TIME Magazine Cover

[rtjunker]

http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20120521,00.html

Anyone have thoughts on TIME magazine's newest issue?

[ahimsamom]

I have only had time to read the yahoo news coverage and some of the comments...The majority of people commenting are saying things like, "Anyone who breastfeeds their child past 6 months is SICK and needs to get their heads checked out!" and that mothers who breastfeed into toddlerhood are clingly, dependent and needy.

What a sad world we live in.

(typed as I nurse my 18 month old)

[Spring Lily]

I haven't read the article, but my first impression is that Time has created a provocative cover knowing that it will prejudice most readers against APing. The article is about APing, so I'm half interested in it yet half dreading what it will say. Based on the cover, I predict it will have some sort of negative spin.

[Ramzubo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spring Lily 

I haven't read the article, but my first impression is that Time has created a provocative cover knowing that it will prejudice most readers against APing. The article is about APing, so I'm half interested in it yet half dreading what it will say. Based on the cover, I predict it will have some sort of negative spin.

Yeah this is what I'm thinking too. Even the subtitle "why AP drives some mothers to EXTREMES" is clearly pushing AP as abnormal.

[PatioGardener]

I haven't read the article, but I LOVE the photo on the cover!
 

[yellow73]

I think the cover was just being provocative as a way to up sales. I highly doubt there is anything positive in the article.

[Cyllya]

Originally Posted by yellow73 

I think the cover was just being provocative as a way to up sales. I highly doubt there is anything positive in the article.

Yeah. Someone posted the article in another part of the forum. You need some kind of membership to see the whole thing, but the little summary is terrible. (You can also see the paragraph and a half at the start of the article, if you click to read the full story below.) It says that attachment parent, which was apparently invented by Dr. Sears , "has made parenthood more physically and emotionally demanding than ever before." 

http://ideas.time.com/dr-william-sears-meet-the-man-who-remade-motherhood/

[anjsmama]

It's AP bashing under the disguise of being AP interesting. If they'd wanted to highlight why women choose to EBF or why they choose to parent in  an AP style, they probably would have gone with a picture where mom & son are looking at each other, instead the boy looks "caught" and the mom looks like she's challenging the world. Not real pleased with all the negativity built into it. The only good news is that it's likely to make readers realize just how many moms out there ARE breastfeeding toddlers and older children. Just don't like the way it puts moms on two different sides of the fence. 

[expat-mama]

Yeah, it seems like the magazine has a whole series of "articles"  about AP some seem to have a negative spin and tout "detached" parenting methods. Like "The Detached Dad's Manifesto" and "Parenting Quiz: Are you TOO attached?"-  I think most people out there should be wondering the opposite given the current state of society- are you attached ENOUGH? But there are a couple of "articles" (yes, sarcastic quotes again) listed on the site that MIGHT be more supportive or at least open-minded.

Who has time to read drivel like TIME anyway???

I hope AP proponents can speak out and get the same buzz about the positives of AP. Did they actually interview DR Sears?

[GoddessKristie]

The comments around the web on this article are so shocking. SO MANY people are going on about how this is pornography and molestation and men saying how wrong it is in one sentence and how they want to take a turn in the next. It's a real sad reflection on where we stand in terms of lactivism and breastfeeding education.

This cover is clearly meant to drum up publicity and, as one comment said, "raise eyebrows, not awareness." I worry that the way the public reacts to this type of image will be bad for breastfeeding in the long run and that the title is insulting to women who can't or choose not to breastfeed this long. 

[Super~Single~Mama]

If you click on the links in the summary you can see more photos - which are really good! There is one that is of the cover mom holding her sleeping nursling (adorable - that kid is too cute), and of tandem nursing as well.

[motherhendoula]

yeah, i agree with goddess kristie about the title "are you mother enough?"  implies that to nurse for fewer months / years than this woman makes you LESS of a mother....

this is the stereotype that seems so hard to shake - that all AP parents  are completely intolerant of other people parenting choices.

Meanwhile, on the cover of Newsweek is a pudgy baby holding a bag of french fries 'saying' "i will grow up to be 300 lbs, help!" 

its actually a decent article talking about how eating sugar and flour are the real culprits of todays obesity 'epidemic' ...of course, not one mention of how breastfeeding could help curtail said 'epidemic'!   

Happy Mothers Day everyone!

[P.J.]

I'm a little ashamed to admit I bought it to read the article. I knew it was going to piss me off but I was just too curious. And of course, I was fuming as I read how they described AP as a "parenting style that's more about parental devotion and sacrifice than about raising self-sufficient kids." Just one example among many.

I can only hope that there are a few expectant or new mamas out there who will be somehow interested enough to look into AP after seeing this article. More likely it's just going to annoy parents like us and elicit some of the sick responses mentioned in posts above. *sigh*

[JavaFinch]

I think the 'mom enough' thing isn't a GOOD thing from the tone of this headline.  To me it seems to imply that AP is mother over-load. 

Maybe the mom thought she was doing a lactivism piece (and I haven't read the article) but it doesn't seem overly positive to me - looks to be trying for shock value and I would guess that more people who didn't really care one way or another about 'extended' breastfeeding are even LESS open to the idea after seeing that cover. 

[rtjunker]

Yesterday when I first saw this article, and then began reading the dozens of response articles on the internet, I was fuming. TIME seems to have put a very negative spin on motherhood in general with questions like "Are you Mom enough?"and then discusses Attachment Parenting in a non-supportive way. I haven't read the articles in their entirety but what I did read left me not wanting any more.

I am absolutely appalled by most of the comments I've read about how disgusting BF is, followed with but I wouldn't mind having a turn. To me breastfeeding is NOT SHOCKING and it is NOT SEXUAL. I honestly have trouble understanding what the big deal is, when in so many other places around the world it's perfectly normal to breastfeed well into toddlerhood. Why does a mother breastfeeding her child seem to piss off so many people? Why isn't it just the norm?

Today though, I'm feeling that the more BF is discussed, the more BF is seen, even if in an intentionally negative light, the more normal it will eventually become.

[member234098]

I 

Edited by member234098 - 5/25/12 at 4:59pm

[stik]

The mom is fine.  The kid is fine.  The photograph is deliberately provocative and confrontational - the mom and the kid staring at the camera, the kid's pose, the camo pants, are all visual signifiers of aggression.  There's another pic online of the mom holding the kid while he nurses that is much more reflective of the typical nature of nursing a 2-5 year-old.  I can see why they used the shot they did on the cover, but it really was a crass marketing decision.  The other photo is so much more realistic.
 

[Amys1st]

This. I dont like how challenging this Mom looks or the way its portrayed. Its a shame to take something as wonderful as AP and turn it into this.  

Originally Posted by stik 

The mom is fine.  The kid is fine.  The photograph is deliberately provocative and confrontational - the mom and the kid staring at the camera, the kid's pose, the camo pants, are all visual signifiers of aggression.  There's another pic online of the mom holding the kid while he nurses that is much more reflective of the typical nature of nursing a 2-5 year-old.  I can see why they used the shot they did on the cover, but it really was a crass marketing decision.  The other photo is so much more realistic.
 

[mar123]

http://healthland.time.com/2012/05/10/q-a-with-jamie-lynne-grumet/

The article with the mom on the cover is pretty good. It is in question and answer format, so she gets to say what she wants.

[stik]

I wanted to add that I think the photo is gorgeous, and I can imagine a number of contexts that would enhance its fabulousness. It would be a great choice for promoting a nurse-in, just for example. Or an awesome addition to a fierce family album.