🚀 go-pugleaf

Debbie O'Leary <doleary@falstaff.ucs.indiana.edu> writes:

>opdi@netshop.net (Alleycat) wrote:

>>I see nothing wrong with breastfeeding in public provided women make
>>attempts NOT to expose more than necessary.  I highly admire the
>>courteous women who are concerned about ALL people's feelings, and make
>>an attempt to cover up most of the scenery with a blanket.  I don't see
>>how anyone could criticizse such considerate people.  In fact, if women
>>were that polite, I doubt politicians would ever have felt a need to
>>even discuss the subject. Obviously a number of people must've
>>complained. -- Alleycat

>So when do the complaints of a few outweigh the needs of society or 
>babies for that matter? Children obviously don't have a voice in this 
>matter (except for their heart-wrenching wails), mothers don't seem to 
>have much of a voice either. What is the problem with breasts?? Why do 
>people find them offensive? Why do women need to cover up when they are 
>feeding their children? This seems so puritanical to me. Could someone 
>please explain what this society finds so morally wrong about breasts???

Breasts have, it seems, two principle functions:

1.)  Bait.  They entice at least some males to consider mating with
their owner.

2.)  Feeding the offspring produced by mating.

Both of those purposes serve to ensure the survival of the species.

I have always been struck by the bizarre split in approval of the two
functions.  As a society we have pretty much decided that the first use
is A Good Thing.  We devised special undergarments to make the bait more
obvious and to make it appear to be more plentiful that it may be.  We
have surgical procedures to increase the amount of bait a woman can
display.  We have special exercize apparatus and regemines women use to
improve the quality of their bait.

Clothing is often designed specifically to reveal and enhance the
appearance of bait.  Beaches have become primarily places where bait is
openly displayed, with only the tiniest portions of it concealed in
order to make the prey more aroused.  Whole industries thrive on helping
women use their bait more effectively.  Malls have stores devoted
entirely to bait.

So I confess to my amazement at the hostility sometimes shown to women
whose bait has been successful and who have moved on to the second
purpose their breasts serve.  Somehow, a woman who publicly uses here
breasts as bait is seen as exercising her rights and pursuing her
femininity in an appropriate manner.  But the woman whose femininity
has been demonstrated by successful conception and bearing of offspring
has less place in society.

I am not familiar with the people or places that the proposed law is
intended to attack.  But I do not see that conduct that reinforces the
truth that breasts have that second important function is any less
protected than conduct that shows disapproval for certain political
actions by burning a flag.

It may be that there is a distinction that I would appreciate if I saw
it [the conduct in question].  But I have seen women feed their babies
with varying degrees of privacy and modesty, and I have yet to come away
needing a cold shower or with a sense that I was harmed.  (I did once
come away needing to wash my clothes; a friend whose baby had started
crying had a powerful letdown reflex that squirted milk several feet
during the couple of seconds she needed both hands to steady the baby.
It got my shirt pretty wet.)

So.  If a case exist for making breastfeeding--even militant
breastfeeding--a felony, it has not yet been made.

Regards,

Bill
--
gray@visi.com, a former Winternet customer
Dump Clinton.  I know what you have to do is ugly, painful, even sordid.  But
you know you have to do it.  It's a wretched duty, kind of like shooting
Old Yeller.  But you know you must.  Find the strength.  Do it.