On a completely lighthearted note, I think you underestimate the size of the porn industry.

On a serious note, what would you do if you saw a woman giving birth in a public place? Would you do the same thing to a woman who breastfeeds? "Go have your baby in the bathroom or in the car or at home, don't do it here, it's indecent! Just go have a cesarean! This wouldn't happen if you just went to the hospital!"

This is the attitude I get from you, and I think it's completely unacceptable and uncalled for. I don't want the society that I participate in to act like you do. I want it to be okay for women to feed their frikkin' children. So I wouldn't dare tell a woman to cover up or be ashamed of her body. She has a child to take care of--worrying about her "nudity" is so petty and I am ashamed that people behave in a manner that alienates women who breastfeed.

Heaven forbid I walk around barefoot lest someone with a foot fetish see them! I think that "it might be construed as sexual" is a pretty weak argument. A baby calf suckling a cow's udder isn't sexual (unless you're into that sort of thing), so an infant sucking on a mother's teat shouldn't be any different (unless you're into that sort of thing). Society as a whole shouldn't be punished because of a few perverts.

That's very difficult to answer, and like I said, from an infrastructure standpoint it may be too expensive to be considered practical to designate "where."

When should be now, but how is the hard part. A lot of this "it's indecent to show boobs in public even for breastfeeding" stems from religious morals (Adam and Eve I suppose). It would take a lot of work to get enough churches on board to teaching women not to be ashamed of their bodies, and to teach everyone that it's okay for women to be topless in public. If we were to do that though, breasts would become de-sexualized (if that's even a word) and it would become just as much of a fetish as feet.

Unfortunately, in most of the prevalent religions, women have been demonized as temptresses and adulterators and whores and sluts, while men get off as being tempted and adulterated, so we should cover up the women for being attractive instead of punishing the men for not being able to keep it in their pants. It's not easy to overturn a notion that has penetrated society for a couple thousand years.

Personally I think we should all go "Greek." In ancient Greece, nudity was tolerated, but if you were sporting a boner it was considered indecent. So if you've got a case of the hornies, you cover up. (I imagine women on periods covered themselves up as well, and I think that's a good policy too)

I suppose this would also imply not having sex in public, but personally I wouldn't want to do that around anyone else because I consider it very personal and not something I want to share with others (even visually).

I think breast feeding is fine. Most women cover themselves up with a shawl or a blanket while doing it, and it's a natural thing. You don't look away when you see a calf suckling do you?
It's a natural thing and shouldn't be looked down upon. Otherwise it'd be illegal to hug your children in public.

Huh. My apologies, then. Although, that just makes me all the angrier at the reports I've heard.

Sorry to come off so harsh. It wasn't really directed to you, but more like a clarification so that there's not any confusion where I stand if a third party sees our discussion.

I'm all for breastfeeding in public. That said, I think it would be nice if buildings serving a large number of people at any given time would provide a more secluded place for mothers to feed their children - and no, a public restroom does not suffice! Ick.

I really think breastfeeding should be done in a more secluded place then the center of the food court or the middle of a park. Please read my entire post before labelling me as a bigot and baby hater.

I have read the entire thread, so before someone jumps down my throat about the bathroom thing, let me make another point. You guys keep saying that you would not want to eat in a restroom, but there are certainly places where even adults are not allowed to eat. It would be totally inappropriate for an adult to pull out a pizza in the middle of the clothing store, sit on the floor, and start eating their food in the middle of the store. An adult can't eat in certain places because of decency and other worries like not getting food on the merchandise; they have to take the time to go to the food court and eat there or if the store doesn't have a food court they have to wait until they are done and leave the store. I think kids are the same way. You don't take a rowdy toddler or a loud infant to a very expensive high-end resteraunt because they would disturb the other guests. In my church, there is a special room with a one-way window for nursing mothers to use, not because the members of my church despise breastfeeding, but because they don't want to be distracted from the message. Even when breastfeeding mothers try to be discrete, as many have pointed out, it is not always possible. The very act requires some level of exposure of private body parts. As a women, I am not sexually attracted to boobs at all, especially since I live in a house with all girls most of the time and we sometimes will walk around without a shirt on. But, we would never leave the house like that, we only do it in the private of our house.

My cousin just had a beautiful baby boy about a year ago and she never breast fed him in public. She did breast feed him in private and used a bottle when in public. He is perfectly healthy and lively and I don't think the baby would care ONE BIT if he had to feed in a restroom or other private place. The baby DOES NOT care, it is only adult people who think that a baby would mind. The most important thing about breast feeding is the baby's health, the second is public concerns. If the baby's health needs can be met and the mother can still satisfy the public concerns, why is this not acceptable? It is not healthier for a baby to feed in a crowded public room as opposed to a more secluded corner, so why should mothers get so defensive of their babies needing to feed right there in the middle of everything.

In regards to having to feed your child immediately instead of the few minutes it takes to get to a secluded place, how many times does a mother have to put off feeding her child for other reasons? A lot, I know with my baby cousin, there were many times when my cousin was busy doing something and couldn't feed him right this second. It doesn't really hurt the baby to have to wait a few minutes and mothers monopolize on this fact ALL THE TIME. But, suddenly in public they want to argue that babies need their food right this minute when they don't even do that in their own homes.

Too many people think that if someone is against public breastfeeding, they are against the best interests of the baby. That is such a rude thing to think. I love babies and my baby cousin so much and truly want the best for him and all babies, but their best interests do not include having their every need met immediately and without concern to the people around you.

If I saw a woman giving birth in public, I would be disgusted. End of story. And no, I wouldn't tell her that it's her fault, because how was she supposed to know that she was going to give birth? I guess that if it was her due-date, then she shouldn't have been outside. Not because I don't want to see her have birth outdoors, but because she should be taking it easy at that point.

The point is, someone is going to have a problem with it.
And you can't just say that we can't do natural things because someone happened to deem it sexual, but say breastfeeding is perfectly fine. I agree with whitebeast on that point.

The baby also won't mind if it's in a car on a summer day without air conditioning, but that doesn't mean it's the bright thing to do. Babies know very little. They cannot tell what is good and what is bad for them.

It is not always possible for a woman to pump and have breast milk in a bottle. When this is the case, why should we force mothers to use pricey alternatives which are not nearly as good for the children?

Why should we penalize women for trying to feed their child, if there is no other alternative? Certainly, this shouldn't be the case.

There's a huge difference between having sex and feeding a child.
You still didn't answer me about this.

What is sexual about feeding a child?

Who is to say it isn't?
Some people get off on that.

And some people get off people wearing socks. That means we should ban socks from public places, right? And I'm sure dog collars are pretty up there on the kink scale. So they shouldn't have them. Instead of walking their dogs, owners will just have to carry them. And if they run away, they are screwed.

The point is. It's not the babies demanding to be fed in a crowd. Yes, they want to be fed, but it does not bother them to be fed in a corner. It would bother them to be in a hot car. I'm not talking about being fed vs. not being fed or breast milk vs powder milk. I'm talking about being fed in a certain place, which does not affect the health of the baby at all.

I never said she pumped or anything. I was just saying what she did. I am not against breast feeding in public as long as it is done in a secluded area, even if that just means a table in the corner instead of a bench in the middle of the hallway. I myself would prefer to pump rather than breast feed, but that is not a part of my argument.

We are not penalizing them. We are asking them to be a little courteous of the people around them. The baby still gets fed and people don't have to feel uncomfortable. There are limitations on how selfish a mom can be even for a baby and I think one of those is choosing to expose themselves in public without consideration for the people around them when there is a viable alternative that still allows all the benefits to the baby.

It is not a major inconvenience to move a little ways to a corner or the bathroom (also, now they usually have family bathrooms in most places that would lend themselves well to this) and I believe I have already talked about the bathroom, so don't bring it up unless you have something new to say.

People are often a little inconvenienced for politeness. Think of any time you have had to wait in line to use the restroom. Just because you didn't get to go right then, doesn't mean you just squatted right there in the line and went to the bathroom. Or, for a closer example, when you are waiting in line at a resteraunt and are really hungry, you don't just barge into the kitchen and start grabbing other people's food.

I think Kris was responding to Double S, who mentioned her sister using a pump if going out in public for an extended period of time.

I agree with this statement. People should always be curteous of others around them. And the few seconds or minutes it takes to move someplace secluded is not going to jeoperdize the baby.

There is disagreement and then there is a blatant attack. Now I wasn't directly going against you or what you have said previously. And by not going to read the entire thread doesn't change my original post. I am not going against everybody in who posted in this thread. I actually am only commenting on the more recent ones. I'm sorry if I seemed like I was going against anyone or if I was misunderstood. I am not. I just don't want to see someone criticized for their opinion. Just saying you disagree because such and such is one thing. To say their are wrong for what they think is another. I also apologize if it sounds like I am repeating myself.

Wearing socks isn't sexual. Walking your dog isn't sexual.

A person having their breast sucked is not the same thing as the two stated above, whether it is a baby or a grown person doing it.

But breast-sucking isn't sexual in this context :| The baby's not doing it because he gets off on it, he's doing it because there's milk coming out and he's hungry. Likewise, wearing a collar or socks is sexual sometimes, othertimes it isn't. It depends on the context, and in the context of breastfeeding, no, breast-sucking isn't a sexual act in any way and you repeatedly saying it is does not make it so.

Wearing socks isn't the same as walking a dog isn't the same as feeding a child with your breasts.

Also, there IS a definite difference between an adult and an infant sucking on a breast. One is for fun, the other is for need. I assure you that women do not (typically) feed children out of sexuality. They do it because (1) their infant is hungry and (2) lactating can be painful and relief comes from milking.

Everyone has a fetish. If we change the general perception of breasts, they will become desexualized. The whole population shouldn't have to pay for the crimes of a few perverts.