Help Me Address Those Concerned about Modesty

[Maggirayne]

How can I answer if someone says, "What is a woman exposes her whole breast--we don't want that!"

I am going to be testifying before my state's house committee regarding the Bill where modest and discreet language was added to it.

I want to establish mutual purpose and explain why supporting breastfeeding is important.

This their concern, how can I address it and reassure those concerned and explain why it is not the focus? That it is not wise to define modesty?

I can't figure it out without just entirely staying away from the modesty issue, but it is a huge question.

I have pro-BFing friends who say modesty is a good thing, Yes but, but what?

[songbh]

It's great you are doing your homework to prepare for testifying before the house committee. I really hope it goes well and that they hear what you are saying.

About the modesty issue -- I think I would explain that talk about modesty actually interferes with mothers successfully nursing -- that a law that requires women to nurse modestly is going to make it harder for women (even those who would have nursed discreetly to begin with!) to feel confident and protected about nursing in public, and that this in turn will result in fewer babies being breastfed exclusively for the recommended 6mos, etc.

I would stress that breastfeeding is a public health matter and that the state should be doing whatever possible to encourage it. Keep bringing their attention to the very costly and personally ruinous chronic or terminal health conditions that are linked to not breastfeeding -- diabetes, cancers of all sorts, obesity. Talk about how much the state spends on WIC and Medicaid every year and explain that even a small increase in breastfeeding rates would save the state money. Then mention that it would be ridiculous to compromise these important public health and cost savings over squeamishness about glimpsing a breast now and then. Ask them, what's more important? Protecting the tender eyes of a few easily-offended citizens, or improving our children's health and controlling our state's healthcare costs?

What I would avoid in this committee hearing is saying anything that might make me sound like the feminist that I very much am. Nothing about modesty being just another term for the patriarchy controlling women's bodies, etc. Make it about the babies and most of all the state's bottom line.

You should probably also be prepared with some powerful stories about how it feels to be harassed for nursing in public. Nothing works better than an anecdote to make a point that sticks in people's minds. Another thing to consider is that the committee members probably understand very little about how breastfeeding works -- it might be wise to be prepared to respond to comments like, "My cousin always used a blanket" or "My wife would just pump and bring a bottle" or "Formula never hurt our kids any," with something that is both tactful and informative about how these approaches can disrupt breastfeeding or may not work with every baby.

[Maggirayne]

Thank you, songbh!

And great other comments to prep for.

I've been thinking how advertising uses breasts all.the.time--and for profit, but I couldn't figure how breastfeeding compared financially at all.

Since this is a conservative state, I was thinking of coming from the supporting families side. But appealing to the financial benefits can't hurt.

One of the main supporters who's been working for this bill is from WIC. I should ask her if she'll have some of that side covered.

[krystyn33]

I don't know the law that well, but I would think that defining modesty would be terribly problematic since it is so subjective. Songbh's points are great--having modesty "out there" as a concern is a hindrance, period.

Best of luck to you--hope you get a good bill passed!

[KnitLady]

Modesty can also depend on a woman's body shape, experience, and the age of her baby. A new mother with large breasts NIP for the first time will probably need to show more than an experienced woman with small breasts and an older baby or a toddler. Also, not all babies will tolerate a shirt next to their nose, or a blanket over their face, and not all women are able to latch their babies on in those circumstances.

In the end, it's all about context. A woman with her breast exposed or partly exposed while trying to feed her baby is in no way sexual.

[siobhang]

a friend of mine quipped that next time she was asked to cover, she'd use a copy of cosmopolitan with some plunging neckline on the front.

Good luck!!!

[Bluegoat]

Modesty would be hard to describe legally. The only thing I can think of to compare are cases where women have tried to go topless in public, or sometimes in cases dealing with pornography. The phrase they seem to use is "in accordance with the standards of the community" or something like that.

I don't have a problem with a community having standards of modesty, in that I think they exist in all communities. I'm not sure they always need to be legally defined, and in the case of breastfeeding there would be special problems.

The difficulty with defining modestly in relation to breastfeeding is that we are, as a society, in an unnatural state as far as BF is concerned. We took a bit of a bad turn and so are no longer used to BF practices, or seeing it. It's like we have been abnormally sensitized to breastfeeding. In a few generations, if we are used to seeing it, it might make more sense to talk about it in terms of community standards. But until then, I think they would have to be artificially created if we were going to have them at all.

But, is this really a problem? I know occasionally people feel they are seeing too much, but I have never heard of any topless ladies in the mall breastfeeding or anything that would go way way beyond most peoples' comfort zone.

[nerdymom]

Can you bring in photos of bfing and advertisements showing a lot of breast? That is the only thing I can think of to help you make your point about commercial exposure of the breast versus breastfeeding. I think that this is a very important point to bring up.

As for the "my wife always pumped and brought a bottle", more than a few women have a hard time expressing any milk. Not to mention the cost involved with purchasing a pump. Even if WIC helps with the cost, not all women have a lot of luck with a manual pump, and they need something a bit stronger. Women with lower incomes already have lower bf statistics. We don't want to make bfing a financial hardship for those women.

Good luck testifying! :

[LilacMama]

People have the legal right in the United States to wear skimpy clothes that offend lots of other people around them. The courts have no business allowing that but then putting rules and regulations on a mother nursing her baby. It's anti-family, anti-child to regulate breastfeeding at all.

[tanyam926]

It might help to ask the question who is going to define modesty? Point out that different people have different definitions, in other countries it is the ankles, knees, hair etc. that should always be covered.

How could the modesty clause be enforced? It can't and it will only cause more harassment of BF mothers. There is NO WAY to prove that a mom was BF immodestly based on people's opinions.

Are the cops going to be called out and asked to watch the mom nurse so they can give their opinion? Makes no sense whatsoever.

Plus, other states have laws w/no modesty clause and I don't hear about women running around naked w/baby attached. It seems that it's entirely unneeded.

BTW, thank you for speaking for all of us!

[AislinCarys]

There is another problem with "modesty". I am a quite modest mama, but I will breastfeed my DD when she needs it. but there have certainly been times when I have been showing more than I wanted - usually for quite a short time. I suspect that this is the case with most mamas NIP. However, with this clause in law, quite modest mamas may get in trouble, despite doing all they can to be "discreet".

(DD would never feed with a cover over her, period.)

[jillmamma]

Another thing they are forgetting is the child's rights. Every person has the right to eat in public, right? If putting a "modesty" clause in the law will inhibit some moms from being able to feed their children, won't that actually infringe on the child's right to eat?

[MaryJaneLouise]

Legislators don't like to go out on a limb. Can you find the wording of other GOOD laws from similarly conservative states? I'm not up on which "red states" have good BFing laws, but I know Mothering did a good article on the issue not too long ago. I think it was written by mamajake, you might PM her for ideas.

Also, you might point out that these breastfeeding women are MOTHERS. And, you could point out (anecdotally but yes it's all about the story) that you don't know anyone who would deliberately expose herself in an "immodestly sexual" way, while feeding her child. It just doesn't make sense.

[MaryJaneLouise]

As far as adding "discreet" language -- I would ask what people are really trying to insinuate when they use that word. I've c&ped a previous rant of mine Maybe this will help you too. Mandating a nursing woman to be "discreet", aka "secretive", is absolutely offensive and should ALWAYS be avoided.



I absolutely hate the word "discreet" when using in conjunction with breastfeeding.

"Discreet" implies that a topic if off limits, taboo, forbidden, dirty, unwholeseome. Secret.

Married lovers are discreet about an affair. I can be discreet when (not) talking about a friend's criminal past. President Obama is in discreet talks with Syria and Iran.

Why the heck is breastfeeding secret? Shameful? Unwholesome? Forbidden?

It just doesn't make sense.

Do people mean "modest" instead, as in showing a minimal part of their bodies? That makes more sense, though not completely.

Why should a woman EVER be secretive about breastfeeding? :

[kriket]

what an opportunity for you!

I know I have always wanted to tell "them" that for the longest time, "too much" in the way of breasts was described as nipple and areola exposure. Well, you just can't BF without some degree of nipple and areola showing!

I think the most "discretion" that I would be comfortable with in language of the law would be that the breast thats not "in use" should be covered. Thats as much on that topic as I would like to see.

[rivkah]

I would say that the terms "modest" and "discreet" are unconstitutionally vague. What is "modest" for a 20-year old college student to wear at a party is not the same thing that is "modest" for a 40-year-old to wear to church. What is modest to an Orthodox Jew or certain Muslims is a far cry from what is modest for a main-stream Protestant or Catholic. What is modest for a shopping mall is different than what is modest for a beach on the Riviera. The problem with using modest or discreet in a law such as this, is that it imposes other people's conceptions of what is modest on the person affected by the law. For example, I have visited Orthodox Jewish communities. As a married woman, I do not cover my hair, which is considered immodest in certain Orthodox communities. Of a mother is NIP at the park and some of her areola is visible, this may be considered immodest to some, but not all other park-goers. So whose conception of modesty is the legal standard? There are some more "fuzzy" legal standards in existence, for example, those governing pornography and profanity. However, I there is far less disagreement on these issues in our society. Almost everyone considers the "F" word profanity. But many people think it is acceptable for 14-year-olds to wear teeny-tiny skirts form Abercrombie and Fitch, and probably an equal number of people think that it is not acceptable.

[mamabadger]

Originally Posted by jillmamma

Another thing they are forgetting is the child's rights. Every person has the right to eat in public, right? If putting a "modesty" clause in the law will inhibit some moms from being able to feed their children, won't that actually infringe on the child's right to eat?

Also, the modesty issue gives a considerable boost to bottle feeding, which is not officially recommended but is always considered decent in public places.

[claddaghmom]

Originally Posted by MaryJaneLouise

As far as adding "discreet" language -- I would ask what people are really trying to insinuate when they use that word. I've c&ped a previous rant of mine Maybe this will help you too. Mandating a nursing woman to be "discreet", aka "secretive", is absolutely offensive and should ALWAYS be avoided.



I absolutely hate the word "discreet" when using in conjunction with breastfeeding.

"Discreet" implies that a topic if off limits, taboo, forbidden, dirty, unwholeseome. Secret.

Married lovers are discreet about an affair. I can be discreet when (not) talking about a friend's criminal past. President Obama is in discreet talks with Syria and Iran.

Why the heck is breastfeeding secret? Shameful? Unwholesome? Forbidden?

It just doesn't make sense.

Do people mean "modest" instead, as in showing a minimal part of their bodies? That makes more sense, though not completely.

Why should a woman EVER be secretive about breastfeeding? :

I hate discreet too! And modest is iffy as well. It brings up religious puritanism in my mind.

How about, "protecting my body from sexual exploitation and puritanical zealots"

I guess that's kind of long though.


Are you allowed to bring evidence? Why not grab a stack of the magazines available at the checkout of every grocery store in America.

[Maggirayne]

Well, I have testified, thank you all for sharing your thoughts. It was helpful, and I did use some of your comments!

See this link for updates:
http://mothering.com/discussions/sho....php?t=1043957