The feminist view of breastfeeding

wrote in news:1154917793.137319.262950
@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:

Breastfeeding can help prevent breast cancer.


Which is why she is against it, no doubt.

PS: Going braless also prevents breast cancer.

http://www.007b.com/bra_sagging.php

On 5 Aug 2006 12:07:25 -0700, elizabeth wrote:

snip
sure some unattractive "earth mothers" in the 60s breast fed but to
call them "progressive" because they were "hippies" is just silly,
since their ideals are anything but progressive -- their only concern
seemed to be a neurosis about food -- women who spend all their time
being mammals ain't going anywhere in this life or doing anything to
help uplift other women


Wow. Wish I'd said that. But that's why feminism failed--the moos
took it over, and it became all about middle class women getting poorer
women to do all their ****work. You can't have a union of scabs. The
men won't do the work, and so they dump all the **** on other women.

The mammal mamma sort of sow really hates the idea that she is what she
is, and must try to drag down all other women to her level. She
doesn't mind if women are harmed, as long as she's harmed less.
Breeders are beggars, and they have managed to go back to the idea that
the only women who matter are those who breed. The breeders-uber-alles
types all sound like Magda Goebbels, the UberSow of the Nazis, who was
crazier than a bat on acid from postpartum psychosis. She denounced
equity feminism, insisting that women have their sacred power from
breeding . .. it was all about Family Values there, too.

I say a woman should be judged on the content of her character, not the
contents of her womb. In an overpopulated world, these womben should
be seen as the absolute destroyers of civilization. It's a repeating
pattern in history, women being forced, coerced, or bribed to
overbreed, so the leaders have surplus population so they can have
enough young males to go to war, and that leaves all the excess young
females for the old men at home. But why bother learning history; it
just repeats itself.



Someone sounds barren and jealous.

On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 07:59:34 -0500, Mitchell Holman wrote:

wrote in
oups.com:

I really am curious why you are so frustrated with something that is an
option in the first place. Why do you not respect a womans rights?



Women really don't like other women.



That's not true; however, many feminists really do not like women who do
not agree with their agenda.

On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 14:19:09 -0500, Mitchell Holman wrote:

"elizabeth" wrote in news:1154890987.827732.58720
@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:


Mitchell Holman wrote:
wrote in
oups.com:

I really am curious why you are so frustrated with something that is
an
option in the first place. Why do you not respect a womans rights
Women really don't like other women.


I loathe women who make it impossible for women to be treated like
human beings.


Make it impossible - how?


By becoming a broodsow


Is that what you called YOUR mother?


and insisting that this is the
way women should be,


It is the some women CHOOSE to be.


she is pushing the same ideas that Magda Goebbels
did, that motherhood is what women are for, and in a time of
overpopulation, the idea that half the population should stay home and
breed more resource suckers is absolute insanity, unless you like wars,
plagues, and famines.


Are all children "resource suckers"?

It must be painful to live with that much hate.



She's a hardboiled lesbian. Just leave her alone.

woman a slave to baby for years at a time, it's sad and it forever
truncates the woman's future

if the formulas aren't good enough, then by god, invent better formulas
but what is the point of technology if woman must be a slave forever?

the hole in woman's earning ability and future created by spending
years w. a kid attached to her boob is a hole that can never be
overcome


Oh good ****in' grief. Few normal women spend *years* with a "kid
attached to her boob" (in Western culture). As somebody who breastfed 2
kids for about 6 months each (and then gradually made the ol'
switcheroo to formula) I can say with great certainty that BFing a baby
in the middle of the night is a hell of a lot easier than getting up,
boiling water, measuring out formula, etc etc etc....

If women are so freaking busy and insecure and "enslaved" that they
can't do this for a few damn months then they shouldn't have babies.
Or they should just go for the formula and STFU. I have no problem with
women who choose not to breastfeed. But I have a huge problem with
women who make a huge sexist deal out of how they shouldn't be wasting
their precious time breastfeeding because it's "sexist"....

Idiotic!

"elizabeth" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
Lol, yeah and I would not have it any other why. I like to get layed
don't you.

I like to get laid.
But then, I got educated first.


I wish more people had your view, Elizabeth
Loner

Mitchell Holman wrote:
"elizabeth" wrote in news:1154893466.406728.285740
@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
snip
Well, it's a stupid CHOICE, because women who choose to stay home and
breed kids end up homeless and alone quite a bit. It's a loser's game,
where you have no market value at all. In a capitalist society, such
women are beggars.


Whereas in a non-capitalist society they are....?

Women, and mothers in particular, actually had it much better in the
former Soviet Union. Women had the better treatment in Afghanistan
under the Soviets than they do now, even after we came there.

Because it's too expensive to raise children now

The mothers here seem to disagree with you.

Because of the huge subsidies they are getting from taxpayers now. And
every time you turn around, some moocow is squealing how they need
more, more for the schools, free daycare, free preschool, free
healthcare and housing available only to poor people who have children
they can't support (while poor people too responsible to breed children
they can't afford are dying on the streets).

(because we've "overgrazed our range" and it takes more work to provide
resources) taxpayers are expected to pay for more and more of the costs
involved in raising children.

So? The future of our country is a good
investment.

Not anymore, since so many of these children can't function as soldiers
or scholars, and most of the jobs are outsourced or done by illegal
aliens.

Because so many men CHOOSE to be
deadbeats and not support their children, we have more foster kids than
ever, and less children being supported by their fathers.

So you hate mothers AND fathers.

People who choose to breed children they can't/won't care for are worse
than comtemptible. Children don't ask to be born, nor do taxpayers ask
to pay for other's contraception failures.

That means
the taxpayers pay for more of the parent's responsibilities. I'm also
****ing tired of all the crime and mess children create, like how it
costs SF at least 30 million a year just for graffitti clean up, we
have gangrapists in middle schools, and shootings at high schools are
common. All the breeders of those thugs CHOSE to have a child.

Perhaps you would refer no one to have any
children anywhere. That's going to make it tough
to find people to care for you in your dotage.

Nope, and who would care if no one bred any more children? Ray
Bradbury addressed that in _The Martian Chronicles_

If no one had kids for about 40 years, we could repair some of the
damage to the ecosystem, and be able to move the 80% of the world's
population that live on seacoasts to higher ground, since the oceans
are rising quite fast now. If you breeders keep it up, your dotage
will be as Soylent Green, because the only use they will have for you
used up breeders is chow. Sperm and embryos can be stored for that
long, we already have the technology.

Besides, there are plenty of former breeders on the streets, and they
are dying off. No one is taking care of their dotage.


What overpopulation? There are whole towns in
certain countries that have died because no one
is making babies. Every hear of negative popultion
growth? Look it up.

If you really think the world is underpopulated, you are insane.

True, white Europeans are not breeding as fast as the darker people of
the world, but we're already over 6 billion and closing in on 7
billion.

JohnArbor wrote:
snip
Someone sounds barren and jealous.

Must be you, since this is a ng and you can't hear anything but your
own mutterings. At least when you talk to yourself, you have someone
who won't laugh at you.

elizabeth wrote:
Phyl wrote:

elizabeth wrote:

Mitchell Holman wrote:

"elizabeth" wrote in news:1154890987.827732.58720

snip

My mother had her children before legal contraception and abortion,
when there were fewer than 3 billion people on the planet, with none of
the tax giveaways and freebies we give people now who breed children
they can't or won't support.

and insisting that this is the
way women should be,

It is the some women CHOOSE to be.

Well, it's a stupid CHOICE, because women who choose to stay home and
breed kids end up homeless and alone quite a bit.

I chose to stay home and have children, and I went back to work after
they were in school. My girls are terrific, and I enjoy them immensely,
as does my husband.


Whoopee for YOU! So what? Why do you feel a need to trumpet your
so-called happiness?


You have a lot of issues, it sounds like, and a great deal of
bitterness.


And that would be more projection on your part.

No, your tone makes me think you are one bitter person.

If I had wanted
children, I would have had them. I had to fight *not* to have
children. I can remember when abortion was illegal, and women had to
lie to get contraception.


You don't want to have children? Great. I did? Great.

Live and let live.


Trouble is, because of breedersows like YOU

Ouch. Ew. Oh. Ouch. Hurts. So. Much. Not.

, YOUR children will have to
sell their asses for support, because we have too many people and too
few jobs.

My children will have more than enough money to take care of themselves,
thank you very much.


You know what it's like for girls in the former soviet
union? That's better than the future YOUR daughters will face.
Because of YOUR choices, the Commons is overgrazed and everyone
suffers.

Because of MY choices, one of my daughters may well grow up to cure YOUR
disease


BTW, if you want to get a glimpse of your future, check out a women's
shelter. Almost all the middle aged and elderly women in shelters have
children.

My future? Get real. I make more than enough money to take care of
myself, my husband has more than enough money to take care of both of us
in retirement, and I'm not worried. At all.

Many of them work, or did work. It's just that there isn't
much of a future being a breeder, because you make yourself obsolete by
middle age,

Here in middle age (I'm 48) I'm making a terrific buck in a field where
there's a shortage. I have job offers every week. Next?

and there is no pension plans. Depending on the kindness
of men is why most women end up on the streets.

I have a pension plan, as does my husband, and he cannot do a thing with
it or to it without my knowledge or permission. Next?


One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over,
expecting a different result.

I had three kids, stayed home to rear them, got three degrees, and am
working now that they're older. Next?

After a couple of generations of
"displaced homemakers" women like you look truly insane.

Heh. you wish, darling. I have a great life. I'm not a "homemaker," and
even if I was, where's the harm in that?


Why do you feel a need to call me bitter? Seems to me that indicates
that maybe you're not as happy with your choices as you want to make
yourself believe.


I call you bitter because you use degrading terms and your tone is caustic.

Now, go sit in your child"free" room alone and bask in your happiness.


--
Phyl

Kari wrote:
elizabeth wrote:


BTW, if you want to get a glimpse of your future, check out a women's
shelter. Almost all the middle aged and elderly women in shelters have
children. Many of them work, or did work. It's just that there isn't
much of a future being a breeder, because you make yourself obsolete by
middle age, and there is no pension plans. Depending on the kindness
of men is why most women end up on the streets.




I also think that another good way for breeders to
look at their future is to visit a rest home and
ask the residents there how often their children
come to see them. Breeders of both genders seem
to think that their kids will always love them
unconditionally and will "take care of them when
they're old."


As opposed to the breedless, childless people who'll have tons of people
to visit THEM?

BWahahaha.


--
Phyl