Empowerment: Women Now Choose Objectification Over ‘Creepy’ Breastfeeding
posted at 12:34 pm on June 30, 2010 by Lori Ziganto
[ Feminist Nonsense ]
Originally posted at NewsReal:
You’ve come a long way, baby. But make sure you keep babies off my “fun bags.” Or so says Kathryn Blundell, editor at the parenting magazine, Mother & Baby.
Under the headline “I formula fed. So what?”, Kathryn Blundell says in this month’s Mother & Baby that she bottlefed her child from birth because “I wanted my body back. (And some wine)… I also wanted to give my boobs at least a chance to stay on my chest rather than dangling around my stomach.”
She goes on to say: “They’re part of my sexuality, too – not just breasts, but fun bags. And when you have that attitude (and I admit I made no attempt to change it), seeing your teeny, tiny, innocent baby latching on where only a lover has been before feels, well, a little creepy.”
She concedes that “there are all the studies that show [breastfeeding] reduces the risk of breast cancer for you, and stomach upsets and allergies for your baby. But even the convenience and supposed health benefits of breast milk couldn’t induce me to stick my nipple in a bawling baby’s mouth.”
Thanks bunches, ’sexual empowerment’! You’ve now made nurturing a child “creepy”. Many websites, like Lactivist, are upset over the negative, and misleading, message that the above article sends about breastfeeding and the benefits thereof. That is an issue; breastfeeding is frowned upon far too often and many women succumb to the pressures of family or work, and wean their babies earlier than they actually want to.
I breast fed my daughter for nearly two years. She weaned herself but, admittedly, I would have likely cut her off at age two regardless. Because, unfortunately, if one breast feeds older babies, they are often looked upon as if they should be wearing Birkenstocks, making tie dyes, and following around Lilith Fair in a volkswagen van.
But, there is another issue here that I find equally disturbing. What bothers me immensely is the fact that women now see their breasts as “fun bags” and as something meant for “lovers” only and not as a part of nurturing and motherhood. This concept epitomizes the very worst in female and motherhood degradation and it shows just how much damage the “sexual empowerment” fallacy, pushed by the Leftist Femisogynists, has caused. The thought that women should exist solely as sex objects is now rampant — even amongst women themselves.
The theory behind this whole article, in a woman’s parenting magazine, is that motherhood and nurturing a child is, as they always claim, a punishment. Something that results in the cramping of one’s “empowered” style. Sex is super fun! Motherhood? Not so much. Also, creepy. And anyone who says otherwise is a nutty wing nut liar!
They have ended up diminishing women and womanhood itself with these constant attempts to demonize motherhood and to try to turn it into a punishment and a detriment to one’s happiness. Instead of realizing that being a life bearing nurturer is one of the very best things about being a woman and is an attribute in and of itself, they constantly try to take that away, all in the name of some delusional perceived equality via sexual empowerment.
They’ve dehumanized women, as Kathryn Blundell’s article shows, by encouraging women to focus on sexual “equality”. That has now removed any requirement that women be treated as something other than a sexual toy – even by themselves. And now, this has culminated in the idea that being a sex object is more important than nurturing a child.
But oh-how-wrong they are. Guess what? Those concepts aren’t mutually exclusive. A woman can be a mother and a sexy and sexual being. A woman can nurture and breast feed her child, bonding in a way that brings so much joy that it honestly cannot be fully described, and still be sexually enticing. Considering yourself, and your body, as only a vehicle for sexual amusements is not empowering; it’s oppressive. Resenting the natural functions of your female body is not empowering; it’s enslaving.
Breast feeding isn’t creepy. What is truly creepy is when women dehumanize themselves and demean motherhood to the point where they see their breasts as nothing but “fun bags.” Not creepy, and actually empowering, is embracing all aspects of your feminity, including being a life bearing nurturer. That is sexy. Moms can multi-task, you know. We can be barefoot, in the kitchen and still practice getting pregnant.
—–
Follow Lori on Twitter and read more of her NewsReal posts.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Excellent column, Lori.
Daggett on June 30, 2010 at 12:52 PM
Thank you!
Lori Ziganto on June 30, 2010 at 12:59 PM
Thanks for that, Lori.
A: bottle feeding won’t “save” her from gravities/damage wrought by pregnancy
B: Just me and my lack of empathy, I guess, but I can’t understand how anyone with half a brain cell could maintain a notion that breasts are not for babies. #majorrealitydisconnect
C. That piece makes me ashamed for bottle-feeders, and I think bottle feeding is ok if that’s what you want or need to do.
SarahW on June 30, 2010 at 1:15 PM
I was able to eat 4,000 calories a day while nursing and donating milk, and maintained my pre-pregnancy weight of 115 lbs.
So even if the argument against nursing is based on some selfish idea of wanting one’s body back, it’s still a stupid and inaccurate argument to make. Breasts are sexy because they signal fertility, and the only reason there is sensation in nipples to make “funbags” fun is the same reason that sex is enjoyable– to encourage humans to want to engage in it.
Nothing is more empowering for a woman than expressing her womanhood. If we aren’t supposed to celebrate the things that we can do that men can’t, what’s the point in being female at all?
RachDubya on June 30, 2010 at 1:25 PM
Dude?
Count to 10 on June 30, 2010 at 2:16 PM
The best comment over at The Guardian made this succinct point-
Has anyone told Kathryn Blundell which part of her body that teeny, tiny innocent popped out of before it started perving at her fun bags?
Only 1 in 100 women in the UK breast-feeds past six months- and yet somehow the other 99 are intimidated by this tiny minority? Patently ridiculous.
It’s pretty clear though that this woman has some issues that she needs to work out.
Jay Mac on July 1, 2010 at 6:45 AM
Years ago, before I even thought of having kids, I read an article in a magazine that quoted a woman as saying (and I paraphrase) “breasts are meant for looking good in tight tops, not feeding babies”. True story. I was a little stunned by this because, um, NO. Looking good in tight tops is a bonus, not the intended purpose.
Don’t get me wrong, I have not and would never breast feed (just not my thing)and of course them kids of mine are just fine. But this kind of attitude is not only infuriating, it can be downright harmful. When you disparage women for possessing the natural (and miraculous) ability to nurture their young, you have the potential to create a situation where it’s simply “not done” anymore. What then of people in economically challenged circumstances (formula is expensive) or preemie babies for whom mother’s milk is (IMO) essential? When my sister had her twinners, the lactation consultant (or “breast feeding nazi” as we called her jokingly) convinced her it was the right thing to do. She only did it for the first few weeks but has never regretted it.
I LOVE the term “femisogynist”…so, so true!
WaltzingMtilda on July 1, 2010 at 8:48 PM
Also? I absolutely HATE the term “fun bags”. It makes me think of big saggy sacks of flour meant for punching. Yep…reaaal sexy.
WaltzingMtilda on July 1, 2010 at 8:51 PM
Apparently Kathryn Blundell believes the female nipple should be as vestigial as the male nipple, despite the latter having no functional purpose and the former having a bleeding obvious one.
Why do you think your boobs get bigger during pregnancy Kathryn? It’s not because they boost self-image temporarily after the baby drops. Though as a guy I’m completely out of my element here but umm… doesn’t the pressure eventually hurt if you don’t release mother’s milk?
BKennedy on July 2, 2010 at 2:15 AM
I love boobs as much as the next guy, but even I know that I’m playing with borrowed time with things that ain’t made for me.
My wife says yes. She had to pump when it got bad.
uknowmorethanme on July 2, 2010 at 9:30 AM