Differences between Lounge & Family Rom users

[Mick Mac]

There seems to me to be a lot of pressure on mothers to breast feed. There seems to be a lot of research suggesting its best for the baby, or so its implied.

I think however the pressure is too much to the extent that mothers sometimes feel like a failure where they are unable to breast feed, however unjustified this feeling may be. Most of the older generation were not breast fed and seem to have fewer allergies etc than children these days, but that could be down to other factors.

On the family v lounge - a good subject for a thread on the lounge will still get a fair amount of serious posts. But in general the other sections of the forum including the family room are intended to be useful and people are aware of that and are in general helpful.

[*Bob*]

When my Mum and her friends had babies, the done thing was to formula feed at get back to work asap. It was all about empowerment and a woman's right to choose.

These days, the best thing is to breastfeed for as long as possible and give up work. It's all about empowerment and a woman's right to choose.

I'm still unsure as to who's really doing the choosing, either then or now.

[Brendan]

The difference is that in the Lounge when you start a thread about breastfeeding people make jokes about tits.

[ryedalema]

Hey Keef and all - good topic for a thread. Perhaps you could do a Family vs. Lounge thread in the Family room to get the other side of things? Just a thought.

I remember this was one of the questions the researchers asked at that focus group a few months back. Some said that there was a different 'vibe' to the different sections and a few (me included) said that they/I felt a little intimidated posting in the Lounge but felt 'welcomed' in the Family room.

I know I sometimes feel a bit like a hedgehog/meerkat/snail (take your pick) popping its head out to see whether it's safe to go out, when posting in the Lounge. Then usually retreating back to the Family room when the pace/tone takes an unexpected tack.

Sorry - I'm probably a wuss (goes back into hole).:-$

[ryedalema]

Oops - just read your last sentence again 'This is NOT an attempt to start some Lounge Vs Family Room nonsense!'.

Sorry!

(Perhaps I'd better retreat again)

[Mick Mac]

Off you go then.

[Mick Mac]

I'm sorry - that's just rude.

[jalapeno]

Hmm.. Good point *Bob*

Breast feeding is hard work, a lot of sleepless nights, sheer exhaustion, cracked nipples and generally being withdrawn to a state of of zombiehood in the fist few weeks (atleast in my case) but sleep deprivation existed (in my case) till my daughter was on solids and I appreciate if another female has alternate views / approaches to this. I have no grudge with how another prefers to bring their baby up, of course it is an individual choice.

I think the term "creepy" along with the whole article may have come across insensitive and self centered in general and therefore caused some disharmony in the "female world". I don't disagree with you, neither do I think that people have opposed the point you have raised, just that the editor phrased her words inappropriately.

I have "friends" who continuously debate this topic and some can be very tyrannical with the rights and wrongs of this issue! I suppose it would be plain boring if we had nothing to argue about, but I don't have a tendency to chastise those who do different to me.

I am intrigued to discover her views on birth? On the positive, I am glad to discover women with such high sex drives post birth...! You can't blame her for wanting her dear man at her breasts!:))

Do stay on Keef.

[Brendan]

daizie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well Desmond Morris in the Naked Ape says that,

> for our species, breast design is primarily sexual

> rather than maternal in function

That?s an interesting point on its own. The consensus is that protruding breast must have evolved as a social/sexual adaptation in modern humans. The consensus seems to be based on a lack of any other reliable theories. Some more radical ideas are that they evolved for buoyancy during feeding in water or to stop Neanderthals from raping Cro-Magnon women by fooling them into thinking they were pregnant but these theories seem to be considered nonsense by those in the know.

When exactly and how quickly we developed them is still not really known. Most of what I?ve read* suggests it was pretty recently. Within the last million years. Apparently it is very hard for palaeontologists to say with soft tissue.

It is interesting (although it doesn?t really help to deduce anything) that Bonobos have slightly more protruding breast tissue than common chimpanzees. We last shared a common ancestor with these species about 7 million years ago.

But all this has nothing to do with feeding babies from the mammary gland. That is a defying characteristic of mammals and probably evolved with the first mammals up to 200 million years ago.

So yeah it?s all very interesting but trying to use the sexual role of the breast in human evolution as an argument for or against feeding babies from the mammary gland is perhaps barking up the wrong tree.

(facts may have been changed to protect the innocent)

* What I've read about human evolution not specifically about boobs ok.

[*Bob*]

Creepy is a strong word to use, but it's there to get a reaction. Wasn't there some other newspaper article written not so long back by a mother who found her children 'boring'? Cue outraged mothers foaming at the mouth, falling over themselves to declare every gurgle, faecal ejection and withering scream to fill them with nothing but unmitigated joy.

Anyway, it might not be creepy, and it may be the most natural thing in the world, but that doesn't stop it from being 'a bit weird'. Milk is weird. Nature is weird. And when you're watching Eastenders whilst a double expressing contraption huffs, puffs and bubbles away, clamped to a set of nipples just to your left, it's even weirder.

[????]

I agree *Bob*, watching Eastenders is weird

[Ted Max]

That's a woman sitting there, *Bob*, not just a set of nipples.

Although what she does with your Gaggia does sound interesting.

[Brendan]

move along.

[Brendan]

What the fukis a Gaggia? Does everyone have one?

[*Bob*]

In fact absolutely anything to do with babies, from start to finish, is nothing short of freaky.. if you think about it in any detail.

Especially the sex part. Indeed, Mrs *Bob*'s insistence on a 'glory holes only' policy did take a little getting used to.

[????]

Agreed, cutting huge holes in the bathroom door was difficult to explain to our regular chippy *Bob*.

[*Bob*]

Quids, you do know it's your parts which are supposed to go through the hole, right?

[brum]

I may have got this wrong, but I recall Desmond Morris once suggesting that the breasts evolved once we started walking on two feet. Before then, females would attract males by simply sticking their bottoms in the air. Once we became bipeds, this obvious signal was not so.... well, obvious. So women, being very clever, grew their breasts larger and made them permanent to imitate a pair of bum cheeks (not exactly Desmond's words)... and when you think about it chaps, the view 'from behind' is not too dissimilar to the ladies' cleavage view from the front!

Plausible?

[*Bob*]

brum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Before then,

> females would attract males by simply sticking

> their bottoms in the air.

You mean this isn't the way it's still done?

Well it worked for me.

[OliviaDee]

* edited because i got the wrong body parts and the wrong holes and made a t1t of myself.

[brum]

OliviaDee Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> * edited because i got the wrong body parts and

> the wrong holes and made a t1t of myself.

It is easily done!

[OliviaDee]

you too Brum?

[brum]

...Well I am a bit clumsy at times, it has to be said!

[OliviaDee]

no babies then?

[brum]

Well I have, so I can't be that clumsy I suppose...!