Time Magazine's Breastfeeding Cover -- Tastful or Trashy?

Photo Credit: Time Magazine
Oh, Time Magazine! The featured picture of this weeks Time Magazine is Jamie Lynne Grumet breastfeeding her 3 year old son. The cover, pictured above, has created a lot of discussion between moms who breastfeed and ones who don't.  The main topic of the article features the attachment style of parenting, which can be read all about in The Baby Book by Dr. Bill Sears. The main components of this parenting is breastfeeding, co-sleeping, and "baby wearing" {by slings and baby carriers}.  The question is, was that picture REALLY appropriate to show the support of breastfeeding?

Respectively, in my opinion, no. As a mom who breastfeeds {my son is 9 months old} and will continue to do so up until he reaches 1, I just don't think this was the way to go about displaying the bond and beauty of breastfeeding. Also as someone who completely believes in a lot of the attachment style of parenting, {how could I not? breastfeeding is a huge attachment?}, I don't see the cover as appropriate.

It is not so much the fact that a 3 year old is breastfeeding {though I do not agree with it, to each their own} but a lot more that it doesn't display the loving, nurturing relationship that takes place when you are breastfeeding. In my opinion the cover sparks more of a "Hey, look at this kid hanging off my boob" look. I personally plan on breastfeeding until age 1, but could not see myself breastfeeding a 3 year old. I think that at that age the breast milk is not a NEED or essential to their health; not ot mention the fact that a 3 year old can practically pour themselves a bowl of cereal. But again that is my opinion and I don't have any dislike towards people who differ.

I really would love to see more people educated on breastfeeding, it is a wonderful experience and provides your baby with great benefits as it does for the mother, however Time Magazine did not really offer the support I think most people would be looking for.

What do you think of the cover?

0 comments: