271 Comments »

1. Kerri,

   Opposition to breastfeeding is cultural and retarded. So many women breastfeed in my ward in class that its a non-issue. You just need to do it discreetly.

   You need some ward allies to help you out. Gather your forces (AKA the RS pres, Bishops wife, YM pres) and go to battle in a quiet fashion. Do not fight back publicly. Gather your forces and get to work PRIVATELY. Also have your husband call the Bishop as well.

   Also this may be a reaction to your other daughters behavior. You need to ask them that question.

   Also its pretty impressive to be able to breastfeed a adopted child. Major major kudos….

   Comment by Leonard — October 28, 2005 @ 1:18 pm

2. Oh my goodness, Kerri, I am so sorry you went through this ordeal. I’m sure I would have been utterly crushed, just like you, in the same situation. For me, there is almost nothing as bad as being treated unfairly by an inaccessible authority, particularly when my feelings for my children are involved; fortunately this has rarely happened to me. I hope we can help you figure out some constructive responses in this thread, but for now, please know of my sympathy. Bless you for the good work you do with your children; you’re an inspiration.

   Comment by Rosalynde — October 28, 2005 @ 1:19 pm

3. How stupid. My head just about exploded reading your story. I agree that you need allies and getting your husband and leaders together to help would be good. Perhaps these guys will back down if faced with a bunch of people making it clear that nursing is natural and good and not to be banished. This is what, two men out of the entire ward? They should not get to have their way without even a discussion or a peep from anyone else!

   However, should you wish to work on a better mother’s room: my suggestion to the twits who want you to nurse in the mother’s room is that they spend their lunch hour in there. Then, you can suggest that they work to find a classroom that can be converted to a mother’s room. I’m sure they’ll be generous enough to buy new armchairs, a coffee table, and a nice Mary Cassatt print for the door. Then they can buy a Diaper Genie for the old room, which will be the new improved changing room (why is it that Genies have been around for 10 years, but no ward building has them?).

   Comment by dangermom — October 28, 2005 @ 2:08 pm

4. I agree with the practicality of advice to get man-allies, and to do the fighting behind the scenes, quietly. It’s is practical advice if you want to get what you want with the least amount of disruption to your life.

   But still, doesn’t it just gall you to the pit of your soul that such blind stupidity can’t be blown out of the water loudly! I mean really!

   Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 2:12 pm

5. Oh. My.

   After trying to muster all the dignity which is in me (which can’t be much) I still cannot come up with anything more helpful than…..what an ass. I mean, honestly, who does he think he is?!

   Tell that Bishop to get a backbone and to stop bowing to his idiotic “ward counsel” of two old white men. And then DO WHAT MAKES YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE. You’re not there to make other people “comfortable”, you’re there to worship. What a painful and completely unnecessary experience for you to have to deal with. Kudos for not calling him a ludicrous moron to his face.

   Your fellow adoptive mama,

   Comment by Kanga — October 28, 2005 @ 2:13 pm

6. I am going to link to this article in my LiveJournal and spread this around. I COULD NOT AGREE MORE!!!!

   My heart goes out to you for being put on the chopping block in this issue. Do not back down!

   What would Jesus eat?

   *hugs*

   Comment by Suzanne — October 28, 2005 @ 2:18 pm

7. I would be tempted to print out all of these images and ask them if MARY covered up when she was feeding the baby Jesus. I mean, really. If it’s okay for the uptight Catholics of the 17th Century to look at, what is wrong with us???

   http://www.breastfeeding.com/art_gallery/antiquity.html

   Comment by Suzanne — October 28, 2005 @ 2:28 pm

8. Kerri, I am outraged. First, I think you need to request that the entire ward council meet together on this…not just the two lame old men. That is just so ridiculous. If that doesn’t happen or doesn’t go well, go to the Stake President. And, try to be calm. I know that is going to be nearly impossible, but try. (Who am I to be giving advice about staying calm…I very emotional!) I also agree with Leanord’s advice about getting support from other mothers; no matter the outcome, you need support in this.

   I have 5 children and have breast-fed them all (including the twins, but not at the same time while at church). I hated the blankets, and so did my babies. We learned, as it sounds like you have, to be very discrete about it. I would nurse in sacrament meeting because no one knew what I was doing and didn’t want to be forced into one of those stinky nursing rooms you talked about. I would even nurse while I was standing up.

   I have heard some pretty negative comments about breast-feeding, a lot of them coming from women and friends of mine. I think you have every right to feel the way you do. This is your right as a mother! As a woman! I, too, hate that our bodies have become so sexualized that breastfeeding, one of the most natural and beautiful things on this planet, has been degraded to the point of appearing perverted. (I really empathize with people, I can feel your pain…)

   I don’t that I can help much, other than being here to listen and cry with you like Rosalynd. This is hard situation, but you are justified in your feelings. Again, make sure to remain calm (and if it helps, have your husband go with you next time to lend support and be the rational voice), pray, pray, pray…because the Lord will help you in this. This is the what He made your body for, and He will support you in this. And, know that whatever happens, you have friends here that understand.

   Best of luck Kerri! Bug hug!!!

   PrincessLeah_mom

   Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 2:33 pm

9. (I can’t spell today…) not “bug hug”, “Big Hug!!!” LOL Big Hugs, Kerri!

   Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 2:38 pm

10. I just re-read your short bio:

    Adoptive Mama to Cole 6, Naomi 5, Adam 4, and Noah (1)
    Breastfeeding Counsellor and Doula
    British Columbia, Canada

    I think he chose the wrong mama to mess with!

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 2:40 pm

11. Is there something wrong with being a white man? or Old? IF the other two dorks were maybe asian and the bishop was black would it be OK to make dumb comments? Just wondering.

    Comment by Leonard — October 28, 2005 @ 2:47 pm

12. I think you should nurse anywhere you want.

    Also, If anyone else wants the mother’s lounge to be better, they can just put that nasty diaper pail in the hall for all to share in the aroma.

    Comment by Melissa — October 28, 2005 @ 2:54 pm

13. Wow, wow, WOW. I’m appalled and offended with you.

    I agree with Leonard, who suggested gathering forces and fighting back privately, at least to begin with. The suggestion to have your husband call the Bishop was also good.

    I have to say that I have issues with a mothers room. When I was nursing my son, I saw absolutely nothing wrong with nursing him in the back corner of Sunday School. When women leave Relief Society - of all places! - to go to the mothers room and nurse, missing out on the spiritual food needed to sustain a tired mom through the week, I just do not get it. The room is full of women. I know some moms, however, are nervous about nursing in public, so having good mothers rooms is important for them.

    Sorry I’ve gone off, this is a tender subject for me. Bottom line: they can’t tell you not to breastfeed in church. And as long as everything’s covered - who cares? It sounds like it might be a challenge for you to keep your chin up in this ward with this situation and this Bishop, but you really, truly need to. My prayers are with you.

    Comment by JulieP — October 28, 2005 @ 2:55 pm

14. So ridiculous! I’d continue on as you always have. If there are more incidences with the bishop, I’d have a prepared statement and let him have it!

    My mother-in-law made me feel awful about my breastfeeding. She went as far as to tell me only disadvantaged people nursed and formula has more nutrients. I almost felt sorry for her pure ignorance and chalked it up to her being a product of the era in which she comes from. It’s no excuse really and I still have a hard time forgiving her for the emotional turmoil she put me through during a time when I needed familial support.

    Just know, you have support here and really everywhere. Education, science and nature are on your side.Your bishop’s ignorance is glaring. Maybe you could print out this thread and its comments and give them to him.

    Hugs!

    Comment by Wendy — October 28, 2005 @ 3:04 pm

15. I think one of things that offended me most was when he told you, Kerri, to go out to the van to feed your child. That was upsetting. Aren’t we allowed to eat our dinner where ever? And you did make a good point about bottle fed infants can eat anywhere…that just isn’t right to be biased against women who breastfeed.

    My first husband, being embarrassed of breastfeeding (we were only together 4 weeks after the baby was born) told me, while at a friend’s house, to go into the bathroom and sit on the toilet while I fed the baby. I was furious…does ex-husband eat his dinner in the same place he “relieves” himself? Until they ban bottles and cheerios and fruit-loops from the chapel, from Sunday school, from the Ward building, you have the right to feed your child anywhere, just like all the bottle-feeding mothers do.

    Leonard: sorry for saying, “lame old men”. In my defense, they were “men”, they were somewhat “old”, and their decision, IMHO was “lame”. I would have said that if they had been a different race or color. But, it was a male-centered, biased decision that was made. That was my point, even if my words came out a little “emotional”.

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 3:07 pm

16. I dont want to be seen as defending the Bishop in this case, because i’m not. But there are some concerns that you may not realize here.

    I do not believe that the young men in our ward are turned on or disgusted by breastfeeding

    If you dont believe this, then you are wrong. Granted, it is our culture that creates the situation, but when I was 12 or 13 seeing just a glimpse of the top or side of a woman’s breast while she was nursing was a huge turn on. It was everything you could do to not stare constantly in hopes of even a peek at a nipple. Even with IMAGES flooding the world, seeing the REAL THING or eveb part of the real thing to a young man can wreak havok with him internally.
    Just seeing a flash of the side of a breast was more than enough to send me to go masturbate when I got home. Usually was enough to dream about all week. Dealing with that and how it escalates is an entirely different story.
    While I do agree that nursing is natural and healthy and wonderful, I do not think that covering with a blanket is out of the question. In a perfectly adult world, that wouldnt be an issue. Sacrament meeting isnt a perfectly adult world.

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 3:08 pm

17. Trust me. Your husband needs to call the bishop and tell him that as a man he (your husband) must defend you and your children from silly personal attacks.

    The bishop will quickly quickly realize that he has gone way way overboard and will completely understand it when your hubby calls him on it. All fathers/husbands understand that when a man rises to the defense of his family that the father/husband is almost always right and they will backpeddle like a NFL cornerback. All of a sudden the I am a bishop stuff will go away and it will be just two men talking. Your husband will have the upper hand in this dynamic.

    IF the bishop is still being stupid after this conversation (seriously unlikely) then the SP needs to step in cause HE will understand the man rising to the defense of his wife/children sistuation.

    Comment by Leonard — October 28, 2005 @ 3:08 pm

18. Also,

    In the dynamic above it does not matter what personality your hubby has. The Bishop will walk away with more respect for him afterwards if this is handled in a calm manner.

    Then this will go into the bishops mental file as a lesson learned in life.

    Comment by Leonard — October 28, 2005 @ 3:13 pm

19. Kerri, what an awful experience to have. I hope you’re able to get the support you deserve.

    I have strong opinions on the subject. I nursed for almost four years total, between my three kids, and I hate the idea that a woman discreetly taking care of her baby needs to go hide somewhere to do it. Especially in the typically cramped and smelly nursing closet most LDS chapels have. We share a building with three other wards, and there is only one (1) permanent chair in ours. To use this space, we have to steal those little short chairs from classrooms or sit on the floor if it’s already taken (and it always is).

    I can still see a need for a nursing lounge (my middle child would never nurse for more than 30 seconds at a time without getting distracted by her surroundings, and it helped to go somewhere quiet) but if we’re going to claim to support motherhood and all it entails, the nursing lounge should be comfortable, pleasant and adequate. The changing tables/diaper pails should be moved to the men’s and ladies’ restrooms, and there should be enough comfortable chairs in a room big enough to accomodate all the new moms in the several wards who meet in any building.

    Comment by Allison — October 28, 2005 @ 3:20 pm

20. Leonard is right, but isn’t it too bad that the bishop will likely give more respect and credence to what a husband/man says than what a wife/woman says? Another unfortunate condition of our culture.

    Lyle, your example is just another reason why breastfeeding needs to be encouraged and visible–if boys grow up not seeing it, then the acculturated appeal of the forbidden is more likely to play out like it did with you. But if boys grow up seeing it and understand it as natural, good, and non-sexual, then it won’t affect them the same way. In fact, it might do a lot to counter the oversexualization of women in our society, and that, in turn, would probably cause both the culture and men in general to respect women more.

    Comment by Artemis — October 28, 2005 @ 3:24 pm

21. “All of a sudden the I am a bishop stuff will go away and it will be just two men talking. Your husband will have the upper hand in this dynamic.”

    Leonard, if you are right about this, and you may well be, it painfuly highlights the plight of single women in the church, who have no husband to represent andadvocate for them with the male leadership of the church.

    Comment by Rosalynde — October 28, 2005 @ 3:25 pm

22. Lyle,
    I think you’re right and you’re wrong. Yes boys like boobs. But the solution isn’t in teaching women to hide a natural essencial process of baby feeding. Truth is, I too was fascinated by breasts as a young girl, they’re mysterious, and I didn’t have them yet. I had a hard time not staring too. I probably did stare.

    And there was milk coming out of them, I mean who wouldn’t want to see that? How cool is that? The curiosity is normal. Even the attraction is normal. They’re breasts! What’s not to like? None of that is perverted or unnatural or bad.

    Yes, babies sometimes jerk away, mom’s get distracted. Things happen. Boys/girls/men/ may get a flash of milk-spurting nipple on occation. This may cause all kinds of interesting and exciting results in young minds. But instead of punishing (yes blankets in a chapel full of people in July is punishing) women for these inevitable and natural occurances, we have to teach men and boys how to deal with their thoughts and themselves when these things happen.

    BOYS and MEN must learn their own strenghts and responsiblities. Otherwise we are simply reinforcing the myth of male weakness. Men and boys are perfectly capable of controling their thoughts and reactions. Boys can learn to respect breatfeeding mothers. Assuming they can not, and must be protected from us underestimates their strengths and their responsibilites. If they can not learn to control their reaction to/ curiosity about a flash of mother breast in church, how can you expect them to learn to control their reaction to/ curiosity about a flash of porn on the computer?

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 3:28 pm

23. I highly recommend Hugo’s essay, The Myth of Male Weakness. On this subject.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 3:29 pm

24. Artemis

    But if boys grow up seeing it and understand it as natural, good, and non-sexual, then it won’t affect them the same way.

    Until women walk the streets topless, breasts will be sexual to adolescent boys.

    I have no objections whatsoever to a woman sitting in the middle of the chapel nursing her baby. What is wrong with asking her to cover up with a blanket?

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 3:30 pm

25. Lyle, you’re right to bring up the situation of young men, who are children just like infants, and, like infants, are harmed by the culture in which they’ve grown up. I don’t think we should reflexively dismiss them and their concerns in favor of the needs of the mother-infant dyad. But I also think Artemis is right: it’s not going to help young men or mother-infant to continue to contribute to the absurdly intense sexualization of the breast. But that doesn’t mean that we need to
    carelessly put our YM in spiritually dangerous positions. Perhaps Kerri could, with the bishop, work out a compromise in which, say, mothers wouldn’t nurse during the passing of the sacrament, which seems to me the only occasion on which there’s real danger of a young man seeing more than he wants to.

    Comment by Rosalynde — October 28, 2005 @ 3:31 pm

26. I think you should just say, “Thanks for bringing this to my attention, bishop”, and walk away and continue to breastfeed your baby in Sacrament meeting, only maybe do it on a pew a little farther away from the young men. Seriously, like there is a breastfeeding police out there? What would they do, staple your shirt shut? Use crazy glue on those little flaps in your bra? Oh, that you could release a jet of breastmilk on demand!

    It’s hard, really, really hard, to disagree with a Bishop. I know that sounds wussie and unfeminist-like, but we’re used to obeying and sustaining our local leaders, so it’s hard to call them on it when they make stupid mistakes.

    This is definitely a stupid mistake. Call him on it, but I think you can do it with minimum amounts of fuss. Just remember who the most important person in this scenario is, and take care of that person’s needs.

    Comment by Heather Oman — October 28, 2005 @ 3:33 pm

27. By the way, admin, there’s something very bizarre about your comments feature right now, thus the multiples.

    Comment by Rosalynde — October 28, 2005 @ 3:36 pm

28. I agree with Artemis on this one. My husbands large family (I’ve mentioned them before–13 kids) are now all grown and have children, some have grandchildren now. There is ALWAYS at least 2 or 3 nursing mothers around and because all of the males have grown up with it, it isn’t a problem.

    DH’s family is very open about it (made me uncomfortabe at first–my bro-in-laws would ask me how nursing was going and one so kindly returned a nursing pad I had dropped…) But if it is a normal part of a young man’s world, they grow up with it, they understand it, and it is not sexualized. I also agree with Artemis’s observation that seeing this normal part of life will help men to respect woman, rather than always seeing them as sex objects.

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 3:36 pm

29. I suppose I am being something of the devils advocate here, because I do think that Rosalynde’s suggestion is a fine one. And a blanket the size and weight of a large handkerchief would do the trick. But using fMhLisa’s argument, it should be totally educational and acceptable to let young women watch men urinate along the side of the road. Its natural, its instinctive, and its using a multi-purpose organ in a nonsexual way.

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 3:38 pm

30. Rosalynde,

    A friend, a father, a brother can do the same thing for a single sister.

    The dynamic can work in other situations for men with a female advocate when they are having a problem with a female in a position of authority.

    Essentially you are correct in your analysis though. Its one of the reasons that its tough to be single and female in the church past a certain age. (I say this as a complete traditional conservate both LDS and politically.) I think though that this dynamic of men rising to the defense of their wives/kids etc works in all cultures across the world and is part of the male make-up.

    Thank goodness for marriage. When properly done the family benefits from the strengths of both genders for the betterment of all the family members

    Comment by Leonard — October 28, 2005 @ 3:40 pm

31. Leonard wrote,
    “Is there something wrong with being a white man? or Old? ”

    No of course not. You are what you are, nothing you can do about that. Railing on middle-aged white men is just the language often used to rail against privilege. Unfortunatly, I can see how that might feel a bit abusive to someone who fits that description. I’ve found, as a person with a great load of privilege myself, the best response to just acknowledge the privilege as best you can, minimize it when possible, and listen, really listen to the voices of people who don’t have it.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 3:46 pm

32. Until I get this weird thing fixed, please just click once on “add my comment” no matter what the computer is telling you. It works I promise.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 3:48 pm

33. I think you should just say, “Thanks for bringing this to my attention, bishop”, and walk away and continue to breastfeed your baby in Sacrament meeting, only maybe do it on a pew a little farther away from the young men.

    Heather said it perfect. Why, oh why, can’t I just say things wonderfully simple when I get all razzled up and emotional? She hit the nail on the head.

    Comment by JulieP — October 28, 2005 @ 3:50 pm

34. By the way, Kerri, is there a way I can get in touch with you about adoptive breastfeeding? I have a 15 month old and will be adopting. I’ve got questions that no one else has answered to my liking yet, and since you’ve obviously been there/done that, I’d love to pick your brain.

    Comment by JulieP — October 28, 2005 @ 3:51 pm

35. The dynamic can work in other situations for men with a female advocate when they are having a problem with a female in a position of authority.

    When does this ever happen? Sounds academic to me.

    The (secondary) problem here (I know, it’s a threadjack), is why do women, single or otherwise, NEED a male advocate? Why can’t she be her own advocate? Why doesn’t society respect women as much as men?

    But using fMhLisa’s argument, it should be totally educational and acceptable to let young women watch men urinate along the side of the road. Its natural, its instinctive, and its using a multi-purpose organ in a nonsexual way.

    Lyle, for starters, you’re using the wrong parallel. Using your argument, it should be totally educational and acceptable to let young men watch women urinate along the side of the road. Its natural, its instinctive, and its using a multi-purpose organ in a nonsexual way.

    Breasts don’t excrete bodily wastes (which is yucky). Everybody eats and is nourished. Why does that process have to be turned into yucky (or forbidden) when it really isn’t?

    Comment by Artemis — October 28, 2005 @ 3:51 pm

36. Before you jump on me, let me clarify–womens’ organs of urinating is not multifunctional the way mens’ are, but they’re physically located so closely to the ‘other function’ that I think the analogy works.

    Comment by Artemis — October 28, 2005 @ 3:54 pm

37. Lisa,

    Its nothing less than your white, your male and you stink.

    Its fashionable on liberal campuses and is practiced far more openly then old fashioned anti-black stuff. Your poster was very comfortable with an open display of sexism and rascism in the form of a post. That says a lot.

    Comment by Leonard — October 28, 2005 @ 3:58 pm

38. Nursing isnt “yucky” or “forbidden” at all. But breasts are definately erotic and exciting. The nursing element in my comments is basically a non-issue. If women wore loose blouses and tiny bras the overall effect would be the same - Excited young men getting turned on by the sight of the side or top of a breast. If Kerri was asked not to nurse inside the Chapel there is a problem. If she was simply asked to cover up a bit ( is a large handkercheif really that terrible?) then I can understand some of the Bishop’s concerns.

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 3:58 pm

39. That you think it is logical to compare feeding a baby to peeing is very revealing. You might want to work on some of your underlying assumptions there.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 4:00 pm

40. Leonard,
    As someone who has said “it” many-a time myself, because I’m very saddened by cost of privalige, And as someone who loves and admires a whole lot of middled-aged white men. I’m just going to tell you you’re wrong.

    Privalige is something I have, want it or not. I’m not at fault for that, it just is. Hating the privalige isn’t the same thing as hating the middle aged white men who have it. And it isnt’ the same thing as hating myself because I have it.

    But that’s not what this thread is about. And we should probably save this discussion for another day.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 4:05 pm

41. So maybe it was a bad example. All I was saying is that breasts are for feeding a child, but are also a sexual organ, and always will be. That can be an incredible distraction. Thats all Im saying.
    How would you feel if a woman came to sacrament meeting practically falling out of a gown, flashing everyone every time she turned? Im not saying its the same situation, but to a 13 year old boy, the distinction doesnt really matter. It should, and eventually will, but that takes some teaching and guidance from good role models

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 4:06 pm

42. Nursing IS the issue here, and the oversexualization of the breasts and the women that facilitate the activity. If boys & men are conditioned to see breasts only as sexual and/or forbidden, then that is where the problem is. Shifting the burden to women (again) does not solve the problem, it hides it (under that lovely required breast-blanket).

    Comment by Artemis — October 28, 2005 @ 4:08 pm

43. Why is everybody so worked up? Does every person have to think they way you do to be acceptable in your eyes. Just as those men and obviously others in the ward were worried about it, whether you disagree or not, why is their point of view no better than yours. I don’t see why a little accomodations is not appropriate. Why can’t you jsut put the blanket over the child AND the breast to diffuse the problem or be more conspicuos about it. Why must it turn it to: I HATE MEN, I HATE MEN, I HATE MEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!WHY MUST MEN BE SO HORRIBLE AND SEXIST PIGGSSS!!!!!!!
    Some people don’t like to see it. I agree that is stupid, but hey, thats life. I don’t see why we must bring out the guns, post this message around the world for all to see how stupid men are, and rally all the women and men allies we can get. You sound like you are going to war for heavens sake. Settle down.

    Her feelings were hurt. Guess what it happens to all of us. They shoudl have been more aware of her and acted more appropriately. We don’t have to turn it into a manhating fest.

    You guys are scary sometimes

    Comment by not easily offended — October 28, 2005 @ 4:09 pm

44. Actually, Lyle, breasts are not a “sexual organ”, (forgive my descriptiveness) vaginas and penises are. Breasts are for feeding babies. They have been sexualized, just as anything else can be…some men are turned on by ankles, some by necks…those are just part of the human body, but can be sexualized just like the breast can be.

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 4:10 pm

45. Lyle,
    My children did not allow blankets or oversized tissues, or anything to cover their heads. They have arms, you know, and are perfectly capable of informing you when you are upsetting them.

    Not to mention that you deciding which complication isn’t a big deal to add to an overburdened’s woman life is really the height of arrogance. Not that you meant it that way, but have you really sat down to think about all the step that might be involved in adding that one “small” thing to a woman’s list.

    1. Purchasing/making appropriate covering.
    2. Packing covering everywhere you go.
    3. keeping your other kids from losing it, stealing it, peeking under it, using it as a tissue.
    4. not being able to feed a hungry child if you forgot it.
    5. getting it to say in place, due to gravity, or uncooperative child.

    Sure, blankets’ hankies work great for some women, they may even like it. But I do think it’s too much for you to expect.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 4:12 pm

46. I’m sorry, but breasts are most definately sexual organs. My wife frequently climaxes just from having her breasts played with. They are sexual organs to me.. but more importantly, they are also sexual organs to her. It would be interesting to hear how many women here do not like their breasts involved during romance.

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 4:16 pm

47. “Im not saying its the same situation, but to a 13 year old boy, the distinction doesnt really matter. It should, and eventually will, but that takes some teaching and guidance from good role models”

    I think you’ve hit it on the head there Lyle. I totally agree. But I think the teaching has to come sooner rather than later. And I think that breastfeeding has to be made a non-issue. There are too many burdens in the life of young mothers for people to be heaping more responsiblities and expectations and condemnation upon them.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 4:16 pm

48. Not easily offended: One of my female friends, who had children but chose not to breastfeed, sayed to me one time, while I was nursing under a blanket “You’re not doing that “nasty” thing again are you!” It is not a “hate men fest”, women can be mean about it to.

    I am a very modest person, I don’t flip the boob out for all to see, and it doesn’t sound like Kerri did that either. You can nurse without a blanket, and not see any part of the breast whatsoever!

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 4:17 pm

49. Not easily offended,
    Your behavior is rather trollish. We don’t plan to feed you.

    We’re up for a good conversation, but please don’t tell us we hate men. Or any of the other blather I didn’t really bother to read. We like niceness here, Please read this before you responds again. And please watch your tone.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 4:20 pm

50. bla bla blad. you know you hate men….

    Comment by not easily offended — October 28, 2005 @ 4:20 pm

51. fMhLisa,
    Your comment is well made. I do understand the difficulty with the burdens mothers have. I do not have any good solution to staying in the chapel and still nursing.
    In the end, I am afraid that as long as some women use the flash of a breast as a sexual tool, some men will see the flash of any breast in a sexual perspective. And some men (and women) will be uncomfortable with the flash of any breast - or part of a breast

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 4:22 pm

52. I think though, as shown in my last post, that to some people it doesn’t matter what preventive matters you take, whether it be a blanket or whatever…it is still going be viewed as disgusting or sexual.

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 4:25 pm

53. I have never met a man in my life that thinks nursing is disgusting. The only time I have ever heard it even referred to as distastefull in any was was listening to women talk about where and when some other woman chose to do it.

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 4:26 pm

54. Yikes, Lyle, about your wife’s proclivities in bed—TMI! TMI! TMI! Let your wife post about that, if she wants to.

    Breasts are secondary sexual characteristics, exactly like beards; in fact, like beards, the opposite sex can develop them under the right conditions. Whether or not one–or one’s sexual partner–finds them sexy depends on a complex mix of psychological and environmental factors. There’s nothing inherently “sexual” about them, except that they’re unique (usually) to one sex. Of course, this says nothing about how you (or your wife!) respond to them individually.

    Comment by Rosalynde — October 28, 2005 @ 4:32 pm

55. Lyle,
    I’d agree that breasts are sexual organs. they certainly are in my life. Though they aren’t in every culture. But we’re in this culture. And frankly, I’d find it a little sad not to have breasts as sexual organs, they can be the source of a great deal of pleasure.

    Still, boys are going to be confronted with breasts for the rest of their lives. They’ve got to learn to deal with that and to control themselves.

    Certainly it’s a good idea to make it as easy as possible for 13 yo boys not to think about boobs all the time. I’m all for women being circumspect, but the thing is, most women ARE, especially at church. Breastfeeing is far to important an activity to restrict because a few young boys might see a flash of flesh.

    It is always the women who are paying the price of men seeing us as sex objects. Our first instinct is to tell women to use blankets or nursing rooms instead of teaching boys how to control their thoughts and teaching them how to think about women with love and respect.

    I think women have to push back and expect men to be stronger. It’s a balance, and I’m not sure where the ideal is, but I do think that covering women in burkas is just as evil, if not more so, then running around naked. Men have to learn that If you see me as a sex object, that is your problem, not mine. Men and boys have to learn to see women rather than boobs. No, it’s not always easy, but I expect it. Especially at church.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 4:33 pm

56. easily offended,
    I’ve never banned anyone in my life, but that last comment makes it very tempting. Be nice. It’s what we expect.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 4:36 pm

57. Men and boys have to learn to see women rather than boobs.

    Very very true. But for that to happen women need to stop using their breasts in a sexual manner. Its not just the males fault.

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 4:40 pm

58. When I was raped, the first thing the police officers asked me was “what were you wearing”. I was quite upset by this. I was very modest, and at the time, I was wearing jeans (not tight) a tee-shirt and a cardigan over top of it. I wasn’t showing flesh, I wasn’t wearing revealing clothes, I wasn’t leading him on…but still that is the first questing that gets asked “what did you as a woman do to turn this man on”. And regardless of what I was wearing, where his responsibility in controlling himself and his thoughts. All of the responsibility was lumped on me because I was a woman and had breasts.

    Obviously, it plays out in the breastfeeding ring as well.

    It is always the women who are paying the price of men seeing us as sex objects. Our first instinct is to tell women to use blankets or nursing rooms instead of teaching boys how to control their thoughts and teaching them how to think about women with love and respect.

    I agree that women need to be “modest” about breastfeeding, but men and boys need to learn to look at it differently and control their thoughts.

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 4:42 pm

59. I don’t have much to say about this. But I’d like to make it known that unless the Bishop signs off on the idea, it isn’t an official ward policy.

    Two members of the ward council voicing gripes doesn’t make it official. The fact that the Bishop approached you privately indicates that he didn’t consider it official either.

    Comment by Seth Rogers — October 28, 2005 @ 4:47 pm

60. Um, for what it’s worth (admittedly not much)…I saw boys peeing by the side of the road many times, and, ahem, was never particularly “bothered” (although very impressed!) by it.

    Moreover, as a competitive swimmer, I practically grew up in a swimming pool (read: itty bitty speedos galore), and I don’t seem to have a problem distinguishing between the multiple uses of the male anatomy and the appropriate responses to varied situations. Nor do any of the women I know who shared these experiences with me when we were growing up.

    Men/boys simply don’t distinguish because they’ve never had to. Culturally it’s always been okay for them to blame the “immodest” woman for thoughts and responses, rather than learn to self govern.

    Comment by Athena — October 28, 2005 @ 4:56 pm

61. What I meant to emphasize by the speedos reference is that because I was exposed to the male body (or, it was exposed to me!) so much as I was growing up, it was never an over sexualized mystery to me as it was to most of the non-swimmer girls I knew, who would stammer and splutter and turn beet red at the sight of a man in a speedo if they ever happened to meet one. To me it was simply never a big deal.

    Familiarity breeds comfort, shall we say?

    Comment by Athena — October 28, 2005 @ 5:02 pm

62. Interesting comment, but a speedo is still a speedo. It hides male nakedness as well as a woman’s suit hides her nakedness.

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 5:05 pm

63. which is to say…not very well

    Comment by Athena — October 28, 2005 @ 5:06 pm

64. or completely, depending on your perspective

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 5:08 pm

65. Not to mention it maketh him look rather silly.

    Comment by Seth Rogers — October 28, 2005 @ 5:11 pm

66. Lyle,
    “But for that to happen women need to stop using their breasts in a sexual manner. Its not just the males fault”

    Nope. I don’t agree here. Ultimatly, what is in your mind, is your issue. Period.

    Certainly women and how we display our boobs, can make it harder, but you brain is your problem.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 5:15 pm

67. Bravo, fMhLisa!

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 5:20 pm

68. So you dont believe that Men - and Women - teaching the younger part of society that breasts are sexual will result in young men seeing them as sexual?

    Comment by Lyle — October 28, 2005 @ 5:20 pm

69. I’m quite confused, she’s a adoptive mother of Noah, so how does she produce milk for him? Is there a drug or a horomone that she take to make her come to her milk?

    I don’t have kids myself, but I’ve been rasied around horse, cattle, pig and sheep, and well, none of them lactated with out having given birth first. Did I miss something?

    “My youngest baby (Noah) came to me from a birthmother who was beating him up. He’s had a very tough time attaching and learning how to be happy. If I hadn’t nursed him I don’t know how any of us would have survived. And I told the bishop this and said I’d have to go to the car or something because Noah has special needs and I didn’t want to miss out on all my meetings. He said he didn’t want to drive me from the building

    By Kerri
    Adoptive Mama to Cole 6, Naomi 5, Adam 4, and Noah (1)”

    Comment by photosbykris — October 28, 2005 @ 5:26 pm

70. Women (and animals) can produce milk when their nipples are stimulated. There might be hormones that can help too, I’m not sure. I’m sure others know more than me.

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 5:31 pm

71. Ultimatly, what is in your mind, is your issue. Period.

    Yes! And I would love FMH to do a post on privilege–so many people just don’t “get” it.

    I remember as a young adult watching an episode of Mr. Rogers with some children I was babysitting. He went over to Picture Picture and played a film with various animals nursing their young and the very last was of a mother feeding her baby. I was quite surprised when the baby was taken off the breast and a nipple with dripping milk was shown on MR. ROGERS. I was duly impressed! Go Fred!

    Comment by Wendy — October 28, 2005 @ 5:32 pm

72. There are shots, as well as herbs, that are suppose to aid in milk production. (A sis-in-law who adopted was considering breastfeeding.)

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 5:34 pm

73. In New Jersey, I am allowed to breastfeed anywhere I myself am permitted to be. When I left the hospital, the lactation consultant gave me a pink card with the statute and its number printed on it. My dream of being arrested for breastfeeding in public was shattered. Oh well It came in handy, because I wasn’t going to the mother’s lounge with the busted speaker and the skanky diaper can. I’m not interested in Sacrament meeting sounding like a bad cell phone call. I was totally ready to whip that card out, but little man kept it low key and I didn’t have to.

    Comment by Josette — October 28, 2005 @ 6:04 pm

74. Lyle said
    “Very very true. But for that to happen women need to stop using their breasts in a sexual manner. Its not just the males fault.”

    Huh? How do you propose we do this?

    Anyway, I can sympathize with the young boys’ plight in being turned on by breasts. But it really and truly is not the burden of a nursing mother. Her primary concern has to be for her child and its comfort. If her baby is happy with a blanket, great. If not, that is just dandy too.

    These boys are never going to live in a world where breasts and other sexually arousing body parts aren’t highly visible. They really do need to learn how to process these images with self-control, respect for women, respect for God’s laws, and without shame.

    Comment by Minerva — October 28, 2005 @ 6:05 pm

75. I fled the building, not wanting anyone to see my crying feminine emotional weakness. Sobbed and sobbed in the van until church was over

    I would note that public crying has an incredible effect on people. I know it is hard, but a woman who does not flee, but merely breaks down in the lobby, is a terrible rebuke.

    Women (and animals [such as men]) can produce milk when their nipples are stimulated

    Yep, even men can be forced to produce milk with effort.

    Glad our culture does not engage in that practice.

    I really missed a lot by being distracted by the BOH mess.

    Comment by Stephen M (Ethesis) — October 28, 2005 @ 6:15 pm

76. But isn’t oxytocin dangerous to take? I mean the vet has told us to be carful with it as it could ruin the fertility of our mares and cows. Usually we give it when the cow or mare don’t clean by themselves.

    Daires can’t use oxytocin in there milk cows as it was banned under the the prevention of cruelity act in 1960. I use to work for a dairy farm. That and if they are on it long term it destroys there reproductive system. That and the small quanitiy that is in the cows milk that is for human consumption, enters the milk and cause hormonal imbalances in humans affecting growth, eyesight, and fertility.

    I know that drug use in human and livestock is different, cattle can be given mycotil, for respiratory infections and it will kill a human in a mater of hour with just a low doseage. I’m always careful, when we use that vaccine on our calves, making sure that the cover is on the needle and that I don’t prick my finger with that needle, it’s killed two ranchers, with just a prick of a finger.

    Comment by photosbykris — October 28, 2005 @ 6:20 pm

77. Question, Kerri: are there other mother’s in your ward that are breastfeeding? Do you know if they have been approached about this? Not that it makes a lot of difference, but if you find out another mother has been approached, at least you know that you are not being singled out. And, then, you would have another mother to support you and you could both help each other get through this.

    Like I said, it doesn’t matter a whole bunch, I think it’s ridiculous this was even mentioned to you, but to me, it would make me feel better, at least a little, knowing that I was not the only one being talked about.

    Comment by princessleah_mom — October 28, 2005 @ 6:29 pm

78. I am very sorry that this happened to you, Kerri, I also would have had a hard time defending myself articulately in such a situation.

    I agree with Heather’s suggestion that you continue nursing wherever you are comfortable doing it. If the topic is raised again, hand the bishop a packet about breastfeeding that he can copy and give out to anyone who needs some more education. Also, let him know that you will be contacting the Stake President. If you fear becoming emotional when talking to SP, send him a letter and ask him to call you–that ensures that he would have read your best arguments and you don’t have to worry about forgetting them.

    You might also suggest that you swap rooms for the mother’s lounge: small, stinky room for High Preists classroom. It only seems fair.

    [Incidentally, my meetinghouse has no mother’s lounge and my baby would not nurse in public (too distracted), so I got nurse in my car through the entire winter in upstate NY–so ridiculous!]

    Comment by ESO — October 28, 2005 @ 6:41 pm

79. “Breasts are like beards. . . ”

    That’s pretty funny, Rosalynde. There are some similarities. They start growing during puberty and all.

    That said –

    1. Do women get reprimanded and left out of church leadership for having breasts? I hope not! On the other hand every few months someone in the nacle mentions beard sanctions;

    2. I’m aware of many women who find beards positively unattractive. I’m not aware of a single man who feels that way about breasts;

    3. Lots of men say “I grew out my beard because my wife likes it” or “I shave because my wife likes it.” Women can’t exactly ungrow breasts on a whim.

    It’s a cute comparison and all, but I don’t think it holds up under any kind of scrutiny.

    But maybe I’m wrong.

    Comment by Kaimi — October 28, 2005 @ 7:11 pm

80. Yep, Kaimi, you’re wrong, this time, at least. Breasts and beards are both secondary sex chararacteristics, as distinct from primary sex organs. See here for a primer, if you like (clean wikipedia link).

    If you prefer, you can substitute “chest hair” for “beard,” and the point is the same.

    Comment by Rosalynde — October 28, 2005 @ 7:28 pm

81. Not that there’s anything wrong with the comment, but for the record, I did not write #12.

    MP

    Comment by Melissa — October 28, 2005 @ 8:10 pm

82. What is my chest hair then?

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 8:33 pm

83. Just kidding!

    Comment by fMhLisa — October 28, 2005 @ 8:33 pm

84. “Lyle, your example is just another reason why breastfeeding needs to be encouraged and visible–if boys grow up not seeing it, then the acculturated appeal of the forbidden is more likely to play out like it did with you. But if boys grow up seeing it and understand it as natural, good, and non-sexual, then it won’t affect them the same way. In fact, it might do a lot to counter the oversexualization of women in our society, and that, in turn, would probably cause both the culture and men in general to respect women more. ”

    Not gonna happen. In Guatemala (on my mission), breastfeeding is done in public as much as you can imagine. I remember having a ward get-together, and after looking up from reading a verse in the BOM being shocked at seeing seeing several women openly breastfeeding, many of whom would not cover up after the child was done in case he/she wanted more. So this was obviously something the YM grew up with there. But in no way did this stop p0rnography (it’s widely used) nor teenage sex, and it definitely did not make men respect the women more.

    BTW, anything wrong with pumping–seemed to work well for my wife. Just wondering.

    Comment by Tim J. — October 28, 2005 @ 9:14 pm

85. In the US, states decide if breast feeding is counted within their indecent exposure laws. If your province/state or municipality does not have breast feeding attached to the “indecent regs”, you can breastfeed anywhere a mother and child are permitted to “be”. Good luck!

    Comment by concierge — October 28, 2005 @ 9:28 pm

86. And Kaimi, if you think about it, I’m guessing you almost certainly do know men who don’t find breasts a turn on…

    Comment by Justin H — October 28, 2005 @ 9:30 pm

87. The myriad factors that influence cultures don’t make such clean analogies very useful.

    Disrespect for women in latin cultures has much more to do with machismo and latin cultural influences than with public asexual nudity.

    Find me a WASP culture in which breastfeeding in public is tolerated more than in ours, then make the analogy if you want to be persuasive.

    Comment by toady — October 28, 2005 @ 9:30 pm

88. Tim J.–

    I assume that you are talking about pumping as an alternative to public breastfeeding. In that case, here’s what’s wrong with requiring it:

    (1) the kind of pumps that will keep up your milk supply are expensive and many women don’t have them (I’ve nursed three kids, one year each, and don’t own one)

    (2) pumping is time consuming–as is washing bottles and the pumping equipment

    (3) milk must be kept at the proper temperature to avoid contamination–requiring refrigeration and heating

    (4) some babies experience nipple confusion and have nursing problems if they are given a bottle

    In my opinion, this is way too much to ask the mother of a baby (and the baby) to endure to avoid the risk that a deacon will be adversely affected by the sight of a nursing mother.

    Kerri, I’ve been thinking about (puzzling over) your experience for a few hours. Call me nuts for asking, but are your children of a different race than you? (NOT THAT THAT WOULD JUSTIFY WHAT HAPPENED!) But this is so inexplicable to me that I am trying to figure out how two (three, if you count the bishop) such mother-hostile people could end up in the same ward, and was wondering if maybe some other prejudices were coming into play?

    Comment by Julie in Austin — October 28, 2005 @ 9:42 pm

89. Well, toady, I’m not sure what you meant by ‘our’ culture, but I have definitely noticed more acceptance of public breastfeeding in Northern California and Austin than in Utah and New England.

    Comment by Julie in Austin — October 28, 2005 @ 9:43 pm

90. Pumping just makes more work in a busy mom’s schedule. No way would I ever pump so as not to have to nurse in public. I think it’s fine for people who want to but good pumps are expensive. Then you have to deal with keeping the milk cold and sanitary. Plain old nursing is free and clean.

    My last ward building had the changing pad in the bathroom (on a counter top) and since diapers weren’t changed in the mother’s room at least it didn’t stink. My current ward has the stink issue and it is so unpleasant.

    Comment by Vicki — October 28, 2005 @ 9:45 pm

91. Julie:

    Those are interesting (and surprising) combinations if one is interested in the idea that public acceptance of breastfeeding can contribute to greater respect for women.

    Why the disparities, I wonder. Do they relate to the de-sexualizing of breastfeeding or are they created by other influences? Which of these regions manifests greater respect for women, and why, do you think?

    Comment by toady — October 28, 2005 @ 9:52 pm

92. Having gone to the same mission as Tim J. (in Guatemala) my feeling is that what the deacons in the States need is to see more Guatemalan breasts. That’s the quickest way to de-sexualize the breast.

    Comment by Rusty Clifton — October 28, 2005 @ 10:21 pm

93. I’m interested in a couple of things here. First, I have always thought of LDS women as champion breastfeeders. I really only know one or two who have not nursed for at least 6 months with each child, and then only because of physical problems. It’s not even considered something to think about for most people, and bottle-feeding is unusual enough to cause me to notice it. Is this unusual? Does nursing have a lot more to do with regional differences than I realized? I do live in Northern CA, but although I have never lived in Utah I thought things were similar there from my visits.

    Then, mothers’ rooms. I like mothers’ rooms–I never mastered discreet nursing very well and frequently wore button-front dresses, so I would just open up the whole front (or sometimes take off the top of my dress). Also, I could stick a book in the diaper bag if there was nothing to listen to. Our mothers’ room, happily, is quite pleasant and even has a movable curtain over the door so you can undress as much as you like. (It’s comfy enough that I have caught bishopric members holding personal meetings there.) Our stake center’s room is abysmal.

    Anyway, how much of the responsibility for getting better mothers’ rooms lies with us? Most people in a ward, especially the men, never enter the mothers’ room. They don’t know what it’s like. If a ward building has a bad mothers’ room, shouldn’t we speak up and ask for changes to be made? How many of us have put up with old spittupy chairs and stinky diaper pails without saying anything or demanding better accomodations? I think we ought to be speaking up more.

    Comment by dangermom — October 28, 2005 @ 10:27 pm

94. toady, I have no good answers to your (very good) questions. I only mentioned those four areas because I am (somewhat) familiar with them. But my data is very anecdotal.

    Comment by Julie in Austin — October 28, 2005 @ 10:44 pm

95. I agree with Lyle. What’s the harm in a little cover up blanket? It worked fine for my little one. Modesty requires effort on our part too. It is ridiculous to say that the 12 and 13 year old boys need to control their thoughts and emotions better so ladies can openly breastfeed in church. The boys are going through puberty and have enough to worry about without having to avert their eyes in church sacrament meeting.
    Ladies, get a clue and stop being offended at every little thing!

    Comment by Katreena — October 28, 2005 @ 10:49 pm

96. Is Kerri’s experience a “little thing”?

    Comment by toady — October 28, 2005 @ 10:53 pm

97. As a follow-up, (and I’ll address more of the question next because I haven’t read all 93! responses. I’m just aghast this got so much traffic) my Mum emailed the bishop that night, without my knowledge or blessing. But she and my Father REALLY went to bat for me. She was absolutely pissed to have been misrepresnented as part of the ward counsel (it was she who told me it was only two men who had an opinion, and I mentioned their race because I do actually think this is relevant).

    Anyway, she also warned him that he’d picked the wrong person to pick a fight with over breastfeeding. That I could have 50 topless mothers nursing on the front steps with the snap of my fingers. The poor guy has huge regret for even touching the issue, and has somewhat apologized for the way it was handled, which I appreciate.

    I’ll continue reading (I’m only on #12!) and post more later.

    Kerri

    Comment by Kerri — October 28, 2005 @ 11:00 pm

98. About turning on teenage boys:

    Honestly, if they have some image of my breast burned into their brain all week, poor them. It doesn’t bother me none. I applaud their resourcefulness, considering that they wouldn’t have ever seen my breast. They might have seen a baby snuggled up my shirt, and his jaw may have been moving, so they could of course take that as proof that I indeed had breasts.

    But do we tell beautiful slim young women they are causing young men to have impure thoughts? Cautioning them to be respectful and discreet? Even I am in awe of a beautiful woman, so I’m sure young men are too.

    And I assure you that my sons will not be tittilated by seeing someone nurse their baby, discreetly or otherwise. It’s normal to them. It’s normal for God and farmers and evolution experts.

    Kerri

    Comment by Kerri — October 28, 2005 @ 11:28 pm

99. Wow. I bottle-feed, but I fully support any and all women who breast-feed, and do so publicly. How else are you going to feed your child? Breast-feeding is NATURAL. Boobs are NATURAL. And it’s not your fault if some 14 year old boy gets hot from watching you breastfeed (that’s more disturbing than anything else, actually). He should be able to control his own thoughts.

    Good for you for standing up for yourself. I probably would have called the bishop an idiot and walked out, but I digress…

    Comment by Emily — October 28, 2005 @ 11:32 pm

100. Yes, I have adopted and nursed all my children. Our bodies are miraculous and our brains recognize nipple stimulation to mean it’s time to start building the milk-making apparatus. It’s been done for generations, and there are still cultures on this earth where other women help Mama nurse the baby. People who want more information can contact me, the adoptive breeastfeeding resource website www.fourfriends.com/abrw , or read this article: http://www.breastfeedingonline.com/23.html

     Comment by Kerri — October 28, 2005 @ 11:34 pm

101. Kerri, I’m sure you probably know this by now, but this is all going to be fine, and ultimately benefit some other mother someday, because of how tough you have been. I stand in awe, honestly! Counting myself lucky to have “known” you online as long as I have. Keep up the awesome work! –Ana (Sam & Abe’s mom)

     Comment by Ana — October 29, 2005 @ 12:02 am

102. Lisa,

     Best. Post. Title. Ever.

     You rule.

     Comment by Geoff J — October 29, 2005 @ 1:00 am

103. Kerri and all you other women who suggest it is silly for young men or whatever kind of men to think breasts are sexual–puleez! Maybe you don’t find the sight of breasts sexual . . . well, hello, you are women. Do you find the sight of any part of a woman sexual?

     Thanks to fMhLisa for a little honesty.

     Kerri, your sons will know that breastfeeding is normal and natural and right and to be respected and encouraged and praised. They will be used to it. Great. That doesn’t mean it won’t make them uncomfortable in one way or another. What reason do you have to think it wouldn’t? When they get married, they will get used to their wives’ breasts and everything else, but that doesn’t mean their wives’ bodies will stop being sexual. My mother was a champion breastfeeder, fed other mama’s kids when they couldn’t, fed some of hers for two years plus . . . I was the second of six, so I saw plenty of breastfeeding, and all my friends are committed breastfeeders. That doesn’t change the fact that breasts are sexual, and breastfeeding makes me a bit uncomfortable. The only difference is, I figure it is as much my problem as hers if anything is to be done about it.

     Rosalynde, the fact that breasts and beards are both “secondary sexual characteristics” has about as much relevance as the fact that they are both composed of molecules: None. There are plenty of things involved in sexuality besides reproduction, or the “organs of reproduction”. In fact, the very classification of breasts as “not organs of reproduction” is pretty dubious. Take any pre-twentieth-century society and tell the women not to use their breasts. Would you pretend this is less than a massive impediment to reproduction?

     Comment by Ben H — October 29, 2005 @ 2:15 am

104. So Kerri, thanks for your post, and for being such a trooper with tough kids, and kudos for making it work as well as you have!

     You absolutely need to do what works with regard to the most important issues here: being a full participant at church on the one hand, and giving your child the care and love he needs on the other. If that means you have to just ignore what the “ward council” says, okay. (And from the way you described the bishop, not disagreeing with you, maybe that’s how he feels too)

     I would only say, try to be a little more understanding of the awkwardness, and maybe consider giving the bishop and others involved a little more credit. They probably don’t exactly understand what it is about the request that makes it seem unreasonable to you. Maybe they need to hear you explain a little more of what makes it difficult, what is tough about the blanket business, etc. (don’t you carry a blanket for your kid anyway? something to mop up when he spits?) Maybe there are very subtle ways in which you can reduce the awkwardness, say, by turning a little bit in your seat on this occasion, maybe sitting in a different spot on that occasion. You are clearly close to your limit as it is, trying to manage church and children, and for all I know even little things like this are too much to ask of you. In that case, I suspect it would do a lot of good for you to just tell the bishop that is where you are at: “Bishop, that is just one more thing than I can really afford to think about! I have enough trouble just making sure my kids are getting what they need. I’m afraid the young men are just going to have to avert their eyes if it’s causing a problem.” He might be more sympathetic than you think.

     Comment by Ben H — October 29, 2005 @ 2:42 am

105. I really do agree that a woman should be able to breastfeed her children.
     But, please consider the teenage boys in your ward for a moment. Imagine your son someday passing the sacrament. And he gets noticibly excited because attention is called to a woman’s breast. I think that when I have a teenage son, I will be more sensitive to how tight a leader’s clothing is, or about public breastfeeding.
     I think that you should really talk to your husband about how it felt to be a teenage boy and burdened with a teenage boys’ sex drive.
     I think it is possible that the bishop is very worried about some young men in your ward. And he is trying to help the youth. Many bishops think that the youth are their most important job. You are an adult. You can understand things. Teenagers are not adults.
     I would suggest perhaps education. Volunteer to help in a YM activity where they can learn that women’s bodies are not just sex objects. That babies need to be fed from breasts, etc. About respecting of women’s bodies in general.

     Comment by jks — October 29, 2005 @ 2:50 am

106. What kind of young men DO you have in your ward? Maybe time shave changed, but when I was a teenaged boy, I would never become excited by seeing a flash of breast while someone was breastfeeding. Maybe a bit giddy, but never excited. I saw much more at the beach than I ever did when someone was breastfeeding. It took a lot more than a section of breast to get me excited.

     Comment by Kim Siever — October 29, 2005 @ 7:19 am

107. Kerri, I’d be interested in knowing the ward. Feel free to email me at kim.siever@gmail.com

     Comment by Kim Siever — October 29, 2005 @ 7:21 am

108. Kerri

     I know you don’t I?? Anyway, I totally feel for you, quite possibly know who your Bishop is, and wish I was there to completely support you!!!

     Kim was just saying that if boys are having problems with seeing a mother breastfeeding and having sexual thoughts the Bishop should be speaking to THEM, not you. I agree with your whole post (obviously, being the breastfeeding advocate I am) and my opinion is the same. Why are girls not taken to task for wearing tight revealing clothes but mothers are for nursing their babies??

     As well I think you are an utter hero for breastfeeding your adoptive children, you already know the wonderful blessing and gift you are giving them. The human body is so amazing that a mother who has never birthed a child can breastfeed. It takes a lot of work and effort to accomplish this and the Bishop should have been congratulating you instead of trying to segregate you.

     The thing is, my children (and many more I know) are being raised to see breasts has primarily objects for nurutring and feeding babies. My son is 4.5 and sees them this way, and my daughter is almost 7 and see is this way. My 1 month old certainly does. This has been their first connection to the breast and should be their primary connection as they get older.

     This society is over-sexed and it is society, not babies or mothers, that have the problem.

     Ben, you know it makes no difference. Kerri is covered up. It has to do with people KNOWING she was breastfeeding. No one sees any skin when I nurse either, but I get the looks only if they are aware I am. If they aren’t, I hear nothing. It’s the fact that many people are incomfortable with the fact of breastfeeding, having been taught for so long that breasts are for the sexual pleasure of a man. If breastfeeding had been more encouraged in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s I have a feeling we wouldn’t be dealing with these issues.

     JKS, yes Kerri is an adult, but Noah is a baby. The teenage boys need to learn and can understand even more than a baby can. Babies understand that they need to be loved and taken care of, and not why society has such an issue with their needs.

     Comment by Mary Siever — October 29, 2005 @ 8:00 am

109. Hi Ben—

     You seem pretty upset with me, but I’m not sure why! If you read the entire thread, you’ll see that I urged Kerri to consider the fact that young men may well have difficulty, and that we ought to recognize their needs, too. Furthermore, I acknowledged that psychology and environment can have a powerful effect in sexualizing parts of the body. What are you arguing with? If you’re claiming that breasts are necessary for reproduction, um, they’re just not, sorry. Sure, they’ve been sexualized in our culture—that seems to be everybody’s point—but there’s no reason why, say, ankles or feet or clavicles couldn’t become the focus of such intense sexualization, either. In fact, they have ,in certain times and places and psyches—just as breasts are worn uncovered and entirely desexualized in other times and places and psyches.

     Comment by Rosalynde — October 29, 2005 @ 8:05 am

110. I haven’t weighed in, simply because I don’t really have anything different to add, but I have breastfed in the chapel during SS and Sacrament, as I don’t see why I should be hidden away, like breastfeeding is something to be ashamed of. Nothing can be seen when I nurse, and have never been taken to task over it. Congrats Kerri on taking the time and effort to breastfeed your adopted children - it’s to be admired.

     Comment by Rebecca — October 29, 2005 @ 8:35 am

111. Can I tell a funny story?

     A breastfeeding friend was babysitting a 3-year-old boy who was the youngest and had not been exposed to breastfeeding in his memory. The boy was puzzled that my friend could feed her baby with her body. After my friend had told him it was true and that lots of women did, he lifted up his shirt to show off his belly-button, saying: “Look, I have a belly-button, but no one eats there.”

     I agree that breasts are sexualized in our society and that they need not be–I have lived places that they are not, and part of what keeps them from being sexualized is the fact that they are seen and used for feeding. When men understand that not only academically, but FEEL it, this will not be an issue. It is a man’s problem and Kerri is justified in acting as she does. You should be commended, Kerri.

     Comment by ESO — October 29, 2005 @ 8:38 am

112. What Rosalynde said.

     And I will clarify my position by saying that I agree that breasts can be used in a sexual way, but it is all about CONTEXT. If a woman is wearing provocative clothing and acting in sexually suggestive way, that is one thing. But a woman breastfeeding is rarely (if ever) suggesting sex, either intentionally or as interpreted by an observer. I briefly mentioned this thread to my husband and he was astonished that people could react that way to breastfeeding–and he’s an ‘our culture’ midwestern boy. He even went so far as to say that while my breasts in the bedroom may turn him on (a lot), other women’s breasts breastfeeding do not affect him, because it’s simply not sexual. Teach (condition?) the boys about contexts and they’ll get it, both mentally and physiologically.

     Clothing that raises no eyebrows at the beach could be very, very sexual at a business or a church (or clothing that covers roughly the same areas). It’s not necessarily which body parts are exposed, it’s how or where the exposure is done.

     Comment by Artemis — October 29, 2005 @ 8:48 am

113. Breasts are not a sexual organ, they are an erogenous zone. Requiring women to cover up in this way starts with a handkerchief and ends with a burquah. You would pretend horror at the covereing demanded of Moslem women but they are covered for the same reason, to stop them being desirable to men. In the Epsom ward Crawley England Stake I was once asked to vacate the kitchen where I was breastfeeding my daughter because it was needed by 2 priesthood members for an interview. It was sugggested that I use the boiler room.

     I went and sat in the foyer and fed her.

     Serve them damn well right

     Comment by christine — October 29, 2005 @ 9:20 am

114. Don’t be so sensitive. Your a women, you have no idea what seeing a womans breast does to a young man. get over youself, be humble and don’t make this such a big deal. If you have been through the temple, then do what you have covenented to do. Follow your leaders.

     Comment by Jeff — October 29, 2005 @ 10:23 am

115. are you a bigot?

     Comment by Jeff — October 29, 2005 @ 10:43 am

116. If you Bishop was African American would you have mentioned it?

     Comment by Jeff — October 29, 2005 @ 10:44 am

117. I hope Jeff’s posts are jokes.

     I don’t recall a no-nudity covenant in the temple ceremony.

     Here’s the deal: I have a hard time believing a 13-year-old boy will find the sight of an exposed breast in this context titillating. I specifically remember the first time I, as a young teenager, encountered and exposed nursing breast. I was certainly curious (and a bit uncomfortable, though I think this had more to do with culture than with my own sexuality), but I was not titillated or aroused. In fact, it was an important moment for me and my growing awareness of the body.

     Even if a thirteen-year-old boy is going to somehow be titillated by seeing a nursing mother in church, I, for one, am more than willing to ask him to bear the burden of that discomfort. Kids are not that fragile.

     Comment by toady — October 29, 2005 @ 11:09 am

118. oops. I meant “AN exposed nursing breast.”

     he he.

     Comment by toady — October 29, 2005 @ 11:16 am

119. The problem, as I see it, is like some have already mentioned: an intolerance to using the body as God made it. Men, women…it doesn’t matter; some view breastfeeding as “unnatural”. Men view it as somehow “sexual”, and those women who don’t like it view it as gross and disgusting. The woman’s body has been so oversexualized, breasts in particular, that the nursing of a child is somehow viewed as “erotic”. Give me a break!

     As I had mentioned before, a female friend sayed to me, while I was nursing, with a blanket over both myself and baby, not showing ANY flesh “You’re not doing that disgusting thing again, are you!” It was not that I was showing ANYTHING, it was the fact that I give my infant nourishment with my breasts, which is how God intended for that to work.

     And, I mention again, that Kerri was not showing anything, just as probably 85-90% of the nursing mothers do. I nursed all 5 of my kids, I’m very modest and was dang sure no one was going to see a flash of my flesh, and they didn’t. I made sure that my shirt was pulled down on the outside of my breast, my arm was there, and my shirt was pulled down covering the top of my breast to my child’s cheek. Nothing was showing, as with Kerri. It is a problem with the culture about breastfeeding, not the breastfeeding mother and infant.

     I also appreciated whoever brought up that the bishop should be talking to the young men with those thoughts rather than Kerri. Also, honestly, what about all those “perky” little teenage breasts that young women are showing off in their tight little, form fitting shirts? I’d be more worried about that, than a teenage boy seeing a quick flash of a very saggy breast, with stretch marks all over it. I think they are focusing on the wrong thing.

     Comment by princessleah_mom — October 29, 2005 @ 11:33 am

120. I guess I mentioned the race of the men who had an issue with it because, as I said earlier, it seems relevant. In many cultures (I grew up in New Zealand where I grew up being not only part of the only white family in my stake, but also exposed to breastfeeding as a normal thing), and we must remember this is a multicultural church, breastfeeding wouldn’t be worth an eyebrow-raise. A policy, as much as I wish there was one, would seem absolutely redundant in most places.

     After I was sad the first day, I was very angry the next day and vowed to change things for other people. Being supportive of families means respecting parents to meet the needs of their children. Other churches manage to do it. There are churches in my town that announce from the pulpit and in their newsletters that they are a family-friendly church and promote breastfeeding as how God intended children be fed. Of course, one of their pastors is our wonderful feminist woman deputy-mayor, but still!

     Other churches, not even known for their family-oriented philosophies like ours, have wonderful big rooms that mothers can use with cribs and toys and windows and speakers and rocking chairs and books and soundproof glass, because they know babies get tired and older children want to follow Mama. The Methodist church has a wonderful statement on breastfeeding, and so does the Catholic church. It’s a matter of making it a priority. As long as we make do with small dark closets, there is no reason for change. I talked to the bishop about this later in the week and he said that they asked for a display shelf for the wall to hold giveaway brochures and missionary videos, and they were denied in a letter because of the importance of consistency in the church buildings! So he didn’t hold much hope for an improved Mothers’ Lounge. That makes me very sad.

     Comment by Kerri — October 29, 2005 @ 11:47 am

121. That would be very frustrating, Kerri, If that’s the case, I say take over the foyer. Are there other nursing mother’s in your ward?

     Comment by princessleah_mom — October 29, 2005 @ 11:53 am

122. That’s a ridiculous argument. Maybe the Church wants buildings to look consistent, but that doesn’t mean that rooms have to be used in the same way. Mother’s rooms vary wildly over the Church; you see tiny closets, converted classrooms, and rooms designed to be comfortable mothers’ rooms in the first place–my husband grew up in a building with a room off the chapel with one-way glass. By his reasoning, we would never have gotten changing tables in the bathrooms, but my building has a good one and newer buildings are being built with tables in both bathrooms.

     All that is needed for a decent mothers’ room in any building is the willingness to respect mothers, a reserved classroom and some new furniture.

     Comment by dangermom — October 29, 2005 @ 11:57 am

123. As far as the mother’s room, sometimes it is better to do and apologize later than ask permission. Get a core group together and just do it!

     As far as nursing vs young men go: there are two conflicting goals & natural instincts
     1) Nursing is a good goal and is natural
     2) keeping YM thoughts clean is a good goal and the oversexed male drive is a natural inclination

     I don’t think it is fair to espouse one with total disregard of the other. There are shades of grey.

     Also there are a lot of people in the chapel who, by nursing in front of them withour covering, would be made uncomfortable. This includes me, my Grandma, the sister down the row, etc. While there discomfort shouldn’t overrule a needed thing, it should be considered. To always follow them would be foolish but To not consider the feelings of others is the very definition of rudeness.

     Comment by ola senor — October 29, 2005 @ 12:15 pm

124. There’s 124 comments but one thing I still don’t get: it isn’t as if these boys live in Saudi Arabi. They can’t open their eyes without seeing exposed female flesh at their schools, on billboards, etc. etc. If these kids are tempted to commit grave sins at the sight of a saggy, stretch-marked, 30-year-old breast that they can’t even see, how do they make it through the day in this culture? There seems to be a disconnect: if they have strategies to deal with the flesh advertised all around them, why can’t they use those strategies in the chapel?

     Comment by Julie in Austin — October 29, 2005 @ 12:35 pm

125. Real life flesh is significantly different than photo flesh. And even in photos The unnatractiveness of a female breast didn’t make much of difference to generations of surreptious National Geographic readers.

     Comment by ola senor — October 29, 2005 @ 12:38 pm

126. Wait a second; Kerri, your bishop said he couldn’t have a display of pamphlets in the foyer? We have shelves holding pahmplets and cards and stuff to take. There are no videos, though. Maybe that was the problem? Or a regional thing? Because I have seen many buildings with brochure displays.

     Comment by dangermom — October 29, 2005 @ 1:21 pm

127. There’s 124 comments but one thing I still don’t get: it isn’t as if these boys live in Saudi Arabi. They can’t open their eyes without seeing exposed female flesh at their schools, on billboards, etc. etc. If these kids are tempted to commit grave sins at the sight of a saggy, stretch-marked, 30-year-old breast that they can’t even see, how do they make it through the day in this culture? There seems to be a disconnect: if they have strategies to deal with the flesh advertised all around them, why can’t they use those strategies in the chapel?

     This comment sums up my feeling perfectly. During my youth I can remember seeing women breastfeed, accidently walking in on a friends sister dressing, and many other occasions to see breasts. None of these caused me to lose control and become a sexual fiend. If breasts were always covered, we as a culture would find soemthing else to sexualize and stare at, maybe necks or wrists?

     I’m amazed that anyone would take something like breastfeeding and in any way try to tell a woman that she’s having a harmful effect on YM. As was said earlier, this seems similar to blaming a rape victim for wearing revealing clothing. Even teenage boys with raging hormones have control over themselves.
     Besides, I doubt any YM in Kerri’s ward saw something that that haven’t seen on television, at a movie or in a Victoria’s Secret/Sears/Target catalogue (sad but true).

     The big thing here is, bodies are not evil. But as long as we treat them that way we’ll have problems like this.

     Comment by jjohnsen — October 29, 2005 @ 1:26 pm

128. Unfortunatly, I don’t actually know you. But Kudos for fighting this.
     Your bishop is suppost to be the head of your ward, not this ward council. And it’s his duty to pay attention to everyone’s needs. I don’t care how busy he is.
     Anyway, good luck.

     Comment by Gwyn — October 29, 2005 @ 1:28 pm

129. Real life flesh is significantly different than photo flesh. And even in photos The unnatractiveness of a female breast didn’t make much of difference to generations of surreptious National Geographic readers.

     Really? I don’t remember them having much effect on me, and I’m what my wife calls a “breast man”(and still I don’t have any trouble controlling myself around women that are breastfeeding).

     Comment by jjohnsen — October 29, 2005 @ 1:28 pm

130. Everyone here mentions how modest they are while breastfeeding. Many Mormon women are very modest while breastfeeding. Some are even hyper-modest, constructing mini-tents out of baby blankets. A few are less circumspect.

     Some exposed flesh isn’t the end of the world. My wife and I had one squirmy baby who wouldn’t do blankets. Some inadvertent exposure is going to happen in those cases. We don’t need boob police who watch like hawks for the slightest hint of skin.

     But there is a minority of women who are much, much more comfortable with exposure than the rest of us. I’ve been around women who let an unused breast hang out for five minutes, post nursing. That’s distracting, to say the least.

     So when your bishop says to be careful, he may not be thinking of you, but of Sister X who lets her bare breast sit out for five minutes before bothering to put it away.

     Comment by Kaimi — October 29, 2005 @ 3:25 pm

131. Why stop at breastfeeding without covering up? If breasts are so non-sexual, why not go topless at beaches? Or around the house? After enough exposure, the mystery will be gone and they won’t be sexualized anymore. Seems like that’s what the ladies here want..

     Justifying exposed breasts in sacrament meeting because young men see similar things or more in the media today is crazy.

     Why should young men have to avert their eyes and control their thoughts in SACRAMENT MEETING of all places because a mother doesn’t want to be bothered with a blanket.

     Talk to your husbands about their experiences as young men. Ask a young men’s group how they feel. What makes the ladies here experts on the inner workings of a young man’s mind? Seems like you are judging them pretty harshly.

     Why would anyone feel it’s innapropriate for a young man to not wear a white shirt and tie while participating in the sacrament, but feel it’s just fine to expose their breasts? I would guess that there are many posters here who probably feel that way. Sheesh.

     Comment by Katreena — October 29, 2005 @ 4:26 pm

132. WOW! Fantastic comments by all! The subject is fascinating AND irritating. I think it’s pretty clear that some feel that discretion is encouraged and others feel that it’s a natural thing and if it were more common place it would be more socially acceptable.

     There were a couple of posters that tried to point out the ‘root’ of the issues but missed the mark. The root of this whole issue revolves around “Sexual thoughts are BAD!”. If this were not the case then the entire issue would be moot.

     If the church did not constantly reinforce this attitude of ‘impure thoughts’ to the nth degree, many of the cultural issues surrounding sexuality that keep the membership in mental loops would disappear within a generation.

     The sexual culture that pervades the church causes MANY issues that would otherwise be non-events, i.e. destructive self-esteem, “grey” temple marriages, “value” of virginity, etc.

     I realize this is a bit off-topic . . . . but it IS the root of the logic-bomb.

     Comment by Bill — October 29, 2005 @ 4:33 pm

133. Real life flesh is significantly different than photo flesh

     Yes, photo flesh looks much better (air brushing, no cellulite, no stretch marks, etc.)

     Kerri, I think what you are doing (have done) is SO admirable. And the fact that the vast majority of commenters have been so supportive also warms my heart.

     Comment by Kayla — October 29, 2005 @ 5:00 pm

134. Talk to your husbands about their experiences as young men. Ask a young men’s group how they feel. What makes the ladies here experts on the inner workings of a young man’s mind? Seems like you are judging them pretty harshly

     I’m a husband, former teenager and a father. None of that makes a difference to me, I still feel 100% of the responsibility is on the young man. If he can’t control his thoughts when the top of a breast peaks out, will he be able to when a woman bends over in the hall outside of nursary to pick up their child? Butts can be sexual too, right?

     Comment by jjohnsen — October 29, 2005 @ 5:06 pm

135. Bill you’re right, of course.

     This puritanical attitude is not the gospel. God doesn’t want us to hate our bodies and sexuality. Talk about confusing! I mean, I still have sexual guilt and I’ve been married for 9 years. The line between porn and art is blurry, just as the line between discreet and nondiscreet. Just as the line between admiring the wondrous female form and exploiting it.

     But honestly, should we loathe ourselves? I grew up knowing that my body was something to keep hidden and be a little ashamed about, because it is gross after all. Combine that with years of Young Women lessons on chastity and how the loss of it was something to die fighting against. That sexual sins are next to murder in seriousness. I was constantly talking boyfriends out of things and it was wearing me out. So, suddenly we’re allowed (married) and it’s all on? One day it’s next to murder in seriousness, the next, people are teasing and talking about it like it’s just another thing normal people do, even righteous ones!

     So what are the answers? I don’t know. But chastising someone who’s barely holding it together anyway can’t be one of them. How about trying to foster a healthy respect for our bodies and their abilities?

     We are so careful of sexual transgression and the appearance of evil, that we are seeing things that aren’t there. I’m sure I’m not the only one who wonders with all the anti-porn talks, articles, counsel, etc. ad naseum, what the heck I’m missing out on! I mean, they devote so much time to it, there really must be something to this porn stuff. It’s the same thing. If people are covering up all hints of breastfeeding, people are going to be fascinated by the forbidden.

     Really, I’m not expressing myself clearly. My brain sees it clearly, but I can’t find the words. My mama-bear instincts take over because it’s so emotional and personal.

     (And Kim and Mary, yes I’m in Chilliwack, BC. Hi)

     Comment by Kerri — October 29, 2005 @ 5:12 pm

136. In fact, just to be safe we beter not let women wear anything that shows shape or form at all. I believe I have the perfect solution. This will prevent women from torturing young men. The Burka! For those boys that may find butts attractive, gone. For the boys that are distracted by breasts, gone. Those lovely ankles are giving you problems, gone. You never know when an uncovered neck will get in the way of salvation, gone.

     Comment by jjohnsen — October 29, 2005 @ 5:12 pm

137. Great post Kerri, sums up the root of the problem very well I think.

     Comment by jjohnsen — October 29, 2005 @ 5:15 pm

138. Katreena,
     One of our contributors Not Ophelia did a post Called Boobs, Burquas and Bare Behinds: Modesty’s Paradox that talks about many of your concerns. I personally feel that your view of things is very intransigeant and culturally bound. This kind of mind-set has never worked for me personally, life is just too complicated. We’ll probably just have to agree to disagree.

     Bill,
     You have a really good point. And I’m glad you brought it up. All this fear of boobs and boys who like boobs makes me itchy all over.

     Comment by fMhLisa — October 29, 2005 @ 5:21 pm

139. I’m a husband, former teenager and a father. None of that makes a difference to me, I still feel 100% of the responsibility is on the young man.

     jjohnson–I sincerely hope you are a young men’s teacher for much of your life. Bless you, bless you, bless you.

     And to say what I had hoped was obvious to those few touting the “follow your leaders, you’re commanded to” line: I sustain my leaders, and that’s not the same thing. Sometimes the best way to sustain leaders is to educate them. Kerri is now one of my personal heroines.

     Comment by janet — October 29, 2005 @ 5:26 pm

140. And let me also thank you for the support. I had hoped people would see my side of things, but the love I’m receiving exceeds my expectations. I so appreciate it. FMH rules!

     Comment by Kerri — October 29, 2005 @ 6:09 pm

141. Katrina-

     Whoa, calm down girl. I think by and large, most nursing mothers, espeically at church, do try their hardest NOT to expose their breasts while nursing. I know that I always picked out my outfits very carefully when I went to church, including especially choosing an uncomfortable bra, just so I could nurse as duscreetly as possible.

     Just because we are all advocates of nursing and trying to make other people feel comfortable with it doesn’t mean that we actually want those young men leering at our breasts. Despite the fact that I loved nursing, had an easy time of it, and wished I could continue longer than I was able to, I still did everything I could possibly do to keep people from seeing my boobs when I nursed in public. I think most women, or at least the women I know, are like that. And, like other kids that have been mentioned, my kid wouldn’t stand for the blanket thing, at least not after he figured out he could pull it off.

     “Why stop at breastfeeding without covering up? If breasts are so non-sexual, why not go topless at beaches? Or around the house? After enough exposure, the mystery will be gone and they won’t be sexualized anymore. Seems like that’s what the ladies here want..”

     I think you are overblowing things, here. I think that what most ladies here want is the respect that they deserve for taking care of their children the best way they know how, and to have some compromise in dealing with some people’s obvious discomfort in the situation instead of putting all the burden on the mother, who is, after all, just trying to keep her child alive.

     Comment by Heather Oman — October 29, 2005 @ 7:22 pm

142. And, I’m sorry, I think the “sustain your leaders” in this case is a TOTALLY bogus line. The line “Nobody else can have revelation for your family” comes to mind. This is not an incident where a bishop has prayed and gotten revelation from the Lord to call Kerri to nurse her baby in a mini-van. This is an example of a guy who is getting lots of complaints from different directions, and is just trying to do what is best for his ward. Kudos to a bishop who tries to soothe things over in his stewardship, but don’t give me the “He’s inspired, do what he says” crap.

     Comment by Heather Oman — October 29, 2005 @ 7:28 pm

143. Katreena,

     Read my comment. I already related my experience as a young man.

     FWIW, I also made sure that my deacons did not make light or get all giddy when the topic of sex came up in the classroom. We discussed it in a mature and responsible fashion.

     Comment by Mary Siever — October 29, 2005 @ 7:31 pm

144. Sorry, the last one was from me.

     Comment by Kim Siever — October 29, 2005 @ 7:31 pm

145. Heather–

     I agree. My point was that “sustaining” and “following” aren’t the same thing. I think if leaders acts clearly out of line, part of sustaining him or her is to politely tell them they’re wrong. If we disagree at all, it’s just semantical. I was disagreeing with someone who touts the absolute obedience line, not offering it as a good idea.

     Comment by janet — October 29, 2005 @ 7:43 pm

146. EEEK. Bad day. Sorry about the grammar in that last post.

     Comment by janet — October 29, 2005 @ 7:43 pm

147. I do not feel welcome here. Why am I wrong about my feelings because I disagree with most of the ladies posting here? Kerri is a “heroine” because she expressed her opinion to her bishop; I am being mocked here because I am expressing mine.

     I think breastfeeding is a natural and good thing. All I am saying is that boys passing the sacrament might feel more comfortable if they don’t have to worry about averting their eyes. My suggestion was covering with a nursing blanket. I don’t understand why the ladies here are so offended by that.

     jjohnson — Blankets do not equal burkas. And yes, butts can be sexy too. However, I do not think we are talking here about exposing female glutes in sacrament meeting. Congrats on being a breast man though. That sure says a lot about you viewing them as “non sexual” objects.

     fmhLisa — thanks for agreeing to disagree. Although it would have been a little nicer if you hadn’t prefaced it by saying my view is “intransigeant and culturally bound”.

     Comment by Katreena — October 29, 2005 @ 9:25 pm

148. Seems to me your beef isn’t just with the bishop, it’s with American/Canadian societal constructs as a whole. Unfortunately, there’s not much you can do to change that overnight.

     If you lived in Mexico or South America, this would never have even become an issue. In Japan, it’s rude for anyone to eat in public, babies included. If you lived in the Middle East you wouldn’t have to worry because you would be covered from head to toe and sitting in a separate section from the men anyway.

     It’s not a religious/moral thing, it’s a cultural thing. The young men are being used because he can’t very well use “it’s just not done that way here” as an excuse.

     That said, breastfeeding in public is one of the most controversial issues around today. You will always and forever find people highly offended by it. And it is much easier for the bishop to ask you to cover up while feeding than it is for him to try and change the cultural bias of (I’m sure) more than a few people who find it offensive.

     This coming from a currently breastfeeding mother.

     Comment by Anelie — October 29, 2005 @ 9:34 pm

149. Katreena,

     The reason we are so adamant about this is, and I’ll share part of one of my previous posts:

     Kerri was not showing anything, just as probably 85-90% of the nursing mothers do. I nursed all 5 of my kids, I’m very modest and was dang sure no one was going to see a flash of my flesh, and they didn’t. I made sure that my shirt was pulled down on the outside of my breast, my arm was there, and my shirt was pulled down covering the top of my breast to my child’s cheek. Nothing was showing, as with Kerri.

     (post # 119)
     If Kerri had “whipped” it out, and was letting “it” hang there, then I think more of the posters would be more understanding to your side of the issue and would agree with you. But it doesn’t appear like she did or has. That is just my opinion and my observation.

     I’m sorry if you don’t feel welcome here. I struggled at first trying to feel where I fit in with all these Feminist Mormon Housewives. I had to learn that disagreements happen… sometimes very intense and very passionate, because we are all very independent women (and men). I tend to be more conservative than most of my sisters here, and I’ve had to learn that it’s okay for me to be the way I am, and it’s okay for them to be the way they are. Because we are all independent and very strong, and feel very strongly about some subjects, sometimes words and wording can come across as harsh and offensive. Most of the time it isn’t meant that way…it is just the unfortunate side affect of speaking through a computer with no human interaction. There is no “tone” with which to gage how a statement is being meant.

     But the people here really are good people. They may seem “tough” on the exterior, but once you get to know them and understand them better, you’ll find they are likeable and friendly.

     Comment by princessleah_mom — October 29, 2005 @ 9:59 pm

150. My wife is the mother of four. After reading the initial article and responses, she offered the following observations:
     1. Yes, the mother’s lounge is a dank cesspool of stinking diapers, poor ventilation, no changing table, and 40 year old spit-up stained rockers that squeak with every move. Still, why wouldn’t you like the mother’s lounge? It’s her only chance to leave the older-fighting-fidgeting siblings alone with me. She hears more of the sacrament meeting in the mother’s lounge than she ever hears in the chapel. I never understood why she was gone so long during the meetings until she made this confession.
     2. When we lived in a large, baby-factory ward, the mother’s lounge was the hub of ward activity. Play dates were planned, recipies exchanged, philosphosies expounded, and sisterhood shared. Most of the women felt cheated when their babies stopped nursing and they didn’t have a good excuse to be there.

     She claims she’s not a feminist, but she is a firm proponent of breast feeding. Blankets are not needed. She’s discreet without them. It’s much more obvious that breasts are in use when the tent is in place.

     As for me, I like breasts. Sorry for my sexists ways, but with my wife nursing, I get much more sleep (I’ve trained the babies to hate bottles). Besides, having had a Samoan nurse maid as a child, who am I to complain about breast-feeding women?

     Comment by Big Brother — October 29, 2005 @ 10:15 pm

151. What bothers me is the one-sidedness that Kerri is limiting herself to. I agree that she has the right to feed her baby. Breastfeeding is the best. Babies need to eat often. No to mom/baby nursing action is the same…..some babies do blankets, some breasts or bras seem to be more discreet.
     I fully support any woman who wants to breastfeed in public anywhere that it is appropriate for a mom and baby to be.
     However, I think that it is gracious to care about the feelings of others. They have an equally legitimate experience, whatever it is.
     I think you have a great bishop. He fully agreed that breastfeeding is best, that he doesn’t want to banish you to the car. He didn’t say you can’t do it anymore. He simply put forth the situation, acknowledging that your rights and situation are valid as well as whatever “other” people he seems to be equally concerned with.
     I would suggest looking at your situation and trying to figure out what accomodations you are willing to make out of consideration for your fellow ward members. Is there a more discreet place in the chapel to nurse? Could you go to an empty classroom if you aren’t in the middle of something important, but stay put and nurse if you can’t leave just then? It doesn’t have to be an all or nothing thing.

     Comment by jks — October 29, 2005 @ 10:16 pm

152. Well, for what it’s worth, here’s a site that sells breastfeeding, modesty, and fashion friendly clothing: Motherwear.com. May it help quiet myriad uproars.

     Katreena,

     PrincessLeiaMom is right–the disagreements here are not intended to be a personal attack on you for having a minority opinion, which, in this case, you happen to have. Please don’t be offended because people challenge your position–that’s part of what this forum is about–rigorous discussion and varied opinions, as well as support for faithful feminist convictions. This just happens to be one of the topics many of us feel similarly about. We expressly insist that no personal attacks are made and that people are respectful. fMhLisa’s comment was a perfectly appropriate analysis of your position–she didn’t slam you, she just articulated why she disagreed.

     Please feel welcome here and welcome to express your opinion. Just be prepared to have people challenge it.

     Comment by Artemis — October 29, 2005 @ 10:50 pm

153. Hey, that’s not just any big brother, That’s MY big brother! And I am so happy that he commented here. It just made my day.

     You tell the wife I’m totally with her on the nursing lounge. I love it there, leave the toddlers with the dad and run for the hills, I say. Even when it stinks in them there hills. I just don’t think women should have to go there if they don’t want to. (I do.) I’m sure you would agree.
     .

     Comment by fMhLisa — October 30, 2005 @ 12:34 am

154. Just to clarify something in #148–meetings of the LDS church in the middle east are not segregated, and women nurse their babies in sacrament (at least in my ward) without incident. I know because I am in the middle east. Happy Sunday, everyone.

     Comment by Mary Ann — October 30, 2005 @ 5:39 am

155. jjohnson — Blankets do not equal burkas. And yes, butts can be sexy too. However, I do not think we are talking here about exposing female glutes in sacrament meeting. Congrats on being a breast man though. That sure says a lot about you viewing them as “non sexual” objects.

     I’m not sure if your post was an attack trying to make me look like a pervert or not, so I’ll proceed as if it wasn’t.

     I never said I viewed breasts as non-sexual objects. What I said was even though they can be viewed as sexual object, so can other parts of the body, so why not cover everything up? The fact that men view them as sexual should force women to hide them in public when performing an act that is totally natural and non-sexual? In the end it should be the YM’s responsibility.

     If instead of telling you my wife thought I was a breast man, I told you I was a neck and ear man would it have changed the conversation? If I went home after church and masturbated to the thought of women in dresses with their sexy necks and earlobes, would you say it was the womans responsibility to cover them up? What if myself and a few other men went to the bishop to discuss our problem and he decided it would be better for the women to cover up than it would be for us to take responsibility for our actions?

     Breasts happen to be part of sexuality to me, but what about men that have sexual; feelings when it comes to necks, ankles, butts or whatever? A dress that is a little tight may show off a butt, and ankles and necks aren’t even a concern. Am I the crazy one because I feel like women (and the baby) shouldn’t be punished by being thrown in a corner or covered with a blanket?

     I’ve been in the feeding room of our last two chapels, they’re so dreary and stinky that I’m thinking of blaming post-partum depression on them.

     Comment by jjohnsen — October 30, 2005 @ 7:54 am

156. That last comment wasn’t meant to make light of post-partum depression in any way.

     Comment by jjohnsen — October 30, 2005 @ 7:57 am

157. Well the thing is, Kerri has to be one sided, because she is protecting the needs of her baby.

     I am with Lisa, I think women should be able to breastfeed wherever they wqant. I don’t mind the mother’s lounge and often go there, but sometimes I can’t. Like once I was wedged in a pew in General Conference and my baby was in dire need RIGHT THEN to nurse, it was dark anyway, and would have been more disruptive to leave, so we nursed right there. This was with baby number one.

     Heck, I have nursed while grocery shopping (yes, walking down the aisles).

     Comment by Mary Siever — October 30, 2005 @ 9:26 am

158. Kerri: Sorry to say, we’ve been there, done that, and gotten the nursing T-shirt to boot. Your scenario was almost identical to ours. After meeting with stake officials, and several letters to regional authorities, here is what they all said. “No, we don’t have a policy on that, but you will be blessed for obeying your bishop’s counsel.”

     In the end, we decided to ignore his so-called counsel, and have only been cursed with well-adjusted, well-nourished children.

     DW continued to discreetly nurse our son whenever he wanted, and he wasn’t weened until he was 3.

     Hang in there, or should I say, stay latched-in there.

     Comment by Francisco Quevedo — October 30, 2005 @ 12:48 pm

159. WOW!!!! I’ve missed a lot! You go girl, Kerri!

     I am glad to know that there is not official church policy on breastfeeding in church. Just weaned my 2 1/2 year old this summer, but armed with this knowledge I will be a more courageous mother in taking care of my childrens’ needs when we have our next little nursling.

     I stopped nursing in sacrament meeting with my first after getting glares from the crones in the ward. I’ve breastfed just about everywhere my children have needed to nurse–libraries, restaurants, parks, museums, stores, on the metro, etc.–and have been saddened to realize that church was probably the least comfortable place for me to nurse my children–so much so that callings have been affected. In my ward, it isn’t even considered “kosher” to nurse in RS or at Enrichment meetings (unless conspicuously “tented”–amen to that characterization!).

     As for the mother’s lounge, it has actually been helpful to my post partum mental health (physical limitations notwithstanding) because of the support and comeraderie there. In fact, I think it is the one place in the church aside from the baptismal font where the most important work of the kingdom takes place because it is where mothers are received, supported, and learn more about their new and most holy calling from other mothers. I think that everyone who is NOT nursing should feel honored to ever witness a mother so nourishing her child. Scripturally, it is a symbol of Christ’s nurturing relationship with each of us.

     If our facilities are to be consistant with our messages, I think all mothers lounges should be the largest and most comfortable rooms (aside from the chapel and gym), but particularly in buildings with many young families. (We’ve had as many as 20 births a year. That’s a lot of nurslings.) Diapering facilities belong in the bathrooms, but nursing rooms do not. Ours is currently in the BACK of the bathroom, which I think is the worst possible scenario message-wise–and it’s a brand new chapel.

     Input from women leaders in the stake was solicited in design considerations. Unfotunately, medical misinformation about nursing from the 40s and 50s has had a huge (and negative) impact here as elsewhere. Older women are sometimes the most negative about breastfeeding, particularly if they had no support or information to help them nourish their own children. But this (design considerations for mothers’ lounges) is an area in which potential problems with male-dominated church leadership are revealed.

     Comment by LisaB — October 30, 2005 @ 1:43 pm

160. I hate those dang nursing rooms at the church. Time to feed the baby. Ok, let’s hike out to the back forty to the dark closet where there are 5 other women already nursing. Hhhmm, no more chairs I guess I’ll just sit on the floor over here by the diaper pail.

     Our culture has such an unhealthy attitude about nursing. I had a friend who refused to nurse because she said it was too “kinky” for her. Aaaggghhh!

     I’m sorry, I’m not being very helpful. I could just rant and rave for hours on this subject!

     I do think Heather Oman had a great suggestion earlier in the comments.

     As far as nursing your adoptive babies, I’ve read about what it takes to do that. Anyone who goes through all that to breast feed should be able to do it when and where ever they want. Your children are lucky to have such a committed mom.

     Comment by kristen j — October 30, 2005 @ 3:17 pm

161. In a culture that is ambivivalent, at best, about breast feeding in public, it will naturally take a long time to go from where we are now to complete acceptance. If too many women decide that it isn’t worth the fight, it will take forever.

     I think that the right compromise would be to provide nursing rooms that are as nice as they can be under the circumstances, and to remind everyone from time to time that the use of these rooms is optional. I admire my wife for having had the courage to feed our babies without leaving sacrament meeting. Among the many right and wrong choices that we made along the way, I think that this was one of the right choices. It probably is not yet the right choice for everyone.

     Comment by Steve S — October 30, 2005 @ 8:14 pm

162. A few points:

     1. Caring for a newborn is so difficult and awkward and inconvenient in so many ways — I have very little sympathy for those who try to make it even more so by discouraging breastfeeding in public. Definitely makes my blood boil.

     2. Luckily, I think that the vast majority of Americans are very enlightened and accepting on this subject. You get the occasional glare from the unenlightened lout (in airports, subways, restaurants, etc.), but it’s not as common as people think. (People who smoke in public get a whole lot more glares than people who breastfeed — and rightly so! — but that doesn’t seem to stop them…)

     3. How should you respond? Use a blanket if the baby doesn’t mind. Otherwise, just sit as far away from the young men as you can and try to be careful about preventing accidental nipple exposure. Your bishop may be wrong, but it’s best to avoid a battle if you can and not waste too much time feeling hurt or indignant.

     Comment by S. — October 30, 2005 @ 9:39 pm

163. I skipped a lot of this (it’s late) but I have to comment that Lyle and men like him need some serious help with controlling their thoughts, like a lot of men who want to tell the rest of the world’s women to go hide under a veil and birka so they don’t have to think lustful thoughts (see comment #16 for example), which really translates as, they don’t want to have to control their own thoughts. Sheesh dude, get a grip! And if 13 y.o. boys want to run and masturbate at the first sign of a breast, it’s a clear sign our culture is in serious need of help. Can you imagine a European reading this blog and laughing their heads off at our uptight American silliness? This is the craziest thing I’ve read in a long time. While I like boobs a much as the next guy, there’s a time and place to control your thoughts, and that’s the important lesson here, and I think the whole point Kerri was making in the first place. The Church is always preaching to the YW about modesty, but far less so to the boys/men to learn and practice self-control. That’s just wrong. And so is Kerri’s Bishop and the Ward Council. They all need a good spanking for stupidity. Growing up our chapel in California (built in the late ’50’s) had a room at the back of the chapel with a big, mirrored window into the chapel that nursing mothers could sit in and nurse without worry and not miss any of the meeting. But it was probably wayward (undisciplined) teenage boys that usurped it for goofing off during Sac. meeting when nursing moms weren’t there that got the church to put a stop to adding those rooms to chapels I suspect. Too bad.

     Comment by Rich — October 31, 2005 @ 12:47 am

164. Oh geesh, why do we cater to the weakest links in the ward instead of telling them to get a grip? If some teen boy or grown man can’t handle the thought-not even the sight–of a woman’s “boobie” being used for nursing instead of propped up in a wonder bra, I’m a thinking they need the counseling with the bishop instead.

     I think you should have turned the tables and did a total female equivalent to his routine. Say sometimes it’s not a popular thing to be a mom, sometimes people will be mad at you for inconvenciencing them….but gosh darnit, you’re stewardship as a mother makes it vital for you to put your child first. Tell him that since motherhood is always being compared to the female equivalent of priesthood, this is outside his realm of influence, but thanks anyway for you concern.;)

     Comment by Karina — October 31, 2005 @ 1:40 am

165. Rosalynde, breasts *are* a reproductive organ. They are for feeding children. What happens to a child if it doesn’t eat? It dies. No reproduction. The doctors who convinced everyone otherwise are probably the same idiotic doctors whose idiotic notions about bacteria and breast-feeding and a few other things are a major cause of the problem this thread is about!

     Is a vagina a reproductive organ? The child is not produced there. The child never has to pass through there; we can always do a caesarian! Still, let’s face it, it is a reproductive organ. Breasts are too. And that is only maybe half of why they are sexual. fMhLisa has put quite plainly the other half. The way the nerves and a few other physiological processes work in an ankle is just not to be compared.

     Now the other odd assumption: Who says it is the sight of a breast that is the problem? What if someone’s husband was caressing her breast in Sacrament meeting? It’s perfectly good and natural, and her breast is fully covered by her clothing. So what’s sexual about it? Guess what: you don’t have to see the breast for breast-feeding to be disruptive. If you don’t like that analogy, well, I’ll let you fill in some alternatives. There are plenty. No one has to see any bare flesh, for an activity to be disruptive.

     Once again, I am completely in favor of breast-feeding (and I am also completely in favor of husbands caressing their wives’ breasts etc.–in appropriate times and places). And I think women should be able to comfortably and conveniently breast-feed at church. But to say that the potential audience has 100% of the responsibility to do something about potential awkwardness or unwelcome thoughts and the mother has 0 responsibility is a rather narcissistic attitude.

     While Mary Siever breast-fed her child in General Conference, she did at least think about the effect on others, enough to note that it was dark in her story. There is an effect. There are many ways to show consideration for those around us. Sometimes it is the gesture that does more than anything.

     That said, if the bishop, or the institution is not willing to take real, sincere, reasonable steps to accommodate breast-feeding mothers, then they are not doing their job, and anger (of the kind that I think lies behind these “100% their responsibility” comments) is quite justified. If they are taking 0 responsibility, then I don’t expect you to compromise. Kerri, I think you would be completely justified, for example, telling the bishop that you will breastfeed in a pleasant space only, and if he wants you to use a nursing lounge, he needs to find some way to make it a pleasant space.

     : )

     Thanks for supporting the minority view, Katreena!

     Comment by Ben H — October 31, 2005 @ 2:34 am

166. You don’t have to see the breast feeding for it to be disruptive?Please elaborate, I don’t quite get that since I thought it was the sight of the breast that was the problem. Are you saying just the thought of the act itself, even if not seen, is disruptive? If so, why? Because it’s understood the baby is suckling on a breast?

     I realize you said the example of the husband playing with a wife’s breast might not work, but yeah, it doesn’t. Having a grown man play with a woman’s tata in church is disruptive because it’s not functional, it is sexual. That’s why you can’t do that natural gesture before marriage!

     Responsibility to me as a nursing mother is this. Keeping the twins covered while “prepping” and being discreet enough that you aren’t being intrusive. I get personal space and discretion.

     But I don’t think my responsibility is to make sure that even unseen breastfeeding doesn’t bother someone. Maybe you could elaborate more. I just think especially within a Mormon setting where we basically have big families and nursing moms, such an “act” is not really going to be so foreign to grown men or teenage boys of this religion.

     Comment by Karina — October 31, 2005 @ 3:03 am

167. Ben,

     Breasts are not required in the production of babies. Nourishment, yes. Production, no. A vagina is (well, naturally speaking).

     In addition, are you suggesting that feeding a baby is the same thing as petting?

     Comment by Kim Siever — October 31, 2005 @ 7:06 am

168. Ben, I like you too much to let this become a serious issue of contention between us. I was making the narrow point that breasts are not a reproductive organ—any doctor or biology book will confirm this—and you’re making a larger point, that breasts have a role in sexuality and nurturing children. Absolutely granted, and I’m sorry for contributing to the argument between us.

     Comment by Rosalynde — October 31, 2005 @ 7:55 am

169. Well, when some of our leaders talk about young women as walking pr0n, it’s not difficult to understand why (a) boys get a reaction out of seeing any skin not covered from the neck to knees as somehow titillating.

     BTW, is anyone going to this conference? I’ll post the link on the relevant thread when I can find it, but it sounds great. One of the conference organizers is Sister Barbara Winder (former General RS president)’s daughter.

     http://sltrib.com/faith/ci_3162675

     Comment by Sally — October 31, 2005 @ 8:15 am

170. actually I should clarify. I wasn’t thinking of others, I was thinking of my baby and me. I think of my baby first and foremost, and being me, I hate to draw attention to myself, and I am aware that breastfeeding in public can draw attention, so the darkness was for my sake. I have breastfed everywhere, in broad daylight. Honestly, society over sexualises breasts and babies don’t care about that, and being a mama, my first priority is my babe (well actually all of my children). And being an ardent, passionate advocate of breastfeeding and babies’ need for it, I will pick that over the sensibilities of others mosst days. However, I hate to make a huge issue out of most things unless absolutely necessary. There was a teenager who got all bent out of shape when I was nursing my baby on the bus several years ago, though you could see nothing, and when SHE made an issue out of it (in her low tank top and shorts) I told her to wear a bag over her head when she eats.

     Comment by Mary Siever — October 31, 2005 @ 8:31 am

171. Guess what: you don’t have to see the breast for breast-feeding to be disruptive.-

     SNIP

     But to say that the potential audience has 100% of the responsibility to do something about potential awkwardness or unwelcome thoughts and the mother has 0 responsibility is a rather narcissistic attitude.

     So, to take your example to it’s inevitable conclusion, I guess you’re saying that even though my clothes cover my breasts, since they are still noticable under those clothes it’s my responsibility if somebody notices and gets all hot about it, right?

     Fortunately, the solution is not hard — if we women would just modifiy our dress none of this would be a problem.

     NO

     Comment by Not Ophelia — October 31, 2005 @ 8:32 am

172. Hey Rosalynde, I am sorry if I sounded like I was angry. I wasn’t. I was incredulous, whence the emphasis. I don’t want you to back down because you’re worried this is getting unpleasant. If it is getting unpleasant, let me apologize, and hopefully we can continue. It is hard for me to imagine being angry with you; I like you too much, and you’re too nice.

     That said, are you seriously conceding my point? That breasts are inherently sexual, physiologically speaking, in a way that ankles are not?

     Comment by Ben H — October 31, 2005 @ 8:32 am

173. No, Not Ophelia, I am not saying that.

     Don’t you think that comparison is a bit much?

     Comment by Ben H — October 31, 2005 @ 8:42 am

174. Are we still on this topic…..Any new posts ideas out there?

     Comment by anonymous — October 31, 2005 @ 8:51 am

175. Just one quick point-as for teen or more likely pre-teen boys, I should have differniated between them and men. They are at a different level. But I do think honestly you can’t really save or shield them from their hormones or thoughts. That comes with guidance and maturity. I mean, they really can be random and indiscriminate about what is going to stimulate them and so maybe the guidance part is where we come in as a congregation for them in terms of seeing a nursing mother who isn’t baring her breast in the process.

     Comment by Karina — October 31, 2005 @ 9:07 am

176. Ben

     I am glad you’re not saying that and I really hope the comparison is too much. Unfortunatley, it isn’t always. There is a long history of women being blamed for men’s lusts and actions — rape victims, the Middle Ages [women are lustful temptresses that imperil a man’s salvation] modern middle eastern culture [see my link above,] not to mention Elder Oaks’ unfortunate ‘walking pornography’ comment that really, really bothers me.

     But as anonymous has noted, this conversation is getting off topic.

     NO

     Comment by not ophelia — October 31, 2005 @ 9:12 am

177. What ever happened to telling people to avert their eyes. My parents always told us not to stare at people–you don’t stare at accidents, you don’t look at people being carried into ambulances. I don’t remember being told not to look at naked people (there were darned few of them around in Provo, Utah, in the 1960s), but the same advice seemed to apply.

     So, for the young men who are shocked! SHOCKED! to see a bit of breast when Sister A’s baby pulls away, I have one bit of advice. It’s rude to stare, so quit staring. Get on with your life, and let Sister A and her baby get on with theirs.

     This advice came in useful, although it was a bit of a challenge, in a real estate closing once. The female half of the purchasers had a newborn, and proceeded to feed the child while we waited too long. She was the opposite of discrete–shirt off, open bra, slurping little baby. Oh well, check the title report one more time, and don’t gawk.

     One more thing: it’s time bishops spent more time engaging the aaronic priesthood youth in one of their principal responsibilities–caring for the church building. One suggestion: every 30 minutes or so the assigned deacon should knock on the Mother’s Room door, enter, check the diaper pail, remove the plastic liner and contents, replace with a new liner, and take the old bag out to the dumpster. Ditto for the men’s/women’s rooms where babies are changed. No more problems with smelly rest rooms/mothers’ rooms, and there are few things that will stop young men from thinking about sex faster than the smell of poop.

     Comment by Mark B. — October 31, 2005 @ 10:07 am

178. I think nursing infants is fine and understandable; discreet or not, in church or not, but breastfeeding kids who can talk might creep some people out. Maybe this is what’s making the bishop or the boys uncomfortable…

     Comment by Joanne — October 31, 2005 @ 10:28 am

179. It appears that the real division exists between women who are offended by a bishop’s request that nursing women use a blanket for privacy, and those women who nurse in the mothers lounge for extraordinary privacy. Women who seclude themselves in the mothers lounge signal that nursing is private, or shameful, or embarrassing, and show be done out of the eyesight of men and boys. It seems that the many commenters here who think adolescent boys should learn to view nursing as a natural act unrelated to sex should first convince the adult women in their wards to stop perpetuating the unnatural message they communicate by sequestering themselves away from men to nurse.

     Comment by Matt Evans — October 31, 2005 @ 11:44 am

180. Thanks for the summary Matt. Do you have any opinion to add?

     Comment by anonymous — October 31, 2005 @ 11:55 am

181. Ben- I cannot believe you are serious. Do you honestly believe that public breastfeeding of any kind (discreet or not) is inappropriate, or are you just trying to be shocking?

     Comment by LisaB — October 31, 2005 @ 12:02 pm

182. Julie (#89)– I don’t know where you have been in Utah, but in my old ward plenty on nursing moms nursed in Sacrament, RS, Sunday School, etc. It was a BYU student ward, but I never noticed (or heard) of anyone being uncomfortable.

     Comment by Erin — October 31, 2005 @ 12:27 pm

183. I still maintain that woman should be able to discreetly breastfeed whenever and where ever they choose. Flagrantly flashing breasts should be avoided although accidents will happen from time to time.

     Breasts are sexual to some degree. The degree is debatable. You have to live in the culture that you live in. I think that North Amercan culture is trending rather rapidly (if its not there already) to full acceptance of Breastfeeding.

     I still am in line with my support of the original post. She should not be ashamed to breastfeed at church.

     Comment by Leonard — October 31, 2005 @ 12:43 pm

184. Women who seclude themselves in the mothers lounge signal that nursing is private, or shameful, or embarrassing, and show be done out of the eyesight of men and boys.

     Goodness. We do? Sorry, I don’t agree. The mothers’ room can be a comfortable place to be. People who prefer it do not have to justify themselves to you. Women who nurse in the mother’s room may also be perfectly happy to nurse in public. They may happily nurse in the foyer sometimes. Or…they may just want some peace and quiet, and a chance to nurse with their dress completely open.

     Comment by dangermom — October 31, 2005 @ 1:04 pm

185. Anonymous,

     I’d seen many commenters complain about the social norms surrounding nursing but no one had rightfully seen the crucial role Mothers Lounges play in perpetuating and communicating those norms, and believe that pointing this out will make the discussion more productive.

     Comment by Matt Evans — October 31, 2005 @ 1:05 pm

186. Dangermom,

     I fully agree with you, and wrote my comment from the perspective of the majority commenters on this thread, not using my own voice. My point was to show that if nursing is as mundane and unsexual as most commenters here (not you) claim it to be, there’s no reason to exclude men and boys from the mothers lounge in the first place. According to these commenters, the request that nursing women use a blanket in public as an additional precaution against exposing the breast are unnecessarily preoccupied with keeping breasts covered and/or their sexualization. By using the mothers lounge, you (and my wife, I hasten to add), contribute to the notion that breasts should be carefully hidden from men, thereby perpetuating the mindset many here dislike.

     Comment by Matt Evans — October 31, 2005 @ 1:23 pm

187. “Using the mothers lounge…contribute[s] to the notion that breasts should be carefully hidden from men…”

     What? Matt, you seem to be ignoring the comments made about distractable babies (my daughter sometimes won’t nurse if someone is talking, she likes to look around). Not to mention the fact that she is VERY noisy (she sure loves her food!), and often lets loose an enormously loud “man-burp” during/after feeding. That’s why I don’t nurse in quiet meetings like sacrament, Sunday School, or RS–I find an empty room in the building (I’m lucky that we have the whole building to ourselves during our ward meeting time) and nurse comfortably there.

     Comment by Keryn — October 31, 2005 @ 2:14 pm

188. Matt,
     I think your point is, that nursing is not so “natural” and breasts not so utilitarian as we claim, otherwise none of us would ever bother with a nursing lounge. I disagree.

     I think your ideas are interesting . . . if you live in a world of ideas. But we live in a world of people, and people are going to want and need different things for different reasons.

     Nursing isn’t about making a political point, or proving that boobs are harmless. Nursing is about feeding our babies in the best way possible for us and them.

     We have to understand and accept that different women/babies are going to have different nursing experiences. Some babies need a quite calm space to nurse. Some women are self-consious about their bodies for whatever reason. Some women don’t have access to convient nursing clothing and have to disrobe more than others. Some women need to escape their other ten kids. Some babies are really loud. Smack Smack.

     I would have no big problem with nursing rooms disappearing from the face of the earth, I wouldn’t have a problem if they served a larger baby wrangling purpose with men and boys welcome to enter, but that’s just me. Different women have different needs. And trying to force all women into the lounge, or under a blanket, or into sacrement meeting is functionally silly.

     Giving women options to do what’s best for her, is the point.
     Expecing women to act as a monolith for any reason is totally unreasonable.

     Comment by fMhLisa — October 31, 2005 @ 2:15 pm

189. I don’t necessarily see the perspective of cultural norms being the culprit. This is how I see it. Young boys(which I assume are the main concern, right? Not grown men in my mind) will always check out a breast. Most young girls will check out a breast. Heck maybe alot of women and men too. It’s more human nature to take a peek at something that usually is covered. That’s a natural reaction.

     The thing to talk over is what to do after the initial reaction to notice the setup of a woman nursing in public. So, everyone got the sneek peek out, where do we go from there? I think the healthiest thing is to not make it a shame deal for the mom(hide it!) or the young boy or young man(pervert!).

     The healthiest thing to instruct is to realize a child is hungry, the mom’s feeding baby, and isn’t that pretty understandable? And now let’s check back on what the speaker on the podium is saying.

     The initial reaction to me is not a big deal(to notice). The post-reaction is where we can guide people in a way that isn’t about guilty parties or self righteous idignation on either side of the debate. My initial annoyance to the scenario was more the engagement of the issue than the issue itself.

     Comment by Karina — October 31, 2005 @ 2:16 pm

190. I’m with fMhLisa on this one. With all 5 of my kids I have had different needs at different times; there were times the nursing rooms came in handy, like when I had twins and would feed them at the same time at church (didn’t happen very often, but when two screaming infants need to be fed, you do what you have to do). Being modest feeding twins is pretty much impossible, so I opted for the mother’s lounge.

     Even just feeding one, there were times when we did need some privacy…like when I didn’t wear a button down shirt, I was in a full dress and had to heave it up to my neck. Then (as other have mentioned) sometimes babies are just noisy eaters; at some point, all of mine had problems snorting while eating because they couldn’t get it fast enough. Now if that isn’t a dead give-away of what’s going on, I don’t know what is.

     I have been glad the mother’s lounge has been there when I need it, but I don’t think I should have to go in there. I think it is an option. And on the flip side, I don’t think mother’s, who, for whatever reason, need to use the mother’s lounge for sanity purposes, modesty issues, etc., should be forced to give it up. Different strokes for different folks… I guess it goes back to one of the feminist issues–we are not all the same, so quit trying to squeeze all into the “one size fits all” category.

     And since we are adding babies to the mix that all have different temperaments and personalities, how can we expect to say “just through a blanket over them and be done with it”. I had one who loved the blanket…my other 4 did not. They hated it. And the mother’s room wasn’t always an option. If the nice comfy chairs are taken, there is the option of the floor or hard-back chairs. But if you have a bad back, that really isn’t an option at all. There are so many variables, and every single mother is different, and it’s going to work different with every single baby.

     If you can feed your baby discreetly and feel comfortable feeding in public, then I think we should be allowed and encouraged to feed our babies whenever and wherever we choose…as long as Junior cooperates and doesn’t start snorting like a pig!

     Comment by princessleah_mom — October 31, 2005 @ 2:55 pm

191. I don’t think mother rooms were ever inteneded to be used for breastfeeding, but for loud children? I really don’t know being very young my self.

     Comment by Bryan — October 31, 2005 @ 3:11 pm

192. Keryn,

     I agree that there are other reasons to not nurse in public besides a desire for privacy, but privacy is the reason driving much of the mothers lounge use, and the expectation that men and boys not enter.

     fmhLisa,

     I agree with you and believe we should apply your distinction between World of Ideas / World of Real People to the argument that nursing women needn’t use blankets — boys should just avert their eyes and control their thoughts!

     And when you write, “Some women are self-conscious about their bodies for whatever reason,” I think you know as well as I do the reason: women have been *taught* to be self-conscious, in large measure by growing up in a culture where their role models, adult women, were self-conscious about their bodies. According to the majority view expressed here, many women are perpetuating the self-conscious culture.)

     Comment by Matt Evans — October 31, 2005 @ 3:18 pm

193. “I agree with you and believe we should apply your distinction between World of Ideas / World of Real People to the argument that nursing women needn’t use blankets — boys should just avert their eyes and control their thoughts!”

     I have never for a moment suggested anything different. I don’t think it’s thoughtful or helpful for women to throw their boobs around in sacrament meeting. I also highly recommend against squirting milk across the isles as the decons pass the sacrament.

     But I still hold that blankets are an unreasonable and unnecessary requirement. Using a tent and being circumspect are not necessity the same thing. And I still say that we put far far far more emphasis on women covering ourselves than on boys controling themselves. And I think that mis-balance is both anti-woman (we’re at fault for your thoughts), and anti-man (implying that you are too weak to learn self-control).

     I’m not sure what you’re refering to when you say the majority view here perpetuates women’s self-consiousness. You lost me there.

     Comment by fMhLisa — October 31, 2005 @ 3:34 pm

194. I have boys-of course they won’t automatically avert their eyes. But does that mean they are going to be permanently scarred either if they don’t avert their eyes?I think saying “boys will be boys” is a copout. Give them more credit as well as some leeway while they learn to transition into a more mature young man.
     .
     Some sentiments here seem to imply that we have to shelter boys from all temptations. And I’m sorry but a women feeding her kid is lower down on the scale of temptations. Where do you guys want to draw the line? What about sisters who have gotten breast augmentation or are naturally big breasted? Should we put them in the nursing lounge as well, because geesh, even when they are covered, they are still disruptive? Do you see how crazy this could get if we worried about all the “disruptions” the female form could wreak havoc on men?

     I just think it’s silly to think somehow a young boy being disrupted by his naturally developing libido is something unique or alarming. Sister so-so could drop a paper and bend over and there we go-the young man will be disrupted. Sister whatever’s blouse hangs a little low while she ties her child’s shoes. Oh no-the disruption bell again for the young boy.

     Does that mean we’ve failed him? No, it means he’s reacting like a normal kid, and hopefully he will learn how to adjust to such “disruptions” eventually. Until then, he’ll be distracted by anything remotely female like most boys his age. But he’ll learn, and the world will go on, and most importantly, the mom nursing feeds her baby as she should. The sky isn’t going to fall, folks.

     Comment by Katie Conroy — October 31, 2005 @ 3:37 pm

195. On one had, you say - boys will be boys and they need to learn to control their thoughts. On the other hand, every woman here routinely condems the culture of guilt the LDS culture sometimes builds. I have nothing against nursing anytime or anyplace but it is interesting to me how many women here find no need to try to at least cut a young man a break. Waking up every week to 10 days having orgasms in your sleep makes a 13 year old kid guilty enough, add jacking off to that guilt, and shame and guilt get pretty severe. Sacrament meeting should be the last place on earth he has to deal with that kind of issue. Is it too much to ask to simply sit someplace a bit more discreet, and maybe only nurse after the sacrament, when no one is walking around? Cant some women cut the kid some slack as we try to teach him how to process what he comes in contact with?

     Comment by Jersey — October 31, 2005 @ 3:48 pm

196. Jersey,
     I agree with you whole-heartedly. We aren’t talking about grown men here, the bishop asked in behalf of young men. Young men who are just learning to deal with their sexual experiences. I think that we should take their feelings into consideration.
     I still think every woman has the right to nurse publicly, anywhere that it is appropriate for her and her baby to be. But it is also polite to take into consideration the needs and feelings of those around you.
     It doesn’t have to be an all or nothing thing.

     Comment by jks — October 31, 2005 @ 3:56 pm

197. Jersey-my post cuts “the kid” slack because I think it’s silly to imagine an immature and sexually developing boy to not perhaps react in an immature way. I have boys, I realize that.

     Where I think the problem lies is with adults’ well meaning but misguided belief that you somehow protect young boys from having inapropriate thoughts by sheltering them. That’s what’s silly to me. Do the adults REALLY think a nursing mom is the only catalyst for inappropriate thoughts during church? Do you know how low on the radar that probably is for many young boys whereas young teenage girls and busty members and pretty young adult wives are probably more distracting to them?

     I just think it’s silly to single out nursing mothers of all distractions.

     Comment by Katie Conroy — October 31, 2005 @ 3:56 pm

198. Do you know how low on the radar that probably is for many young boys whereas young teenage girls and busty members and pretty young adult wives are probably more distracting to them?

     Just like Lyle, and unlike you, I do know where on the radar they fall - Way above anything that is normally covered. Thats where they fall.
     Its all about the situation. Being on a bikini filled beach and seeing someone nursing would be one thing - and not a very big one given the surroundings. Being someplace where it isnt the norm, can cause all kinds of interesting effects.

     Comment by Jersey — October 31, 2005 @ 4:12 pm

199. As a question based on what Katie said and what some other posters have said:
     Have any of you women with sons ever actually asked them how much they masturbate? and why? and what prompts it?
     Somehow Im guessing not very many of you have.

     Comment by Jersey — October 31, 2005 @ 4:15 pm

200. “But it is also polite to take into consideration the needs and feelings of those around you.”

     JKS,
     I’m not sure where you got the idea that we were saying it is an all or nothing thing. In fact I’ve said repeatedly, several, many, multiple times, that blatant boob flinging is an impolite choice. Hear me.

     And Jersey,
     If you think waiting an hour is no big deal when your baby is hungry and screaming and begging for you to feed him, you are clearly insane.

     Comment by fMhLisa — October 31, 2005 @ 4:16 pm

201. Last time I checked, Sacrament Meeting was almost over after and hour. Passing the Sacrament starts about 10 minutes in, and lasts 5 minutes. Is that 5 minute period too much to hold out for? If you cant read what I wrote and understand it, you are clearly insane. (thanks for the inusult)

     Comment by Jersey — October 31, 2005 @ 4:19 pm

202. Before we got married, the shirt my husband hated the most covered the surface area actually, but was white, too tight, and made of thin material. He always said it’s not what’s covered, but HOW it’s covered. So, I think every guy may just have a different way of how their radars operate.

     Regarding your assertion about coverage. Let’s take some lady in her near 40’s in a pinafore dress who’s just had her fifth kid nursing. Most likely, she’s not going to be “way above” a young sister who’s wearing a very tight top with her perky breast popping out. Or the hot young mom who’s wearing a jersey material dress that’s hugging all the right places.Covered, schmovered-it’s all about the presenters and the presentation.

     Comment by Katie Conroy — October 31, 2005 @ 4:24 pm

203. Can I just say, Jersey, I find that turning a thread on breastfeeding into a thread on masturbation is just plain weird. I don’t know what’s going on inside that head of yours, but I do think you should figure it out.

     And yes, 5 minutes can be too long to hold out. And asking me to leave if my child is hugry is asking too much. And I may very well be insane, it’s one of my quirkier charms.

     Comment by fMhLisa — October 31, 2005 @ 4:25 pm

204. Funny, I thought personal insults were against your posting policy. Does that only apply to men with a different opinion?

     Comment by Jersey — October 31, 2005 @ 4:32 pm

205. Jersey, also, I don’t recall Kerri’s post mentioning that he didn’t want her to not nurse just during the passing of the sacrament. It was generalized “they young men are distracted”.
     

     A few times he referenced how hard it is for teenage boys to keep it together sexually, and seeing a mother nurse her baby could potentially be more than they could handle. What the freak does that mean, anyway?

     It is not a problem with “when”, it was a problem that she was nursing her baby at church without a blanket/not in the nursing room. He didn’t mention he “didn’t want her nursing when the sacrament was passed because that was when the young men were getting a peep show”.

     Comment by princessleah_mom — October 31, 2005 @ 4:34 pm

206. Jersey-regarding my boys. Dude, I grew up with brothers, I was a tomboy, almost all by best friends were boys until college. I know how boys think as I was an honorary member for most of the time.
     I went through puberty early-yet another great window into how gross boys AND men can be. This isn’t a mystery for me.

     I think my points quite reasonable. Boys will probably look and may even get “disrupted” by the sight of a nursing mom in church, but guess what? They are most likely getting disrupted about 30 times every sacrament from any vague glimpse of a girl or women that they find hot. They’ll survive is my point. They’ll mature, and they’ll learn how to react more appropriate with age. I don’t think the nursing mom needs to scurry off to some private room just because my kids are full of hormones right now. Let her feed her kid, and my sons will “survive” the experience.

     Comment by Katie Conroy — October 31, 2005 @ 4:35 pm

207. princessleah_mom I wasnt agreeing with the Bishop at all. I was just stating that I think an even balance could be reached that would work for everyone. Is it too much to ask for some compromise from both sides?

     Comment by Jersey — October 31, 2005 @ 4:41 pm

208. As I’ve said before, if the woman was whipping it out, and wasn’t covering herself, I can completely understand your side. But that is not the case in this instance or in most. A woman can cover up and not show anything at all while not using a blanket or anything else other than her blouse and her arms.

     I think if a woman can nurse her child without showing an ounce of flesh, her baby is quiet and content, that it shouldn’t be an issue. Now, if said infant likes to lift up mommies shirt to show all the young men where his dinner comes from, that’s another issue. But in that case, most, if not all mommies, will retreat to the mother’s lounge.

     Comment by princessleah_mom — October 31, 2005 @ 4:55 pm

209. princessleah_mom
     that is definately not what I am reading here.

     Comment by Jersey — October 31, 2005 @ 5:03 pm

210. Reading from Kerri’s post, or the comments from other posters?

     Comment by princessleah_mom — October 31, 2005 @ 5:06 pm

211. The comments from other posters. Most of them seem like they are not about to leave under any circumstances.

     Comment by Jersey — October 31, 2005 @ 5:08 pm

212. Jersey, I have actually gotten a different feel from them. I think that most would agree that if the baby consistently has a difficult time nursing in public, and flashing is a problems they would leave to nurse. I think most, like myself, generally find that they can nurse modestly, not show anything, and baby is cooperative and calm.

     Comment by princessleah_mom — October 31, 2005 @ 5:42 pm

213. What? LisaB, I think public breastfeeding is fine.

     Wow, I feel like we are having an argument over whether or not people should say “excuse me” after yawning!

     I think when women breastfeed in public, as they often should and often must, small efforts at being discreet will be greatly appreciated by some people who may be nearby, for good reason. The particular gesture that is proportionate in a situation will vary by the situation. Sometimes it might be going into another room. Sometimes it might be positioning a blanket or something else so that people don’t wonder quite so much how much breast they are about to see. Sometimes it might be choosing where to sit, or turning a little in one’s seat. Sometimes it is only an acknowledgement, “Oh, I think Sam is hungry. I hope you don’t mind . . .” And yes, sometimes it is nothing. If you really think the person you are with is so rude that they would try to tell you not to feed your child, and not recognize that if they are uncomfortable, they are free to avert their eyes or leave, then you should probably just proceed without giving them any extra opportunity to be obnoxious. Saying, “I hope you don’t mind,” doesn’t mean you are going to stop just because they do mind!

     A little surprised I had to spell that out again.

     My point in comparing things that clearly would be a problem in public was to make the point that hello, breasts really are sexual, and hence discretion in one form or another is appreciated and appropriate, and requests for discretion are not morally outrageous–gentle requests, like I think Kerri’s bishop’s was, from her description. In Kerri’s case, maybe the proper gesture of discretion is just to tell the bishop, “You know, I am already at my limit with those kids, and I’m sorry, but I’m afraid my breastfeeding routine is as discrete as it’s going to get.” That is an acknowledgement of the awkwardness, which is half the point of all the other things, anyway.

     Er, what jks said. fMhLisa, I don’t think he was talking about you, but perhaps about these comparisons.
     Katie, this is a thread about nursing mothers. On other occasions people talk about other potential distractions.

     princesleah_mom, that seems like one reasonable place to come down on this issue, but I don’t see that someone who thinks the place to come down is a little different is thereby an advocate of burkas. Wherever one comes down, it is a matter of balancing convenience versus awkwardness etc., and since both of those vary with the situation and the company, I think it is reasonable for a bishop to ask a woman for a bit more discretion, and then listen sincerely to her response.

     Comment by Ben H — October 31, 2005 @ 8:04 pm

214. I can also understand Kerri’s being upset, under the circumstances, particularly since it sounds like she is already self-conscious enough about the difficulties she and her kids are having living up to her own expectations. It sounds like it was a really bad time, and what she really needed was validation, not the sense of being criticized over one more little thing.

     Comment by Ben H — October 31, 2005 @ 8:10 pm

215. Jersey

     5 minutes can be an eternity to a baby. Seriously. But you would have to be a mother to understand that.

     Comment by Mary Siever — October 31, 2005 @ 10:14 pm

216. The issue of where or how I was breastfeeding never came up.

     The issue was that I was nursing in parts of the building that weren’t the Mothers’ Lounge. Like I said, I am very discreet and that was acknowledged and appreciated by the bishop. So the issue still seems to be that people knew I was nursing, without seeing any flesh. And I’m not about to take responsibility for the impure thoughts or disgust of other people when they’re not seeing any more of me than they are of every other female at church. Sorry, but I don’t buy it. I have been raped before, and the way I was treated then is sadly similar:

     “Well, what did you expect, you did go into his house.”
     “You were dating him, so it’s not really rape.”
     “Being alone with a guy is dangerous, don’t you know how boys are?”
     “You should have kicked him in the balls and ran away.” (Yeah, because my crying and saying no the whole time didn’t tip him off that I wasn’t into it? Again, the inference is that it was my job to control him, not his.)

     And it’s crap. I’m so repulsively sick of women being held responsible for the actions of weak men.

     And no, I’m not comparing being raped to being asked to use a blanket. I am saying that females with innocent intentions are not to blame if males are unable to control themselves.

     Comment by Kerri — October 31, 2005 @ 10:18 pm

217. Ben, in #172, asks if “breasts are inherently sexual, physiologically speaking, in a way that ankles are not? ”

     Ben, since you were nice enough to re-engage me so kindly, I’ll respond, even though the thread has really moved on.

     Upon further reflection, I’d say that yes, because breasts are secondary sex characteristics unique to women, and ankles are not, breasts are probably inherently more attractive to men than are ankles, under the theory that “exotic becomes erotic.” (However, this is not to say that culture or psychology cannot impress itself upon the female form in such a way as to sexualize the ankle more than the breast in particular times, places and cases.) But I see no reason why, independent of culture, breasts should be inherently more attractive to men than other secondary sex characteristics unique to women, including enlarged hips, buttocks, and thighs, smaller stature, smoother skin texture, etc. (Again, I’m not contesting the fact that in the present environment breasts are sexualized more than those others.)

     And that’s all from the man’s point of view. From the woman’s point of view, there’s nothing inherently sexual about breasts. There’s nothing unique about the skin or tissue of the breast. The nipple has a large concentration of blood vessels and nerve endings in order to facilitate the complex milk-ejection reflexes, and it can become erect with a variety of stimuli, but it is not constructed of the erectile tissue present in the primary sex organs—fortunately for nursing mothers, or else nursing in public really would be inappropriate!

     Now please, I know dozens of readers want to pipe up and say, “But when my partner does such-and-such, this-and-that response occurs!” I’m sure it does, but please, please do not share the details; none of us are that interested! Certainly women enjoy a range of psychosomatic responses to, uh, such-and-such, but there is nothing inherent in the physiology of the breast to produce those responses.

     Comment by Rosalynde — October 31, 2005 @ 11:27 pm

218. Ben-yes, this thread is about nursing mothers, but that’s not all. It’s about where the burden of responsibility whould be placed regarding distractibility and disruption.

     The alleged distraction and disruption is the nursing woman. Some say it’s the actual sight of the woman’s breast nursing. Some say it’s the simply the act itself, even if it’s not visibly exposing her body, that can be distracting and disruptive. The main concern of distraction is potentially turning on young, impressionable boys. This goes beyond nursing mothers then-it is speaking to bigger issues here.

     I think my point is staying on track by saying, hey, worst case scenario, a young impressionable boy does take a peek and might find the act somewhat stimulating. He’s gonna live through it, he probably has those types of thoughts and impulses quite often and most likely brought on by pretty benign situations, and most likely he’ll mature eventually to not see the act of nursing in such a light.

     As a mother of boys, I can live with that scenario, and I think the mother’s need to feed her kid trumps that worst case scenario. My point very much has to do with nursing mothers because I’m discussing the very reasons being given here why nursing moms are to show more discretion in terms of personal space between themselves and males.

     Comment by Katie Conroy — October 31, 2005 @ 11:51 pm

219. All I can say, Rosalynde, is that although I respect your intellect to no end you are completely off your rocker in this thread, which I half believe rightly belongs on another blog I am familiar with. If you honestly think that beards and breasts are comparable you are crazy. If you think the only reason an ankle isn’t more inherently sexy than a breast is is because men have ankles too you are a loon. If you think that a culture could effectively sexualize an ankle to the point where it would be seen as sexy as breasts are viewed in our current culture you are a nutbar. If you use “psychosomatic” to describe the pleasure many women experience via their breasts than I think you need to re-acquaint yourself with the meaning of the word. Your genius is uncontested, but after following your thinking all across the ‘nacle for months I have never seen you be so irrational.

     Comment by Brian G — November 1, 2005 @ 2:44 am

220. Ben, thanks for the clarification. Your yawning example assumes that the person did NOT say excuse me when she yawned. If that were the case, I still do not think it would be appropriate for someone who never has to deal with yawning to correct someone who has been perceived to be rude in how she yawns (i.e. yawning etiquette). While we’re talking about breastfeeding, we’re really talking about unequal distribution of power in church that extends even to the responsibilities that are uniquely female and which are supposedly THE equalizing force between women and priesthood-ordained men. A bishop who presumes to correct a mother her mothering is exercising unrighteous dominion in that he is assuming dominion that has not been granted him by priesthood keys, by God, or by any other means.

     Comment by LisaB — November 1, 2005 @ 7:49 am

221. Wow, longest thread EVER! I even think this one beats out Bannergate over at T&S. Well done, people.

     Comment by Heather Oman — November 1, 2005 @ 9:42 am

222. I’m surprised it has gone on so long, when this is so “much ado about nothing”. I’ve been an active member of the church for over 4 decades. I’ve attended wards in various states and countries, and have seen a lot of women (my wife included) breastfeeding kids in church. I never got flashed, never got turned on by it, and never found it a problem (I think it’s cool actually), even when babies were noisy abou it. I honestly can’t for the life of me figure out why a few guys on this thread are making such a big freaking deal out of something so fundamentally natural and normal, and over Kerri’s clearly out of line Bishop and those two stupid whining neanderthals that brought it up in the first place. “School your thoughts my brethren” and cut the poor moms some slack already!

     Comment by Rich — November 1, 2005 @ 10:06 am

223. Actually, on 2nd thought, let’s end this thread on a lighter note.

     Q: Why do babies prefer mother’s milk?
     A: Because it comes in such cute bottles!

     :o)

     Comment by Rich — November 1, 2005 @ 10:19 am

224. I’m in total agreement with Rich-I wasn’t going to post because I don’t even know what to comment on at this point! But Rich makes the point that I think is really true-this isn’t a big deal!

     1) As a lifelong member in her 30’s-I’ve seen women nurse numerous times in sacrament without any repurcussions and without people seeming to have problem with it.

     2) I’ve nursed in sacrament without ever getting even a raised eyebrow

     3) It’s quite easy to nurse without exposing flesh!

     4) The reality is I think Kerri’s bishop and the few people who complained are an EXCEPTION to the rule

     5)Kerri’s reaction was reasonable-she sounds like she really has her hands full and her priorities, and as a mother who’s dealing with little ones who need alot of attention, your patience for people complaining about a natural act that you are discreet about will be a little low!

     6)It’s just one of those “get real” moments she had with her bishop, and maybe her reaction was helpful for the bishop to understand a mother’s perspective, not just the perspective of some men or young men.

     Comment by karina — November 1, 2005 @ 10:20 am

225. oops lighter note-gotcha- cute bottles.:)

     Comment by karina — November 1, 2005 @ 10:22 am

226. So LisaB, when the bishop asks people (that would be parents) to cut down on Cheerios (which they feed to their kids) in Sacrament meeting, is he exercising unrighteous dominion?

     Comment by Ben H — November 1, 2005 @ 10:27 am

227. Thanks, Rich : )

     Comment by Ben H — November 1, 2005 @ 10:30 am

228. Kerri (post #216), It sounds like you and I have a lot in common and have experienced many of the same things. I appreciate your strength and determination. Keep it up…you’re doing great!!!

     Comment by princessleah_mom — November 1, 2005 @ 11:05 am

229. Ben–absolutely. Asking the entire congregation to be mindful of reverence, distractions, and chapel cleanliness is one thing. The scenario you give is another. What’s your beef here, Ben? I honestly don’t get it.

     Comment by LisaB — November 1, 2005 @ 12:26 pm

230. Rich–I’ve been an active member of the church all my 35 years (minus a couple months) in 4 different U.S. states and dozens of wards and my experience has NOT been the same as yours. I have never been in a ward where nursing anywhere outside of the mothers lounge has been considered socially acceptable (even during RS, Homemaking, or Enrichment). When I have done so, I have gotten glares and comments, from both men and women.

     When we had a regional conference and I asked about what nursing and diaper changing facilities would be available on site, commenting that I would be happy to nurse at my seat in the arena but knew of other nursing mothers who would not attend if facilities were not available, the word back was that they would come up with facilities somehow (can’t have women nursing in the pews for heaven’s sake!) and they did.

     Nursing in our anti-breastfeeding culture is so difficult that few women nurse their babies as long as even doctors now recommend (at least a year) and even fewer for as long as they are designed to be nursed (measured in years, not months). Until you have personally bucked the trends and experienced the social resistance out there as a result of doing so, you cannot possibly understand why this is a 200+ response post.

     Comment by LisaB — November 1, 2005 @ 12:50 pm

231. My sister in law nursed all her kids until the age of 3 1/2 without any flak from anyone in church.

     Comment by Louanne — November 1, 2005 @ 1:21 pm

232. That’s great for your SIL Louanne. What’s YOUR stance on or experience with this issue?

     Comment by LisaB — November 1, 2005 @ 1:39 pm

233. No experience. I’m in an singles ward and never really had to think about the issue. It’s a really interesting conversation.

     Comment by Louanne — November 1, 2005 @ 1:47 pm

234. Lisab-interesting, I didn’t realize this was an issue for a good number of people, I was thinking my own experiences were pretty good indicators(never saw a problem, never had a problem myself) of what’s “out there”–maybe not then.

     Why do you think women would glare at you? I’m curious as I truly don’t know. Do they think it’s rude? Maybe we can get an idea if this is a regional thing.

     I have lived in Northern, Central, and Southern California and Hawaii when I nursed my babies and never had a problem at church. I’ve had a couple glares in public places but overall thought I’ve never been treated badly or judged for doing so. Are you folks in different places? Would that even matter-maybe it doesn’t. I don’t know. Just want to understand better.

     Comment by karina — November 1, 2005 @ 2:01 pm

235. Brian G–
     

     If you think that a culture could effectively sexualize an ankle to the point where it would be seen as sexy as breasts are viewed in our current culture you are a nutbar.

     Check out the Congo. You are right about Ros’s brilliance, though.

     Comment by janet — November 1, 2005 @ 4:29 pm

236. Brian,
     Breast eroginization (is that a word) really is more culturally tied than I think you realize. Sure there are a lot of lovely nurves on breasts that can be a pleasurable sexual experience for women, but the nurves also make nursing itself a pleasurable experience, so the pleasure doesn’t have to be tied sex.

     In cultures where women are routinely bare chested, most women are mystified by the idea that men might want to suck on breasts like babies.

     Also, many of the more horriable abuses of women in history and culture have to do with what is sexualized in that specific culture. In China, the small feet are sexualized, big boobs not at all . In Padaung the long necks are sexualized. And then there’s always FGM.

     I don’t think Rosalynd is insane. Brilliant yes. I think you’re more strongly tied to your boob culture that you realize.

     Comment by fMhLisa — November 1, 2005 @ 5:35 pm

237. Dear Ladies,

     Please understand, I have checked out the Congo.

     Lotta women have nice breasts there. (I keed. I keed.)

     No, seriously, I do not insist that cultures do not exist that sexualize parts of the body that most in our Western culture find a bit odd, and I do understand that breast-admiration is perhaps at an all-time high here in the U.S. currently. In spite of the fact that I find a foot and half long neck covered in gold rings a tremendous turn-on I do believe that great wrongs have been committed throughout history by the process of over-sexualization of certain body parts. I also believe the popularity of breast enlargement surgery, although, primarily a choice made independently by women (albeit under the influence of our culture), is a sad side-effect of the current over-sexualization of breasts in our country. Nevertheless, I still think Rosalynde is being crazy.

     First, I haven’t ever seen conclusive proof that in the foot-binding culture of China, the neck-stretching culture of Padadung, or the lip-disking culture of wherever the hell that is, that breasts are not still considered outrageously sexy by the men there, and also, most likely by most of the women.

     Secondly, and most importantly, I object to Rosalynde’s entire rhetorical strategy and I say this at the same time I admit that she is my favorite feminist on the planet besides, of course, my dear wife. The proper attitude to men in authority that object to breast-feeding etc. is not to vainly attempt to desexualize your own beautiful bodies. That is just wrong.

     The proper attitude is to embrace the sexuality of your own bodies and their remarkable ability to be fascinating in a variety of ways and stimulated in a number of regions. The proper attitude is to state unequivocally that, yes, breasts are sexy, and yes, we can breastfeed in public venues if we so choose, and yes, it is your own responsibility uptight men to keep your thoughts and actions pure, not ours.

     Convincing men that breasts aren’t sexy is an argument that you will never ever win. Surely your realize this.

     Comment by Brian G — November 1, 2005 @ 7:11 pm

238. Er, surely YOU realize that.

     Comment by Brian G — November 1, 2005 @ 7:27 pm

239. Er, surely YOU realize that.

     Comment by Brian G — November 1, 2005 @ 7:28 pm

240. LOL, dearest Janet and Lisa—thank you for your valiant defenses! Brian knows that the quickest way to provoke a reaction in me is to call me a “genius,” and I know that the quickest way to provoke a reaction in him is to ignore him on blogs. Thus you see we had our little exchange.

     Brian knows me well enough to know that, in general, I do not err on the side of desexualizing myself before male authority; on the contrary, I tend to be something of a flirt and an attention-seeker in person, to my everlasting chagrin. I think Brian also knows that the attention I get from those strategies is never, ever as satisfying as the attention I earn the honest way: by earning respect for myself as a person and an intellect.

     Comment by Rosalynde — November 1, 2005 @ 7:56 pm

241. Okay, guys, I’ll grant you that breasts are sexy in our culture (and as a result in our brains and even in our automatic responses regardless of reason–nature or nurture) and the silliness and futility of trying to argue otherwise.

     Perhaps the goal is not to convince anyone that breast are only relatively sexy, but rather that the fact of their erotic power does not make every use of them erotic. I do think this is at the heart of people’s discomfort with breastfeeding. While we can mentally separate a medical exam (even of our sexual and secondarily sexual organs and body parts) from a sexual encounter, we seem to have trouble doing the same with breastfeeding–and I think that is specifically because we haven’t seen much of it. I think our sexualizing of all things sensual is related, too.

     The negative reactions I get to breastfeeding seem to include a sense that I am somehow flaunting my sexuality to breastfeed even discreetly in the presence of others (this has even occurred in the mother’s lounge when I don’t drape in the presence of even more bodily conscious mothers than myself). In the sense that breastfeeding is reproductive, perhaps I am. But I think that read is quite a stretch.

     Perhaps what this is really all about is the fact that while breastfeeding, a mother’s instincts (by divine design) place the infant–not the sexual partner–first for a time. And that’s definitely counter-culture for us. For most women, sexual interest decreases during this time (part of natural child spacing and an infant-protective impulse). In fact, I know women who have stopped breastfeeding because their husbands have complained about the decreased attention they’re getting and I think that’s really sad. Time and energy available to one’s partner decreases with parenthood whether the mother is breastfeeding or not, and all couples have to make efforts to avoid parent burn-out and create time for eachother regardless. For some (lucky?) women, sexual interest increases during the breastfeeding months or years, but that’s less common and so less liable to influence cultural attitudes and behaviors.

     Maybe the sexual partners of the second group of women are more comfortable with public breastfeeding because they are not personally threatened by it since it’s not a public expression of what they are missing in private. Maybe that’s why men have been so interested in arguing for limits on public breastfeeding (the drape, discretion…) in this discussion. Plain ol’ male possessiveness.

     Comment by LisaB — November 2, 2005 @ 7:31 am

242. LisaB (230), thanks for clarifying. I honestly didn’t think this was such a problem, but then, I’ve obviously never done it personally, and don’t remember any big complaints from my wife who fed 3 kids for at least 8-10 months each.

     I have to give credit to Kerri for being more civil about it than I would have. If it had been me, I would have told the Bishop to instruct those men and boys offended to excuse themselves from the meeting and go sit in a stinky bathroom until they regained control of their lustful thoughts. If they didn’t like the stinky bathroom, they could go outside and sit in a van (and eat government cheese) until they got their lustful thoughts under control. The men are the problem here, not the breastfeeding moms. It’s a lot easier for them to pick their sorry asses up off the bench and walk out than it is a mom with hungry children (along with all the crap moms have to tote around with them).

     Oh well, so I finished on a not-so-lighthearted comment. I tried!

     Comment by Rich — November 2, 2005 @ 9:18 am

243. haha, that last post from rich made me dribble while I was drinking and reading and giggling at the same time.

     Comment by katie conroy — November 2, 2005 @ 11:11 am

244. Just to add a little more fuel to the breasts are sexy argument, I just heard on NPR that recent research shows that women with big breasts are, on average more fertile than women with small breasts. So the attraction is at least in part pre-programed.

     Say me, the deflated ballon poster gyrl.

     Comment by fMhLisa — November 2, 2005 @ 2:47 pm

245. First-time visitor here, and I’m not a Mormon.

     I have seen Muslim women in full chador breastfeeding on the subway in Manhattan. It’s not considered immodest. It’s considered a necessity of life.

     In general, the alternative to seeing a nursing baby is hearing a crying baby.

     Comment by Shamhat — November 2, 2005 @ 5:19 pm

246. Welcome, Shamhat! You turn phrases quite nicely, BTW.

     Comment by janet — November 2, 2005 @ 6:10 pm

247. “Just to add a little more fuel to the breasts are sexy argument, I just heard on NPR that recent research shows that women with big breasts are, on average more fertile than women with small breasts. So the attraction is at least in part pre-programed”

     Sh*t.

     Comment by Heather Oman — November 3, 2005 @ 10:24 am

248. No one has yet mentioned the secondary purpose of nipples and breastfeeding, in that nipple stimulation causes the uterus to contract therefore facilitating the body in healing after childbirth. Nipple to uterine contractions aren’t unique to postpartum as nipple stimulation can be a useful tool in labor and also a lot of fun in the sack. This does not make breasts or nipples sexual organs, just secondary sexual characteristics that can be utilized erotically.

     Is this a reason to not nurse in public? nope.

     My babies HATED being covered while nursing by anything. None of you eat with something covering your heads and yet we expect babies who are more instinct than anything else to be ok with this. It’s ridiculous. Trying to cover turned a ten minute meal into a half hour screamfest. You tell me what would be more distracting in church?

     I’ve been in only one ward where nursing was frowned upon. There were only two families in it with children and the rest were retireees. There were no young men to pass out sacrament at all. It wasn’t the fact that I had nursed that was distressing but that I had children who made the occasional peep. Had I been called out on it I would have peeped louder than any of my two kids at the time ever had.

     I find it surprising that a religion that values families so highly have such disgraceful mother’s rooms. I’ve never used one myself. I changed my kids in the restroom because that is where we take care of that bodily function. If my children were noisy I often took them outside where a good run took care of the issue. I nursed where I sat and I can’t say if anyone noticed or not.

     Comment by Becky — November 3, 2005 @ 10:26 am

249. Poking my nose in here for the first time, I notice that MANY people (men and women) are asking why nursing mothers can’t just cover up with a blanket. If you haven’t had to deal with it, it’s probably a reasonable question since modesty is desirable.

     My son could not deal with blankets AT ALL. Putting a blanket over his head resulted in 1. the blanket being yanked at HARD and 2. loud screaming.

     Personally I chose to do 2 things: for church I tried to nurse him before sacrament meeting so that I could have a happy (hopefully sleeping) baby and could listen. I realize this only worked because the timing of our sacrament meeting was appropriate AND he was our only child. I also promised myself that I would never hide to feed my son and fed him anywhere I needed to when he was hungry. I was always as discrete as possible and even our unmarried male friends who have issues with immodest women had no problems with it.

     I’m glad I saw women nurse at church — they set the example for me.

     Comment by Erin — November 3, 2005 @ 11:48 am

250. In retrospect, I realize haven’t been too charitable in my responses to those who have innocently asked why can’t women just use a blanket while nursing in mixed company or what is wrong with the bishop expressing the concerns that had been voiced. Sorry for being so defensive in my responses. But I stand by my assertions that bishops have no business instructing women in nursing manners, and that ward members (male or female) have no business judging a woman who nurses in church.

     You are so right, Becky! Oxytocin is involved orgasm, labor, and milk let-down, so breastfeeding IS inately (not just culturally) sexual in a way. Or perhaps contrastingly, “by divine design” female orgasm is less exclusively sexual than male orgasm–them not having a hormanal tie-in to other pleasurable experiences that are non-sexual like women do. I don’t believe God intended women to be in hiding during all the nursing years merely because of this link.

     Ditto with what other nursing mothers have said about the blanket thing. Not suffocating is a built-in infant instinct. Also eye-gazing during nursing (which a blanket destroys) which is why an infant’s focal point is approximately the distance from nursing position to therir mother’s face.

     Something else that hasn’t been discussed beyond the statement that 5 minutes is sometimes too much is the fact that infants stomachs are about the size of a walnut and breastmilk is digested rather quickly, and that nursing when the infant indicates hunger helps them develop trust as well as their ability to respond appropriately to hunger and develop healthy eating habits, and keeps milk supply up while at the same time avoiding engorgment. Older nurslings are of course more easily distracted, can eat other foods to forestall hunger, and gradually learn limits about nursing. But even with older nursers, there are times when nursing is the surest, quickest comfort, peacemaker, or tantrum tamer.

     Comment by LisaB — November 3, 2005 @ 12:43 pm

251. If I had guts and a quick wit I would have asked the bishop “Is this something you have prayed about? Did the Lord make it clear to you as bishop that nursing in church meetings is inappropriate and that I should excuse myself?”
     Discreet? Yes. Invisible? No.

     Comment by Andermom — November 4, 2005 @ 3:14 pm

252. How self centered to breastfeed withouth thinking of the consequences to those around you! Did you have sex in front of the neighbors too?
     Sex is as ‘natural’ as breast feeding, but both should be viewed as sacred and not for public display.
     Grow up, have some class and be discreet. Obviously you were not discreet enough as somebody saw you and it raised an issue.

     Comment by Bill — November 4, 2005 @ 11:40 pm

253. *head explodes*

     Comment by Wendy — November 5, 2005 @ 2:34 pm

254. Bill,

     Your post is so ironic. Reading it made me wonder who it was that really needed to grow up and have some class.

     I would continue to point out why but since your head exploded I don’t see the point in it.

     Comment by jennifer — November 5, 2005 @ 2:41 pm

255. Bill, it seems you are being very ignorant about this issue. Have you read all the posts? If you had, you would realize this is bigger than “flashing” skin.

     Comment by princessleah_mom — November 5, 2005 @ 2:42 pm

256. Bill thy name is troll. Please return to your damp abode under yonder bridge and leave the mommys and babies alone.

     Comment by fMhLisa — November 5, 2005 @ 2:53 pm

257. I’ve heard the argument ad nauseum. Farting, Puking, Peeing, having sex, etc. are all natural, yet aren’t appropriate public behaviour. Guess what, you didn’t think of that one. It proves absolutely nothing, except that people are unable to see what’s really going on (a baby drinking) due to their twisted and perverse logic. Yes, perverse. I dare suggest that anyone who can compare a baby suckling to a sexual act has big problems, so I hope poor Bill can get the help he obviously needs. Babies are non-sexual innocent angels.

     How ironic it is that if a man sees a mother nurturing her child how God intends, gets aroused and presumably fantasizes about it in a sexual way, she’s the one with the problem? I’ve said it before. I’m tired of it. It’s not my problem if you’re turned on by knowing I have breasts somewhere hidden away up my shirt. Most of us have them anyway. Big deal. This is getting old.

     Comment by Kerri — November 5, 2005 @ 6:36 pm

258. “A few times he referenced how hard it is for teenage boys to keep it together sexually, and seeing a mother nurse her baby could potentially be more than they could handle.”

     This is one of my pet peeves: LDS women and teenage girls are told they must dress modestly because teenage boys might get impure thoughts. Well, how is it my responsibility to keep their thoughts pure? Shouldn’t they learn to control their own thoughts, rather than blaming me and my bare shoulders?

     Comment by KangarooQ — November 10, 2005 @ 11:43 pm

259. Kanga-I think we mostly agree with you here. For me, teaching responsibility for how we respond to our thoughts and impulses/ physiological reactions is important, but the real rub for me here is realizing that most (LDS) people probably believe that it is perfectly reasonable and within a bishop’s stewardship to comment or place limits on nursing at church. That’s the part that is upsetting to me.

     Comment by LisaB — November 11, 2005 @ 1:08 pm

260. Not to belabor this thread anymore, but…
     I sympathise with Kerri. I have to admit, that, although I believe a woman should be able to nurse a child wherever she chooses, I fell on the “why don’t you just get a little blanket for church” argument initially. I had no idea that the mother’s lounge was so unpleasant and had never really considered the extra burden placed on a woman in dealing with the issues associated with having to cover herself. I say nurse wherever.
     That doesnt mean that its not going to turn on the teenage boys. Hell, it will probably turn on the grown men just as much. In my experience, I don’t make a conscious choice about what turns me on. It just happens. I can, however, choose how I react to certain stimuli and decide the direction my thoughts will go. During one of the first discussions I taught on my mission, our extremely attractive investigator began breastfeeding half way through the discussion. Yeah, I was turned on for a minute, but I got over it and kept teaching about Jesus. While I will agree that what is in an individual’s mind is their own issue (post 66), it doesn’t mean that they are able to decide what enters their mind initially, or that they should be blamed for it. Even if we teach kids that breastfeeding is a separate context, that doesn’t mean that they wont have a sexual reaction. I believe that it can help, but it does not guarantee the result. In the end, many men are going to be attracted to breasts, whether a baby is attached to them or not. It’s their deal, not the woman’s.
     Also, Mary (post 215), perhaps you didn’t mean to, but I found the “you’d have to be a mother to understand that..” a little offensive. My ex-wife didn’t produce milk. 75% of the time I fed him- middle of the night, whenever. I don’t expect a pat on the back for that. It’s my job as a parent. But I also expect to be given the respect any parent would about knowing and attending to the needs of my child. There, I said it.

     Comment by Matt — November 11, 2005 @ 4:19 pm

261. I am a woman without children and seeing others breastfeed makes me feel embarassed. No, not because it is an erotic act, but because:

     1)It creates a taboo zone that I must consciously avoid looking at, least my accidental glance be misctonstrued.

     2) I have to hide my own unease to make the mother feel more comfortable.

     3)If the mother and I are talking when her child needs feeding, I am uncertain how to best to accomodate her. Should I stop talking so she can concentrate on bra straps and blankets? Does she not like breastfeeding in public but didn’t want to offend me by leaving and should I leave?

     I don’t discourage breastfeeding, but just wanted to explain that you don’t have to be white, male, old, or horny to be bothered by it.

     Comment by jane — November 24, 2005 @ 11:14 pm

262. Some options:

     Continue talking and maintain eye contact as you normally would.

     Ask if she would like privacy or no distractions if you’re unsure.

     Admit you haven’t seen much breastfeeding so are curious, uncomfortalbe, embarrassed, or whatever.

     Stay or excuse yourself

     Comment by LisaB — November 25, 2005 @ 8:31 am

263. I hope this gets read by the original poster. The exact same thing happened to me. In my case, the RS president was sent to my home where she implied and nearly right out said that my breastfeeding was pornographic! I am putting a link to your post in my own personal blog. Thank you for sharing your story.

     Comment by Maria — February 23, 2007 @ 12:30 am

264. This reminds me of what my mother went through 28 years ago:
     My mother wanted to breastfeed when her babies were born, but no one she knew could show her how. She ended up calling her sister in another state and getting instructions over the phone.
     So a couple years later when her friend, one of the head nursing dept. people at BYU, asked if she would help with a breastfeeding expo for a BYU health majors fair, my mom agreed. They took pictures of my mom breastfeeding me–discreet, non-nipple showing pictures–they just wanted to demonstrate. These pictures were displayed for pre-med and biology and other health majors–people you’d hope would take the right attitude. And apparently, people at BYU got so offended, they had to take the entire booth down.
     When I nursed my daughters, I always wished I could just stay in the meeting–it was such a good way to keep them quiet so I could listen. It never occurred to me to just stay and nurse. I would go to the teeny mothers lounge and crowd in. In a church newly built to accommodate a BYU married stake, with two chapels and two wards meeting at the same times, there was ONE nursing room, the size of a bathroom stall, with two chairs. Five of us or so would crowd in, sitting on the floor, with barely enough room to sit cross legged. And all the air would run out of the room. It was hard to breathe. This is where I’d nurse. So thanks, all of you, for saying that it’s OK to discreetly nurse in SM. I may get up the courage to try it with my next baby.

     Comment by Day — March 19, 2007 @ 8:28 pm

265. This is ridiculous. Lyle, thanks for being a normal person. The rest of you are nuts.

     Comment by someone else — July 11, 2007 @ 9:57 pm

266. I found your blog on my quest to find out what has been riddling me for some time now: why do those women at the Texas polygamy ranch have such high hair? Is it a status thing? Are there cultural roots affiliated with the LDS? My friend says the higher the hair, the more status the woman has. Is this correct? Seriously, I need to know.

     Thank you!

     Comment by amity — May 31, 2008 @ 11:32 pm

267. Hah! Sounds like someone has been teasing you. Either that, or you’re teasing us.

     Comment by sare — June 1, 2008 @ 8:21 am

268. Sare,

     Actually… they are correct. There is a ’status’ involved in the high hair. They don’t cut their hair because it is a ‘woman’s crown.’ They also plan on washing Jesus’s feet with said hair.

     Anyway… FYI.

     Comment by Elise — June 1, 2008 @ 8:28 am

269. “They” referring to FLDS, not LDS. Just to clarify.

     Comment by Artemis — June 1, 2008 @ 9:21 am

270. right…

     I believe the status thing. I know Emma Smith didn’t cut her hair.. back in that time it was consider a woman’s glory and all that. But the higher the hair the hair the status? That seems a bit far-fetched to me. Maybe I’m ill-informed and skeptical… lol. Sorry if I’ve offended anyone.

     Comment by sare — June 1, 2008 @ 9:35 am

271. sorry, meant, thehigher the hair the higher the status

     Comment by sare — June 1, 2008 @ 9:36 am

Leave a comment

RSS feed for comments on this post.

• Information
  • Introduction & Contact Info
  • Comment Policy
  • Newbie? Introduce Yourself
  • fMh bloggers
  • Submit a Guest Post
  • Need Advice? "Ask fMh"
  • T-shirts Cafepress or Zazzle
  • fMh Facebook group            
  • Help us pay our server fees:
  
• Search
  • 
    

• Recent Comments (IE click link twice)
  • Kimberly: Strict Mormons
  • Kimberly: Back to School Bus
  • cms: Strict Mormons
  • Tatiana: Strict Mormons
  • Stephanie: Remembering Summer
  • Tatiana: Strict Mormons
  • bookharlot: Remembering Summer
  • Ray: Strict Mormons
  • mfranti: Remembering Summer
  • mfranti: Strict Mormons
  • Stephanie: Remembering Summer
  • Stephanie: Remembering Summer
  • Tatiana: Strict Mormons
  • meems: Strict Mormons
  • Kimberly: Remembering Summer
  • Kimberly: Strict Mormons
  • TAG: Strict Mormons
  • wayfarer: Strict Mormons
  • Mike H.: Strict Mormons
  • Emily A.: Remembering Summer
• Do Good
  • Join fMh's Kiva microloan team
  • Join Team fMh at Kiva
• Sideblog
  • - BeliefNet: Mormon women talk about priesthood, temples, jobs & kids
  • - NYT: Delusions of Gender
  • - National Go Topless Day (For Gender Equality)
  • - What My Mother Taught Me (Vada’s Reflections on Pres. Benson’s Talk)
  • - Celebrating women’s suffrage
  • - SLC Trib: Exponent II restarts the presses
  • - SLC Trib: Mormon Feminism, It’s Back
  • - Patheos: Future of Mormonism
  • - In new TV ads, Mormons pitch message to Middle America
  • - Eat, Pray, Spend
  
  
  • more » | feed »
• Facebook Blog Network
  Blog Networks

  Blog:

  feminist Mormon housewives

  Topics:

  feminism, Mormon, LDS

  Join my network
• FMH Book Group
  "Well Behaved Women Seldom Make History" by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich -----Sep 1st-----
  
• Special Guest Discussion
  
  • Women & Authority:
  • Re-emerging Mormon Feminism
  • Discussion Lead By: Lula and Stephanieeeeeee
  • Now Reading:
  • Chapter Three
  • Discussion Date: Wednesday (usually)
  • Discussion Archives:
  • Introductory Material (2006)
  • Introductory Material (2010)
  • Ch. 1 (2006)
  • Ch. 1 (2010)
  • Ch. 2 (2006)
  • Ch. 2 (2010)
  • Ch. 3 (2006)
  • Ch. 3 (2010)
  • Ch. 4 (2006)
  • UP NEXT Ch. 4 (2010)
  • Ch. 5 (2006)
  • Ch. 6 (2006)
• Feminist Mormon Blogs

  A Liberal Mormon
  Beginnings New progressive site for YW leaders!
  By Common Consent
  Dave's Mormon Inquiry
  Doctors & Covenants
  Erin's LDS Women's History Blog
  Exponent II blog Am I not a woman and a sister?
  Hieing to Kolob
  Letters from a Broad
  Mama Nirvana
  Mind on Fire
  On Our Own
  PilgrimGirl
  Sunstone Blog
  The Faithful Dissident
  Zelophehad's Daughters
  




• Blogs by Mormon Women

  • Groups
  Mormon Mommy Wars
  Segullah Blog
  
  • Individuals
  Almost, But Not Entirely
  But I digress . . .
  Cchrissy's Tender Cargo Blog
  Dandelion Mama
  Enduring to the End
  Excelling at Mediocrity
  Gay Blanchard
  good times, noodle salad
  How I deal Faithful Gay Woman's Blog
  I hope you dance
  Keepapitchinin
  law blawg of theres petrey
  Lollygaggering
  Miss Jill in NYC
  Mom on a Wire
  Mrs. Everything
  Navel Gazing at it's Finest
  Neddy Palaver
  Posts of My House
  Reese Dixon
  Selo's Mini
  Tater Tot Casserole
  Tickle the Pear
  Watch out For Mama
  

• Official LDS sites
  LDS.org
  Mormon.org
  
• Random Links
  • (Because we're nice like that.)
  11 D
  Advice for New Feminists
  Black LDS.org
  Danithew
  Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought
  EMSA
  Ethesis
  FHA site (Geoff's)
  Gospel Cougar
  Holla Back NYC
  Invisible Green Photography
  Kulturblog
  Latter-day Main Street
  Liberal Oasis
  Life On Gold Plates
  Morman Mentality
  Mormon Chic
  Mormon Matters
  Mormon Stories
  Mormon Women's Forum
  Mormons for the Environment
  New Cool Thang
  Our Thoughts
  Segullah
  Sunstone Magazine
  Tender Cargo Baby Store
  The Good Democrat
  The Red Brick Store
  Times & Seasons
  
• 
> > Archives
• September 2010
• August 2010
• July 2010
• June 2010
• May 2010
• April 2010
• March 2010
• February 2010
• January 2010
• December 2009
• November 2009
• October 2009
• September 2009
• August 2009
• July 2009
• June 2009
• May 2009
• April 2009
• March 2009
• February 2009
• January 2009
• December 2008
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• December 2007
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005
• August 2005
• July 2005
• June 2005
• May 2005
• April 2005
• March 2005
• February 2005
• January 2005
• December 2004
• November 2004
• October 2004
• September 2004
• August 2004

• September 2010

  M	T	W	T	F	S	S
  « Aug
  		1	2	3	4	5
  6	7	8	9	10	11	12
  13	14	15	16	17	18	19
  20	21	22	23	24	25	26
  27	28	29	30

• Categories
  • Abortion/Contraception
  • Abuse
  • Best Posts
  • Body
  • Book Club
  • Career
  • Conversion
  • Day in the Life
  • Education
  • Environment
  • Faith
  • Father in Heaven
  • Feminism
  • Food
  • Jesus Christ
  • Just Life
  • Humor
  • Marriage
  • Mormon Culture
  • Mormon History
  • Mother in Heaven
  • Motherhood
  • Parenting
  • Patriarcy
  • Politics
  • Polygamy
  • Pop Culture
  • Prayer
  • Priesthood
  • Reconciling Questions
  • Sexuality
  • Social Issues
  • Spirituality
  • Temple
  • Womens History
  • Young Women
• Meta:
  • RSS 2.0
  • Comments RSS 2.0
  • WordPress
  • JS Quicktags
  • 
  • 

•