Home

Time Magazine cover

Posted By: olivant

Time Magazine cover - 05/10/12 07:49 PM

Well, what do ya'll think?

http://moms.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...hock-talk?lite/
Posted By: Sicilian Babe

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/10/12 09:03 PM

The kid looks a bit older than a toddler, more like he's in first grade. I consider a toddler to be older than a year, but no older than two. A child breast-feeding after that age is just awkward.

The breast-feeding itself should not be controversial, if it were a younger child. The fact that we make it something that should be hidden is what's wrong.
Posted By: ronnierocketAGO

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/10/12 10:40 PM

Originally Posted By: Sicilian Babe


The breast-feeding itself should not be controversial, if it were a younger child. The fact that we make it something that should be hidden is what's wrong.


I have no problem with it. And to those that do, all I can say is tough titty.
Posted By: SC

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/10/12 11:28 PM

Originally Posted By: ronnierocketAGO
I have no problem with it. And to those that do, all I can say is tough titty.


I think it sucks.
Posted By: ronnierocketAGO

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/10/12 11:31 PM

Originally Posted By: SC

I think it sucks.


You're gonna milk this joke for all its worth?
Posted By: XDCX

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/10/12 11:36 PM

I'm in udder shock.
Posted By: ronnierocketAGO

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/10/12 11:39 PM

Originally Posted By: XDCX
I'm in udder shock.


This thread is awesome. Go ahead and teet about it online.
Posted By: goombah

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 12:16 AM

I think the kid is old enough to get some Oreos to dunk...
Posted By: Mark

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 12:29 AM

If that's what a milk break looks like nowadays in grammar school, I bet nap time is rated NC-17!
Posted By: olivant

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 12:39 AM

It's good that we can keep abreast of developments.
Posted By: XDCX

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 12:48 AM

I've heard both sides of the argument regarding this picture, but to me, it sounds like a bunch of tit for tat.
Posted By: olivant

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 01:27 AM

Some may think this is all utter nonsense.
Posted By: pizzaboy

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 02:56 PM

Seriously, how old is that kid?
Posted By: klydon1

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 03:11 PM

He looks like the fat dumb kid on Two and a Half Men. Yet I have a feeling he'll end up more like Norman Bates.

I'm inclined to think that mothers, who breastfeed children of that age are not so much doing it for their children as they are for fulfilling some type of self need.
Posted By: pizzaboy

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 03:14 PM

Originally Posted By: klydon1
I'm inclined to think that mothers, who breastfeed children of that age are not so much doing it for their children as they are for fulfilling some type of self need.

I agree, Klyd. Mothers breast feeding their children in public don't bother me one iota. But continuing to breast feed past a certain age can't be mentally healthy for the kid.
Posted By: Sicilian Babe

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 04:53 PM

The article says the kid is 3, but he looks ready for middle school!

Klyd hit it right on the head. These types of mothers are the kind that you see roaming the halls of the schools on a daily basis, puffed-up with self-importance and volunteering at every opportunity, not because they think they're doing the right thing, but because it's a way to insert themselves into their children's lives at a time when their children should be learning to stand on their own two feet.
Posted By: olivant

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 05:05 PM

Try this on for size:

http://thebabybond.com/Breastfeeding%20Crime.html
Posted By: pizzaboy

Re: Time Magazine cover - 05/11/12 05:08 PM

Attachment parenting is nothing but junk science. And for those members who don't know me, yes, I am a parent, of two daughters in their early 20's, and a teenaged son.
© 2024 GangsterBB.NET