Author Topic: time mag  (Read 393 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Babdah

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 265
  • Darwins +4/-3
  • “We live in an age disturbed, confused, bewildered
“We live in an age disturbed, confused, bewildered, afraid of its own forces, in search not merely of its road but even of its direction

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7275
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: time mag
« Reply #1 on: May 10, 2012, 10:24:22 PM »
It's like nudity, it's scary and creepy, and nasty.

Online hickdive

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +32/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: time mag
« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2012, 04:56:15 AM »
I have no problem with breastfeeding in private or public however, I have a theory as to why people might find this kind of thing strange. I'll freely admit that is a theory that is entirely plucked out of my ass, so feel free to demolish it:

Humans are omnivores that are generally weaned at around 4 months old.

Uniquely, we have evolved the ability to switch off the lactose intolerance that all other mammals develop (although this doesn't kick in in some humans, leaving them to develop natural lactose intolerance). That ability has only evolved as humans have developed animal husbandry to produce dairy foods. The lactose intolerance that mammals develop is a key part in forcing offspring to become independent of the mother and ensure species continuation.

So we have a relatively recently evolved (and not yet universal) ability to consume milk beyond infancy competing with a much longer established evolved drive to be independent of the mother and to produce independent offspring.

So when we see images like this we are often conflicted and uncomfortable.
Stupidity, unlike intelligence, has no limits.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: time mag
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2012, 10:26:44 AM »
strikes me as some women wanting attention and who will do anything to get it.  Rather than "Are you mom enough?"  IMO it should read "When are you willing to give up being a mom? and having a "little one"?   

this scene from Raising Arizona when "Dot" finds her children "too big to cuddle" strikes me as a reason some women have latched on to this.



When do they stop breast feeding?  Age 21?  :)
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6271
  • Darwins +722/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: time mag
« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2012, 10:36:33 AM »
The photo is fine. But a four year old breast feeding? I have no idea why that would be necessary.

That kid is going to get grief for years over the photo. When other kids at his school realize it was him he's in for a lot of baby talk.

I had friends years ago who adopted, and of course couldn't breast feed. But they decided that their son could keep the bottle just as long as he wanted. He was still drinking from it when he started school. When he pulled it out of his lunch box the first day he was teased mercilessly, and was still reminded of the incident often when he was in high school.

Giving kids whatever they want doesn't teach them much.
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline Kimberly

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1044
  • Darwins +78/-1
  • Gender: Female
    • I am a Forum Guide
Re: time mag
« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2012, 11:27:44 AM »
I have no problem with breastfeeding, or breastfeeding in public. It's also not my decision how long a parent should breastfeed her child. But when I see a child being breastfeed at age three I have absolutely no idea why that's necessary. Is there a nutritional need at that age 3 to breastfeed?

When I look at that picture I wanna hand the kid some cheerios. But to each their own I guess. I weaned my daughter off her passy around age 2. While it's not the same thing, the only reason I can see this mom rationalizing this is the emotional need. I think by age 3 better coping skills should be developed/developing.
Thank you for considering my point of view; however wrong it may be to you.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: time mag
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2012, 11:40:14 AM »
I want to photoshop out the chair the child is standing on, so it looks like the child is hanging while suction cupped to her boob.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline stuffin

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
  • Darwins +26/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: time mag
« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2012, 01:56:25 PM »
If you showed just the picture, a claim of child molestation could be made.

I'd cut him if he stands, and I'd shoot him if he'd run
 Yes I'd kill him with my Bible and my razor and my gun

Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime.
Aristotle

Offline Nozzferrahhtoo

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Darwins +3/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
    • Atheist Ireland
Re: time mag
« Reply #8 on: May 11, 2012, 04:51:18 PM »
I have no problem with breastfeeding in private or public however, I have a theory as to why people might find this kind of thing strange. I'll freely admit that is a theory that is entirely plucked out of my ass, so feel free to demolish it:

I think they chose well. Well in the sense of gaining maximum publicity. WHO currently recommend feeding a child until age 2 as far as I know. Some people go longer, some people go shorter. Arguments for both abound. If you wanted to create maximum debate and controversy therefore a child age around 3 is likely to do just that. It is right on the border line of all kinds of arguments on the subject.

So the cynic in my just thinks that picture was chosen very deliberately to sell copy.

I have long been interested in the breast feeding debate though. On a lot of forums I have followed people arguing about breast feeding in public and the like and heard how angry it makes people to see such a thing. I have my own theory, also plucked out of my ass, as to why so many people get so riled up over such a "natural" thing.

And that theory is that it is actually BECAUSE it is natural. Many humans want to think of humanity as being somehow above and beyond the animal kingdom. There is plants, there is animals and there is US and we are special. Anything which reminds people of our animal origins and affinities is sicking to such people and makes them angry. Breast feeding is one such thing. They want it hidden away because it is a reminder of just what we actually are.

I rather think my theory also goes some way, though clearly not all because of other religious reasons, to explaining some peoples hatred for Evolution. Evolution Theory places us very much as "just another animal".

We are special enough without having to pretend we are something we are not... or more precisely... pretending we are not something we are. But those horrified by the implications of breast feeding and evolution will forever stand up against public displays of either. Ironically I think such emotional immaturity rather takes away from what makes us special, the opposite of what they intend by exercising it.

Offline Babdah

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 265
  • Darwins +4/-3
  • “We live in an age disturbed, confused, bewildered
Re: time mag
« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2012, 06:56:20 PM »
  I don’t see anything wrong with it in public, my concern would be more so the overweight people stuffing their face with fatty foods should be more of a concern then breastfeeding.  I think that they should be covered when they do it. I figure if the antibodies that are in the mother’s milk help improve the child’s immune system there should not be any age limit to when she should stop the child, I also think that it could also de away with certain vaccines.
“We live in an age disturbed, confused, bewildered, afraid of its own forces, in search not merely of its road but even of its direction

Offline Kimberly

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1044
  • Darwins +78/-1
  • Gender: Female
    • I am a Forum Guide
Re: time mag
« Reply #10 on: May 11, 2012, 07:17:41 PM »
^ How long does a child need to be exposed to their mothers antibodies before they start creating their own and no longer rely on their mothers?
Thank you for considering my point of view; however wrong it may be to you.

Offline Babdah

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 265
  • Darwins +4/-3
  • “We live in an age disturbed, confused, bewildered
Re: time mag
« Reply #11 on: May 11, 2012, 07:22:40 PM »
they have antibody when thy are born, the antibodies supplement their own, if i am not mistaken.
“We live in an age disturbed, confused, bewildered, afraid of its own forces, in search not merely of its road but even of its direction

Offline Kimberly

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1044
  • Darwins +78/-1
  • Gender: Female
    • I am a Forum Guide
Re: time mag
« Reply #12 on: May 11, 2012, 08:29:40 PM »
Babdah, that was my understanding as well. Which is why I don't understand the need to breastfeed at 3. I thought maybe you knew more about it since you said:

<cut>I figure if the antibodies that are in the mother’s milk help improve the child’s immune system there should not be any age limit to when she should stop the child, I also think that it could also de away with certain vaccines.

I honestly don't know if the mothers antibodies continue to be beneficial after the child's nutrition consist of more solids and table foods. I also don't know that our antibodies do anything to reduce the need for vaccines. I've not studied it thoroughly but I did read up on it when I was trying to breastfeed my daughter. I don't recall anything that would help straighten this out. If you have more information I'd love to read it!
Thank you for considering my point of view; however wrong it may be to you.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: time mag
« Reply #13 on: May 14, 2012, 09:09:19 AM »
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline Kimberly

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1044
  • Darwins +78/-1
  • Gender: Female
    • I am a Forum Guide
Re: time mag
« Reply #14 on: May 14, 2012, 11:24:22 AM »
So if I understand those articles correctly the antibodies continue to be beneficial until weaning occurs. But the lack of abtibodies isn't detrimental to the baby except in high risk enviroment where there's unclean drinking water and other reasons for infections. And WHO recommends until age two. So in relation to the OP the only harm IMO is as I said before they are already getting all dietary needs from their foods, have enough of their own antibodies, and need to be moving on to the next stage of emotional development. But that's just my opinion, it's every mother's job to decide that for herself.
Thank you for considering my point of view; however wrong it may be to you.