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