Newsweek ties women down with black silk scarves. Time does it with overgrown babies. This weeks’ image of hot California mom (who looks a little like Kathryn Hahn) live-breast-feeding her son who will turn 4 in June surely makes Tina Brown wish she’d thought of it first.
There are many aspects to its genius: The mom and son’s twin impassive expressions, with just the teeniest hint of So What? F—- Y—. The mom’s blond highlights and skinny jeans, an urban packaging meant to prove once and for all that home schooling and breast-feeding a kid even though he’s old enough to make his own breakfast is not just for the yahoos who can’t afford milk. (Tina did this story on urban attachment freaks first, by the way, she just didn’t think of the image.)
The image is the natural next step in the hot naked-mama photos that have become an obligatory part of a celebrity career path, (Claudia Schiffer, Britney Spears, Jessica Simpson) and makes Angelina Jolie, who allowed herself to be photographed breast-feeding a mere infant, look like a wimp. Then there is the “Game of Thrones” aspect to the photo. Bounty of milk, mother “love,” incest, it’s all lurking in there.
The mom is not a model but one Jamie Lynne Grumet, a 26-year-old who lives in L.A. with her two sons and writes the blog “I Am Not the Babysitter.” Grumet assures us in this Q-and-A that she is not interested in judging anyone, but her blog’s name alone is so obnoxious that I don’t care to delve further. I will just pull out a few choice sentences from the Q-and-A, so you get a sense of what demographic sandbox we are playing in:
“My husband is so great — he would bring the equipment in and actually do the pumping while I was asleep. It was a full family effort.”
“My mother breast-fed me until I was six years old until I self-weaned.”
I have rehearsed my objections to the breastfeeding cult at great length in the past, in my Atlantic story, “The Case Against Breast-Feeding,” and more broadly against attachment parenting in a recent Slate discussion of Elisabeth Badinter’s book, “The Conflict.”
There is the very basic objection that it is virtually impossible to do what the advocates say is best for your baby and have a job, which the vast majority of American mothers have these days. In the Time magazine story, which is largely a profile of attachment guru William Sears, he answers this objection by arguing that attachment parenting is perfect for working mothers because as soon as they get home they can instantly rebond with their babies by strapping them up in a sling and then sleeping with them the whole night. Voila! Instant maternal bliss!
But this leads to my second and more profound problem with it. Attachment parenting demands not just certain actions you take with your baby but also certain emotional states to accompany those actions. So, it’s not just enough to breast-feed but one has to experience “breast-feeding induced maternal nirvana.” And it’s not enough to snuggle — you have to snuggle enough to achieve a spiritual high. As Badinter has said, once women were just expected to tolerate their babies, Betty Draper style, but now they are expected to experience “jouissance,” loosely translated as “orgasm.” And this is what makes the movement truly oppressive.
Hanna Rosin is the author of “God’s Harvard: A Christian College on a Mission To Save the Nation” and a contributing editor at the Atlantic.



I’m sorry, but a photo like this on the cover of a national magazine is just wrong.
The good old United States of America where people have an issue with an exposed breast. In a lot of other countries nobody would give the cover a second glance.
Kevin, I don’t have a problem with breast feeding, naked breasts or nudity at all. But clearly, this image was selected for the Wow! factor to sell magazines. A 4 year old breast feeding? Really? Not the norm, and probably not normal, certainly not natural. Our closest primate cousins don’t do it, early modern humans probably didn’t nurse for 4 years.
My reaction would be the same if they did a story on siblings who lived together, dressed alike, worked together, etc. in the name of “closeness”. Not normal behavior, only engaged in by a tiny minority.
Sort of like a gay parade. Most gays are just regular folks who dress like us, work in jobs like us, want the same thigs as us except in who they take to bed. But almost invariably the ones who get their pictures in the papers are the drag queens, masochists/sadists or other un-regular gays.
So yes, I have a problem with the image (probably better described as a problem with Time editors), but only because it is outrageous because of Time’s effort to portray the fringe as normal behavior for a mom with a 4 yr. old.
Yellow journalism lives. I haven’t bought Time in a while, and now will probably never purchase it again. Has it been bought by News Corp?
Women have been breast feeding children his age for a very, very, very long time. You state it is not the norm but that is only your opinion. If that image is going to stop you from ever buying a Time magazine again I feel bad for you.
Oh don’t feel bad. For a magazine to descend to this level to sell mags is like the naked woman on the inside page of that former rag of Murdoch’s “The News of the World”. It probably means the standards are quite eroded.
And yes, I am certain that a few women throughout history have been breat feeding some kids for that long, maybe longer. Is it harmful? Not for me to say. Is it necessary? Probably not.
Did you know that the ability to process lactose starts to decrease in most humans about the age of 2? Most humans outside of Northern Europe and India lose the ability to process milk sugar as adults. Sub-Saharan Africans and American Indians are particularly lactose intolerant. I take that as a clue that humans were meant to be weaned starting about 2. By 5, most humans are lactose intolerant.
Likely as not, if you graphed the level of lactase (the enzyme that allows you to digest milk sugar), it would show a steep decline by the age of 4. From that, one can assume that nursing at 4 is not the norm since human genetics does not allow for it unless you are from N. Europe, Arabia, India and a very few other places.
So although you might think it is opinion that breast feeding at 4 is not the norm, human genetics suggests otherwise.
As an aside, I remember the affront American charity orgs registered in the 60s when we sent powdered milk to Peru to the native peoples. They used it to whitewash their homes and fences. The Americans did not understand that powdered milk upset the stomachs of the people. Except for infants (who were breast fed), the milk was useless, so they used it for decoration. Now we know better. So should this publicity seeking woman.
Not to worry… I stopped buying TIME many years ago.
Once in awhile, I become convinced of my earlier decision when TIME is all one can read waiting for a doctor.
I wonder, are doctor’s waiting rooms their largest outlet these days?
Drinking cows milk is not natural either! We are the only mammal to drink the breast milk of another mammal! So, should we all stop drinking cows milk?
Most humans do not drink cow’s milk. Just because it is widespread in this country, doesn’t mean the rest of the world does it too.Drinking any milk after 5 is a property of a minority of the human race. And why do you think it is not natural to drink milk? As omnivores, humans have learned to get nutrition from lots of odder sources. Cow’s blood (the Masai), fermented fish (hakarl in Iceland) and svio. (Don’t google that one unless you have already eaten, and then only if you have a strong stomach. http://www.islands.com/article/Travel-Tales-Vikings-in-Vogue)
Humans are also the only creatures with a telescope and religion. Humans are also the only creature that imprisons other species as well as its own. Some things we do are unique, but not unnatural. Some are unnatural, meaning that nature didn’t allow for it. Most humans have a hard time digesting milk by age 4, which means our genes did not plan for it to happen on a regular basis. On that basis, it probably is not the norm.
“lots of odder sources”,you crack me up. Thank.
Wow, that was very thought provoking. Well said!
Never had any trouble digesting milk. My older brother used to drink a couple of gallons a week. Last I knew he still was and he’s 70.
Yes, we should. Milk protein (casein) causes cancer and other health problems.
Yes
Actually, in some places like Germany and E. Europe, children will breast feed until adolescence; usually when they start to teeth, it becomes uncomfortable. They even sell breast milk ice cream in London. There is a booming market in breast milk sales to men for a variety of health related reasons.
OG, something in your post gives me whiplash. You say they nurse until the have teeth, but then also say they nurse until adolescence. Don’t most kids over there get teeth by 2 or 3?
And for me, this isn’t about breasts, breast milk or breast feeding. It is about the poor taste of the editors and the whacky woman who chooses to breast feed long after the kid forms memories and the child has other good sources of nutrition.
—-
ORGANICGARDEBER, you wrote:”Actually, in some places like Germany and E. Europe, children will breast feed until adolescence; usually when they start to teeth”
Adolescence is generally thought of as from about 12 to 18 years of age. You state that they nurse until adolescence, then state that they nurse until they get teeth. Therefore, I came to assume that the people you refer to (E. Europeans) did not get teeth until 12 years of age. Therefore the whiplash. What part am I missing?
—-
Oops. Sorry. You are right. I’ll insert the title of the right person before my post.
(Insert the emoticon for embarrassment here.)
++++
Which ancient civilations?
….
I suspect you’ll find the #1 reason for long-term breast feeding was to reduce the frequency of pregnancy in these “primitive cultures”.
Poor taste of editors???
Do you live in a cave…. this is exactly why editors get paid the big bucks! There are no ethics, no moral codes, only artfully presented outrage, esp. among print media with declining revenues. That was ART not porn!
Watched Rhianna doing a ‘crotch’ grab on a Sat. Night live show last weekend repeatedly while she sang. …another line crossed, but no outrage.Teething is a major reason to wean children, but for people who continue it can be painful at times.
Excuse me. Rhianna’s behavior is an example of good taste?
The cover photo might be art to some, but then all photos must be art to those people. My bad.
I recall reading an article that explained the population explosion in Africa. It seems that the tribes of Africa had a tradition where mothers that were nursing didn’t have sex with their husbands. Then the missionaries from Europe entered the picture and showed them that they could feed their babies by bottle and not have to nurse. The nursing ususally lasted around 3 to 4 years. Now the mothers were free to have children much faster.
Best post I have seen to date.
This is not “another” country, and it’s a “little” different when you have a child that age suckling your breast for all to look at!—But then, we don’t have to buy the magazine, as I’m sure you would remind us!
Sadly “this” country has way to many sexual hang ups and that is a huge part of the problem.
So you are admitting this woman’s practices are just sexual. Sex with a child, even your own, is a crime isn’t it?
—-
No, I am not. I am stating that a lot of people see it as a sexual act when it is not.
What picture are you looking at? I looked and didn’t see any reporductive organs exposed. Or are you seeing pictures in your own mind.
Nothing to do with exposed breast, all to do with narcissistic people and the weird/ perverse stuff they do when they become parents.
People still purchase Time magazine? It’s half a step above a coloring book.
It’s all about selling magazines. The more outrageous the topic, the more magazines they sell !
brings special meaning now, when i order my double double at tim’s
Yep. It seems more like child porn being passed off as an innocent mom breast feeding.
Yes because feeding your child as nature designed them to be feed is just evil and must be stopped. I have always found this odd. In many other places in the word this is done in public without a thought. Even in America depending on where you live this may be done in the open. The American “fear” of the site of a person nude or doing something natural like breastfeeding or urinating is just nonsensical to me. Just part of our massive preoccupation about what others are doing I guess.
Did you bring enough to share with the rest of us?
Ms. Rosen seems awfully angry.
Exactly my impression when reading this.
Look at the end of the article.She’s written about a Christian college.
Wonder what he’s going to grow up to be…….? And I don’t understand why the article had to have an F—- Y—– cleverly woven into it’s wording. Just weird attention- getting-marketing……..sort of a modern twist to the “Mad Men” show on TV.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXEvIb1YEgM&feature=related
Looks like a woman… but the brazen Mz. surely is no lady. As for Time, well… each passing year reveals a noticeable dearth of substance and subscribers… and gentlemen who once reported the news.
Yep. Just what one wants to see on the cover
of a magazine. Now if some pedaphile had that
on their computer it would be considered child
porn. But since it is Time, it is okay.
Why would a pedophile like this photo?
The child is fully dressed and the women is not showing anymore than you could see at the beach and is covered up more than most women on the cover of a magazine.
So you really think this is an acceptable photo depicting
a 4 yr old child that should be shown on a supposed national
magazine? And do you really think it makes a difference to some
weirdo if a child is clothed or not?
so we all run in fear because a photo might arouse some weirdo– a little more censorship anyone?
So you really think that this photo is anything like child pornography? Should we never depict a child on a magazine cover, *ever*, for fear of arousing some fetishist?
It may or may not be acceptable, that is up to the person looking at it, but it is by no means pornographic nor a turn on for pedophiles. A pedophile is more likely going to look at boy or girls scout brochure, or a cheerleader catalog or other child related magazines.
And yes I co think it makes a difference whether the child is dressed or half dressed. If it didn’t then all pictures of children would have to be banned.
Breast feeding is for babies. That boy is no baby
And cow’s milk is for baby cows. And yet. . .
So eggs are for chickens to sit on, and maple syrup is for maple trees? Are we supposed to be breast fed all out lives?
Can all ‘natural’ things be photographed like this for Time? Since it is a ‘natural’ occurance, having sex is also suitable for a magazine cover? Haven’t seen a Time cover of Hustler-goings-on, maybe that is for next month.
nothing wrong with breast feeding come on now the kid is what 6?
nothing wrong with breast feeding come on now the kid is what 6?
If we look at other mammals that feed their young in a similar fashion we will find that it is quite common in nature for offspring to nurse at least off and on up to an equivalent age far beyond what Americans think of as the normal age to wean a child.
Nutritionally mother’s milk is the best food to develop a healthy child.
Examples? All the animals I can think of are weaned not long after they can process solid food. Lions for less than 2 years, Orangutans usually for less than 4 years. Breastfeeding for 4 years in a human is a bit much. Not illegal, not perverted, but a bit much.
The animals you mention mature faster than humans. Try comparing equivalent maturity or % of expected total lifespan rather than age in years or months.
Let’s see, what are your examples?
Orangutans are near humans in lifespan and are some of our closest biological relatives.
Elephants, which can outlive humans, start to wean at one year of age. They can nurse for much longer, but gestation is 2 years, and weaning is complete if mom gets another calf after 2 or 3 years.
You wrote “If we look at other mammals that feed their young in a similar fashion
we will find that it is quite common in nature for offspring to nurse at
least off and on up to an equivalent age far beyond what Americans
think of as the normal age to wean a child.”
Now I want to know which animals you look at, and I still wonder which ones they are.
“In a group of 21 species of non-human primates (monkeys and apes) studied by Holly Smith, she found that the offspring were weaned at the same time they were getting their first permanent molars. In humans, that would be: 5.5-6.0 years. ”
http://www.kathydettwyler.org/detwean.html
What is the big deal? This woman is breastfeeding – so what? Breastfeeding is NOT pornographic, it is the natural way to feed your child. Why is the writer of this article so angry?
What if the child was ,say 12 or 13? What if the “child” was not her own?I’m sure there are benefits for adult’s,what if it was me there having a quick snack?
Why is it that liberals today take something that is natural and conman sense and pervert it once they “discover” it? The prevalence of Narcissism in these folks is unbelievable. One of these Einsteins realizes that carrots grow in dirt, manage not to kill a few seeds, and all of the sudden they are at the forefront of the “Organic revolution”.
Heres the thing,Militant looking mother, we all know the benefits of Breast feeding.You didn’t discover it and we could careless about your need for attention. You are not ahead of your time or an innovator in anyway, now knock that kid off your breast , give him a yogurt then run off to your Zumba class.
///
the support/enabling of this behavior is another perverse aspect of all of this.
—-
This isn’t a liberal/conservative issue. It’s about the choices parents make, that’s it.
Your “what ifs” are irrelevant anyway. What if the child was 23?! What if the mother never fed the child at all?! What if they reversed roles and the child breast fed her own mother?
Only “irrelevant” if you have blinders on.
If 4 or 5 years old is ok with you, then is 11 or 12? Not an irrelevant question, just one you would rather not answer.
The child is not 12 or 13, and the child is her child, so all your what ifs are meaningless.
But as for the rest of your comment, I agree with you. A little humility in life is not a bad thing.
Two reasons I brought up the ages 12 or 13. First one is I can show examples of woman who are doing this with 12 and 13 year year old children. Two, is that still hunky dory , or have we now pushed even your comfort zone to far?
Eating placenta soup is practiced right here in the good old USA also.
Yup, I would welcome them to use that as part of their argument .
Since I don’t know her, I will pass on the urge to discuss her politics, the kid’s diet and her Zumba classes. Since you either know her personally or are all knowing, feel free to lambast and link her behavior to a whole lot of other people you don’t know.
I don’t know you, but in the same vein, I can see that somebody died and made you God.
Look at jenrn47’s post about the T.V interview, will save me some typing. I have God things to do.
After watching an interview with the cover subject on television, I could only conclude that her actions have nothing to do with feeding her son. They’re all about feeding her ego. It was fascinating to hear her remarks — without any provocation — focus on how her breastfeeding a 4-year-old does not impact her relationship with her husband. I heard a lot of “me” and not about the “he” who is her 4-year-old son. Can you say narcissm?
The cover was featured on an AM news program and had to be pixeled.That should tell you something.
I don’t have an issue with the content of the photograph per se; honestly, I don’t see a need to pixilate it. The image is supposed to sell magazines and is no doubt achieving its purpose. Personally, I wouldn’t buy it. But I don’t appreciate the media pretending that this is about parenting. It’s about one woman’s self-obsession and the media cashing in on it. That’s a pretty old story. What perturbs me is the potential damage she is doing to her child by exploiting him.
Very well said.Andy Warhol was right about the 15 minutes.
When I saw this cover, I thought it was a comment on why gay marriage isn’t equal to traditional marriage….somehow I can’t see how Adam & Steve will manage breastfeeding in their ‘marriage’. ……maybe the writer is gay, and a bit jealous?
That you could drag something as important as gay marriage into this debate speaks more to your own issues.
Some people see gay people as the reason behind everything strange. The modern equivalent of “The devil made me do it.”
Didn’t take long for the pervs to show up
Look at me …Look at Me!!
Another Narcissist looking for an excuse for a foot stomping tantrum. Just looking for attention.I cant wait to see how this kid ends up.
Breastfeeding alone is not pornographic but there comes a point where the child is too old and it just gets disturbing.
Disturbing to who? You or the child and mother?
That kid is going to be teased all through school. How inconsiderate of that mother and Time magazine.
oh please, that kid teased all through school? care to bet most won’t remember this in 2 weeks
Aside from the obvious anger, did anyone else find this story confusing? Very poorly written. The woman has the right to breast feed as long as she wants.
I couldn’t make heads or tails of it either. And I don’t really care to take the time to re-read it.
I have known several moms who breast fed till their kids were two or three and then the kids usually get tired of it. In America, because of the taboo nature of sex there is less tolerance to the practice, in other countries not so much, countries where not nearly as many kids develop food allergies, which is now about one in three in this country.
Yes she can. And old people can run around naked, but who wants to see it on the cover of a nationally distributed magazine.
Not everything done and seen in this world deserves front cover status. That includes my naked body. My wife is kind and says nothing, but if I put it up for the whole world to see as good looking, I deserve the condemnation I would get.
Didn’t read the story, I refuse to grant it legitimacy in my world by doing so. Spent my time reading this:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120510225001.htm
Breast feeding a 4 year old is freaky. Women can allow their body hair to grow uninhibited and dye it a rainbow of colors, but why is it news, normal or something entertained as rational.
Another case was the “Octomon”. Octomom had the right to do what she did, but when she goes public and embraces the fame that comes with it, she better be ready to endure the flip side of that coin too. Ditto for this human on the cover of this desperate magazine.
Octomom cost taxpayers gigantic amounts.She had NO right to make herself out as a freak at taxpayer’s expense.Same thing with the Duggars who claim there is no population problem.
I agree, to a point.
Octomom IS costing taxpayers. Duggars are an embarrassment to humanity.
They remind me of the woman who was anti-development who was interviewed. She was from MD or VA and was protesting the development of a dairy farm into homes and stores. She said that when she and her 6 kids moved out there, they could hear the cows mooing, etc. Her and 6 kids. Wonder why they were developing that farm?
On the other hand, even trying to limit tax deductions for big families is political suicide. Trying to limit family size brings out the big guns from the Catholic Church, among others. Education is the only answer it seems, and even that is under fire from the Right.
I wish you weren’t right.My brother is childless and nobody does a cover story on how he’s getting screwed every week.The CC has no business in politics since they are nothing but a pedophile RICO group.Obama’s DOJ should go right after them.He won’t.Bad mistake.
I saw a story where a woman sued about problems with a pig farm near her.Admittedly pig farms may not be ideal BUT she had lived there four years and the farm had been there for nearly 100.She lost in court.
“Breast feeding a 4 year old is freaky. Women can allow their body hair
to grow uninhibited and dye it a rainbow of colors, but why is it news,
normal or something entertained as rational.”
Well said!
The moral fiber of some folks is going down the drain. What would the picture be if it was a gay father and son? you fill in the blanks while i get sick.
You have quite the imagination.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/09/homophobia-homosexuality-gay_n_1412846.html
“Homophobics should consider a little self-reflection, suggests a new
study finding those individuals who are most hostile toward gays and
hold strong anti-gay views may themselves have same-sex desires, albeit
undercover ones.”
This is a breastfeeding picture. Men don’t breastfeed. Grow up.
No they don’t, but when they do it’s pretty funny….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OkcucXIuVI
Then I’d imagine the father would be holding a bowl in one hand and a spoon in the other.
They put it on the cover to sell them.
Let me know where that kid is in 20 years. I really wanna know…
Don’t think you’ll have to look far to find him. He’ll still be firmly attached to Mommy’s apron strings.
Kind of my point.
_.-._
“Her choice, her child” may be correct but it really doesn’t need to be demonstrated on the cover of a magazine. Personally, I think there’s something sick about it. I am offended by the blanked-out expletive the author of this article used. Just one more reason I don’t subscribe to the print version of the BDN.
…
It couldn’t be breastfeeding – the kid’s too old – so maybe it’s kiddy porn.
YUP…Thats the most poorly written article Ive read in a long time…I feel dumber just trying to make sense of it. Whats with the F— Y– in a newspaper article? Come on BDN. Show some class.
Oh, good lord. Get a grip, girl. Raise your children the way you want to and other mothers will do their own thing too. How about that?
Some day this kid will be in high school and die of embarrassment when his friends get hold of this picture.
Time a failing mag is selling them this month. Job done.
Time is no longer relevant to modern culture. There was always more good information in Newsweek anyway. Time has about as much current value as the Saturday Evening Post.
Newsweek also has a child on its cover this week.
Headline”When I grow up I’m going to weigh 300 lbs-HELP!”
Sadly I saw a young girl in the store this week who looked like she was almost too fat to walk.No surprise her parents were huge also-and mom was in a motorized wheelchair!
What if it turns out she’s been dry for a long time now? That would change the opinion of some people.
/’/’/’/
If Hes Old Nuff To Chew His Food Get Him Off The Boob!! The Line Needs To Be Drawn Somewhere….
I believe in breastfeeding a baby. This child has teeth and can eat any food that is presented to him.
I agree with others that have written in the comments, this kid will be so embarrassed later in life
when someone realizes that it was him on the cover of Time. It is really doing him a disservice.
Oy. It doesn’t have to be one extreme or the other. Our kids are 2 and 4, and they sleep with us when they want. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. They were breastfed until the demands of my job caused me to lose my supply. I would have liked the children to decide when they wanted to wean, but they are both so independent that I have no doubt they would have done so by now. They are both healthy and well adjusted, and they know mom and dad are there for them when they need emotional support. I carried them around in wraps because I found it convenient to be able to use my arms while carrying them, and the babies liked being close to me. I never read up on anything “attachment parenting” but we probably fall into that category. I really don”t see why we have to put a label on everything. I do find it offensive that people will see this picture and a) judge the woman and b) decide that since they think this scenario is inappropriate, that all women who breast feed their children are somehow weird or twisted. They are just breasts. Every 2nd person on the planet has them.
Wrong, just about 100% of humans have breasts. (Just checked, I’m a male and my breast tissue didn’t develop, but I definately have moobs. Need to exercise more I guess.)
If you let yourself be put up as a national poster child for whatever, you will get support and condemnation. Both will show up, guaranteed. That is also as natural as breast feeding.
Breast feeding a 4 year old is outside the norm, and probably should be. Letting a kid sleep with you is natural and normal. My daughter was about 6 when she quit coming in before long trips, stormy nights, etc. (At the risk of holding myself up as a racist, we called them “Newfie Nights”, and in the morning we invited the dog up to make it complete).
Letting your 40 year old into bed to cuddle is about the same as breast feeding a 4 yr. old.
You are absolutely correct about breasts, men have them too and are also at risk of breast cancer. Thanks for the correction. I agree with pretty much everything you said. I am just surprised at the strong feelings against breastfeeding and attachment parenting. We didn’t do what we did because it was AP, rather we just followed our instincts as parents. I am not sure how I feel about 4 year olds breastfeeding. It doesn’t make me uncomfortable to see it, but I don’t think I would have been comfortable with doing it myself. It does seem strange to me, but I certainly don’t think it harms the child at all, and I have never heard of a case of a mother breastfeeding a child who didn’t want to.
I just don’t see what all the fuss is about. Most people don’t seem to mind men having a bare chest (like at the beach or playing ball), but it’s socially unacceptable for women. It’s perfectly fine to use breasts to sell things…magazines in this case…but not to feed babies…or toddlers…or preschoolers in this case.
I think we should put more effort into ending child abuse and less effort into how long other people breastfeed. The milk is tons better for the kid than the processed food most kids eat. Put more effort into ending cancer and less time caring who shows a breast in public.
I completely agree with you about differing opinions on anything in the public eye. No two people are ever going to agree on anything. A lot of people can’t even agree on what toppings to order on their pizza. This opinion is how I feel, and I know some will agree and some will disagree.
shock and awe….
an androgenously shaped individual with a young boy hanging from their ‘less-than-a-man-boob teat’ is not a poster for motherhood. An ad for spandex perhaps? , maybe a foot-stomp of retaliatory tantrum at being rejected by ‘Victoria’s Secret’? … journalism it isn’t…. Tab fodder at best.
She looks in shape. I wonder if she jogs with him sucking on her boobs.
I <3 Breastfeeding. Its the best thing you can do for yourself and your child. The longer the better. Way more appropriate and natural, than cows milk, or men peeing outside. We need higher breastfeeding rates and lower formula feeding rates. Affordable healthcare begins with Breastfeeding!!!
LOL!! What’s wrong with a man “peeing” outside? Seems quite natural to me…..
I will breastfeed until my daughter decide SHES DONE!!!! I would love to forever.
I think its less than a attachment thing for the child and more of a emotional thing for the mother. Kind of like “I dont want my baby to grow up, so I am going to hold onto letting her/him bf as long as possible!” I hope someday you can get over it, and there is always counseling down the road.
Nothing at all wrong if it doesn’t affect public hygiene. Seriously, though, the penis is a sex organ and the breast is not.
Stevey likes it…LOL… Have a great weekend Pab…:)
Yessiree…..I came thru your neck of the woods last week….drove up from the sunny south….No problems with any SMIB’s……
We know good people…;)
SD
I’m a woman, and on long drives where there never seems to be a gas station with a public restroom…
Ya gotta go when ya gotta go.
haha!
The health benefits of breast milk are astounding. Some doctors will prescribe donated human milk for preemies if the mom can’t provide the milk. I was really surprised when I looked into it just how beneficial it is to both mothers and babies. Plus, it is always the right temperature, always available and never spoils. I would love to see the US get on board with all the other developed nations to give new moms the option to stay at home for the first year. If the majority of babies were breastfed for the first year, we would see a dramatic decrease in our healthcare costs for infants.
Unfortunately, this photo just set the breastfeeding fight back 20 years.
The longer… until a year. Not much more. Then it’s absurd. Get a life, dear. You don’t need your kid dangling from your teats all your life.
Foolish, this ranks up there with Alicia Silverstone feeding her kid like a baby bird…
I’m with you, Gomer. The pictures I saw of that on television were plain ole disturbing. Spitting food into your kid’s mouth? Nasty. Hope she brushes a lot. Not to mention the fact that she has plenty of money to buy or make the organic foods she wants her child to eat.
////
I breast fed till my children didn’t want it anymore. Longest was 2 days before first birthday. My own children showed definate signs that they wanted to move on from the breast. Nurturing is also knowing when to allow children to move on to bigger and better things. For my own, it was the independance of drinking from a cup on their own. That fullfilled me like nothing else.
This will sell magazines, that’s for sure. lol
I saw this on CNN last night. Did she take one minute prior to the picture that she is exploiting her son and he’ll be the “Time Magazine 4-year-old nursing boy” when he’s trying to become a man. Obviously not. Totally self-serving on her part. Shame on her. Anyone can have ideals and principles without a picture. She wanted to show off herself.
All five of my children were breast-fed until they were about 1-year old. I strongly support and advocate for breast-feeding. Breast-feeding is totally natural, and photos of breast-feeding or breast-feeding in public generally doesn’t concern me, but this is a bit much. I can see pushing it to 2-years old at maximum. But almost 4-years old? That’s ridiculous! Something’s wrong with the mother at that point…
Somethings wrong with people being judgy toward a woman making the right choice for her child.
Bullcrap. This broad is WEIRD. She needs counseling.
She also breast fed her ADOPTED son and she says it is a myth that you can’t be intimate with your husband when you co-sleep. Sorry, this woman is TWISTED.
Agree!
What about the child? Will he learn to accept Mom’s misjudgment in Time? Not sure if standing on a chair at work is OSHA compliant and if he is victim of child labor laws during the photo shoot. Someone should check that out.
What’s weird too, is how this picture has been ‘staged’. The photographer doesn’t seem to catch the act candidly. It was set up to get this going for the camera, and the shock value. Why does that seem wrong to me? LOL I’m sorry, it’s disturbing. Look at the child’s eyes. He’s not snuggling and pacifying. He’s on a freakin chair and looking at the camera. Just too weird.
When I saw this cover, I thought it was a comment on why gay marriage isn’t equal to traditional marriage….somehow I can’t see how Adam & Steve will manage breastfeeding in their ‘marriage’.
Left wing fetish.
-_.._-
Where do you get this info? Can you provide a source for your claim that 3-4 years was ever a common length of time to breastfeed babies in this country, or even in the Western world?
Have to agree…. 3-4 yr olds dont breast feed….. Not normal…
Tons of people go for extended breastfeeding.
Sorry, but it is abnormal…
This TIME cover does not bother me at all. I nursed both of my girls until they were 15 months old.
Now my sister nursed her 2nd daughter till she was 4 and I have to say, it was my sister, not my niece that enjoyed nursing that long. My niece enjoyed nursing that long but I honestly think if my sister said no more at age 2, my niece would not have been content to stop.
Nursing is beautiful, natural and every mom/child has the right to do it as long as they feel they need to. There are more kiddos out there that have a bottle/binky/thumb till the age of 4+ and we do not make a big fuss about that.
I can see if it is a 3rd world country nursing at 3-4…. But this is quite a joke..
There was also a time when blacks had to sit at the back of the bus. People extended breastfeeding mostly due to poverty back then and in the areas where it is still common practice to breast feed up to 7 years old, it is also due to poverty which results in a lack of clean & safe food sources. In America in 2012, it is completely unnecessary.
I have to say that very little shocks me. This was not the case with this cover. Not only was a shocked but also a little bit disturbed. If it had been a mother breast-feeding a baby, i would have thought it was one of the most beautiful visions on earth, but that is NOT a baby. That is a four year old child. Most of us can conjer up memories from when we were four or five. What will this do to this kids psyche and is the mother really doing it for the nutritional value for the child or for HER?? I understand the whole attachment program and though i do not agree with it, i do believe that too many families go without the affection to each other they should give, but come on here, this is a four year old attached to him mom’s breast. I wonder how the husband feels here? What does this say for women that have psychological problems after giving birth. Isnt this going to make those situations worse? At what age do you consider contact with a parents genitalia to become incest? I honestly think there are so many questions and i think it was in poor judgement as well as poor taste for Time to run such a photo, but i am quite sure they are getting the debate they were hoping for and putting Time back in the public eye.
I can say anything I want about breastfeeding by the way…been there, done that. I have bf for a total of 3 years and I know that children stop on their own by at least 1. All of my kids did and I didn’t request for them to breastfeed. These mothers that let their child bf for 4 years is bizarre, poor kids!
Wow seriously? they obviously did this to sell more magazines, but seriously, WHAT’S THE BIG DEAL?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zy23pvkobU
This would be good if you lived in a third world country and couldn’t afford any other means of feeding your child… Totally fooo foo…
This looks like porn to me – 4 yrs old – give me a break. Does she go nurse him at Headstart or Day Care too? This is very sick. I bet the child molesters loved this photo.
I think breast feeding is wonderful , but my concern is that, by the age of 4,most children are developing their own sense of identity & independence- would n’t breast feeding at that age hinder their emotional growth? And by then, who needs it most- the child doesn’t, they have long been eating on their own….if the mother still needs it when her child is 4, is that not a bit abnormal? To each their own but to me this is not that healthy at that age….for either the mother or child.
I just stopped breast feeding from my mom last week. And I’ll be 52 on my next birthday!
I have no issue with a mother choosing to breastfeed. I know that breast milk is very healthy for babies. Being very honest though, it does give me pause when the child is old enough to open the refrigerator and pour a glass of milk for himself, but whatever works for them.
What does irk me is that the mother is exposing her son’s image in such a way that will definitely cause him more than a little bit of embarrassment in the future. I’m sure his peers in school will be super understanding when they get their hands on the picture of their buddy on the cover of Time, taking a drink from his mom.
yeah, she looks real loving and nurturing in this picture which adds to the wow factor in a disturbing way.
Is breastfeeding why this boy is so huge? The article says 3, but he looks like he’s in second grade.
He turns 4 next month.
(sorry, it posted twice)
Breastfeeding issue aside, in my opinion I found it insensitive that the author called people who cannot afford to buy milk ‘yahoos.’
She is clearly exploiting her child…for her own gain.
Sales must have been slow at Time. This is actually anti-breastfeeding propaganda, and tries to make a natural, healthy choice for babies and toddlers (which an oberwhelming majority of health professionals encourage) appear instead to be freakish and shocking. Maybe next they’ll show us a middle aged man sucking his thumb or an old lady picking her nose. Media ghouls