Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday August 24 2016, @03:12PM   Printer-friendly
from the mmmmmmmm-lunch! dept.

In 2013, 81.1 percent of U.S. mothers said they started out breast-feeding their baby. That's up from 75 percent in 2008, and 70 percent in 2000, according to the CDC.

[...] 52 percent of U.S. mothers said they were still breast-feeding their infants when the babies were 6 months old, and 30 percent said they were still breast-feeding when the babies reached 1 year.

How should society handle breastfeeding in public and the workplace? Should there be any restrictions on the age of the child?

Breastfeeding has obvious benefits for a child's development, but breast milk is also a fluid of the body that can carry disease.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-still-breastfeeds-daughter-aged-4881835

http://www.livescience.com/55846-breast-feeding-mothers-united-states.html


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Moof123 on Wednesday August 24 2016, @06:32PM

    by Moof123 (5927) on Wednesday August 24 2016, @06:32PM (#392712)

    Yes, there is a monolithic answer. Is the kid hungry? Can you find a safe spot to sit while the kid gets fed? If "yes" to both, feed the damn kid.

    Should a woman be required to go in a back room? No.

    Should she be required to cover up? No.

    So weirdos who stare, gawk, or comment be asked to leave or shutup? Yes, keeping a mom from feeding a hungry child is approaching child abuse.

    When I have gone to kids parties where moms need to feed their kid #2 while our kid plays their their kid #1 has shown me that it is no big deal, get over it. They generally find a quiet corner, and often cover up, but should not feel obligated to do so. None of the toddlers find anything odd about the situation, it is only as we get older and learn our wacko norms that kids learn that it is odd. As a guy I do my best to avert my attention, as I do for parents changing diapers, and that should be the end of it.

    Personally I think if we let women go topless like men can it would be about like legalized pot. It would be new and novel for a month then completely a non-issue that we all shrugged our shoulders at. Frankly a lot of guys on sites like this are more offensive looking shirtless than a topless woman.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by jdavidb on Wednesday August 24 2016, @07:47PM

    by jdavidb (5690) on Wednesday August 24 2016, @07:47PM (#392742) Homepage Journal

    Should a woman be required to go in a back room? No.

    Of course not, that would be slavery. But dictating that somebody else must allow her to feed her child on his property is also slavery. I oppose slavery, so the only moral choices are those that both she and the property owner are agreed to.

    --
    ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday August 25 2016, @07:32AM

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Thursday August 25 2016, @07:32AM (#392902) Homepage
    Aesthetic offensiveness has nothing to do with it when it comes to acceptability.

    I remember at uni a huge group of us, equal gender mix, watched "Dick" (it was one of the girl's 20th birthdays, and was one of the presents). With no vocal objections, male and female alike, straight and gay alike, we unanimously agreed afterwards that flaccid dicks were just plain ugly compared to erect ones. Yet in pornography laws worldwide, the ugly one is more legal to publish.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves