(@): Angelina on cover of W, BF'ing

MarquisDoll · October 2008

caden:
is_it_over_yet?:
caden:
is_it_over_yet?:

caden:
But to me it's an intimate thing and I don't think it should be publicized like merchandise on the cover of a magazine.

I understand and respect your opinion. I feel the same way personally for myself and always removed myself to private areas when nursing my children. However, I see nothing wrong with nursing being as public as anyone else eating a meal.

I applaud this ordinarily ridiculous magazine's willingness to put this photo on the cover.

I would agree if we all got our food from other women's tits.

And some people use forks, others drink directly out of the carton, others use chopsticks, and still others put the bowl to their mouth and slurp. What does the source matter?

Personally, I'd rather watch a baby nurse than watch someone shovel food into their lascivious vacuum cleaner of a mouth, chew with their mouth open, belch, wipe their mouth with the back of their hand, and go back for more.

It's breastfeeding. How could the source not matter? Babies don't drink from their mother's exposed thumbs. Breasts are something we cover up for public decency. I'm not saying breastfeeding is unnatural or disgusting. Just that a public breast makes me uncomfortable and I don't think it's something that needs to be displayed on magazine covers like a purse or a designer dress. To me, the act of breastfeeding is private and should be kept that way. Of course people who eat like farm animals are disgusting. I wouldn't want to sit across the table from that either. I don't see people putting that on the cover of fashion magazines.

It's not odd for W to have photo spreads where the models are completely nude or only covered by sheer. Some readers complain, some readers love it. From what I understand, it's not all that strange to see nipples in fashion shows under just one sheer layer.

Basically, to put it in context, W treats breasts in photographs like you might see in sculptures or a renaissance painting.

It is a fashion magazine, but it's not Vogue or Cosmo. It focuses on very high end, which is the level of fashion which considered art. It treats it as art. It does take itself too seriously, but you know how when you get to opposite extremes of a topic they start to look similar? Well, I think that's what's happening here. W doesn't show breasts b/c it's sooo tacky; it does it because it's the opposite.

But then you could easily argue that just as the average person passing a newsstand won't appreciate Mikhail Baryshnikov performing Albrecht in Giselle, they won't understand a famous woman breastfeeding on a magazine cover and will instead just think 'boobies!!'

In a similar vein, I totally appreciate you calling 'bullshit' on this as art as I so often do with modern art, performance art, etc. Just wanted to give context in case you weren't familiar.

LittleMissWifey · October 2008

MarquisDoll:
caden:
is_it_over_yet?:
caden:
is_it_over_yet?:

caden:
But to me it's an intimate thing and I don't think it should be publicized like merchandise on the cover of a magazine.

I understand and respect your opinion. I feel the same way personally for myself and always removed myself to private areas when nursing my children. However, I see nothing wrong with nursing being as public as anyone else eating a meal.

I applaud this ordinarily ridiculous magazine's willingness to put this photo on the cover.

I would agree if we all got our food from other women's tits.

And some people use forks, others drink directly out of the carton, others use chopsticks, and still others put the bowl to their mouth and slurp. What does the source matter?

Personally, I'd rather watch a baby nurse than watch someone shovel food into their lascivious vacuum cleaner of a mouth, chew with their mouth open, belch, wipe their mouth with the back of their hand, and go back for more.

It's breastfeeding. How could the source not matter? Babies don't drink from their mother's exposed thumbs. Breasts are something we cover up for public decency. I'm not saying breastfeeding is unnatural or disgusting. Just that a public breast makes me uncomfortable and I don't think it's something that needs to be displayed on magazine covers like a purse or a designer dress. To me, the act of breastfeeding is private and should be kept that way. Of course people who eat like farm animals are disgusting. I wouldn't want to sit across the table from that either. I don't see people putting that on the cover of fashion magazines.

It's not odd for W to have photo spreads where the models are completely nude or only covered by sheer. Some readers complain, some readers love it. From what I understand, it's not all that strange to see nipples in fashion shows under just one sheer layer.

Basically, to put it in context, W treats breasts in photographs like you might see in sculptures or a renaissance painting.

It is a fashion magazine, but it's not Vogue or Cosmo. It focuses on very high end, which is the level of fashion which considered art. It treats it as art. It does take itself too seriously, but you know how when you get to opposite extremes of a topic they start to look similar? Well, I think that's what's happening here. W doesn't show breasts b/c it's sooo tacky; it does it because it's the opposite.

But then you could easily argue that just as the average person passing a newsstand won't appreciate Mikhail Baryshnikov performing Albrecht in Giselle, they won't understand a famous woman breastfeeding on a magazine cover and will instead just think 'boobies!!'

In a similar vein, I totally appreciate you calling 'bullshit' on this as art as I so often do with modern art, performance art, etc. Just wanted to give context in case you weren't familiar.

MD just hit the nail on the head why I don't like this picture. It's a fashion picture first! Breastfeeding is fashionable! It's sexy! Nevermind the baby...I would like it better if it were on a parenting mag. I think W is sexualizing the act of BFing.

caden · October 2008

mominatrix:
...but that's the whole point.
Breasts have been sexualized, but they aren't genitals - they aren't sexual... breastfeeding is the reason why they exist.
Having BF'ed DD for 18 months I can say this: it's no more a "private" act than anything else involving a baby. Especially when she was younger - when she was hungry, that was it, it's time to feed her. Public. Private. Soft light and a rocker, or in the middle of a retail environment or restaurant. She didn't care... and neither did I.
Sure, a lot of bonding occurs at the breast... but it's also the case that (especially in the first few months) breastfeeding is simply a HUGE portion of your time (moreso for AJ, given that she's BF'ing twins)... it feels like ALL you do... so if you want to go out, you NIP...
Honestly, I wish there were more pictures of me nursing DD... I have precious few of them, and it's kinda sad, because it was such a humungous part of our lives for months.
funny, here's one of the few I do have... nursing DD at an Obama rally...

I don't care if people take pictures of breastfeeding for themselves. I will for my private albums. I just think it's inappropriate to blast them all over the world in magazines and elsewhere. You're right that breasts have been sexualized. Displaying them publicly with a baby attached to them isn't going to make playboy rethink its photo spreads. NIP doesn't unsexualize anything.

What is private or public is subjective. If you want to do that publicly go right ahead. It's a free country. Just don't be surprised that people are taken aback by it and feel uncomfortable around you doing that.

MarquisDoll · October 2008

LittleMissWifey:
MarquisDoll:

It's not odd for W to have photo spreads where the models are completely nude or only covered by sheer. Some readers complain, some readers love it. From what I understand, it's not all that strange to see nipples in fashion shows under just one sheer layer.

Basically, to put it in context, W treats breasts in photographs like you might see in sculptures or a renaissance painting.

It is a fashion magazine, but it's not Vogue or Cosmo. It focuses on very high end, which is the level of fashion which considered art. It treats it as art. It does take itself too seriously, but you know how when you get to opposite extremes of a topic they start to look similar? Well, I think that's what's happening here. W doesn't show breasts b/c it's sooo tacky; it does it because it's the opposite.

But then you could easily argue that just as the average person passing a newsstand won't appreciate Mikhail Baryshnikov performing Albrecht in Giselle, they won't understand a famous woman breastfeeding on a magazine cover and will instead just think 'boobies!!'

In a similar vein, I totally appreciate you calling 'bullshit' on this as art as I so often do with modern art, performance art, etc. Just wanted to give context in case you weren't familiar.

MD just hit the nail on the head why I don't like this picture. It's a fashion picture first! Breastfeeding is fashionable! It's sexy! Nevermind the baby...I would like it better if it were on a parenting mag. I think W is sexualizing the act of BFing.

Well, I don't think it's quite so much about sex as it is about art. I say that based on other topless photographs that I've seen in the magazine where the models looked like barbie dolls (as in, plastic and expressionless) or more like women from a painting than a porn mag.

But I do agree with you that it's not about glorifying breast feeding. It's about art. or sexy art. I like it.

mominatrix · October 2008

Funny, I don't think it's about sex or art.

It's about something that's part of womens' lives. You see fashion spreads about "work" settings, about "dates"...

this is something that is an all consuming part of the life of a mom to a newborn... something that's been pretty closeted for a long time. I love that it's starting to be more and more public.

talltalltrees · October 2008

mominatrix:
LittleMissWifey:
?Isn't breastfeeding supposed to be the ultimate act of mother/child bonding and maternal sacrifice?
?
I think "maternal sacrifice" is a bit much.

My screaming, sore nipples that just finished feeding for two hours straight beg to disagree with you. ?

talltalltrees · October 2008

Also I think it's totally weird that there's a picture of her "breast feeding" except the baby is barely even IN the picture. Kind of like the baby was an afterthought.?

?

Oh and why is it that she looks gorgeously disheveled while doing this while I look exhausted and unshowered? Yes I hate her.?

bunnybean · October 2008

I like the picture. ?I'm not really an Angelina Jolie fan, but I like seeing her like this. ?I don't think it's hot, but I find it attractive (in a non sexual way, if that makes sense). ?She seems sweet, real.?

Also, DSL?! ?I haven't heard that term, and DH and I are not the queen by any means. ?Also, I'm totally unoffended by pretty much everything, but this one rubs me the wrong way. ?It seems?really klassy.?

is_it_over_yet? · October 2008

caden:
mominatrix:

...but that's the whole point.

Breasts have been sexualized, but they aren't genitals - they aren't sexual... breastfeeding is the reason why they exist.

Having BF'ed DD for 18 months I can say this: it's no more a "private" act than anything else involving a baby. Especially when she was younger - when she was hungry, that was it, it's time to feed her. Public. Private. Soft light and a rocker, or in the middle of a retail environment or restaurant. She didn't care... and neither did I.

Sure, a lot of bonding occurs at the breast... but it's also the case that (especially in the first few months) breastfeeding is simply a HUGE portion of your time (moreso for AJ, given that she's BF'ing twins)... it feels like ALL you do... so if you want to go out, you NIP...

Honestly, I wish there were more pictures of me nursing DD... I have precious few of them, and it's kinda sad, because it was such a humungous part of our lives for months.

funny, here's one of the few I do have... nursing DD at an Obama rally...

I don't care if people take pictures of breastfeeding for themselves. I will for my private albums. I just think it's inappropriate to blast them all over the world in magazines and elsewhere. You're right that breasts have been sexualized. Displaying them publicly with a baby attached to them isn't going to make playboy rethink its photo spreads. NIP doesn't unsexualize anything.

What is private or public is subjective. If you want to do that publicly go right ahead. It's a free country. Just don't be surprised that people are taken aback by it and feel uncomfortable around you doing that.

You sound like me before I had children. Wait until you are out in public and your child goes from zero to 60 in the hunger category and you must BF in public, regardless of whether you want to. You might find that your attitude on public nursing changes pretty quickly. You are going to resent the looks and the comments, and you just might find yourself feeling rather defensive of your little baby's right to eat when s/he's hungry, regardless of what other people think. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you may even decide that breasts aren't simply eye candy and play objects for men.

ITD that photos of nursing babies won't desexualize breasts. If more people saw the proper, natural use of these God-given parts of our bodies for their intended purpose, nursing would be more acceptable and get the side-eye far less frequently.

engaged_and_underage · October 2008

talltalltrees:
Also I think it's totally weird that there's a picture of her "breast feeding" except the baby is barely even IN the picture. Kind of like the baby was an afterthought.?

See I don't get that impression because, according to the cover, these weren't staged photos and this wasn't a photo-shoot about breast feeding. They're private photos taken by Brad Pitt (read: not a professional. Just a dad.) and the cover doesn't even advertise it as a BF'ing pic.?

I think she looks calm, peaceful, and happy. I like it.?

(@): Angelina on cover of W, BF'ing

Re: (@): Angelina on cover of W, BF'ing

Choose Another Board

Search Boards

(@): Angelina on cover of W, BF'ing

Re: (@): Angelina on cover of W, BF&#039;ing

Choose Another Board

Search Boards

Re: (@): Angelina on cover of W, BF'ing