Barb wrote:
"just ONCE they couldn't show a mom nursing?!  Oh no, that would be
indecent!"

If a response like that is given when we suggest showing a nursing mom,
simply say,"Why does it have to be showing any feeding method?  The ad
has nothing to do with feeding per se.  Why not simply show a happy
family comfortably settled on the couch with the parents looking
adoringly at their baby.?"

I had a similar response when a local article had a graph about some
non-feeding related maternity statistics.  They had a drawing of a
bottle accompanying the graph.  When I questioned the appropriateness,
the immediate response was, "You certainly wouldn't want a picture of a
boob there would you?!"  I pointed out that no drawing was really
necesary, but if they wanted one it could just as easily have been a
rattle or perhaps a baby-like smiling face with a single curl on top
(I've seen such drawings to indicate "baby".)  A similar debate occurred
years ago about identifying a baby changins location in a public place
using a bottle to identify the location.

Our battle is bigger than fighting the assumption that bottle as the
norm for feeding.  We also need to fight the notion that the bottle is
such a normal part of a baby's life that it then becomes synonymous not
just with feeding, but with everything about a baby.  It's not just
"feeding=bottle", it's "baby=bottle"!

Winnie Mading

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html