If Elle from www.thebundlejungle.com had not emailed me to flag up the article in the first place I would not have set up the Facebook Campaign to ask Mother and Baby Magazine to support breastfeeding. Huge thanks Elle!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/27/breastfeeding-is-creepy-outrage
Breastfeeding is ‘creepy’, says parenting magazine
Mother & Baby’s deputy editor, Kathryn Blundell, shocks mums and midwives with pro-formula milk confession
An article describing breastfeeding as “creepy”, written by the deputy editor of a leading parenting magazine, has caused widespread outrage on the internet and prompted protests to the Press Complaints Commission.
Under the headline “I formula fed. So what?”, Kathryn Blundell says in this month’s Mother & Baby that she bottlefed her child from birth because “I wanted my body back. (And some wine)… I also wanted to give my boobs at least a chance to stay on my chest rather than dangling around my stomach.”
She goes on to say: “They’re part of my sexuality, too – not just breasts, but fun bags. And when you have that attitude (and I admit I made no attempt to change it), seeing your teeny, tiny, innocent baby latching on where only a lover has been before feels, well, a little creepy.”
She concedes that “there are all the studies that show [breastfeeding] reduces the risk of breast cancer for you, and stomach upsets and allergies for your baby. But even the convenience and supposed health benefits of breast milk couldn’t induce me to stick my nipple in a bawling baby’s mouth.”
She continues: “I don’t think I’m the only one, either – only 52% of mums still breastfeed after six weeks. Ask most of the quitters why they stopped and you’ll hear tales of agonising three-hour feeding sessions and – the drama! – bloody nipples. But I often wonder whether many of these women, like me, just couldn’t be fagged or felt like getting tipsy once in a while.”
The shockingly frank article has reignited the breast-versus-bottle debate. The Department of Health recommends that babies are fed only breast milk for the first six months of life – an aspiration achieved by only one in 100 UK mothers. Many women who are unable to breastfeed or who choose to use formula milk say they are made to feel guilty or inadequate by an increasingly vociferous pro-breastfeeding lobby.
Blundell’s piece has electrified parenting websites and six people have complained to the PCC. Many are furious at the anti-breastfeeding message being sent out by a journalist in a senior position at a magazine read by new mothers. Others are more angry at the tone of the article and the reasons the author cites for not breastfeeding, rather than the fact that it is pro-bottle feeding.
A campaign group supported by nearly 500 people has been set up on the social networking site Facebook calling on Blundell to apologise. One member wrote: “As a formula-feeding mum who was unable to breastfeed, I am left wondering whether, thanks to this piece, people who see me giving my baby a bottle may assume that I am doing so because I could not be fagged to breastfeed/found the idea ‘creepy’.”
The article also attracted hundreds of comments on the Mumsnet website. One mother posted: “Even if it is intended to be tongue-in-cheek, you can imagine it having a bad effect on someone who’s feeling vulnerable postnatally and struggling with breastfeeding.”
On the pro-breastfeeding website Lactivist, one woman wrote: “This surely cannot be allowed, for a woman in her position to be so unapologetically negative regarding breastfeeding and generally spreading misinformation.”
Another wrote on Clothnappytree.com: “While breastfeeding numbers are so low, a magazine targeting new mums should not be printing an article that is anti-breastfeeding. It is completely unsupportive.”
Not all postings were unsympathetic to Blundell. One contributor to The Midwife Sanctuary, a website for midwives, wrote: “There are quite a few women that feel like this and are feeling alienated because of it. Not every mother has the urge to breastfeed and that doesn’t make them less of a mother.”
Mother & Baby has received scores of letters and emails in praise of the piece. Reader Emma Dwight emailed: “I love your article! Not only does it completely sum up the minds of us formula-feeding mothers, but does it with humour and respect for those breastfeeders too.”
Miranda Levy, the magazine’s editor, said: “Mother & Baby is a constant and vocal supporter of breastfeeding.”
Of Blundell’s article, she said: “This was her personal experience, and has a place in the debate. We have been inundated by emails applauding her ‘refreshing’ point of view: we have made readers feel ‘normal’ and less of a ‘failure’ for not managing to breastfeed – a situation which is incredibly common.
“The way you feed your baby is not a moral issue and at Mother & Baby we seek to support all new parents in what is a glorious, but often difficult and emotional, time.”
“The way you feed your baby is not a moral issue”
No, it is not a moral issue, it is a health issue. We should always promote and protect health, especially for babies. It is rather worrying that this is not understood, by a woman, a mum, an editor of a magazine for mums.
I try to imagine the same article written under the title: I smoke during pregnancy so what? I feed my toddler in Macdonalds everyday, so what? I never use the seatbelt in the car for my baby so what? We leave our baby crying so what? Oh hold on, this one it is already acceptable.
There is an easy way to end this debate, this war amongst women.
And it is to always, always, always promote health for mother and babies, it is not a moral issue, it is a health issue, however for me to conciously and openly admit that despite having breasts and milk and knowing the health differences betwen formula and breastfeeding, a woman chooses wine and a very male directed vision of her own body, doesn’t tell me that she is a good or bad mother but rather that she is struggling to be one.
And this article and this woman are nothing but symptoms of a very confused ill and patriarchal society.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh my goodness….unbelieveble!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“we have made readers feel ‘normal’ and less of a ‘failure’ for not managing to breastfeed – a situation which is incredibly common.”
*scratches head*
*thinks hard*
*scratches head again*
Nope, don’t get it. How can anyone say that article written by a woman who DIDN’T attempt to breastfeed AT ALL makes them feel better about the fact that they DID breastfeed but it wasn’t successful?
If I wrote an article about how running The London Marathon is a waste of time because it makes your legs muscular and wears you out, and how I’d rather sit on the sofa eating chocolate, would I be inundated with letters from people who had taken part in the marathon – but had to drop out along the route for various reasons – saying how I made them feel better about them not reaching the finishing line?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And also, because I am really very, very cross* with this editor, since when was bottlefeeding NOT “normal”? She’s contradicting the very statistics given in the article that say it is NOT normal to breastfeed, ergo, it is normal to bottlefeed.**
* more than cross, but not going to swear!
** by normal I mean in terms of how many people breastfeed compared to formula feeding.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This article is not sympathetic to those who cannot breastfeed, thus making them feel less guilty, it is pro-formula to the point of ridiculing breastfeeding. It uses completely selfish motives to promote formula feeding such as wanting to have some wine or retain ones figure. It shocks me that any mother would prioritise such things over the health of their babies. It really makes me wonder why such woman want to become mothers if doing so leaves such an intolerable black mark on their bodies and feelings regarding their sexuality. To be a mother is to give your child the best in life; and citing the reasons above for not breastfeeding shows a complete lack of understanding about what it is to be a mother. Yes plenty of woman can’t breastfeed, and many others can but experience such a hard time with pain, poor supply, slow weight gain in their babies, the inability of their child to latch on and so forth, that giving up is a difficult but sometimes beneficial decison. This atricle is disrespectful to women who have tried so hard and would give anything to beastfeed effeciantly or at all. What a selfish and irresponsible woman.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Reader Emma Dwight emailed: “I love your article! Not only does it completely sum up the minds of us formula-feeding mothers, but does it with humour and respect for those breastfeeders too.”
???
She obviously has a very different concept of respect than I do. I don’t find being a saggy breasted, creepy member of the milk mafia very respectful at all and my happily bottle feeding friend hates the idea that people will think she’s as selfish as the articles author.
As a breastfeeding Mum of 4, I’m obviously pro-breastfeeding and will gladly wax lyrical about the benefits and offer support to any Mum that needs it BUT I totally support any Mother in their choice of feeding whatever her reasons. I am all too aware of the downsides of breastfeeding and women’s reasons for not. I think this article was highly irresponsible for such a well respected parenting magazine. It could so easily have been writing from a pro-bottle feeding stance, full of humour without being so offensive to anyone.
And in case she dares venture in here to give a jot of consideration to other’s viewpoints, yes I have bottle fed 2 of my children too but not so I can swing my ‘funbags’ while out on the lash.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You’ve got your point through much better than I at any time might, many thanks!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0