Mothering Forums

Mothering Forums (http://www.mothering.com/forum/)
-   Lactivism (http://www.mothering.com/forum/25-lactivism/)
-   -   TIME Magazine Cover (http://www.mothering.com/forum/25-lactivism/1352916-time-magazine-cover.html)

rtjunker 05-10-2012 02:51 PM

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

 

Anyone have thoughts on TIME magazine's newest issue?


ahimsamom 05-10-2012 04:18 PM

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 05-10-2012 05:52 PM

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. eyesroll.gif

Ramzubo 05-10-2012 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spring Lily View Post

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. eyesroll.gif

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 05-10-2012 06:52 PM

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


yellow73 05-10-2012 07:07 PM

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 05-10-2012 07:58 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by yellow73 View Post

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 eyesroll.gif, "has made parenthood more physically and emotionally demanding than ever before." duh.gif

 

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


anjsmama 05-10-2012 08:04 PM

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 05-10-2012 09:00 PM

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 05-10-2012 11:35 PM

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 05-11-2012 06:40 AM

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 05-11-2012 07:08 AM

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. 05-11-2012 07:11 AM

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." irked.gif 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 05-11-2012 07:17 AM

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 05-11-2012 09:41 AM

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 05-11-2012 11:40 AM


stik 05-11-2012 12:43 PM

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 05-11-2012 01:05 PM

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.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

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 05-11-2012 02:07 PM

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 05-11-2012 03:31 PM

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.

Diana Holquist 05-12-2012 07:46 AM

Yes yes yes to everything about how provoking and inflammatory the picture and headline are. For mothers day this year, I'm not reading anything. I'm taking a big old break from everyone who wants to tell me how to be a mom and how not to and all the Internet pundits and media shock-jocks and I"m spending the day with my gorgeous daughter and son. I almost feel better already....


Asiago 05-12-2012 12:10 PM

I like the photo because she appears strong. I am envious actually, for I am the wimp nursing my 2.5 year old in the car just to avoid NIP and the social negativity.

 

 After reading some comments on various news sites I am so thankful when an informed reply comes in with reference to Jack Newman, Katherine Dettwyler, or the like. Even if it helps to educate just one person that would be helpful.


WuWei 05-12-2012 12:39 PM

I knew I'd seen this! 101 Reasons To Breastfeed:

http://www.my-natural-motherhood-journey.com/benefits-of-breastfeeding.html

 

more: http://www.notmilk.com/101.html

 

another version: http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/leslie_burby.htmlA

and this! http://kellymom.com/ages/older-infant/ebf-benefits/


blessedwithboys 05-12-2012 03:58 PM

Love the cover pic, can't decide if I want to buy a copy or not.


Drummer's Wife 05-12-2012 05:54 PM

I'm annoys me - the who thing. It's creating such negative press and controversy and "mommy wars", that I'm sick of.

I'm someone who has breastfed a child about that age (he was 3 when I was tandem nursing the 1 yr old). I just hate all the drama and labeling of AP being freakish and extreme. Clearly, the cover of Time was meant to stir controversy and put us mothers against each other with the whole Are You Mom Enough crap. 3/4 of my babies only nursed until 12/13 months, and I can see where the offensive aspect lies. But, it's mostly pissing me off that it's putting women against other women and when it's all said and done the majority of responses are anti- extended Breastfeeding. What a F-up, really, b/c we as women, as mothers, should be celebrated regardless whether we have never nursed or breastfed until our kid was 5. Basically, I'm over it all and annoyed that it create this whole AP or extreme parenting vs. everyone else.

Storm Bride 05-12-2012 06:10 PM

I dislike the choice of such a challenging pose, but I am glad to see extended breastfeeding being talked about. The conversation itself is making me both sad and angry. I've lost track of how many times I've seen the words "sexual", "pornography", "pedophilia", "incest", and "disturbing" applied to extended breastfeeding since the cover came out.  I've also lost track of how many people have made comments about the mother doing it for herself, or about the mother's "urges", or about self gratification. As a mom who has been trying to gently wean (don't offer, don't refuse) my almost three year old for several months (because I am done), I find these sentiments somewhat amusing, although also infuriating. I actually force weaned ds2 when I was pregnant with Aaron, because the pain was just too much. I actually do think that had a negative effect on our relationship (although my crappy parenting during the crisis stage probably did more damage), and I'd probably tough it out if I had it to do over again...for his sake, not mine. While I'm kind of done with the pregnancy and breastfeeding thing - just too physically drained at this point - I'm not going to force wean dd1. This is obviously still important to her.

 

I haven't read the article. I don't plan to read it. The "Are you Mom Enough?" challenge pissed me off enough for one article. After just over 19 years at this parenting gig, I can safely say, "yes - I'm mom enough". I'm mom enough to do what's right for me and my family. I'm mom enough not to give a crap what you do with your family (obviously excluding out-and-out abuse, severe neglect, etc.). I'm mom enough to have a really hard time of it when I fail to meet my own expectations. I'm not mom enough to live up someone else's checklist, be that Attachment Parenting International or Mr. Ezzo...and I'm okay with that. We all need to make the best choices we can for our own family and our own situation...and those families and situations are all different, so if we were all making the same choices, it wouldn't be a great sign, imo.


transylvania_mom 05-13-2012 01:04 PM

If I had a stone for every negative comment posted by people on news websites, that mother would have been stoned to death by now.

 

I admire her. This is such a normal nursing position with a 3 y/o. My almost 3 y/o dd nurses like this while I type. But I feel sorry for the mom. I can't believe the mob rage she caused.
 


erinsuzy 05-14-2012 08:32 AM

This cover DOES cause mommy wars! I read this article at my mother-in-laws house yesterday (on mother's day) and people there were calling it "Disgusting" (1 man and 1 woman)....  which sort of set me off. All the feelings started coming to the surface. (I breastfeed my son at their houses, but I stay in a corner of the room not drawing attention or showing skin) So not only did my sister in law say it was disgusting but she says that women who breastfeed should go in the bathroom to do it. I asked her "would YOU eat in a bathroom?" (no answer) I said "I am not sitting in a bathroom to feed my child. How sad is it that we have so sexualized our breasts that the thought of a child sucking on it is now "disgusting" ?" That is what breasts are for! The irony here is that this same woman who called this "disgusting" was fine with having her newborn infant son strapped down and having a piece of his penis cut off.....  now that is "Disgusting" to me. (I should have said that to her) Mommy wars? Youbetcha, but I will defend nature with everything I've got as long as someone condemns me for doing it.


member234098 05-14-2012 07:16 PM

Q

llwr 05-15-2012 09:14 AM

It really bothers me that people are so worried about a 3 yo nursing.  I think the cover pose makes it worse, but our own AAP not only encourages exclusive breastfeeding for 6 mos and continued breastfeeding for at least 12 months, but they specifically say it still has health benefits over one year and that there is no top age when it should be discontinued.  Shouldn't we be a lot more worried about all the 3 MONTH olds who are on formula?

 

With all the health benefits, it just blows my mind how few people breastfeed.  I can't figure it out.  It seems as though is is nothing more than an inconsequential personal choice.  Even the formula companies have to say that breast is best, but if we really believe that, why are our rates so low?   I know access to proper support is a problem.  I suspect maybe expectations are too.  All the moms I know that gave up on breastfeeding did it in the first weeks because it was hard.  Honestly, I would expect it to still be hard at two weeks no matter how much support you had. 



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.