Timothy Birdnow
Time Magazine has caused a stir with a rather risque' picture of a pretty model breastfeeding her three year old son, and the internet has been abuzz with commentary, much of it directed at the picture - and its appropriateness - itself. What has been missing is a discussion of the actual article the picture was intended to promote, and why Time felt it worthy of devoting the cover to an article about extended breastfeeding. One must ask; is there more to this than meets the eye?
Unquestionably. This is the tip of the iceberg.
The Time article was devoted to the theories of Dr. Bill Sears, who advocates something called "attachment parenting" http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/attachment-parenting/what-ap-7-bab...
Sears believes that children are encouraged to be independent too early and too much, and that mothers should wrap their little ones in a cocoon of motherly love. Now, there is nothing wrong with showing love to your child, but one must ask where the line should be drawn. Adolf Hitler, for example, was extremely close with his mother and look how he turned out. At any rate, one wonders exactly how a society of children so smothered by parental care will fare upon adulthood; will the children learn independence and self-reliance as American children have traditionally done, or will they move from breastfeeding on their mothers to breastfeeding on Uncle Sam? It seems to me that "attachment parenting" is going to make a bunch of permanent children to replenish the dependent classes.
Be that as it may, the question arises; why did Time run this article on the front cover, and why now?
This is an issue that has been quietly gaining momentum.
The U.S. Surgeon General supports breastfeeding http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/08/20110801e.html, and even extended (over one year) breastfeeding. So does the World Health Organization http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/exclusive_breastfeeding/en/, so does Michelle Obama. In fact, the IRS is offering tax breaks to encourage nursing. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/02/14/michelle-obama-to-promote-b...
And the city of Seattle has declared breastfeeding a civil right.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/09/11106924-breastfeeding...
According to an AP article, the Surgeon General issued goals that fully 25% of all babies be breast fed by 2020.
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-05-masks-problem-kids-breast-fed...
And the Affordable Healthcare Act (aka Obamacare) requires employers to provide for nursing workers. http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2011/02/new-breastfeeding-law...
There is the key.
The new federal regulations will force employers to give mothers time off during the workday to nurse their children (unpaid at present, but that will be subject to change) But what value is time to nurse if the child is not available? This ultimately requires employer-provided daycare to exercise this new "right". It fundamentally redefines the relationship between employer, employee, and the government. It puts the grubby paws of the regulators that much deeper into the economy. And it creates a new right where one did not exist. How long before this right metastasizes into a right to free daycare, or free healthcare for the children, or the right to other special privileges?
Meanwhile, the father's role is diminished even more as mom drags her children to work every day.
There are other nice benefits to this from the Progressive standpoint. For instance, the Left has always hated the cow http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/01/wheres_the_beef.html, which they see as the embodiement of American excess. They hate it for it's Global Warming-causing flatulence, for the damage it does to creeks and streams, for the four pounds of grain it eats to produce one pound of meat. They would love to be rid of the stinky animals, but the cow produces milk. Extended breast feeding would greatly reduce the demand for cows milk, and perhaps push some dairy farmers to sell their land to some Soros-owned investment corporation or forfeit it to the government. The Administration has been quietly waging a war on cows milk, classifying milk as a form of oil http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/28881 thus forcing dairy farmers to keep expensive "toxic spill" equipment on hand lest they spill a milk jug, and raiding "raw" milk farms. And milk, once the hallmark of America's bounty, will become less profitable as sales decrease. Oh, and America will become more like the Third World where mothers breastfeed for long periods of time because they have to.
There are several organizations dedicated to promoting extended breastfeeding and the like. La Leche, for instance. I found a group called the Lactavists, too.
Let's not forget this continues the feminization of America, what Rush Limbaugh calls the "chickafication" of our society.
But again, why now? Well...
There is a real chance Obamacare will be found unconsitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court, and if that law is struck down so too will the breastfeeding requirements. Obama can start campaigning for stand-alone legislation imposing these regulations on businesses, and the GOP will be forced to oppose him. He and his lackeys in the media will then have the perfect souondbytes for the "war on women" shibboleth they have been fashioning; the GOP and that evil Mitt Romney hate women, children, and despise motherhood. And they will walk right into this trap, as they always manage to do.
Progressives do not do things Off the cuff, and their stated motives are never their true motives. This is particularly true of this Administration. We would be wise to seek out the real purposes behind Time Magazine's cover article, and to understand that this is the beginning of a campaign to create a new right. A right imposes no obligation on others to exercise, yet the Progressives have turned the concept on its head. Consider Barack Obama's lament that the Constitution does not offer "positive rights" delineating what government must do for the citizenry; he shows that he thinks rights obligate others. He would undoubtedly see breast feeding as a right, and demand that businesses and society at large reorganize itself to promote the wishes of a minority of women. and with the media's help he will manage to convince many Americans that this is so.
Thus begins a titanic struggle. We need to get out in front on this.
(Thanks to Jack Kemp for telling me about La Leche.)
Tim's website is www.tbirdnow.mee.nu
Comment
Comment by Ronald Sorrells on May 16, 2012 at 6:45am We might increase the "Health & Security" of children in America, if their "Fathers" Were Required to take "The Children that they have fathered on a one hour walk each day".....Rather than "Mothers" being expected to breastfeeding the children that she bore !
Ron
Comment by Gail A. Goniwicha on May 16, 2012 at 6:18am I agree with American Infidel, for I too, when shown that cover was horrified to see this child who surely must be at least 5 with his mother's breast in his mouth. Absolutely disgusting to breastfeed a child past the age of 1-1/2 years old. Like the other reader said, once that child begins to get teeth, that's the time to wean that child off the breast and onto a sippy-cup. All my friends who breast fed their children did so very discreetly by placing a receiving blanket loosely around the baby while he/she fed. While personally I don't see anything wrong with a nursing child in public, I do understand how it may upset others and there are ways to hide it.
I have a friend who escaped tyranny from an Eastern European country at a young age. She has been out of the loop for a few days due to an illness in the family so I sent her a pic of the cover. Here is her response:
OMG! This is clearly disgusting. No wonder the kids today are the way they are. I'm no prude, but this is beyond the pale.
If you know history, all empires before they fell became Sodom and Gomorrah . This sure looks like that, too.
There are a lot of things people do in the course of their normal lives that I don't need to see a picture of on the cover of a national magazine. On his old show "Coach", Craig T. Nelson once blustered to his fiance, "It used to be there were some things you just don't talk about (in public)! Life was better then!" I subscribe to that notion.
Comment by Karen Gaffney on May 15, 2012 at 3:09pm I won't comment on everything in the above post, but I will say that I am conservative, and I nursed my son until he was 3. And NO, he won't necessarily turn out to be dependent on government as Timothy Birdnow suggests ("It seems to me that "attachment parenting" is going to make a bunch of permanent children to replenish the dependent classes."). There are an awful lot of assumptions made on something (childrearing) which is affected by MANY variables, not just the age when the child stopped nursing! My son is now 9, and he is independent, well-adjusted, happy, and I am teaching him to value self-reliance, along with other conservative values.
As far as Adolf Hitler goes? Well, we know he adored his mother but we don't know the nature of their relationship...it could have been a very maladjusted and psychologically aberrant. Like I said, too many judgemental assumptions made about mothering styles here. A very personal topic, and I agree, not one that should be legislated - OR judged.
Comment by Thomas Angle on May 15, 2012 at 12:52pm All this nonsense will stop when we stand up and say no more and mean it.
Comment by Lizzie on May 15, 2012 at 12:14pm Little-known fact: While human colostrum is full of antibodies, human babies (and primates) can't absorb those antibodies. Human and primate mothers pass antibodies to their babies in the womb. This is not new information, it has been known for decades! The only reason this information is now suppressed, even from all medical students other than those studying immunology, is that the breastfeeding nazis are THAT obsessed with politicizing and mandating breastfeeding. Not kidding!
The truth is, breastfeeding is beneficial. But when good formula is available, it's just not that critically important. Ladies, it really is up to you! It's just a choice, and not one that anybody in a first-world country really needs to worry about.
Comment by American Infidel on May 15, 2012 at 11:32am Ron, you are so right with what you wrote about the lack of respect and civility in our society! Feminism is the root of most of these problems. You will be cheering when you read this great Mother's Day blog by Pamela Geller, authoress of the Atlas Shrugs blog, about motherhood and how feminism has destroyed our society:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/05/on-mothers-...
Comment by Pat Sulliva on May 15, 2012 at 11:30am I didn't even read the story. I work in an Adult Medical Care office. I threw the magazine out, because it was inappropriate at all levels. How much lower can we go.
Comment by Juls on May 15, 2012 at 11:12am One question regarding all hoopla surrounding this magazine cover: Has anyone wondered how this kid is going to feel years from now when his buddies and classmates get ahold of this photo?
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!
Join Tea Party Nation