Time Magazine cover. Your reaction?
98 Comments on "Your Turn"
Really sucky cover AND title. No pun intended. I'm so tired of how women are expected to shoulder at least 95% of the burden of child rearing. C'mon men, time to step up! I almost burst into tears tonight seeing a heavily pierced and tattoed kid being adoringly affectionate to his little boy, who was about 4. He was constantly and very affectionately ruffling his hair, and talking to him as if he were an actual person. OMG.
This picture? Gross. The picture is deliberately provocative, I don't care what anyone says otherwise. Why the chair for the kid? Why the sexy tank top? It makes me want to punch whoever took that picture.
And I'm mom enough, bitches.
I did not know he was adopted. That changes things. Anything she can do to foster a real connection with him is good, and breastfeeding is bonding even after it is not needed for nutrition. This photo does not depict bonding though; he should be held and curled up, but despite that I say it's good she's breastfeeding him after he watched her breastfeed the child she gave birth to. Do whatever keeps him from feeling like an outsider in the family.
"…I don't care what they think, I don't care what they say, What do they know about this love anyway…?"Thank you, Melissa Etheridge!
I breast-fed my 3 children till the teeth came in. To me, it was kind of nature's way of letting you know they are ready for more than mamma's milk. What other mother's do is their business. Having said that, this cover is sick and wrong, and further, proof that Time needs shock to sell their magazines now.
No. Just no.
There is no basis for breast feeding this late. It will not help the child in any way. After 6 months the child be eating his/her own food and developing their own identity.
See this kind of stuff is just more end of empire type arrogance. Just look how proud she looks!
She probably has the iq of a turnip. The boy will end up working at Starbux when Mommy marries some guy 15 years younger than her after divorcing Daddy.
THere were some really beautiful pictures inside the issue of other moms breastfeeding "older" kids. (ages 1-3).
There is a beautiful picture of this particular kid sitting in his mom's lap, still attached to the breast, but sleeping. It reminds you that even though he is tall, he is still just a child.
Kids don't breastfeed all day long after a certain age, it's not going to stop him socialising. He probably feeds once a day or night or even once a week.
Most of the horror towards the photo is from people who don't understand that breastfeeding, once you are used to doing it, is so easy and everyday that it doesn't strike you as weird, it's just a practical thing.
No mum could force a child to feed if they didn't want to.
Even a six-month-old is perfectly capable of refusal if they're so inclined.
I'm all for breastfeeding, extended and otherwise. The cover, I feel, is for pure shock value and for that reason alone in poor taste. Why not use a photo of how mothers actually sit and spend that BFing time with their kids?
The fact that they are both staring down the camera as if challenging someone to complain makes it look like something other than a meal. Creepy shit!
Did anyone ever see the show "Little England" where the son brings his girlfriend home for dinner to meet the parents and the mother breastfed him. He was in college and obviously the girldfriend..Well, you know. Thought we could use a little humor.
OMG..I just read other comments and I guess you have seen that skit…Just hilarious!
Gross. And that kid is totally going to be bullied.
That's not a baby, he's a year away from college.
I remember the endorphins that flooded my brain whenever I breastfed my infants. And I look at that cover photo and think, you're not doing what's best for that kid, you're getting your fix.
How could you ever think a public boob flash with a baby attached is sexy? I look away because, um, let the lady do her business in peace!
" It makes me think it is more about the mom than the child. In fact, I guess that is my bottom line – it the fact that she is nursing at this age more about her? " THIS.
Denise, no one is saying BREASTFEEDING is sexual. Getting one's breast out in public could be seen as sexual by OTHERS, regardless of the reason.
Ewwwwwww! Dusturbing! Y cant she express the milk and lat child drink it?
Marna Palmer- Some adoptive mothers are able to stimulate their breast into producing milk. In her case… she did not start breastfeeding her adopted so until he showed an interest in what her younger bio son was doing. The adopted son is a year older than the boy she is pictured with on the cover.
I am pro boob. My children were completely self weaned by 18 months. This in my opinion is completely absurd.
Oh but I missed the point I was trying to make! That pic sets back breastfeeding and attachment parenting by 50 years, it's so in your face, jesus!
Sexualizing breast feeding is dispicable and that is the aim of this cover, the controversial cover will get Time some publicity but it will alienate some readers like me.
I breast fed my son exclusively for over 24 months and weaned him when I felt the time was right for us, there is no need to vilify women who breast feed past 6 or 12 months, it's what nature intended and yes mothers milk is best but some mothers cannot breast feed for various reasons and they should be respected and do not deserve scorn for formula feeding.
initial reaction – OMFG.
I just hope that's her kid and not a model. Cause that would be weird on a whole other level.
I've also read it's her adopted child, not her biological one. I don't know at what age she adopted him but if she forced this on him, that's not cool. And, just because I'm ignorant about pregnancy and babies, how does her body produce milk if she wasn't actually pregnant?
If you want to know what this kid's future will look like, check out "Little Britain" and the Bitty sketches. Pure comedy gold!
Google "Little britian" and "bitty" and you'll see someone a bit too old to breastfeed.
It's simple: Time wanted a bump in sales, the mom wanted her 15 minutes of fame, and now this kid will be teased for the rest of his life.
Well said Meg.
I thought that woman was Ivanka Trump at first. And no, I'm not bothered by this. Pretty gutsy if you ask me even though I know Nobody did, but whatever. The kid looks like he's 7 or 8 years old which I do find disturbing. Don't think I'll be buying this magazine – I'll get some weird looks from the cute Tina Fey-ish girl who works at my local bookstore for sure.
*Nothing…not morning auto correct!
Well said AngusParvo.
If one considers the confrontational title of the piece, the somewhat advanced age of the child and the slim, blond, yoga-toned "California Mom" in the picture, it all seem deliberately deigned to provoke controversy, which it has. Personally, I can't breastfeed, so I'll leave that discussion to the women here, but this is pretty obvious marketing ploy on the part of Time magazine.
When the kid grows teeth, it's time to stop breast feeding. Teeth coming in is a sign the kid can eat on their own. Nature's calling card of independence, no?
Eeew! This photo is so disturbing on so many levels and nails the hypocritical society we live in:
Mom looks like a 14 year old that breastfeeds a 7 year old camouflage trouser look-alike. The camouflage trousers could be the most disturbing part of the entire image.