WTF?

[muninnhuginn]

So I wanders off this afternoon to deal with things parental and come back to find my screen full of beautiful pictures of contented babies doing what comes naturally. Wow.

And the reason? Double wow.

And nope, I cannot see how there is anything obscene about images of breastfeeding... at all. Nipples 'n' all. But I can't find one of me and Looby Loo "at it" so the new icon's courtesy of cangetmad to whom many thanks. It's a gorgeous image.

I wasn't breastfed. I suspect I may have had better health if I had been and I think it was a matter of my mother's health post delivery that meant she didn't. My younger brother was. I did breastfeed. For just over twelve months. It was bliss. I'm certain it helped support Looby Loo's health and growth. It changed my attitude to my body and my internal view of myself--entirely for the better. It's not something to be hidden from view--except if an individual woman is happier to be private whilst feeding her child: her baby, her breast, her choice--well not unless we ban all images of anyone at all eating in public.

Comments

Re: 1/2

[yonmei.livejournal.com]

I was talking to a friend of mine who's several months pregnant last night, who told me that a number of other mothers she knows have had people come up to them while breastfeeding in public and tell them to their faces that they think it's disgusting. Does that sound like confirmation that I'm a lone, abnormal phobic to you?

No: it sounds like you have the kind of social support that - for example - homophobes get. I have had people come up to me in public and tell me to my face that they think my sexual orientation is disgusting. They're confident that their phobia about queerness is justifiable and righteous, and that the appropriate solution to their phobia is not for them to suppress it politely but for me to go into the closet. I disagree, though evidently you would feel differently.

Re: 1/2

[ex-lark-asc.livejournal.com]

Actually, my friend is a very bright woman who completely disagreed with me.

For context, I'm also bisexual.

You're really not interested in accepting that my point of view might in any way have value, are you?

Re: 1/2

[yonmei.livejournal.com]

For context, I'm also bisexual.

And yet you're in favour of being closety around homophobes because they'll get offended and social support is on their side? You think it's up to LGB people to avoid offending homophobes? Or does this avoidance strategy you advocate only apply to breastfeeding mothers?

You're really not interested in accepting that my point of view might in any way have value, are you?

Since your POV appears to be that other people should strive not to offend you, but that you have a right to offend anyone... well. No, can't say I do think that POV has any value.

Re: 1/2

[ex-lark-asc.livejournal.com]

And yet you're in favour of being closety around homophobes because they'll get offended and social support is on their side? You think it's up to LGB people to avoid offending homophobes?

I think you're comparing apples and oranges again. In terms of social norms versus aberrant phobias, homophobia is moving more and more clearly now into the phobia camp for most of society. It's no longer legally sanctioned, for example. Breastfeeding, equally obviously, isn't by any means so clear-cut. You think it should be entirely acceptable; I think that whether or not it should be acceptable is immaterial, because it self-evidently isn't and for the foreseeable future is never going to be. And in that atmosphere of deeply grey areas, I think it's by far wisest to put the politics on the back burner and do what you can to avoid constant stress and confrontation. Particularly if you've got a baby's wellbeing to think about.

you have a right to offend anyone

No, I don't have a right to offend. I do, however, have a right to express my opinions without being insulted, accused of deviance and assumed to be a bigot.

Re: 1/2

[yonmei.livejournal.com]

No, I don't have a right to offend. I do, however, have a right to express my opinions without being insulted, accused of deviance and assumed to be a bigot.

Heh. Sure, you have the right to express your opinions. But, to quote your own advice back to you, "in that atmosphere of deeply grey areas, I think it's by far wisest to put the politics on the back burner and do what you can to avoid constant stress and confrontation." In short, if you feel that the important thing is to avoid constant stress and confrontation, you shouldn't go around expressing your opinions.

But if you do, and you know your opinions are broadly offensive, you shouldn't then complain that you have been identified as the kind of person your expressed opinions suggest that you are - phobic about breastfeeding, unwilling to be adult about your phobia and manage it courteously without disrupting others, and with a sense of entitlement so high it's breathtaking.

Re: 1/2

[ex-lark-asc.livejournal.com]

the kind of person your expressed opinions suggest that you are

I wouldn't make assumptions like that, if I were you. I fool a *lot* of people online, and I've already found holes in your assumptions about me once today.

I'm also fascinated by the way that every time it becomes clear that in terms of facts you can't argue me down, you come up with some social sin or other I'm committing. Thus far, we've had denial, which is very amusing since I happen to be well aware that denial is the last problem I have; we've had bigotry, the eternal catch-all; and now, since you have nothing more concrete to go on than the fact I won't back down and stop disagreeing, you decide I have a "sense of entitlement". As far as I can tell, that's simply feminist jargon for "confidence in opinions I don't agree with".

But there again I don't think this is about my opinions at all, I think it's about the fact I don't have the grace to feel hunted and oppressed. I can't possibly be right to be happy with the status quo because it's so hideously unjust: yet you haven't been able to force me to see my terrible insensitivity and acknowledge the error of my ways. I must be driving you nuts.

However, it strikes me that nobody else has jumped into this conversation to fight your side against me. If my opinions really were "broadly offensive", experience tells me they would have done exactly that: this is the internet, after all. The fact that they haven't makes it look rather as though it's you personally, rather than the whole world, who is offended.

To me, along with the right to freedom of expression comes the responsibility of dealing with the fact you won't always like other people's opinions or the way they express them. The only thing I'm "entitled" to is a fair hearing - but that's precisely what you're either unable or unwilling to give me. For a whole constellation of reasons I'm damned if I'll lie about the fact I find your opinions distasteful, but I'm more than happy to debate them anyway; you, as far as I can tell, will neither answer my arguments rationally nor back up your own with anything other than political rhetoric and personal insults. Now charitably I could interpret this as a simple communication problem, but I'm much more inclined to think that you're one of those people who just doesn't deal well with my forthright manner; you don't seem to have a great deal of ability to separate the content from the form. And quite honestly, while I'm well aware that arguing with me is a challenge and I don't expect everyone to cope (you're doing pretty well, by the way), it's also true that if you can't debate sensibly with people unless they're being gentle with you, you're not likely to get very far in proselytising a cause. I just don't think the world is ever going to be a lovely safe playground in which nobody ever has to cope with hard stuff, so I don't see any reason to laboriously make myself unthreatening just because some people find it a chore dealing with me as I am. Everyone's got to learn to cope with the rough stuff somehow, and some of them will learn a little by tangling with me; that, thanks to the marvellous sense of humour of the Fates, appears to be my gift in life.

Re: 1/2

[muninnhuginn]

However, it strikes me that nobody else has jumped into this conversation

Nah, watching's more fun ;-)

Nope, actually I'm a slow reader and had a pile of stuff to get through without distractions.

Re: 1/2

[ex-lark-asc.livejournal.com]

Hm. So as opposed to providing anything remotely resembling an interesting counterpoint in an debate which might if I'm lucky prove educational to the person I'm arguing with even if they do wind up loathing me for being too bloody clever by half, I'm just the LJ equivalent of Big Brother.

*sigh* I'll go back to my novel outlines. I've said everything I want to say anyway.

The thing that interests me is that before this conversation started, I had no problem with that userpic of yours at all. Now, I can't stand the sight of it; I've had to take your journal off my default view.

Re: 1/2

[muninnhuginn]

I'm just the LJ equivalent of Big Brother

Don't put yourself down: you're far more intelligent :-)

Since the argument's happening in my space, I think I can choose to participate or just watch on as I please.

I've had to take your journal off my default view.

Argh! Banished to the darkest reaches! (The sun's just come out: always brings me out in flippancy.)

Re: 1/2

[yonmei.livejournal.com]

I fool a *lot* of people online, and I've already found holes in your assumptions about me once today.

So, all the offensive comments you've been making about how awful it is to see women breastfeeding and how it's their responsibility to go into the closet so that people like you won't be offended... all of that is just you fooling people online?

Sorry I wasted time talking to you, then: people who strike appalling attitudes for the sake of causing dissent just for the sake of "fooling people online" just annoy me.

Re: 1/2

[ex-lark-asc.livejournal.com]

people who strike appalling attitudes for the sake of causing dissent just for the sake of "fooling people online" just annoy me

No, I'm not a troll. I'm not playing devil's advocate: I'm arguing for what I believe. And insofar as that constitutes deliberately making comments which offend you personally, then yes, I am doing it: because I happen to be in an excellent position to present you with something you obviously haven't considered before, namely the fact that there are people out there who disagree with you completely and are also rational, well-adjusted, intelligent adults as opposed to bigoted morons. The fact that it's winding you up - well, I can't deny I find that funny, but not out of sadism: it demonstrates that you really can't cope with the existence of well-thought-out opinions that oppose yours, and the humour lies in the fact that in spite of that you also appear to be wanting to go about persuading other people you're right. You just can't do that simply by informing them they're wrong; if you want to get people who totally disagree with you to take up your beliefs, first you have to be able to stretch your mind round their beliefs enough to find a pathway between the two.

And that really is the last I'm saying in this argument: there are other things I should be doing.

Re: 1/2

[yonmei.livejournal.com]

No, I'm not a troll. I'm not playing devil's advocate: I'm arguing for
what I believe.

And you believe that people shouldn't be allowed to offend your sensibilities by breastfeeding where you can see them because you have a phobia about it.

Further, you believe you should be allowed to be as offensive as you like in defense of that belief.

And finally, you get very defensive and twitchy and pissy when you are offended.

It all adds up to a really whopping, toddler-sized sense of entitlement. Suggest you lose it.