Should women be allowed to nurse their baby on airplanes?
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
Bells
Staff member
Ah but you stated yourself you would attempt to show the officer the permit and state your rights, which is exactly what Gillette had done. When the ticketing agent approached them and asked them to exit the plane, they did so without argument and went quietly. That's what you failed to understand. You demand that she meekly cover her child's head with a blanket when she knew she had a right to breastfeed her child. She told the attendant so, just as you'd attempt to show your licence to the police officer to show them you have a right to carry the gun. When asked to leave, she left the plane and took it up with the airlines concerned and with the equal opportunity board. Much like you have stated you would do.
My question in regards to shooting the kids in the school bus was meant to point to you how silly and dangerous it is to simply do everything you are told to do, just because someone in authority told you to do it. If you know what the 'cop' told you to do was wrong, do not do it. People in wars attempted to use that excuse when tried for genocide and crimes against humanity and it is a pitiful excuse.
You're damn right if a police officer asked me to do something that I knew was wrong, that I would not do it and fight not to do it. What kind of an idiot would do everything they are ordered to do by a police officer if they know what they are being ordered to do was wrong? Hence why I asked you, if a police officer asked you to shoot a busload of children because he thought a terrorist might have been on board, you'd not do it and you'd fight not to do it.
You asked for the long post you prat. But if you can't read it because it is too difficult for you to understand, that's your problem and not mine. But that's ok, we all know you have certain difficulties in many areas.
Bells
Staff member
But... but.. how would you travel?
Hmm, I did misunderstand that! I thought she raised a big stink on the airplane. If not, and if she obeyed the attendant and left the plane willingly and obediently, then I ain't got no complaints about it all. It's exactly what should have happened.
Sorry, I just missed that part of the issue.
It was just so ridiculous that I didn't even continue reading it ...and didn't read it again this time! Some things are just too ridiculous to bother with, ya' know?
Baron Max
Bells
Staff member
Yeah Baby!
Galactic_Command
Registered Member
Should women be allowed to nurse their baby on airplanes
First, a distinction should be made between 'Work Places' and 'Public places'.
'Work places' have theirs own 'dress code' and 'behaviour code'.
In 'Public places' the notion is little fuzzy. You cannot deny an infant it's food. That is barbaric. This was never an issue in old societies hundreds of years ago. Woman feeding her baby was considered natural. In fact most of the old societies and primitive socities 300 years ago, most people were semi-nude. Full clothes were an luxury.
First, a distinction should be made between 'Work Places' and 'Public places'.
'Work places' have theirs own 'dress code' and 'behaviour code'.
In 'Public places' the notion is little fuzzy. You cannot deny an infant it's food. That is barbaric. This was never an issue in old societies hundreds of years ago. Woman feeding her baby was considered natural. In fact most of the old societies and primitive socities 300 years ago, most people were semi-nude. Full clothes were an luxury.
Pronatalist
Registered Senior Member
Title: An increasingly populous world, is all the more reason, why mothers should be welcome to breastfeed in public.
Opposing breastfeeding in public, is completely unreasonable. People eat in public, so why can't babies feed in public too?
They say that breastfeeding is nonsexual, and nonpornographic. Pretty much correct. Of course there's likely a few men, who consider most anything "suggestive" of something, to be sexual. A bulging breast discreetly covered in clothing, a nice shaped butt, a sexual thought, most anything might turn them on, or maybe give them an erection. So how is it right to pin the blame on a breastfeeding mother? In polite society, we have the decency, especially if it might be an issue to us in some way, to turn away and not gaze or stare. Some guys supposedly have large penises, that might at times show a bit of a bulge. So what? Don't gaze if it be an issue.
Let all the babies have their bottle? Is that but another name for breasts, in that usage? Bottles are unnatural. Breast milk is natural. Proponents of breastfeeding have a fairly impressive list of reasons, better for baby and all that. What is the alternative? Ban babies as non-humans? Everybody have to endure a baby crying through almost the entire flight?
There might be a few "in your face" feminists about the issue, but it really isn't their issue, since they don't have enough babies anyway. It's a mother's rights issue. Humans weren't designed to use any means of "birth control," and so a properly pronatalist society should make every reasonable effort to welcome families to grow naturally, possibly large and "unplanned." Parents have a responsibility and duty to provide for their children, which includes obviously, breastfeeding babies, and do I need to make a list of reasons why mothers might understandably, not "cover up" sufficiently to supposedly not "offend" a few prudes' delicate sensibilities?
I am no advocate of excessive nudity, so I see it as quite simple. No baby around to explain it, and it's "obscenity." If a baby is feeding, then it's merely breastfeeding. (Sorry Janet Jackson, no excuse for you.)
I advocate large families worldwide, so that far more people may live. For the greater good of the many. So by all means, if mothers find some need to breastfeed in public, go right on ahead. I also obviously have no problem with some of these mothers who for whatever reason, don't get the right maternity clothes and their "exposed" belly poofs out of their shirt. I have seen that in public places a few times, at least one was a Hispanic, the Hispanics supposedly tend to breed like rabbits. Natural human population growth is beautiful as it then benefits all the more people, so I am all for it.
Besides, in a burgeoning world of over 6.6 billion people, I would raise the obvious question of just how much privacy and discreetness can there really be, especially in some cramped places like airplanes, where the economic model requires that they "pack" the plane with nearly as many people as possible, to keep the fuel costs of operating the plane, affordable on a per-ticket basis. Could be a practical reason why private nursing rooms are more common in Churches than on airplanes.
And women who naturally have all the babies their bodies want to produce, might tend to feel more comfortable about such matters, as breastfeeding their precious darling babies, even if in a public place. My sister breastfed right there in the living room, with family present.
Almost had a point there, did you? Telling a mother not to breastfeed in public, might as well be saying, "Don't bulge your breasts so much in public." Like a woman can help that her breasts make a noticable bulge? Like it's not natural?
No, tits do not cause boners. Sexual thoughts, or having a penis causes boners, which I would then blame on nature or on the man with the boner. But then people ought not to gaze or stare upon a guy's boner either, but respect his privacy too by looking away or at the very least, don't be caught looking.
Is it the mother's fault, to live in a society so prudish, and not nearly pronatalist enough, that people aren't already used to seeing people nurse in public, as they commonly do in developing countries often more pronatalist than us? In countries where it's more common to just let the babies push out without ever the use of anti-child "birth control," it's going to seem more natural, that people of course have to feed their babies wherever they happen to be. Especially in societies with large, youthful populations.
But just like how people point out, that the mother doesn't just whip out her breasts and swirl around for everybody to see, and announce that she is now going to breastfeed, neither should the poor guy with a boner, for some unknown reason, parade it around either. He can perhaps cover it up, with his briefcase, laptop computer, coat or whatever, if he has one.
So babies aren't hungry, just because there be men around?
When I was in the military, and we went to field, we had a big co-ed tent. Did women have a problem with guys in their big tent? Not at all. When they wanted some privacy, they just kicked us out for a few minutes. I imagine in some settings, of human overcrowding, people would just change their clothes, co-ed and all. That's sort of how it was at a place I once worked. People changed into their workclothes, behind where customers couldn't see, but not caring that opposite sex employees were around. Not that we could see anything, with them facing the wall and wearing underwear. But the restroom, was like a tiny "water closet," with scarcely enough room inside to change one's mind, let along clothes. To my knowledge, nobody ever complained or had any issue with it.
I don't see any relevance of including porn stars in the discussion. Apples and oranges comparison error.
Not at all. You think it's easy for us guys, to have women taking out their boobs in public? We get the worst end of the deal. Don't we dare get caught looking, or we will be the ones in trouble?
I saw some mother breastfeed outside, with people all around, right at the Church picnic. I am glad she could. Surely I wasn't the only person to notice, but apparently, among sensible people, nobody cares or makes any issue of it.
Well maybe it's hot and all. But don't dare get caught looking. And with around 4 or more babies being born a second somewhere throughout the world, I would naturally expect and hope, that women can continue to breastfeed in public, as it is nature's way and all that. And since we were all once babies, we should naturally welcome the babies to just go on pushing out naturally, without ever people being expected to use any sort of means of awkward, unnatural, anti-life "birth control."
Opposing breastfeeding in public, is completely unreasonable. People eat in public, so why can't babies feed in public too?
They say that breastfeeding is nonsexual, and nonpornographic. Pretty much correct. Of course there's likely a few men, who consider most anything "suggestive" of something, to be sexual. A bulging breast discreetly covered in clothing, a nice shaped butt, a sexual thought, most anything might turn them on, or maybe give them an erection. So how is it right to pin the blame on a breastfeeding mother? In polite society, we have the decency, especially if it might be an issue to us in some way, to turn away and not gaze or stare. Some guys supposedly have large penises, that might at times show a bit of a bulge. So what? Don't gaze if it be an issue.
Let all the babies have their bottle? Is that but another name for breasts, in that usage? Bottles are unnatural. Breast milk is natural. Proponents of breastfeeding have a fairly impressive list of reasons, better for baby and all that. What is the alternative? Ban babies as non-humans? Everybody have to endure a baby crying through almost the entire flight?
There might be a few "in your face" feminists about the issue, but it really isn't their issue, since they don't have enough babies anyway. It's a mother's rights issue. Humans weren't designed to use any means of "birth control," and so a properly pronatalist society should make every reasonable effort to welcome families to grow naturally, possibly large and "unplanned." Parents have a responsibility and duty to provide for their children, which includes obviously, breastfeeding babies, and do I need to make a list of reasons why mothers might understandably, not "cover up" sufficiently to supposedly not "offend" a few prudes' delicate sensibilities?
- Baby pulls off the blanket.
- Too hot outside.
- What blanket? Forgot and left it at home.
- Thought it was discreet enough back in this corner or whatever.
- Just started, not finished adjusting.
- Didn't wear a nursing bra.
- Didn't think there was a need to cover up.
I am no advocate of excessive nudity, so I see it as quite simple. No baby around to explain it, and it's "obscenity." If a baby is feeding, then it's merely breastfeeding. (Sorry Janet Jackson, no excuse for you.)
I advocate large families worldwide, so that far more people may live. For the greater good of the many. So by all means, if mothers find some need to breastfeed in public, go right on ahead. I also obviously have no problem with some of these mothers who for whatever reason, don't get the right maternity clothes and their "exposed" belly poofs out of their shirt. I have seen that in public places a few times, at least one was a Hispanic, the Hispanics supposedly tend to breed like rabbits. Natural human population growth is beautiful as it then benefits all the more people, so I am all for it.
Besides, in a burgeoning world of over 6.6 billion people, I would raise the obvious question of just how much privacy and discreetness can there really be, especially in some cramped places like airplanes, where the economic model requires that they "pack" the plane with nearly as many people as possible, to keep the fuel costs of operating the plane, affordable on a per-ticket basis. Could be a practical reason why private nursing rooms are more common in Churches than on airplanes.
And women who naturally have all the babies their bodies want to produce, might tend to feel more comfortable about such matters, as breastfeeding their precious darling babies, even if in a public place. My sister breastfed right there in the living room, with family present.
Almost had a point there, did you? Telling a mother not to breastfeed in public, might as well be saying, "Don't bulge your breasts so much in public." Like a woman can help that her breasts make a noticable bulge? Like it's not natural?
No, tits do not cause boners. Sexual thoughts, or having a penis causes boners, which I would then blame on nature or on the man with the boner. But then people ought not to gaze or stare upon a guy's boner either, but respect his privacy too by looking away or at the very least, don't be caught looking.
Is it the mother's fault, to live in a society so prudish, and not nearly pronatalist enough, that people aren't already used to seeing people nurse in public, as they commonly do in developing countries often more pronatalist than us? In countries where it's more common to just let the babies push out without ever the use of anti-child "birth control," it's going to seem more natural, that people of course have to feed their babies wherever they happen to be. Especially in societies with large, youthful populations.
But just like how people point out, that the mother doesn't just whip out her breasts and swirl around for everybody to see, and announce that she is now going to breastfeed, neither should the poor guy with a boner, for some unknown reason, parade it around either. He can perhaps cover it up, with his briefcase, laptop computer, coat or whatever, if he has one.
So babies aren't hungry, just because there be men around?
When I was in the military, and we went to field, we had a big co-ed tent. Did women have a problem with guys in their big tent? Not at all. When they wanted some privacy, they just kicked us out for a few minutes. I imagine in some settings, of human overcrowding, people would just change their clothes, co-ed and all. That's sort of how it was at a place I once worked. People changed into their workclothes, behind where customers couldn't see, but not caring that opposite sex employees were around. Not that we could see anything, with them facing the wall and wearing underwear. But the restroom, was like a tiny "water closet," with scarcely enough room inside to change one's mind, let along clothes. To my knowledge, nobody ever complained or had any issue with it.
I don't see any relevance of including porn stars in the discussion. Apples and oranges comparison error.
Not at all. You think it's easy for us guys, to have women taking out their boobs in public? We get the worst end of the deal. Don't we dare get caught looking, or we will be the ones in trouble?
I saw some mother breastfeed outside, with people all around, right at the Church picnic. I am glad she could. Surely I wasn't the only person to notice, but apparently, among sensible people, nobody cares or makes any issue of it.
Well maybe it's hot and all. But don't dare get caught looking. And with around 4 or more babies being born a second somewhere throughout the world, I would naturally expect and hope, that women can continue to breastfeed in public, as it is nature's way and all that. And since we were all once babies, we should naturally welcome the babies to just go on pushing out naturally, without ever people being expected to use any sort of means of awkward, unnatural, anti-life "birth control."
Last edited:
Pronatalist
Registered Senior Member
Title: What anti-child, anti-mother prudes we be?
Not using a toilet, violates reasonable public sanitation standards. However along a hiking trail, where there is an obvious lack of "toilet facilities," to take a pee standing off the trail far enough, even with mixed company nearby but not right there, is understandable and to be expected.
I am fine with people having sex in public, in a few situations of understandable human "overcrowding." I've heard that babies were conceived on the Mayflower. Back then, ships were quite crowded, with no place of privacy for things like sex. I imagine that people may need sex with their mates, in overcrowded refugee camps? How many nights can they sleep together and not have their normal married sex? And when an entire family lives in a room or two, or shares a motel room, it's understandable that the children might not really be asleep after all, when their parents go at it to make more babies.
But in other situations, society reasonable expects people to find a place of more privacy, such as maybe where they sleep in their bed at night. I have heard that (married) people can't go without sex, for more than 4 days. What does that mean then in terms of public policy? Either provide a place of privacy then, or I expect there just may be some "sex in public" going on. The urge to reproduce is a very important primal need of humans.
Yeah, how is it appropriate, for stupid people to make up nonsense about how the other person supposedly "offends" them? Was the other person forcing them to listen to Rap-is-crap? Ba-Boom-Ba-Boom-Boom-stupid rhythms, incomprehensable lyrics, rebellion, Ba-Boom-Boom! Last time I heard, breastfeeding is a very quiet activity. If a person doesn't want to see, can't they use one of those thin airline blankets, and cover up their own eyes and take a nap? Maybe the sunset outside "offends" that person too, or maybe the person's light on, a few seats away, just to read his magazine "offends" too? I think not.
Not using a toilet, violates reasonable public sanitation standards. However along a hiking trail, where there is an obvious lack of "toilet facilities," to take a pee standing off the trail far enough, even with mixed company nearby but not right there, is understandable and to be expected.
I have had sex in public....no one complained
I am fine with people having sex in public, in a few situations of understandable human "overcrowding." I've heard that babies were conceived on the Mayflower. Back then, ships were quite crowded, with no place of privacy for things like sex. I imagine that people may need sex with their mates, in overcrowded refugee camps? How many nights can they sleep together and not have their normal married sex? And when an entire family lives in a room or two, or shares a motel room, it's understandable that the children might not really be asleep after all, when their parents go at it to make more babies.
But in other situations, society reasonable expects people to find a place of more privacy, such as maybe where they sleep in their bed at night. I have heard that (married) people can't go without sex, for more than 4 days. What does that mean then in terms of public policy? Either provide a place of privacy then, or I expect there just may be some "sex in public" going on. The urge to reproduce is a very important primal need of humans.
Yeah, how is it appropriate, for stupid people to make up nonsense about how the other person supposedly "offends" them? Was the other person forcing them to listen to Rap-is-crap? Ba-Boom-Ba-Boom-Boom-stupid rhythms, incomprehensable lyrics, rebellion, Ba-Boom-Boom! Last time I heard, breastfeeding is a very quiet activity. If a person doesn't want to see, can't they use one of those thin airline blankets, and cover up their own eyes and take a nap? Maybe the sunset outside "offends" that person too, or maybe the person's light on, a few seats away, just to read his magazine "offends" too? I think not.
It's none of other people's fucking business. If they don't like the sight they should just avert their eyes.
Pronatalist
Registered Senior Member
I have never once seen or heard of women breastfeeding leading to much anything, other than a fed, happy baby.
An airplane filled with women breastfeeding?
How often does that happen?
Perhaps they are all going to the same lactating conference?
And no, they don't need a curtain. Airplanes don't have room for a "nursing room." Airports maybe, but not airplanes. But then, who wants to miss their flight, while nursing her baby? A mother can nurse, even while boarding the plane.
It Is Not Perverted. It Is Utterly Natural, And Not Remotely Analogous To Masturbating.
Oh, Bells you have got to be kidding. It's a hospital for gods sake. How horribly puritanical. For years the hospitals here have an anytime anywhere policy for breastfeeding and they will not allow baby formula merchants into the hospital to give free samples.
I breastfed both my kids where ever I happened to be and I never noticed anyone give me a dirty look or oogle. I occasionally got nods of approval.
You are making some great points here. Keep up the good work.:thankyou:
Pronatalist
Registered Senior Member
Title: In a more properly pronatalist country, it wouldn't even be an issue.
I would love to give nods of approval for women breastfeeding in a public place, being noticably pregnant, or having an "unusually" large family apparently, but how? How should guys give such compliments to encourage the natural pronatalist flow of human life, without it being taken the wrong way?
Human population growth is beautiful, and because it allows all the more people to enjoy live, should always be encouraged, worldwide.
I would love to give nods of approval for women breastfeeding in a public place, being noticably pregnant, or having an "unusually" large family apparently, but how? How should guys give such compliments to encourage the natural pronatalist flow of human life, without it being taken the wrong way?
Human population growth is beautiful, and because it allows all the more people to enjoy live, should always be encouraged, worldwide.
Of course women should be allowed to breast feed. But let's go one better. To make women who need to breast feed feel more comfortable and not stand out so much, let's require that all women of childbearing age be topless on planes.
Pronatalist
Registered Senior Member
Title: In order that nursing mothers not stand out so much, let's just ban all the nasty contraceptives, so that it will become all the more common to see.
No, we don't need that sort of excessive nudism.
My point is that, due to the great importance and necessity of naturally enlarging the human race, for the greater good of all, mothers needing to feed babies, get to bare their breasts, but only for that purpose. It's an understandable, moral, cultural exception to what might otherwise be called "obscenity." Also meant to be among the many pronatalist rewards, for reproducing.
No, we don't need that sort of excessive nudism.
My point is that, due to the great importance and necessity of naturally enlarging the human race, for the greater good of all, mothers needing to feed babies, get to bare their breasts, but only for that purpose. It's an understandable, moral, cultural exception to what might otherwise be called "obscenity." Also meant to be among the many pronatalist rewards, for reproducing.