Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 29 Apr 2011 16:14:37 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
It is VERY sad, and thank you so much for saying so and for posting this. As a
long-time feminist... and daughter and granddaughter of feminists, it disturbs
me greatly to see how ideas are twisted in the name of feminism. My feminist
view has always been that women should be free to choose AND BE SUPPORTED in
fulfilling all the roles they may wish to take on. One of the manifestations of
that view has been doing everything I can to help women who are combining what
can be two very fulfilling roles: working and breastfeeding. We are starting
to see more support for women who want to continue breastfeeding after returning
to work (whether the work is fulfilling or just necessary for survival of her
family). Now THAT is feminism!
And, of course, we still need more support for working AND breastfeeding women.
People like Joan Wolf are not helping any feminist cause as far as I'm
concerned. She's no feminist.
Cee
________________________________
From: Susan Burger <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thu, April 28, 2011 7:54:19 AM
Subject: Faux feminists
Dear all:
Joan Wolf doesn't know the first thing about building a causal case. This is
where most people who have only taken one statistic course may get the false
impression that the randomized controlled trial is the only way to establish
causality. In fact, there is much more involved in developing a causal
relationship. I previously posted an oldie but goodie publication that was
provided as testimony to congress on smoking. If you follow all the important
steps of establishing a plausible case for causality, there are direct parallels
between the case made for smoking and cancer and formula feeding and a whole
host of health risks.
Joan Wolf is a faux feminist in that she doesn't understand that women should
have access to fulfill all the roles they may wish to encounter, including
breastfeeding. Feminists argued that women had the right to have an orgasm back
in the day when women weren't supposed to enjoy sex, they were supposed to do it
out of duty to their husbands and for procreation. There are NO randomized
controlled trials that I know of that show that women who are allocated to never
having an orgasm have more health risks than women who are allowed to have
them. So by the very basis of Joan Wolf's arguments, you could argue against
women having fulfilling sex -- its simply not necessary. I doubt she would find
that argument palatable. Yet, here she is arguing AGAINST breastfeeding.
Clearly she does not understand how fulfilling breastfeeding can be, merely as a
normal part of being a women.
How sad is that? Especially when you THINK you are a feminist and THINK you are
benefitting women.
Sincerely,
Susan E. Burger, MHS, PhD, IBCLC
***********************************************
Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set
lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome
***********************************************
Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome
|
|
|