Why Are Breast Feeders Condemned For Doing Something Natural

PUBLISHED: 10:33 04 November 2008 | UPDATED: 10:35 04 May 2010

IN reply to the letter from Anne Scuse last week, why should a breast feeder have to ask for permission to feed her infant when a bottle feeder does not? After all, they are doing the same thing, reaching the same goal, but by different methods.

Magazine

IN reply to the letter from Anne Scuse last week, why should a breast feeder have to ask for permission to feed her infant when a bottle feeder does not? After all, they are doing the same thing, reaching the same goal, but by different methods.

Magazine racks that show women's breasts, still do not make them sexual objects, it is what's in the mind of the individual that does that.

The honest answer... keeping small children safe and under control whilst breast feeding - it is no different to bottle feeding. Mothers cope very well and are quite able to keep a watchful eye on other children. Or was you trying to say that you could not cope?

Common sense tells you who would be responsible for a scalded child.

Whether it's en-masse bottle/breast feeding, women are achieving the same aim, to feed their infant. And further more, it is only an individual's insecure, naive, sexual misinformed mindset which would make the view breast feeding as more sexual and intimidating than bottle feeding. Take breast feeding for what it is, a means of feeding an infant.

Nature's way is to breast feed, so why are breast feeders being condemned, discriminated and victimized because they choose to do what nature intended?

ALISON ARNOLD

By email.

Most Read

Most Read

Latest from the Ely Standard

Hot Jobs

Show Job Lists