This week, NYC Mayor Bloomberg found himself to be quite the hot topic with his Latch On NYC initiative which seeks to promote and encourage breastfeeding success by diminishing the amount of infant formula made available to new mothers in the hospital. As I read conversations on all sides of spectrum reacting to this initiative, I kept thinking about how we, the Church, a called-out people, can respond to topics like this.
I’m sharing with you a piece I wrote back in July 2010 that encourages church culture to undergo a paradigm shift when it comes to the topic of breastfeeding, starting with changing our attitude on breastfeeding in public:
I was born, raised, and currently live in the Bible Belt, and I’ve been a practicing Southern Baptist for each of my thirty-three years on this planet.
I consider myself well-acquainted with evangelical Christian culture*, and I would feel comfortable with saying that many evangelical women feel uncomfortable with nursing in public.
Why?
- Fear of being immodest.
- Fear of tempting a man to sin with lustful thoughts upon seeing a flash of breast.
- Fear of making people uncomfortable with the simple act of nurturing and nourishing a child in the very way our Creator God designed our bodies to be able to do.
Ultimately, we have collectively swallowed our culture’s poisoned message that declares breasts to be singularly sexual, therefore breastfeeding is something to be covered.
I know so many evangelical Christian families who are taking great care to raise their children in a Christian worldview. Everything from education curriculum to a trip through the mall is filtered through the lens of God’s Word, but in the matter of breastfeeding, we are falling far short.
Entirely too many contemporary Christians see the body of a woman exactly the same way our culture does . . . “a breast is a breast — it’s a sexual thing.” Yet this sentiment stands in direct opposition to God’s Truth as revealed through creation.
God’s Word acknowledges briefly the sensual allure of breasts in the Song of Songs – the Bible’s love story filled with poetry and figurative language. But we find far more mentions of breasts fulfilling the role of nourishment mentioned in the pages of Scripture (see 1 Kings 3:21, Job 3:12, Isaiah 49:15, Isaiah 66:10-11, and Luke 11:27 for starters).
To agree with our culture’s corrupted view of breasts and breastfeeding is to deny God’s beautiful, exquisite design. According to His perfect plan, breasts are dual-purposed wonders of creation, perfect evidence of a holy blend of function and form. Oh, how it must grieve the heart of God to see what we – even we! Those called according to His Name! – have allowed our thinking to become regarding His incredible design.
What I would like to suggest to my brothers and sisters in the faith today is that we embrace a shift in paradigm.
- What if we, the Body of Christ, reject the notion that breasts are merely sexual things?
- What if we, His children, decide to agree with God that His plan for feeding our babies and children is, indeed, a wonderful plan?
- What if we, the Church, declared that the act of breastfeeding reveals God’s glory? What if went so far as to say that because it invites communion with the Creator, because it glorifies Him, and because it speaks volumes about the Sustainer of Life, that breastfeeding is a beautiful act of worship . . . an act of worship to be honored, not hidden; an act of worship to be encouraged, not embarrassed of?
It begins with you, nursing mama. This little revolution begins when you grab hold of that truth that breastfeeding your child reveals the glory of God’s creation. Breastfeeding is all too often not easy. Worship sometimes intertwines with sacrifice. Worship Him through the painful moments and worship Him in the incredible and beautiful and blessed moments.
It continues with you, sister in Christ. Let’s do what we can to support the mamas who are breastfeeding. Let’s offer encouragement and a comfy place to nurse and maintain eye contact when a little one latches on rather than squirming around uncomfortably. Let’s pause and thank God for His perfect design.
And we need you, too, Christian brother. I would ask you to embrace the fact that part of God’s amazing design for women is that breasts can be sexual and life-giving. I would ask that you see breastfeeding as glorifying to God and know that many women do find it to be a worshipful experience. I would ask that you not make a big deal out of it if a woman breastfeeds near you – I promise you that no woman will find it offensive if you continue to talk to and interact with her in the same way you were before her little one latched on to eat.
The Church is to be a peculiar people, an assembly of believers called out following The Way. Can you imagine how beautiful it would be if we were to lead our culture in embracing nursing in public as completely normal, appropriate, and pure? In my most hopeful of dreams, I imagine a time in the not-too-distant future when a nursing mama needs to feed a little one in public, she knows that nursing in front of Christians means she is nursing amongst friends.
To further the discussion, I would like to recommend:
Why I Nurse at the Mall . . . and at Mass by Kate Wicker
Religion and Breastfeeding: How Breastfeeding Impacts the Religious Woman by Jennifer M. Paquette
Lactivism and Public Breastfeeding by Tim Challies
* I realize that Christian culture varies wildly, both by denomination and geography. I fully admit to a rather limited scope, and so just know that because I am most familiar with evangelical culture, that is the culture I am most comfortable in addressing. If you practice a faith or belong to a denomination that is ahead of the curve on normalizing breastfeeding, please share about your experience in the comments!
photo by blmurch
Beautiful. Thank you. I know there are some mamas out there who will be really blessed to read this and I pray there are other church people out there whose paradigm will shift to support and encourage us to feed & nurture our children the way God designed it to happen!
love this, megan. yes and yes. too much of the Church has swallowed the lie that breasts are wholly sexual and forgotten how good and broad is the vision of the Creator of our bodies. i think the catholic church has much to teach the rest of the Body about breastfeeding-as-worship.
i visited a youthful, trendy sort of evangelical church once and arrived a little early. i fed my babe in the nursery before worship as a bunch of kids played. this made a young woman visibly uncomfortable, so she found a blanket and THREW IT AT ME, mumbling “hereusethis” as she ran away as fast as she could. it was the weirdest and least hospitable experience i’ve ever had at church. if a woman can’t even feed a baby in peace and without shame in the nursery, we have miles to go before public breastfeeding is normalized and our theology of the body reflects our incarnational faith.
since this comment thread keeps coming back to us “baring breasts in public,” i feel inclined to mention that women nursing with covers and without both manage to avoid indecent exposure. mothers are fabulous multi-taskers, and no one is advocating public nudity:)
Oh man, I would have turned twenty shades of scarlet and then probably died laughing, Suzannah!! hilarious!!
I always resonate so much with everything you write. I’ve lived in the Midwest, New England and now we’re at a Southern Baptist church in the Bible belt. And I’ve noticed that the women who do breastfeed go missing.
Now when my little girl was nursing, as a rule I liked to nurse privately. I’m an introvert and I always enjoyed the excuse to hang out just with her. But being in New England at the time, I never had a second thought about nursing in public if that was what was most convenient. If and when we have our second kiddo I wonder if I’ll feel the same freedom down here…
Amen.
PS: The first link does not work.
“Why I Nurse at the Mall . . . and at Mass by Kate Wicker”
Thanks for the heads-up, Jessica! Just fixed it.
I have nursed four babies, I am Catholic, I live in the Midwest, and I am a very modest person. All of that said, I have nursed them everywhere, from restaurants to the mall to parks – you name it. I do always use a blanket to cover up, just for my own modesty. I have never had anyone ever say anything to me, or give me “the look” – not that I have noticed anyway. It makes me sad that there is such a controversy on this subject, something that is natural and beautiful and as God intended. My thought is that if we as nursing mamas go about our business, maybe, just maybe, the controversy will disintegrate.
Beauty, right here. <3
So beautifully written. Just to share a positive story… when I first moved here (to Connecticut) with my then 2-week-old daughter, I introduced myself to the priest. He asked if he could help me with anything. I quietly asked if they happened to have a nursing room (as opposed to just the rest room.) He smiled gently and opened his hands wide, indicating the entire church. “We are grateful to have you and your blessed baby here.” It was such a beautiful welcome. I’ll never forget it.
I just swooned a little at the thought of being so welcomed! What a beautiful gesture! If only every place were so welcoming I truly feel breastfeeding rates would be much much higher.
JessieLeigh – your church? I want to go there.
Honestly, in my experience, the Catholic Church *seems* to have the fewest hang-ups about breastfeeding wherever and whenever a mother needs to feed her baby. I can’t help but wonder if the reverence given to Mary, the Mother of Christ, helps shape the collective culture in the Catholic Church in such a way that all things mothering are given reverence. That’s just the observation of a lifetime Baptist, so I don’t know. But I do completely affirm Catholic culture for their accepting view on breastfeeding.
(Also just re-read your comment and I’m making the assumption of Catholicism, but perhaps you are Episcopal or some other denomination with priests? Forgive me if I have overstepped!)
I realized after I posted my comment that I neglected to state it was a Catholic church. Sorry about that! I will say that, while I don’t in any way believe the Catholic church is perfect, I have been very grateful for the approach to breastfeeding and also pregnancy loss. All life is so recognized and cherished within the Catholic faith that I was truly given a ton of support for both my babies here on earth and also my little one in heaven.
yes, i was thinking the same thing as i read jessieleigh’s comment. the reverence for mary must factor in there somehow, in such a special and beautiful way. broad assumption, but i think a fair one.
That is AWESOME. I would have hugged the man, on the spot!
a gorgeous picture of the church right there. and the very essence of the word “hospitality”.
Romans 14:13 “Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister. 14 I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean.”
I completely agree that we need to be free to nourish our children in the way our Creator intended but this is my caution: know your audience. Our church has a ministry to folks who are healing from pasts where perversion is a way of life. What is meant to be beautiful and pure becomes so easily perverted. Just like I am careful to not offer someone a drink if I do not know their story, I would be careful to be as modest as possible while breastfeeding in front of others. I don’t believe you have to build a tent but I would use caution. It really is about balance and caring about those around you as well.
*ducking rolled up burp rags*
I loved this post the first time I read it (and I remember it well!), and I love it still now. You know that I’ve been reading your blog a long time now, Megan, and you have been so instrumental in my own crunchy journey. I became passionate about breastfeeding in public at some point (don’t remember exactly when), and like a good red-headed mama, I can find myself QUITE fired up about it. You, however, have brought the humble, beautiful approach that is so needed to balance out the fiery types like myself
I wrote a post last fall on breastfeeding in public, and it turned into a four-part-series. Apparently I had a lot to say on the issue
Here it is, if you’re interested… http://redandhoney.com/2011/11/uninhibited-breastfeeding-in-public-reclaiming-my-womanhood-from-perversity/
This is much needed encouragement. I am much farther into extended breastfeeding than I ever thought I’d be. My son is now 18 months old. I admit, it embarrasses me and we only nurse in private. Thanks for writing and sharing.
I can appreciate your holy perspective on breastfeeding Megan. As people become encultured they lose sight of God’s purpose and plan on nearly everything. This subject is a prime example of how we’ve allowed perversion to shape our thinking and have lost sight of his intent. I nursed all my children for longer than the “norm” because it was natural, and because we bonded deeper. I don’t recall ever thinking, I’m done with this chore. Because it wasn’t a chore at all, it was one of the greatest blessings I’ve ever experience, seeing how God gave me the divine means to nurture and feed my own.
Oh Megan. I always love your perspective. This is spot on.
Thanks for your thoughts, Megan.
As the only man commenting so far, I am opening myself up for attack. I’ll ask for the same grace in your objections that I hope to offer in the following assertions. Please forgive the helter-skelter order:
1. A breast as an image is a poly-symbol. Like most symbols, we can never say “this is that.” Breastfeeding, by definition, does something different than a photograph of some sexual caress. That goes both ways–we can never say that a breast is solely a motherly image.
2. Context and culture interpret a given symbol. Dragons are (generally) lucky things in China but (generally) terrifying symbols of covetousness in the West. Breasts are (generally) motherly symbols in Papua New Guinea but (generally) symbols of sex in the West–see Aphrodite’s statue from Greece or any cavalier stack of magazines at a Quick Trip.
3. Jews, who breastfed as often as the tribal groups many ladies reference in these kind of posts, still kept themselves covered. Overall, nakedness in any form was looked down upon. See the Noah/Ham story for an ancient example and Saudi women for a modern example. Idencency was… well… indecent. It’s like the fad for mom’s to take half-naked maternity pictures–that communicates something else entirely both to the viewer’s mind and about your body.
4. Personally, as a man that was addicted to pornography in high school and has been clean for eight years, I can say that baring your breast in public is not the way to get men on your side–godly or otherwise. The former will ignore you (at best) and the latter will covet you (at worst). The way to do it is to change the definition of the symbol by changing the context in which it’s viewed not the other way around. Usage out of context leads to misunderstanding and even violent outbursts (most likely in dialog). Changing the context, however, allows for new usage.
5. Culturally, the symbol of breast has come to mean sex-only. Thank the pornography industry for that. I deal with symbolism in my work all the time and often think of culture creation. The way to change the idea of a symbol (a word, image, etc.) is not to use that symbol publicly but rather to cut off the supply of the bad usage in order to provide room for a new context of the new one. In other words, when you use a symbol in an already established context, you communicate the standard meaning–regardless of your motives. For instance, if I say “pissed” in on place, people think “drunk” while another group thinks “mad” while another doesn’t hear the meaning at all (my mother) and thinks “curse word.” Meaning depends on context. Breast in public = nudity here in America. Period. Does that suck? Yes, that’s terrible, but the way to change it isn’t to bare your breasts publicly–not unless you’re purposefully using your child as a jacked up piece of performance art. Kids are more than projects. I know I would’ve been ashamed had my mother done such a thing in this climate. No, the best way you ladies could change the symbolism of the breast in this culture is not to breastfeed in public but rather to support initiatives to irradiate sex-trafficking and find ways to quench the demand for pornography. (I’d start here: http://vimeo.com/31795904 ).
Unless, of course, convenience is more important than kindness.
Thoughts ?
i’m awestruck at how you moralize against infant feeding in front of humans and place the onus of ending trafficking/quenching the demand for porn on the shoulders of nursing mothers!
very little about caring for babies is convenient. did you know that infants feed every two hours or more, for up to an hour at a time? you suggest we favor kindness over convenience, but it comes across a bit like you want moms and infants to cater to your preferences. that on top of the body shaming and reluctance to prioritize a baby’s needs doesn’t seem especially kind.
i’m sorry that breastfeeding makes you uncomfortable and that you’ve struggled with sexual addiction, but you always have the choice to avert your eyes or remove yourself. (breastfeeding does not require anyone to bare her breasts.) respectfully, this conversation isn’t about getting men on anyone’s side. it isn’t about you at all, unless you want to do the work of re-imagining symbols through a gospel lens.
Right on, Suzannah. Took the words out of my own mouth.
Woah, this is what I was afraid of. Hold on.
I’m not putting anything on anyone’s shoulders. I’m talking about symbols and culture here in order to properly redirect energy. I think your energy is better spent helping others change the context in which the symbol of “breast” is viewed rather than using that symbol in ways that offend or lead astray others. The gospel’s offensive enough, we need not add offense to her.
Yes, I knew that. My mother’s an RN and head over Marion County’s health department–I assure you, I got more lectures on breastfeeding than any three young mothers combined as a young man. Because of my experience on the topic, I’m speaking out, not as some ignorant man emotionally removed from the topic.
And, again, it’s not about my preferences. I prefer the duality of the symbol of breast, partly as erotic imagery in the Song of Solomon between a man and his wife, partly as motherly imagery in line with “the womb of God” in Job. If it wasn’t clear, I find the definition rather shallow in this culture of what a breast is and is not.
Breastfeeding doesn’t make me uncomfortable. It makes my peers uncomfortable–grown men who currently struggle with pornography. If and when an image makes me uncomfortable, I have and do avert my eyes or remove myself. We’re not talking about me. We’re talking about a shopping mall full of men who are being abused by a corrupt femininity in our culture.
Which is why I’m not talking about me, but the context in which a symbol is viewed–as you said at the end, “re-imaging symbols through a gospel lens.” You can only do that if you create culture as a Christian. C. S. Lewis, for instance, created culture with the Chronicles of Narnia. Inside that book and the context of rational animals devoted to Aslan, he redefined the symbol of a centaur–an image that, in ancient Greece, meant something like “irresistible rape.” After the chronicles of Narnia and through affirmation in works like Harry Potter, centaurs have come to means something like “prophets and sages.”
Again, in short, you can’t redefine a symbol merely by using it in public. You must construct a new culture and a new context with which to view it. I’m not taking potshots at any woman or nursing mother and, as I started my first comment, I expect that grace in return.
I’m talking about a methodology that could actually achieve what you ladies are trying to do–reinstate the motherly side of breast imagery.
Thoughts?
“I’ll ask for the same grace in your objections that I hope to offer in the following assertions.”
Offering condescension and patriarchal orthodoxy and calling it graceful is, at best, disingenuous. And please, let’s not act like suggesting we subjugate and restrict women’s activities because of men’s inability to control themselves is a new idea.
Now, for a few helter-skelter points of my own:
1. “we can never say that a breast is solely a motherly image” No, but I’m certain that we can confidently say that a breast with a baby attached to it is solely a motherly image. Let’s not act like they’re the same thing.
2. “I can say that baring your breast in public is not the way to get men on your side.” That you couch the argument in terms of winning men over (as if somehow the appropriateness of a mother feeding her child is predicated on men’s approval) exposes the patriarchal subtext underlying the entire argument.
3. “No, the best way you ladies could change the symbolism of the breast in this culture is not to breastfeed in public but rather to support initiatives to irradiate sex-trafficking and find ways to quench the demand for pornography.” First of all, “you ladies”? Seriously? Second, again, the idea that women, in any way, are responsible for men’s inability to control themselves is just grossly unfair.
4. “I’m not putting anything on anyone’s shoulders.” Yes, you are. See quote above in point 3.
5. “I think your energy is better spent…” Thanks so much for that helpful suggestion.
6. “It makes my peers uncomfortable–grown men who currently struggle with pornography.” These men’s addictions are not the responsibility of mothers and their babies. If men struggle with pornography, I can think of about 864 other steps that could be taken to help them with that addiction besides restricting where mothers can feed their babies. Here’s a thought experiment: if foot-fetish pornography enjoyed an explosion in popularity, so much so that men’s sexualization of the foot was as ubiquitous as the sexualization of the breast, would we demand women wear socks and close-toed shoes at all times as well?
7. “We’re talking about a shopping mall full of men who are being abused by a corrupt femininity in our culture.” Oh, NOW I see. Men are the VICTIMS here.
As a parting thought, I would simply add that shaming is not graceful, and calling patriarchy what it is is not ungraceful.
Thank you, Luke.
Thanks for chiming in here, Luke.
“Offering condescension and patriarchal orthodoxy and calling it graceful is, at best, disingenuous.”
I indended neither condescension nor chauvinism (which is implied, but not said here). Regardless of how it was received, I’m talking about language, symbols and culture–the heart of the argument here. I think I’ve made that clear in the original post and elsewhere here.
1. “we can never say that a breast is solely a motherly image” No, but I’m certain that we can confidently say that a breast with a baby attached to it is solely a motherly image. Let’s not act like they’re the same thing.
Obviously you’ve never counseled a man that’s dealt with matriarchal or feministic or lesbian pornography. I’ve come across them and worked with them through their issues, so yes, my point about the corruptness of the culture stands.
2. “I can say that baring your breast in public is not the way to get men on your side.” That you couch the argument in terms of winning men over (as if somehow the appropriateness of a mother feeding her child is predicated on men’s approval) exposes the patriarchal subtext underlying the entire argument.
I’m neither promoting a patriarchal nor chauvinistic argument. Feminism, in and of itself, is as violent in its rhetoric as chauvinism. If you don’t believe me, look at the violent word fights that were started in this post from one man posting honest objections in a tactful way. No, I reject the grammar of feminism to for the same reason I’m no misogynist–it’s a violent rhetoric that makes men look stupid, ignorant and violent themselves and gives them no chance for redemption.
3. “No, the best way you ladies could change the symbolism of the breast in this culture is not to breastfeed in public but rather to support initiatives to irradiate sex-trafficking and find ways to quench the demand for pornography.” First of all, “you ladies”? Seriously? Second, again, the idea that women, in any way, are responsible for men’s inability to control themselves is just grossly unfair.
I’ve put no blame in this statement. You’re diverting from the point: the easiest way to change a symbol is through culture creation, not through usage. Deal with my argument, not your own emotion.
4. “I’m not putting anything on anyone’s shoulders.” Yes, you are. See quote above in point 3.
Well if I misspoke, this statement should reinterpret that misstatement. As should this one: I’m not putting anything onto the shoulders of a specific demographic. As stated elsewhere, I’m dealing with effectiveness in culture. The best way to change a symbol, as I’ve said repeatedly in this post–an argument that no one has dealt with, is to change the culture in which it’s viewed. That’s my argument, nothing more.
5. “I think your energy is better spent…” Thanks so much for that helpful suggestion.
Though you’re trying to be condescending, I reject your insult and stand by what I said. Your, my, their, our energy is best spent in culture creation. You’ve still yet to deal with my original argument.
6. “It makes my peers uncomfortable–grown men who currently struggle with pornography.” These men’s addictions are not the responsibility of mothers and their babies. If men struggle with pornography, I can think of about 864 other steps that could be taken to help them with that addiction besides restricting where mothers can feed their babies. Here’s a thought experiment: if foot-fetish pornography enjoyed an explosion in popularity, so much so that men’s sexualization of the foot was as ubiquitous as the sexualization of the breast, would we demand women wear socks and close-toed shoes at all times as well?
Your thought disregards the point of your argument, not to mention it’s superlative–no you can’t think of 864 other steps, which shows again that you’re emotionally reacting rather than dealing with the logic of what I said. Yes, if we had a problem with feet, we should reevaluate that. We’ve a problem with tying the glorification of violence to the degradation of sex in our culture (50 shades of Grey) so we should do everything we can to reevaluate that and establish a better, truer, nobler culture for people to gravitate toward. Or, if you prefer: http://thebaochi.com/2011/10/20/muslim-women-versus-american-women-cartoon/
7. “We’re talking about a shopping mall full of men who are being abused by a corrupt femininity in our culture.” Oh, NOW I see. Men are the VICTIMS here.
No, both are. Men are abused by feminism as women are abused by chauvinism. Again, I say we come up with a third way that deals with the actual culture rather than pretending like this is a gender-divided issue. A culture that oversexualizes things harms men and women and pornography is a female problem (statistically) as much and in some cities more than a male problem. The example is about symbols, not about men. Again, you’ve yet to deal with the argument of symbols.
As a parting thought, I would simply add that shaming is not graceful, and calling patriarchy what it is is not ungraceful.
I’m no patriarch–feel free to ask any woman in my life. If I shamed anyone in posting this, I apologize. My intent was to get home and help my wife prepare a meal for our small group. I wrote in a rush and didn’t have time to edit. So again, I’ve no intent to shame anyone. I said “graceful” at the start to set the tone for myself and keep emotions at bay–something you’ve obviously not done, Luke. That’s okay, I understand as I’ve posted in anger or reaction before, but please deal with my argument.
As my presence here is obviously doing more harm than good, I’ll bow out. I appreciate this blog and have been a reader for a long time. Sad that my first interaction was received with such hostility, but that’s what I get for posting in haste. I’ll be leaving you to yourselves now, but please consider the heart of my argument: the usage of symbols (words, images, smells) in a given cultural context.
Thanks again for your time, everyone. I appreciate you interacting with me.
The TL;DR version of this is dudes: start taking responsibility for yourselves and stop viewing women as anything less than fully human with intrinsic value of their own apart from how they affect your life.
The full version…Yes, I get emotional and passionate about confronting patriarchy whenever and wherever I see it. I don’t see that as a vice. It troubles me to see a conversation like this and to see voices like yours (that reinforce traditional, harmful stereotypes) be the only male ones.
If you’d honestly like to talk about culture change and pornography, we can talk about how conservative Christian culture in America and its perverted view of man and womanhood. We can talk about how it results in the subjugation of the woman to the desires of the man actually perpetuates the desire for pornography and instant sexual gratification. We can talk about how, after all if you take this line of thinking to its logical end, that’s all women are good for anyway, an expression of our masculinity and a means to satisfying our desires.
Until Christian men are willing to abandon the privilege of patriarchy that they have enjoyed since the institutionalization of Christianity, and stop attempting to use women as scapegoats for their own emotional inadequacies, then culture will NEVER change. Until Christian men are willing to acknowledge the full humanity of women apart from their utility to men, our culture will continue in its corruption.
“I’m talking about language, symbols and culture–the heart of the argument here.” Yes, and the context within which you’re talking about that language, those symbols and that culture is a patriarchal one (as pretty clearly evidenced by the notion that the needs and conveniences and mothers and their babies should be ON PRINCIPLE prioritized beneath the comfort level of a minority of men.)
“Obviously you’ve never counseled a man that’s dealt with matriarchal or feministic or lesbian pornography. I’ve come across them and worked with them through their issues, so yes, my point about the corruptness of the culture stands.” On this line of thinking, the versions of a radically few individual determines the meaning of a symbol within the context of the culture writ large. I’m sorry, but that argument simply doesn’t hold water.
“I’m neither promoting a patriarchal nor chauvinistic argument.” Yes, you are, in demanding obedience in a particular cultural norm of “modesty” from women in order to accommodate the needs of men, and you’re doing so by grounding your argument in a male-dominated culture, thus both your grounding and your application are dependent on a patriarchal interpretation of culture context.
“The best way to change a symbol, as I’ve said repeatedly in this post–an argument that no one has dealt with, is to change the culture in which it’s viewed.” I agree. What I disagree with is the idea that breastfeeding in itself is not an effective means of changing the culture. I would, in fact, say the opposite, that it is probably the MOST effective means of redeeming the hyper-sexualization of the breast by putting an alternative interpretation of a particular symbol out in the open. As long as women are forced to continue hiding the biological function of their breasts (because it makes men uncomfortable), the taboo nature of the breast dictated by a patriarchal culture persists, and culture cannot and will not be changed.
As far as the 864 steps comment, it wouldn’t matter if I would’ve said 2 other steps or a million other steps, the fact that the FIRST place that you go is to the restriction and condemnation of specific behaviors in women again illustrates the patriarchal subtext of the argument. It says, “let’s get those womanfolk in line first, then we’ll deal with this other stuff.”
Regarding men being “victims,” there’s an easy fix for the “victimhood” of men with regards to a corrupt culture: stop participating in and perpetuating the corruption of culture.
The bottom line is this, brother: if your first impulse is to place the responsibility for accommodating men’s issues with culture on the shoulders of women (which, regardless of how you couch it, is what’s being done here), and in the same breath (or internet paragraph, in this case) decry patriarchy and male-chauvinism, you shouldn’t be surprised when people question the internal-consistency of your world view.
Luke, it seem like you’re looking for patriarchy under the doilies.
Lancelot has clearly made this topic broader than just breastfeeding. His point about sexualised symbols is well established. We may not like it, but we are out of control of others’ perceptions. Human beings are really bad at understanding each other’s motivations, and if we’re honest, often even our own. Without dialogue, we cannot even see how we’re affecting each other, because we can only look through our own eyes.
Shame is a way that we impose control on others — that may be your interpretation of Lancelot’s words, but I don’t at all see that as what he’s advocating. He’s advocating for informed responsibility in the context of freedom. Sadly, your violently dismissive rebuttal of that aim reveals more about you than it does about him.
::heavy sigh::
“Luke, it seem (sic) like you’re looking for patriarchy under the doilies.”
I’m sure this comment was meant to funny, but it actually just serves to illustrate my point about the kind of passive patriarchy that’s so pervasive in our culture, we don’t even recognize it as such any more. I mean, you might as well have opened with, “Stop getting so emotional, you know, like a woman.”
“His point about sexualised symbols is well established.” If we accept his patriarchal assumptions about the normative aspects of culture-creation, then his argument might have a chance, but I don’t, so I don’t think it does.
“We may not like it, but we are out of control of others’ perceptions.” Let’s be clear what we’re talking about here: men’s perceptions, and particuarly the segment of the male population that struggles with pornography and, to follow Lancelot’s argument, the sliver of that population that struggles with “matriarchal or feministic or lesbian pornography.” As the foot fetish analogy seemed to fly right past Lancelot, let me try another on you. Say an argument could be made that men in the act of drinking water are perceived in a highly sexual way by some women, causing them to struggle with lustful thought. Would you advocate for the same kind of segregation of men drinking water that’s being argued here for women feeding their babies? I’m guessing the answer is “no.”
“Shame is a way that we impose control on others — that may be your interpretation of Lancelot’s words, but I don’t at all see that as what he’s advocating.” Right, probably because you agree with his patriarchal assumptions about the normative aspects of culture-creation. The whole of the argument can be summarized like this:
1. Breasts are sexual (because men see them that way)
2. Men struggle with controlling their sexual desires
3. Therefore, women breastfeeding are causing men to struggle with controlling their sexual desires.
That is an argument with one singular purpose: to shame women into conforming to a particular behavior pattern in order to accommodate men in their struggles with controlling their sexual impulses. And it’s absurd.
“He’s advocating for informed responsibility in the context of freedom.” Right, and implicit in that statement is the converse that women who do breastfeed in public are uninformed and/or irresponsible in doing so. It’s just more shaming.
“Sadly, your violently dismissive rebuttal of that aim reveals more about you than it does about him.” I think your characterization of the rebuttal as “violent” is a bit…dramatic…but I’ll agree that it says more about me than it does him. It says that I’m not willing to accept the status quo that relegates women to a secondary status, subject to notions of “culture creation” dictated by men for men. And frankly, I don’t find that sad at all.
megan wrote a gorgeous piece about freedom and honoring women and God’s good design for our bodies, and lancelot and brad want to use this community space to reduce women to pairs of boobs/”symbols”, dictate the proper behavior for women, and educate us on how “violent” and “abusive” feminism is. smh
the objectification espoused here is every bit as damaging as the pornographic culture you rail against (and somehow blame women for)–possibly worse because of its religious spin.
a culture that welcomes breastfeeding IS creating and affirming another way that practices hospitality for moms and babies and embraces a holistic theology of the body. it affirms a masculinity that takes responsibility for itself and esteems women as people made in the image of God instead of objects or body parts existing primarily in relation to men.
“a culture that welcomes breastfeeding IS creating and affirming another way that practices hospitality for moms and babies and embraces a holistic theology of the body. it affirms a masculinity that takes responsibility for itself and esteems women as people made in the image of God instead of objects or body parts existing primarily in relation to men.”
YES! Yes, yes, yes. THAT, quite simply, was my point here. Thank you for hearing me, friend.
Others have provided some well-formed thoughts in response. Forgive me for my tardiness in response … I’m newly pregnant (TWINS!) and quite sick, so I haven’t been at the computer much this week.
I think I understand what you are saying. I am hearing you say we have to understand breasts and how they are viewed in culture. It seems to me, though, that you may have missed the point of my call to the church. I am completely acknowledging that in OUR culture, breasts are viewed merely as sexual objects. I am calling out to and challenging the Church to reject what our culture has corrupted and embrace what God has created.
As to your point regarding kindness over convenience, I would say this: one of the tenets of the gospel of Christ is the idea of serving those around you in love. Some women may choose to cover up or leave a room altogether to nurse a baby to serve the needs of those around her and I affirm that choice as I trust that each woman will do what the Holy Spirit leads her to do in any given situation. However, I would expect that Christian men, of all people in our culture, that CHRISTIAN MEN could be expected to serve the women around them in love by averting their eyes or leaving the immediate area if a woman feeding her baby is uncomfortable. This is kindness and is surely more convenient that breastfeeding a baby in a bathroom stall. (I speak from experience.)
Your recovery from pornography addiction is a wonderful testimony to the sanctifying grace offered to us by Christ, and I would imagine that a beautiful way to participate in the work of redemption of those years of struggle would be to support a woman in the act of providing nourishment for her child in a way that glorifies God’s creation rather than placing on her the burden of being responsible for any illicit responses the mere act of breastfeeding may bring.
These were the thoughts I was going to write, but better done. What she said!
The fact that you equate breastfeeding in public with baring one’s breasts shows you know very little (if anything) about breastfeeding. I’ve breastfed 4 children and as far as I know (and my husband assures me I’m accurate on this point) I’ve never flashed anyone, thanks to receiving blankets, baby slings, my own clothing, and the wonderful fact that the baby itself blocks view of whatever part of the breast might be exposed to public view. Hardly any woman breastfeeding in public actually bares any part of her breast to do so. I would tell you to take a closer look next time you see someone breastfeeding in public, but then you would get slapped in real life, instead of just online – which is what I’d like to do to you at this moment, as you’ve directed me to stop sex trafficking and porn, since I am encouraging both by breastfeeding my children in public instead of just behind closed doors in my own home!
Maybe my view will change after I have my baby but I don’t plan on breastfeeding in public. I personally don’t like watching another woman breast feed in public. I know a lot of people disagree with me but it’s how I feel.
JAC, I have three babies and I’ve only nursed in public a handful of times. It is my preference and my “usual” to seek a quiet, private place. That said, I cannot begin to describe the joy it brought me to feel completed accepted and welcome to feed my child should the need arise– without shame or censor. Even though the odds were high I would still seek out a private nook someplace, it brought me such peace to know that my baby and I were not viewed as “disgusting” or “something to be ‘put away’”.
I agree with Lancelot. Like 110%. Preach it brother!
Amen. I was rather nervous about breastfeeding my first in public, even with a cover, in part due to my church. Even when I went in the women’s restroom (which had nice couches), I was told there were other places to nurse (which was not true…until the pastor’s daughter had a child and then they opened up a nursing room). My second I nursed everywhere (with a cover) including in our current church’s service. No one batted an eye and even if they did…my baby needed to eat. Hopefully, breastfeeding the little one due in a month will be an experience along the lines of the second.
I would give this entire post the slow clap, and a standing ovation. I’m fortunate to live in a pro-breastfeeding community as a whole. There are always mamas nursing – at the mall, at the park, in the church, everywhere. And no one is weird about it. The fact that you even have to write this is just weird to me but I’m glad that you did.
This would be an example of a culture or context in which it works (assuming you’re not being naive). I’d be interested in a documentary or interview from this cultural context as a way of informing currently ignorant cultures, one that includes the opinion of many different men in this culture along with the women.
Well, thank you for assuming I am not naive. What a gift. I have breastfed three babies, and I do live in a supportive community and church culture for breastfeeding – including men. And as thrilled as I would be to soothe your burning concern about breastfeeding’s link to sex-trafficking and porn, with documentary and interviews from this cultural context as a way of informing your currently ignorant culture, one that includes the opinion of many different men, I’ll have to pass. The truth is that you are having an adventure in missing the point, Lancelot. The onus in this debate is on you, not on women, and certainly not on their hungry babies that require nutrition. All scientific research lines up on the side of supportive breastfeeding environments as linked to successful breastfeeding experiences (which, I’m sure you would agree, is recommended without question as the best choice for babies and mothers physically, emotionally, psychologically and, as Megan points out in the article above, spiritually). Those of us that are simply getting on with the work of mothering in a way that glorifies God, and his creation design and intent, do not need to prove or justify anything.
Sarah, please take a moment to measure your own heart here. Lancelot is a brother in Christ, trying to be honest about his perspective. You don’t have to agree, but he’s hardly your enemy, and he seems to be trying to help. I really agree with the original point this article was trying to make, but wow, you sure seem angry. I think ALL parties in this little debate could do with less self-righteousness and a bit more compassion for others. Let’s remember that sometimes love has to temper our Christian liberties. And let’s not be the pharisee in the story, “Thank you God that I’m not like this man who disagrees with my perspective on breastfeeding ….” I think an honest reading of the New Testament leaves little doubt that (although this is an important issue that deserves discussion), at the end of the day, Christian unity is more important than breastfeeding. Just my opinion, feel free to ignore if my words are unhelpful.
I for one didn’t read anger in your words, Sarah. I think you brought the comments back to the context of the article concisely and without malice. Nice job.
Seriously?
I meant naive about the culture, not your babies. Nor did I mean it offensively. Naive as in “ignorant” and “ignorant” as in “potentially missing information you’re unaware of.”
To everyone else: this would be an example of using a symbol in a way that does not fit in a given context. She assumed I meant an insult or a slight, I did not, but I was ignorant to how it might come across. This sort of thing’s at work for words and images.
My first child was born four and a half months ago and I am breastfeeding. Although I have breastfed in public when necessary, I prefer to excuse myself to somewhere private when possible. On a few occasions, when I knew I was going somewhere I personally would not be comfortable breastfeeding in public, I have taken a bottle of pumped breast milk with me. I always keep myself covered up when I breastfeed, not because I feel like I have to, but because I want to. There are certain parts of my body that I prefer to keep private. And I should be allowed to do so. I have never had anyone so much as bat an eye at me for nursing in public, let alone make a negative comment. However, whenever I read things like this that assert how women have a right to breastfeed in public and we shouldn’t be ashamed of baring our breast in public to nurse, it makes me feel bad about myself, as if somehow by wanting to keep my breasts covered I have done something wrong. I don’t think that is what you meant, but it is how it makes me feel.
Honestly, I feel like the bigger fuss women make about their right to breastfeed in public, the more uncomfortable people get. (And the worse women who prefer to breastfeed privately feel about themselves.) And the more women just breastfeed, quietly, without making a fuss, the more normalized breastfeeding becomes. Less talking the talk and more walking the walk. More supporting breastfeeding moms however they choose to do it. Just my opinion.
Emily, that’s exactly how I feel about the situation – “supporting breastfeeding moms however they choose to do it”. I like the excuse to go to a calm and quiet place to reconnect with my baby. The times we do nurse in public, my baby gets distracted, pulls away, and generally does not eat as well, thus making us both frustrated.
I will say, having a supportive husband makes all the difference. He’s encouraged me to feed in public if its necessary, and understands if I want to slip away and nurse in private.
emily, i think this conversation *is* about supporting breastfeeding moms however they chose to do it (and, more broadly, would include respect for moms who don’t breastfeed at all.) i don’t think anyone is saying that breastfeeding in public is the “right” way, only that it isn’t the wrong way and shouldn’t be shamed, especially by the people of God.
each mom, baby, season, and context are so different. whether tucked away in a quiet corner or in the middle of life, nursing with cover or without, we all have different experiences and preferences. it should be up to the nursing pair to decide what’s best for them. then we as a church can honor a mother’s choice slip away privately (rather than demand it) as well as another mom’s choice to nurse wherever life happens.
If this conversation is about supporting breastfeeding moms however they choose to do it, then why do I feel called out, shamed, judged, for not wanting to breastfeed in public?
In an earlier comment, someone mentioned being at a church and asking if there was a nursing room, and being told that they were welcome to nurse anywhere. Someone replied and said how wonderful that was and how if everywhere was like that nursing rates would be higher. But if someone said that to me, I would be upset. If I ask for a nursing room, it’s because I want to nurse in private, not to feel like I’m supposed to nurse in public.
I feel like women who are so gung-ho about women breastfeeding in public (which I completely support for those who desire that) forget about those of us who want nursing mom’s rooms, who want privacy, and don’t want to feel like we are supposed to or have to nurse in public.
i’m not sure. if anything i’ve written has made you feel like that, i am sorry. my heart is wholly for all women to find freedom and grace in their choices, and i see that in the voices of much of the community here.
i do think that we as women often feel defensive about our parenting decisions, no matter what they are. we are bombarded by so many opinions, judgments, “experts”, and constructed media wars that it’s a perfect storm to make every woman feel inadequate, no matter what.
it sounds like you would feel most welcome at a church with a designated nursing mom room, and i think those can be so great! i just think that there is a tremendous difference between making such a family/mother hospitality room available and demanding that that is the only “proper” place for women to nurse. i’d imagine that the priest who said that women were welcome to nurse anywhere truly meant anywhere and would be happy to direct a woman to a quiet library or other room should she indicate that privacy would make her most comfortable.
“i’d imagine that the priest who said that women were welcome to nurse anywhere truly meant anywhere and would be happy to direct a woman to a quiet library or other room should she indicate that privacy would make her most comfortable.”
But she she said in the post that she specifically asked for a nursing room, and instead was told to nurse anywhere…
I do agree with this statement of yours:
“i do think that we as women often feel defensive about our parenting decisions, no matter what they are. we are bombarded by so many opinions, judgments, “experts”, and constructed media wars that it’s a perfect storm to make every woman feel inadequate, no matter what.”
And for me, it’s this particular post that makes me feel inadequate. If the author is truly for empowering breastfeeding women, then as a breastfeeding woman, I wanted her to know how this post made me feel.
Emily, I am the one whose priest opened his arms to me in a gesture of welcome, that I should feel free to nurse anywhere. The reality is this– if I was in Mass with all three of my children, I sat in the back row and would nurse my newborn daughter, if needed. Our priest’s gentle spirit and acceptance had set the tone that allowed me to feel comfortable doing so. That said, I am one who actually prefers a quieter, more private place, if possible. And, so, on the occasions when my daughter needed to nurse and my husband was there to mind the older two, I did excuse myself. Where did I go? To a lovely leather rocker in the aforementioned priest’s office– which he had offered to me when he saw me leave the sanctuary one Sunday. All this to say– I do agree with you. Women should be made to feel comfortable nursing wherever they prefer. I don’t think “nursing in public” is superior in any way to seeking a private spot. But I do think that feeling WELCOME to nurse in public is indeed superior to feeling shamed for feeding your baby in the presence of others. I’m sorry if my earlier comment implied something different.
I appreciate your clarification. I absolutely agree with you that feeling welcome to nurse in public is superior to feeling shamed for feeding your baby in the presence of others. I support women who breastfeed in public 100%. At the same time, no one should feel shamed for wanting to excuse herself to nurse in private, but that is what the original post and some of the comments have made me feel. For example, the original author stated, “To agree with our culture’s corrupted view of breasts and breastfeeding is to deny God’s beautiful, exquisite design.” Suddenly, because I’m not particularly comfortable nursing in public and would rather do so in private, I have adopted our culture’s corrupted view of breastfeeding and am denying God’s beautiful, exquisite design? This is so hurtful to me, and as someone who has persevered with breastfeeding despite massive struggles, it just makes me want to cry. I’m doing my best, and yet I still can’t measure up.
I personally appreciate lancelot’s thoughts. It’s not easy for a guy to admit struggles with porn addiction, and it IS incumbent on women to help our brothers in Christ, even if we are nursing. That being said, there really is a middle ground. Guys (even ones who struggle in this area) can prayerfully make a serious effort to understand that nursing is difficult, and moms who nurse in public usually do not have any other reasonable option, or else we would take it! Most moms who nurse publicly are not trying to be obnoxious or in-your-face, they are just trying to quiet a hungry, fussy child. Guys, you should know … often, you’re facing a choice between hearing my kid scream, or watching me nurse my kid (as modestly as possible). That’s just how it is.
But ladies, we should do our part, too. Examine your heart. When you see someone who is uncomfortable by your nursing, is your heart inclined to sin, or to love them? We sin when we sit there and stew, thinking how wrong they are, and how much they need to change their thinking. Let’s admit, we don’t know that person’s history or what struggles they may be facing, and cut them some slack. That doesn’t mean you have to run away and hide, but it does mean nursing moms should try to be as covered as reasonably possible, at least when men are present who might be caused to stumble. It’s a “law of liberty / law of love” issue. Yes, we are and should be free in Christ to nurse. But sometimes, love requires us to voluntarily restrict this liberty, for the sake of our brothers in Christ. Let’s read 1 Cor 8:9, and examine our hearts.
Just my two cents. Thanks all for your thoughts.
Agreed.
Yes this, this, this! I have always seen nursing my babies as worship. I am fortunate to live in Canada, where breastfeeding in public (in cities anyway) is normal, prevalent, accepted and legal. Everyone nurses in my church, right in the service, some cover, some don’t. As a registered lactation consultant, IBCLC and someone who volunteers with women/teen moms in poverty, I can agree that the way perceptions are changed about breastfeeding in public and as breasts being seen as very lovely dual purpose organs, is in part to women breastfeeding in public and having positive experiences doing so. (I would add a few things about marketing, capitalism and the fiscal benefits to huge corporations to keeping women’s breasts as only sexual objects, as well as paid maternity leave, among other things
). Personally I am not ever sure why this is an issue – when a woman is breastfeeding you don’t see her breast anyway, the baby is covering it.
Less than a quarter of nursing moms are persevering a full year, which is the minimum the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends babies dine on mom’s milk. (WHO recommends at least 2 years). Only 43% of U.S. mothers were still nursing at six months, although the AAP advises babies stick exclusively to breast milk during that period.
I supplemented my boys before 6 months and they were both weaned before a year. This was because of the stigma I admitted even then that I had towards breastfeeding and it was reinforced by many around me. I felt like I lacked natural affection because I didn’t enjoy breastfeeding. Information didn’t make me change my mind. Knowing I had a hangup didn’t change my mind. Modeling and acceptance did.
I did not grow up seeing moms nursing. I grew up seeing babies with bottles, and nursing moms hiding in back rooms where I was not allowed. Nursing was talked about like it was gross or spoken about in perverted ways. This affects how women feel about their own bodies and the choices they make when caring for their babies.
I think it’s just one more way that the world is crazy flipped on it’s head, inappropriate shame. I still hear future mothers talking about how gross it is–that is why I think it’s important to be hospitable to moms. I am grateful to those who had a better sense of what motherhood is about and didn’t shrink away. I am happy with my decision to hang in there and push through my own discomfort. I am not trying to attract attention. I am not insensitive to others’ discomfort. I am not insisting on my own way. I still try to be discreet. I still cry when people say I’m only thinking about myself, and that my mothering presence is an imposition, but that shame and hurt asks me to be brave so that perhaps our daughters and granddaughters will be so comfortable that such an environment is foreign to them. I hope when my daughter is older that she can hang out with nursing moms around.
Love.
Megan these are beautiful words and also hard ones. I am soon to be a nursing mama again and I value this gift wholeheartedly. I believe in the beauty in nourishing & bonding with my babe in these moments (for the most part aside from middle of night to be honest). I don’t feel uncomfortable for the most part in nursing in front of people, preferring to be covered in the company of men.
I do think there is this gift we give to our children and other children even, or even other women who have never experienced this, of what nourishment looks like. That it isn’t taboo. Living in Bellingham it is actually more taboo to bottle feed to be quite honest. And so the nursing community can tend to be over emphasized here to a fault. It becomes more about how some Christians now a days feel like they are the ostracized ones living in America (does that make sense?). So how then do we as a church encourage the beauty & gift in nourishing & bonding through nursing, while not ostracizing those with how proud we are in nursing (posting pictures of us nursing our babes with lots of breast showing)? I hope I’m making sense as I’m pondering myself.
I do appreciate you & your beautiful words.
Kamille – I hear you loud and clear, sister! I breastfeed all four of my kids – until I was diagnosed with cancer when my youngest was 6 weeks old. I had to wean him at 5 months so I could get cancer treatment. From then on, he was bottlefed. You wouldn’t BELIEVE the backlash and the comments I received from other Christians, most of whom didn’t know the full story, when they saw me bottlefeeding my little guys. Ouch, did that hurt! Especially since I would have given anything to still be breastfeeding. It made me really reconsider and think back to how I might have made bottlefeeding moms feel in the past – or working moms, or public schooling moms, or disposable diapering moms, fill-in-the-blank moms, any mom who chose something different than me!!! Ugh, what a close minded and judgmental person I have been. And how much pain I myself have spread around. Love, love, love. We HAVE to spread it around and lube up all of our interactions and relationships with none other than love, love, and more love.
I was largely unaware that breastfeeding was taboo anywhere, muchless in the church, having been given the gift of being raised by a unique and wonderful Christian mother – “former” feminist, commune-dweller, hippie, wearer of handmade patchwork skirts, avid breastfeeding advocate of toddlers and small children, and barefoot strong-willed bride of an absent minded professor. Imagine my surprise when I began nursing my eldest and, finding it to be the most natural thing in the world, I nursed her right in the pews so that I could continue listening to the sermon without imprisoning myself in the gossip chamber of the mother’s room at the rear of the church. I immediately became acquainted with the incredible peer pressure of several hundred pairs of piercing straight-laced Scandinavian Protestant eyes focused in my direction, all looking askance although I had by no means “whipped it out”, having covered myself appropriately, I thought, with a receiving blanket. I stayed seated in silent protest and continued nursing my children (all 4 of them) in church. At times my “silent” protest became somewhat less so thanks to the smacking of satisfied little lips and the occasional “oohs” and “aahs” of undeniable pleasure issuing forth as my milk let down. My cheeks did burn scarlet during these embarrassing moments, but I held my ground. How I wished that someone – ANYONE! – would join me in my march on the sacred, holy ground of the unbreached-by-breast sanctuary! I wonder if anything will have changed by the time my 3 daughters breastfeed their progeny in the hallowed halls of the Church? Somehow I think that if our institutions survived the bra burning of the ’60s and the freedom of our own generation unscathed, little progress will have been made by the time their breastfeeding days come in 20 years.
Thank you for broaching this subject here. I am thankful someone is willing to bring it up. Yes, our breasts are sexual (“let her breasts satisfy you always” Pr. 5:19), but they are created also for the feeding of our little ones (“blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed!” Luke 11:27). Can we not progress past the hedonist adolescence of our testosterone driven culture and think intellectually and maturely for just a moment here? Grow up, guys, and not only allow, but stand up for your wives, sisters, mothers and daughters so that they can take care of business wherever the kidlets are hungry!!
I loved this the first time I read it, and I love it all over again. Thank you Megan. May this life-giving message reach far and wide.
I read your original post sometime ago, and sobbed through most of it. The place where I have experienced the most judgement and rejection for feeding my children has been the very place I feel like I should receive the most support. Your post is beautiful, and I think so important in the truth it contains. Thank you for sharing it again! I will be sharing it on all my social media feeds, but I was wondering if you would consider linking it up with the Breastfeeding Blog Hop that I host? I think it would be such a great thing for people to read, especially this week! You can find out more about the hop here: http://sistersncloth.com/2012/08/02/breastfeeding-blog-hop-week-31-and-its-world-breastfeeding-week/ Thank you again for this post!!
Well, the post itself is stand alone glory. Straight up. I am pleased that women AND men promote nursing, in public if that’s when and where the baby is hungry. I’m saddened that we cannot STILL view women as full humans, and give proper respect to the amazing ability of the woman’s body to give full nourishment to her children. So often in scripture, God is described as having this kind of ability for us.
I’d like to point out that this is a symbiotic relationship, which starts at conception. Mother and baby exist in harmony; we need each other. At birth, hormones that release the placenta also produce breast milk. The contractions continue to expel blood even while providing fuel for a new person. As the baby grows and the mother continues to nurse, a beautiful thing CAN happen; how often do nursing mothers experience let down right before that little one cries out for food? You see? Our bodies anticiate their need before they do! How lovely an image of our Father. (Now you’ll tell me that to ascribe that to HIM is to call him HER. Bring it.)
I also want to say that when I was nursing, 14 years ago, there was no google. There were no “blogs.” We did not have the same kind of global support that you younger mothers are experiencing today. What a thing to rejoice.
Well said, Megan. I got your back, any day.