Thursday
May072009
Breastfeeding Nazis
Thursday, May 7, 2009 
Day in and day out, I keep hearing and reading the term Breastfeeding Nazi used to describe lactation consultants, La Leche League leaders, breastfeeding advocates and other lactivists. I think it is completely inappropriate.
- First, lactivists have not killed millions of people like the Nazis did. People that advocate for breastfeeding are doing so to give babies the best possible start in life and to save lives. In fact, improved and increased breastfeeding could save millions of lives each year. According to UNICEF:
It has been estimated that improved breastfeeding practices could save some 1.5 million children a year. Yet few of the 129 million babies born each year receive optimal breatsfeeding and some are not breastfed at all. Early cessation of breastfeeding in favour of commercial breastmilk substitutes, needless supplementation, and poorly timed complementary practices are still too common. Professional and commercial influences combine to discourage breastfeeding, as do continued gaps in maternity legislation.
- Second, calling someone that is an enthusiastic advocate of something a Nazi trivializes and minimizes the suffering of the victims of the Holocaust. Even if you feel like you have been a "victim" of extreme lactivism, you cannot in good conscience compare that to the complete and utter horror that the Nazis carried out.
So stop. Please stop. It is not appropriate. Not funny.
Don't believe me? Want to know more? Then read the perspective of Kathy Kuhn, a Jewish lactation consultant. Or the perspective of the child of a Nazi prisoner of war camp.
Reader Comments (182)
Language evolves and changes. This is just an example of that. I don't believe it's worth getting worked up over -- you're not going to change society. All you can do is stand up for yourself (so if someone directs a "nazi" phrase at you, ask them not t0), but going on some Crusade over it is just over-reactionary and feeding into the stereotype in my opinion.
It's offensive, inappropriate and - above all - inaccurate. Thanks for this post.
just posted on this topic today on my blog www.pajamasandcoffee.com and am going in to edit that particular word out now- did not realize it may be offensive, so thanks for your post.
@Tatiana: If I'm not going to change society, who should or who can? I think there are a lot of things about society that are worth trying to change and I think individuals need to be invested in helping to make those changes. I'm not a big fan of apathy.
@ Mary McCarthy - Thank you. I just left you a comment on your post too.
@Tatiana -- No one should have to ask others not to call them a nazi! Unfortunately, you said it yourself, the type of person who would use that term in the first place would likely see any request NOT to use it as more evidence of "nazism"...(feeding into the stereotype)
1. Godwin's Law isn't a logical fallacy. It's a joke.
2. the reductio ad Hitlerum (also a joke) that IS a fallacy is a fallacy because it is the fallacy of association. So if someone relies on the evil of Hitler (or the Nazis) as the only reason you shouldn't do something (be an artist, drive BMWs) then they have committed a fallacy. Because surely it's not enough that Hitler did it; what is evil about it?
3. Assuming, or taking, x-Nazi comparisons as invoking the Holocaust's evil (that is, taking the argument made by those making the comparison, as a reductio ad Hitlerum) and rejecting them is itself committing a fallacy: "You have invoked the Nazis. You must be invoking the Holocaust. Therefore you are wrong."
4. I say I have no horse in this race because I'm not anti-LLL nor pro-LLL. I didn't invent the phrase I used to describe topic-neutrality.
5. You don't have to take my word for it that rejecting the Nazi comparison is a fallacy. You can study fallacies on your own. I'm not appealing to my authority when I say that there are argumentative fallacies being committed. But appealing to Wikipedia is definitely a fallacy.
6. MomTFH: I'm not playing up minor points of the comparison. I'm playing up the ONLY points of the comparison. There is no way that someone using the term 'boob-Nazi' is trying to make people reject LLL because LLL wants to commit genocide. Seeing a comparison that isn't there and rejecting the term because of it is, unfortunately, a fallacy. You need better reasons.
7. Undoubtedly the Nazi comparison is offensive to LLL. But that would be the point, wouldn't it? So being offended at being CALLED a Nazi really has no weight in the argument. Insults are supposed to be offensive. That doesn't mean that they aren't making legitimate comparisons. You have to find a reason to say that the comparison isn't fair before you can reject it.
7. This isn't an exercise in banter. If I were completely disinterested I wouldn't bother. But people are wrong, and argue incorrectly, and rely on bad premises for believing what they believe, and it's exactly those mistakes that I try to correct every day. The point of studying philosophy is to learn how to not fall for bad arguments.
Yes, it can be inappropriate although I'm with backpacking dad in that it's more associated with neo-nazi attitudes rather than war criminals exterminating millions. I mean, seriously now.
But again, I think we're missing the point. These discussions aren't helpful until we go deeper and ask, WHY are these terms branded about.
The comments here alone indicate the naivity prevalent amongst so many of us - that all/most lactivists or LCs are 'well-meaning', and any woman feeling oppressed etc has a personal guilt problem, or that she is overacting to 'innocuous' advice. Reality check! lol.
We will find more compassion for one another if we realise and accept what's actually occuring. Women ARE being ridiculed, oppressed, marginalised, and shunned because of not breastfeeding. Visit any popular mothering forum and mention the word formula. it is ugly, REALLY ugly.
@ Mon
Women are more often being "ridiculed, oppressed, marginalised, and shunned" FOR breastfeeding. All you have to do is do a simple Google search for any article related to breastfeeding in public, and you'll see nursing mothers called "dogs" and "exhibitionists." Even Bill Maher went on a sexist rant about how disgusting it was to nurse in public. For every mother who was given a dirty look for formula feeding, there are dozens more mothers who were kicked out of restaurants or shamed by their family members for breastfeeding their baby. What's the term for those people? Formula-Nazis? There is no term because those people are the norm in our society.
To be fair, I don't think it needs to be a competition about which "side" has it worse. Both face ignorance and jackasses, and women who choose either option should be faced with tolerance and understanding, and the fact that that doesn't appear to be happening to either 'group' is the real issue here.
BD - what you don't realize is that there are people who are hurt by the words, however you'd like to debate logic. Parenting isn't an emotional investment unless you are truly apathetic to it.
There are many things that are emotionally volatile in this parenting gig, for instance the decision to work or stay at home, what parenting practices a parent decides to use (CIO or not; to spank or not to spank, etc), and HOW to feed a baby. Basically, no matter what you choose, you are going to be wrong in someone's eyes and someone is going to criticize it.
However, it's one thing to disagree with someone's viewpoint, but it's another thing entirely to attach outrageous disparaging remarks about it or make comparisons to it.
Why use the term "breastfeeding Nazi". Why not "breastfeeding fascist"? Not necessarily better, but at least it doesn't immediately conjur up a specific instance of the annihilation of innocent people.
In either case, it's akin to using a racial slur. Public figures get into heaps of trouble when they slip and make a racial slur - no doubt the ethnic groups affected by it do not let it slip by unchastised. But hardly anyone bats an eye when they attach -Nazi to something. Why is that? Why has it morphed into something so banal that most people don't give it a second thought? That's one of the words that just shouldn't be allowed to morph into something defamatory.
It is used for defamation of a person or a group of people (in this case over-the-top breastfeeding lactivists),but nobody is doing anything about it. Well, we in the blogosphere are and that, my friend is our whole point. We are rallying around those that are offended by it.
"In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel (for written words), slander (for spoken words), and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. It is usually, but not always,[1] a requirement that this claim be false and that the publication is communicated to someone other than the person defamed (the claimant)."
So, in theory, being called something defamatory like a breastfeeding-Nazi, could be grounds for lawsuit (not saying it is or it should be, just that it could be).
Also from wiki
"In common law jurisdictions, slander refers to a malicious, false and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images."
Furthermore, false light laws are "intended primarily to protect the plaintiff's mental or emotional well-being."[3] If a publication of information is false, then a tort of defamation might have occurred. If that communication is not technically false but is still misleading, then a tort of false light might have occurred.
Tell me then, would anyone be willing to explicitly blog about a specific person with their name posted and call that person a breastfeeding-Nazi? Probably not for fear of libel.
Should it then be used in generalities either as a descriptor for anyone or group of people who might fit the description of a pushy, overbearing, pro-breastfeeding advocate? Short answer: no.
Mon - I'm not saying that overbearing attitude is not out there, but it doesn't deserve to attach -Nazi to it.
Think of another term for their attitudes - that's all we are saying. Take "Nazi" out of use.
Edited - I meant to say parenting IS an emotional investment, not isn't.
I absolutely agree with The Feminist Breeder, bf moms get way more slack, it's just accepted because bottlefeeding has become the norm (just try to find a card or gift bag for a baby shower gift with no bottle on it, or a doll without one as an accessory). That is why there are no "formula nazis" -- because most of NA society is pro-formula (look no further than the low bf rates in Canada and the US for proof). And don't get me started on the disdain or downright disgust mothers get if they bf past 3, 6, 9 months...Even the bf moms I know assumed I would wean to a bottle--after all, they all did, and many of them encouraged me to do so. I didn't call them nazis though, they aren't evil, just misinformed. So if there are some "pushy" lactivists out there, maybe it's because they have to be (but I still maintain it's mostly perceived -- of course anyone advocating something will seem "pushy" if you really aren't dedicated to succeeding at it anyway.)
@Andrea @zchamu @others.... I do think that there are people that step over the line in advocating for breastfeeding and advocating against formula. At the same time, people also need to have thicker skin and be more confident. There will always be people out there that will criticize something you are doing in your life. I think it is fine and even beneficial for people to disagree and to debate the pros and cons of different things. I just wish people could do it without resorting to name calling (e.g. Nazi) or berating people.
KC--it's only defaming of the group if the group is supposed to be identified with the obviously false or inflammatorily false aspects of the concept represented by the term, i.e. genocidal practices. Or, if the group is supposed to be identified by the other aspects of the concept represented by the term AND THAT IDENTIFICATION IS BASELESS. You can reject the use of x-Nazi. You just have to do it by saying that the group is not like the Nazis in the aspects the comparison is pointing out. (I have no idea if the comparison is fair along those lines.) But you can't reject it by referring to aspects of the concept not picked out by the term in the comparison.
If what you are saying is that you have illogical reasons to reject the use, then I agree. If you are saying that you have illogical reasons to reject the use, but that's okay because the issue is an emotional one, I disagree. If it's an argument logic rules. Otherwise he who feels most strongly wins all arguments. If you are saying that you have logical reasons to reject the use, and those reasons do not involve actually looking at the concept and comparing the groups to find differences, then I'm interested, but pessimistic, that you do.
Mon said: “But again, I think we’re missing the point. These discussions aren’t helpful until we go deeper and ask, WHY are these terms branded about.”
I am reading people discussing here why the term is used.
Mon said: “The comments here alone indicate the naivity prevalent amongst so many of us - that all/most lactivists or LCs are ‘well-meaning’, and any woman feeling oppressed etc has a personal guilt problem, or that she is overacting to ‘innocuous’ advice. Reality check! lol.”
Since you quoted my comment, I’ll reply. I made a clear distinction between offering information and following someone around the store (or the Internet) to berate them for needing and/or choosing formula. Didn’t I? I thought I did. I'm not sure I see how it's beneficial for you say that we're all naive. Do you really think so?
In fact, I actually addressed your first point about how this discussion is pointless until “we go deeper” by offering a theory of why it might feel like other women are oppressing them to the point of wanting to call them Nazis. I didn’t say that formula feeding moms who encounter pushy jerks have “personal guilt problems,” nor did I pathologize the experience of formula feeding at all.
I do, however, wonder how someone could feel so oppressed that they feel that the Nazis have a hold of them. I always hope that they’re just using the term in a tongue-in-cheek manner, which is the very, very simple message of the original post—stop using it flippantly.
Mon said: We will find more compassion for one another if we realise and accept what’s actually occuring. Women ARE being ridiculed, oppressed, marginalised, and shunned because of not breastfeeding. Visit any popular mothering forum and mention the word formula. it is ugly, REALLY ugly.
I would put a period after “shunned” to read, “Women ARE being ridiculed, oppressed, marginalised, and shunned.” Period. That’s a problem. Jerks are jerks. Annie says that it’s inappropriate to call such jerks “Nazis.” Some people don’t care about the use of the term in a semi-joking manner. Some of us find it offensive. Difference of opinion.
@Jill: You said "I do, however, wonder how someone could feel so oppressed that they feel that the Nazis have a hold of them. I always hope that they’re just using the term in a tongue-in-cheek manner, which is the very, very simple message of the original post—stop using it flippantly." I agree. Absolutely. Until lactivists start rounding up the formula feeders and hauling them off to concentration camps, the level of oppression just cannot compare.
@Backpacking Dad: The Holocaust is certainly the most well-known thing that the Nazis did. But even if people are referring to neo-Nazis when they use the term breastfeeding nazi or boob nazi, I don't think that is a whole lot better. I really think that neo-Nazis would be likely to do the same damn thing that the historical Nazis did if they had the means and opportunity to do it. That is why being a Nazi is illegal in Germany. I looked up a lot of definitions of neo-Nazi and they all talked about violence, genocide, glorifying what Hitler's Nazis did, etc. None of those are appropriate comparisons to a lactivist, unless they start trying to carry out violent attacks on formula feeders.
When I think of pro-life advocates, I think of two types. There are those that feel abortion is wrong, don't think women should have a right to choose, and share that message (sometimes politely, sometimes not so politely). Then there are those that throw bombs into abortion clinics and murder or violently attack doctors and nurses that work in abortion clinics. If lactivists ever go as far as the that latter group in promoting breastfeeding (e.g. bombing formula companies, murdering formula company executives, kidnapping doctors that hand out formula samples), then perhaps they deserve a label as horrible as "Nazi". But as long as they are just sharing a message (whether well intended or not, whether well received or not), they do not deserve the comparison with Nazis.
zchamu said: “To be fair, I don’t think it needs to be a competition about which “side” has it worse. Both face ignorance and jackasses, and women who choose either option should be faced with tolerance and understanding, and the fact that that doesn’t appear to be happening to either ‘group’ is the real issue here.”
Nicely put. I totally fell into the “who has it worse” mentality. I’m kicking myself for that because I don’t think it’s really a polarized, black-and-white issue at all and you’re right… there are intolerant, proselytizing turds everywhere in all areas of life. Is it appropriate to refer to them as Nazis? Nah.
Mon said that we’re all naïve in thinking “that all/most lactivists or LCs are ‘well-meaning’, and any woman feeling oppressed etc has a personal guilt problem, or that she is overacting to ‘innocuous’ advice.” While I don’t think we’re all naïve here, I think this raises an interesting point about the cultural good-bad, right-wrong, winner-loser mindset of infant feeding.
For decades, formula was considered the superior choice of infant feeding by pediatricians. Breastfeeding was not the norm and the practice was battered by inaccuracies, mythology of medical origin and negative cultural attitudes. Women were not just not supported but were discouraged from breastfeeding.
Right now, women are supposed to be encouraged to breastfeed in hospitals. Lactation consultants are on-hand to help (or should be). I am personally in the “do what works for you” camp. It’s hard to find what works for you if you can’t find support for a range of options… exclusive formula, exclusive bf, part-time pumping, exclusive pumping, milk donors, supplementing with formula, etc. So making sure that women know about breastfeeding as an option is important.
Two things:
1. How one goes about sharing info about breastfeeding is important. I don’t usually reach out to offer advice—not my personality. I write about my thoughts on things but on a one-on-one level, I mind my own business and figure that if a friend wants help, they know where to find me. It’s not that I don’t care what they do, but I operate under the assumption that everyone makes the decision that is right for them with the info that they have. I’m more interested in putting info out there on a public level so women can take it and use it in their own decision making process.
Some do offer advice liberally and I’m glad some do because advice-givers have helped me in life. I can always take what I like from their info and leave the rest. Friend to friend, woman to woman info has saved me over the years.
2. Say you’re a person that has to feel as thought you’re following rules or you’re a person that feels the need to tell everyone what the rules are. Evidence that breast milk is best for human babies is shaping dominant cultural attitudes toward breastfeeding. Some would take that as a chance to be “right” and run around and tell others that they’re doing it wrong. I don’t personally know any of these people, but I’ve seen a few on the internet. They make me feel uncomfortable but I don’t consider them to be evil like Nazis.
@backpacking dad
The reason that Godwin's Law and Reductio ad Hitlerum are jokes is because apologists like you try to defend ridiculous and offensive comparisons to Nazis as somehow logical and appropriate. It's so sad and predictable, entire internet jokes are based on it.
I think your adherence to defending the term x-Nazi is a little too fanatically dedicated, as you seem to keep returning to it with such passion...like a NAZI perhaps??
Numbering your arguments doesn't make you right. Saying you are right, no matter how big the words are, does not make us "fallacious".
Casually using "nazi" is an inappropriate and offensive term to many, and it is not a true comparison. Saying things that are inflammatory may have a purpose, but comparing someone who supports a public health initiative to the most well known genocide in recent history is a sad thing to defend this passionately. I'd rather be this committed to, say, breastfeeding.
I used to use the term X-Nazi before I moved to Germany (in fact, my nickname in college was the Service-Nazi), but now that I've lived in Germany and learned more about the German and Jewish peoples, I think it's a pretty appalling term to use. I'm pretty sure if you said it in Germany you'd have no doubt, from looking at the faces of those around you, that it's completely inappropriate to use for anything but a real Nazi or neo-Nazi.
(Though, as for your numbering of arguments, I have to say I thought the second #7 was just as good as the first #7 and deserved its own number).
I also wanted to add I can't believe you defended its use while admitting it was an offensive insult. Insults are, by definition, not good argumentation. Referring to the fact that your arguments are so sad that there is at least two internet jokes based on it that are well known enough to show up on Wikipedia does not make my arguments false.
I did decide to look up fallacies of argument, however. First site, did a "find" search, and found the Hitler comparison in less than a second! They consider it a straw man argument, which I can see. I can also see how it can fall under ad hominem. Trying to turn this into a philosophy of argumentation discussion, poorly, didn't work. Not only is discussion of what is a fallacy irrelevant to how people interact socially when discussing breastfeeding promotion (which is what this blog is about!), it’s just a distraction tactic that is so predictable, again, there are entire web jokes built on it.
@Christina: Thank you for adding that perspective. I do wonder if the fact that I have many Jewish friends, lived in Germany, and am married to a German means that I have a slightly different perspective on this.
Thanks for posting this - I find myself getting irrationally upset whenever I see this term, both for the offense to those who have and do suffer at the hands of Nazis/neo-Nazis and for all the tireless women who give of themselves and time for their families to help others. It's hard to defend oneself against vague accusations of "making someone feel guilty" and even harder on those women who are committed to helping mothers because they obviously care about mothers and their babies. Thanks for speaking out... eloquently as usual.
I'm going to throw a curveball here.
I think we're (almost, hah) all agreed that the term "breastfeeding nazi" shouldn't be used, due to its extremely negative connotations. Great.
But what about the attitudes that lead people to brand people with these names? Both the attitudes of the people who are disdainful towards breastfeeding and write off simple advocates with cruel names, as well as those who are horrible and judgmental people when it comes to the decision to breastfeed and treat bottle-moms like crap?
I'd love to see this kind of energy directed towards that debate.
Absolutely great post! Thank you for stating the obvious, though it does make me sad that it has to be done at alll. Not only is calling some a boob-nazi for supporting breastfeeding horribly innapropriate, it's also probably a sign of a deeper issue. That kind of insecurity should be worked out in therapy, not by tossing out Nazi to everyone who brings your insecurity to the surface.
@PhdInParenting: Sorry, I should have made clear before the comments were blended together: the Neo-Nazi point was just to wonder if that's what the term was picking out. Later on I became convinced that it wasn't, so that's not what I've been pushing. You are absolutely right that it would make no difference: Neo-Nazis are just as genocidal as historical Nazis, and moreover they are similar along all of the other lines of comparison.
What I take you to be saying in the second paragraph of your comment is "lactivists aren't like Nazis. Look at how they differ. So the label is inappropriate. Don't use it." And that's perfectly fine. In fact, that's exactly the avenue for rejecting the term that you need to take. But it is a different avenue than saying "it's impossible for anyone to be as bad as the Nazis because they committed genocide, so let's not look at the groups to compare them along any other lines. No lines are legitimate. Just don't use 'Nazi' anymore." (Not quoting anyone, just paraphrasing the argument.) It's the latter that makes no sense.
@zchamu
I think that is a great idea. Any ideas where to start?
@zchamu
After writing that last comment, I re-read this post that I read a few days ago. I think it has some good ideas: http://obnurse35yrs.wordpress.com/2009/05/08/breastfeeding-bottle-feeding-and-somewhere-in-between/
In particular, I think part of the difficulty in knowing what to say and how to say it is this:
[...] PHD in Parenting wrote about breastfeeding “Nazis.” The two points in the piece are that, “…lactivists have not killed millions of people like the Nazis did,” and that, “…calling someone that is an enthusiastic advocate of something a Nazi trivializes and minimizes the suffering of the victims of the Holocaust.” Yes, exactly. Thank you. You may recall that I am completely offended by the comparison and appreciated reading another person’s point of view. Did You Enjoy this Post? Subscribe to Nursing Your Kids. It's Free! « Back Home Posted in News on May 12th, 2009 Link to this Entry Email This Entry [...]
I think the best way to talk about this is to treat it as a health decision, not a lifestyle decision, not a moral decision, and not really a parenting decision.
There is still stigma associated with making certain health decisions, but in general it seems to make the conversation a little more reasonable.
@Backpacking Dad - That is exactly what she did in the original post. Have a nice day.
@MomTFH @Backpacking Dad Exactly - that is what I was trying to say in the original post.
@MomTFH Backpacking Dad - That's what we've all been trying to defend on her behalf. Perhaps I won't win any awards for arguments based on logic here, but essentially I was trying to support the same thing that's been said, and re-said and summed up. I'm sorry you didn't see it that way and that I was fodder for your clearly superior intelligence and use of logical debate. I'm still trying to see how what I said was all that markedly different from what others had said (this is not an invitation to point it out by the way - I'll eventually figure it out or I'll move on).
@PhD in Parenting - Excellent post and thought provoking discussion (as usual)!
To anyone who might be curious - I've been on both sides – I desired to breastfeed but for two of my children I also had to use formula because of severe low milk supply. My breastfeeding days are long over. I support the decisions of what anyone chooses to do, though I've been able, through my example and not by pushing the issue, to inspire one of my sisters and my SIL to provide breastmilk in some fashion and I have respected both of their choices on how they made it happen (one chose to exclusively pump, the other only gave it 2 months before she went to the bottle of formula). No one on either side of the family chose to even attempt to give breastmilk in 2 generations (or more) before I did. There was no need to persuade argumentatively or be overbearing - they just knew there was another way to do things because they'd seen me do it. Had I not "normalized" breastfeeding for them, I don't know if they would have been interested in even trying. I even emailed them some information when they had problems, and bought a few breastfeeding supplies (nursing pads and lanolin) to help them get started.
Two of my other sisters have had babies since my last was born and have also seen my bf my babies, yet in the end were simply not interested in trying to breastfeed. I did ask if they gave any thought to breastfeeding and said there are many benefits to both the child and the mother, and if they had any questions, I was available to ask. My oldest sister initially thought she'd try breastfeeding and ultimately decided not to. When I asked her why, she simply said it didn't feel fair because she didn't breastfeed her other 3 children. Fair enough. I let it go. Of course, this is the same sister who had later criticized me for bf my last daughter for 3 years - openly criticized me in front of others for nursing in her home (away from everyone in a bedroom). She is the only one in my life to actively try to shame me out of breastfeeding my older child. In all my 3 years of nursing my last baby, the only one who objected to it was my oldest sister – and I’ve NIPed everywhere – in restaurants, at the playground, at the county fair. I couldn’t get ANYONE to bat an eye at me publicly, but my own sister felt the need to say “it’s time to give that up, don’t you think?”
I didn't push the issues with the two that decided not to and I don't hold it against them or even feel sorry for them or their kids that they had no interest in trying. I made myself available and backed off when they weren't interested. I even forgave the sister that was mortified that I was nursing my 3 year old and felt that I should be too.
The way I see it, it doesn’t have to be that hard to support another woman with how they choose to feed their baby. You provide some initial information, you see if they seem interested, and you let them know you are available for help if they need it. If they’re not, then you let it go and support them anyway.
That's my experiences of supporting other mother's decisions. I hope this helps someone else.
Of course it is rude and inappropriate to call anybody a Nazi for any reason. But there are some people who come awfully close to fitting the description and they give those who are passionate nursers a bad name. And unfortunately, these people are loud, and rude and unfortunately stick out as ugly representatives of the group. I give you an example below. This is a copied and pasted comment from my own blog. I ask if you don't agree that this person is appears to be something of a Nazi?
______________________________________
Comment from Emily Jones:
“We must always remember that a mother’s physical and emotional well-being are probably more important in the nurturing of an infant that the delivery of breast milk and the hard cold fact is that sometimes breastfeeding stands in the way of a woman being the best mother she can be.”
That is the most selfish bunch of nonsense I have ever heard, and it seems to be gaining popularity. If my physical and emotional well-being trumped everything, I wouldn’t bother having kids in the first place.
Newsflash: kids are inconvenient. They take time and sacrifice to do what’s best. That includes breastfeeding, spending time with them, cooking them proper food, teaching them, etc. If you can’t be bothered to provide even their basic needs, don’t have kids.
You are right about one thing: Breast isn’t best. Breast is ONLY. Formula is not only inferior, it is unhealthy and potentially life-threatening. It was only ever meant as a last-resort feeding method for babies who would die from lack of breast milk. The only reason it exists as a “choice” now is because of the extreme marketing and financial power the formula companies have invested in seeing to it that more mothers buy their crap.
All this blustering and debating about oppression by breastfeeding advocates is nothing more than an admission of guilt for choosing a less-than method of feeding your children. If you are confident about your parenting choices, then you have no need to defend them.
Well said and sad that it has to be said.
@Angeline
Emily has a strong point of view. I'm not going to debate the merits of her argument, because that is not what this post is about. I don't see her suggesting acts of violence against formula feeders anywhere in that argument, so no, I don't think she appears to be something of a Nazi.
These types of strong views exist on lots of topics. You could almost replace "breast" with "Jesus" and "formula" with "sin" and it would sound like something you'd hear from the pulpit on a Sunday morning. You could replace "breast" with "keeping your baby" and "formula" with "abortion" and it would sound like the arguments made by pro-lifers.
Yes, I understand that strong opinions sometimes do have the potential to insight violence, like all the wars caused by religion and the bombings committed by pro-lifers. But I don't think calling people with strong opinions Nazis will help avoid that type of thing. In fact, I think it is more likely to fan the flames.
@phdinparenting ... Good response to Angeline re: comments from Emily. Excellent analogy. I often make the same one about pro-life and Jesus when speaking to friends. Thanks
I don't care how strong someone's opinions are or how intentionally cruel s/he is. Unless s/he intends genocide AND has a government and army to enforce that agenda, s/he's not like a Nazi in any relevant sense. The ONLY reason to use a term like "breastfeeding Nazi" is to make a personal attack (that's a fallacy ad hominem, for BD) and to shut down conversation. Shutting down conversation AND misdirecting it, as BD does, violate norms of argument--not logical norms, but those aren't the only norms that matter.
After reading the pasted "then don't have kids" comment, I want to paste something MomTFH stated:
"I think the best way to talk about this is to treat it as a health decision, not a lifestyle decision, not a moral decision, and not really a parenting decision."
PhDinParenting- The Sunday pulpit/ proselytizing image works perfectly. I often wonder if someone could stand in front of a friend who is stressed-out, exhausted and crying and, rather than gently ask if they are open to working with an ICBLC or if they can help pick up some slack around the house for them so they can chill out and nurse OR simply accepting that their friend has weighed the risks herself and made an educated decision for herself and her child, stand there and shout “Well, motherhood is hard and if you don’t want to nurse, you shouldn’t have had kids!”
That’s not genocide, but it’s… whew. I don’t know.
zchamu (#74) What do you think? I guess I’ll just never, ever understand that type of black-or-white, extreme rigidity. I have tried. Where is the compassion? The love? The respect for each mother and her individual situation that is as unique to her as her DNA?
Re Angeline/Emily comment #84... she might not be a nazi, but I would have no qualms in calling her a bitch.
I have a lot - a *lot* - of friends and acquaintances with young children, and I've watched them go through the breast vs bottle debate. And it's never, ever an easy decision. So anyone who comes to them with a black and white opinion is talking out of their butt, IMHO, and should be told as much.
Wow, my infamy follows me everywhere.
To those who would like to know the full extent of my opinions about the use of infant formula, feel free to visit my blog and read the many posts I have written on the subject.
Obviously in the comment section of a blog, I am not interested in going into a dissertation of the full scope of my opinion, so is it any wonder that a less-than-200-word comment is curt and lacking expansion?
In any case, since I've been "called out" so to speak, I'll put in little more illumination. Ours is one of the ONLY cultures in which the attitude of "oh well, at least she tried" is acceptable, esp. where breastfeeding is concerned. In many other cultures, breastfeeding is accepted as the norm, and the only women who don't breastfeed are those who physically can't, or won't; and those of the latter sort are generally considered selfish and lazy. The only reason we accept this in our culture is because formula feeding is so completely pervasive, that to suggest otherwise would impugn 85% of the population. It is culturally not acceptable to disagree with the established norm, hence the popularity of the term "boob nazi."
Jill and I have had some small discussion about this topic on her blog Unnecessarean already, but I'll repeat it again here:
"If a friend's husband was not a good worker, if he only went to work on days he felt like it, if he was constantly asking his co-workers to finish his tasks, and was all the time complaining about how much he hated working, would you be as forgiving? If he then just quit, and lived off unemployment, would you take him a tub of ice cream and commiserate, and tell him "It's okay, at least you tried. I support your decision to not deal with that stressful work stuff." I somehow doubt it. Why, then, do women get a free pass on work ethic, be it natural birth, breastfeeding, etc?"
While I understand that different women have different situations, and I can't possibly know every woman's struggle and journey, I can safely say that ALL WOMEN have trouble. We all have bad things happen to us. We all have trials and struggles. I don't think it is at all unreasonable to be a voice for persevering in the face of opposition.
And as far as it being a matter of personal choice, I disagree where it affects the health and well-being of children. Should smoking in daycares and schools be legal? It is the choice of the smoker, after all, whether she wants to take those risks. No, because we do not want her choices harming our children. It is the same with formula. Formula has documented health risks for children, and should never be considered a cavalier choice. It's not like choosing between Coke and Pepsi, because Pepsi (as far as I know) has never killed anyone through contamination, diarrhea, starvation, etc. I would say it is more like the choice between smoking and non-smoking.
And before anyone starts arguing that comparing cigarettes and infant formula is a stretch, I might remind you that just 50 years ago, cigarette manufacturers were denying their product carried any health risk at all, and in fact, tried to convince us that it was healthy for us. 20 years ago, smoking was still allowed in hospitals. 15 years ago it was finally discovered that the cigarette companies had known for DECADES that smoking was harmful to people's health, and yet covered up the evidence for years. And just last March, a study (http://www.sciencealert.com.au/news/20091003-18890.html) showed that "researchers reporting poorer health among formula-fed children too often shy away from including a mention of formula feeding in their titles or summaries," thereby effectively hiding studies that show ill effects from the use of infant formula from those who are searching for it.
Is it any wonder some of us have strong opinions on the subject? Infant formula is injuring and killing babies all over the world every day. If a woman must take that risk on herself, that is her business. But every woman should know that risk exists, and they will never know it by patting them on the back, handing them a can of formula, and saying, "Well, you tried." Women should be expected to breastfeed because that's what we are designed to do. It's not a matter of choice - it's a matter of health and biology. If a woman is not prepared to accept that responsibility, then I still say she should not have children. Having children implies accepting a certain level of responsibility for their health and well-being, even at the expense of our own comfort sometimes.
And I'm not the only one. Every single scientific and health body in the world confirms what I am saying here: breast milk is the first and only choice for human infants, except where not physically possible. Infant formula has health risks, has killed MILLIONS of babies, and should only be used as a last resort.
I don't think it is a simple matter of choice at all. I consider this issue so important, that I don't feel like mincing words will make lasting changes. As pervasive and oppressive as the bottle-feeding culture is in our country, I don't know that anyone will hear what we have to say unless we are shouting it. No one can argue that formula is just as good as breast milk, so the only obvious conclusion is that the entire debate just boils down to guilt and insecurity. And I, for one, will not be cowed by others' insecurity for their less-than decisions.
(As always, a disclaimer applies to those for whom breastfeeding is not physically possible. That is why formula was invented, after all.)
And as a side note, the blog to which I replied originally (http://mommymythbuster.wordpress.com/2009/03/16/myth-24-breast-is-best/) was a diatribe supporting Hannah Rosin's poorly-written article on how breast milk is not necessarily better that formula. More of the same propagandist tripe designed to make women feel better about using infant formula by perpetuating half-truths and stereotypes of breastfeeding advocates as pushy, overbearing judgmental types. The author of that article also wrote, in response to someone's comment that formula has killed millions of babies in other countries,
"1.5 million babies die of formula feeding in Uganda because they do not have clean drinking water to mix with the formula (not because the formula is bad). …and this is not Uganda."
The author has written a number of articles dismissing the benefits of breast milk and denying the dangers of infant formula, while at the same time quoting articles from and being sponsored by, of all people, the International Formula Council.
She, and everyone like her, continues to propagate the formula companies' marketing line and tries to make those of us fighting against such tyranny appear as judgmental bitches. I would hardly take what she has to say as reliable opinions on the merits, or lack thereof, of the "breast is best" argument.
In response to Emily's comments, I do agree that the reach and approach of formula companies is dangerous. They are deceitful and unethical. I touched on one aspect of this in my http://www.phdinparenting.com/2009/05/04/sabotage/" rel="nofollow">post on sabotage, but there are many many more examples and Emily is right to be wary about the objectivity of posts and comments by a blogger that is sponsored by the International Formula Council.
I think that the decision to breastfeed or not to breastfeed is an important one. It is something parents should carefully consider. If all other things are equal, breastfeeding is absolutely best and is the standard to go by. But other things are not always equal. Rather than trying to explain that at length here, I would ask you to hang on for my next few posts that I hope will go up today and tomorrow, where I will talk about this in more detail.
I just want to keep this thread going so I can be #100 and win a prize. Maybe something ironic, like a month's supply of Enfamil. Yeah, I'm kidding.
I think the question that I have for Emily, who I think articulated why she feels so passionately very well, is "Could you or would you tell someone to her face that she is just not trying hard enough if she's using formula and shouldn't have had that baby if she didn't plan on breastfeeding?"
Haaa haa ha... There are a whooooooole lotta things I think about other parents that I'd never say to their face. I've seen kids standing in the car (sans carseat - which is very illegal) and though I think to myself "how can you procreate when some smart people cannot" - I will not be saying that to directly to that parent's face. Why? You never know who's got a gun these days. ;)
If whether or not you'd say these things to someone in real life is the measure of whether or not they should be said at all, then I'm pretty sure none of us would be allowed to keep blogging.
What FeministBreeder said. No, I would never say it to a woman's face. What would that accomplish? It would create hurt feelings and destroy any chance I might have at maintaining a supportive and loving relationship with her. Besides that, if she's already using formula, nothing I can say will change what has already happened.
However, what I *can* do is blog about the dangers of formula, and give my opinion on things. Sure some (okay, maybe a lot of) people may be turned off by my very straightforward approach. But there will be some out there who will say, "Holy crap I never knew that. Why did no one tell me that?" How many women know that using formula before 6 weeks increases a baby's risk of dying from SIDS FIVEFOLD? How many women know that infant formula has almost singlehandedly maintained the infant mortality rate in developing countries? How many women know that just by persevering and continuing to breastfeed through trials and obstacles, they will significantly reduce the risk of infection, injury, and death to themselves and their babies? Do women know that using infant formula can really kill their babies? No. Granted, in the industrialized nations, that risk is fairly small. But even a small risk of death with infant formula is considerable when you stack it up against -0- risk of death with breast milk.
Someone posted this article on Twitter this morning: http://www.ajph.org/cgi/reprint/93/12/2000.pdf
in which the public health concern that is artificial infant feeding is discussed. Two quotes from that article that spring to my mind are:
"...the American propensity to shun human milk is a public health problem and should be exposed as such."
"Because breastfeeding is the biological norm, breastfed babies
are not ‘healthier;’ artificially fed babies are ill more often and
more seriously."
I'm not the only one who holds this opinion. I'm just one of the few that is not afraid to say it.
I really appreciate ready Emily Jones comments #91, 92, and 96. It is impressive to see how a few sentences can be so distorted and misunderstood (in my opinion) by taking them out of context ( in Angeline's comment #84). I certainly feel like I understand Emily's stance much clearer after hearing from her. The initial quote from Angeline's comment made Emily seem to be an unempathetic and judgmental zealot, but now I see her as passionate, strong, and wise.
Shoot. That should be "reading", not "ready" in the first sentence.
I don't necessarily agree that equating "formula feeding" to "choosing to live on unemployment and eat ice cream all day" is a hallmark of wisdom, but that's me.
I agree that calling someone any kind of nazi is just wrong (unless you're calling an actual nazi a nazi, in which case, go for it) but I think the whole nursing v. formula battle is best kept between you, your baby, and your baby's pediatrician. Personally, I have been breastfeeding my daughter since birth and she's 1 now, but it's not my place to judge someone for going half and half or strictly formula. Can't we all just get along- or at least mind our own business?