*Really* extended breastfeeding

Rate this post

This week’s Time magazine cover is causing quite a stir.
It features Jamie Lynne Grumet, a 26-year-old woman breastfeeding her three-year-old son. Grumet was one of four mothers photographed by Time for a cover story on “attachment parenting,” an approach — outlined in Dr. Bill Sears’ 1992 The Baby Book — which recommends extended breast-feeding, co-sleeping and “baby wearing.”
Grumet is saying she will continue to breastfeed her son until he’s five.

Y-A-W-N


Frankly, I don’t know why people are making such a big fuss about Grumet or the Time cover.
After all, full-grown American men and women — in their 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and even 70s — have been engaged in “extended breastfeeding” for years now.

H/t our Miss May!
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

0 responses to “*Really* extended breastfeeding

  1. You know, this is ridiculous. There are just some things that should remain private. Breast feeding should be done with discretion and modesty. No, I think the ultimate intent and message is to promote child abuse or some other sexual perversion. I can’t prove it, but that’s my opinion. When was the last time Time Inc. ever cared about the bond of the family?
    Time magazine is just a socialist rag that cares nothing about the family, so they are using the image to promote something other that what is good.

     
  2. His school teacher?

     
  3. Rush is brilliant!

     
  4. Most women who breast feed hold their babies while doing it. This is off the wall. It just looks perverted to me. Gives me the creeps!!!!

     
  5. Well she finally got to be on the cover of a magazine! Look at all the publicity she is receiving as well. Making this a public affair is going to have horrible consequences for the child later. Can’t you just imagine when his 17 yr. old friends get hold of this picture in the future? If she is really trying to do what is best for her child she would be keeping this off the cover of TIME magazine.

     
  6. She gave him milk money to do it.

     
  7. I was very pro-extended breast-feeding back in my wee days…
    my mother was for early weaning….guess who won , sigh 🙂
    Those were good times , though. Happy mama’s day

     
  8. I’m just not seeing the problem with this.
    It’s her three-year-old kid.
    So what?
    It’s not as though this is anything new.
    -Dave

     
  9. I will admit…she looks amazing! And it’s a proven fact that breast feeding helps shed the “baby weight” super fast.
    I’m sorry but I just cannot help myself. If she is maybe a “B”,or an iffy itty-bitty “C”, while breast feeding can you imagine how ummm…aaa….flat she must be when she is not? (not going to lie, I am jealous!)
    In this picture she needs an “over the shoulder softball holder” but when she does decide to quit, she will probably need an “over the shoulder rice holder”. (LOL!)
    know, I know! That was really BAD! 😀

     
  10. There’s no argument as to the benefits of breastfeeding. However, even throughout the entire animal kingdom, there is a point of time that the young are WEANED ! Babies aren’t mean’t to be on the teat indefinitely! It’s Nature’s way that after teeth come in, and little stomach’s mature, the diet changes! Humans are no different in that concept!

     
    • you’ve got that, Lilly…I’ve been kicked in the head by milk cows
      that have decided that they don’t want to be milked anymore.
      …I believe that my being weaned involved a biting er…accident.

       
    • I was insinuating that the woman is SELFISH. She breast feeds for her own benefit…not the child’s. I was NOT supporting her decision.
      However, I will admit I do not believe it is any of our business honestly. I may have read it wrong but I think this post was talking about whether it is acceptable for this mother to breast feed her 3 yr. old on the cover of TIME magazine in front of the entire world.
      IMO, things like breast feeding, bottles, binkies, the family bed, pre-K, etc. should be left up to the parents ONLY. Unless a parent asks for our opinion, I believe we should keep it to ourselves. People always feel the need to tell me how I should raise my 3 and 4 yr. old…even though I have NOT asked for their opinions. (It drives me up the wall if you want to know the truth.)
      The decisions we make in our home concerning our children are made between me, my hubby, and The LORD….the only 3 invited to our child-rearing discussions. There is a good chance that what was best for your child might not be what’s best for someone else’s.

       
    • One more thing….When I said that I was “jealous”,I just meant that I was jealous of how flat her chest was. (lol!) 😉
      (Especially after having kiddos!)

       
  11. His big sister?

     
  12. You guys are funny 🙂 But seriously, ewww, gross, ick. I breastfed until my kids weened themselves around 1 year. I can see going until 2, maybe a longer if you live in a 3rd world country where food is scarce, but c’mon! This to me smacks of pedophilia…almost like I get the feeling the mother gets some sort of twisted, sicko reward out of it. Or maybe a sick form of entitlement. These lib mom’s are seriously nutso.

     
    • Liz-
      Tee totally agree with ya girl!
      I believe this is all about her 15 minutes of fame, if you ask me. B/c even if I had of breast fed my kids 3 yrs (which I MOST certainly did NOT) you could NOT have paid me enough to do something like this.
      Think about it…somehow TIME magazine found these women for this article. Meaning either the women were already trying to draw attention to themselves (protesting, advocating, etc.) or TIME advertised that they were seeking Mothers for the story(Internet ads, magazine ads, etc.). Either way, people have to be searching for these types of opportunities to actually find them….kinda like reality tv castings.

       
      • The mother has a blog advocating this attachment parenting thing. I’m guessing Time found her blog and sought her for their cover.

         
  13. My immediate thought on seeing that cover was:
    “Oh, another psy-op to present motherhood and natural family in a negative way.”
    Yeah, real pro-Mother, pro-Family cover for Mother’s Day, indeed. (Not.)
    And think about it: Breastfeeding one’s child is something universal, timeless, and central to life. it seems Time/Newsweek would easily find a reason to feature a breastfeeding mother, maybe even once a year like other regular subject features. (Like those on “the latest wonder drugs” or
    “going to college”) After all, their magazines are directed at humans.
    But when’s the last time you saw Time or Newsweek feature a mother breastfeeding — in a positive or natural presentation?
    I can’t think of one instance, whether decorous or edgy.
    Notice all these movie themes the past few years featuring an “evil” baby or an demonic child? Same agenda. This Time cover is just more insidious anti-mother, anti-family, anti-child, and anti-nature propaganda
    designed to make motherhood look ridiculous, bizarre, and unattractive.
    The people running the media are sick, and evil.

     

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *