BREASTFEEDING BAD FOR GENDER ROLES, SAY STUPID BOOBS
It’s not hard to find controversy when it comes to breastfeeding. It’s really easy to be controversial when it comes to breastfeeding. Everyone gets angry and vocal. All you have to do is say something new and stupid. Maybe not even new! It will work every single time. And this is no exception. A new study in Pediatrics has made some brand new authoritative assertions that are pretty damn shocking. The study doesn’t like it when government or medical groups describe breastfeeding as natural. Huh? They think it’s ethically inappropriate. Again, huh? Seems odd, right? Well, they say it’s wrong to say natural in terms of breastfeeding as it enforces strict ideas of gender roles. Get it? There are some stupid boobs in our society. But they want to tell us about ethics and nature.
SOCIETY CAN’T HANDLE BREASTFEEDING, IN PUBLIC, IN PRIVATE, IN CONVERSATION
The study claims, “Coupling nature with motherhood… can inadvertently support biologically deterministic arguments about the roles of men and women in the family (for example, that women should be the primary caretaker).” Ok, if you’re having trouble deciphering that, you’re not alone. I get it, and yet I’m confused and angry regardless. Editor’s note: I’m a dude. Ideas of newborn childrearing have shifts of focus and messaging. But recently, many groups have promoted breastfeeding in preference to bottle-feeding, referring to breastfeeding as natural. Those groups include notables like the World Health Organization, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. So much for obvious reality, amirite?
Read More:
SO WHAT IS NATURAL IF IT’S NOT A WOMAN’S BREAST AND A BABY?
But the study has a big problem with describing breastfeeding as natural. “Referencing the ‘natural’ in breastfeeding promotion… may inadvertently endorse a set of values about family life and gender roles, which would be ethically inappropriate.” Ok, someone needs to explain to me how saying something that is natural is, um natural, diminishes someone not born to the gender that would allow that to be natural? The study attacks the idea of using natural to describe breastfeeding. It assumes it represents “values and beliefs that underlie them.” Ok, I’m definitely part of the problem then. I happen to believe that natural human breastmilk is….natural.
Call me crazy. And when a child breast feeds that is also…natural. What could be more natural? Our society is so confused about this. In a big way. This gender role thing is getting crazy.
More:
STUPID BOOBS SAY BREASTFEEDING PROMOTES ANTIVAX, WHAT?
But the situation got even murkier. And the motivations and agenda too. The study’s authors also claimed that using the term “natural” to describe it also had another negative social impact. What could that be, you wonder? They say that if you say breastfeeding is natural, you’re helping to promote the anti-vaccine movement.
I just can’t even more with these people. I think this study should have acknowledged that it was researched and written by a couple of unnatural boobs. Big, obvious, ugly, gender and proportional bending, stupid boobs. So what is wrong with these people?
