Thursday, August 12, 2010

topless thursday: gisele's a pompous ass

DON'T FORGET TO ENTER ONE OF MY GIVEAWAYS:
_________________________________

Recently super model, Gisele Bundchen made the news for suggesting that there be an international law requiring all mothers to nurse their babies for six months. And she goes on to say (in Harper's Bazaar's September issue) , "Are you going to give chemical food to your child when they are so little?"

And as a mom,  breast feeding or not, I get what she's saying as far as wanting what you think is best for your baby.

But I think she's a pompous ass.

What she doesn't account for in this "law"she is suggesting is that not all mom's can nurse their babies for medical reasons. Low milk supply. Not producing milk at all. Complications from breast surgery or even cancer. Medications necessary for mom, but not good for baby. Or the baby wont nurse.

And for these reasons (and so many more), her comment is asinine.

Who is she to publicly judge how mother's raise their babies?  My mother, wanted to, but couldn't nurse my brother and I. We were formula fed. And she raised us wonderfully and we are both healthy, well adjusted adults. Gisele's comment suggests that she wronged us.

And even if mom's don't nurse because they think it's weird or unnatural, who is she (or we) to judge? So a baby gets formula. Really, is it that bad?

I visited a township in South Africa where mom's were giving babies stale Coca Cola in their bottles to give them calories. And even then, is it fair to judge?  Perhaps they can not nurse all the time, don't produce milk, or worse, trying not to pass the HIV virus that they are infected with along to their baby via breast milk and have no means to purchase pricey formula. Those mama's are doing the best they can with their resources and what they think is best for their babies.

I had challenges in the beginning nursing Hayden. She was a few weeks early and the lactation folks felt that she had some preemie tendencies when it came to feeding. So I pumped and bottle fed for two months. And finally, she accepted my breast willingly at home, but tends to not want to nurse when we are out and about. And frankly, with a 2 year old to chase around, it's hard to sit down while out and spend the 30 minutes or so necessary for a good nursing session when. Not to mention spending half your day attached to the pump. So we supplement with 10 oz of formula a day. And she is happy and growing beautifully! Mind you, if she would take from me all the time and was an efficient nurser, I'd totally be doing it. And if someone asked my opinion I would certainly say "breast is best," but this is our situation.

Bottom line, a babies gotta eat. And as long as we do what we think is best for them, who is anyone to judge if they are getting a bottle of formula or breast milk. I can't fault Gisele for doing what's best for her baby, but I am angered by her lack of compassion for other people's situations.

PS - Gisele has taken quite a bit of flak about her comments! See here and here.

_______________________________

Like what you're reading? Vote for me. Just takes two clicks.
Vote For Us @ TopBaby Blogs! The Best Baby Blog Directory

5 comments:

  1. She's ridiculous - my advice to her, just worry about being pretty, that's what you get paid for!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why is it that some of the most physically beautiful people open their mouths and ugly comes out? I tried to breastfeed with both my two, and wasn't able to for various reasons. The last thing new mothers need is someone making them feel bad for choosing to feed their child, no matter how they do it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Absolutely! Breast feeding is not easy in the beginning. And then to realize it just isn't working and making the decision to stop is hard. I was at that point with Hayden, my youngest, and I cried. A lot. I mourned it. I was lucky that it finally worked for us. But Gisele acts as if those of us who give our babies formula are doing it because we just don't care if they get breast milk. I WANT to give my baby only breastmilk, but my circumstances require me to supplement. Am I articulating my thought well?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ooh, okay, I didn't like her comment, but for a completely different reason. I steadfastly believe that the WHO code should be more stringently enforced so that women are given greater options and support with regards to feeding their infants, and I also tend to believe that the argument that formula should either be classified as a drug or socialized. I have a serious problem with formula companies using sub-par chemical compounds and, as we find out year after year after year, hormones or additives that are nutritionally inferior just because they are cheaper and will turn a buck. I also have a very big problem with free samples being handed out willy nilly and with aggressive advertising and with formula companies maintaining breastfeeding support phone lines or groups that do not employ international board-certified lactation consultants.

    HOWEVER, I also think it's wrong for anybody - be it a supermodel or a government entity - to tell me what I must do with my breasts. No matter how pro-breastfeeding I may be, I am certainly aware that there are many, many reasons that women might opt out of breastfeeding - and without being intimately familiar with each circumstance, I am certainly not going to be the person who stands up and says one reason is viable and the next is not. I do think that every woman should give it a try - I mean, at least once put that baby to your breast. There's a biological drive to do it, and you can't really say you don't like something until you've given it a shot, so just once try it out. But do I think it should be legally mandated? NO. That's ludicrous! Nobody should be breaking the law if they decide not to breastfeed.

    So that's the problem I have with it. Not that it excludes a group of women who cannot breastfeed, because let's be honest. The group of women who cannot breastfeed is a very small minority, much smaller than most people realize (particularly if other options are subtracted from the picture), and for every woman who cannot, there is a woman like me on the other end of the spectrum who pumps an enormous surplus. Wet nurses, milk donation, I don't know what the answer would be, but obviously there are options out there. So although I do not want to minimize the fact of medical necessity, it's rare (if it weren't, the human race wouldn't have survived), so that's not what bothers me. What bothers me is that she overlooks a certain level of personal freedom. For hundreds of years, women who have had options (i.e. wet nurse, goat milk, etc.) have sometimes opted out of nursing their own child. It's a case of personal liberty, of choosing how to utilize one's body. I don't like anyone who pronounces that we should eliminate that.

    Really, what's next? Where you're allowed to set down your right arm in public? How often a man is allowed to masturbate in a week? Body liberty = slippery slope!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Wow. Look at me, writing you a novel. Sorry about that!

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for reading my 'lil ole blog! I love comments and would love to read yours.