LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Kathy Dettwyler <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 4 Apr 2000 04:41:28 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
Magda, I agree with what you wrote about the interpretation of the New
Yorker cover.  I just wish I knew *what the intention was* of the New Yorker
when they published this.  With advertising, it is usually to get people to
buy the product, or to think about the issue.  I find the "Sometimes it's OK
to suck up to the boss" photo highly amusing, and wear my t-shirt with that
image on it.  It gets people thinking, but as you point out, sometimes they
don't end up thinking well of bf because of it.  But we know that the "suck
up to the boss" image comes from INFACT Canada, and they are definitely
intending to promote bf, even if by being provocative.

But the New Yorker cover came out at a time when Rep. Caroline Maloney was
presenting legislation before the US Congress to allow mothers time to
breastfeed at work, or to pump at work, and there was a lot of discussion in
the popular press (radio, TV, etc.) about whether or not babies belonged at
work with their mothers, or whether the typical US separation of work and
family life was the correct one.  One of the arguments against Maloney's
legislation was that work sites might be dangerous to young infants and
children and that therefore they did not belong.  And the New Yorker in
general adopts of tone of hip/sophisticated sarcasm towards US culture
(please, no flames) rather than a tone of straightforward providing of
information.

I suspect the cover was meant to be negative to breastfeeding, but have no
way of proving that, as there was no article inside, and no reference to the
cover in the magazine.  I know that even the sweetest portrait of a
breastfeeding mother will be viewed as distasteful by someone who thinks
breasts shouldn't be seen in public, but still, one can usually tell if the
photo was *meant* to be pro-bf or not, regardless of how some people view
it.  But with the New Yorker cover, I still suspect it was *meant* to be
anti-bf.

Kathy Dettwyler

             ***********************************************
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2