Sunday, August 06, 2006
Booby Prize
The cover of this months Babytalk magazine, a free US parenting magazine that caters to young mothers, is causing quite a stir with a "graphic" image. Americans are crying foul over the publication's latest cover depicting a woman breastfeeding, with some calling the photo offensive and disgusting.
There have been over 5,000 letters sent to the magazine in response to a poll to gage reader sentiment about Babytalk's August cover photo, which shows a baby nursing. One woman from Kansas wrote:
"I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine. I was offended and it made my husband very uncomfortable when I left the magazine on the coffee table."
Another reader said she was "horrified" when she received the magazine and hoped that her husband hadn't laid eyes on it.
"I had to rip off the cover since I didn't want it laying around the house," she said.
Understandably the editors of the magazine are somewhat perplexed. The US government and health professionals have attempted to encourage women to breastfeed by raising awareness about the benefits.
Babytalk executive editor Lisa Moran said everyone is saying that breastfeeding is best for baby but there is so little support for it in public. Moran chalks that up to the real puritanical streak running through America. Celebrities, according to Moran, get a free pass to bare their wares while Americans cringe at the sight of a breast with an occupant.
There have been over 5,000 letters sent to the magazine in response to a poll to gage reader sentiment about Babytalk's August cover photo, which shows a baby nursing. One woman from Kansas wrote:
"I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine. I was offended and it made my husband very uncomfortable when I left the magazine on the coffee table."
Another reader said she was "horrified" when she received the magazine and hoped that her husband hadn't laid eyes on it.
"I had to rip off the cover since I didn't want it laying around the house," she said.
Understandably the editors of the magazine are somewhat perplexed. The US government and health professionals have attempted to encourage women to breastfeed by raising awareness about the benefits.
Babytalk executive editor Lisa Moran said everyone is saying that breastfeeding is best for baby but there is so little support for it in public. Moran chalks that up to the real puritanical streak running through America. Celebrities, according to Moran, get a free pass to bare their wares while Americans cringe at the sight of a breast with an occupant.
# posted by Shaky @ 12:20 a.m. 
Comments:
<< Home
Breast feeding is important, good for the editors of baby talk for trying to raise awareness. Some people need to be a lot less sensative about images of nudity in the media, and a lot more sensative about images of violence. I know which one of the two I think is more of a problem.
# posted by 
: 2:25 a.m.
: 2:25 a.m.
Christ on a pogo stick! It's a baby having a meal.
There's NOTHING erotic about breast-feeding, as any mother (like myself) who has done it (and plans to start again in short order) can tell you.
What is wrong with people??????
That's what Breasts are FOR!!!!
Yes, I know, men like them for other reasons, but come on people. This is hysteria tinged reaction is so weird, I can hardly believe it.
You can't even see a nipple, and if you go to any beach on any given summer day, you will see a lot more than what's on display in that picture!
What a screwy culture we live in.
There's NOTHING erotic about breast-feeding, as any mother (like myself) who has done it (and plans to start again in short order) can tell you.
What is wrong with people??????
That's what Breasts are FOR!!!!
Yes, I know, men like them for other reasons, but come on people. This is hysteria tinged reaction is so weird, I can hardly believe it.
You can't even see a nipple, and if you go to any beach on any given summer day, you will see a lot more than what's on display in that picture!
What a screwy culture we live in.
A picture very similar to this was posted on LiveJournal and the member who posted it was asked to take it down because it was an offensive image.
As you mention, there is a puritanical streak that seems to run through our society, and this notion seems often to affect women more than men. All you have to do is look at pop culture magazines for women and the article indicate this virgin/slut dichotomy is alive and well. Apparently breastfeeding advocates think that women should be breastfeeding because it is best for their child but their offensive bodies need to be discreetly hidden under a blanket while donating their body for the betterment of babies health. Mothers are then relegated to breasfeeding in dirty mall/church bathrooms so as not to offen anyone.
kh
As you mention, there is a puritanical streak that seems to run through our society, and this notion seems often to affect women more than men. All you have to do is look at pop culture magazines for women and the article indicate this virgin/slut dichotomy is alive and well. Apparently breastfeeding advocates think that women should be breastfeeding because it is best for their child but their offensive bodies need to be discreetly hidden under a blanket while donating their body for the betterment of babies health. Mothers are then relegated to breasfeeding in dirty mall/church bathrooms so as not to offen anyone.
kh
# posted by : 7:38 p.m.
: 7:38 p.m.
It is sad that a woman's biology is still taboo as far as images go. It speaks volumes about the deep roots of patriarchy and the continued oppression of women in our society.
That's ridiculous. If there wasn't a baby attached to it, you could almost mistake that breast for an elbow or some other body part.
This is no more offensive than a picture of a swimsuit model on the cover of Maxim, the baby's probably covering more than what they call a "bikini" would.
Post a Comment
This is no more offensive than a picture of a swimsuit model on the cover of Maxim, the baby's probably covering more than what they call a "bikini" would.
<< Home
