get off while breastfeeding a toddler. Why is this even an argument?

  443. Lolagirl:
    “Historytellsusthereareplentyofwomenintheworldwhocan’tbetustedwiththeirownchildren,they’vekilledthem,rapedthem,torturedthem,maimedthem,injuredthem,neglectedthem,”

    Whatonearthareyougettingathere,thatjustbecausesomewomenhavedonetheseawfulthingsthatallwomenshouldbesubjecttoheightenedscrutinyandpresumedtobesociopathic,murderouscriminalsunlesstheyprovethemselvestobeotherwisetoyou?Doyounotseehowthislineoflogichashistoricallybeenusedtofurtheramisogynisticagendatodiscreditandkeepwomenunderthethumbofmenandsocietyforhundredsandeventhousandsofyears?

    Whatutterandoutrageousnonsense.

    “Soyouwanttoraisesonswhowilldemandtoknowwhytheycantsuckonsomeone’snipplesinpublic?Theyhavearighttoknowwhythedictatorwontgivethemaccesstothebreaststheysorightfullydeserve?”

    Thissoundslikeaclosecousintotheoldsongthatboysshouldn’tbebreastfedbecauseitwillturnthemtehgay.Ihappentohavefoursons,andnoneofthemthinkthattheyhavecarteblanchetodowhatevertheywantwhenevertheywanttomeoranyoneelse.Eachofthefirst4werebreastfedforayear,andtheyarealldoingwell,thanksthoughforthefauxconcerntrolling.WhatI’msureisfarmorelikelytobetheoutcomeoftheirbeingbreastfedisabetterappreciationandunderstandingofthebiologicalrealitythatthesolepurposeofbreastsisnotforthesexualtitillationandenjoymentofmen.

    Butyougoonassumingthatallbreastfeedingmothersarepervsandthatalloftheirsonswillturnouttobemisogynistic,domineeringcreeps.Becauseyouseemutterlyinsistentuponthinkingsodespitewhatothersherehavesaidheretothecontrary,Azalea.

    FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME I BREASTFED TOO!!! WTF is wrong with youall? Just because I wont defend having orgasms during breastfeedings (and then continuing to breastfeed into toddlerhood, possibly while continuing to orgasm during these bonding sessions) doesn’t mean I am against breastfeeding. I am against SEXUAL AROUSAL while breastfeeding older children ebcause I BREASTFED and I KNOW that not every time your child WANTS to nurse you actually have milk, I KNOW that there will be times the “comfort” nursing is nothing more than your child sucking on your nipple instead of sucking on a pacifier for comfort and if that action is getting you off and you see NO harm in having ORGASMS while bonding with your child (dont compare that to giving birth, giving birth is not done as often and is necessary otherwise you’ll need MAJOR SUGERY and it isnt something you do multiple times throughout the day).

    Come on, at this point this DOES sound creepy. You;re now ROdeo at al defedning the right to orgasm while breastfeeding/allowing your nipples to be used as pacifiers by toddlers.

  444. I clearly have been out of the loop, having missed both of the Prudie threads this week. However, it is sort of like having a Tivo. In a parallel universe.

  445. Angus Johnston: Absolutely.Iwasjustrespondingtothevarious“breastsaredesignedforbreastfeedingbecauseSCIENCE”comments.

    It isnt JUST dont breastfeed if you feel arousal but WHY breastfeed for SO LONG if you’re feeling arousal? That question has been met with but how are the mother’s orgasms or sexual gratification/arousal/stimulation which result from breastfeeding their 3,4,5,6,7,8 year old child harmful to the child who likes breastfeeding? There are those of us who are shocked.

    The best way to know if it harmed the child, ask your child when they are an adult how do they feel about you (mom) having orgasms during breastfeeding (and insert that you breastfed them until they were whatever age) and see what happens.

  446. shfree:
    Not everything that feels good is of a sexual nature.

    But this thread has gotten to a point where they are specifically talking about experiencing SEXUAL pleasure/gratification sometimes even orgasm frombreastfeeding and deciding to continue breastfeeding for years while experiencing SEXUAL pleasure/gratification and sometimes even orgasms.

  447. Sandy:
    ^Becausesexualarousal=|=sexualgratification=|=sexualdesire.

    Yeah until Rodeo stated he had a friend who orgasmed during breastfeeding and others (Im not sure if you did too) cheered it on like YEAH thats totally OK and natural to orgasm while bonding with your child.

  448. Kristen J.: I think feminism should be highly supportive of any efforts by men to take a more active role in child care and for me that includes being supportive of men nursing for either comfort or nutrition. Its not inappropriate. Its not gross. Its not child molestation. Its freaking awesome.

    If men are nursing for comfort (presumably their own), that’s all fine and good, but how much comfort does a baby get out of it when the person who’s “nursing” them doesn’t produce any milk, or anything at all? I know there are examples of men producing milk under unusual circumstances (including pituitary gland disorders), but I’m extremely skeptical of the idea that “nutrition” is possible in general absent massive doses of estrogen and anti-androgens. And how many cis men, even devoted fathers, would really be interested in that? There are certain side-effects that aren’t necessarily reversible, after all.

    If trans women are the people being referred to, I’d strongly object to any characterization of them as “men” or even as “male,” for reasons mentioned in another thread when I and others objected to the insistence by certain commenters on referring to trans women as “biologically male,” allegedly in the interest of “scientific accuracy.”

    But even for trans women, lactation is extremely rare, and I’ve read a number of sources indicating that even when it occurs, the milk produced is insufficient for nutritional purposes, requiring a great deal of supplementation. Look, not only have I been on hormone therapy for more than 11 years now, but I was actually one of the very few documented cases of a trans woman not only ending up with off-the-charts prolactin levels, but actually developing pituitary gland tumors — not from taking estrogen, but from taking an anti-androgen not generally available in the U.S. because my Crohn’s Disease made the standard medication impossible for me to take. And despite all that? No lactation whatsoever, at any time. And the same is true, so far as I know, for 99% of trans women. Hence my skepticism about cis men nursing for “nutrition.”

  449. azalea: You need to stop taking your issues out on random internet people. Seriously, your rage is way out of proportion.

    It’s none of your business what I or anyone else experienced durimg nursing.

  450. @DonnaL,

    I’m talking about cismen. And it does happen. It often requires hormone therapy but is not the same as the hormone therapy a trans woman would typically receive. For more info: 1995 Article, SA Article, a book discussing – amazon, a recent Slate article. There are also numerous scientific discussion, but they are behind pay walls.

    But more to the point, why the pushback? There are many documented cases of male lactation. There is an entire society built in part around men nursing children as part of sharing childrearing responsibilities. Clearly there is some benefit to those children. Why all the objections and consternation?

  451. Hm. I hadn’t thought of it that way, and it’s worth considering.
    I don’t find the male nursing to be a derail, because it forces us to interrogate our ideas about what bodies and bodily functions are “for” in the same way that nursing an older child does. I’m not particularly uncomfortable with the idea of a woman nursing a 5 year old, but thinking about male nursing bothers me–and WHY it sets off those “AHH! RUN!” alarm bells is worth interrogating. From a feminist perspective it fits in the category of bodily “purposes” we would never allow men to do because their bodies are not “for” it, but ours supposedly are. I think at various points science has considered female anatomy to have been “made for” things like housecleaning, passive sexual roles, etc–so why not this?

    Kristen J.:
    @Chava,

    Someofthemeninthattribelactate,butmoretothepointthereisagrowingnumberofmeninthe“West”thatarestartingtonursetheirchildren.Someofthesemenaretheprimarycaregiverstotheirchildren(someofthemaregaymen).Otherswanttobondwiththeirkids.Themenwhonurseoftensaytheyexperienceasimilarsenseofcalmandjoywhennursingbuttherehasn’tbeensufficientresearchonthechemicalreactionphenomenonbecausethereissuchenormousstigma.

    Ithinkfeminismshouldbehighlysupportiveofanyeffortsbymentotakeamoreactiveroleinchildcareandformethatincludesbeingsupportiveofmennursingforeithercomfortornutrition.Itsnotinappropriate.Itsnotgross.Itsnotchildmolestation.Itsfreakingawesome.

  452. 1) Breastfeeding: not just for infants. Aside from which, children hit milestones at wildly different rates. I dislike the “you are not pushing the child away fast enough, you bad mommy!” vibe on this thread. It plays straight into the catch-22 women have faced for years: either you’re too nurturing, or you’re not nurturing enough. Either your children are too indepenent due to your emotional frigidity, or they’re momma’s boys who will never grow up since you infantilize them (I find it fascinating how we’ve been referring to the danger of nursing male children in particular) . It’s a very old, very tired trope, and I would think Feministe would know better.

    2) I disagree with you about thumb sucking. It’s a self-soothing action predicated on the fact that human children are hardwired with a suck reflex, and works to calm a child like a pacifier or nipple does.

    Politicalguineapig:
    EG:IconsiderOxytocintobebullshitbecause1)itwasonlydiscoveredrecentlyand2)Ifirstheardofitwhentheabstinencecrowdwascrowingaboutit.Atthispoint,ifaRepublicansaidtheskywasblue,I’dhavetohaveatleasttwootherpeopleconfirmit.
    AlthoughI’verecentlyconfirmedthatapparentlyit’sofficiallyconsideredtoexistbythemedicalcommunity,theyalsoconsideredhysteriatobeathingtoo.Ithinkyou’vehitthenailontheheadaboutmilestones,andgottowhatIwasfailingtoarticulate.Idothinkthatonsomelevel,breast-feedingat,say4or5suggeststhateithermotherorchildarereluctanttoacknowledgethatthechildisn’taninfantanymore.(And,yes,at4and5,fromwhatI’veobserved,kidsatthatagewant,morethananything,tobeseenasbigkids.
    Chava:Thethumbsuckingisusuallyjustanervoushabit,acarryoverfrombabyhood.It’sgotf-alltodowithnursing.

  453. chava: I dislike the “you are not pushing the child away fast enough, you bad mommy!” vibe on this thread. It plays straight into the catch-22 women have faced for years: either you’re too nurturing, or you’re not nurturing enough. Either your children are too indepenent due to your emotional frigidity, or they’re momma’s boys who will never grow up since you infantilize them (I find it fascinating how we’ve been referring to the danger of nursing male children in particular) . It’s a very old, very tired trope, and I would think Feministe would know better.

    Fancy that, people believing that there is an ideal threshold for breastfeeding or other nurturing behaviour, like everything else on the planet. Too much sun? Too little sun? OMG those fucking doctors, always throwing us into a double bind like that with the way we have to be mindful of upper and lower limits!

    Not that I actually have any confidence that there should be an upper limit on breastfeeding for any reason other than peer torment, but let’s not get carried away.

  454. chava: I think at various points science has considered female anatomy to have been “made for” things like housecleaning, passive sexual roles, etc–so why not this?

    I kind of think it depends on how Judith Butler you’re willing to go. I just don’t buy that every single thing about our bodies is socially constructed–lactation is not like housecleaning. It is an actual bodily function. It’s not like you have to provide hormone treatments to men to enable them to wash the dishes. That said, while I think male nursing seems unnecessary (as a non-lactating caretaker, I found that the baby girl I was taking care of loved to suck on my fingers or knuckles for affection and comfort, and also her own thumb, and both of those seem much more convenient to me than maneuvering her to my not-engorged-with-milk breasts; I’ve never loved anybody more than her and my favorite memories are of holding her in my arms, so while not having breastfed I can’t compare the emotional experiences, I can say that our bonding was pretty intense), if it’s working for those dads, I can’t see any reason to object.

    chava: I dislike the “you are not pushing the child away fast enough, you bad mommy!” vibe on this thread. It plays straight into the catch-22 women have faced for years: either you’re too nurturing, or you’re not nurturing enough. Either your children are too indepenent due to your emotional frigidity, or they’re momma’s boys who will never grow up since you infantilize them (I find it fascinating how we’ve been referring to the danger of nursing male children in particular) . It’s a very old, very tired trope, and I would think Feministe would know better.

    I cannot second this hard enough.

    Azalea: The best way to know if it harmed the child, ask your child when they are an adult how do they feel about you (mom) having orgasms during breastfeeding (and insert that you breastfed them until they were whatever age) and see what happens.

    I disagree. That would be doing harm do the child by inflicting knowledge of its mother’s sexual experience on it without its consent and for no good reason. It would be a form of exhibitionism. I wouldn’t ask my grown child how it feels about knowing that I sucked its father’s dick while it was napping in the crib in the same room, either, because I would expect the answer to be “Jesus, Mom, I don’t want to picture that!” Damn, that would be my response if my mother asked me that. I recently made her tear up a photograph of me and my father when I was about three years old. She had snapped it because we were napping side-by-side on my parents’ bed, a few inches apart, and had somehow fallen asleep in exactly the same position. She thought it was cute. What she hadn’t noticed was that apparently my father was having some kind of erotic dream because ew. It’s not that my father having an erotic dream while sleeping within six inches of me is sexual abuse (how was the man supposed to help it?); it’s that I don’t want to know about it, thank you very much, because he is my father.

    Politicalguineapig: EG: I consider Oxytocin to be bullshit because 1) it was only discovered recently and 2) I first heard of it when the abstinence crowd was crowing about it….Although I’ve recently confirmed that apparently it’s officially considered to exist by the medical community, they also considered hysteria to be a thing too.

    Then we’ll just have to disagree. Medical and neurological science makes advances all the time as researchers build on previous work and new tools are discovered. It’s only been rather recently that scientists have had the tools to study brain chemistry and suchlike, so of course new advances and discoveries are going to be made. Otherwise, well, what would be the point of research? By the time we’re aware of something’s molecular structure and can make synthetic oxytocin and use it routinely to induce labor successfully, it seems quite evident to me that we’ve gone way beyond the “diagnose them with hysteria” stage.

    And hysteria was/is a thing; we just don’t call it that any longer or consider it to be caused by female inferiority or treat it in the same way. We call it PTSD (or shell-shock, earlier than that, when WWI soldiers started exhibiting hysterical symptoms but doctors didn’t want to insult their manliness by using “hysteria”), or panic attacks, or anxiety disorders. “Hysteria” was a catch-all term for “there’s something wrong with you, you strange woman, so we’re just going to blame it on your woman-ness.” They were dead wrong about the second part, as they learned during WWI, and in generalizing “something wrong” to mean “anything you’re doing that some dude doesn’t like, like demanding things.” That doesn’t mean they were wrong about the first part; some women were experiencing a number of upsetting symptoms that were, at the time, inexplicable to them. If you reconsider those symptoms in the light of what we know about PTSD etc. and how confined and helpless many of those women were to process traumas such as rape or sexual abuse any other way, it doesn’t seem odd to me at all that many women were in “treatment” for “hysteria.”

  455. Azalea: When you add SEXUAL ACTIVITY with CHILDREN there is going to be outrage, as there should be, there is going to be an inquiry AS THERE SHOULD BE.

    Breastfeeding is not sexual activity.

    Azalea: NOBODY called YOU a pedophile unless you’re saying YOU breastfeed because it turns you on.

    Bagelsan called Sandy a pedophile just for noting that many women receive sexual stimulation from breastfeeding. So don’t go around acting as though it’s been a matter of breastfeeding older children for orgasms all along. That is some major goalpost-moving.

    In fact, your whole current focus on “evil mommies who breastfeed six-year-olds in order to continue having orgasms” is goalpost-moving. That was not part of your initial freak-out. The orgasm issue didn’t even arise until comment 202, well after you had already flipped out at the idea that some freakish women were feeling sexual pleasure from having their nipples sucked on. In comment 202, Rodeo went on to say “It only happened once, during the first few magical, unreal weeks after birthing a baby when everything is amazing, and after that breastfeeding became routine and she didn’t pay much attention to it.” So your strawmommy of some wicked woman manipulating her child into continuing to breastfeed so she can experience wild orgasms over and over again over the years didn’t happen. You are flipping out over something that has not happened and is not going to happen, something you have made up.

    Azalea: WHY breastfeed for SO LONG if you’re feeling arousal?

    Because both mother and child want to. Why is this so difficult for you to understand in any light but that of sexual abuse? There are plenty of reasons a mother might want to continue breastfeeding.

    Further, you are making up this imaginary connection between extended breastfeeding and sexual arousal. Many women experience sexual stimulation while breastfeeding. Some women allow breastfeeding to extend into their child’s fifth or sixth years. Why are you assuming that the women in the second group are also automatically in the first? Nobody has made any statement to that effect. You have no reason to think that the proportion of women who experience sexual stimulation while breastfeeding a five-year-old is any different from the proportion of women who experience sexual stimulation while breastfeeding a two-month-old. The two things have not been linked. There has been no correlation suggested by anybody but you. In fact, considering Rodeo’s anecdote, it seems likely that the proportion of women who experience sexual stimulation while breastfeeding is lower than those who experience sexual stimulation while nursing a newborn.

    TL; DR: You are making things up. So stop it.

  456. EG: That would be doing harm do the child by inflicting knowledge of its mother’s sexual experience on it without its consent and for no good reason.

    I don’t understand this. This isn’t what I think you’re saying, but since the child is a part of the sexual experience in the hypothetical, I don’t see how this isn’t the same as saying, “Oh, I raped you in your sleep, but thought it was better that I didn’t tell you.” I can actually imagine a rapist using that logic – I didn’t want to hurt you by inflicting knowledge of my sexual experience that occurred without your consent and for no good reason.

    This isn’t to say mothers in this example are rapists, but I will say I fall into the camp of “Getting sexual gratification from a child when the child is not getting nutritional benefits and may or may not be getting some kind of ill-defined ‘bonding’ benefits” strikes me as weird.

  457. PrettyAmiable: I don’t understand this. This isn’t what I think you’re saying, but since the child is a part of the sexual experience in the hypothetical, I don’t see how this isn’t the same as saying, “Oh, I raped you in your sleep, but thought it was better that I didn’t tell you.”

    To be honest, I’ve been part of debates about this in which a significant chunk of the women discussing it said they’d rather not know. That said, I don’t think the situations are analogous because in the one example of orgasm-while-breastfeeding anybody in this 500+ comment thread has noted, it happened once while the infant was a few weeks old. So, sure, if one buys into Azalea’s completely imaginary boogey-man of The Mother who Nurses her Five-Year-Old So She Can Get Off (no doubt in public at the lunch or dinner table, like Meg Ryan in When Harry Met Sally), then that would be weird. But since that doesn’t happen, I was working with the actual example we have of the mother having one orgasm at the very beginning of breastfeeding when she was awash in oxytocin and not yet used to it.

    Now that I think about it, if my mother told me that had happened while she was nursing me, I don’t think I would even be freaked out. I think I would find it fascinating. But I’m a particular case, because I’ve always found all aspects of pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, and childcare fascinating.

  458. EG: What she hadn’t noticed was that apparently my father was having some kind of erotic dream because ew. It’s not that my father having an erotic dream while sleeping within six inches of me is sexual abuse (how was the man supposed to help it?); it’s that I don’t want to know about it, thank you very much, because he is my father.

    Not to pick up on a completely off topic part of what you said, but you might be comforted (or not) to know that random erections are pretty much just a feature of how bodies with penises sleep, rather than indicative of an erotic dream per se. Physiological reaction not necessarily connected in any way to sexual thoughts/dreams. It’s ok to continue to see your father as entirely non-sexual! Woo!

  459. Thanks! I will continue to do see him that way, then, because…ew. Fathers. No, Mom, I don’t want to hear about how you met in college during the ’60s! Stop it! That’s gross!

    Anyway, that was exactly the point I was trying to make about arousal or even [the very unusual circumstance as far as I know of] orgasm during breastfeeding. That it’s not necessarily or in the vast majority of the time connected to sexual thoughts, and it’s just the way some women’s bodies work.

  460. PrettyAmiable: This isn’t what I think you’re saying, but since the child is a part of the sexual experience in the hypothetical, I don’t see how this isn’t the same as saying, “Oh, I raped you in your sleep, but thought it was better that I didn’t tell you.” I can actually imagine a rapist using that logic – I didn’t want to hurt you by inflicting knowledge of my sexual experience that occurred without your consent and for no good reason.

    I think I see what you’re getting at, but this is comparing things that in my opinion just can’t be compared. Both motivation and effect are entirely different.

    DonnaL: If men are nursing for comfort (presumably their own), that’s all fine and good, but how much comfort does a baby get out of it when the person who’s “nursing” them doesn’t produce any milk, or anything at all?

    In the hospital after my daughter was born, I wanted to hold her for that heel prick thing they do, cause I was all wibbly about her being hurt, but a couple of the nurses (actually, one might have been an intern or something) were like, “We want to show your husband something.” One of them did the heel stick while the other showed my husband how best to insert the tip of his pinkie finger into our daughter’s mouth, angling it as though it were a nipple, to trigger her sucking reflex and calm her. The nurses were teasing my husband, and said they liked to show male partners this, to involve them in the process of minute-to-minute baby care by giving them a quick and easy method of soothing. My husband still does it when he’s putting our daughter to bed, although he often uses the back of a finger now. I am sure there are people who would have negative things to say about that, but it’s effective. And context and intent matter. They matter a lot. A man putting his finger, or yes, his nipple, in a baby’s mouth can be doing it from a place of caring and love. It doesn’t automatically equal OMG CHILD ABUSE. I think The Happiest Baby on the Block, which our pediatrician pushed on us, also describes the instinct to suck as a reflex that comforts. Even without the remotest possibility of receiving the tasty tasty milk.

    It could be argued that fingers are better than nipples, but then we’re back to that “because breasts are for sexytimes” and “inappropriate” stuff.

    I am inclined to agree that male nursing is something we should be more open to then we are. Regardless of nutrition, I can think of one advantage of male nursing vs finger suckling straightaway, which is that fingers tend to be a lot dirtier than nipples. My husband washes up like ER personnel before offering our baby his finger. He won’t do it if he can’t wash his hands first. (For the record, he is disturbed by the idea of a baby latching on to his nipples, which, and I hope this doesn’t really need to be said, is understandable and completely okay.)

    EG: That would be doing harm do the child by inflicting knowledge of its mother’s sexual experience on it without its consent and for no good reason. It would be a form of exhibitionism. I
    wouldn’t ask my grown child how it feels about knowing that I sucked its father’s dick while it was napping in the crib in the same room, either, because I would expect the answer to be “Jesus, Mom, I don’t want to picture that!”

    This. Why would you do this? Dear sweet Jeebus no.

    EG: Further, you are making up this imaginary connection between extended breastfeeding and sexual arousal. Many women experience sexual stimulation while breastfeeding. Some women allow breastfeeding to extend into their child’s fifth or sixth years. Why are you assuming that the women in the second group are also automatically in the first? Nobody has made any statement to that effect. You have no reason to think that the proportion of women who experience sexual stimulation while breastfeeding a five-year-old is any different from the proportion of women who experience sexual stimulation while breastfeeding a two-month-old. The two things have not been linked. There has been no correlation suggested by anybody but you. In fact, considering Rodeo’s anecdote, it seems likely that the proportion of women who experience sexual stimulation while breastfeeding is lower than those who experience sexual stimulation while nursing a newborn.

    Yes. Also what antiprincess said here:

    antiprincess: the older a child gets, the less pleasurable nursing is. the shape of the mouth changes, they don’t latch like they used to – it’s just not the same, and that feeling of bodily pleasure for me diminished rapidly after he was about 2 and a half. I don’t know if my experience is textbook or unique, but I imagine that the danger of mama having falling orgasmic ecstasies while nursing an older child is somewhat overstated.

    Azalea: Yeah until Rodeo stated he had a friend who orgasmed during breastfeeding and others (Im not sure if you did too) cheered it on like YEAH thats totally OK and natural to orgasm while bonding with your child.

    I don’t think I said much about it, but I’ll say this – if it just happened, because of hormones and whatever, doesn’t that make it pretty much the definition of natural? Not typical, but certainly not unnatural. I’m sorry you’re horrified and think she should have instantly switched to formula or pumping + subsequent bottle-feeding (you do realize the latter doubles the work involved, right?), but I don’t see why she should be ashamed to her soul. I think it’s lucky for her that she has Rodeo as a friend, as Rodeo is supportive of the wide range of experiences women have while feeding an infant and as such did not try to shame her, tell her she should switch to formula, dial CPS, etc.

    No one has cheered anything on in this thread. Defending breastfeeding women. That is all.

    I agree there has been a lot of goalpost moving going on here.

  461. PrettyAmiable, your non-comparison of breastfeeding moms who feel twinges p
    of sexual pleasure to rapists (except that you did, in fact, compare them) is predicated entirely on the assumption that a breastfeeding mother is inherently harming an infant or toddler if she feels any sexual feelings at all while breastfeeding.

    Again (and again, and again. and again): this is NOT TRUE. If it is, show me the studies.

  462. From a comment in moderation –

    Sandy: It doesn’t automatically equal OMG CHILD ABUSE.

    Not, Donna L, that I think that’s what you were saying. At all. I was speaking more generally to stuff from the thread.

    Also, don’t think I said so before, but the stuff about male nursing that’s come up has been very interesting and informative and I appreciate that.

  463. Sandy: Not, Donna L, that I think that’s what you were saying. At all. I was speaking more generally to stuff from the thread.

    You’re right; I wasn’t saying that at all. I asked the question because (believe it or not!) I didn’t know the answer and was curious. My son wasn’t breastfed (my former spouse wasn’t able to), but he certainly spent plenty of time sucking on my finger and various other parts of my hand, when I wasn’t giving him his bottle. And — although I hesitate to admit it, because I wouldn’t want anyone to retroactively call CPS on me for it, or for having admitted to allowing him to sleep in my bed with me sometimes when he was as old as 10 or 11 and came into my bedroom in the middle of the night — I used to allow him to chew on my hand and fingers when he was 8 or 9 and even older, especially once he was old enough to sit next to me in the front of the car while I was driving, and I’d drive with my left hand while giving him my right hand to chew on. He found it especially tasty when I was wearing leather gloves. Yum. I’m sure there are those who would assume there must have been something developmentally “delayed” about him, and maybe there was, but who cares? He enjoyed it, and I didn’t mind, and it was better than having him chew on his sleeve or his fingernails or even his fingers. Or toes. (He got an infection around his thumbail from chewing on his thumb not that long ago, so he still does it sometimes. And smokes, too. Sigh.) And none of it has stopped him from being an amazing 21-year old who spent a summer studying in Germany on his own this year, and will probably graduate with honors next spring from the University of Chicago and go on to get a Ph.D. in art history. Even if some people can’t seem to understand why he was able to understand and accept my transition so well, and think it’s odd that we still have long phone conversations every two or three days, all initiated by him. So I guess all that chewing and co-sleeping didn’t do any harm!

    I have to say that I was kind of neutral about the topic of this thread until more than that one person early on started talking about calling CPS if they saw someone breast feeding a 5-year old. I understand that sometimes people hesitate *too* long to call CPS when they witness *actual* abuse, or injuries that could evidence abuse. But even if you think someone breast feeding an older child a little “weird,” I don’t see how, all by itself, it constitutes actual abuse, short of your witnessing a woman publicly breastfeeding a teenager while, as EG suggests, having a loud orgasm a la Meg Ryan in When Harry Met Sally. Calling CPS, as others have pointed out, usually results in taking the child away first and asking questions later. Even if it’s one parent calling CPS about the other parent, the child is often taken away even from the complaining parent. And it isn’t so easy to get the child back, as many parents have learned. I think you need a little more evidence than breast feeding of a post-toddler before inflicting that kind of trauma on the family, including on the child her- or himself. I remember how scary it was, when my son was about 2 1/2 and his pinky got bent into an odd position while he was playing with other kids on the block on someone’s front lawn, and it wouldn’t go back in place and I took him to a local ER. I was very lucky that he was so verbal at that age, because after the doctor asked me what happened, he proceeded to question my son about it, and my son was able to explain it all very clearly and confirm my “story.” If he hadn’t been able to do that, who knows? At least he enjoyed himself going around the waiting room and saying hello to people, and none of it seemed to traumatize him. I can’t even imagine his reaction if someone had taken him away.

    So please, don’t anyone do that to anyone just because you think they’re too old to breast feed. Or too old to sleep in a parent’s bed, or too old to chew on a parent’s hand!

  464. EG: Well, I still doubt that it’s a cure-all, and it might, in fact still be a hoax. Doctors really, really don’t know shit about the way the brain works or how hormones work. I say this as someone who’s been around the medical block.
    And as for hysteria, well, some of it might have been early cases of PTSD, but a fair amount of cases might have simply been husbands or doctors getting inconvenient women out of the way. That happened to one of my great-aunts. Her hubby was a doctor who committed her to an asylum, possibly because he wanted to cheat or disliked her, but mostly because he was a dick. Luckily, she got out again, and kicked his ass to the curb.
    Chava: I’m aware that children develop at different rates. However there are certain milestones that kids are expected to hit, like, say being able to count to five at four years of age. At five, most children should be able to sustain themselves on solids, with juice, cows milk or water on the side. (And no, juice is not code for rat poison, nor is it the sugar bomb of doom.) Five year olds shouldn’t be confused with infants, and they are old enough to be able to wait- or, you know, be weaned. I’d also like to point out that most little boys are probably going to be heterosexual, and that they develop a sex drive much earlier than girls do. So, yeah, breastfeeding at five is probably going to fuck with a boy’s sexual development.

  465. ^
    Gee, maybe the co-sleeping and hand chewing are the reasons why my son turned out to be gay. (I think not.)

  466. chava: From a feminist perspective it fits in the category of bodily “purposes” we would never allow men to do because their bodies are not “for” it, but ours supposedly are. I think at various points science has considered female anatomy to have been “made for” things like housecleaning, passive sexual roles, etc–so why not this?

    This is part of why I object so vehemently to the function/nature discussion above. It is extremely gender essentialist (among other things).

    Consider the generalized form of this argument: It is inappropriate to use our bodies for the functions which are not deemed natural.

    This argument would typically create a shitstorm. First there is the fact that what is natural is determined socially and politically. There are many documented cases of spontaneous lactation by men particularly in times where food resources are particularly low and yet that is not “natural”. Why? Because our perceptions of “normal” define “natural”.

    Second, as I attempted to argue above, it separates the internal self from the body and seemingly requires that “natural” bodily functions should trump our desire to have a body that functions differently. If I want my body to lift heavy objects I am limited by my own physiology (to the extent it cannot be modified by modern medicine), but I shouldn’t be limited to what is considered “natural” for my body simply because it is presumed that natural is better.

  467. DonnaL: I stated that poorly. I meant that the boys who breastfed past three, are likely to want to be babied by their romantic partners, and are more likely to have some sort of an Oedipus complex. I don’t think nomming on someone’s hand or glove is the same sort of thing, ’cause hands are pretty neutral, unlike boobs.

  468. So, yeah, breastfeeding at five is probably going to fuck with a boy’s sexual development.

    Citation?

  469. Politicalguineapig: Well, I still doubt that it’s a cure-all, and it might, in fact still be a hoax. Doctors really, really don’t know shit about the way the brain works or how hormones work. I say this as someone who’s been around the medical block.

    No doctor or medical professional who is not a shill for the Christian right has ever claimed that oxytocin–or anything else, for that matter–is a “cure-all.” So I’m not sure where you’re getting that from. As for a hoax…really? A hoax? So, what, they put saline solution in an IV, bring a woman whose cervix has not begun to dilate or efface into the room, hook her up, and contractions not only begin, but increase in intensity as the amount of saline solution flowing into her veins becomes greater, decrease when it becomes lesser, and stop when it is stopped regularly with reliably successful results because of…the placebo effect? A placebo effect that also manages to work on non-human mammals to stimulate childbirth and breastmilk production? What on earth would be the point?

    This hoax idea sounds to me like just another example of the anti-intellectual, anti-professional distrust of expertise that has been infesting US culture for decades now. The right wing thinks there’s some kind of global scientific conspiracy that’s making global warming and evolution up out of whole cloth. Enough crunchy woo liberals are so blind to the boon that vaccinations have been that we’ve been getting outbreaks of pertussis and measles again. Just make things up and say they’re facts, and if some expert who’s actually studied the thing you’re talking about ventures to disagree, just accuse him of elitism. Or conspiracy. Or make fun of her glasses. Whatever.

    No, experts don’t know everything. And often, they don’t know a lot. But that doesn’t mean that they don’t know anything, either. Especially about a hormone whose properties began to be identified in 1906 and synthesized artificially in the mid-1950s.

    Politicalguineapig: And as for hysteria, well, some of it might have been early cases of PTSD, but a fair amount of cases might have simply been husbands or doctors getting inconvenient women out of the way.

    That’s not the argument you made, though. You said they believed in hysteria. Well, hysteria existed. It still exists; we just call it other things. The issue wasn’t whether the diagnosis had been abused in order to disempower women; of course it had.

    Politicalguineapig: I’d also like to point out that most little boys are probably going to be heterosexual, and that they develop a sex drive much earlier than girls do. So, yeah, breastfeeding at five is probably going to fuck with a boy’s sexual development.

    Evidence? For either of these? I have read nothing in any child development book or heard from any of the mothers I know that boys develop a sex drive earlier than girls. My personal experience does not jibe with this idea at all. And what makes you think breastfeeding at five is going to fuck with a boy’s sexual development? Is there any evidence for this? At all? Hell, for all you know, breastfeeding at five could enhance a healthy sexual development.

    FashionablyEvil: I meant that the boys who breastfed past three, are likely to want to be babied by their romantic partners, and are more likely to have some sort of an Oedipus complex. I

    For fuck’s sake, there is no evidence indicating this whatsoever. What is it with this thread that people feel perfectly justified in making shit up? I could make exactly the opposite argument: hey, boys who were weaned before three will feel that they never got enough babying and breast milk, so they will be more likely to want to be babied by their romantic partners in order to make up for what they experienced as an unjust deprivation early on. I have precisely as much evidence for that statement as you have for yours: none. It is pure speculation.

    As for the Oedipus complex, if you buy into Freud’s theory and description of the Oedipus complex, which I don’t, all boys have one, because developing an Oedipus complex and going through the Oedipal stage is a necessary part of psychosexual development for boys, according to Freud. Breastfeeding has fuck-all to do with it, largely because Freud himself didn’t think mothers were that important at all.

  470. EG, chava, sandy, tinfoil hattie and others (sorry it’s hard to keep track of everyone in a 500+ comment thread): THANK YOU.

  471. Are you even serious? Aside from the fact that there is no evidence for this, it’s incredibly hackneyed and anti-feminist. Yes, contact with the feminine body outside of certain strictly defined limits feminizes little boys, destroys their independence, and makes them a threat to the nuclear family.* Must keep them away from the boobies!

    *clearly, this is a Universal Fact in human development. It’s why Gengis Khan and Alexander the Great had such a hard time being independent entities. All that Mongolian extended breastfeeding fucked. Khan. up.

    Politicalguineapig:
    DonnaL:Istatedthatpoorly.Imeantthattheboyswhobreastfedpastthree,arelikelytowanttobebabiedbytheirromanticpartners,andaremorelikelytohavesomesortofanOedipuscomplex.Idon’tthinknommingonsomeone’shandorgloveisthesamesortofthing,’causehandsareprettyneutral,unlikeboobs.

  472. Well, to be fair, Alexander the Great was gay, wasn’t he? Or at least bi? So clearly he was totally corrupted by all that booby-access. Also, he isn’t he the one who is supposed to have wept when he saw how vast his empire was, because there were no more worlds left for him to conquer? What a sissy.

  473. Oh, damn. Fashionably Evil, I’m sorry. I must’ve quoted the wrong comment by mistake. I know you didn’t write that blockquote; you responded to it. My apologies.

  474. Never mind the ridiculousness about the psychologically damaging effects of breastfeeding beyond some unspecified point, is the assertion that boys develop a sex drive earlier than girls something that other people have heard of? I know that puberty and the development of a libido aren’t necessarily synonymous, but I’ve always heard that (in general) girls mature earlier than boys in just about every way. Why should libido be the one exception? (Other than because everyone knows that boys are interested in only one thing, etc.) I’m not exactly the greatest example for a number of reasons, and probably shouldn’t even count, but I didn’t enter puberty — or have any kind of “sex drive” at all — until I was 14, and even that was only after I was administered testosterone (a kind of anabolic steroid that bodybuilders used to take) on a daily basis for three years. Which would have been a remarkably unpleasant process (even at 11, I wished it could be estrogen instead) even if the doctor in question hadn’t happened to be the same one who regularly molested me. For the first couple of years, I wasn’t even able to do what he kept asking me to do. I had no clue.

  475. Not only is the general belief that I’m aware of that girls mature faster than boys when it comes puberty–often given as the reason that teenage girls will look to date boys a couple years older than them–but I can also say from experience, that baby girls start to masturbate at the same time that baby boys do: as soon as they get enough gross motor control to get their hands to the appropriate places while their diapers are off. So no, I have no idea what could possibly be being referred to with this whole “boys’ libidos develop earlier than girls'” thing.

  476. DonnaL: You’re right; I wasn’t saying that at all. I asked the question because (believe it or not!) I didn’t know the answer and was curious.

    No, I believe! I started out answering your question, but it turned into more of a jumping-off point without my noticing it. I hit submit and then realized hey, that looks like I was still responding to DonnaL, fail.

    Your son sounds like he turned out awesome, congratulations. 🙂

    Politicalguineapig: So, yeah, breastfeeding at five is probably going to fuck with a boy’s sexual development.

    Politicalguineapig: I stated that poorly. I meant that the boys who breastfed past three, are likely to want to be babied by their romantic partners, and are more likely to have some sort of an Oedipus complex.

    You just stated it was 5. Now it’s 3? I say not even! If you breastfeed your baby boy past 1, he’s more likely to turn into a giant reptile and start eating people!!!!*

    *If we’re going to make stuff up it might as well be exciting action-movie stuff.

  477. Sandy: You just stated it was 5. Now it’s 3? I say not even! If you breastfeed your baby boy past 1, he’s more likely to turn into a giant reptile and start eating people!!!!*

    OMG, I just belly-laughed at work. Awesome.

  478. Politicalguineapig: I stated that poorly. I meant that the boys who breastfed past three, are likely to want to be babied by their romantic partners, and are more likely to have some sort of an Oedipus complex. I don’t think nomming on someone’s hand or glove is the same sort of thing, ’cause hands are pretty neutral, unlike boobs.

    Where do you even get this shit?

  479. You just stated it was 5. Now it’s 3? I say not even! If you breastfeed your baby boy past 1, he’s more likely to turn into a giant reptile and start eating people!!!!

    Suddenly, so much about my sons makes sense.

  480. @PGP –
    the boys who breastfed past three, are likely to want to be babied by their romantic partners, and are more likely to have some sort of an Oedipus complex.
    yeah, it would be awesome if you could cite your source (something more recent than, say, 1956).

    the whole point behind so-called “child led weaning” is exactly the opposite of that. the idea is to let the kid come to a place where s/he grows out of nursing without it being abruptly taken away, because it’s the sudden denial of softness and comfort which leads to weird little complexes. but again, please cite your source. I’d love to read some further research on that.

    on a different matter: last night while I was nursing my three year old, here’s what was going through my head — man it’s nice to get off my feet and lay down for a bit…hope I don’t fall asleep…did I pay the gas bill?…where am I going to find those boots for TeenageGirl for christmas?…I’m hungry…dude, go to sleep!…right, hungry…

    I don’t know what if anything was going through his head…I imagine it was something like — I like nursing! I like noodles! I like Lightning McQueen! I’m scared of cookie monsters! I like nursing! zzzzzzz…

    so, yeah, not so much a Big Incestuous Deal, honestly. just kind of a routine part of life.

  481. Scared of the Cookie Monster?!? Clearly the product of “extended” breastfeeding. SHAME and CONDEMNATION.

  482. But don’t you see? The common cultural link between cookies and milk means that his fear of Cookie Monster is actually a displaced form of the fear he feels of the Milk Monster who manipulates him into breastfeeding for her own selfish gas-bill-paying, Teenage-Girl-boot-buying desires! But his resentment and fear are too upsetting to be admitted to, so he has cathected them onto Cookie Monster. Now he will never be normal. How could you do this to your son?

    Why, yes, part of writing my dissertation did involve doing some research into the tradition of mother-blaming in the psychological profession during the 20th century. Why do you ask?

  483. Chava: You do realize that even though Alexander and Genghis Khan were royalty, they were still vulnerable to starvation? Even though Genghis was born later than Alexander, nomads don’t farm, so the risk of starvation was even more acute for him. And at that point, there were all sorts of nasty childhood diseases: nursing a child through an illness was literal, since dehydration is one of the biggest killers of children. Also, Genghis and Alexander weren’t any sorts of feminist: Genghis was a rapist, and Alexander belonged to a culture that believed romantic love between a man and a woman was at best a delusion, at worst an act of hubris that would require some sort of punishment (usually by the hand of the local divinity.)

    And now: well, in a Western society, most of the nastiest childhood diseases are vanquished, and in a middle-class or upper class household (I assume the writer is from a middle-class family, at least), kids aren’t usually deprived of food to the point of starvation. At five, I was old enough to make myself a sandwich or heat some soup, and I think most five-year-olds could, in fact, manage to make a sandwich. Although of course, most of the proponents of late breast-feeding aren’t going to line up for vaccines or want their child eating bread they didn’t make themselves.

  484. FWIW, I am currently working through a Middle English version of a typical romance text, and came across this:
    The Christen woman fedde hem thoo
    Ful wel she lovyd them both twoo
    So longe she fedde them in feere
    That they were of elde seven yere

    Basically, the heroine’s mother breastfed the heroine and her eventual love interest until they were seven, because she “loved the two of them.” Not presented as icky, incestuous, or what have you. And the hero doesn’t seem to be portrayed with an Oedipus complex…

    Anyway, breastfeeding circa 1300, cultural artifacts, ahoy.

  485. Chava, that’s pretty cool!

    on the other hand, several hundred years later, you have Mozart’s father encouraging Mozart’s mother to give little Mozart sugar water so that she doesn’t get “milk fever” (mastitis). for the record, Mr. Mozart won the day. so take that, folks-who-say-breastfeeding-makes-smarter-babies!

    I’d love to do a history of breastfeeding through the ages.

  486. Although of course, most of the proponents of late breast-feeding aren’t going to line up for vaccines or want their child eating bread they didn’t make themselves.

    Stop. Making. Stuff. Up. In your comments, you have called extended breast feeding “abnormal,” not “developmentally appropriate,” “manipulation in the parent-child relationship,” and a “textbook case of regression.” You have also asserted boys who are breastfed past the age of three “are likely to want to be babied by their romantic partners, and are more likely to have some sort of an Oedipus complex.”

    All of this without ONE link to ANY source that supports any of these assertions. And now you’re making up caricatures of the women you think are likely to engage in extended breast feeding. Just stop.

  487. PGP–breastfeeding isn’t some sort of cure-all against starvation. At best it provides hydration to a child with an uncertain/unsafe water supply. And if the woman is sick, drunk, etc–all these can be passed along in the milk. It can be a handy hydration and calorie supplier for young children, but nutrition isn’t the only reason people in other cultures breastfeed for longer than we do.

    Regardless, your attitude towards nursing seems to be that it is something women and children in the developing world should outgrow as they have other sources of nutrition. OK, as you like. But at best, you’re arguing that long-term breastfeeding psychologically damages children in devloping societies; but that that risk is outweighed by possibility of dysentary/malnutrition that breastfeeding mitigates. Can you see how that might sound a wee bit patronizing towards women and babies in other parts of the world?

    FWIW, I’m rabidly pro-vaccine, although I have been known to bake my own bread (the HORROR).

    Politicalguineapig:
    Chava:YoudorealizethateventhoughAlexanderandGenghisKhanwereroyalty,theywerestillvulnerabletostarvation?EventhoughGenghiswasbornlaterthanAlexander,nomadsdon’tfarm,sotheriskofstarvationwasevenmoreacuteforhim.Andatthatpoint,therewereallsortsofnastychildhooddiseases:nursingachildthroughanillnesswasliteral,sincedehydrationisoneofthebiggestkillersofchildren.Also,GenghisandAlexanderweren’tanysortsoffeminist:Genghiswasarapist,andAlexanderbelongedtoaculturethatbelievedromanticlovebetweenamanandawomanwasatbestadelusion,atworstanactofhubristhatwouldrequiresomesortofpunishment(usuallybythehandofthelocaldivinity.)

    Andnow:well,inaWesternsociety,mostofthenastiestchildhooddiseasesarevanquished,andinamiddle-classorupperclasshousehold(Iassumethewriterisfromamiddle-classfamily,atleast),kidsaren’tusuallydeprivedoffoodtothepointofstarvation.Atfive,Iwasoldenoughtomakemyselfasandwichorheatsomesoup,andIthinkmostfive-year-oldscould,infact,managetomakeasandwich.Althoughofcourse,mostoftheproponentsoflatebreast-feedingaren’tgoingtolineupforvaccinesorwanttheirchildeatingbreadtheydidn’tmakethemselves.

  488. Dude, mastitis would have been freaking scary back then. I wonder if it used to be a significant cause of maternal mortality before antibiotics.

    antiprincess:
    Chava,that’sprettycool!

    ontheotherhand,severalhundredyearslater,youhaveMozart’sfatherencouragingMozart’smothertogivelittleMozartsugarwatersothatshedoesn’tget“milkfever”(mastitis).fortherecord,Mr.Mozartwontheday.sotakethat,folks-who-say-breastfeeding-makes-smarter-babies!

    I’dlovetodoahistoryofbreastfeedingthroughtheages.

  489. Politicalguineapig: Also, Genghis and Alexander weren’t any sorts of feminist:

    Good thing you knocked down a point that literally no one on this thread was arguing. No one said “if you breastfeed long enough, your sons will become FEMINISTS!” People have taken issue with your assertion that boys who are breastfed too long will be overly babied weaklings, offering G. Khan and Alexander as counterexamples.

    But I suspect you are moving this goalpost because you can’t really justify your assertion that boys will be screwed up by extended breastfeeding. You haven’t provided a single source or study backing you up. You’ve relied solely on your own personal squicky feelings and conjectures, which hold about as much water as Sandy’s boy-turns-into-maneating-reptile scenario.

    If you are going to concern troll breastfeeding mothers, you could at least have the decency to pretend you have some scientific basis for it.

  490. Politicalguineapig: Alexander belonged to a culture that believed romantic love between a man and a woman was at best a delusion, at worst an act of hubris that would require some sort of punishment (usually by the hand of the local divinity.)

    Point of fact: no. In fact, Alexander’s love for his first wife Roxanna was legendary.

    Politicalguineapig: Although of course, most of the proponents of late breast-feeding aren’t going to line up for vaccines or want their child eating bread they didn’t make themselves.

    Why do you keep making shit up? You don’t know this. Typing something out does not make it true.

    chava: FWIW, I’m rabidly pro-vaccine, although I have been known to bake my own bread (the HORROR).

    YOU CHILD ABUSER.

    antiprincess: EG – what’s your take on Philip Wylie and “Momism”?

    I hate to admit ignorance, but honestly, his work wasn’t something I ran across when I was doing that part of my diss; since it was a bit of background to contextualize the development of feminist psychoanalytic theories of motherhood in the 1970s, my focus was pretty limited to Major Psychoanalytic Theorists and my lit review was by no means comprehensive.

    I do remember, at one point, coming across a list of things that mothers were blamed for prior to the 1970s. It ranged from the heartbreaking (I cannot imagine many things more devastating than, on top of being told that you beloved son/daughter is schizophrenic, being told that it is all you fault for being a “refrigerator mother”) to the patently absurd (I didn’t even know that “inability to cope with color-blindness” was a thing).

    antiprincess: I’d love to do a history of breastfeeding through the ages.

    My memory is that the feminist medical historian Valerie Fildes has done some great work on this, though I believe her focus is/was on Western Europe. Or maybe not; that may have just been the area that I was using her research for.

  491. Dude, mastitis would have been freaking scary back then. I wonder if it used to be a significant cause of maternal mortality before antibiotics

    Interesting question, which a quick google search has done nothing to enlighten me on. It’s my impression that it isn’t often a fast-moving or invasive infection (had it five times or so; the last time, years after I stopped nursing, involved an abscess and was somewhat less than fun), and I believe it can go away on its own, particularly with a voraciously-nursing baby.
    Nursing with mastitis – NOT fun times, but always better to nurse on the affected breast first, in my experience.

  492. Rodeo made a post where she notes a friend had orgasm during breastfeeding, that post was HAILED as oh coo, that was TOTALLY ok, she shouldnt stop having those orgasms form breastfeeding when the child is 5 if she doesnt want to.

    This ENTIRE thread is about breastfeeding a 5 year old, not newborns. I breastfed my children so I dont have a problem with breastfeeding the first almost 2 years of my son’s life , all milk was Mommy-made but they stopped nursing directly from the breast long before then. It was not comfortable for me. I actually cheered on other women who breastfed longer directly from the breast.

    My INITIAL whoa was at breastfeeding a child at the dinner table, I have NO interest in someone’s bodily fuild being slung around my dinner/dessert table, please dont french kiss over my food either, not in my house I promise you will not ike my reaction.

    HOWEVER this was a 5 year old and I suggested hey I know there are some people who have a problem with breastfeeding because they thought the breastfeeding mom is feeling the same sensations from her child as she does from her sexual partner when they suckle at her breasts. I did notexperience that sensation so I thought , that needed to be shot down..UNTIL people on thos thread said they DID experience sexual arousal and they liked it and were not ashamed of the sexual enjoyment breastfeedng gave them. From there I went in the direction of why does it not? People are uncomfortable with this for good reason. Being a mother does not mean its ok to experience sexual arousal from an activity (and yes its sexual if part of the reason you do it is because of the sexual arousal and its an unnecessary activity as there are plenty of other non sexually arousing ways to bond with your child).

    Again, FUCK YOU (not you specifically) if you’re gong to make me seem like some anti-breastfeeding misogynist just because I thinkg breastfeeding is not always great and wonderful in every single instance of breastfeeding. I had a problem with ONE scenario that ONE scenario being breastfeeding an older child and experiencing sexual arousal, sometimes even orgasm regularly.

    If I am going to be villified because I think a parent should not be receiving orgasms from their child, fine. I’m cool with that.

    EG: Breastfeedingisnotsexualactivity.

    BagelsancalledSandyapedophilejustfornotingthatmanywomenreceivesexualstimulationfrombreastfeeding.Sodon’tgoaroundactingasthoughit’sbeenamatterofbreastfeedingolderchildrenfororgasmsallalong.Thatissomemajorgoalpost-moving.

    Infact,yourwholecurrentfocuson“evilmommieswhobreastfeedsix-year-oldsinordertocontinuehavingorgasms”isgoalpost-moving.Thatwasnotpartofyourinitialfreak-out.Theorgasmissuedidn’tevenariseuntilcomment202,wellafteryouhadalreadyflippedoutattheideathatsomefreakishwomenwerefeelingsexualpleasurefromhavingtheirnipplessuckedon.Incomment202,Rodeowentontosay“Itonlyhappenedonce,duringthefirstfewmagical,unrealweeksafterbirthingababywheneverythingisamazing,andafterthatbreastfeedingbecameroutineandshedidn’tpaymuchattentiontoit.”Soyourstrawmommyofsomewickedwomanmanipulatingherchildintocontinuingtobreastfeedsoshecanexperiencewildorgasmsoverandoveragainovertheyearsdidn’thappen.Youareflippingoutoversomethingthathasnothappenedandisnotgoingtohappen,somethingyouhavemadeup.

    Becausebothmotherandchildwantto.Whyisthissodifficultforyoutounderstandinanylightbutthatofsexualabuse?Thereareplentyofreasonsamothermightwanttocontinuebreastfeeding.

    Further,youaremakingupthisimaginaryconnectionbetweenextendedbreastfeedingandsexualarousal.Manywomenexperiencesexualstimulationwhilebreastfeeding.Somewomenallowbreastfeedingtoextendintotheirchild’sfifthorsixthyears.Whyareyouassumingthatthewomeninthesecondgrouparealsoautomaticallyinthefirst?Nobodyhasmadeanystatementtothateffect.Youhavenoreasontothinkthattheproportionofwomenwhoexperiencesexualstimulationwhilebreastfeedingafive-year-oldisanydifferentfromtheproportionofwomenwhoexperiencesexualstimulationwhilebreastfeedingatwo-month-old.Thetwothingshavenotbeenlinked.Therehasbeennocorrelationsuggestedbyanybodybutyou.Infact,consideringRodeo’sanecdote,itseemslikelythattheproportionofwomenwhoexperiencesexualstimulationwhilebreastfeedingislowerthanthosewhoexperiencesexualstimulationwhilenursinganewborn.

    TL;DR:Youaremakingthingsup.Sostopit.

  493. Sandy: IthinkIseewhatyou’regettingat,butthisiscomparingthingsthatinmyopinionjustcan’tbecompared.Bothmotivationandeffectareentirelydifferent.

    Inthehospitalaftermydaughterwasborn,Iwantedtoholdherforthatheelprickthingtheydo,causeIwasallwibblyaboutherbeinghurt,butacoupleofthenurses(actually,onemighthavebeenaninternorsomething)werelike,“Wewanttoshowyourhusbandsomething.”Oneofthemdidtheheelstickwhiletheothershowedmyhusbandhowbesttoinsertthetipofhispinkiefingerintoourdaughter’smouth,anglingitasthoughitwereanipple,totriggerhersuckingreflexandcalmher.Thenurseswereteasingmyhusband,andsaidtheylikedtoshowmalepartnersthis,toinvolvethemintheprocessofminute-to-minutebabycarebygivingthemaquickandeasymethodofsoothing.Myhusbandstilldoesitwhenhe’sputtingourdaughtertobed,althoughheoftenusesthebackofafingernow.Iamsuretherearepeoplewhowouldhavenegativethingstosayaboutthat,butit’seffective.Andcontextandintentmatter.Theymatteralot.Amanputtinghisfinger,oryes,hisnipple,inababy’smouthcanbedoingitfromaplaceofcaringandlove.Itdoesn’tautomaticallyequalOMGCHILDABUSE.IthinkTheHappiestBabyontheBlock,whichourpediatricianpushedonus,alsodescribestheinstincttosuckasareflexthatcomforts.Evenwithouttheremotestpossibilityofreceivingthetastytastymilk.

    Itcouldbearguedthatfingersarebetterthannipples,butthenwe’rebacktothat“becausebreastsareforsexytimes”and“inappropriate”stuff.

    Iaminclinedtoagreethatmalenursingissomethingweshouldbemoreopentothenweare.Regardlessofnutrition,Icanthinkofoneadvantageofmalenursingvsfingersucklingstraightaway,whichisthatfingerstendtobealotdirtierthannipples.MyhusbandwashesuplikeERpersonnelbeforeofferingourbabyhisfinger.Hewon’tdoitifhecan’twashhishandsfirst.(Fortherecord,heisdisturbedbytheideaofababylatchingontohisnipples,which,andIhopethisdoesn’treallyneedtobesaid,isunderstandableandcompletelyokay.)

    This.Whywouldyoudothis?DearsweetJeebusno.

    Yes.Alsowhatantiprincesssaidhere:

    Idon’tthinkIsaidmuchaboutit,butI’llsaythis–ifitjusthappened,becauseofhormonesandwhatever,doesn’tthatmakeitprettymuchthedefinitionofnatural?Nottypical,butcertainlynotunnatural.I’msorryyou’rehorrifiedandthinksheshouldhaveinstantlyswitchedtoformulaorpumping+subsequentbottle-feeding(youdorealizethelatterdoublestheworkinvolved,right?),butIdon’tseewhysheshouldbeashamedtohersoul.Ithinkit’sluckyforherthatshehasRodeoasafriend,asRodeoissupportiveofthewiderangeofexperienceswomenhavewhilefeedinganinfantandassuchdidnottrytoshameher,tellhersheshouldswitchtoformula,dialCPS,etc.

    Noonehascheeredanythingoninthisthread.Defendingbreastfeedingwomen.Thatisall.

    Iagreetherehasbeenalotofgoalpostmovinggoingonhere.

    Hormones or whatever? Get real! The argument has been “its a nipple that someone is sucking on, nipples are sensitive etc etc etc. I can assure you, as someone who breastfeed less than 8 months ago that what I FELT had a lot to do with nerve endings than it did hormones. Nipples have nerve endings, you can feel pain, pleasure etc on your nipples. If you ORGASM that isn’t hormones, thats your nerve endings and clearly if your nipples are being touched in such a way that you feel sexual arousal its physical and sexual, dont blame it on estrogen. This woman experienced an orgasm courtesy of her child and you see no problem with it because if it happens during breastfeeding it is A ok right? I cant join that crowd. Sexual arousal and orgasms during breastfeeding an older child is just not a nice and cozy concept to me.

  494. and yes its sexual if part of the reason you do it is because of the sexual arousal and its an unnecessary activity

    ok – 1) I don’t know anyone who nurses just for the sexual charge of it. and I know a lot of nursing moms, even long-term nursing moms.
    2) unnecessary? isn’t that a little arbitrary? who can say if it’s “necessary”?

  495. Holy F, this is a trainwreck. I have no dog in the breastfeeding fight and don’t ever plan to have children, but some of the things people have been saying to/about nursing mothers on this thread are heinous.

    Yes, if a mother was making an unwilling child breastfeed for her own sexual gratification, that would be abuse and would be really terrible. But there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE that anyone has done that, and certainly not that it’s common among mothers who engage in extended nursing. This thread is equivalent to men coming into a conversation about sexual assault and yelling BUT WHAT ABOUT ALL THOSE WOMEN WHO MAKE UP RAPE ACCUSATIONS. Yeah, it’s terrible when women do that. It’s also INCREDIBLY RARE and by yelling about that you SHAME AND SILENCE ALL OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED SEXUAL ASSAULT. Just like coming into a thread about breastfeeding and yelling BUT WHAT IF A MOTHER IS ONLY BREASTFEEDING AN OLDER CHILD TO GET OFF when there is NO REASON TO THINK THAT HAPPENS has the effect of SHAMING AND SILENCING EVERY MOTHER WHO HAS EVER HAD ANY TWINGE DOWN THERE WHILE BREASTFEEDING.

    I mean, seriously, what do you “ANY TWINGE OF SEXUAL PLEASURE WHILE BREASTFEEDING IS ABUSE” crowd think a mother should do if she is trying to nurse her newborn and the physical sensation gives her tingly feelings in her no-no place? Yank the baby off and never breastfeed again? Because from what I understand — and from what mothers have said on this thread — it’s REALLY COMMON to feel some amount of arousal while breastfeeding. And while doing things with a child for the purpose of deriving sexual pleasure is not okay, doing things with a child for other reasons that have that unintended and unavoidable consequence is not the same thing.

    I agree that at some point it’s not a good idea for mothers to breastfeed their children anymore. I don’t know where that line should be drawn between infancy and college-age, but I know that it’s NONE OF MY DAMN BUSINESS if a particular mother chooses to breastfeed until the kid is four or five. And that’s what this post was ACTUALLY ABOUT. That people are trying to justify the squicky feelings they have about extended breastfeeding (and yeah, I have them too, but at least I recognize that they’re not a reason to indict mothers) by running to the NON-EXISTENT example of a college-age kid breastfeeding is fucking ridiculous.

    Jesus Christ.

    And Jill, I know your moderation policy isn’t as stringent as some sites, and generally I like that, but I can’t believe you haven’t shut this shit down yet. Given that actual mothers in this conversation were being told that they were sexually abusing their children and should have CPS called on them, it’s troubling that the only time you intervened was to call out a poster for saying breasts exist solely to breastfeed — which yes, was a stupid statement that pissed me off, too, but was miles away from the worst thing said here and was an isolated comment in the middle of a 500 post pile-on about strawmen mothers sexually abusing their children by forcing them to breastfeed.

  496. Azalea: I had a problem with ONE scenario that ONE scenario being breastfeeding an older child and experiencing sexual arousal, sometimes even orgasm regularly.

    Your problem is with a scenario that does not happen, and that nobody has any stories of happening: one orgasm while feeding a newborn within the first couple weeks is the only context in which orgasm during breastfeeding has been reported. So if that was your one concern, you can now rest easy.

    Azalea: and yes its sexual if part of the reason you do it is because of the sexual arousal and its an unnecessary activity

    Oh, should we all check in with you in the future to make sure that our breastfeeding isn’t “unnecessary”? That’s going to make your life kind of difficult, what with the millions of women phoning in every couple months, but I suppose if that’s the only way to make sure that children aren’t suffering from SEXUAL ABUSE VIA BREASTFEEDING OMG, then that’s what we’ll have to do.

    And again, can you produce one instance of a mother continuing breastfeeding for the sexual pleasure it brings her? At all? I can’t, and I’ve talked to a lot of mothers who have breastfed and read quite a lot about breastfeeding, whereas you were apparently unaware that any woman ever had ever experienced a twinge of sexual stimulation from breastfeeding. I’m going to go ahead and say you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.

    Azalea: My INITIAL whoa was at breastfeeding a child at the dinner table, I have NO interest in someone’s bodily fuild being slung around my dinner/dessert table

    You must’ve been one sloppy nurser. I’ve witnessed a lot of breastfeeding; I’ve done a lot of bottle-feeding. In both cases, the messiest it ever got was when some milk/formula trickled out the sides of kids mouth, usually ending up in his/her neck. What did you do that makes you think that other mothers are “slinging” milk around the table? Position your kid a foot away and squirt it into his/her mouth?

    Azalea: Hormones or whatever? Get real! The argument has been “its a nipple that someone is sucking on, nipples are sensitive etc etc etc. I can assure you, as someone who breastfeed less than 8 months ago that what I FELT had a lot to do with nerve endings than it did hormones. Nipples have nerve endings, you can feel pain, pleasure etc on your nipples. If you ORGASM that isn’t hormones, thats your nerve endings and clearly if your nipples are being touched in such a way that you feel sexual arousal its physical and sexual, dont blame it on estrogen.

    Sigh. Could you try to keep up? The hormone in question isn’t estrogen. It’s oxytocin. Those are two different hormones. Breastfeeding stimulates the release of oxytocin, so why you think the sensations of breastfeeding have nothing to do with hormones is beyond me. I suspect that the problem here may be that you don’t know shit about biology.

    Azalea: Sexual arousal and orgasms during breastfeeding an older child is just not a nice and cozy concept to me.

    You have no example of orgasms while breastfeeding an older child. It does. not. happen. Your bizarre fantasies are not an appropriate topic for discussion. Move on.

    And you know, fuck you right back. When you’re replying to a comment of mine, putting “not you specifically” in parentheses is a load of passive-aggressive bullshit.

  497. Oh, and not only does breastfeed stimulate the production of oxytocin, but the production of oxytocin stimulates lactation. Again, hormones and physical stimulation are intimately connected. Why you think the nervous system is somehow completely divorced from the endocrine system is really beyond me.

    (this is an addendum to a longer comment that’s in moderation)

  498. Politicalguineapig: Although of course, most of the proponents of late breast-feeding aren’t going to line up for vaccines or want their child eating bread they didn’t make themselves.

    My babe is getting fully vaxed, sorry to disappoint. And I only bake Toll House cookies and brownies from mixes. But please feel free to make other sweeping random generalizations.

    Azalea: I can assure you, as someone who breastfeed less than 8 months ago that what I FELT had a lot to do with nerve endings than it did hormones. Nipples have nerve endings, you can feel pain, pleasure etc on your nipples. If you ORGASM that isn’t hormones, thats your nerve endings and clearly if your nipples are being touched in such a way that you feel sexual arousal its physical and sexual, dont blame it on estrogen.

    Nipples are sensitive, I agree, and the release of oxytocin is tied to the stimulation of the nipples receive during nursing. As EG clarified, we are not talking about estrogen here. Oxytocin is a hormone spurring bonding and emotional attachment, released in large quantities in the brain during both orgasm and breastfeeding. If you did not know that, and it’s also come as a shock to you that many women experience sexual arousal during nursing, I have to question how much you actually know about breastfeeding. Because this stuff is pretty basic.

    Esti: And Jill, I know your moderation policy isn’t as stringent as some sites, and generally I like that, but I can’t believe you haven’t shut this shit down yet. Given that actual mothers in this conversation were being told that they were sexually abusing their children and should have CPS called on them, it’s troubling that the only time you intervened was to call out a poster for saying breasts exist solely to breastfeed — which yes, was a stupid statement that pissed me off, too, but was miles away from the worst thing said here and was an isolated comment in the middle of a 500 post pile-on about strawmen mothers sexually abusing their children by forcing them to breastfeed.

    I concur.

  499. Oh good grief…this isn’t anyone’s first rodeo…when conversations around here go off the rails we hash it out amongst ourselves particularly when the disagreements are among long time commentors. I’m not saying they’re right (FSM knows I think they’re ignoring the practicalities over a theoretical wrong…or possibly a different risk assessment…its not clear to me which), but they are not trolling. Being horribly, horribly wrong is part of life Expecting Jill to continuously monitor every thread to prevent shitstorms like these is downright silly. We create ’em, we live with ’em.

  500. It’s not my first rodeo here, either, Kristen. We’ve had a lot of conversations about when it’s a good idea to intervene more actively in discussions that alienate particular groups, from shutting down people who hijack discussions of racism to building a safer space for trans commenters to the number of discussions of parenting/children that have caused some mothers to say that this isn’t a community they want to be part of. I don’t think it’s necessarily to always police threads as heavily as, say, Shakesville, or even as heavily as some of the guest bloggers did on the parenting posts this summer, but it’s not like it’s unusual for Feministe mods to step into conversations when people get out of line, even just to point out that, hey, you’re out of line. (I should have been clearer with my language in that first post — by “shut it down” I didn’t mean close the thread, but rather tell people to knock it off.)

    And no, I don’t think Jill should be glued to her computer at all times making sure that everyone’s playing nice, but she did in fact get involved in this thread — it was just to call out an admittedly ridiculous comment from a breastfeeding-supporter, rather than to say anything about the dozen or so people going to town on hypothetical breasfeeding abusers. Somehow I think that if we had a dozen or so people hijacking a thread about sexual assault to talk about false accusations for hundreds of posts, it would be viewed as kind of problematic for a mod to ignore that while taking issue with a single commenter saying stupid things while defending rape victims.

  501. Meh, I don’t think anyone got any nastier toward mothers in this thread than the commentariat always gets toward anyone they perceive to be on the wrong side of the issue. I say, leave Jill / the mods alone. Mothers don’t deserve special protection from dickery over everyone else.

    *braces*

  502. Yeah, see…the thing is…look at the people you’re listing there…those are some highly oppressed groups that are not privileged vis-a-vis most of the commentariat…whereas…probably half of the commentariat around here are mothers or otherwise mother-friendly. Indeed some of the people you’re wanting Jill to shut down *are* mothers and some are sexual abuse survivors.

    Also, when some asshat engages in victim blaming we typically mock them and shout them down not ban them. Hell, we had dudes in a thread justifying *eugenics*. Compared to that some one saying they would call CPS is relatively mild.

  503. Kristen J.: Compared to that some one saying they would call CPS is relatively mild.

    Not really. Threatening to get someone’s child removed is pretty fucking hardcore, and in the eugenics thread, none of the eugenics defenses included anything like “and you should be sterilized whether or not you want to be, because you suck and can’t be trusted to control your own fertility,” whereas people in this thread were directly accused of pedophilia.

    igglanova: Meh, I don’t think anyone got any nastier toward mothers in this thread than the commentariat always gets toward anyone they perceive to be on the wrong side of the issue.

    I’ve had plenty of arguments with people on various feminist blogs, including this one, as well. I’ve disagreed with other regular commenters in the past as well. I’ve never before seen charges of pedophilia launched at other commenters.

    Sandy: My babe is getting fully vaxed, sorry to disappoint.

    Sandy! Don’t be a fool! Don’t you understand? “Vaccinations,” as the agents of the medical-industrial complex like to call them, are nothing more or less than yet another hoax perpetrated on us by…scientists, doctors, and nurses. Sure, they say that vaccinations are the reason that children don’t die of pertussis or lose their hearing to mumps or that babies aren’t born with the horrible deformities caused by rubella, but how do we know? After all, “vaccinations” have only been around…for a really long time. And you know what else they did for a really long time? Apply leeches! It is clearly exactly the same thing.

  504. EG: Threatening to get someone’s child removed is pretty fucking hardcore, and in the eugenics thread, none of the eugenics defenses included anything like “and you should be sterilized whether or not you want to be, because you suck and can’t be trusted to control your own fertility,” whereas people in this thread were directly accused of pedophilia.

    I really can’t say it better than that. Threatening to have someone’s child removed is extremely fucking hardcore, I can’t think of many things worse, and to stand accused of sexual abuse for defending private feelings during breastfeeding is pretty godawful too. But apparently only Rodeo needed to be shut down, for calling Jill a dick, or something.

    Leeches, you say? Allow me a moment to thoughtfully stroke my chin. Would I also have to start baking my own bread?

  505. Sandy: I can’t think of many things worse

    Things that are likely to happen to me personally, I should have said. Obviously eugenics, nuclear war, etc, worse on a grand scale.

  506. @EG,

    Umm…you implied that all men who nurse were pedos…but that’s different because? I mean it seems pretty obvious that Bagelsan misinterpreted what Sandy said and that they both agree that using a child for sexual gratification is abusive. It also seems pretty clear that the commentariat had those arguments pretty much shut down before Jill got around to this thread. Which sometimes happens when threads go cabblewy.

  507. Kristen J.: Umm…you implied that all men who nurse were pedos…but that’s different because?

    What? There is a huge difference there. EG was talking about male nursing in the context of the fact that men almost never nurse in Western culture, it’s an aberration, and so seeing a woman nursing a 5 year old is going to be quite different from seeing a man with that same 5 year old latched on. However anyone might like it to be otherwise, as things stand now, the former is going to get shocked looks and possible calls to CPS, but the latter is likely to have the cops called on him, to be immediately arrested and probably charged with something that will force him to register as a sex offender. Noting this dramatic discrepancy, again, in the context of understanding that almost no men nurse, is not the same as slinging accusations of pedophilia at a breastfeeding woman, and not the same as saying you’d like to have a commenter’s kids taken away. EG said if nursing was working for some men she saw no issue with it; I believe her words about male nursing from birth on were “Where’s the harm?” which has been the stance she has maintained on nursing throughout this thread. Nothing she’s said or implied here is even remotely like the content of the posts that went, in my view and others’, far beyond mere rudeness.

    You know, I think we really are going to get to 600 posts.

  508. Kristen J.: Umm…you implied that all men who nurse were pedos…but that’s different because?

    I really don’t see how I did. I believe that what I said was that it doesn’t happen. You corrected me on that. We went back and forth a couple times because by nursing I meant lactating and you meant suckling. I didn’t call anybody a pedophile or imply that anybody was a pedophile. But if you could point me to where I did?

    I still think that it sounds like it would be very inconvenient, which I believe I mentioned when discussing the sucking options open for non-lactating caregivers, but that’s a far cry from pedophilia.

    Kristen J.: I mean it seems pretty obvious that Bagelsan misinterpreted what Sandy said and that they both agree that using a child for sexual gratification is abusive. It also seems pretty clear that the commentariat had those arguments pretty much shut down before Jill got around to this thread.

    Meh, maybe, maybe not. I’m agnostic on the question of whether or not Jill should interfere in general, mostly because it’s just an internet thread, and if it’s upsetting me too much, I just shut it down and go do something else. Though interfering because of the “boobs are for nursing” moment and not for anything else on the thread seems weird to me, but then, I’m not in charge of moderating multiple threads simultaneously on a popular website, lucky me. I just don’t agree that the reason Jill shouldn’t have bothered to intervene is because accusing people of pedophilia and justifying calling CPS to have their kids taken away from them is no big. There are arguments to be made against Jill intervening, but that one doesn’t fly, as far as I’m concerned.

    Sandy: Leeches, you say? Allow me a moment to thoughtfully stroke my chin. Would I also have to start baking my own bread?

    Well, if you want your children to get the real benefits of it, and thus avoid the vaccination hoax, you’d have to start by grinding your own wheat…

  509. Sandy: Mybabeisgettingfullyvaxed,sorrytodisappoint.AndIonlybakeTollHousecookiesandbrowniesfrommixes.Butpleasefeelfreetomakeothersweepingrandomgeneralizations.

    Nipplesaresensitive,Iagree,andthereleaseofoxytocinistiedtothestimulationofthenipplesreceiveduringnursing.AsEGclarified,wearenottalkingaboutestrogenhere.Oxytocinisahormonespurringbondingandemotionalattachment,releasedinlargequantitiesinthebrainduringbothorgasmandbreastfeeding.Ifyoudidnotknowthat,andit’salsocomeasashocktoyouthatmanywomenexperiencesexualarousalduringnursing,Ihavetoquestionhowmuchyouactuallyknowaboutbreastfeeding.Becausethisstuffisprettybasic.

    Iconcur.

    MY KNOWLEDGE OF BREASTFEEDING IS THAT I BREASTFED TWO KIDS. I want all of you to read that, let it sink the fuck in. Got it? Ok.

    I know MANY women who breastfed and none of them experienced sexual arousal. None of them orgasmed. I dont know which study was taken and how many breastfeeding mothers aprticipated that made this experience a normal one but I’d love to see a trusted link with this information.

    Now, as far as oxytocin is concerned, this obviosuly doesnt happen to ALL women and without a poll of ALL women who breastfeed its pretty difficult to say most. because if you;re only questioning women who have engaged in extended breastfeeding Im sure most of them get some type of physical enjoyment out of it or else they’d stop a lot sooner than 4 or 5 years because of the discomfort. So your pool is already biased towards that direction. Oxytocin is released during a lot of different activities but the release fo that hormone in and of itself does not cause sexual arousal or orgasm.

  510. antiprincess:
    andyesitssexualifpartofthereasonyoudoitisbecauseofthesexualarousalanditsanunnecessaryactivity

    ok–1)Idon’tknowanyonewhonursesjustforthesexualchargeofit.andIknowalotofnursingmoms,evenlong-termnursingmoms.
    2)unnecessary?isn’tthatalittlearbitrary?whocansayifit’s“necessary”?

    1) I said PART not “just” 2) It is not necessary, the child does not need to nurse for nutrition past a cetain age and as far as comfort, once the child is older there are a multitude of ways to comfort a child that does not invovle the mother’s sexual arousal.

    This entire thread (as far as my point goes) is about sexual arousal and orgasm during breastfeeding, that can not be dismissed. I see a big problem with regularly engaging in an optional form of comfort/bonding that gives the mother sexual pleasure/arousal/orgasm.

    For those who ask how does it harm the child, how does performing oral sex on a child cause physical hamr? If no one ever told the child that was wrong, if no one wver knew what was happening to tell the child it was wrong, how would it cause harm? What if the child liked it (because they have nerve endings that are stimulated too? Does that make it ok? There are some people that put EVERYTHING that involves sexual arousal of an adult that occurs with their interaction with a child when that interaction is not an absolute necessity (childbirth, nursing an infant things like that) in a pile of shit things people should NOT do/things that should NOT happen. How are we wrong for thinking sexual arousal between an adult and child is NOT ok? How does that make us hate women when 1) many of us ARE women and 2) many of us ARE mothers and 3) some of us like myself are mothers who breastfed?

  511. @EG,

    I was looking at comment 266, which I admittedly may be misinterpreting. I don’t think you were being malicious or even unkind, you weren’t aware. It seems to me many of the really negative responses here are because people were not aware how prevalent sexual arousal is for women who nurse and are struggling with gratification vs. arousal. And the sexual abuse of children is a triggery sort of topic.

    As for the rest, eh…I don’t see as big, but since you and Sandy do I retract the comment.

  512. You know, Azalea, if I had experienced arousal, and we were RL friends? I sure as hell wouldn’t tell you about it.

    Azalea: 1)IsaidPARTnot“just”2)Itisnotnecessary,thechilddoesnotneedtonursefornutritionpastacetainageandasfarascomfort,oncethechildisolderthereareamultitudeofwaystocomfortachildthatdoesnotinvovlethemother’ssexualarousal.

    Thisentirethread(asfarasmypointgoes)isaboutsexualarousalandorgasmduringbreastfeeding,thatcannotbedismissed.Iseeabigproblemwithregularlyengaginginanoptionalformofcomfort/bondingthatgivesthemothersexualpleasure/arousal/orgasm.

    Forthosewhoaskhowdoesitharmthechild,howdoesperformingoralsexonachildcausephysicalhamr?Ifnooneevertoldthechildthatwaswrong,ifnoonewverknewwhatwashappeningtotellthechilditwaswrong,howwoulditcauseharm?Whatifthechildlikedit(becausetheyhavenerveendingsthatarestimulatedtoo?Doesthatmakeitok?TherearesomepeoplethatputEVERYTHINGthatinvolvessexualarousalofanadultthatoccurswiththeirinteractionwithachildwhenthatinteractionisnotanabsolutenecessity(childbirth,nursinganinfantthingslikethat)inapileofshitthingspeopleshouldNOTdo/thingsthatshouldNOThappen.HowarewewrongforthinkingsexualarousalbetweenanadultandchildisNOTok?Howdoesthatmakeushatewomenwhen1)manyofusAREwomenand2)manyofusAREmothersand3)someofuslikemyselfaremotherswhobreastfed?

  513. Azalea: For those who ask how does it harm the child, how does performing oral sex on a child cause physical hamr?

    1) Nobody specified that the harm has to be physical. You haven’t produced one instance of any child experiencing harm of any sort due to breastfeeding.

    2) We actually have plenty of evidence that any adult, including a parent, performing oral sex on a child causes harm. We have the stories those children tell us about their lives and their experiences when they grow up. We have studies done by child psychologists and therapists for grown people about the risks of emotional illness and life difficulties that so often dog people who were molested as children. We have the behavioral problems of the children themselves. If you’d like to know how and why this harm is caused by molesting children in detail, I suggest you do something that you seem to find inconceivable: RESEARCH. However, absolutely none of those results–the stories grown children tell about the difficulties they’ve encountered over their lives, the psychological studies, the childhood behavioral problems–has turned up with respect to babies/children who were breastfed by their mothers and whose mothers had the very common experience of experiencing sexual stimulation during breastfeeding.

    Azalea: There are some people that put EVERYTHING that involves sexual arousal of an adult that occurs with their interaction with a child when that interaction is not an absolute necessity (childbirth, nursing an infant things like that) in a pile of shit things people should NOT do/things that should NOT happen.

    So, again, how far does this go? Was it abusive of my mother to take me to see a movie starring Kevin Costner when she had a crush on him? I suspect she might have been experiencing sexual arousal right there in the theater next to me. Wait, it gets even worse. When I was even younger, say, around five years old, she took me to see a concert movie of the Rolling Stones, when I know for a stone cold fact that she’s had a crush on and, I can only assume, been sexually aroused by thoughts of Mick Jagger ever since she was a teenager. Should I have been bundled out of the room every time my mother put on a Rolling Stones album? Was it OK for her to dance to the Rolling Stones with me?

    You can have a philosophical position that prohibits things that cause no harm if you wish to. But you don’t deserve any respect for it.

  514. Azalea: MY KNOWLEDGE OF BREASTFEEDING IS THAT I BREASTFED TWO KIDS.

    Congratu-fucking-lations. That doesn’t mean you know jackshit about how the system works, or what a normative experience is. I’ve certainly cried many times over the three and a half decades I’ve been alive, but that doesn’t mean I know shit about tear production or how my tear ducts work. I don’t, because I haven’t learned or studied anything about it. Lactating doesn’t automatically download knowledge about breastfeeding into your brain, you know.

    Azalea: I know MANY women who breastfed and none of them experienced sexual arousal. None of them orgasmed. I dont know which study was taken and how many breastfeeding mothers aprticipated that made this experience a normal one but I’d love to see a trusted link with this information.

    Really? Did you ask? Because you certainly sound as if the idea never crossed your innocent, delicate mind before it came up in this thread. In fact, the experience is so common that it’s addressed in many breastfeeding books. So go pick one up.

    But if you find it impossible to do your own research, as seems likely, here is a thread on the La Leche League forums in which a new mother anxiously asks if what she’s feeling is normal, and plenty of other women assure her that it is. It’s possible, I suppose, that they’re all child-abusing freaks who are just trying to indoctrinate her into their cult, when the proper, Azalea-approved response would be to tell her that she’s a sick predator who ought never to nurse again and then to call CPS, but it seems a bit more likely to me that there’s more in the world of nursing than even so great an authority as some random woman who’s nursed two kids might know.

    Here are some excerpts from breast-feeding/childcare books:

    The Complete Book of Breastfeeding
    The Vital Touch
    The latest edition of Dr. Spock, for fuck’s sake

    Is there a reason you can’t do these searches to educate yourself?

    Azalea: Now, as far as oxytocin is concerned, this obviosuly doesnt happen to ALL women and without a poll of ALL women who breastfeed its pretty difficult to say most. because if you;re only questioning women who have engaged in extended breastfeeding Im sure most of them get some type of physical enjoyment out of it or else they’d stop a lot sooner than 4 or 5 years because of the discomfort. So your pool is already biased towards that direction. Oxytocin is released during a lot of different activities but the release fo that hormone in and of itself does not cause sexual arousal or orgasm.

    I have no idea what you think your point is with this comment. Oxytocin is a hormone released during sex, childbirth, and breastfeeding, among other activities. If you would actually bother to do any research rather than assuming that having nursed is all you need to do in order to know everything there is to know, you’d know that sexual arousal during breastfeeding is most common in the first few months. Nobody is questioning only women who do extended breastfeeding.

  515. Kristen J.: I was looking at comment 266, which I admittedly may be misinterpreting.

    Oh, of course. Yes. I did make that comment not knowing that paternal suckling was a thing. Still, though, after you corrected me and I figured out where our miscommunication was with the lactating/suckling thing, I did say OK, in that case, where’s the harm, instead of insisting that because I had no personal experience with it, it must not be true.

    Annoyingly, I broke up my response to Azalea into two comments specifically so that it wouldn’t go into moderation, and now half of it has gone into moderation anyway.

    I will sum it up: Azalea, nursing doesn’t mean that knowledge about breastfeeding automatically appears in your brain. Sexual arousal during breastfeeding is so damn common that it’s discussed in The Complete Book of Breastfeeding and the latest edition of Dr. Spock. Do some research, for God’s sake, instead of just spouting off about how you know best because you breastfed two kids and never in all your born days have you heard of such a thing.

  516. EG: 1)Nobodyspecifiedthattheharmhastobephysical.Youhaven’tproducedoneinstanceofanychildexperiencingharmofanysortduetobreastfeeding.

    2)Weactuallyhaveplentyofevidencethatanyadult,includingaparent,performingoralsexonachildcausesharm.Wehavethestoriesthosechildrentellusabouttheirlivesandtheirexperienceswhentheygrowup.Wehavestudiesdonebychildpsychologistsandtherapistsforgrownpeopleabouttherisksofemotionalillnessandlifedifficultiesthatsooftendogpeoplewhoweremolestedaschildren.Wehavethebehavioralproblemsofthechildrenthemselves.Ifyou’dliketoknowhowandwhythisharmiscausedbymolestingchildrenindetail,Isuggestyoudosomethingthatyouseemtofindinconceivable:RESEARCH.However,absolutelynoneofthoseresults–thestoriesgrownchildrentellaboutthedifficultiesthey’veencounteredovertheirlives,thepsychologicalstudies,thechildhoodbehavioralproblems–hasturnedupwithrespecttobabies/childrenwhowerebreastfedbytheirmothersandwhosemothershadtheverycommonexperienceofexperiencingsexualstimulationduringbreastfeeding.

    So,again,howfardoesthisgo?WasitabusiveofmymothertotakemetoseeamoviestarringKevinCostnerwhenshehadacrushonhim?Isuspectshemighthavebeenexperiencingsexualarousalrightthereinthetheaternexttome.Wait,itgetsevenworse.WhenIwasevenyounger,say,aroundfiveyearsold,shetookmetoseeaconcertmovieoftheRollingStones,whenIknowforastonecoldfactthatshe’shadacrushonand,Icanonlyassume,beensexuallyarousedbythoughtsofMickJaggereversinceshewasateenager.ShouldIhavebeenbundledoutoftheroomeverytimemymotherputonaRollingStonesalbum?WasitOKforhertodancetotheRollingStoneswithme?

    Youcanhaveaphilosophicalpositionthatprohibitsthingsthatcausenoharmifyouwishto.Butyoudon’tdeserveanyrespectforit.

    Did YOUR presence at the concert cause her arousal? We arent talking about breastfeeding moms who are sexually aroused by their partners sucking on their nipples we are talking about breastfeeding moms, who are breastfeeding school-aged children who are experiencing sexual arousal during these nipple sucking bonding sessions.

    How many children grow up KNOWING their moms were orgasming when they breastfed at 3, 4, 5 years old? Liek I said, tell a few children what’s going on and the research will turn up. Show me a teenager or adult who is not sickened by the idea that *part* of the reason their mom continued breastfeeding them into preschool was because she experienced sexual arousal/stimulation/orgasm.

    Do that and let’s revisit this discussion a good ten years after all of this has been made known. Because you know what, a child who has had oral sex performed on him or her eventually learns that it was a sexual thing their parents did with them and the idea of doing something that sexually arouses your parent is the fucking harm.

    So again…..

    If this is so harmless, where would be the harm be in admitting to your children that part of the reason you breastfed for so long was because it got you off? Remember to tell them that this is normal.

  517. Azalea: we are talking about breastfeeding moms, who are breastfeeding school-aged children who are experiencing sexual arousal during these nipple sucking bonding sessions.

    OK. So you’ve claimed that we’re talking about women who extend breastfeeding in order experience orgasms; that doesn’t happen. You’ve claimed that we’re talking about women who extend breastfeeding in order to experience sexual stimulation; that doesn’t happen. Now you’re claiming that experiencing sexual arousal while nursing an older child is the problem. What happened to it being only a problem if the mother was nursing in order to gain sexual pleasure? Now sexual pleasure as a side effect is a problem?

    And why, if sexual pleasure as a side effect is the problem, are you concerned only about school-aged children? Surely you do not condone sexual abuse of infants?

    There is no sexual abuse happening here. If you would bother to do even the most cursory research beyond lactating and calling up your friends and saying “You’re not one of those disgusting pedophiles who felt sexually stimulated while nursing your baby, are you? Because I would totally call CPS on one of those pervs,” you would find that sexual arousal is most common in the first six months of nursing.

    Now, if the mother and older child are both enjoying and receiving benefits from the nursing, and the presence of arousal does not influence her nursing decisions, what is your problem?

    Azalea: How many children grow up KNOWING their moms were orgasming when they breastfed at 3, 4, 5 years old?

    None, because this does not happen. The orgasm situation occurred once in the first few weeks during the most volatile weeks, hormonally speaking. It rarely happens. It does not happen at 3, 4, and 5.

    Azalea: Show me a teenager or adult who is not sickened by the idea that *part* of the reason their mom continued breastfeeding them into preschool was because she experienced sexual arousal/stimulation/orgasm.

    This does not happen. You have not found one instance of correlation between extended breastfeeding and sexual arousal.

    Azalea: If this is so harmless, where would be the harm be in admitting to your children that part of the reason you breastfed for so long was because it got you off? Remember to tell them that this is normal.

    Extended breastfeeding for orgasms does not happen. How many times do I have to repeat this for it to sink in? As I said, if my mother told me that she’d been sexually aroused by nursing me when I was a baby and once, early on, had even had an orgasm, I would find that interesting, because I find the biology and experience of this sort of thing interesting. That is a very different thing from your fever-brained notion of wicked sexually abusive mommies manipulating four-year-olds into nursing because of the multiple orgasms it brings them, which, as you do not seem capable of understanding, does. not. happen.

    You asked for citations that sexual arousal during breastfeeding is normal. I provided them, including one from the single most famous baby-care book of the past several decades. Is it actually impossible for you to accept that this is something you’re wrong about?

    Why don’t you spend some time worrying about something that is slightly more likely, like drunken unicorns running unattended children through with their horns? Better yet, spend some time doing some research and actually learning something.

  518. EG: OK.Soyou’veclaimedthatwe’retalkingaboutwomenwhoextendbreastfeedinginorderexperienceorgasms;thatdoesn’thappen.You’veclaimedthatwe’retalkingaboutwomenwhoextendbreastfeedinginordertoexperiencesexualstimulation;thatdoesn’thappen.Nowyou’reclaimingthatexperiencingsexualarousalwhilenursinganolderchildistheproblem.Whathappenedtoitbeingonlyaproblemifthemotherwasnursinginordertogainsexualpleasure?Nowsexualpleasureasasideeffectisaproblem?

    Andwhy,ifsexualpleasureasasideeffectistheproblem,areyouconcernedonlyaboutschool-agedchildren?Surelyyoudonotcondonesexualabuseofinfants?

    Thereisnosexualabusehappeninghere.Ifyouwouldbothertodoeventhemostcursoryresearchbeyondlactatingandcallingupyourfriendsandsaying“You’renotoneofthosedisgustingpedophileswhofeltsexuallystimulatedwhilenursingyourbaby,areyou?BecauseIwouldtotallycallCPSononeofthosepervs,”youwouldfindthatsexualarousalismostcommoninthefirstsixmonthsofnursing.

    Now,ifthemotherandolderchildarebothenjoyingandreceivingbenefitsfromthenursing,andthepresenceofarousaldoesnotinfluencehernursingdecisions,whatisyourproblem?

    None,becausethisdoesnothappen.Theorgasmsituationoccurredonceinthefirstfewweeksduringthemostvolatileweeks,hormonallyspeaking.Itrarelyhappens.Itdoesnothappenat3,4,and5.

    Thisdoesnothappen.Youhavenotfoundoneinstanceofcorrelationbetweenextendedbreastfeedingandsexualarousal.

    Extendedbreastfeedingfororgasmsdoesnothappen.HowmanytimesdoIhavetorepeatthisforittosinkin?AsIsaid,ifmymothertoldmethatshe’dbeensexuallyarousedbynursingmewhenIwasababyandonce,earlyon,hadevenhadanorgasm,Iwouldfindthatinteresting,becauseIfindthebiologyandexperienceofthissortofthinginteresting.Thatisaverydifferentthingfromyourfever-brainednotionofwickedsexuallyabusivemommiesmanipulatingfour-year-oldsintonursingbecauseofthemultipleorgasmsitbringsthem,which,asyoudonotseemcapableofunderstanding,does.not.happen.

    Youaskedforcitationsthatsexualarousalduringbreastfeedingisnormal.Iprovidedthem,includingonefromthesinglemostfamousbaby-carebookofthepastseveraldecades.Isitactuallyimpossibleforyoutoacceptthatthisissomethingyou’rewrongabout?

    Whydon’tyouspendsometimeworryingaboutsomethingthatisslightlymorelikely,likedrunkenunicornsrunningunattendedchildrenthroughwiththeirhorns?Betteryet,spendsometimedoingsomeresearchandactuallylearningsomething.

    WTH Everything I have said from the time Sandy said it was OK to experience sexual stimulation/arousal and Rodeo threw in orgasm was that it should not be happening. First of all as a mother who breastfed I dont need to ask anyone shit. Get that through your head, let it marinate. I breastfed, not all women who breastfeed are getting off on it, I can attest to that as I and the women I know who breastfed did not experience sexual stimulation or arousal.

    Breastfeeding a newborn is best. Formulas THRIVE to give the nutritional value of breastmilk. Therefore, breastfeeding trumps formula. That it stimulates a woman at that point is something she deals with it, she can even pump the milk.

    However we are talking about breastfeeding children who no longer need mother’s milk nutrition as there are foods they should be consuming to get their nutrition from, there are vitamins, there are multitudes of other options that do not involve her sexual arousal that will not cause more harm than good. Infants have trouble digesting ANYTHING that is not breastmilk, that’s just fact. Formula is great but breastmilk is best for infants. A 5 year old is not an infant, a 5 year old can bond with his/her mother without sexually arousing her.

    Someone stated bluntly that there was NOTHING wrong with extending breastfeeding partially because of the sexual stimulation/arousal/orgasm a mother experiences during breastfeeding.

    MY original comment on this thread:

    Azalea:
    I saw a youtube video of a mothe rbreastfeeding her 8- .I wonder what would happen if this continued until her son was 8? With the way people sexualize breasts(and no kidding I have heard heterosexual women say they would feel “funny” about breastfeeding their daughter but not their sons) would there be some inference of sexual assault on the boy?

    Eitherway, bodily fluids near my food is gross. I dont even share my drink, if you take a sip the rest is yours. I breastfed and think breastfeeding is a huge sacrifice and totally awesome but I dont want anyone’s breastmilk near my dessert. Other than that, breastfeeding openly is her business.

    The grandfather IS a bigoted asshole.

  519. The emphasis below are mine but here Sandy brings in the idea that a woman would breastfeed in part for the sexual stimulation, that has been deemed natural by the random women (random women = woman/women who have dubbed me a random woman). I was not hte one who made *that* shot up, I was not the one to say it, and honestly, there were PLENTY of people within the comments who cheered this comment on and went on to share how if it werent for this sexual stimulation/arousal they would NOT have breastfed for so long. SO I challeneged you all to take you tales of sexual stimulation/arousal OR orgasm (meaning EITHER of the three options there) and tell your children. Tell your daughters that the sensations she feels when someone sucks on her nipples now (when she’s an adult) is the way YOU felt when she sucked on YOURS when she was 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 years old and that there is NOTHING wrong with that because she liked it. Let’s see how that plays out. I know the idea is unnerving, it makes you uncomfortale it doesn’t sound like platonic hugs and kisses anymore. DUH that is how those of US who have been “aquicked” out by it have felt this entire thread. ANY research you offer that doesn’t include THAT; a study on how adults feel knowing PART of the reason they were breastfed for so long (beyond infancy) was because mom said it felt good: she was sexually stimulated/aroused by your mouth sucking on her nipple.

    Because I already noted the obvious difference between nursing an infant (which is the best option for NUTRITION for the infant- you know a necessity, doesnt make formula feeding bad, just that breast is best) and feeling sexually aroused over nursing a toddler/pre-schooler and beyond and feeling sexually aroused/stimulated.

    Sandy:

    Sandy 11.29.2011 at 11:14 pm

    PrettyAmiable: Nipples get tough after breast-feeding? I am never having a child of my own.

    Haha, wee derail incoming. I will verify this. My nipples got super tender, painfully dry, and itchy by turns. I was constantly dabbing on lanolin gel. My mom told me when I complained that if I continued nursing my nipples would toughen up–those exact words. And they did. They are still soft and feel the same as my pre-breastfeeding nipples. They didn’t get callused or anything, they’re just not easily irritated.

    That’s right, eventually it takes a deep raking from tiny fingernails to hurt them. On that note, formula also makes a perfectly happy baby.

    Joking aside, I really am disturbed by the idea that anyone would report a nursing mother if they suspected she was doing extended nursing for sexual gratification. I’m having trouble letting that go. Breastfeeding certainly does have the potential to be sexually stimulating, because there’s a mouth on your nipple. But there are a lot of wonderful things about breastfeeding, like the closeness and cuddles and the love hormones that swoosh through your brain and my personal favorite, not having to wash bottles. So what if a woman likes the feeling, yes, sexually, of that mouth on her nipple? If the child and mother wish to continue the breastfeeding relationship, where is the harm? If you have other reasons to suspect abuse, fine, but nursing by itself is not abuse. And whatever a woman’s private reasons for wanting to breastfeed (or formula feed for that matter), they are really none of your business.

    Azalea

  520. Li: Nottopickuponacompletelyofftopicpartofwhatyousaid,butyoumightbecomforted(ornot)toknowthatrandomerectionsareprettymuchjustafeatureofhowbodieswithpenisessleep,ratherthanindicativeofaneroticdreamperse.Physiologicalreactionnotnecessarilyconnectedinanywaytosexualthoughts/dreams.It’soktocontinuetoseeyourfatherasentirelynon-sexual!Woo!

    He was not conscious, he probably wasn’t even aware that eh had an erection, her sleeping there did nto cause the erection. Breastfeeding mothers who are breastfeeding older children who feel sexual stimulation/arousal/orgasm during breastfeeding are AWARE of the sexual stimulation and dont see anything wrong with it because the child initiates it. That’s a terribly different thing going on altgoether, talk about golapost moving. I wasn’t the one who said women experience sexual stimulation someone else said it and then everyone else defended it. The op was about breastfeeding an older child so I dont understand why this conversation continues to veer towards breastfeeding infants.

  521. From the le leche discussion so many people keep quoting
    :

    Join Date: Nov 2006Posts: 390

    Re: Strange sensations while breastfeeding

    I was recently experiencing sorta the same thing, wasn’t much like a sexual feeling but I had that “wave feeling” in my chest, it would start from about my collar bone down through my breast.

    ____

    Join Date: Sep 2007Posts: 6

    Re: Strange sensations while breastfeeding

    Thanks so much for replying to my post. I have talked to my doctor and she had no idea what could be causing this but suggested hormones and the release of oxytocin. I guess I am the type of person who needs some sort of concrete answer (or to feel like I’m not alone) because I have anxiety issues and when my body feels strange I panic. I don’t want these sensations to get in the way of how I feel about my baby but when it happens I get really upset.
    ____

    There are a grand total of 16 posts on that topic and only one or two of them outright accept what they feel as sexual stimulation, ALL of them blame it on hormones and most of them felt depressed during letdowns. The initial poster says her doctor doesn’t know wtf she was feeling that way -_- . And because this is in the beginning of breastfeeding I dont paint her as a pedophile or someone doing something wrong, she rightfully sees that sensation as DISTURBING she’s not all gungho yay I can get off on this woo hoo!! Like everyone else on this thread cheering it on with , my body my sexual stimulation.

    People showed outrage when sexual stimulation was brought up (early on way before Rodeo’s comment at 202 by Sandy) and defended as being an ok partial reason to continue breastfeeding, in fact, Sandy said WHATEVER reason a woman choose to continue breastfeeding was nobody’s business. We said BULLSHIT, there is a child invovled, the reasons matter. Abortions yeah any reason is a good reason, interaction with a living breathing child the reasons MATTER. Books written on the subject will point to the rush of oxytocin what we’re tlaking about here, as Sandy initially put it is a child’s “mouth on a nipple” and the pleasure (physical and sexual) that gives the person whose nipples are being sucked on.

  522. First of all as a mother who breastfed I dont need to ask anyone shit. Get that through your head, let it marinate.

    Let it be noted that, as the only person on this thread who has ever breastfed, Azalea’s opinion trumps you all.

    (Research? Why would she need research? She’s breastfed two kids, biatch.)

  523. Mezzanine:
    FirstofallasamotherwhobreastfedIdontneedtoaskanyoneshit.Getthatthroughyourhead,letitmarinate.

    Letitbenotedthat,astheonlypersononthisthreadwhohaseverbreastfed,Azalea’sopiniontrumpsyouall.

    (Research?Whywouldsheneedresearch?She’sbreastfedtwokids,biatch.)

    LMAO!!! You are hilarious, thank you for that laugh. See had you actually read the comments, I was accused o hating breastfeeding mothers and not knowing anything about breastfeeding because I didn’t know before this thread that there were women who were being sexually aroused/stimulated orgasming even from breastfeeding. Yeah see, if you DIDNT know that breastfeeding was a source of sexual arousal/stimulation/orgams, then you couldnt have possibly breastfed, that was the vibe which is why I repeatedly remind them to kill teh condescending bullshit about how I dont knwo *anything* about breastfeeding just because I dont know anything about orgasming from it. I am GLAD I dont know about ir firsthand, that sounds like a hell I dont want to be in, being experiencing arousal from my child, no thanks, glad I do NOT know about that firsthand.

  524. Kristen J.:
    @EG,

    I was looking at comment 266, which I admittedly may be misinterpreting. I don’t think you were being malicious or even unkind, you weren’t aware. It seems to me many of the really negative responses here are because people were not aware how prevalent sexual arousal is for women who nurse and are struggling with gratification vs. arousal. And the sexual abuse of children is a triggery sort of topic.

    As for the rest, eh…I don’t see as big, but since you and Sandy do I retract the comment.

    The blockquote feature requires me to go back and insert spaces between every single word, or else I would blockquote more but, My pushaback on this began as “eww no breatsmilk at MY dinner table!, otherwise breastfeeding, awesome” then when someone said well sexual arousal is cool during breastfeeding, I had trouble seeing how that is cool. If a male friend confided in me that when he changed his daughter’s diaper touching her vagina made him hard, I would strongly suggest to him that he no logner change her diaper until he was able to sort that out. Alas, a heterosexual male touching a vagina is bound to get a reaction, I just feel that reaction to his small child is inappropriate. Likewise, with breastfeeding mothers. From what I’ve read on the internet (where people are anonymously self reporting) many are saying they get a sensation and sometimes even depression from the initial flow of milk. This is all hormonal, what so many have been tlaking about here is how the physical act of the child sucking on their nipple feels good to them, in a sexual way and that its ok because it happens to *everybody*. Well, it doesnt happen to everybody there isn’t a real scientific study done on how many women experience what is categorized here specifically as sexual arousal/stimulation during breastfeeding as opposed to how many do not. In pure numbers, 10% of all breastfeeding mothers could be viewed as “many” because that would be a lot of women but in comparison to how many women actually breastfeed it could be a small number. We do not know that, no one here has proven that yet they are calling those of us who are flabbergasted at teh idea of this ignorant about breastfeeding (because if you dont know about the sexual stimulation you know absolutely NOTHING about breastfeeding and you’re a misogynist, and you hate breasts, and you hate mothers, and you hate comforting children, and you’re a big bully who want do nto want children to bond with their mothers the only one way in the world ther eis to bond with them, oh and saying you are uncomfortable with the idea of sexual arousal between parent and child is the SAME thing as saying you’d call CPS on a breastfeeding mom…even f you said ad nauseam that you would never call CPS ona breastfeeding mom just because you saw her breastfeeding.)

  525. Azalea: First of all as a mother who breastfed I dont need to ask anyone shit.

    I eat and shit, what more could I need to learn about the human digestive process?

    Hell, why do any of us go to doctors or consult specialists? After all, we’ve all done the things we’re asking about.

    Get this into your head: you have shown yourself to be utterly ignorant on this topic. Having nursed two kids doesn’t make you an expert on anything but the interaction between you and your kids. Further, are you under the impression that you are the only woman who has ever nursed babies? I hate to burst your bubble, but I have met many, many women who have nursed babies, and while this may be hard for you to believe, many of them have different views on nursing than you do. I guess they’re all just predatory child molesters.

    Azalea: not all women who breastfeed are getting off on it, I can attest to that as I and the women I know who breastfed did not experience sexual stimulation or arousal.

    What’s your point? Nobody said that all women experience sexual arousal. I and others have said that many women do, and it’s quite normal to do so.

    Azalea: However we are talking about breastfeeding children who no longer need mother’s milk nutrition as there are foods they should be consuming to get their nutrition from, there are vitamins, there are multitudes of other options that do not involve her sexual arousal that will not cause more harm than good.

    Given that you haven’t found one instance of harm being caused by extended breastfeeding, I’d say that breastfeeding falls into the category of things that do not cause more harm than good.

    Azalea: Someone stated bluntly that there was NOTHING wrong with extending breastfeeding partially because of the sexual stimulation/arousal/orgasm a mother experiences during breastfeeding.

    She said that it was a horrible idea to report someone to CPS because that was what you suspected was happening. She said that there’s no reason to discontinue the relationship just because the mother feels sexual stimulation, given all the other positive points. She said another mother’s reasons for breastfeeding were none of your business. I agree with all that. Note, though, that she did not say that the reason mothers go with extended breastfeeding was because it turned them on. She did not mention one case of this happening. Neither have you. So if you manage to dig up a case of a woman sexually abusing her five-year-old by breastfeeding it, then by all means, it will be worth discussing. However, I have never been interested in “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” type questions. And for fun, I prefer to contemplate drunken unicorns.

    Azalea: there were PLENTY of people within the comments who cheered this comment on and went on to share how if it werent for this sexual stimulation/arousal they would NOT have breastfed for so long.

    Cite? Because, again, sexual arousal is most common within the first six months, though not unheard of after that, and the only mention of orgasm happened within the first couple weeks. I have been reading this comment thread, I assure you. I saw nobody post “I totally would have stopped nursing when the kid was 12 months, but it was such a fabulous sexual thrill that I couldn’t stop until she was 5!”

    Azalea: SO I challeneged you all to take you tales of sexual stimulation/arousal OR orgasm (meaning EITHER of the three options there) and tell your children. Tell your daughters that the sensations she feels when someone sucks on her nipples now (when she’s an adult) is the way YOU felt when she sucked on YOURS when she was 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

    I’m afraid I can’t do that. I don’t have children yet (I know, that means I can’t possibly know anything about breastfeeding), and if I did, I don’t think I’d want to nurse that late. Well, three, I suppose, and there we reach the end of my comfort level. However, I am able to conceive of the fact that other women might have different comfort levels. It is a remarkable talent on my part.

    Azalea: Breastfeeding mothers who are breastfeeding older children who feel sexual stimulation/arousal/orgasm during breastfeeding are AWARE of the sexual stimulation and dont see anything wrong with it because the child initiates it.

    No, breastfeeding mothers who feel sexual stimulation during breastfeeding don’t see anything wrong with it because it is common and normal. I know that your vast experience of nursing two whole children hasn’t encompassed that, but it is true nonetheless.

    Azalea: The op was about breastfeeding an older child so I dont understand why this conversation continues to veer towards breastfeeding infants.

    I deeply, deeply apologize for allowing myself to drift toward something that actually happens (nursing mothers experiencing sexual stimulation, usually within the first six months of breastfeeding, and occasionally thereafter), rather than staying focused on your paranoid fever-dream of wicked mothers who nurse eight-year-olds for the back-arching orgasms it brings them.

    Oh, wait, I’m not. If you’d read anything at all, you’d see that the reason the conversation is going that way is because that’s when sexual stimulation during breastfeeding is most likely. Oh, but what am I saying? You don’t need to read anything ever. You’ve nursed two children. There cannot possibly be any information that is unknown to you.

    Azalea: her sleeping there did nto cause the erection.

    I think you’re correct…but, then, I know my father. You don’t. What makes you so sure that this is the case? Maybe he was sleeping next to me specifically because doing so was such a turn-on. You know no more about him than you know about these imaginary scary mommies of yours. But you automatically give him the benefit of the doubt. Hmm.

    Azalea: There are a grand total of 16 posts on that topic and only one or two of them outright accept what they feel as sexual stimulation, ALL of them blame it on hormones and most of them felt depressed during letdowns. The initial poster says her doctor doesn’t know wtf she was feeling that way -_- . …she rightfully sees that sensation as DISTURBING she’s not all gungho yay I can get off on this woo hoo!! Like everyone else on this thread cheering it on with , my body my sexual stimulation.

    Ok, so it’s OK if they don’t call it sexual stimulation but instead say “like sensations I sometimes get ‘down there'”? Ok. I’ll call any feelings I might get of which you don’t approve “Fred.” That ought to make you A-OK with it.

    And it’s OK if the woman is upset and ashamed, but bad if she thinks “Oh, OK, that’ll happen. Well, normal and not much to be done about it, so I’ll just relax and feel it until it stops.” So, in your book, feeling bad makes the woman virtuous? That’s pretty fucked up. I see no virtue in feeling bad.

    Nobody said “yay I can get off on this, woo hoo.” I and other said that it’s normal, it’s natural, it’s not a big deal, and it’s nothing to be upset about. I think I also said that given the great difficulty and pain some women endure when it comes to breastfeeding, the last thing they should be doing is beating themselves up over something that is normal and feels good. I know it’s horrible to suggest that a mother should relax and feel good, but I guess I’m just radical like that.

    Azalea: Books written on the subject will point to the rush of oxytocin what we’re tlaking about here, as Sandy initially put it is a child’s “mouth on a nipple” and the pleasure (physical and sexual) that gives the person whose nipples are being sucked on.

    What are you even trying to say here? I believe that I referred you to three books. I also believe that I brought up oxytocin a while ago, as well as the interconnections between the nerve endings and the production/effects of the hormone. What on earth are you on about?

    I promise you that there are no sexually-abusive-via-breastfeeding-an-8-year-old mommies in your closet. Or even under your bed.

  526. Azalea: I was accused o hating breastfeeding mothers and not knowing anything about breastfeeding because I didn’t know before this thread that there were women who were being sexually aroused/stimulated orgasming even from breastfeeding.

    I believe that what I said was that, given that you had never heard of something so common in breastfeeding as to be mentioned in Dr. fucking Spock, and indeed, by every childbirth educator and lactation consultant I’ve ever spoken to, and you didn’t seem know anything about the hormone oxytocin, you didn’t really know jack shit about what was going on. I stand by that. Breastfeed to your heart’s content, but don’t think it means you know more than you do.

    Azalea: This is all hormonal, what so many have been tlaking about here is how the physical act of the child sucking on their nipple feels good to them, in a sexual way and that its ok because it happens to *everybody*.

    No, that’s not what anybody has said. Nobody has said that it happens to everybody. What I and others have said is that it is a completely normal sensation. And again, your biological illiteracy and inability to understand how the various biological systems that run the human body interact–i.e. part of the reason having your nipple sucked on feels good because of the oxytocin, which is also released during sex–points to nothing but your continued ignorance.

    As to studies, you can, if you like, feel free to use scientific databases to look up any surveys done or articles written. I’ve done some runs through google scholar and turned up a couple of studies, but all of them require payment for access to the article, and I don’t think that it’s really my responsibility to shell out 30 bucks to deal with your lack of knowledge. Look it up yourself.

  527. I am going to come right out and say that when I was breastfeeding my daughter, it felt good to have her suck on my nipple. It is supposed to feel good, otherwise, when they are waking us up every three hours to eat during those first few weeks when some of us really don’t like our babies and wish someone else would fetch them, we might not feed them. (I know I had horrible thoughts about my daughter just after she was born, and I almost felt like she belonged to the hospital when it was finally time to to take her home.) And for some women, the hormone that helps us want to feed our babies goes a bit overboard from time to time, and that’s it.

    And as a person who breastfed her daughter until she was two and a half even through, according to you, Azalea, she wasn’t getting anything else from it that she couldn’t get from outside food, a plushie, a hug or a blankie, mind your own damn business. I would have continued to nurse her if outside forces hadn’t made me wean her, up until the time one of use decided it was time to quit. Breastfeeding was awesome.

  528. This issue (breastfeeding for longer than usual) has actually been brought up in my “Writing about Women” course in college. I agree with Prudence when she says that if a woman wants to breastfeed her child until he is 5 years old, who care? Who are we to judge her on her actions with her own child? Especially men. I think that the family should be more understanding, however, if they are truly uncomfortable with this, that is understandable too. They have a right to ask her to breastfeed in private, or to leave the room. Personally, I do not think that I will be breastfeeding past the age of 1 year old, however every mother makes their own choices and as women, and as people, I feel as though we need to respect that.
    In contrast, I believe that, in the first letter, the granddaughter did absolutely the right thing in calling out her grandpa. Racist remarks, especially in this day in age, are unacceptable and ignorant no matter your age. I idolize the granddaughter for having the guts to stick up for herself against her grandfather, who seems like a not-so friendly guy. We need more people like this all around the world to help end racial prejudice.

  529. shfree:
    IamgoingtocomerightoutandsaythatwhenIwasbreastfeedingmydaughter,itfeltgoodtohavehersuckonmynipple.Itissupposedtofeelgood,otherwise,whentheyarewakingusupeverythreehourstoeatduringthosefirstfewweekswhensomeofusreallydon’tlikeourbabiesandwishsomeoneelsewouldfetchthem,wemightnotfeedthem.(IknowIhadhorriblethoughtsaboutmydaughterjustaftershewasborn,andIalmostfeltlikeshebelongedtothehospitalwhenitwasfinallytimetototakeherhome.)Andforsomewomen,thehormonethathelpsuswanttofeedourbabiesgoesabitoverboardfromtimetotime,andthat’sit.

    Andasapersonwhobreastfedherdaughteruntilshewastwoandahalfeventhrough,accordingtoyou,Azalea,shewasn’tgettinganythingelsefromitthatshecouldn’tgetfromoutsidefood,aplushie,ahugorablankie,mindyourowndamnbusiness.Iwouldhavecontinuedtonurseherifoutsideforceshadn’tmademeweanher,upuntilthetimeoneofusedecideditwastimetoquit.Breastfeedingwasawesome.

    WHen the fuck did I say someone should take your or anyone else’s daughter away? You wont find it.

    I said Im uncomfortable with it, that yeah KNOWING you said it felt good and that if it hadnt felt good you would have stopped (for clarity *I* am specifically talking about feeling good in a SEUAL way) yes and I’d think you were fucked up. I’d have no way of proving it and wouldnt risk your family unit but I would be sickened by the sight of you havign a sexual moment with your child and I wouldnt want myself or any child I loved to be around you.

    My discomfort with you getting sexual enjoyment from breastfeeding is not a reason to take your daughter away from you but the discomfort isnt some misogynistic bullshit that so many others have tried to make it seem. You see my discomfort for people intentionally doing things they KNOW and are AWARE of which sexually arouses/stimulates or brings them to orgasm that involve their children is natural. Most people are grossed out by the idea of sexual arousal/stimulation that is brought on by an activity you intentionally do with yout child that is optional.

    EG: Ieatandshit,whatmorecouldIneedtolearnaboutthehumandigestiveprocess?

    Hell,whydoanyofusgotodoctorsorconsultspecialists?Afterall,we’vealldonethethingswe’reaskingabout.

    Getthisintoyourhead:youhaveshownyourselftobeutterlyignorantonthistopic.Havingnursedtwokidsdoesn’tmakeyouanexpertonanythingbuttheinteractionbetweenyouandyourkids.Further,areyouundertheimpressionthatyouaretheonlywomanwhohasevernursedbabies?Ihatetoburstyourbubble,butIhavemetmany,manywomenwhohavenursedbabies,andwhilethismaybehardforyoutobelieve,manyofthemhavedifferentviewsonnursingthanyoudo.Iguessthey’realljustpredatorychildmolesters.

    What’syourpoint?Nobodysaidthatallwomenexperiencesexualarousal.Iandothershavesaidthatmanywomendo,andit’squitenormaltodoso.

    Giventhatyouhaven’tfoundoneinstanceofharmbeingcausedbyextendedbreastfeeding,I’dsaythatbreastfeedingfallsintothecategoryofthingsthatdonotcausemoreharmthangood.

    ShesaidthatitwasahorribleideatoreportsomeonetoCPSbecausethatwaswhatyoususpectedwashappening.Shesaidthatthere’snoreasontodiscontinuetherelationshipjustbecausethemotherfeelssexualstimulation,givenalltheotherpositivepoints.Shesaidanothermother’sreasonsforbreastfeedingwerenoneofyourbusiness.Iagreewithallthat.Note,though,thatshedidnotsaythatthereasonmothersgowithextendedbreastfeedingwasbecauseitturnedthemon.Shedidnotmentiononecaseofthishappening.Neitherhaveyou.Soifyoumanagetodigupacaseofawomansexuallyabusingherfive-year-oldbybreastfeedingit,thenbyallmeans,itwillbeworthdiscussing.However,Ihaveneverbeeninterestedin“howmanyangelscandanceontheheadofapin”typequestions.Andforfun,Iprefertocontemplatedrunkenunicorns.

    Cite?Because,again,sexualarousalismostcommonwithinthefirstsixmonths,thoughnotunheardofafterthat,andtheonlymentionoforgasmhappenedwithinthefirstcoupleweeks.Ihavebeenreadingthiscommentthread,Iassureyou.Isawnobodypost“Itotallywouldhavestoppednursingwhenthekidwas12months,butitwassuchafabuloussexualthrillthatIcouldn’tstopuntilshewas5!”

    I’mafraidIcan’tdothat.Idon’thavechildrenyet(Iknow,thatmeansIcan’tpossiblyknowanythingaboutbreastfeeding),andifIdid,Idon’tthinkI’dwanttonursethatlate.Well,three,Isuppose,andtherewereachtheendofmycomfortlevel.However,Iamabletoconceiveofthefactthatotherwomenmighthavedifferentcomfortlevels.Itisaremarkabletalentonmypart.

    No,breastfeedingmotherswhofeelsexualstimulationduringbreastfeedingdon’tseeanythingwrongwithitbecauseitiscommonandnormal.Iknowthatyourvastexperienceofnursingtwowholechildrenhasn’tencompassedthat,butitistruenonetheless.

    Ideeply,deeplyapologizeforallowingmyselftodrifttowardsomethingthatactuallyhappens(nursingmothersexperiencingsexualstimulation,usuallywithinthefirstsixmonthsofbreastfeeding,andoccasionallythereafter),ratherthanstayingfocusedonyourparanoidfever-dreamofwickedmotherswhonurseeight-year-oldsfortheback-archingorgasmsitbringsthem.

    Oh,wait,I’mnot.Ifyou’dreadanythingatall,you’dseethatthereasontheconversationisgoingthatwayisbecausethat’swhensexualstimulationduringbreastfeedingismostlikely.Oh,butwhatamIsaying?Youdon’tneedtoreadanythingever.You’venursedtwochildren.Therecannotpossiblybeanyinformationthatisunknowntoyou.

    Ithinkyou’recorrect…but,then,Iknowmyfather.Youdon’t.Whatmakesyousosurethatthisisthecase?Maybehewassleepingnexttomespecificallybecausedoingsowassuchaturn-on.Youknownomoreabouthimthanyouknowabouttheseimaginaryscarymommiesofyours.Butyouautomaticallygivehimthebenefitofthedoubt.Hmm.

    Ok,soit’sOKiftheydon’tcallitsexualstimulationbutinsteadsay“likesensationsIsometimesget‘downthere’”?Ok.I’llcallanyfeelingsImightgetofwhichyoudon’tapprove“Fred.”ThatoughttomakeyouA-OKwithit.

    Andit’sOKifthewomanisupsetandashamed,butbadifshethinks“Oh,OK,that’llhappen.Well,normalandnotmuchtobedoneaboutit,soI’lljustrelaxandfeelituntilitstops.”So,inyourbook,feelingbadmakesthewomanvirtuous?That’sprettyfuckedup.Iseenovirtueinfeelingbad.

    Nobodysaid“yayIcangetoffonthis,woohoo.”Iandothersaidthatit’snormal,it’snatural,it’snotabigdeal,andit’snothingtobeupsetabout.IthinkIalsosaidthatgiventhegreatdifficultyandpainsomewomenendurewhenitcomestobreastfeeding,thelastthingtheyshouldbedoingisbeatingthemselvesupoversomethingthatisnormalandfeelsgood.Iknowit’shorribletosuggestthatamothershouldrelaxandfeelgood,butIguessI’mjustradicallikethat.

    Whatareyoueventryingtosayhere?IbelievethatIreferredyoutothreebooks.IalsobelievethatIbroughtupoxytocinawhileago,aswellastheinterconnectionsbetweenthenerveendingsandtheproduction/effectsofthehormone.Whatonearthareyouonabout?

    Ipromiseyouthattherearenosexually-abusive-via-breastfeeding-an-8-year-oldmommiesinyourcloset.Orevenunderyourbed.

    So, are you calling your father a pedaphile, do you think he laid there with you, in part, to dream about sex because laying with you makes him hard? If not, then everything you said about him after is moot.

    Moving on…

    Breastfeeding is not all about sexual arousal.stimulation. First of all breastfeeding CANT occur if the baby is not latching on properly, I know about that. I knwo what makes breastmilk best for babies, I know why it is comforting, I know that the baby needs to suckle for a while to promote the milk production unless the breast is already full, these are essentials. KNowing about the sexual stimulation ONLY matters if you;re sexually stimulated, otherwise, its moot. SO yeah I ADMIT to being ignorant of getting off on breastfeeding my babies. And many women can be a few thousand out of the millions who breastfeed. Until there is a number from a trusted source your many is is meaningless. 500 women is many women because 500 people is a lot of people to have experienced the same thing, no matter what that thing is.

    Sandy said, blatantly. SO WHAT if a mother is breastfeeding in part because of the sexual stimulation and there were people who ahd a problem with that. We have no shame in having a problem with sexual arousal between parent and child. I have no shame in saying I think it is wrong. I didnt call anyone a pedaphile, I didnt even call you ignorant but I will say at this point you’ve come off as a supreme asshole with your condescending ass tone just because I wont fucking bow down to what the fuck you have to type.

  530. WHYYYYYYYYYYY?

    Sorry, I just had to get that out.

    Also, that EG is merely condescending at this point instead of scratching out their own eyes with frustration? Worth many many Internet respects.

  531. Azalea: I will say at this point you’ve come off as a supreme asshole with your condescending ass tone just because I wont fucking bow down to what the fuck you have to type.

    I’m being fucking condescending because you seem to think that because you haven’t heard of it, it isn’t true. Nobody who isn’t you could possibly have any expertise. It’s not a question of bowing down; it’s a question of proudly elevating your own ignorance above anything anybody else has to say. You don’t know something? Then it’s not true! You don’t know something? Then it doesn’t matter! I mean, that won’t stop you from making fucked-up judgments about it or anything, but your judgments are fine because the thing you’re judging isn’t true or doesn’t matter, because if it were true or mattered, you would know about it.

    Except that you wouldn’t, because now you’re saying you know only the basics. That’s nice. I mean, I would call a fact included in Doctor Spock and The Complete Breastfeeding Book “basic,” but I guess since you haven’t heard of it, it can’t possibly be. In any case, people who know far more than the basics, people who study this stuff, lactation consultants, childbirth educators, disagree with you. I gave you citations to reliable sources. I gave you a link to a forum discussion. Even if we just take the forum discussion as representative, and even if we take your ridiculously strict definition of “sexual” (i.e. if the woman doesn’t use the word “sexual,” it can’t possibly be sexual, never mind the stigma attached), you note 2 out of 16 commenters, which is 12.5%.

    But hey, I know the basics of eating, right? I eat things until I feel full, and then my body digests them, and I then I shit out the remains. I mean, until some years ago, I wasn’t lactose intolerant, so I guess by your logic, until I was in my late 20s, I would have been perfectly justified in arguing that lactose intolerance didn’t exist, and anybody who is lactose intolerant is just a weirdo freak, not, you know, representative of a significant proportion of the human race of anything. And anyway, lactose intolerance doesn’t really matter; it’s not a basic of digestion or anything.

    Azalea: I didnt call anyone a pedaphile

    Nah. You just compared women who breastfeed longer than you’re comfortable with to women to rape, torture, maim, and murder their children. And molesters who perform oral sex on children. I can’t imagine why anybody arguing with you would become hostile.

    Azalea: So, are you calling your father a pedaphile, do you think he laid there with you, in part, to dream about sex because laying with you makes him hard? If not, then everything you said about him after is moot.

    I didn’t actually say much about him. I said it about you. You’re perfectly willing to give a man who gets a hard-on sleeping next to his three-year-old daughter the benefit of the doubt, but you’re not willing to give a woman who breastfeeds her kid even if she feels sexual arousal from it the benefit of the doubt. That speaks volumes to me about what you claim isn’t misogyny.

  532. Are we still pretending oxytocin is real? Makes about as much sense as pretending Taylor Swift is a country singer. And, yes, just because the medical establishment thinks it’s real, does not make it any less of a woo-woo thing. As I noted before, the medical establishment has been wrong on a lot of other things. I mean, a lot of doctors still think St John’s Wort is an effective treatment.

  533. I read that article a while back Chava and found it to be pretty insighful. The actress who was the subject of the article was definitely over the top her approach, but she still effectively highlighted the weird and disturbing madonna/whore complex that pervades U.S. and western culture wrt women and mothering. I also have to say that the whole back and forth here in this discussion has really left me kind of shell-shocked to see how even some people who are otherwise quite progressivly feminist in their world view can still be so backwards when it comes to mothering and breastfeeding.

    Azalea, I still don’t know whether to conclude that you are simply arguing in bad faith of if you are operating with a basic failure at reading comprehension. You have repeatedly taken mine and others words here out of context and twisted them around to try and bolster your argument. Sandy never, ever said anything about “getting off” while breastfeeding. What she and others (including myself) have simply pointed out is that breastfeeding itself can be a physically pleasant experience. We have also taken the position that there is absolutely nothing intrinsically immoral or wrong with that.

    Furthermore, finding the act of breastfeeding itself as being pleasant does not equal getting off or orgasming from it. Are you taking the position that a woman should only breastfeed if the physical experience of it is either neutral or unpleasant? You Quixotic crusade against imaginary legions of pedophile mothers breastfeeding their 5 year olds in order to get their jollies from it is just so utterly bizzare. In the meanwhile, rhetoric like yours only serves to fan the flames of societal dissaproval regarding breastfeeding as a disgusting and immoral act. Because I and others here have repeatedly discussed the very real and widespread problems we have experienced in our every day lives that served to actively discourage and undermine our attempts to ever breastfeed our children at all.

    I keep trying to to walk away from this discussion. I should know better how pointless it is to keep coming back in the hopes that the voice of reason has prevailed over Azalea’s frantic “ZOMG, why isn’t everyone else at full on DEFCON 5 freak-out mode along with me!” over such a non-existent issue.

  534. Politicalguineapig: Are we still pretending oxytocin is real? Makes about as much sense as pretending Taylor Swift is a country singer. And, yes, just because the medical establishment thinks it’s real, does not make it any less of a woo-woo thing. As I noted before, the medical establishment has been wrong on a lot of other things. I mean, a lot of doctors still think St John’s Wort is an effective treatment.

    Do you feel this way about global warming and evolution as well? Vaccinations?

    We identified oxytocin over 100 years ago. We know its molecular structure. We can make it artificially and use it to get the results we want. We have identified the genes in DNA that cause it to be produced.

    What is it that makes you think it’s not real? Just that the religious right mentions it in their rhetoric? They also mention AIDS. That doesn’t mean AIDS isn’t real; it just means that it’s not God’s punishment for being a gay slut.

    What’s woo-woo about it? The existence of oxytocin isn’t based on some mystical, inexplicable, supernatural mechanism, and it’s not dependent on some unlikely global conspiracy.

    My understanding, based on the superficial looking-things-up-on-the-internet technique, is that there have been numerous studies done on St. John’s Wort, and the results are as yet inconclusive. Many studies find it to be significantly more effective than placebos and about as effective as standard antidepressants, and other studies suggest that it is not. The latter studies have been faulted for not maintaining the quality of the St. John’s Wort and for not being sensitive enough to possible statistical differences (by the researchers conducting the experiment, no less). It looks like that medically/scientifically, the jury is still out on St. John’s Wort.

  535. Azalea: Breastfeeding is not all about sexual arousal.stimulation.

    Hey, we agree on something! Look at that.

    Azalea, we know you’re grossed out by the idea of sexual feelings during an act that involves a baby, but once again: please present evidence of harm to babies whose mothers felt sexual arousal sometimes when nursing and enjoyed it as a private reflection, along with the many delightful feelings of nurturing and closeness and love that go hand-in-hand with breastfeeding.

    Oh right, there isn’t any.

    Breastfeeding, mutually desired by mother and child, is not sexual abuse. And by continually trying to focus on ‘BUT ALL THESE MOMS ARE ENJOYING IT TOO MUCH AND THAT’S WHY THEY’RE DOING IT’ you are contributing to a discourse that hurts women and babies.

    Azalea: SO yeah I ADMIT to being ignorant of getting off on breastfeeding my babies.

    *sigh*

    The fact that you’re still using the phrase “getting off” in this discussion, after all this thoughtful nuanced explanation, tells me that despite your demonstrated ignorance about various aspects of breastfeeding, you aren’t interested in learning anything new here, and you are continuing to talk about this because women who feel the wrong feelings during nursing need to be shamed.

    Li: EG is merely condescending at this point instead of scratching out their own eyes with frustration? Worth many many Internet respects.

    This. EG, your patience is truly astounding.

  536. The problem I have with oxytocin is the same problem I have with vitamins. Too many people fixate on it as a magical cure-all or a magical bonding hormone. Evolution and dinosaurs are real, scientific facts, and so are some vitamins. But.. just because I acknowledge that vitamins exist, doesn’t mean that I don’t think that the people who tout vitamins as a cure-all aren’t, at best, ignorant, and at worst smug fools who’ve never been sick. And I really wouldn’t put it past the hippie industry to invent some nonsense vitamin- or, whoops, they did that with vitamin K.
    As for vaccination: well, it works. It’s hard to argue with the results. But it relies on a logical premise: a little bit of virus, or a milder strain of the virus will trigger the immune system to react, thus the real illness will be vanquished by the immune system.
    Oxytocin simply relies on magical thinking from start to finish. It makes sense that mothers are happy when their babies are warm and fed, but do we really need to pretend that the endocrine system is involved? Or that people *should* automatically bond with someone just because of some backwash of overexcited chemicals? People can live their whole lives without bonding to someone else.

  537. Sandy, I do not think you are a pedophile and I would of course not call CPS on you for breastfeeding even if I knew who you were in RL. I apologize that my comments came across that way; your posts freaked me out and so my responses were written much more personally and harshly than they should have been.

    I will still say that many of the things you and others here are advocating seem very sketchy to me; I’m not a fan of arguments from biology, I’m not keen on how people’s discomfort with sexual arousal derived from a child is being dismissed, and I’m really not cool with the idea of “trust women” being taken to the extreme that it is in these comments, where any examination of a mother’s motives is being called “anti-feminist” etc.

    I definitely want to make clear that I think poorly of your arguments and opinions, not your parenting. We obviously have a strong philosophical disagreement, but I’m sure you’re a fine and loving mother and would never harm your child(ren).

  538. It looks like that medically/scientifically, the jury is still out on St. John’s Wort.

    Just fyi, I don’t know about the efficacy of St. John’s Wort as an anti-depressant, but I have been warned that it can possibly interfere with the effectiveness of oral contraception. Again, that’s just something a doctor mentioned to me word-of-mouth, but thought I’d share it to anyone who might be taking both those things, in case they want to look into that further.

    I think the oxytocin-during-breastfeeding argument is overstated, partly because oxytocin seems to be in play during lots of other actions and situations too. If it were unique to breastfeeding then it might seem more important, but if cuddling etc. gives that same effect then I’m not sold on oxytocin being very relevant to this discussion. I don’t think anyone is saying that parents should not do anything that might result in oxytocin release, yanno?

  539. As for older children breastfeeding, what about their understanding of sexual arousal? A 10-year-old is totally old enough to realize that nipple stimulation can be arousing, and to have possibly experienced it themselves. I am uncomfortable with a child engaging in an act with an adult that both parties know can be sexual — the same would go for a parent washing and wiping/diapering an otherwise self-sufficient 10-year-old. Handling an infant vs. handling a pre-teen is very different; if a parent were touching the genitals of a 10-year-old like they did when the kid was 10 months I think people would have very legitimate concerns about sexual abuse. Obviously we all disagree about where the “appropriate” line is, but certainly we all agree that there is an “appropriate” line, right?

  540. Bagelsan: I think the oxytocin-during-breastfeeding argument is overstated, partly because oxytocin seems to be in play during lots of other actions and situations too. If it were unique to breastfeeding then it might seem more important, but if cuddling etc. gives that same effect then I’m not sold on oxytocin being very relevant to this discussion. I don’t think anyone is saying that parents should not do anything that might result in oxytocin release, yanno?

    Understood, but given that oxytocin plays a part in sexual arousal as well as affectionate, pleasurable feelings of other kinds, I’m not sure why it wouldn’t be relevant. It seems to me to be the entire point–when there’s lots of that hormone sloshing around (that’s the technical, scientific term, I believe). Would you explain a bit further what about it seems irrelevant to you?

    Bagelsan: I’m not a fan of arguments from biology, I’m not keen on how people’s discomfort with sexual arousal derived from a child is being dismissed, and I’m really not cool with the idea of “trust women” being taken to the extreme that it is in these comments, where any examination of a mother’s motives is being called “anti-feminist” etc.

    I think you’re reducing the complexity of what people are saying here. Now, as to arguments from biology, I understand that many people distrust them because they have a history of being used to oppress women and nonwhite people. But, given history, every single school of thought and area of study has been used to oppress women and nonwhite people. There’s nothing particular about biology that lends itself to that. As I said before, I’m an atheist. That means that I don’t believe in any evidence-less claims about supernatural or divine forces. What that means is that as far as I’m concerned, the entire person is the body. Biology, as the study of the body, has told us many fascinating things that are actually true about how that body works. Dismissing an argument because it refers to biology is like dismissing the theory of evolution because some evo-psych researchers use it to justify sexist canards.

    I also don’t think anybody here is saying a blanket “trust women.” What I have repeatedly said is that given that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to suggest that women are prolonging breastfeeding for sexual thrills, I see no reason to believe that this is any kind of threat. It’s something that does not happen and does not warrant the kind of anxiety levels and flipping out and hostility that we’ve seen in this thread. It’s also a pointless discussion to have unless we actually have a situation in which a child has been harmed. Otherwise it’s all conjecture; once an actual situation arises, if it ever does, we can look at what happened there and draw out lessons about what to look for to prevent it from happening again. But there hasn’t been any situation like this identified at all. In fact, what we have are various examples of testimony suggesting that extended breastfeeding is likely to be significantly less stimulating than infant breastfeeding.

    As for discomfort being dismissed…well, yes, I’ll cop to that, because I don’t think that other people’s discomfort is a good measure of whether or not a culturally unusual practice is actually harmful. I’m uncomfortable with co-sleeping because I have all kinds of hang-ups about privacy and anxiety about the risk of blankets and pillows; that doesn’t mean that co-sleeping is going to psychologically damage babies/kids or that parents who do the family bed thing don’t care of their children are smothered. It means that I shouldn’t do it. I’m uncomfortable with a number of different sexual practices adults indulge in, but as numerous people have assured me, those practices are not harmful. And the religious right is uncomfortable with the idea of a fifteen-year-old having sex with her boyfriend, but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea. I do think that if what you have is discomfort, it is important to examine first your own discomfort to see whence it arises and whether or not anybody is being hurt by whatever is discomfitting you before using it as a basis to condemn something.

    Bagelsan: As for older children breastfeeding, what about their understanding of sexual arousal?

    I think that is a very significant issue, and one I would be interested to see addressed by studies of children who have done extended breastfeeding. It is one of the reasons that I wouldn’t breastfeed to an extended degree. But nor am I happy with drawing an arbitrary line before we have any evidence to go on either. That said, Angus is right that those studies will never be done, because the number of nursing ten-year-olds in our country is so negligible as to make such a study not be worth the effort. I really just can’t see it as a pressing concern.

    While I think there probably is a line of appropriateness, it’s a line that I suspect varies greatly among children and among mothers and among the various combinations thereof, so much so that I’m not going to put down a number, or even a range. I just don’t know enough to do that.

    On another tack, Bagelsan, thanks so much for moving the combination back to one of reasonable discussion. It’s much more fun and less polarizing to discuss interesting things in that way.

  541. More thoughts on biological responses that nobody here, I think, would say was evidence at all of a woman’s sexual desires. Sometimes, when I take a bus, the whirring of the engine is somewhat sexually stimulating, but that doesn’t mean that I have a bus fetish, or that I continue to take buses because I want to feel that stimulation again. It just means that in some seats on some buses going some routes, the resulting vibrations are in the right place to stimulate me.

    It is not unheard of for women who are raped to naturally lubricate a bit and, in some rare cases, even to have an orgasm. But that doesn’t mean that she “wanted” to be raped. (My understanding is that the lubrication is something of a defense mechanism to minimize damage.)

    Sometimes–I would say many times, actually–the body’s responses and reactions to stimuli are not accurate reflections of our emotions and desires. Or, perhaps better, culturally, we have a narrow understanding of what a given physical response/reaction can signify. And this narrow understanding usually works well enough, but there will always be many instances where it doesn’t work, where the bodily response does not signify what we, culturally, think of it as signifying.

  542. EG, I’d also like to point out that men don’t have oxytocin receptors. So does that mean they can’t form bonds to other people, either?

  543. Where did you get that idea, Politicalguineapig? It’s not shown up in anything I’ve read.

    Wherever you read it, it’s not true. There have been several studies on oxytocin levels in men regarding sexual response and empathy. There have also been studies on oxytocin’s effect on autism-spectrum disorders, which disproportionately are found in men. There would be no point to doing such studies if there were no oxytocin receptors in men.

    Moreover, even if you were correct about this, which again, I’d like to point out, you are not, it would only mean that men couldn’t form bonds if oxytocin was the only thing that could promote affectionate bonds. But since x causes/promotes y is not the same thing as x is the only thing that causes/promotes y, it wouldn’t even mean that if men didn’t have oxytocin receptors. Which, again, they do.

    Honestly, all this information is easily found, along with citations.

  544. Oh, one correction. It would be more accurate to say that it seems extremely unlikely that a study on how oxytocin affects autism-spectrum disorders, which occur disproportionately in men, would be done on women only. Saying that there would be no point is an obvious overstatement, seeing a significant number of women are affected as well.

  545. lauredhel and EG: I honestly didn’t know that oxytocin was 1) actually taken seriously by scientists, or 2) found in men. ‘Kay? I still think certain things can be judged by their believers, boosters.

    For instance there’s the go-go vitamins crowd, which still make me skeptical of the existence of all the B vitamins.* And then of course, there’s the fact that I first heard of oxytocin from the Fox News/abstininnie Jesus cheerleader squad, whose members never make a good argument for the existence of anything. (If Michelle Bachmann said the sky was blue, I’m sure a case could be made for the sky being green or off-white.)

    That said, it would be really interesting to see how many of the scientists involved in proving oxytocin’s existence and synthesis were Christians.

    *Yes, I’m aware that B vitamins exist. I do not believe they are a cure-all, especially riboflavins and B12. And yes, I’ve run into some particularly odious examples of the vitamin and positive thinking brigade, recently. Makes my woo radar go off anytime someone starts spouting about the “magical healing power” of hormones/vegan diets/acupuncture/biofeedback/vitamins/yoga. Especially from people who should know better by virtue of age and/or profession.

  546. I also don’t think anybody here is saying a blanket “trust women.” What I have repeatedly said is that given that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to suggest that women are prolonging breastfeeding for sexual thrills, I see no reason to believe that this is any kind of threat.

    I think some people have actually literally said “trust women” and called for everyone (even other mothers) to stop questioning mothers completely. :p And as you’ve mentioned, there aren’t studies about the effects of extended breastfeeding. So while there is no evidence that it is harmful, there is also no evidence that it is not harmful — everyone seems too happy to conflate those two things, and pretend the matter is settled, which I thoroughly object to. (What, there’s no stated upper age limit for breastfeeding? Omg, then there will never be one, nor should there be, and it’s theoretically beneficially to breastfeed forever!) That’s the kind of thinking I really disapprove of, and it evidences a misunderstanding both of how scientific studies work and, I think, how many internationally-targeted health recommendations work as well.

    As for the “biology” thing, I’m actually myself an atheist and a biologist, so you don’t have to convince me! But the kind of “biology” I’ve seen on most of this thread is the evo-psychish “biology is destiny” crap (ascribing some sort of one true purpose to breasts, or pretending that oxytocin is basically irreplaceable liquid essence of mother-child bonding, or treating male and female nipples as vastly different creatures even in the absence of lactation, breastmilk can cure every disease and give your baby superpowers and an IQ of 200, etc.)

    I think that the people objecting to extended breastfeeding (past 5 years old, say) and/or who are deeply concerned about sexual arousal provoked by a voluntary activity (breastfeeding when it’s not nutritionally necessary, for example) aren’t just operating off of an unexamined feeling of squickiness. For things like “icky” sex acts between consenting adults there’s the principle of it’s-cool-as-long-as-no-one-is-harmed, and that goes for basically anything I’m not personally into. But I’m still not convinced that extended and/or arousing breastfeeding cannot or never is harmful, and so I think that the practice is still worth interrogating, and that debating its appropriateness is neither anti-feminist nor anti-breastfeeding.

    The messages that have been promoted in this thread include things like “mothers would never do X!” or “even if it’s sexually arousing, if the kid consents it’s okay!” or “men and women are intrinsically different!” and I firmly believe that those are all seriously terrible, harmful messages. I’m perfectly willing to believe that any kind of sexual abuse deriving from extended/arousing breastfeeding is very rare, but claiming that’s it’s impossible is just damn foolish. It’s very frustrating that some commenters have basically taken the “you’re being hysterical!” line over any suggestion that a woman might sexually abuse her young child, with their only evidence being that they certainly never would.

  547. Politicalguineapig: That said, it would be really interesting to see how many of the scientists involved in proving oxytocin’s existence and synthesis were Christians.

    The ones who identified it in 1906 and who synthesized it in the 1950s? I’d guess they were certainly of gentile background, given who had access to the higher education necessary to become a scientist at the time. Nonetheless, I find the possibility of a Christian conspiracy extending over a century to bamboozle people into believing in a non-existent hormone to be so bizarrely unlikely as to be effectively zilch. Conspiracy theories are always way too optimistic for me to buy into.

    Bagelsan: So while there is no evidence that it is harmful, there is also no evidence that it is not harmful — everyone seems too happy to conflate those two things, and pretend the matter is settled, which I thoroughly object to.

    I disagree. In the absence of evidence, I’m going to have to go with the null hypothesis. It’s impossible to prove a negative, and we don’t even have the kind of anecdotal evidence that would make a study seem sensible, the kind of evidence that came out of the consciousness-raising sessions of the 1970s, when women compared experiences of sexual abuse and rape and were able to identify them for they were, or the kind of evidence that Freud so handily endured. In the absence not only of reliable evidence of harm, but of any kind of anecdotal evidence, giving the two hypotheses (“x is harmful” “x is not harmful”) equal weight sounds bizarre to me, like the giving the pink teapot in space hypothesis equal weight with the hypothesis that there isn’t a pink teapot in space.

    Bagelsan: pretending that oxytocin is basically irreplaceable liquid essence of mother-child bonding, or treating male and female nipples as vastly different creatures even in the absence of lactation, breastmilk can cure every disease and give your baby superpowers and an IQ of 200, etc.

    I really don’t think anybody has made either the first or the third argument listed here. Oxytocin has been discussed as a reason why breastfeeding, particularly during the hormonally volative first some months post-partum, when there’s a lot more of it than usual sloshing around and the mother’s body hasn’t yet gotten used to it, would link breastfeeding to sexual arousal. That says nothing about its replaceability or irreplaceability with respect to mother-child bonding.

    Nobody has made any argument about the superpowers of breastmilk. That hasn’t been up for debate in this thread–it’s not a formula vs. breastmilk thread.

    I have made the middle argument, to a certain degree, insofar as the presence of absence of lactation is, in my opinion, a significant distinction between paternal and maternal suckling. I do not like to see biological capabilities unique to women (barring the occasional transman) and their importance waved away; it is a way of dismissing women’s capacities that has a misogynist history. But I never said anything about non-lactating women, so that’s a comparison that I never made; once corrected by Kristen J. about paternal suckling from birth, I would have to put it into the category of things I need to hear at least anecdotal evidence of harm about before I get exercised about it.

    Bagelsan: But I’m still not convinced that extended and/or arousing breastfeeding cannot or never is harmful, and so I think that the practice is still worth interrogating, and that debating its appropriateness is neither anti-feminist nor anti-breastfeeding.

    I would suspect extended breastfeeding is more likely to indicate, sometimes, given specific circumstances, be an indicator that something with the child’s development is not proceeding apace, rather be a vehicle for abuse. But part of the problem here is that commenters, and by “commenters” I mean Azalea, have been assuming that it is reasonable to conflate extended and arousing breastfeeding, when the evidence that we have, anecdotal in the thread and what I’ve read, points in exactly the opposite direction, and that repeated attempts to point this out have been ignored in favor of four-alarm-fire reactions toward the exemplars of this conflation, even though not one has been found. How is that even slightly sensible? The idea that somewhere out there, a woman is breastfeeding a six-year-old for the sexual jollies it gives her is causing immense upset, even though all we have is the hypothetical idea, and not one example of this happening. If the pro-breastfeeding forces were as simplistic and willing to believe that breastfeeding must be inherently positive no matter what as you are implying, there would be no reason to hide such a thing within the natural childbirth/breastfeeding community…but nonetheless, nobody has come up with a single instance of a mother doing extended breastfeeding and experiencing arousal from it. Given that, the immense reaction to even the notion does indeed smack to me of misogyny.

    Bagelsan: I’m perfectly willing to believe that any kind of sexual abuse deriving from extended/arousing breastfeeding is very rare, but claiming that’s it’s impossible is just damn foolish. It’s very frustrating that some commenters have basically taken the “you’re being hysterical!” line over any suggestion that a woman might sexually abuse her young child, with their only evidence being that they certainly never would.

    I think the evidence is not that I never would so much as it is there is not one example found of this. I don’t find hypothetical questions interesting, much less worth getting worked up and worried about, and the conflation of “some abusive mother could potentially use this to abuse her child” with “this activity is inherently abusive” is also problematic: what if some mother somewhere is abusing her child by cuddling it at bedtime? I can certainly imagine such a scenario, and I suspect it’s far more likely to have occurred than abuse via extended breastfeeding. But that doesn’t mean cuddling your older child at bedtime is inherently cause for alarm and suspicion and endless handwringing over how the child will cope with the psychological scars it will leave. It means that people can be abusive assholes and can turn a variety of activities to their abusive ends. That says nothing about the activities themselves.

    Nothing in the realm of human interaction is impossible, but when people react to a potential scenario of which we have not one single example as though it is a significant clear and present danger to children and so we must go into all-sirens-ringing-alert, then yes, while I would not use the word “hysterical” because I find it too loaded, I would certainly use the “flipping right the fuck out for no reason.”

  548. Bagelsan: Sandy, I do not think you are a pedophile and I would of course not call CPS on you for breastfeeding even if I knew who you were in RL. I apologize that my comments came across that way

    Thank you; I really appreciate this acknowledgment. I am very sorry my comments freaked you out. I know how godawful it can be to be unexpectedly triggered, and I would never intentionally do that to someone. I regret that I may have inadvertently caused anything like that level of discomfort for you or anyone else reading.

    Bagelsan: Obviously we all disagree about where the “appropriate” line is, but certainly we all agree that there is an “appropriate” line, right?

    Yes, I believe there’s a line. Just not a universal one. And given how breastfeeding gets so attacked by everyone and anyone from family members to casual acquaintances to strangers*, from infancy on, and mothers get so harshly judged in all areas, I am inclined to give mothers and their children the benefit of the doubt as to when is the right time for them to wean.

    (*and plenty of doctors too, 30-40 years ago.)

    My sister had her last child eight years after the birth of her first. Her fairly mature-for-his-age eight year old firstborn, who hadn’t nursed in I think about five years, saw the new baby nursing and asked if he could nurse. She wanted to minimize the noise-out-of-joint feelings and had read at some point that it’s common for older children to ask to nurse when they see a new baby at their mothers’ breasts, just to test if they will be allowed to. So she said, neutrally, sure. When the baby was done, my nephew went to nurse, but he looked up and his eyes met my sister’s, and he dissolved into giggles and that was the end of it. I asked what she would have done if he had wanted to nurse, and had wanted to keep nursing. She said she was confident he wouldn’t want to continue, that it was a passing, momentary thing. She was right. And he’s still just as happy, just as healthy, I don’t think having his request granted hurt him any.

    I do not think parents should be trusted to the point of ignoring signs of abuse or neglect. I don’t think anyone thinks that. I question, though, what it would mean if, on a societal scale, we weren’t going to assume parents are doing their best with their kids. I think CPS needs wholesale overhauling, and I would like to see greater access to mental health care services available to everyone, but I cringe from the idea that government should have any greater or more involved role in people’s lives. It would be nice if CPS was a friendlier, less menacing organization, but it’s not. Between the underpaid, overworked employees and the high rates of sexual abuse in foster care, you don’t want kids going into the custody of the state unless something is truly wrong. And I mean, CPS just took a kid in Ohio from his mom for being too fat, which to me is some scary shit. Mothers’ choices and abilities are questioned and judged at every turn.

    I may be coming at this discussion from a bad place, though. My experience having my daughter was pretty crappy, and everyone involved meant well. For example, the pediatrician in the hospital interrogated us as to our sleeping plans and equipment, went on at length about the dangers of cosleeping, and tried to extract a promise from us that we were not going to cosleep. It felt threatening and uncomfortable, and we weren’t even planning on cosleeping. (We ended up doing it for about six and a half months, however, to preserve my ability to function like a human being, and I thought of his pressure tactics often during that time. Overall – I took a number of measures to avoid unneeded birth interventions, midwives, birth classes, planned home birth, read the unnecesarean, etc, but whaddaya know, I still got pushed into a horribad hospital labor followed by a C-section I didn’t want and will never know if I truly needed… and that’s where I’m coming from.) So I’m not especially open to the idea of random authorities who’ve decided they know what’s best for me and my baby being any more involved then they have to be. Authorities can be assholes just like anyone else, with bonus power-tripping. So I’m extremely wary about how much extra oversight should there be, and how quick we are to involve the state in people’s lives. So what does it mean, exactly, (and again, barring signs of abuse) when we say we aren’t going to generally trust women to assess and do what’s best for their babies? I am genuinely wondering about that.

    Back to breastfeeding: I really just don’t see this “extended breastfeeding could be abuse” concern as having weight as no one in this thread, and I’d guess most people here are fairly informed about sexual abuse issues, has ever heard of someone being breastfed abusively. Sure it could happen, but it seems incredibly unlikely based on what we know. So why are we looking for trouble? Do mothers’ motives and decisions not get questioned enough by the mainstream?

    Yes, women do sexually abuse children, for sure. But we have no evidence of a woman ever sexually abusing a child this way, or of an adult ever having been emotionally damaged by breastfeeding. So until we have a case in which breastfeeding and abuse are intertwined, can we focus on one or the other? Connecting these two things when there is zero reason to, THAT is what I consider to be anti-woman and un-feminist. I am completely open to the idea of questioning the situation and parents’ motives when there are sketchy goings-on as in your toileting example. And I would be open to a conversation about extended breastfeeding that didn’t summarily accuse mothers who do it of doing it for sexual reasons, or political reasons, but that simply hasn’t been the way this thread has gone. As early as comment 9 there’s been this idea that mothers are breastfeeding too long, for evil or selfish reasons, and someone should call CPS on this mother who nurses her 5 year old. That’s more then merely questioning her motives. That’s potentially deeply fucking up her life and her baby’s over breastfeeding, without any actual sign of something harmful. And in that, I am disappoint.

    Bagelsan: any suggestion that a woman might sexually abuse her young child, with their only evidence being that they certainly never would.

    That’s not what we’re saying. Sexual abuse can and does happen. We’re saying there’s no evidence that breastfeeding is ever sexual abuse.

    Bagelsan: But I’m still not convinced that extended and/or arousing breastfeeding cannot or never is harmful

    When I hear of evidence that it has been harmful, I will certainly be listening. Until then, well… as someone said upthread, I believe sexual abuse is not about being overcome by arousal, it’s about power, so it’s not that just because I wouldn’t, no one would–it’s about me not buying that someone is going to become an abuser because nursing happens to feel good. So I see no harm in a woman enjoying all the lovely feelings that go along with breastfeeding.

    My impression of oxytocin is that its role in breastfeeding is very much settled science, as everyone from my ultra-crunchy, anti-obstetrician, anti-ultrasound childbirth educator to one of my two midwives to a lactation consultant in the hospital mentioned it or talked about it at length. Of course everyone will experience something like that to greater or lesser degrees, and of course it’s not necessary (in the larger quantities released during nursing) for bonding between parent and child, any more then breastfeeding is necessary to feed a baby. Just bio-chemical encouragement, as I understand it.

    Early on I experienced effects similar to someone else in this thread, can’t remember who now, but whomever mentioned a sleepy, lovey, pleasurably semi-drugged feeling during and a bit after nursing. It helped me go back to sleep after waking up to feed my babe. Plus, yes, arousal at times. To me it was just a small curious part of the whole nursing experience.

    I don’t feel any of these things so much anymore, except the occasional strong surge of love for my daughter, and I don’t need to nurse to feel those. We nurse because she wants to and I’m willing. I have no cause to think any other breastfeeding woman’s reasons are different.

    Re: Madison Young, I liked what I read about her exhibition. I’d never heard of her until seeing that bluemilk post a few months ago. The exhibition doesn’t look or sound very porny to me at all, and her point about mothers and sexuality seemed quite pertinent. I wouldn’t be caught dead pumping milk in public, but she made it look most alluring.

  549. Bagelsan: For things like “icky” sex acts between consenting adults there’s the principle of it’s-cool-as-long-as-no-one-is-harmed, and that goes for basically anything I’m not personally into.

    Sure, but I know for a fact that in some cases, deep engagement in S&M has been used as a form of coercion and abuse. Does that mean that all engagement in S&M should be questioned and treated as cause for alarm in and of itself? Or engagement in S&M that goes past a certain arbitrary standard of what doesn’t freak other people out should be treated as a cause for alarm in and of itself? I would argue not; I would argue that we need to understand how the abuse worked in those cases of abuse/rape/coercion that involved deep engagement in S&M as a cover in order to better understand how to differentiate those situations from consenting adults enjoying S&M together. The only way to do that is to work with actual examples of situations in which S&M worked as a cover for abuse so that everybody can be more aware of what should be setting off alarm bells. For that, you need actual examples of abuse and harm, which, when it comes to extended breastfeeding, we do not have.

    [sequel to, you guessed it, a longer post in moderation]

  550. In general I’m highly disturbed by this harm based interrogation when it comes to people who are both non-consenting and unable to remember. I’ve heard the same as an argument for why the rape of institutionalized people or even those raped under the influence of gHB is “not as bad” as the rape of someone who “knows” because it doesn’t cause harm. Ugh, just ugh.

  551. Kristen J.: In general I’m highly disturbed by this harm based interrogation when it comes to people who are both non-consenting and unable to remember. I’ve heard the same as an argument for why the rape of institutionalized people or even those raped under the influence of gHB is “not as bad” as the rape of someone who “knows” because it doesn’t cause harm. Ugh, just ugh.

    I’m not sure what other standard to use when determining whether a behavior is moral or not. Does it hurt people? I believe that institutionalized people and unconscious people are indeed harmed by being raped, as are children who are molested when too young to carry those memories forward. That harm can be expressed in inexplicable feelings that present significant obstacles to happiness, inability to trust, etc. There is also the issue of immediate harm in the moment: even if the 30-year-old doesn’t remember, is the 6-month-old unhappy? Note also that no benefit of any kind accrues to institutionalized or unconscious people from being raped, while we do have anecdotal evidence that some four- or five-year-olds do receive benefits from nursing. The two situations just aren’t comparable, and when you open the door to “that doesn’t hurt anybody, but it’s just bad” and you open the door to the kind of moral strictures that have only ever done, well, far more harm than good.

    When it comes to extended breastfeeding, which does seem to be the issue of concern, four-, five-, and six-year-olds are indeed able to remember, though, and my understanding is that it’s pretty normal to be able to remember back to those days when one is an adult–I do, and if anything, it’s been suggested to me that I have a particularly poor memory when it comes to early childhood. It wouldn’t be that hard to ask people who were breastfed for an extended period of time about possible harm. It’s true that people wouldn’t remember being breastfed as infants, but the idea that breastfeeding an infant is somehow equivalent to sexually abusing it is so outlandish that I just can’t take it seriously.

  552. Kristen J.: people who are both non-consenting and unable to remember

    I agree with your overall point, but with cases of rape or molestation, there is a clear violation of someone’s body without consent, either by something being done to their body or them being made to do something to the perpetrator’s body. Allowing a child who wishes to nurse to do so simply is not morally comparable. And without evidence of harm I don’t think it’s okay to demonize breastfeeding women for breastfeeding.

    Children aren’t able to issue informed consent, obviously, but if a baby doesn’t want to nurse, they don’t latch on, or they push away, or both. They let you know it. It’s not consent per se, but there’s definitely yes-I-want-to-nurse or not-right-now.

  553. EG: I’m not sure what other standard to use when determining whether a behavior is moral or not. Does it hurt people? I believe that institutionalized people and unconscious people are indeed harmed by being raped, as are children who are molested when too young to carry those memories forward. That harm can be expressed in inexplicable feelings that present significant obstacles to happiness, inability to trust, etc. There is also the issue of immediate harm in the moment: even if the 30-year-old doesn’t remember, is the 6-month-old unhappy? Note also that no benefit of any kind accrues to institutionalized or unconscious people from being raped, while we do have anecdotal evidence that some four- or five-year-olds do receive benefits from nursing. The two situations just aren’t comparable, and when you open the door to “that doesn’t hurt anybody, but it’s just bad” and you open the door to the kind of moral strictures that have only ever done, well, far more harm than good.

    Saying it better as usual. <3

  554. EG: The two situations just aren’t comparable, and when you open the door to “that doesn’t hurt anybody, but it’s just bad” and you open the door to the kind of moral strictures that have only ever done, well, far more harm than good.

    But you do the same when you demand people *prove* harm before believing that harm occurs. That’s particularly problematic in situations where the kyriarchy defines harm and tends to minimize sexual abuse by female perpetrators.

    Take that example of the woman in Illinois, horrible case and I won’t link to any of the horrible sexist coverage, but CPS was called when the child told the babysitter that he wanted to stop but his mom wanted to continue. There are no facts here to indicate whether this was sexual abuse, but the child (purportedly) wanted to stop and the mother (purportedly) didn’t. Was it harmful? Depends on who you ask. The Le Leche League supported her throughout the judicial process. I would guess they would not consider it harmful. But to hold that view you have to disregard the child’s own wish to stop.

    Under the *prove harm* analysis, you would have to wait until he is older, and see if he has any developmental abnormalities to determine whether what happened was wrong. In the context of any other sexual or physical contact we would not require that evidence. I think breaking out children from our general conception of non-consentual contact is inappropriate. It is just as easy to explain why extended breastfeeding is acceptable based on the same principles we use to explain other types of non-consentual contact.

  555. Well, we do break children out from non-consensual contact, though, all the time. We do it in cases that I’m fine with (holding a two-year-old still so a doctor can vaccinate her against polio, even though she doesn’t want a shot) and in cases that I’m not fine with (spanking). I’m curious to know if the babysitter would’ve called CPS if the kid had said that his mother spanked him, and he didn’t want it, or he had said that his mother made him go to Sunday School, and he didn’t want it, or he had said that his mother made him clean his plate before he was allowed to leave the table, and he didn’t want to. Those are all cases in which yes, I would say that the mother was doing something wrong, and that the wrong thing involved a violation of the child’s body–hitting, forcing him to be in a place he didn’t want to be, forcing him to eat more than he wanted to or things he didn’t want to–but I’ve not heard of anybody calling CPS on mothers who do those things against the child’s will. I think it’s disingenuous to suggest that the babysitter called CPS because of concerns over children’s bodily autonomy and that’s why the mother had to go to court, etc. Unless there are other facts in play that you haven’t mentioned, it sounds like the babysitter called CPS and CPS took the case seriously specifically because hey, boobies = sexual abuse.

    When it comes to proving harm, I think it matters very much what kind of standard you consider necessary before you deal with the issue. It’s not like I’m saying that I refuse to engage with the question of abuse until I have three double-blind studies proving that harm is consistently likely to occur in at least 75% of all cases. I do want a few real-life examples, though, including people talking about the harm that has been done to them, before I take part in any kind of discussion about potential harm, likelihood of harm compared to any other parent-child activity, and how to distinguish harmful situations from harmless ones. Otherwise it’s all just shooting in a dark room at a target that may not be there; all you’re likely to hit is the people who are taking naps.

    It’s true that our culture consistently minimizes harm done to women and to children, but we nonetheless have had their narratives of harm for a long time and the best activism started to be done when women began to speak out about that harm. In the absence of those narratives, assuming harm seems far, far more likely to penalize nonconforming mothers than to help any children at all.

  556. EG: Well, we do break children out from non-consensual contact, though, all the time. We do it in cases that I’m fine with (holding a two-year-old still so a doctor can vaccinate her against polio, even though she doesn’t want a shot) and in cases that I’m not fine with (spanking).

    But both of these can be expained without breaking out children. It is acceptable to “force” a non-consenting adult to take medication, but it is not acceptable to *hit* a non-consenting adult. The key is whether an action can reasonably be considered to be in the best interests of the person who is otherwise unable to consent, not whether the person has *proof* that they are actively being harmed. Yeah, the best interest standard is going to be twisted up with kyriarchal notions of “best”, but its certainly a better standard than – “Do what you want to unconsenting children until there’s proof that they are harmed.”

    I think it’s disingenuous to suggest that the babysitter called CPS because of concerns over children’s bodily autonomy and that’s why the mother had to go to court, etc.

    Why? That is how the case was decided. That’s how the case was described by the prosecutors to the Court. That’s how the babysitter described it to the police.

    I do want a few real-life examples, though, including people talking about the harm that has been done to them, before I take part in any kind of discussion about potential harm, likelihood of harm compared to any other parent-child activity, and how to distinguish harmful situations from harmless ones.

    There are all sorts of practices that do not result in externally measurable harm that I’m sure we’d both agree are harmful because the person involved says so. Here the person involved *can’t speak* so are we to conclude that anything you do to a pre-verbal child is non-harmful unless there are externally measurable harms? That makes absolutely no logical sense to me and justifies a wide range of behaviors I’m sure we’d both agree are not appropriate.

  557. I honestly didn’t know that oxytocin was 1) actually taken seriously by scientists, or 2) found in men. ‘Kay? I still think certain things can be judged by their believers, boosters.

    That said, it would be really interesting to see how many of the scientists involved in proving oxytocin’s existence and synthesis were Christians.

    In other words, PGP hasn’t done any research into this at all. But it’s still obviously suspicious.

    So while there is no evidence that it is harmful, there is also no evidence that it is not harmful — everyone seems too happy to conflate those two things, and pretend the matter is settled, which I thoroughly object to.

    There is, so far, no information that Random Thing isn’t harmful – so it must be harmful! Panic! Panic!

  558. Sandy: Hey,weagreeonsomething!Lookatthat.

    Azalea,weknowyou’regrossedoutbytheideaofsexualfeelingsduringanactthatinvolvesababy,butonceagain:pleasepresentevidenceofharmtobabieswhosemothersfeltsexualarousalsometimeswhennursingandenjoyeditasaprivatereflection,alongwiththemanydelightfulfeelingsofnurturingandclosenessandlovethatgohand-in-handwithbreastfeeding.

    Ohright,thereisn’tany.

    Breastfeeding,mutuallydesiredbymotherandchild,isnotsexualabuse.Andbycontinuallytryingtofocuson‘BUTALLTHESEMOMSAREENJOYINGITTOOMUCHANDTHAT’SWHYTHEY’REDOINGIT’youarecontributingtoadiscoursethathurtswomenandbabies.

    *sigh*

    Thefactthatyou’restillusingthephrase“gettingoff”inthisdiscussion,afterallthisthoughtfulnuancedexplanation,tellsmethatdespiteyourdemonstratedignoranceaboutvariousaspectsofbreastfeeding,youaren’tinterestedinlearninganythingnewhere,andyouarecontinuingtotalkaboutthisbecausewomenwhofeelthewrongfeelingsduringnursingneedtobeshamed.

    This.EG,yourpatienceistrulyastounding.

    There is ONE aspect in which I am ignorant when it comes to breastfeeding and that is the sexual aspect of it. Until you mention something that has NOTHING to do with how great it feels sexually for the mother that I have demonstrated not to know anything about, you can chill with calling me ignorant. But when it comes down to it, many times when you disagree with the masses it is *always* because of ignorance and not because you are an independant thinker who disagrees with the status quo, nope its all ignorance.

    Getting off= sexual enjoyment. If it is sexually stimulating/arousing and you enjoy it and you continue to do it in PART for that enjoyment, you’re getting off on it. You dont get to tell me which terminology to use concerning this, as you aren’t the Goddes of Terminology to Use in Every Discussion on Feministe.

    Oh please babies are not 4 and 5 we are talking about breastfeeding your post-toddlers in PART because of the sexual stimulation/arousal/orgasms you obtain from the acitivity.

  559. Lolagirl:
    IreadthatarticleawhilebackChavaandfoundittobeprettyinsighful.Theactresswhowasthesubjectofthearticlewasdefinitelyoverthetopherapproach,butshestilleffectivelyhighlightedtheweirdanddisturbingmadonna/whorecomplexthatpervadesU.S.andwesternculturewrtwomenandmothering.Ialsohavetosaythatthewholebackandforthhereinthisdiscussionhasreallyleftmekindofshell-shockedtoseehowevensomepeoplewhoareotherwisequiteprogressivlyfeministintheirworldviewcanstillbesobackwardswhenitcomestomotheringandbreastfeeding.

    Azalea,Istilldon’tknowwhethertoconcludethatyouaresimplyarguinginbadfaithofifyouareoperatingwithabasicfailureatreadingcomprehension.Youhaverepeatedlytakenmineandotherswordshereoutofcontextandtwistedthemaroundtotryandbolsteryourargument.Sandynever,eversaidanythingabout“gettingoff”whilebreastfeeding.Whatsheandothers(includingmyself)havesimplypointedoutisthatbreastfeedingitselfcanbeaphysicallypleasantexperience.Wehavealsotakenthepositionthatthereisabsolutelynothingintrinsicallyimmoralorwrongwiththat.

    Furthermore,findingtheactofbreastfeedingitselfasbeingpleasantdoesnotequalgettingoffororgasmingfromit.Areyoutakingthepositionthatawomanshouldonlybreastfeedifthephysicalexperienceofitiseitherneutralorunpleasant?YouQuixoticcrusadeagainstimaginarylegionsofpedophilemothersbreastfeedingtheir5yearoldsinordertogettheirjolliesfromitisjustsoutterlybizzare.Inthemeanwhile,rhetoriclikeyoursonlyservestofantheflamesofsocietaldissaprovalregardingbreastfeedingasadisgustingandimmoralact.BecauseIandothersherehaverepeatedlydiscussedtheveryrealandwidespreadproblemswehaveexperiencedinoureverydaylivesthatservedtoactivelydiscourageandundermineourattemptstoeverbreastfeedourchildrenatall.

    Ikeeptryingtotowalkawayfromthisdiscussion.IshouldknowbetterhowpointlessitistokeepcomingbackinthehopesthatthevoiceofreasonhasprevailedoverAzalea’sfrantic“ZOMG,whyisn’teveryoneelseatfullonDEFCON5freak-outmodealongwithme!”oversuchanon-existentissue.

    1) It is not just me that has a problem with it, in fact I wasnt the first to say women are enjoying it sexually as I initially thought that was not the case for ANY breastfeeding mother

    2) When someone says ” its ok to be sexually aroused during _____ activity” with your child Yeah, I’m not going to say yeah I trust that although you are sexually aroused doing ____ activity with your post-toddlerhood child its all innocent, especially when there are alternative to that activity that carries equal or greater benefits to the child.

    People are literally asking people to say hey “if you are breastfeeding your child and it feels sensuous and sexual *insert adjective for sexually stimulating* its NORMAL and ust enjoy that sexal stimulation because it isn’t *really* sexual since your genitals arent involved and it isn’t “rape-y” because your child is consenting to giving you this sexual feel good moment.

    I know that breastfeeding is wonderul, Im sure in the archives on *this* site I have comments defending breastfeeding as an excellent choice well past infancy. I know *why* breastfeeding is wonderful, what I did not know about breastfeeding is that “many” women were sexually stimulated by it. I did not know that the seual stimulation was something thought to be considered a “perk” of sorts. Even on the links given with discussion by other breastfeeding moms on other breastfeeding friendly sites, this sentiment of “OMGZ sexual stimulation during breastfeeding, if that happened to me I’d stop and pump/thats not ok/thats gross/thats icky” is SHARED, it is COMMON.

    I havent said finding breastfeeidng pleasant makes you a bad mother, I said, specifically that getting sexually aroused/stimulated/orgasming while breastfeeding an older child is gross. Flatout. I said it is gross and it makes me feel uncomfortable and I could understand why it would make other people feel uncomfortable or why it would gross them out.

    If you see NOTHING wrong with a woman feeling sexually aroused/stimulated/or orgasming while doing any activity with her child, that is ok with YOU, it isn’t ok with me. I am against adults getting sexual arousal from children I think its gross. I always will think it is gross whether you are the coach of a winning football team or a mother who is involved with the PTA, there are no exemptions to that.

  560. EG: I’mbeingfuckingcondescendingbecauseyouseemtothinkthatbecauseyouhaven’theardofit,itisn’ttrue.Nobodywhoisn’tyoucouldpossiblyhaveanyexpertise.It’snotaquestionofbowingdown;it’saquestionofproudlyelevatingyourownignoranceaboveanythinganybodyelsehastosay.Youdon’tknowsomething?Thenit’snottrue!Youdon’tknowsomething?Thenitdoesn’tmatter!Imean,thatwon’tstopyoufrommakingfucked-upjudgmentsaboutitoranything,butyourjudgmentsarefinebecausethethingyou’rejudgingisn’ttrueordoesn’tmatter,becauseifitweretrueormattered,youwouldknowaboutit.

    Exceptthatyouwouldn’t,becausenowyou’resayingyouknowonlythebasics.That’snice.Imean,IwouldcallafactincludedinDoctorSpockandTheCompleteBreastfeedingBook“basic,”butIguesssinceyouhaven’theardofit,itcan’tpossiblybe.Inanycase,peoplewhoknowfarmorethanthebasics,peoplewhostudythisstuff,lactationconsultants,childbirtheducators,disagreewithyou.Igaveyoucitationstoreliablesources.Igaveyoualinktoaforumdiscussion.Evenifwejusttaketheforumdiscussionasrepresentative,andevenifwetakeyourridiculouslystrictdefinitionof“sexual”(i.e.ifthewomandoesn’tusetheword“sexual,”itcan’tpossiblybesexual,nevermindthestigmaattached),younote2outof16commenters,whichis12.5%.

    Buthey,Iknowthebasicsofeating,right?IeatthingsuntilIfeelfull,andthenmybodydigeststhem,andIthenIshitouttheremains.Imean,untilsomeyearsago,Iwasn’tlactoseintolerant,soIguessbyyourlogic,untilIwasinmylate20s,Iwouldhavebeenperfectlyjustifiedinarguingthatlactoseintolerancedidn’texist,andanybodywhoislactoseintolerantisjustaweirdofreak,not,youknow,representativeofasignificantproportionofthehumanraceofanything.Andanyway,lactoseintolerancedoesn’treallymatter;it’snotabasicofdigestionoranything.

    Nah.Youjustcomparedwomenwhobreastfeedlongerthanyou’recomfortablewithtowomentorape,torture,maim,andmurdertheirchildren.Andmolesterswhoperformoralsexonchildren.Ican’timaginewhyanybodyarguingwithyouwouldbecomehostile.

    Ididn’tactuallysaymuchabouthim.Isaiditaboutyou.You’reperfectlywillingtogiveamanwhogetsahard-onsleepingnexttohisthree-year-olddaughterthebenefitofthedoubt,butyou’renotwillingtogiveawomanwhobreastfeedsherkidevenifshefeelssexualarousalfromitthebenefitofthedoubt.Thatspeaksvolumestomeaboutwhatyouclaimisn’tmisogyny.

    Simple, if the woman felt sexually aroused in her sleep while her child was breastfeeding (ie she wasnt conscious and was not AWARE and thus couldnt possibly have a knowledge of a link between her sexual arousal and breastfeeding then yeah she gets tons of benefits of doubts. If your father was AWAKE and he was lying with you and he had an erection whie lying with you and said part of the reason eh continues to lie with you is because of the sexual stimulation and its ok because its natural and he;s your father so we need to trust men I’d tell him bullshit too. But he wasnt awake, breastfeeding moms who are experiencing this sexual arousal are.

    Come on, own up to what has been said in this thread.

  561. Getting off= sexual enjoyment.

    Yes. But sexual enjoyment =/= getting off. One is a subset of the other.

  562. Azalea: There is ONE aspect in which I am ignorant when it comes to breastfeeding and that is the sexual aspect of it.

    You also never heard of oxytocin, or thought it was junk science, and you thought that the primary hormone released during breastfeeding was estrogen, so… I’m going to stand by my statement there.

    Azalea: Until you mention something that has NOTHING to do with how great it feels sexually

    I’ve mentioned many enjoyable and pleasurable aspects of breastfeeding that have nothing whatsoever to do with sexual feelings.

    Azalea: Oh please babies are not 4 and 5 we are talking about breastfeeding your post-toddlers in PART because of the sexual stimulation/arousal/orgasms you obtain from the acitivity.

    Azalea: you’re getting off on it. You dont get to tell me which terminology to use concerning this, as you aren’t the Goddes of Terminology to Use in Every Discussion on Feministe.

    Nor am I the Queen of Nuance, but you seem utterly, willfully oblivious to it. You never heard of sexual arousal during nursing before this thread, and now that you have, you’ve decided that any woman who experiences sexual feelings while breastfeeding is “gross” (thanks) and “getting off” and an abusive mommy who will certainly nurse until the kid is 5 because of screaming orgasms. Lolagirl nailed it: it is bizarre.

    Lolagirl: Are you taking the position that a woman should only breastfeed if the physical experience of it is either neutral or unpleasant? You Quixotic crusade against imaginary legions of pedophile mothers breastfeeding their 5 year olds in order to get their jollies from it is just so utterly bizzare.

    EG: Extended breastfeeding for orgasms does not happen. How many times do I have to repeat this for it to sink in? As I said, if my mother told me that she’d been sexually aroused by nursing me when I was a baby and once, early on, had even had an orgasm, I would find that interesting, because I find the biology and experience of this sort of thing interesting. That is a very different thing from your fever-brained notion of wicked sexually abusive mommies manipulating four-year-olds into nursing because of the multiple orgasms it brings them, which, as you do not seem capable of understanding, does. not. happen.

  563. Azalea: Azalea 11.30.2011 at 12:47 pm

    Last note on this, the benefits of extended reastfeeding isn’t about the milk, its about the bonding.

    People getting a little unnerved about a special bonding session that involves an adult experiencing sexual arousing from an activity with a child is not some horrible reaction in and of itself. It is very diffcult to understand why a parent would *elect* to do something with their child, in the name of bonding, that gives them sexual gratification FROM their child. This wasn’t about nursing a newborn or infant or even a small toddler, we’re talking about doing this special bonding with a pre school aged child. There is a need for leeway on both sides of the argument to explain 1) what it is exactly that makes some people so uneasy about seeing a 5 year old sucking on their mother’s nipples thus sexually arousing her and 2)why that act isn’t as sexual as it seems and what exactly the benefits are that hugs, kisses and cuddling couldn’t suffice o take the place of.

    We’re having a massive misunderstanding here. I’ll admit to not understanding what feels good about breastfeeding, the pump didn’t feel so great either but I could pump 8 oz in 30 minutes, it would take an hour to fill my then infants (30 min on each breast). My mother was my cheerleading in nursing but even she said it looked painful because it looked like my sons “meant business.”

    Also simply sucking on the nipple will not create a gush of milk, if she’s empty she’s empty. Before pacifiers were created, there was a nipple. I would look a little unnerved about seeing a 5 year old with a pacifier. I wouldnt call CPS though.

    (Quote this comment?)

    This is just to reiterate my stance on this whole issue, because people seem to have the idea that I am caling people pedaphiles just for being mothers who *gasp* did what I did and breastfed their children.

    I came into this discussion with a very open mind and even suggested a starting point to deal with some of the misunderstandings people may be having and from there was told I was a misogynist breastfeeding mother who wants to see babies taken away from their families because I hate women (though I am one) and I hate mothers though I am one) and am anti-breastfeeding (though I have breastfed).

    If you can understand why someone would get testy about the insinuation that they are a pedaphile, surely you can understand why someone would get testy at the insinuation that sexual arousal from a child is only bad when the perpetrator is a male or if it doesnt involve breastfeeding. If you say it isnt bad because the child enjoys it, that isn’t an adequate reason. People were not given a reason why a mother would continue breastfeeding for that long if she continues to get sexual arousal out of it except : the child doesn’t want it to stop.

  564. Kristen J.: It is acceptable to “force” a non-consenting adult to take medication

    I strongly disagree, and so does our legal system. My friend cannot force her parents to take their cholesterol medication if they do not want to; she cannot force them to get flu shots, even though it is strongly recommended that older people do; if I decided to stop taking my asthma meds, nobody could force me to start again. The only time non-consenting adults can be forced to take meds is when they have been committed. And again, children and infants are put in a break-out category all the time, for all kinds of things–circumcision, ear-piercing, being confined to a crib. Circumcision and ear-piercing aren’t about the best interests of the child, but we certainly allow parents to do them to infants nonetheless.

    Kristen J.: Why? That is how the case was decided. That’s how the case was described by the prosecutors to the Court. That’s how the babysitter described it to the police.

    I think it’s disingenuous because of all the other things that we routinely allow parents to do their children against the children’s will, things that violate the children’s bodily autonomy, without calling CPS or getting all het up about it, such as the examples I gave. That may well be how it was justified by the judge, the prosecution, and the babysitter; it may well be what they believe. But it does not stand up to scrutiny when compared to other, similar actions.

    Kristen J.: There are all sorts of practices that do not result in externally measurable harm that I’m sure we’d both agree are harmful because the person involved says so. Here the person involved *can’t speak* so are we to conclude that anything you do to a pre-verbal child is non-harmful unless there are externally measurable harms? That makes absolutely no logical sense to me and justifies a wide range of behaviors I’m sure we’d both agree are not appropriate.

    I’m not sure. What range of behaviors are you thinking of that inflict no externally measurable harm on a pre-verbal infant but that we’d both agree are not appropriate are you thinking of? None are leaping to my mind, but I’ll continue to think.

    Again, I’m confused. Azalea says that the problem is with mothers who perversely insist on breast-feeding children at 4, 5, 6, 7 years of age in order to get sexual kicks. Those kids are clearly quite verbal except in very rare instances. Kids start speaking anywhere from 7 mos – 3 yrs, usually with girls on the earlier side and boys on the later side. Are you saying we need to worry about mothers using breastfeeding to sexually abuse seven-month olds? Even though we have no instance of that happening? That we should give the side-eye to a woman nursing her pre-verbal eight-month-old in case she’s feeling sexual stimulation from it? The APA recommends nursing until twelve months at least, so whatever potential harm that could be imagined but we have no evidence for would have to be weighed against the very real benefits that have been noted. And by twelve months, a large percentage of kids are verbal, and are able to articulate when they don’t like something (are they ever). As I think Alara pointed out above, it’s nearly impossible to get an infant to nurse when it doesn’t want to, especially before they’re old enough to understand threats, as any number of women who have had trouble getting their infants to latch can attest. It’s not like you can really manipulate an eight-month-old into nursing or eating if she doesn’t want to. I have, on occasion, tried, when a kid’s weight-gain rate was causing her mom some worry.

    Honestly, in the absence of externally measurable harm and any mention on the part of the supposed victims of harm or distress, why would you assume something bad was happening, and how would you determine whether or not you were correct? If there’s no evidence at all for something’s existence, why would you think it was there?

  565. EG, I’m pretty sure Kristen was specifically thinking of committed adults who are forced to take medication against their will. I don’t see how you disagree with the statement at all, but the way you worded it makes it sound like committed adults don’t really count as adults, and that’s pretty foul.

    EG: What range of behaviors are you thinking of that inflict no externally measurable harm on a pre-verbal infant but that we’d both agree are not appropriate are you thinking of? None are leaping to my mind, but I’ll continue to think.

    And re: this: You identified two earlier – ear piercing and circumcision. I, for one, think are both completely unnecessary and should be up to the person once they’re capable of consent.

  566. PrettyAmiable. . .ear piercing and circumcision create externally measurable harm: pain–which can be measured with brain scanning equipment. There’s also some evidence that circumcision reduces sexual pleasure later in life.

  567. How are we comparing genital cutting with breastfeeding? The mind boggles. Ear piercing, circumcision – these are things that permanently change the body of the non-consenting person. Once that foreskin’s gone, you’re not getting it back. Breastfeeding is something a baby kind of has to choose to do or not. You cannot force a baby to breastfeed. Breastfeeding does not damage the child’s body or change the child’s body, or even affect the child’s body except for the child getting cuddled, getting closeness with mom, getting fed. It is not painful. Nursing generally makes babies happy. Poking a needle through their ears or cutting off part of their genitals generally makes babies cry. If I’m flailing a little here it’s because I think these are ghastly, ridiculous comparisons. You cannot compare breastfeeding to what amount to acts of violence. WTF mate.

  568. PrettyAmiable: the way you worded it makes it sound like committed adults don’t really count as adults, and that’s pretty foul.

    I think that requires significantly willful misreading. What I said was that the legal system disagrees that you can force non-consenting adults to take medication against their will. And it does. That is not a principle that exists. I then specified the specific circumstances under which non-consenting adults can be forced to take meds against their will–when they are committed. I could have been more explicit in pointing to the principle vs. the specific circumstances, but I think to get “committed adults are not real adults” out of what I wrote, you’d have to be reading in pretty bad faith, and/or assuming the worst about me. On the other hand, under our legal system, committed adults have been stripped of many of the rights that accrue to adults in this country, so a case could be made that they are no longer considered “real adults” by our legal system. That is something I would disagree with out legal system about.

    PrettyAmiable: You identified two earlier – ear piercing and circumcision.

    As others have mentioned, both those acts give external evidence of harm. An unanesthetized baby will display its unhappiness with either experience quite clearly. There is blood; the resulting wounds hurt and can become infected in a way that unharmed skin cannot; and, as LotusBen mentions, you can use brain scans to map the resulting electrical activity in the brain. And we have some anecdotal evidence that circumcision can reduce sexual sensation once the wound has healed; it is only anecdotal evidence of harm, of course, but that’s more than we have for either extended breastfeeding or breastfeeding that results in the mother’s arousal.

  569. Azalea, oh Azalea. You bore me, especially now that I have been reaccustomed to thoughtful, rational discourse. And yet I feel a sense of weary obligation to you. No doubt this is a result of my feminine socialization. I will have to work on it.

    Azalea: we are talking about breastfeeding your post-toddlers in PART because of the sexual stimulation/arousal/orgasms you obtain from the acitivity.

    No. You are talking about that, because you cannot let this completely hypothetical situation of which we have no examples go. We have no evidence, or even indication, that such a thing happens. We actually have indications that sexual arousal declines as the nursing goes on. I’m not sure why you can’t let this go, but I’m starting to believe that it says far more about you than about women who do extended breastfeeding or women who experience sexual arousal when breastfeeding.

    Azalea: People are literally asking people to say hey “if you are breastfeeding your child and it feels sensuous and sexual *insert adjective for sexually stimulating* its NORMAL and ust enjoy that sexal stimulation because it isn’t *really* sexual since your genitals arent involved and it isn’t “rape-y” because your child is consenting to giving you this sexual feel good moment.

    First of all, it is normal. You may not like that, but your unhappiness doesn’t make it untrue. Second of all, what I and others have said is that if it happens, you might as well just relax and let it happen without flipping out, because it is normal and it doesn’t hurt anybody. Nobody on the “it’s normal so chill out” side of the argument mentioned consent. I just did a “find” to make sure.

    Your continued, demonstrated inability to keep track of what people have said and to accurately recap it is severely hamstringing your argumentation, and it’s part of what makes arguing with you boring. It’s not hard to double-check things and it’s not hard to find information on sexual arousal during breastfeeding, no harder than it is to find information on oxytocin. Why you and Politicalguineapig seem to find it beyond you to do these things is unclear to me, but it does suggest to me that you are not arguing in good faith.

    Azalea: Even on the links given with discussion by other breastfeeding moms on other breastfeeding friendly sites, this sentiment of “OMGZ sexual stimulation during breastfeeding, if that happened to me I’d stop and pump/thats not ok/thats gross/thats icky” is SHARED, it is COMMON.

    Weren’t you the one who just wrote something about how not agreeing with the masses is evidence of independent thought? I’ll save you the backtracking: yes, you were, in comment #620. Yes, lots of people get freaked out by the idea, which is why Doctor Spock and other guides for new mothers written for a lay audience specifically say not to worry, because it is normal.

    Azalea: Simple, if the woman felt sexually aroused in her sleep while her child was breastfeeding (ie she wasnt conscious and was not AWARE and thus couldnt possibly have a knowledge of a link between her sexual arousal and breastfeeding then yeah she gets tons of benefits of doubts.

    Really? Because here’s a link to a comment thread in which lots of people who use precisely the same arguments you do give no benefit of the doubt to a mother in that situation whatsoever.

    Azalea: If your father was AWAKE and he was lying with you and he had an erection whie lying with you and said part of the reason eh continues to lie with you is because of the sexual stimulation and its ok because its natural and he;s your father so we need to trust men I’d tell him bullshit too. But he wasnt awake, breastfeeding moms who are experiencing this sexual arousal are.

    Come on, own up to what has been said in this thread.

    I’m not going to own up to your poor reading comprehension and textual memory. I told that anecdote in the context of noting that I didn’t feel bad or icky because it happened; I felt bad and icky when I was made aware that it had happened through the photograph, because while it did no harm, I don’t like to think of my father having an erection in any context whatsoever, and that’s not an uncommon attitude in the US. It was in response to what you clearly thought was a masterpiece of logic (“if having being aroused when you’re breastfeeding is harmless, why wouldn’t you tell your kid?”). There are lots of harmless things I wouldn’t tell my kids about, and lots of harmless things I have no desire to hear from my parents whatsoever.

    However, let’s follow your train of thought. A mother has an orgasm in the first few weeks of breastfeeding (again, the only examples we’ve been given of this happening). Now she knows it’s possible. What if she continues to nurse, instead of pumping? Clearly she is depraved, according to you. But here’s the thing: my father saw this photograph long before I did, presumably within a week of it being taken, because my mother has always been prompt about developing photos. And yet he continued to nap with me. He continued to cuddle me while I fell asleep, even though he would doze off doing this quite frequently. Even though he knew that there was a chance that he would again have an erotic dream (or whatever happens to men while they sleep). Now do you think he’s a creepy child molester? Because I have to tell you, many things in my life have harmed me, even things that I blame my father for, but napping next to me is not one of them.

    Azalea: people seem to have the idea that I am caling people pedaphiles just for being mothers who *gasp* did what I did and breastfed their children.

    No. “People” have the idea that you are calling mothers who breastfeed when you wouldn’t pedophiles because you compared them to mothers who rape, main, torture, and otherwise abuse their children.

    Azalea: People were not given a reason why a mother would continue breastfeeding for that long if she continues to get sexual arousal out of it except : the child doesn’t want it to stop.

    You are leaving off the “and there is no indication that it hurts the child.”

    I don’t find sexual abuse of children to be immoral and horrifying because of the adult’s arousal. Arousal, as far as I’m concerned, is morally neutral, just as I don’t care if a rapist of adult women finds his victims hot or not. I find child sexual abuse immoral and horrifying because of the damage and pain it inflicts on the child. In fact, a small percentage of sexual abuse of children seems to be committed by people who aren’t pedophiles–i.e. people who are not actually sexually attracted to or sexually aroused by children:

    According to the Mayo Clinic, approximately 95% of incidents of sexual abuse of children age 12 and younger are committed by offenders who meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia;[16] and that such persons make up 65% of child molestation offenders.[16]

    I do not consider the 5% of incidents of child sexual abuse committed by non-pedophiles to be less horrific, and I do not consider the 35% of convicted child molesters who are not pedophiles to be less disgusting. If a pedophile sees a kid playing in the park, doesn’t break stride or let anybody but, I guess, his therapist know, and then jerks off about it in the middle of the night, I don’t have a problem with him. I don’t particularly want to hear about it, but his sexual arousal is not the point. I don’t give a shit about his sexual arousal. What I care about is whether a child has actually been hurt. Your priorities may be elsewhere, of course.

  570. @EG,

    By non-consenting, I meant unable to provide consent, in which case the law does support allowing my relatives or medical care providers to make decisions that I do not consent to including administering medications. The analysis still stands.

    There’s a long list of things that have no externally measurable harm that would still be “wrong”…from unnecessary medication to fondling to using a child as a (non-penatrative) masturbatory aid. All of which I’ve seen in RL and all of which have been excused by the parents or caretakers as “not causing any harm.”

    @Sandy,

    Some arguments have consequences beyond the immediate question. Arguing that someone is only harmed if they can *prove* that they sustained damage from that action is one of them for all the reasons I’ve mentioned above. One of the places in which that argument routinely surfaces is circumcision where advocates argue that there is no *harm* under anesthetic (remember what I said above about harm being kyriarchically constructed, this is part of that).

    In short, the argument sucks. It doesn’t square with treating children as people under the custodial care of others and it isn’t the only argument in favor of extended breastfeeding so why go there.

  571. Kristen J.: There’s a long list of things that have no externally measurable harm that would still be “wrong”…from unnecessary medication to fondling to using a child as a (non-penatrative) masturbatory aid. All of which I’ve seen in RL and all of which have been excused by the parents or caretakers as “not causing any harm.”

    I don’t how any of those things don’t have externally measurable harm. Medication of all kinds carries the risk of side effects, and risking those side effects when you know for a fact that it is unnecessary is indeed measurable harm, to say nothing of the anxiety engendered by a kid thinking that it requires ongoing medication when that is not true. I’m not entirely sure what you mean by “fondling,” as it means “lovingly stroking,” and I guess I’ve fondled many a kid with no harm resulting. If the touch in question is inappropriate, then yes, we have lots and lots of evidence that touching a child in inappropriate places or in inappropriate ways causes harm. I’m not sure how using a child as a masturbatory aid, whether penetratively or not, could be done without causing harm (unless we’re back to Rodeo’s friend who had an orgasm within the first few weeks of nursing and nonetheless continued to nurse thing, in which case, yes, I agree, that was not harmful and there’s no need to stop it), given what we know about the results of child sexual abuse. None of those examples make sense to me.

    Kristen J.: One of the places in which that argument routinely surfaces is circumcision where advocates argue that there is no *harm* under anesthetic

    Except that in that case, the argument is demonstrably false. First of all, if you have to put somebody under anesthetic to begin with, you are doing them harm. Sometimes that harm is necessary, as when someone needs to have his/her appendix out, but that doesn’t mean it’s not harm, which is why there’s recovery time after surgery. Anesthesia exists specifically to make it possible to do harm when the gain will outweigh the harm.

    Second, even if we left that aside, this argument would only work if the boy were being kept on anesthetic all day every day until the wound healed. I have not heard of such a thing happening, though the world is big and I am small, so it’s always a possibility. It’s certainly not the norm, though. Third, there is also the increased risk of infection given that you have just created an open wound in a vulnerable area. That is also harm. And finally, there is the as-yet anecdotal evidence regarding decreased sexual sensation.

    I don’t see how the argument sucks. I see examples of it being used when it is not, in fact, true.

  572. Kristen J.: Arguing that someone is only harmed if they can *prove* that they sustained damage from that action is one of them for all the reasons I’ve mentioned above.

    There also the issue of the word “prove.” As I said, I’m not talking about court-of-law proof, and I’m not even talking about “would stand up to peer review in a scholarly journal” proof. Wanting an anecdote or two or even three–some indication that harm exists–before I see imagined harm as even plausible does not seem to me to be unreasonable, or anything like claiming that it’s OK to give somebody ritalin unnecessarily.

    Kristen J.: By non-consenting, I meant unable to provide consent, in which case the law does support allowing my relatives or medical care providers to make decisions that I do not consent to including administering medications. The analysis still stands.

    It doesn’t, because children, including pre-verbal children, fall into a break-out category of people for whom we are not only allowed to make medical decisions when they are unable to provide consent, but whose decisions we are allowed to override. A parent can force a child to get a shot against his or her will, and a parent can trick, browbeat, or threaten a child into taking medicine against his or her will, and a parent can also hold a toddler’s nose and pour medicine down his/her throat, all legally. The parallel just doesn’t work. Children are already a deeply disenfranchised break-out category of people whose bodily autonomy we routinely ignore. I am not happy about this, and in general, while I recognize that children cannot for reasons of safety have all the rights and privileges that accrue to adults, I think that they should have considerably more than they now do. But given that they don’t, calling in CPS over unwanted breastfeeding and then saying that it’s because of the kid’s bodily autonomy just doesn’t hold any water as far as I’m concerned. I don’t think unwanted breastfeeding is a good idea (unless there’s something more to it than I’m being told–the kid in general is good with it, but didn’t feel like doing it at that particular hour, but the mother knew that if he didn’t, he’d flip out after she left over not being able to nurse before he went to sleep, I suppose). But I also don’t think a whole number of things we, as a society, allow adults to do to children are good ideas, and nobody takes kids away from their parents for them, so when the representatives of that society start invoking “bodily autonomy,” it seems nothing but hypocritical to me.

  573. But, EG, its only recently that these things ARE considered *harmful* and then only by a portion of the population. The woman who sedated her son at night was a nurse. She and several medical doctors testified that there was no harm in sedating him. Were they lying or defining harm differently? I think you’re conflating your view of harmfulness with some objective notion of harm and using that to define unethical behavior. Which is all well and good if everyone would agree with you about harm. But some people don’t. So as a metric of unethical behavior, a special harms based case for children doesn’t work.

  574. @EG, many adults can be forced to take medication against their will. When medically necessary, adults can be strapped to a table and injected with drugs against their will. Its very much legal.

  575. Kristen J.: When medically necessary, adults can be strapped to a table and injected with drugs against their will. Its very much legal

    Not necessarily. An adult in possession of their faculties has every right to refuse necessary (and even lifesaving) medical treatment, absent a court order. It’s for situations in which people are unconscious, or not in possession of their faculties, that things like health care proxies, advance medical directives, etc., are so crucial. Example: seven years ago, I was told in the hospital that if I didn’t consent to emergency intestinal surgery, I would undoubtedly die sometime in the next six hours. I was so afraid and generally out of it that I was reluctant to give consent. Nonetheless, I was still quite competent in the legal sense, and the surgeon could not have operated if I hadn’t called a close friend (who also happened to be my health care proxy) and asked her what I should do. She came to the hospital and told me to say yes. So I did. If I hadn’t, I would have died, and nothing could have been done about it.

  576. Kristen J.: But, EG, its only recently that these things ARE considered *harmful* and then only by a portion of the population. The woman who sedated her son at night was a nurse. She and several medical doctors testified that there was no harm in sedating him. Were they lying or defining harm differently? I think you’re conflating your view of harmfulness with some objective notion of harm and using that to define unethical behavior. Which is all well and good if everyone would agree with you about harm. But some people don’t. So as a metric of unethical behavior, a special harms based case for children doesn’t work.

    I understand that, and that’s something that’s worth arguing about–whether or not a particular situation causes harm. But in order to have a reasonable argument, we need something, some indication that harm has occurred. One can definitely make that case for ongoing sedation, depending on the drug, the dosage, potential for habit-creation, effect on ability to sleep, and so on. And then the mother and her supporters can make the counterargument. But there’s a big difference between saying “X causes harm because of a, b, c effects” and saying “X might cause harm because there might be a, b, c effects, hypothetically, in the minds of lay people who haven’t done any research on the subject., just as there’s a difference between saying “There’s nothing to suggest that x causes a, b, and c,” and “A, b, and c, are not harmful.”

    Presumably, in the case you cite, there’s an actual kid who can be examined for harm. But we don’t actually have an example of a kid who was nursing at the age of five because the mother got off on it. We do have examples of kids whose mothers nursed them when they were pre-verbal and who found the experience sexually stimulating, and we’ve had no indication that anything bad came of it. So why would we assume harm?

    Noting that different people are going to disagree about what counts as harm, what should count as harm, and whether something is harmful does not mean that the idea that an act should be judged by the harm it does is invalid; it just means that people disagree about things and always will and we’ll have to fight it out. I can’t think of an argument for which that is not true, and I can’t think of a measure of morality any better or more precise than “is it hurting anybody?”. That doesn’t mean that one doesn’t exist, but I’d need to hear it before I agree that a moral standard based on harm is worth getting rid of, or sucks.

    Yes, many adults can be injected with meds against their will under certain circumstances. But not as a matter of course, and for children it is indeed as a matter of course. I honestly don’t think that we could genuinely be in disagreement on this principle. Surely you’re not actually arguing that legally, children have all the rights to bodily autonomy that adults do, or that adults are just as vulnerable to having their bodily autonomy legally violated as children are, with “adults” and “children” designating classes with no further specification?

  577. Actually, I think that moving the culture as a whole toward the “is it hurting anybody?” standard has been incredibly beneficial to left/liberal causes. The right wing has been less and less able to make political arguments consisting of “sex between men is against God’s will” or “just wrong,” and has been forced more and more toward making claims about harm that are actually falsifiable–“if gay men raise children, the children will be psychologically/emotionally/sexually harmed/abused,” well, no, that turns out not be true, so no harm. “If gays get married, straight people’s marriages will be no longer meaningful,” and hey, that turns out not be true, and also, no harm. “Legal gay marriage will mean that we will no longer have the religious freedom to deny marriage to people in our churches,” and that also has turned out not be true (unless the Catholic Church has started marrying gay couples here in NY and nobody mentioned it to me)–no harm to religious freedom has been done.

    “Legal gay marriage signifies that Christianity no longer has a stranglehold on whose relationship is legally sanctioned.” That one is true, and here is a disagreement–the right wing thinks that is harmful, and I think it is beneficial, and we can fight it out.

    We’ve been able to pressure right-wingers into using arguments that can be assessed for truth rather than relying solely on handwaving claims about the will of any deity. That’s a huge gain. Hell, they’ve even been forced to try making claims about how “abortion hurts women.”

  578. Kristen J.: Arguing that someone is only harmed if they can *prove* that they sustained damage from that action is one of them for all the reasons I’ve mentioned above. One of the places in which that argument routinely surfaces is circumcision where advocates argue that there is no *harm* under anesthetic (remember what I said above about harm being kyriarchically constructed, this is part of that).

    Afaic, the arguments that routine infant circumcision does no harm are ridiculous from start to finish, as are arguments that rape doesn’t harm people who can’t remember it. Damage from rape manifests itself. Even if it doesn’t, we can all agree rape does not benefit the people who experience it in any way, and so we can state that rape is categorically bad and should not happen, even if the people involved cannot remember it.

    Some people will disagree, but I believe genital cutting without informed consent is categorically bad.

    Anyone arguing that breastfeeding is categorically bad is in my book a total misogynist. No one here is arguing that, thankfully.

    Plenty of men in the movement for genital integrity are coming forward to say they have been hurt by having part of their penises removed without their consent, though the surgeries took place before they were able to remember them happening. One man sued and won a settlement out of court. The fact is that without teens or adults coming forward and stating, “I was harmed by the abusive way my mother breastfed me and this was the situation” we have no sign that anyone has been emotionally injured by their breastfeeding experiences as children. Without that kind of evidence, and as breastfeeding is not categorically bad and has many many benefits, why attack mothers for their bodily feelings and the duration they breastfeed?

    I think the “show harm” argument is a reasonable one.

  579. EG: Surely you’re not actually arguing that legally, children have all the rights to bodily autonomy that adults do, or that adults are just as vulnerable to having their bodily autonomy legally violated as children are, with “adults” and “children” designating classes with no further specification?

    Actually I am. All human beings have the same right to bodily autonomy. You should only abrograte that right if you have a damn good reason. In many cases with kids you do have a damn good reason, they are unable to consent and so decisions must be made on their behalf and in their best interest. I see no reason whatsoever to treat children differently.

  580. “In their best interest” is no less squishy a standard than “does it cause harm,” though. Should parents be able to force a little boy to cut his hair short and wear masculine clothing if he prefers his older sister’s pink and frilly shirts? I’m sure they would think it was in his best interest to do so. I would argue that it causes harm and is an unnecessary infringement on his bodily autonomy.

    If you’re making a moral argument about what should be, I by and large agree, with some space left around the edges for me to fiddle with different configurations of ideas. But in reality, I simply don’t see that principle being carried through in US law at all, and invoking it in order to remove a child from a home for improper breastfeeding just reeks of hypocrisy to me.

  581. Of course I’m making an argument about what should be! :). In actual fact this is a sexist, anti-mother and anti-child society. My objection was to using arguments that can be anti-child when we’re fighting anti-mother sentiments. I think we can support both and there is an ethical framework to do so (even if as we both know it will be distorted by the kyriarchy at the first opportunity.). But of course, I’m sure supporting mothers and children is something we both agree on.

  582. Of course we do! And that, then, is where I was misunderstanding. I was under the impression that you were referencing the on-the-ground situation, and I was very confused, because I remember that you are a lawyer, and so I figured you had have more accurate info than I do, but on the other hand, you were saying things that did not jibe at all with my experiences of what is practiced when it comes to legal respect for children’s rights. (I was kind of hoping that maybe things had changed dramatically recently and I just wasn’t up to date, but alas, no such luck.)

    I do think that any argument can be misused, used dishonestly, oversimplified, or turned to evil ends, and that’s not even mentioning just honest disagreements! And I don’t think that says anything about the inherent value of the argument itself.

  583. Sandy: You also never heard of oxytocin, or though tit was junk science, and you thought that the primary hormone released during breastfeeding was estrogen, so… I’m going to stand by my statement there.

    I’ve mentioned many enjoyable and pleasurable aspects of breastfeeding that have nothing whatsoever to do with sexual feelings.

    Nor am I the Queen of Nuance, but you seem utterly, willfully oblivious to it. You never heard of sexual arousal during nursing before this thread, and now that you have, you’ve decided that any woman who experiences sexual feelings while breastfeeding is “gross” (thanks)

    Well Yes, yes I have, and I am not alone and if you read threads on the internet about this you’ll see MANY breastfeeding mothers feel the same way.

    and “gettingoff” and an abusive mommy who will certainly nurse until the kid is 5 because of screaming orgasms. Lolagirlnailedit : it isbizarre.

    Show where I said I never hear dof oxytocin. I know what it is, but your initial poston sexual arousal said ” a mouth on the nipple feels good” just where does the rush of oxytocin comes in to play to fool your nervous system that something feels good? Just so we’re clear, its also quite common to feel depressed during this same release of oxytocin, the hormone affects your mood not the physical sensation. My calf cramps when I orgasm that doesnt mean a cramp in my calf feels good when Im not orgasming.

    I KNOW estrogen aids in workings of breastfeeding (too much estrogen fucks up your milk supply but no estrogen is a LOT less important than the sexual arousal hormone, yup oh and prolactin hmmph that has NOTHING to do with breastfeeding right, its alll about that oxytocin). I KNOW there are several things that aid in breastfeeding it is not an oxytocin show.

    This thread was NOT about the inner workings of breastfeeding this was about whether or not its impolite to breastfeed your 5 year old at the dinner table and delved into why people have a probem with seeing someone breastfeed an older child (becase as far as I’ve seen, no one has a problem with breastfeeding an infant so that addition was meaningless). I uggetsed what I thought was a misconception that people thought mothers were being sexually aroused to which you responded YES!THEY DO!

    In case you forgot:

    Sandy 11.29.2011 at 11:14 pm

    PrettyAmiable: Nipples get tough after breast-feeding? I am never having a child of my own.

    Haha, wee derail incoming. I will verify this. My nipples got super tender, painfully dry, and itchy by turns. I was constantly dabbing on lanolin gel. My mom told me when I complained that if I continued nursing my nipples would toughen up–those exact words. And they did. They are still soft and feel the same as my pre-breastfeeding nipples. They didn’t get callused or anything, they’re just not easily irritated.

    That’s right, eventually it takes a deep raking from tiny fingernails to hurt them. On that note, formula also makes a perfectly happy baby.

    Joking aside, I really am disturbed by the idea that anyone would report a nursing mother if they suspected she was doing extended nursing for sexual gratification. I’m having trouble letting that go. Breastfeeding certainly does have the potential to be sexually stimulating, because there’s a mouth on your nipple. But there are a lot of wonderful things about breastfeeding, like the closeness and cuddles and the love hormones that swoosh through your brain and my personal favorite, not having to wash bottles. So what if a woman likes the feeling, yes, sexually, of that mouth on her nipple? If the child and mother wish to continue the breastfeeding relationship, where is the harm? If you have other reasons to suspect abuse, fine, but nursing by itself is not abuse. And whatever a woman’s private reasons for wanting to breastfeed (or formula feed for that matter), they are really none of your business.

  584. EG:
    Azalea,ohAzalea.Youboreme,especiallynowthatIhavebeenreaccustomedtothoughtful,rationaldiscourse.AndyetIfeelasenseofwearyobligationtoyou.Nodoubtthisisaresultofmyfemininesocialization.Iwillhavetoworkonit.

    No.Youaretalkingaboutthat,becauseyoucannotletthiscompletelyhypotheticalsituationofwhichwehavenoexamplesgo.Wehavenoevidence,orevenindication,thatsuchathinghappens.Weactuallyhaveindicationsthatsexualarousaldeclinesasthenursinggoeson.I’mnotsurewhyyoucan’tletthisgo,butI’mstartingtobelievethatitsaysfarmoreaboutyouthanaboutwomenwhodoextendedbreastfeedingorwomenwhoexperiencesexualarousalwhenbreastfeeding.

    Firstofall,itisnormal.Youmaynotlikethat,butyourunhappinessdoesn’tmakeituntrue.Secondofall,whatIandothershavesaidisthatifithappens,youmightaswelljustrelaxandletithappenwithoutflippingout,becauseitisnormalanditdoesn’thurtanybody.Nobodyonthe“it’snormalsochillout”sideoftheargumentmentionedconsent.Ijustdida“find”tomakesure.

    Yourcontinued,demonstratedinabilitytokeeptrackofwhatpeoplehavesaidandtoaccuratelyrecapitisseverelyhamstringingyourargumentation,andit’spartofwhatmakesarguingwithyouboring.It’snothardtodouble-checkthingsandit’snothardtofindinformationonsexualarousalduringbreastfeeding,noharderthanitistofindinformationonoxytocin.WhyyouandPoliticalguineapigseemtofinditbeyondyoutodothesethingsisuncleartome,butitdoessuggesttomethatyouarenotarguingingoodfaith.

    Weren’tyoutheonewhojustwrotesomethingabouthownotagreeingwiththemassesisevidenceofindependentthought?I’llsaveyouthebacktracking:yes,youwere,incomment#620.Yes,lotsofpeoplegetfreakedoutbytheidea,whichiswhyDoctorSpockandotherguidesfornewmotherswrittenforalayaudiencespecificallysaynottoworry,becauseitisnormal.

    Really?Becausehere’salinktoacommentthreadinwhichlotsofpeoplewhousepreciselythesameargumentsyoudogivenobenefitofthedoubttoamotherinthatsituationwhatsoever.

    I’mnotgoingtoownuptoyourpoorreadingcomprehensionandtextualmemory.ItoldthatanecdoteinthecontextofnotingthatIdidn’tfeelbadorickybecauseithappened;IfeltbadandickywhenIwasmadeawarethatithadhappenedthroughthephotograph,becausewhileitdidnoharm,Idon’tliketothinkofmyfatherhavinganerectioninanycontextwhatsoever,andthat’snotanuncommonattitudeintheUS.Itwasinresponsetowhatyouclearlythoughtwasamasterpieceoflogic(“ifhavingbeingarousedwhenyou’rebreastfeedingisharmless,whywouldn’tyoutellyourkid?”).TherearelotsofharmlessthingsIwouldn’ttellmykidsabout,andlotsofharmlessthingsIhavenodesiretohearfrommyparentswhatsoever.

    However,let’sfollowyourtrainofthought.Amotherhasanorgasminthefirstfewweeksofbreastfeeding(again,theonlyexampleswe’vebeengivenofthishappening).Nowsheknowsit’spossible.Whatifshecontinuestonurse,insteadofpumping?Clearlysheisdepraved,accordingtoyou.Buthere’sthething:myfathersawthisphotographlongbeforeIdid,presumablywithinaweekofitbeingtaken,becausemymotherhasalwaysbeenpromptaboutdevelopingphotos.Andyethecontinuedtonapwithme.HecontinuedtocuddlemewhileIfellasleep,eventhoughhewoulddozeoffdoingthisquitefrequently.Eventhoughheknewthattherewasachancethathewouldagainhaveaneroticdream(orwhateverhappenstomenwhiletheysleep).Nowdoyouthinkhe’sacreepychildmolester?BecauseIhavetotellyou,manythingsinmylifehaveharmedme,eventhingsthatIblamemyfatherfor,butnappingnexttomeisnotoneofthem.

    No.“People”havetheideathatyouarecallingmotherswhobreastfeedwhenyouwouldn’tpedophilesbecauseyoucomparedthemtomotherswhorape,main,torture,andotherwiseabusetheirchildren.

    Youareleavingoffthe“andthereisnoindicationthatithurtsthechild.”

    Idon’tfindsexualabuseofchildrentobeimmoralandhorrifyingbecauseoftheadult’sarousal.Arousal,asfarasI’mconcerned,ismorallyneutral,justasIdon’tcareifarapistofadultwomenfindshisvictimshotornot.Ifindchildsexualabuseimmoralandhorrifyingbecauseofthedamageandpainitinflictsonthechild.Infact,asmallpercentageofsexualabuseofchildrenseemstobecommittedbypeoplewhoaren’tpedophiles–i.e.peoplewhoarenotactuallysexuallyattractedtoorsexuallyarousedbychildren:

    AccordingtotheMayoClinic,approximately95%ofincidentsofsexualabuseofchildrenage12andyoungerarecommittedbyoffenderswhomeetthediagnosticcriteriaforpedophilia;[16]andthatsuchpersonsmakeup65%ofchildmolestationoffenders.[16]

    Idonotconsiderthe5%ofincidentsofchildsexualabusecommittedbynon-pedophilestobelesshorrific,andIdonotconsiderthe35%ofconvictedchildmolesterswhoarenotpedophilestobelessdisgusting.Ifapedophileseesakidplayinginthepark,doesn’tbreakstrideorletanybodybut,Iguess,histherapistknow,andthenjerksoffaboutitinthemiddleofthenight,Idon’thaveaproblemwithhim.Idon’tparticularlywanttohearaboutit,buthissexualarousalisnotthepoint.Idon’tgiveashitabouthissexualarousal.WhatIcareaboutiswhetherachildhasactuallybeenhurt.Yourprioritiesmaybeelsewhere,ofcourse.

    Well it works like this, I have a problem with people being sexually aroused by children. That sexual arousal grosses me all the way out. It is disturbing. If someone was changing my sons diaper and going home later masturbating to the memory of changing his diaper I would be pissed, I would not trust that person around my child that person is a threat. If they were masturbating or getting wett/hard while doing anything with my child BECAUSE that physical contact activity with my child caused them to become sexually aroused I would have a problem with that. Just because you wouldnt, doesnt make me an asshole for not being ok with being being seually aroused by my child or any other child. It’s gross, its nasty its horrible. I stand by that. I dont care if you dont stand with me on that.

  585. Also, I said she has issues if she’s continuing to breastfeed AN OLDER CHILD while breastfeeding sexually arouses/stimulates or causes an orgasm for her.

    I did not apply this to infants so when you say that, you’re being an asshole because you’re full of shit.

    I gave a very specific example and people are argueing with me about how they think I said breastfeeding a newborn is wrong if you experience sexual arousal yet you want to say I have terrible reading comprehension skills.

    As far as my independent thinker comment, I didnt even look at your links or ANY link until after the hundredth or so request that I “educate” myself on the thing breastfeeding is all about – oxytocin and sexual arousal according to you all- and offered it up to you that alas, I am not the only person who is a woman who has breastfed and that thins breastfeeding an older child and enjoying it sexually is gross.

    Hell someone- dont know if it was or not- have pretty much said sexua arousal to children isnt your business which would mean pedaphilia isnt your business untl the pedaphile acts on their pedaphilia…in a harmful way because there is nothing wrong with watchign children play in the park and going home and masturbating to the mental images of CHILDREN playing in the park.

    Yeah we can end this here, I know damn well my idea of what is and isn’t ok when it comes to children and yours will never be on the same page.

  586. Azalea:
    Also, I said she has issues if she’s continuing to breastfeed AN OLDER CHILD while breastfeeding sexually arouses/stimulates or causes an orgasm for her.

    And given that the situation described in this entire comment thread in which a breastfeeding mother orgasmed was to do with a newborn, everything else you’ve said on this topic is missing the point. You’re complaining about something that does not happen.

    And you wonder why people think you have issues with reading comprehension?

  587. Azalea: Also, I said she has issues if she’s continuing to breastfeed AN OLDER CHILD while breastfeeding sexually arouses/stimulates or causes an orgasm for her.

    I did not apply this to infants so when you say that, you’re being an asshole because you’re full of shit.

    You keep coming back to this completely imaginary boogeyman that you have made up. Given that this is not a thing that you can find a single example of, I’m going to have do the “I’m rubber, you’re glue” thing and note that in fact, you are full of shit, because you keep claiming that this is a thing that happens.

    Azalea: As far as my independent thinker comment, I didnt even look at your links or ANY link until after the hundredth or so request that I “educate” myself on the thing breastfeeding is all about – oxytocin and sexual arousal according to you all- and offered it up to you that alas, I am not the only person who is a woman who has breastfed and that thins breastfeeding an older child and enjoying it sexually is gross.

    I never said that was what breastfeeding was all about; I said it was common knowledge. Again, your reading comprehension is awful. And yes, lots of people think that being sexually aroused during breastfeeding is gross and wrong. That doesn’t actually make those people correct.

    Is it oxytocin you were referring to when you called something “the sexual arousal hormone”? Because again, that betrays such a simplistic view of how the human body works that I think that is part of the problem here. There are scientists, my cousin among them, who refer to oxytocin as “the cuddle hormone,” because of the role it plays in affectionate bonding both sexually and nonsexually. Your fantasy that your endocrine and nervous systems understand and respect an iron wall between sexual and nonsexual feeling is just that–a fantasy. And your note that some women respond to oxytocin with feelings of depression is really irrelevant (some people feel depression post-coitally as well); hormones can generate a range of different reactions in different people.

    Azalea: your initial poston sexual arousal said ” a mouth on the nipple feels good” just where does the rush of oxytocin comes in to play to fool your nervous system that something feels good? Just so we’re clear, its also quite common to feel depressed during this same release of oxytocin, the hormone affects your mood not the physical sensation. My calf cramps when I orgasm that doesnt mean a cramp in my calf feels good when Im not orgasming.

    Is there rush of oxytocin released into your brain when your calf cramps in a non-orgasmic way? No? Then it’s not a good analogy. Could you explain to me why you think that hormones have nothing to do with why something feels good? You yourself note that some women respond to oxytocin with depression–also a feeling, and on, I might note, that has a number of physical manifestations. Given that every doctor, expert, and reference I’ve seen on this topic cites the presence of oxytocin as a factor in the oft-experienced sexual arousal, and some of them have even nursed two children like you, is there a reason your inability to understand how hormones influence/determine our feelings is more accurate than their expertise?

    Azalea: Hell someone- dont know if it was or not- have pretty much said sexua arousal to children isnt your business which would mean pedaphilia isnt your business untl the pedaphile acts on their pedaphilia…in a harmful way because there is nothing wrong with watchign children play in the park and going home and masturbating to the mental images of CHILDREN playing in the park.

    That person was me. Again, is there a reason you can’t scroll up while you’re writing to check these things? Please explain to me how pedophilia is your business if the pedophile never acts on it harmfully. I’d also be interested in hearing how you’d go about identifying such individuals–perhaps you’ll require everybody to report the contents of their sexual fantasies? And please do, by the way, when referring to something I wrote, make sure that you read the whole thing, as one of the things I specified was that the person in question not run the risk of making the kids in question aware of it by stopping and watching. In those circumstances, yes, I think that what people think about when they masturbate is their own business. Lots of people find terrible images sexually arousing. And as long as they’re neither enacting those fantasies or making anybody an unwilling voyeur to what goes on in their heads, I’m afraid that I just don’t much care. What I care about is making sure that nobody is being hurt.

    Azalea: Just because you wouldnt, doesnt make me an asshole for not being ok with being being seually aroused by my child or any other child. It’s gross, its nasty its horrible. I stand by that. I dont care if you dont stand with me on that.

    OK. So you have a problem with the arousal. My problem is with the child being hurt. So how do you feel about non-pedophiles who molest children? Is that less gross because they’re not aroused?

    Azalea: Yeah we can end this here, I know damn well my idea of what is and isn’t ok when it comes to children and yours will never be on the same page.

    Heh. This kind of thing always cracks me up: “I give you permission not to respond to me!” Um, OK. Actually, that’s always been my decision to make. But if you’d like to end things here, you can feel free not to respond to me, if you wish. Hell, you don’t respond to three-quarters of the things Sandy or I say to you anyway; you have yet to respond to the repeated reminders you have had that orgasm while feeding an older child does not happen, and that all the indications are that sexual arousal while feeding a post-toddler does not happen.

  588. Azalea: (becase as far as I’ve seen, no one has a problem with breastfeeding an infant so that addition was meaningless). I uggetsed what I thought was a misconception that people thought mothers were being sexually aroused to which you responded YES!THEY DO!

    Wait, so women who become sexually aroused while breastfeeding their infants are not gross, then? Since no one has a problem with breastfeeding an infant, you say? Super. Gee, I had this misconception that you thought all mothers experiencing sexual arousal were bad and disgusting for not choosing another way to feed their babies.

    Azalea: Well Yes, yes I have, and I am not alone and if you read threads on the internet about this you’ll see MANY breastfeeding mothers feel the same way.

    That’s fine. If a woman experiences arousal and feels profoundly uncomfortable with it, she is certainly free to switch to formula, or to pump and bottle feed, and I would not get up in anyone’s face about what their reasons are for choosing any particular method of feeding their babies. It’s your opinion that any woman experiencing arousal and continuing to breastfeed anyway is gross and disgusting that I think is shitty. It’s attacking other women, especially for something as common as arousal during breastfeeding, that I have a problem with.

    I stand by my statement that whether a woman feels sexual arousal or not, if she wants to breastfeed and her baby wants to breastfeed, I see no harm. Sexual arousal is irrelevant, a biological quirk, and when it happens, part of a larger whole of the loveliness of breastfeeding. You do not have a single example of a woman deciding to do extended breastfeeding for sexual reasons (as I said in my first post on this thread, I do not believe this woman exists, any more then the woman who gets a late term abortion once a year) and there’s a lot of anecdotal evidence suggesting that sexual feelings during breastfeeding diminish quickly over time. Nor do you have a shred of evidence that a woman experiencing sexual arousal during breastfeeding is harming her baby in any way. You just keep making these pearl-clutching statements and ugly comparisons and misrepresenting arguments (as when you claimed those of us defending breastfeeding mothers on this thread have said breastfeeding is “all about” oxytocin and sexual arousal (647). Who said that? No one has said that, quite the opposite in fact). We get that you think that feeling arousal while breastfeeding is disgusting and terrible. But please either cite evidence of harm or cease with comparisons of nursing mothers to pedophiles hovering in the park. Because that, imo, is what’s gross.

  589. I’m having a hard time understanding how the commentariat can agree that it’s demonstrably possible to orgasm while breastfeeding an infant, but when met with the concern that breastfeeding an older child could produce the same effect, which could harm a very aware and sentient child, the commentariat will just as easily argue that this “does not happen” and to “show harm”.

    I… abuse happens all the time. It’s really bizarre to me for a feminist forum to start demanding “proof” of child abuse, like harm has only occurred if the victim can prove they were harmed. I get that we don’t want to draw parallels between breastfeeding and sexual abuse because of history/discrimination/shitty laws, etc. But. I have kids, I work with kids, I have worked with kids for years, and I can guarantee you that parents do not always do what’s best for their kids, and that sometimes “what’s best” gets perverted by the parent’s own narcissistic bullshit. I mean, this happens All. The. Time.

    Kristen makes an important point that when fighting anti-mother sentiments, we often argue anti-child sentiments. It’s known that breastfeeding women can experience some sexual arousal while nursing, which is all fine and well, but to argue that a woman’s sexual feelings toward/around a child are unquestionable and benign because woman/mother/feminism undercuts almost everything we know about the ethics of consent, bodily autonomy, child abuse, and the legacy of abuse and neglect on the parent-child relationship. People have questions about the limitations of this acceptance of sexual arousal in the parent-child relationship, and while some of these questions are coming from cultural differences and expectations, and some from a lack of education about biology (which, come the fuck on, we lack education about our bodies SYSTEMATICALLY which is something we talk about here ALL THE TIME, back the fuck off of people who are behind you on the learning curve already unless you’re open to others calling you on your educational elitism) some of them are, I think, completely reasonable reactions to to assertion that a mother’s intentions must never be questioned. Women do abuse. The reasons and justifications for abuse are as creative and fucked up and original as you can imagine, and I’m extremely skeptical of this overarching extension of goodwill to all women forever in the name of breastfeeding. It’s a great warm fuzzy, but it’s unrealistic to assume that sexual abuse and breastfeeding don’t ever and have not ever coexisted and will not ever coexist. It’s like Rule 36 of the internet, but real life.

  590. Lauren: it’s demonstrably possible to orgasm while breastfeeding an infant, but when met with the concern that breastfeeding an older child could produce the same effect, which could harm a very aware and sentient child, the commentariat will just as easily argue that this “does not happen” and to “show harm”.

    Because we have no reports of this happening. References have been made to mouth/feeling shape and the drastic difference in hormone levels. And there hasn’t been “concern.” There has been melodramatic, flailing outrage about something that we have not one concrete example of ever happening. If Azalea had said “It would be disturbing if some of the women who extend breastfeeding to six years of age were doing it because it gets them sexually aroused,” then yes, that would have been an expression of concern proportional to the info we have. But we don’t have that info. We have a small percentage of women who breastfeed to a late stage; we have the fact that it is not uncommon for women to feel sexual arousal due to breastfeeding during their child’s infancy. We have no evidence whatsoever that suggests that there is any correlation between these two groups, and some indications that would suggest that the arousal effects stop happening at a later age. So acting as if this is some dreadful terror being visited upon innocent children is nonsensical.

    Lauren: It’s really bizarre to me for a feminist forum to start demanding “proof” of child abuse, like harm has only occurred if the victim can prove they were harmed.

    This would be relevant if a victim had come forward, saying that she/he had been victimized through extended breastfeeding. But we have no victim here. We have outraged speculation at the possibility that somewhere a victim might exist, and the use of the specter of this imagined victim to attack all women who do extended breastfeeding (or possibly all women who feel sexual arousal during any stage of breastfeeding at all, it’s unclear) of being gross abusers. Well, OK. Somewhere, I’m sure there’s an abusive parent who uses Christmas trees as part of his/her tortures. That doesn’t mean getting a Christmas tree is a sign of abuse, especially in the absence of an accusation by a victim. As I have now stated numerous times, I’m not asking for court-of-law proof. I am saying that I refuse to flip out over something that we have no indication is happening, and I refuse to accuse a bunch of Christmas-tree buyers of abuse or accept that such accusations are anything but feverish nonsense when we don’t have any victims. I have never not believed a victim in my life. But we don’t have a victim here. We have Azalea saying that feeling sexual arousal when nursing is gross. OK, got it. She finds it gross. That’s not the same thing as somebody who was breastfed saying “this happened, and it hurt me.”

    Lauren: back the fuck off of people who are behind you on the learning curve already unless you’re open to others calling you on your educational elitism

    I’m not going to back the fuck off of people who have a working internet connection and the ability to type when every single thing they have been wrong about is easily dealt with within the first two pages of a google search, for fuck’s sake. It’s not educational elitism to lose patience with that bullshit; it’s contempt for laziness. You know how long it took me to look up the history of oxytocin? About thirty seconds, and I did so by the extremely complex method of typing “oxytocin” into google. I think on a couple of occasions, when looking things up in this thread, I may have gone to Google Books or Google Scholar. I do have advanced degrees, it’s true, but I don’t think I drew upon them in these actions. I also used the same research prowess to do a quick search and see if there were any accounts of sexual abuse via breastfeeding. The only things I turned up were a) many papers and sites about the experience of breastfeeding for someone who has survived sexual abuse b) forums wherein worried mothers wondered how late was too late to breastfeed and c) a hoax campaign against breastfeeding listed on snopes.

    Lauren: assertion that a mother’s intentions must never be questioned….I’m extremely skeptical of this overarching extension of goodwill to all women forever in the name of breastfeeding.

    If you could just cite the comment stating this? Because this accusation has been made a number of times now, and yet nobody ever seems to quote or provide a number reference for the comment in which somebody said “Never question a mother’s intentions about anything” or “supporting breastfeeding means extending goodwill to all women forever.” Certainly, if you see a breastfeeding mother abusing a child, or are told by a breastfeeding child that it is being abused, by all means, notify the proper authorities. However, breastfeeding itself is not evidence of abuse, even if you think the child who is nursing should have been weaned by this age. If you see a woman breastfeeding and having a screaming, wild orgasm of the sort that would obviously scar a child, then yes, that would be a problem. Given that not one person has provided a real-life example of this, it’s not something I can work up much concern over.

    Lauren: it’s unrealistic to assume that sexual abuse and breastfeeding don’t ever and have not ever coexisted and will not ever coexist.

    Indeed. And if somebody would provide an example of sexual abuse through breastfeeding, that would be something to work with. In that case, we could go through the circumstances and the actions and start speculating on possible indications that abuse is taking place. I said this in comment #601. People can turn all kinds of behavior to terrible, abusive ends, including cuddling one’s child to sleep at night. That doesn’t mean that cuddling one’s child is an indication of abuse, though, even if the child in question is old enough that you think she should be able to get to sleep by herself. Or that the Christmas tree should have been taken down by January 6th.

    Lauren: Kristen makes an important point that when fighting anti-mother sentiments, we often argue anti-child sentiments.

    This is actually kind of refreshing. Usually I’m told that I’m far too pro-child and just don’t understaaaaand how annoying it is for adults to have to endure the existence of children in public, and what about the ones who deserve to be hit, etc. Traditionally, the move to make a sharp differentiation between what’s good for mothers (speaking generally) and what’s good for their children (speaking generally) has resulted in nothing but damage to both–removing children from mothers for the crime of being poor, for example, or thinking that if you don’t provide financial support for mothers but do for the children, the children will be just fine (AFDC was originally ADC until the 1960s or so).

  591. EG,

    The last time I checked, “if” was not an assertion that something has already happend. IF merely means if. Yet I am the one with reading comprehension problems.

    You assert that this is a boogeyman and that “if’ indeed it ever happened it would be no big deal because nobody does it. I dont follow that logic.

    Its very possible to think being sexually aroused by children is gross and to think rape and molestion is gross, it doesn’t have to be either or.

    Just like I’m pretty sure you hink it’s gross for someone to go home and watch kiddie porn, or is that ok because they arent the ones actually doing the rape themselves?

    I said we can end here not to tell you that you “can’t” respond to me anymore but to tell you that we can’t agree to anything concerning sexual and abuse and children because your idea of what constitutes abuse and harm is far more narrow than mine. I am more pro-children int hat aspect, I dont think people should be getting off watching children play in the park. In fact I am pretty damn sure if someone told me that they were watching my SONS play int he park and thought aided them in achieving an orgasm that conversation woudl end with my foot up that person’s ass, stilettos and all. We are total opposites in that aspects in that you dont even think that is gross.

  592. thinksnake: Andgiventhatthesituationdescribedinthisentirecommentthreadinwhichabreastfeedingmotherorgasmedwastodowithanewborn,everythingelseyou’vesaidonthistopicismissingthepoint.You’recomplainingaboutsomethingthatdoesnothappen.

    Andyouwonderwhypeoplethinkyouhaveissueswithreadingcomprehension?

    Yeah, Im tired of blockquoting Sandy;s comment about how it is OK for a mother to enjoy “yes sexually: the feeling of that mouth (her childs) on her nipple (the mother) and WHATEVER her reasons for breastfeeding were her own.

    So…yeah reading comprehension helps when you knwo the whole story. People are focusing on newborns when I have focused on older children this entire thread because *gasp* the OP was about OLDER CHILDREN. Imagine that!

  593. Azalea: your idea of what constitutes abuse and harm is far more narrow than mine. I am more pro-children int hat aspect, I dont think people should be getting off watching children play in the park. In fact I am pretty damn sure if someone told me that they were watching my SONS play int he park and thought aided them in achieving an orgasm that conversation woudl end with my foot up that person’s ass, stilettos and all. We are total opposites in that aspects in that you dont even think that is gross.

    I’m sorry; where exactly did EG say it wasn’t “gross” for people to get off watching children play in the park, or *anything* analogous to it? Nowhere? That’s what I thought.

  594. Azalea: You assert that this is a boogeyman and that “if’ indeed it ever happened it would be no big deal because nobody does it. I dont follow that logic.

    Given that I never said that–but do feel free to quote–your inability to understand it is not my fault. I have asserted, over and over again, that we have no examples of this happening, that spontaneous orgasm during breastfeeding an older child does not happen, and that therefore this is nothing to spend time and energy flipping out about. I will certainly reconsider this position the minute you or anybody else can produce an actual example.

    Azalea: Just like I’m pretty sure you hink it’s gross for someone to go home and watch kiddie porn, or is that ok because they arent the ones actually doing the rape themselves?

    Seeing as porn involving children inherently and necessarily requires that that the children be abused and harmed, consuming or supporting it in any way is vile. Do you actually understand the concept of harm?

    Azalea: I dont think people should be getting off watching children play in the park. In fact I am pretty damn sure if someone told me that they were watching my SONS play int he park and thought aided them in achieving an orgasm that conversation woudl end with my foot up that person’s ass, stilettos and all. We are total opposites in that aspects in that you dont even think that is gross.

    You really do have an inability to process what I write, don’t you? You will note that I specified that watching children play in the park would not be acceptable because in that case, the watcher runs the risk of making the children aware of his gaze and thus doing harm. Somebody telling you that he/she fantasizes about your sons would be making you an unwilling participant in his/her fantasy life, and so that would be doing harm.

    I’d really like to see a citation or a quotation in which I said that pedophilia isn’t “gross.” Your ability to paraphrase accurately is impressively bad. The difference between us is that I understand that “gross” is not a synonym for “abusive” or “harmful.” I find many things “gross.” Abuse and harm depend on actions, not on feelings; just as good intent does not make a bad action any less bed, bad intent does not make a good or neutral action less good or neutral. When it comes to pedophilia, I find the word “gross” to be inadequate. A waterbug caught in a glue trap is gross. A pile of vomit is gross. Picking up dog shit is gross. Pedophilia is upsetting and deeply disturbing, because the absolute best-case scenario with respect to it is that somebody lives a life of iron self-control and unhappiness, and anything short of the best case is horrifying.

    What I find interesting is that I respond to what you say, but you almost never answer any of the questions I put to you.

    Azalea: So…yeah reading comprehension helps when you knwo the whole story. People are focusing on newborns when I have focused on older children this entire thread because *gasp* the OP was about OLDER CHILDREN. Imagine that!

    The OP was not, however, about sexual arousal during breastfeeding. So your monomaniacal fixation on an imagined scenario cannot be justified by claiming that you’re sticking to the topic of the OP.

  595. EG: I’m not going to back the fuck off of people who have a working internet connection and the ability to type when every single thing they have been wrong about is easily dealt with within the first two pages of a google search, for fuck’s sake. It’s not educational elitism to lose patience with that bullshit; it’s contempt for laziness. You know how long it took me to look up the history of oxytocin? About thirty seconds, and I did so by the extremely complex method of typing “oxytocin” into google.

    You’re great at internet searches, okay. I’m also impatient with the “dudes don’t have oxytocin receptors” conspiracy theory stuff, but you have to cut people some credit before deciding they’re ignorant assholes arguing in bad faith. What I’m suggesting in the section that you’re responding to is that this thread, for vastly more people than are actively participating in it, is the ground on which they are learning about some of the finer details of breastfeeding, including but not limited to oxytocin, sexual arousal, the “hardening” of nipples, etc. Also a little troubled that the implication is that book learning takes precedent over lived experiences in this, “I quoted books at you” vs. “I have experience breastfeeding” thing that happened here.

    You know, breastfeeding is one of those odd things that for some people does come “naturally”, in that baby latches on, supply is there, and everything is successful from the get-go, while others have to study, try a thousand methods and get tons of advice before mom and baby both figure it out. It’s also an experience that a lot of women don’t think that deeply about until they’re pregnant or anticipating children or having problems with breastfeeding, so that I’m not all that surprised that people had knee jerk negative reactions to the disclosure of sexual arousal during breastfeeding, which is, again, to reinforce this idea, pretty damn common. In my experience, there are a lot of things related to childbirth, breastfeeding, and the body that inspire a lot of knee jerk squickiness. Some of it, yes, comes from sexism. Some of it springs from innocent ignorance or a simple lack of consideration. I don’t think it’s anti-feminist to deal with those feelings or acknowledge that some of these bodily changes are unwelcome, foreign, gross, or weird to some any more than it is to acknowledge that to some they are healing, positive, and affirmational. It’s all part of the reproductive experience.

  596. Well pardon me EG for saying you said “watched” if a pedaphile is masturbating to the image mental or otherwiese REGARDLESS of how long he viewed the image to fantasize about it, I think it is wrong, you do NOT. For it to be bad the child has to know they are being watched, in my opinion I dont give a flying fuck if the child knows or not, the fact that the pedaphile is seually aroused by children GROSSES ME OUT. I am unapologetic about that.

    Again, as I said your idea is more narrow than mine because for you there has to be harm. But as someone pointed out, if the child was unconscious and the pedaphile stood over them and masturbated would that constitute harm? I dont understand how YOU define harm because your definition is less inclusive than mine, I have no idea where your idea of harm starts and stops.

    The reason I got so “stuck” on my what if is because you and your band of “let’s say Azalea can’t comprehend/is ignorant when she doesn’t agree with us” followers pretty much attacked me for saying IF a woman were breastfeeding an older child for her sexual arousal that would be gross” Not one of you said Oh yeah IF that happened it would be gross BUT, no you ALL said BREASTFEEDING IS UNDER ATTACK!!!!!! OMGZ!!!!! SHE HATES BOOBS AND BABIES!!!! OMGZ!!! SHES CALLIN CPS OMG!!! SHE KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT BREATSFEEDING OR READING OMG!!!

    What really surprises me is that what started as “duh a mouth on a nipple will cause sexual arousal” to what any mouth except that of the same child that has been sucking on it and sexually arousing you in the beginning will cause sexual arousal because without the same exact level of hormones fromt he beginning, that mouth on the nipple just doesnt sexually arouse anymore. That doesn’t make sense. Older children’s mouths are closer to that of an adult’s mouth than a newborn’s is. Yet my what is is something that could never ever happen because nobody would ever ever be sexually aroused while breastfeeding their pre-school aged and older children; although this sexual arousal is “normal” in the beginning it is supposed to go away over time right? For everyone? But then again, even IF it were to happen, you’d have to ask where is the harm? The child doesn’t KNOW they are causing this sexual arousal sucking a nipple doesn’t hurt the child and breastfeeding is normal.

    Yeah..
    Chill. The. Fuck. Out.

    I have noticed that since telling people on Feministe I am a WOC I get a lot more “you’re ignorant! you can’t read!” when I disagree with people as opposed to “we’re having a misunderstanding” (which is what the fuck I said EARLY on but no one respected that and proceeded with trying to address that, nope a full on attack ensued).

    At this point you’re backtracking, but at this point I am the villain who cant read, hates boobs, babies, mothers and women in general too I suppose although I have boobs, two babies, am a woman, breastfed and can read quite well fuck you very much.

  597. Lauren: Also a little troubled that the implication is that book learning takes precedent over lived experiences in this, “I quoted books at you” vs. “I have experience breastfeeding” thing that happened here.

    I don’t think that’s what’s happened here at all. Both elements (scientific study and personal experience) have come into this discussion. Antiprincess talked about her experience of being afraid to nurse her toddler on the bus for fear someone might call CPS. Someone else described how breastfeeding was something that was attacked by their family as unnecessary from birth on. I’ve put my personal experience breastfeeding out there, which has included the feeling of sexual arousal at times. Shfree came out and said that it felt good to have her baby suckle her nipples. Women experiencing arousal during nursing, and women doing extended breastfeeding have been under quite the attack here, and when the personal experiences described aren’t good enough for some people to go on, it’s certainly useful to look at the science and to experts. It’s a pertinent fact in this discussion that a child-rearing authority as mainstream as Dr. Spock says sexual arousal during breastfeeding is completely normal and not to be fretted about. It’s relevant, in defending breastfeeding mothers, to note that a hormone involved in sexual arousal and orgasm is required for milk letdown to occur.

    What you call book learning, I call mere minutes of googling. Truly. I have actually spent much longer googling, because as I said in a previous thread, I did not find breastfeeding to be a simple or natural undertaking, and a lot of googling and advice and a book or two were required. But it doesn’t take very long to find out whether men have oxytocin receptors, or that oxytocin is secreted in quantities during both lactation and sexual response, or that oxytocin is not junk science made up by evangelicals promoting abstinence.

    In any case, no one has said that book learning is superior to anyone’s lived experience of breastfeeding. What has been said is that Azalea’s experience of breastfeeding, which did not include feelings of sexual arousal, and which she is claiming is the superior experience, is not the only experience, and scientific study and experts back up the fact that hers is not the only experience, and there is nothing bad or wrong about my experience which did include sexual arousal.

    Lauren: there are a lot of things related to childbirth, breastfeeding, and the body that inspire a lot of knee jerk squickiness. Some of it, yes, comes from sexism. Some of it springs from innocent ignorance or a simple lack of consideration. I don’t think it’s anti-feminist to deal with those feelings or acknowledge that some of these bodily changes are unwelcome, foreign, gross, or weird to some any more than it is to acknowledge that to some they are healing, positive, and affirmational.

    When it becomes anti-feminist, in my view, is when I don’t see any degree of openness to learning about other mothers’ experiences, or any interest in dealing with said reflexive squicky feelings, and the interest is only in repeatedly bashing the group of women who experience said things and fail to have the proper response (shame, switching to pumping and bottle feeding, etc, in this case).

  598. Azalea, it seems to me that everyone *does* agree that if a woman were breastfeeding an older child for purposes of her own sexual arousal (whether one calls it “getting off” or not isn’t really the issue), and otherwise would no longer be breastfeeding, it would be more than “gross”; it would be abusive and entirely unacceptable. The reason, I think, that people are reluctant to express agreement with you about that is that to do so sounds too much like an admission that this is a real problem that people need to be concerned about — as opposed to, say, being concerned about all the obstacles that so many women face (cultural and otherwise) to breastfeeding for more than minimal periods of time. And I’ve seen nothing here, in 659 comments, indicating that it is a problem, or that it’s ever actually happened. Why can’t it simply be left at that, unless or until someone provides evidence that it has actually happened, preferably at least twice (on the theory that if you find one mouse it’s just a mouse, but if you find at least two, then you have mice)? What’s the point of continuing with another 659 comments full of accusations and insults and curses?

    I was sitting in court earlier this afternoon waiting for my case to be called, and, being as unspeakably bored as I usually am in that situation, I was thinking about this thread, and the following analogy occurred to me. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t, but I think it’s worth raising. There are many people who, when laws are proposed to prohibit discrimination against trans people, in employment, housing, and/or public accommodations, will raise the spectre of “men in women’s clothing in women’s bathrooms,” and will try to get people to agree that it’s an awful thing for predatory men to dress as women and enter women’s bathrooms in order to carry out sexual assaults on women. And if people are reluctant to agree with that seemingly self-evident proposition or even to engage in that kind of discussion on its own terms, there’s a very good reason: to do so is to acknowledge, at least implicitly, that this is an actual issue to be concerned about. Which, in fact, it isn’t. Wholly apart from the fact that nobody’s ever explained how the presence or absence of such an anti-discrimination law has ever either facilitated or hindered anyone’s commission of a sexual assault inside or outside a public bathroom, wearing women’s clothing or otherwise (there’s no magic force field on bathroom doors, after all), there’s simply no evidence — none — that this awful thing has ever happened outside of the perfervid fantasies of the religious right and a certain kind of so-called radical feminist. Court records and newspapers across the country have been scoured, going back a long time (including in states and localities in which such anti-discrimination laws have existed, in some cases for many years), without locating any examples of trans women, crossdressers, or garden-variety male predators wearing women’s clothing (all of whom, of course, are the same thing to those who hate them) committing such a crime. It just doesn’t happen, and there’s no reason to admit that it’s an issue to be concerned about.

    Same thing here. I really don’t see much difference.

  599. Lauren: You’re great at internet searches, okay.

    I’m not. Ask my younger sister–I actually suck at internet research, in part because I did not grow up with the internet. So if I can find it, it’s actually quite easy. Here is what I did: I googled “oxytocin.” I googled “sexual arousal during breastfeeding.” I googled “breastfeeding sexual abuse.” This is not rocket science, and it didn’t involve high-level google skills. I literally searched for the most basic words representing the topic at hand.

    Lauren: What I’m suggesting in the section that you’re responding to is that this thread, for vastly more people than are actively participating in it, is the ground on which they are learning about some of the finer details of breastfeeding, including but not limited to oxytocin, sexual arousal, the “hardening” of nipples, etc. Also a little troubled that the implication is that book learning takes precedent over lived experiences in this, “I quoted books at you” vs. “I have experience breastfeeding” thing that happened here.

    When I address Azalea, I am responding to Azalea, and telling her she doesn’t know what she’s talking about. I am not addressing anybody else. Further, Azalea is not the only woman on this thread who had nursed babies–plenty of women who have nursed babies disagree with her, some of them on this thread, and many I have spoken to in real life. When I first began discussing this issue on this thread, I noted that I volunteered at a midwifery center for a year, saw two women (my mother and my best friend) through full-term pregnancies, accompanying them to doctor’s appointments and learning with them and suchlike, and in doing so, spoke to numerous women who were in various stages of pregnancy and motherhood, as well as doing more formal research. Here is a fact: sometimes doing book research about something will actually allow you to learn more about that thing than just doing it does. There are plenty of things I have hands-on experience with that I know jack shit about, and no amount of writing “I GET COLD SORES” in all-caps will change the fact that I know absolutely nothing about how the herpes virus works, and won’t know anything about it except my own experience of it unless I do some research.

    Furthermore, I provided links to books only after Azalea asked me to provide her with reliable citations.

    Azalea is the one who is dismissing the experiences of women who breastfeed and dare not only to have different experiences of it than she did but also, horrors, have different reactions to those experiences as “GROSS.” She’s not doing it based on book-learning; she’s doing it based on her refusal to accept any information as valid that does not match her experience.

    Lauren: I don’t think it’s anti-feminist to deal with those feelings or acknowledge that some of these bodily changes are unwelcome, foreign, gross, or weird to some any more than it is to acknowledge that to some they are healing, positive, and affirmational. It’s all part of the reproductive experience.

    Actually, I disagree. It is absolutely anti-feminist to call other women’s feelings or bodily changes foreign, gross, or weird, and to reject the idea that in fact, they’re just different from yours, and no more foreign, grosser, or weirder, than your own.

  600. Azalea: Well pardon me EG for saying you said “watched” if a pedaphile is masturbating to the image mental or otherwiese REGARDLESS of how long he viewed the image to fantasize about it

    “Watching” has nothing to do with mental images. That’s not what the word means. That’s why I didn’t use it.

    Azalea: Again, as I said your idea is more narrow than mine because for you there has to be harm. But as someone pointed out, if the child was unconscious and the pedaphile stood over them and masturbated would that constitute harm? I dont understand how YOU define harm because your definition is less inclusive than mine, I have no idea where your idea of harm starts and stops.

    My idea of harm is more narrow than yours because for me there has to be harm? Yes, well, you’ve got me there. As far as I’m concerned, for something to count as harm, there has to be harm involved. Whereas as far as you’re concerned, it counts as harm if somebody thinks bad thoughts. OK. I agree. That is a fundamental difference of opinion. I’m thinking bad thoughts right now. Hell, I’ve been thinking bad thoughts all my life. I guess I’m just not very good at it, because in the three and a half decades I’ve been alive, absolutely none of the people I’ve thought bad things about has shown any sign of being hurt, or even affected, by the things I thought. Perhaps after all this time, though, many of my high-school classmates have been torn to pieces by wild beasts. I guess I could use my amazing google skills to find out.

    I’m curious about under what circumstances you imagine a pedophile masturbating over an unconscious child. Are we talking about a sleeping child? The pedophile’s own child? A child in a coma in a hospital? In no situation that I can imagine, does masturbating over an unconscious child not demonstrate a clear disrespect for the child’s boundaries (what is this person doing in the child’s bedroom/hospital room? did he/she just go in there to masturbate? if so, then there is a clear violation of privacy; I’d say there’s a violation of privacy no matter what, unless the person has had the child’s permission to go into his/her space and masturbate, and clearly gaining such permission is impossible without causing harm to the child, so there’s that). It also demonstrates that the masturbator prioritizes his/her own orgasms over preserving the child’s peace of mind, as there is nothing guaranteeing that the child will not wake up, unless the child has been sedated or drugged or something, and obviously, drugging a kid so you can jerk off over him/her would be harm.

    So if you could flesh out this scenario, I could give you a more definite answer. In no scenario that I can imagine, however, would no harm be done.

    Azalea: The reason I got so “stuck” on my what if is because you and your band of “let’s say Azalea can’t comprehend/is ignorant when she doesn’t agree with us” followers pretty much attacked me

    I have followers! I’ve always wanted followers! And not just followers–a band of followers! Like Robin Hood! This is all very flattering and exciting, because all along, I was thinking of myself as Sandy’s follower.

    But OK, I’ll call your bluff. IF a woman WERE to breastfeed her child in order to gain sexual kicks, that WOULD be disturbing. FORTUNATELY, we don’t have any reason to believe that such a thing has happened, and I personally doubt that breastfeeding would be the ONLY problematic point of interaction between that mother and her child. HOWEVER, since we don’t have any indication that such a thing is AT ALL in play, we can now move on to discussing something that DOES happen.

    Also, it would be disturbing and GROSS if nursing mothers, while cooking dinner for their husbands/wives/older children/anybody else were to squirt breastmilk into the pot. Hey, how do you know it doesn’t happen regularly? Mothers can be abusive and unhygienic and abusive. Nursing mothers should not be cooking unless it is absolutely necessary.

    Now it’s your turn. I’ve acknowledged that, indeed, this completely imaginary possibility would be disturbing if it came to pass. Now you acknowledge that you have no reason whatsoever to think that it does, or that sexual arousal during breastfeeding as anything whatsoever to do with extended breastfeeding.

    You might also want to acknowledge that making your comments about GROSSNESS in a thread where threats of calling CPS and accusations of pedophilia were flying and then comparing breastfeeding mothers to rapists, torturers, etc. just might have influenced how you came across.

    Azalea: What really surprises me is that what started as “duh a mouth on a nipple will cause sexual arousal” to what any mouth except that of the same child that has been sucking on it and sexually arousing you in the beginning will cause sexual arousal because without the same exact level of hormones fromt he beginning, that mouth on the nipple just doesnt sexually arouse anymore.

    Because suckling on the breast, from what I have been given to understand, is not actually the same motion as that of a lover who is trying to be sexually stimulating, so once the hormone surge dies, it’s really not the same thing, would be my guess. But let me point out that the comment about the shape of the mouth changing and the concomitant change in pleasant nipple sensations originated not with me, but with a woman who was not you, but who has nursed children. So if you want to tell her that her experience “doesn’t make sense,” I shall let the two of you fight it out, and leave my “book learning” out of it.

    Here’s another reason: you get used to things and they cease to be new and confusing sensations, and you start to ignore them. And here’s another reason: mothers are, by and large, not actually attracted to their own children, so once the hormone surges level out, their sexual response goes back to what it would be to their own children in any other situation.

    Azalea: At this point you’re backtracking, but at this point I am the villain who cant read, hates boobs, babies, mothers and women in general too I suppose although I have boobs, two babies, am a woman, breastfed and can read quite well fuck you very much.

    Please quote and demonstrate where I have backtracked. I have never accused you of hating boobs, babies, mothers, or women. I have accused you of refusing to accept the validity of any experience but your own, and I stand by that. I also stand by my assessment of your reading comprehension when it comes to what I write.

    Now, just to go back to me and my followers who immediately jumped on you, I just went back and did a control-f search. I made my first comment at #136 and didn’t respond to anything you said until #305, at which point I address your radical misreading of antiprincess’s comment at #289, in which she said she wished she could nurse her three-year-old son on the bus without worrying about strangers being jerks about it, and you…somehow thought she meant that her son was a tyrant and she was unable to say no to him. So if you were immediately jumped on, I’m afraid I cannot take credit for that. Nor do I have a super-villain lair in which I sit at the center of a table of communicators, dispatching my many minions to comment threads. So there’s that, as well.

  601. Donna L: There are many people who, when laws are proposed to prohibit discrimination against trans people, in employment, housing, and/or public accommodations, will raise the spectre of “men in women’s clothing in women’s bathrooms,” and will try to get people to agree that it’s an awful thing for predatory men to dress as women and enter women’s bathrooms in order to carry out sexual assaults on women. And if people are reluctant to agree with that seemingly self-evident proposition or even to engage in that kind of discussion on its own terms, there’s a very good reason: to do so is to acknowledge, at least implicitly, that this is an actual issue to be concerned about.

    Yes. This crystallizes my feelings on this non-issue perfectly. It would certainly be terrible for men to hide in the women’s room and assault women. And it would certainly be terrible for a mother to sexually abuse her child. But the one has nothing to do with transpeople’s rights and the other has nothing to do with breastfeeding…unless you think that non-predatory men will be driven so wild with the passage of a non-discrimination act that they will be driven to sexual assault, or that perfectly loving, non-abusive mothers to whom it would otherwise never occur to molest their children are driven to such orgasmic frenzies by nursing that they magically turn into child abusers.

    Those ideas are so obviously absurd that they do not deserve the dignity of a reply.

    Although I maintain that nursing mothers should not be allowed to prepare food. They could, at any moment, squirt breastmilk into the food and serve it unsuspecting hungry friends/family members. I mean, I know at least one woman who did purposefully squirt her husband when he was annoying her, so it could happen, and how do we know it doesn’t, and we as feminists should not assume that nursing mothers are inherently committed to hygiene and safe food preparation.

Comments are currently closed.