My first reaction was "ew", but I'm still having trouble figuring out why. I would have breastfed my oldest as long as he wanted, but he refused the breast at 10 months old (I was devastated).
I think it might be because it seems like they've deliberately styled the photo to make her seem tiny and delicate, and the child to be big and macho. I know they mean it to be provocative, but that seems deceptive.
You're absolutely right about the styling, I think. And the choice of models, too -- if she was my height, and there was no chair, it wouldn't be nearly as eye-catching. It would, in fact, look like this (which I'll bet is less ew-inducing): http://timethemoment.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/attachment_parenting_time_050612_46041_f.jpg?w=367
I think I'm going to have to see if the library has Time ... I actually do want to read the article but damned if I'm going to pay for it!
Someone named Timothy Anderson made this excellent point on a friend of a friend's Facebook post, which didn't even occur to me:
"One of the issues for me is the right of the child. These pictures on the internet will follow that child, and there will be times in his life when they are likely to be used against him. I am pro-breastfeeding, but the right of the child to not be exploited by having her/his image plastered all over the internet or newsstands in support of an adult's agenda - that is exploitation. I got into trouble with breastfeeding advocates when I pointed out that using their child's picture in this way is a violation of the child's rights. If people want to use pictures of breastfeeding children to make a political statement, then use pictures of children who are now adults and can give consent.
Imagine this child being in junior high in ten years' time - junior high can be unbearable enough - and having this photo surface."
My first reaction was "ew", but I'm still having trouble figuring out why. I would have breastfed my oldest as long as he wanted, but he refused the breast at 10 months old (I was devastated).
ReplyDeleteI think it might be because it seems like they've deliberately styled the photo to make her seem tiny and delicate, and the child to be big and macho. I know they mean it to be provocative, but that seems deceptive.
You're absolutely right about the styling, I think. And the choice of models, too -- if she was my height, and there was no chair, it wouldn't be nearly as eye-catching. It would, in fact, look like this (which I'll bet is less ew-inducing): http://timethemoment.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/attachment_parenting_time_050612_46041_f.jpg?w=367
ReplyDeleteI think I'm going to have to see if the library has Time ... I actually do want to read the article but damned if I'm going to pay for it!
Someone named Timothy Anderson made this excellent point on a friend of a friend's Facebook post, which didn't even occur to me:
ReplyDelete"One of the issues for me is the right of the child. These pictures on the internet will follow that child, and there will be times in his life when they are likely to be used against him. I am pro-breastfeeding, but the right of the child to not be exploited by having her/his image plastered all over the internet or newsstands in support of an adult's agenda - that is exploitation. I got into trouble with breastfeeding advocates when I pointed out that using their child's picture in this way is a violation of the child's rights. If people want to use pictures of breastfeeding children to make a political statement, then use pictures of children who are now adults and can give consent.
Imagine this child being in junior high in ten years' time - junior high can be unbearable enough - and having this photo surface."