Tom W. Watson: Rite of Passage
Worst And Best Countries For Maternity Leave
Naked breast on magazine cover causes uproar
Filed under: Your Pregnancy, Nutrition: Health, That's Entertainment
You pick up a magazine and there, on the cover, for all the world to see, is a breast. Do you, A) yell at your teenage son for leaving his girlie magazines out again, B) remember that you need to renew your subscription to Art & Antiques, or C) freak out that a magazine about babies and parenting would show a baby nursing? It seems that for a lot of people, the answer would be option C.
"I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine," one person wrote. Concerned that her 13-year-old son might catch a glimpse of a body part, Gayle Ash of Belton, Texas knew what to do. "I shredded it," she said, adding that "A breast is a breast; it's a sexual thing. He didn't need to see that." BabyTalk is a free magazine whose readers are almost overwhelmingly mothers of babies, and yet, a poll of more than 4,000 of the magazine's readers found that a quarter of them did not approve of the cover, calling it inappropriate.
I'm sorry, but if you pick up a magazine about babies, you gotta be ready to see a little boob now and then. As for Mrs. Ash's son, I guess he'll just have to figure out what breasts are for from magazines like playboy and hustler instead of BabyTalk. I sincerely hope that Jared grows up seeing a woman's breast as a source of nourishment for babies, not as "a sexual thing." But maybe that's just me. The cover is there; what do you think?
"I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine," one person wrote. Concerned that her 13-year-old son might catch a glimpse of a body part, Gayle Ash of Belton, Texas knew what to do. "I shredded it," she said, adding that "A breast is a breast; it's a sexual thing. He didn't need to see that." BabyTalk is a free magazine whose readers are almost overwhelmingly mothers of babies, and yet, a poll of more than 4,000 of the magazine's readers found that a quarter of them did not approve of the cover, calling it inappropriate.
I'm sorry, but if you pick up a magazine about babies, you gotta be ready to see a little boob now and then. As for Mrs. Ash's son, I guess he'll just have to figure out what breasts are for from magazines like playboy and hustler instead of BabyTalk. I sincerely hope that Jared grows up seeing a woman's breast as a source of nourishment for babies, not as "a sexual thing." But maybe that's just me. The cover is there; what do you think?
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
TheTalkies:RelatedVideos
-
Breast Cancer Prevention Money Raising
Think about the women in your life. You probably know someone, or have yourself been, directly affected by breast cancer. Every three minutes a woman finds out she has breast cancer. While we can hope to avoid being diagnosed, there is more we can do to manage our risks and support those who are fighting the disease.
October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month and Shape Magazine is doing its part with the Pilates for Pink Program, a breast cancer .....
-
Virginia Postrel: How to Reform Health Care Without Killing Innovation
Former Reason magazine Editor in Chief Virginia Postrel has seen the strengths and the shortcomings of the American health care system both as a kidney donor and a breast cancer survivor. She argues that individuals should be free to sell their organs, and that encouraging organ markets may be the best way to save the lives of the more than 100,000 Americans awaiting transplants.
-
SNTV - Kylie Minogue Considering Egg Donation
Singer Kylie Minogue has thought about egg donation to help her have children.
-
Learn how to Prepare Chocolate Covered Grape Truffles
Learn how to prepare chocolate covered grape truffles in this video with world famous Chef Michel Richard.
SitesWeLove
- Site Map
- |
- Staff
- |
- Terms of Service
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Trademarks
- |
- Advertise With Us
- |
- About Our Ads
- |
- AOL Downloads
- |
- Contact Us
- |
© Copyright 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Aol Family
ReaderComments (Page 5 of 6)
7-31-2006 @ 3:06PM
Uncle Roger said...Ruth, I think you're right, in some respects. I don't think I've ever seen or heard anyone say "You shouldn't breastfeed, formula is better" (except maybe the formula companies). The real issue is our views on sex and a woman's body, particularly (in this case) the breast.
Is it, as is biologically evident, primarily a source of nutrition for infants and children or is it, as our society seems to think, primarily a sexual object that can also be used to feed a baby? If the latter, then if you believe sex to be something dirty, naughty, or evil, then, by association, so is the breast. Exposing it in public even to breastfeed becomes something offensive and disgusting.
On the other hand, I see a woman's breast much the same as small children see construction equiment -- they serve a purpose and that's first and foremost. They're also really cool to look at, though.
(I also have no hangups about sex, at least compared to most of this country.)
Reply
8-01-2006 @ 2:59AM
yendoel said...the baby's expression is so cute and sweet! there's nothing wrong with the cover!
Reply
8-01-2006 @ 6:52PM
Shasta said...Here is a link to one of the Cosmo covers... http://www.magazines.com/magcom/covers/0/06/319/0063194.jpg You be the judge! Breasts were made to feed baby's, they are not sexual and whomever believes that that the cover of Babytalk is sexual is a PERV!!!
Reply
8-03-2006 @ 10:06AM
NEW DAD said...First off, this magazine is mainly distributed in physicians offices, where the content of the cover is relevant. The people who are violated by this add do not see a connection in the baby and mother rather than a giant boob. Breast-feeding is the major way a breast is adorned and remembered as a motherly bound between the two - not just a sex object, which is well represented in the world today.
The majority of women or people violated by this cover are a younger generation, where they are taught by society that the human body means sex. The older generation realized the importance of breast-feeding and society openly accepted such acts.
Maybe it would serve a better society if the 4,000+ complaints actually focused on somethings that matters in this world like; smoking, disease, pollution, or war.
Of course opinions are like a assholes, everyone has one. This is just mine.
Reply
8-04-2006 @ 1:57PM
Holly said...There is nothing in this world more beautiful or natural than breastfeeding a baby. I agree with the other posts that say if you think this picture is in anyway sexual, you have other issues you need to deal with other than a mother feeding her baby in the way God intended!!!! If you are concerned about your son or husband seeing it, maybe you should worry more about the Victoria Secret catalogs that come to your door. But I am sure they get the same "disgusting" reaction from those too huh?!!!
Reply
8-04-2006 @ 2:25PM
Cathi said...I'm a modest woman and have nursed three children, sometimes in public as neccessary. The cover of BabyTalk is beautiful, just beautiful. Portraying the female breast in it's most glamorous role, nursing an infant, should be applauded and occur more often. Hats off to the editors of Babytalk for their forward and correct thinking.
Reply
8-04-2006 @ 4:00PM
SHIRLEY said...I never had the opportunity to bear a child so therefore not to nurse one either. But I think the cover is beautiful, especially the look on the baby's face.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is a sick individual
Reply
8-05-2006 @ 12:10AM
elena colombo said...I think that the cover is wonderful, it expresses what we as mothers were intended to do by nature.I feel that there are so many wars going on in the world and for myself and child breastfeeding, has been such a amazing and benefical experience.It is nothing but a POSITIVE THING. GO YOU MAMMAS AT BREATS FEEDING. THE BREAST IS BEST!!!!!
Reply
8-05-2006 @ 5:03AM
Andy Hoffman said...This entire controversy brought an excellent article by Fox News legal analyst Lis Wiehl to mind. Check it out...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200615,00.html
Reply
8-05-2006 @ 1:58PM
Ruth Balaity said...One of my co-workers brought in a gossip rag and as I flpped through it I must have seen Pamela Anderson's near naked breasts 3 times-almost lost my lunch !!!!!
It's breastfeeding !!! People need to spend there time on other issues like 14 year olds with "Juicy" tattooed all over the small of their back. Let's worry about that ,huh parents???
Reply
8-05-2006 @ 4:46PM
Janifer Watson said...Anyone who finds something wrong with this cover must have a screw loose. I find the photograph to be absolutely beautiful. I can't imagine how any thinking person would find it offensive.
Reply
8-05-2006 @ 5:08PM
Kimberly said...As many perverted things there are out there, people are in an uproar about a baby nursing? Come on! Its the most natural and healthy way for a baby to eat. Grow up people!!
Reply
8-05-2006 @ 8:05PM
KL said...American's or these 1/4 of readers are ridiculous.
1st there was NO NIPPLE shown,
2nd the look on the babys face was pure love.
NOT SEXUAL.
3rd. For men and women who are dismayed by what other
people from around the world DO DAILY, get over your idiocy.
I guess the men and teens will have to go back to the NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC magazine or now even the Nat Geo tv show to see BOOBIES>
And they aren't sexual in their countries EITHER>
I hope this magazine does it again. Obviously the people NEED to see more breasts in their natural
FOOD giving way.
Do these same nuts get all weird if they see a dog or cat suckling their kittens/puppies?
It isn't sexual either.
Reply
8-06-2006 @ 10:58PM
Richard Bril said...People need to get over this hangup.
Reply
8-06-2006 @ 11:44PM
Caroline said...You know, Some people will stay in the dark ages forever. I have been all over the world and in some places, there are 1,000 naked breasts all over the beach. Yes, the breast has two uses, but the first is to provide nourishment for our young. As for the women who are afraid that their sons might see a breast---GET OVER IT! YOUR CHILD HAS PROBABLY AREADY MASTURBATED A THOUSAND TIMES. IT IS ONLY NATURAL TO DESIRE THE OPPOSITE SEX. tHE MORE YOU HIDE IT, THE MORE CURIOUS THE CHILD BECOMES.
Reply
8-07-2006 @ 2:26AM
mary martinez said...Years of garbage in the media have twisted and perverted minds in America to the point that people are insulted to see a baby receiving a meal.
I have news for you America-breasts are for feeding babies! They are not for men to slobber over or to make your clothes hang nice! Grow up,people!
That said,though the cover was lovely and very tastfuly done,it goes both ways-feeding baby is not a time for flashing the neighbors for a cheap thrill or playing mommy militant.A blanket drapped modestly over one shoulder lets baby eat the way God meant for baby to eat.
Reply
8-07-2006 @ 9:24AM
Elle said...We would not blink an eye if this "boob" was from a young aspiring actress from Hollywood. That is the norm. Why do we get so upset over something that is so natural? Just look at the babies face. He/She is beautiful!!!!!
Reply
8-07-2006 @ 10:17AM
Laura said...Breastfeeding is a normal part of life. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T THINK SO, GET OVER IT.
Can parents be good parents and explain to their children what breastfeeding is? No one should be uptight and not be able to talk openly about this with their children.
Reply
8-07-2006 @ 2:09PM
ana said...This is the problem with us – problem with the perverts, problem with the mentally sick people. We like to see Janet Jackson’s breasts; we like to see body of Jennifer Lopez under a tiny or loose outfit. What is the problem with this picture? Did those perverts, or the mentally sick people look into the picture with an honest and open mind? Did they look into the eyes of the baby? Did they feel that how innocent look the baby has? I do not think that they have the ability to understand. Because and that’s why they are pervert. And the moms, who are objecting the pictures; I have a doubt about them too. I know some of the mothers are unable to feed their babies for some reasons; but most of the moms, they do not want to feed their baby. Because they are afraid, they are afraid that they would be fat, if they do the breastfeeding to their babies. They are so cautious about their own figure, they do not consider the future of their babies. I think they are objecting too. So, for the perverts, please go to those sex shops, and do your own business over there, please do not come to a world where a baby gets his/her haven.
Reply
8-07-2006 @ 4:26PM
Tasia said...I want to say that I absolutely adore the cover of BabyTalk magazine. The photo is approprate and very beautiful.
I wonder why it's okay to show women prancing around with barely anything covering their breasts as long as its in a sexual manner, however, when you put a child up to the breast it becomes dirty. Doesn't make much sense to me!
Last I checked, breasts were meant to feed our children, not to use as "sales tools".
Reply