There is an interesting debate happening at the moment between a couple of the big name feminist mothers and it’s about breastfeeding, or rather the manner in which the breastfeeding ‘message’ is promoted to women. Is the breastfeeding ‘message’ heavy-handed? Yes. Is there a hurtful judgemental attitude towards mothers who bottle-feed? Yes.
But it’s more complicated than that, because is the breastfeeding ‘message’ also a political one? Yes. (And political campaigns are rarely all that nuanced). Is the shaming of breastfeeding mothers profoundly misogynistic? Yes. (And that makes the case for breastfeeding a feminist one, which also means that when done clumsily feminism can look like its taking sides). Is this whole debate a problem of individualism where we get side-tracked into blaming individual mothers for whichever ‘choice’ they happen to make – bottle-feeding or breastfeeding (too much/too publicly/too long) – instead of institutions for not allowing actual ‘choice’? Yes! and from Lauredhel’s still excellent post:
To mother-blame effectively, you’ve got to be all about the politics of individualism. To mother-blame effectively, you’ve got to convince yourself that women make decisions in a vacuum, that infant feeding decisions are motivated primarily by selfishness and women’s incomprehensible obsession with their own appearance, that the “convenience” of formula feeding is coveted by women in the same way that we trot off for “convenience” abortions. You can’t get to mother-blaming without embracing choice politics.
Despite the cultural and corporate influences on women, the vast majority of women still wish to breastfeed. So why are rates so low, if it’s not the fault of mothers themselves? Why is breastfeeding attrition so rapid and extreme?
You may as well as “How does patriarchy work?” You’re soaking in it. Women are offered stark options, forced to choose between a career and a social life or attached mothering. Women have no guarantee of access to paid maternity leave, so in the absence of extreme economic privilege, forgoing mother-infant separation means either poverty or dependence. Instead of living in a society where women work and play freely with a baby at their breast, workplaces are segregated and babies excluded, we are told that babies are anathema to fun, we are told that women have to CHOOSE. And no matter what we choose, it’s the wrong decision.
Then the male gaze kicks in. We’re saturated with the “yummy mummy” objectification of women. There are strong social forces compelling women to maintain the appearance of sexual availability even while their babies are neonates. Check out a celebrity mag: if a mother-celeb has any detectable bodily changes still visible at six weeks postpartum, New Idea is all over them. And breastfeeding in public predictably sparks flurries of outrage, as choosing to opt out of male-gaze-pandering is one of the worst crimes a woman in the Patriarchy can commit. And sustained breastfeeding? It requires a substantial commitment to bucking the patriarchy to get past the first tooth, the first words, the first steps. It’s not just funny looks and toddler milk ads; women are told that they are breastfeeding only “for their own selfish reasons” starting around nine months or so; that their milk has “turned to water” (complete rubbish); even outright told that that they are “perverts” for breastfeeding a talking baby. Breasts are so heavily sexualised that their nutritious function comes with a ticking alarm clock and a dose of sexual blame. What more effective way to condemn a mother than to be told she is a depraved sicko paedophile?
Last *baby* magazine I bought had, thoughtfully, emblazened ‘GUILT FREE BOTTLE FEEDING’ across the front, straight away implying IT IS BAD. Your blog has summed up why it annoyed me so!
Oh my Gawd, it’s like guilt free chocolate advertising, only worse.
I remember this from when my 8 year old was born. If he wasn’t breastfed he wasn’t getting the best start in life. If he wasn’t bottle fed I was denying his dad an opportunity to bond with him when baby had his bottle. It doesn’t matter what you choose, someone will tell you it is the wrong thing.
Thanks so much for this post, it puts into words some stuff that I have been working on and could not pin down!
Hope your move is going well!
[…] If you’ve noticed anything around the blogosphere about the current inflammation of the old bottle-feeders vs. breast-feeders debate <insert very sad sigh here>, here are two posts that sum up exactly how I feel about it. Firstly at Alternative Mama, and secondly at Blue Milk. […]
Brilliant! Thank you for posting this. I’ve shared on my weekly links post today http://wp.me/p1B5NK-iO, along with a similar one by Alternative Mama in the UK: http://www.alternative-mama.com/the-baby-friendly-woman-haters/
Love this post, totally 100% agree. There needs to be a massive paradigm shift before we see a world in which women are able to truly make a free choice with regards to feeding their babies.
I was about to write that since I’m in the process of weaning my last baby, I’m fast approaching the time when no one will care what I feed my kids. Then I remembered that- no, there is a lot of guilt and nonsense about the food we feed kids, too. The mother shaming never really ends, so in the end the only defense is to learn how to push it out of your mind when you recognize it in yourself.
I think both sides in this particular dust up are reacting to the judgement and insecurities they faced due to their decisions. The fact that strong, feminist women felt so much insecurity around feeding their babies is a sad indictment on our society.
One of those feministbreeder links talks about donor milk as an option… surely I’m not the only one who’d rather not use a stranger’s donated body fluid unless it’s medically required? Looking at pros and cons of formula and donated milk, I’d pick formula.
*medically required or there aren’t safe alternatives that work – I didn’t think of sperm donation.
For myself, and my potential future babies, I just can’t see using a donated body fluid when I know that babies on formula do just fine and are safe, and formula is widely available, is convenient and works.
Sorry, then you’re not basing your decision on science. Donated human milk is a far superior and safer substance than formula, and has been shown to save babies’ lives. I’m guessing you drink cow’s milk? So why is human milk, which is made specifically for humans and much safer, so gross? Donated milk is pasteurized just like the milk we buy in the grocery store, except human milk has immunological properties that no other substance on earth can touch.
The World Health Organization lists various forms of breastmilk as the first three options for infant feeding. They place formula a sad fourth. Formula carries risks. Human milk is a far safer option. Babies on formula do not do “just fine” when compared to their breastfed counterparts. There shouldn’t be any shame in this – it’s just a simple, undisputed, widely researched and published fact.
http://www.womenshealth.gov/breastfeeding/why-breastfeeding-is-important/
I have a hard time believing it’s possible to parent completely in line with what current science says. If someone suggested that it was possible for almost any other issue than breastfeeding there would be a good deal of – warranted, in my opinion- skepticism on that claim. But for breastfeeding it’s somehow ok to suggest that women make a decision solely based on the science.
In a utopia, breastfeeding would be best. But we don’t live in a utopia. There are all sorts of life situations that make breastfeeding not the best for any given woman. Incompatibility with work schedules, taking drugs where it’s contraindicated, and, in my mind at least, just plain not enjoying it are situations where the drawbacks of breastfeeding outweigh the benefits. Certainly we should work on a systemic level to lessen these drawbacks for women but even then there will still be women who decide it’s not for them. I think this gets at the point of this post: individual level attempts to effect systemic change are really ineffective.
The best breastfeeding advocacy has almost nothing to do with individual women. It’s lobbying for improved mat leave policies, seeking funding for doctors and nurses to improve training. Go ahead and sing the praises of breastfeeding to your friends and neighbors if that is your passion but let us also follow that up with coordinated, sustained attempts to improve policy as well.
Alien Tea: Totally agree.
TheFeministBreeder: Please substantiate your bombastic claims with scientific evidence. NO scientific study done has ever proved that breast milk CAUSES the purported health benefits. Those that came close – sibling studies and PROBIT – found negligible differences between both feeding methods. Please understand elementary concepts like correlation vs. causation before you reply with your pharisaical attitude. Or you’ll wind up embarrassing yourself like you’ve already had.
I donated breastmilk and the hospital used it to feed babies and an immuno-suppressed adult. It costs them 150 pounds per litre to buy it so the donations save them a lot of money. I am not sure why you think it is so gross? Why is cow’s milk less gross? And why the comparison with sperm!?
Not gross, just not something I’d choose… I guess I’m more worried about what an expressing woman does with her time that could go into the milk than I am about what a cow does… perhaps that decision is based on my gut more than science, but isn’t it my choice to make? Why should anyone else get a say or judge me for that?
Hmm, must be why the formula fed babies all drop dead of starvation and disease. Oh wait, they don’t.
and yet no one suggested this was the case so… It is clear that breast milk is better nutritionally in the same way that organic pears are better than two minute noodles. These facts inform my choices, it’s good to make an informed choice. Stating that donor milk is a healthy choice doesn’t make formula poison. You are creating a false dilemma.
I’d say that breast milk is better nutritionally in the same way that organic pears are better than pears grown with pesticides. There is a very small difference on the level of the individual pear and the individual person eating it, and that difference may well be too small to measure (and will be greater for people with fewer resources and without clean water to wash fruit before eating). There is a significant difference in a population, when the numbers are larger, and the agricultural practices required to grow pears with pesticides are bad for the ecosystem as a whole.
So the individual choice that I make to buy organic pears (when I can get them) doesn’t really make a huge difference in my health, but it helps support a system that is more sustainable. OTOH, if I can’t get organic pears, I am still better off eating non-organic pears than, say, two-minute noodles.
Fair enuff Jay :) Compare apples with apples and pears with pears.
However my point was less about to what extent human breast milk was superior to formula (I agree that in some circumstances it would be negligible), but rather that saying “must be why the formula babies died” is a logical fallacy. I read TheFeministBreeders post and nowhere did she say formula will make babies drop dead of starvation. The conflation with X is good (or better) being *really* saying Y is bad is one that should be challenged.
Breast is best doesn’t say formula is bad, simply that it is not as good on a scale of goodness. It’s not. This is not a judgement of individuals specific choices, clearly there are all sorts of circumstances that come into play when making decisions about what to feed your kids besides “what is the best thing humanly possible” it’s just that having correct information is a good place to be making those decisions from. Clearly.
My personal story: breastfed first baby with no problems at all, got some bad advice about formula being easier and better for my second, found out the hard way it’s not. No, I don’t feel guilty about formula feeding my second, but I do feel sad that I got such crappy advice and made a decision based on that. There was no real reason for me to wean. Also, I occasionally feed my kids two minute noodles instead of organic pears.
Ok – but it makes me fucking angry that I’m being told what to do and being shamed for my choices before I even HAVE a kid…
It’s not *science* you don’t really *care* about your baby, you should spend $200 dollars a litre on something that grosses you out if you *really* wanted the best for your baby.
Eff that noise.
In a conversation which really needs a global perspective and a look at the privileges concerned, can I ask that you please don’t fling about the “Babies aren’t starving and dying!” thing as though it’s a bit of a light-hearted joke? Many, many, many babies are starving and dying from infectious disease because of a combination of societal pressures to not breastfeed. And it’s really not good fodder for a throwaway line.
I thought you said it didn’t gross you out!? I think you are the one making this conversation into one that is aggressive and judgment, tbh. It is almost like you are spoiling for a fight.
In my experience the most aggressive judgment I have had while being a mother was from a woman who was anti-breastfeeding. She confronted me during a group dinner at a restaurant about how breastfeeding in public was disgusting and how she was bottle fed and is healthy and therefore not sure why I felt the need to breastfeed. Let’s get rid of all judgment and not pin one side as being more judgmental than the other.
Ugh, jen, that’s pretty unpleasant. I got called a “pervert” to my face just for _wanting_ to breastfeed. Sigh.
Yeah, it was awful and the whole table was stunned. Fortunately I wasn’t actually breastfeeding at the time (I was still pregnant) but I happened to mention in passing that I didn’t have a problem with breastfeeding in public. And she got so aggressive – big rant about how many meals of hers had been spoilt by her friends breastfeeding in front of her. I was so shocked I couldn’t respond and it really spoilt the evening. Once my baby was born I ended up avoiding her because I felt so judged. It is funny, the people I expected to be the most difficult to breastfeed in front of (eg: the train conductor who was collecting my ticket!), ended up being great. And when I thought someone was judging me they turned out not to be. Once there was a woman who was just staring at me so intensely in a restaurant that I was sure she was judging me. She ended up coming over and congratulating me on breastfeeding in public. Totally the opposite of what I expected! Anyway, I learnt from my experience that you just can’t tell what is going on in people’s heads and so I wouldn’t presume that everyone is judging you just because you make a particular choice. It is often a reflection of your own insecurity that the person concerned.
As someone who has worked with mothers and families for the last 8 years, I have seen a *lot* more damage done to women from the shame of not breastfeeding than I have seen damage done to babies from formula. I have seen mothers hating themselves over it, and resenting their babies over it. I have seen mothers in despair.
Plus a lot of the research on breastmilk vs formula shows correlations – *not* cause. Yes, breasmilk is preferable, health-wise. No, formula is not something women should be made to feel like failures over, or like they’re hurting their babies with. It’s a valuable option for many women, and should be treated as such.
Have a problem with the formula companies? Attack them then, not women’s choices
That was me. When my milk ran out for my second child at around the three-month mark, I was devastated. I hadn’t known that donor milk was an option, but honestly, I don’t think it would have mattered to me; it was more that I was unable to provide my own child with the nutrition he needed that broke me. It may seem like “just facts” to some, but hearing over and over again the message that “breast is best” and being made to feel like a failure of a parent for using formula … feminists, we can do better.
I do wish women in your situation were able to get the support in the form of correct advice on how to rebuild your milk supply. It can be done, in most cases. I have done it. Sadly, without knowing what to do, many women wean in despair.
Even for mothers whose supply cannot get to the full level it needs to be, can also continue breastfeeding with some formula for supplement. But too often, mothers are made to feel like it is all or nothing, and do not realise that using a bit of formula from time to time is an option. If it is used in the correct way, it will not erode your own supply further, but again, all too often, mothers do not know the way to supplement without loss of their own supply.
Unfortunately, too, more women than you would think have an oversupply in the early days, and when it drops to a normal level, some mothers have believed that their supply has dried up.
I agree with you – but the formula companies aren’t playing fair, either. It’s nearly impossible to counter the “formula is just as good” “there are no negatives to formula” (or worse, since “formula is just fine” then “breastfeeding is a luxury for rich AP moms” or “only ignorant immigrant moms breastfeed” messages without the science saying breastfeeding is better for babies. God knows it’s not enough to say parents just should get to choose what they think is best – a boss isn’t going to give you a nice nursing room just on a whim, the daycare isn’t going to change their shelf-stable-formula-only policy just because you have a feeling about it – it takes the “health of the baby” science.
The problem in the US is that we have so few protections at our jobs, and so few options in child care, and the protections that we do have are nearly 100% dependent on “workplace culture” – which means you have to work the court of public opinion as much as the legal side. We need a message that doesn’t make formula feeding parents defensive, so they step up and protect the rights of breastfeeders – but have we found ANY aspect of parenting that doesn’t induce that defensiveness? It took formula companies close to 50 years to convince parents formula was a good idea, and they have bigger advertising budgets than breastmilk producers.
Completely agree. Well said.
Oh brilliant love your post. Have been feeling a lot of similar feelings towards the natural birth debate. I feel like a total failure when I read yet another post about how I am a drug addict for having an epidural. Or that I am selfish or (my favourite) less womanly because of it.
I wasn’t going to get drawn into debating the science on breastfeeding. I have a PhD in biochemistry, and I exclusively breastfed two kids- I’m just now weaning my youngest, at the age of two. I’ve done that because I LIKE breastfeeding, but I got interested in the breastfeeding science and read a bit of it at one point.
Anyway. I think @The Feminist Breeder is overstating the science a bit. For instance- pasteurization almost certainly destroys the cellular immunological properties (natural killer cells) in breastmilk. And unless the donor is living quite close to the baby, chances are the antibodies in the milk (assuming they survive pasteurization in an active form, which I don’t know that they would) don’t match what the baby is getting exposed to.
Which isn’t to say that I don’t think donor milk is a good idea. I do. I donated some of mine. I think a lot of the push back on donor milk is squeamishness we’ve picked up via the marketing that convinced so many people that formula was better. After all, wet nurses used to be very common.
BUT… @alien tea: I think you understate the science. The research into the benefits of breastfeeding goes beyond mere correlation. There are quite plausible mechanisms proposed for some benefits, and research that is starting to establish those mechanisms.
Which is not to say that I think families that use formula should be shamed. I absolutely do not. Even if every single theory about the benefits of breastmilk is proved to be 100% true, an individual mother may find that formula is better for her (breastfeeding is harder for her than some and she’s losing her sanity, she needs to go back to work and can’t produce enough milk via pumping, etc).
Finally, @Rosa, I agree with your points. But I have to say: all women in the US who work at a company with more than 50 employees are now guaranteed access to a lactation room and time to use it, thanks to the health care reform law. That is huge. We’ve had that in California for quite a while, and I think it really helps. I was able to pump for both kids, with no trouble on the job at all. Of course, I am in a profession where it was unlikely I’d have any trouble. But still- knowing that law was there gave me confidence to make sure I got what I needed to make it successful.
The change in the law is huge – but actually getting it applied in your individual workplace can still be really difficult. If nobody else takes the federally-mandated breaks for hourly workers, then new employees usually don’t – it’s even worse for “special” rights like paternity leave (how many men really take it?), minority religious observances, and lactation breaks.
I agree again.
I agree. And that’s why we need women in management positions.
Last week, I saw the plans for a building my company is renovating. There was no lactation room, despite it being required by law. I pointed that out. There is one now.
Lots of older women I’ve run into in management, though, have the attitude “well i suffered for this, why shouldn’t you?” or, worse “You just can’t have kids if you want to be successful, then.” What we need is more people who will assert their right to have a life outside of work – whether it’s having kids, taking care of elderly family members, going to school, or just having friends and hobbies outside of the job. Management is always going to be putting the pressure from the work side, we have to pressure back. We all collude in working ourselves half to death.
Oh, I didn’t mean to imply that breastfeeding science is bunk, at all… just that I’m not willing to put so much value on it to the detriment of families that chose formula feeding, or have to formula feed.
There are plenty of people walking around who are perfectly happy and healthy who were formula fed. That doesn’t mean that breast isn’t nutritionally ideal… it makes sense that it is… but formula isn’t a bad or “unscientific” choice.
Cloud: The immunological properties of human milk extend beyond cells and antibodies – there are other substances (lactoferrin being the most well-known one that formula companies are now bandwagoning on) that offer protection from infectious disease which are retained at various levels despite pasteurisation. Having said that, a fair whack of antibodies make it through the process, also – 72% of sIgA is retained after pasteurisation at 62.5 degrees C for 30 minutes, and processes to retain maximal activity of beneficial substances are still being improved.
Also, immunology’s way more complicated again than that. Some combination of foreign protein exposure and altered mucosal immunity increases the risk of immunological diseases like Type I diabetes in formula fed children. The risks of NEC from formula feeding are also well-described. And new research into the immunological properties of oligosaccharides and growth factors are intriguing.
Then there are the direct infectious risks of powdered formula, most notably meningitis from Enterobactor sakazakii, which has led to a WHO warning to never feed powdered formula to neonates – something that hospitals and health workers all over the world are roundly ignoring.
Live fresh mother’s milk is the best infant food, as the WHO and almost everyone else notes, either enthusiastically or begrudgingly; but that pasteurised donor milk is third best, above formula at fourth, isn’t exactly sceintifically contested; just socially.
See, this is the debate I didn’t want to get drawn into.
It is interesting to know that some of the antibodies make it through pasteurization. I’ve always sort of wondered about their stability, even in expressed milk that is not pasteurized. But the natural killer cells are gone, right? I mean, killing cells is sort of what pasteurization is supposed to do. And the natural killer cells are one of the things that help protect the baby from infections that the woman making the milk hasn’t been exposed to yet. (Incidentally, i think they are also why breastmilk clears up pink eye so quickly.)
I’m not arguing that donor milk isn’t great. As I said, I myself donated. I don’t enjoy pumping so much that I would have done that if I didn’t see the benefit. I’m just saying that A LOT of subtle things get glossed over when breastfeeding proponents or formula feeding activists discuss the science and I think that this helps to create the “us vs. them” environment that does no one any good.
Personally, I think the science is clear that breast milk is preferable, but I don’t think the science supports the level of concern about formula use that I see in so many of these discussions. The relative risk of- for instance- meningitis, or even just the risk of getting more ear infections, is rarely discussed.
So I can definitely see how a mother who is having trouble breastfeeding would get a message that stopping would be downright dangerous for her baby and feel a lot of guilt about it, possibly even ending up in depression, which has also been shown to be less than ideal for the baby. Or, perhaps she’ll decide to argue back and defend herself against the implication that she is a bad mother for formula feeding. And another round of “mommy wars” gets underway, distracting us from fighting against the other aspects of our patriarchal society that make life hard for mothers.
Furthermore, trying to argue that formula is “dangerous” just fails the sniff test for a lot of people, who may themselves have been formula fed babies. So I think it actually undermines the cause of trying to increase breastfeeding levels.
And I REALLY don’t see a problem with formula companies looking at the research and trying to make their products the best replacements that they can be, since as even the most vehement lactivist will acknowledge, sometimes there is no other choice. Don’t those babies deserve the best substitute they can get?
Also agree with this. I partly formula fed from 9 months (and then completely stopped breastfeeding at 14 months) and felt terribly guilty about it til I realised that it made no discernible difference to my daughter’s health. I felt completely cheated by all those hours I spent expressing milk in the toilets (yes, the toilets) at my workplace. It has now got me thinking that I might introduce formula earlier with the next one.
For some reason I don’t see a “reply” button on Y’s response to me…so I’m down here.
Yes, accurate information is important, but information isn’t value-neutral, and it’s far from the only determinant of behavior. It may not even be the most important determinant. The rate of breastfeeding initiation in the US (which is around 80%) suggests that women have information. More information won’t help – and could hurt, if it’s delivered in a shaming and scolding manner.
What helps is support, on the individual and systemic levels. I agree that formula companies should not be allowed to give samples away to hospitals and to new parents – just as I believe that drug companies shouldn’t be allowed to, either (and they do. Oh, do they). But that’s not enough, either. It’s not enough to chant “breast is best” at individual women. We have to work to change the social context.
Thanks Jay :) I think we agree more than we disagree on this topic.
Perhaps you are reading things into my statements that aren’t there. I have not suggested that information is the only determinant of behaviour nor have I suggested chanting ‘breast is best’ at individual women. It seems to me that you are creating a bit of a strawman here to argue against.
Please, read what I was responding to, specifically Alientea perpetuating the idea that saying breast is best is implying formula is bad. This is a logically incoherent argument and one that should be challenged.
Your other points are very good and I agree with you for the most part, but I’m not sure why you are directing them to me specifically.
Actually, I was responding defensively after having been told that my choices were unscientific (and therefore WRONG) and bad for my baby (which doesn’t even exist yet)…
Awesome that the shame and guilt can get started well before I even have a kid… makes me so glad to be a uterus bearing woman.
To put it another way, If I had asthma and allergies and a doctor said “you can be cured if you have a blood transfusion with donor blood”, I would probably say no thanks – I’d rather handle it in other ways – using donor blood is pretty safe but not without risk plus there’s a personal squick factor there. I would totally respect someone else’s decision to choose the transfusion… and of course there would probably be other factors involved too.
On the other hand, if I was in a life or death situation, I wouldn’t hesitate.
I would probably feel similarly with a baby… if it’s life threatening (say, they’re premature and ill), then I’d love the chance to have donor breast milk, if it would give the baby better chances. A perfectly healthy baby… I’d probably just go with formula and do my best in other ways to protect hir immune system and health and nutrition… the risks of using someone else’s body fluid (even if they are small) as well as the squick factor, not to mention exorbitant cost and lack of availability, make donor milk a less than attractive option.
I certainly hope I *can* breastfeed, but I don’t want “science” shoved down my throat if I’m unable to or end up hating it or it doesn’t end up being the best choice for me for any reason. Perhaps I’ll have an awesome supply and will be able to donate, and in doing so I’ll be helping to expand the options available to other parents… that would be cool.
Anyway, I feel crappy about having typed this all out to defend myself when I feel like I shouldn’t have to defend myself, but here it is anyway. Maybe it’ll help someone else who feels shamed or guilty for their choices or feelings.
You don’t have to defend yourself. Having read all your posts, I have found yours to be the most aggressive! And contradictory – you say you don’t find donated breastmilk gross and then go on to say that you do a bit later. I am not sure that people are really judging you personally – more expressing how they see things. Yet, you seem to give back as good as you perceive you are being given! I don’t have an especially strong view either way in the debate but your building of strawmen and attacking things thing unnecessarily has got my back up against your position.
Tbh, I think you need to take a step back and address these issues if and when they actually affect your daily life. Many things that I worried about while I was pregnant never actually eventuated. I have found much less judgment than I anticipated.
Thanks for the tone argument. I think I explained why I don’t find it gross in general, do find it gross for me in “normal” situations.
Again, really great tone argument here.
I’ve come to believe that the more these conversations are framed as “breastfeeders VS. formula-feeders,” or even “breasfeeding VS. formula-feeding,” the more they play into the hands of the systems and institutions that benefit from parents (and mothers in particular) fighting with one another instead of joining together to undermine the very systems and institutions that make their lives difficult. Shitty maternity leave, lack of (good) lactation support (including a lack of professional empathy for parents who make an informed choice to formula-feed), predatory advertising, a lack of cultural understanding about baby-feeding, etc.–these all make life difficult for nursing moms AND formula-feeding moms alike. And better to fight these forces than each other, I think.
I’ve also come to believe that it’s best to discuss the benefits of breastfeeding from a population/public health standpoint than from an individual standpoint. This is precisely where breastfeeding’s benefits are seen–namely, when examining trends in populations. (To me, this helps to explain why there ARE individual cases where a formula-fed baby is just as healthy or even healthier than an individual breastfed peer.)
What’s more, no person should be shamed for her individual baby-feeding choices, choices that come from her own radically unique circumstances. Nonetheless, the data demonstrating the benefits of breastfeeding do seem to support promoting breastfeeding in one way or another. And (to sound like a broken record) I think this is best done not by shaming women but by undermining the forces and factors that make it difficult for mothers to meet whatever breastfeeding goals they might have.
This is an awesome reply. I agree- lets stop fighting each other and start fighting to fix the system!
We can do that in big ways, by working to get better maternity leave policies, fighting to make sure women have the right to breastfeed in public, etc.
But we can also do that in small ways, by refusing to judge another woman’s choice about how to feed her baby, by speaking up to support lactation rooms, etc., even when we don’t need them ourselves, and offering non-judgmental advice about how to make it through the rough spots in breastfeeding if another women needs it.
Yes. This. Exactly this.
[…] Breastfeeding or bottle-feeding, this sucks […]
[…] Blue Milk, Lauredhel at Hoyden About Town takes on breastfeeding and feminism. From the post (an old one; I […]
[…] blue milk, on the ways the message of breastfeeding is conveyed. I love that it particularly pins down the difficulties I find in the notion of […]
[…] individual women for their choices about feeding their babies? Inexcusable. And mothers who bottle-feed should never be the targets of judgementalism and crusading. […]
[…] Blue Milk, “Breastfeeding or Bottle-Feeding, This Sucks” and “A Word about Breastfeeding […]
I chose to formula feed for a variety of reasons that all added up to my health and what was best for our individual family…there are some issues with breastfeeding studies because often those who are breastfeeding, and certainly six months plus down the road often have the luxury of choosing to do so. They may be stay at home moms because their husband’s income is sufficient to do so, they may have more education and a career that affords them a private office to pump in, etc. The studies showing breastfed babies doing better in school, etc., has a lot to do with the education and income of the family. Those parents can provide more help with homework, are more likely to have books in the home, afford music lessons, tutoring, better schools, etc. That said, breastfeeding is natural and in an ideal world the best choice. But there are so many other factors (I’m American) like the health of the mother, and not just mental health and those medications but rather what about mothers on crazy meds because they are a transplant patient? What is the quality of breast milk from an obese person whose only green food is green m&ms? Is her breast milk as good as in shape non drugged organic mommy? Not only may that woman work a job that discourages breastfeeding (fast food restaurant cooker?) but before she was even pregnant the failure of society to ensure her own nutrition and health is a big part of the further down the line problem of whether or not she is breastfeeding. And of course the lack of paid maternity leave, what insurance doesn’t cover, etc., are enormous challenges women who breastfeed face. And sometimes a formula kid is a random one who slides through the stereotypes ;). That would be my formula fed baby, born to parents in their 30s with advanced degrees and plenty of income for the mom to stay at home. That is me. I’m also 38, white, come from an upper middle class home, and I’m sure what angers the LLL about my failure to breastfeed I was even born in Berkeley, CA! Probably my kid will manage to compete with his peers. I have never eaten anything but whole/natural/organic foods :). My breast milk would have been fatal due to medication or I could have put my own health at risk. Regardless kids like mine throw off the breastfeeding studies that do not take socioeconomic factors into consideration. Since this is a feminist blog I want to note that I am a stay at home mom as well as a work at home mom because my husband supports my desire to be an artist and thinks it is as important as his work and is willing and happy to sacrifice any additional income I might have made with our child in daycare (none, I was a teacher, it would actually cost me money to work but he would support that too), point being on the feminist side that I am supported fully by my husband to do what is most important to me (in terms of work) and he sees it as having equal value to his work. It’s not a much looked at point, women who are at home trying to build a career and balancing that with being a stay at home mom. And it’s still a situation of comparative luxury. We have someone who comes to clean, the baby goes to child care a few afternoons a week, and so on. But I hope my husband’s willingness to sacrifice, etc., and to do what he can to help me succeed in my work/dreams, is viewed as a triumph for feminism as well.