Sometimes, women's bodies just are

A science blog is the last place we should expect to see mythology. Take a critical look at that study you linked to as "proof" that breast feeding makes for smarter kids.

I don't agree with your assertions that men's interest in breasts is cultural, or that women's bodies exist mostly to please men.

In the U.S., it's normative to find female breasts sexay. I'm not sure why; they have a pretty clear function, and it's not reproductive.

Why is it hard to acknowledge that breast have multiple evolutionary purposes. To feed children and for sexual selection.
It's not cultural thing. It's a human thing. Female breasts evolved to attact males because human males prefer females with firm round breast. It's like the evolution of the swordfish's sword. The swords are there because the females prefer males with long protrusions. But unlike human breasts, swords are not otherwise beneficial to the species.

And the female form works in both directions. Yes, us males find it difficult (but necessary) to avert our attention to the female form, but her form is used to attract suitable mates. Certainly in a civilized society, the role of clothing is used to control the amount of wanted/unwanted attention to the female form.

But I agree. We should just get over it. Breastfeeding is best for the baby.

I think you made an important point by observing that breastfeeding is an "intimate act," and therefore evokes a certain degree of discomfort when it's done in public. I suspect this drives closer to the heart of the issue than the claims that those who object can't get past breasts as anything other than a sexual attrraction. After all, I'm a (straight) woman and have definitely felt discomfort in the presence of public breastfeeding -- not because I'm a prude or felt it was immodest or morally wrong, but because I felt like I was suddenly an unwilling voyeur forced into witnessing a private act. But just because I'm a little uncomfortable doesn't mean I can't recognize the necessity.

Can't speak to the science of breast-feeding versus non-breast-feeding, except to say that I'm adopted and therefore never had the option of breastfeeding. I think I turned out okay. :)

Rene, I wish you would elaborate on your objections to the paper that Dr Signout cited. Sure, it's a meta-analysis, but it was supported by makers of baby formula. If there were bias, you would have expected the result to be that breastfeeding was inferior to formula feeding.

'Breasts'? Pul-leeze. A bird has a breast. So does a human. You're talking about tits.

Thighs and asses also attract men's attention, but there is no ban on baring thighs. A string bikini almost bares the whole body, so much so that they might as well go naked -- which would actually look better.

I didn't say look at the study's sponsor, I suggested readers take a critical look at the study. Put on your scientific thinking caps. You don't want me to give you the answer. Pretend you're one of the peer reviewers and try to find the glaring problem in this study. I don't want to say more and monopolize another person's blog, plus that's not the topic of this thread and you'll learn more figuring it out on your own. ;-)
Hint: it is one of the most common errors in studies purporting to find breast is best.

I hate when this natural act turns into a massive campaign that claims breast feeders are superior parents.

Some people can't or choose not to breast feed. They have rights too.

Somewhere, on another blog, I saw the horrible images of nursing. Give me a break! They did show infants cosily snuggled up to fully clad (to the camera's POV) bosums. I assume, from basic Development 101 that the gatekeepers at Facebook once were babies who were gaga at the sight of their mama's boobs. Maybe their own development stopped at age twelve and they got a serious case of the sex frights. If its good enough for the Virgin Mary and the Vatican, it ought to be good enough for the internet. Here in Connecticut we had a case a couple years back about nursing in public (AKA public indecency) and the outrage that resulted (this being an outpost of the LaLeche League) caused the accuser's privates to revert to their infant state. Not a peep since. This sort of prudery needs to be stomped on whenever it appears.

Rene: in science, coyness suggests a lack of data. I encourage you to make with an actual argument.

Also, for the education of the general public, meta-analyses are one of the more robust forms of medical evidence (behind pre-summarized, pre-validated sources). They actually aggregate data from many similar studies to determine if there's an overall trend to the evidence.

Might I observe that breasts are only central sexual signals in particular cultures, and that American culture need not be thought of as the universal rule?

Myself, I prefer a good large mind to breasts. Others prefer a pert dowry.

Rene, just cause I find your posts obnoxious, I'm going to make the conjecture that you have a chip on your shoulder because a) you didn't breastfeed your own kids, or b)you found out you weren't breastfed yourself. This conjecture is based on a scientific evaluation of your posts, but I'm not gonna tell you the specific evidence that leads me to this conjecture because you'd benefit from using your thinking cap on and figuring it out yourself. Oh wait, did that sound a bit condescending? Seriously, give me a friggin' break. You've used two posts to attack a study and yet provided no supporting evidence whatsoever. Why don't you take pity on us and actually share your cricital appraisal of this study so we don't have to think too hard.

To Grackle: It's sort of ODD then, birdie, that they call it BREASTfeeding, and not TITfeeding. Or boobfeeding, melonfeeding, jugfeeding, tatafeeding, hooterfeeding, headlightsfeeding, or any-other-juvenile-name-for-a-really-nice-body-partfeeding. Funny how all of those "nicknames" seem to relate to the sexualization and discomfort -- and, dare I say, tittering -- Signout is exploring in this post. You sound like one of the shifty-eyed ones! Next time you see a nursing mother adjusting her pasties, feel free to whip out your sophisticated terminology.

I have zero objection to breastfeeding pics on networking web sites... it's the profile subject's prerogative. If the photos aren't prurient, nor designed to gross ordinary people out (infected glands maybe?), which I think would be really bizarre, then let the person share what they want to share.

Vis a vis public breastfeeding, I'm fine with it if it's super discreet, using blankets/shields and preferably at the side/back of a restaurant or on a park bench out of the way, or in a ladies' lounge. Not like "hide your shame!" but please don't assume I want to participate in your child-feeding miracle, you baby cultists.

I agree that breastfeeding usually is best for babies, assuming the mother and baby can do it healthfully and reasonably conveniently, so I understand that it can't always be done at home or in a ladies' lounge. (I'm not saying in a toilet stall! i mean a dignified seat in a vestibule.) But as a member of the general public, and a New Yorker, I already have to share more of others' lives than I might prefer, so please, moms do what you can to keep your business private and I won't criticize -- even in my head. Deal? :)

Amy, apparently you've not had a child yet or have had a child and have decided not to breastfeed. An infant needs to eat ALL THE TIME. There is no schedule. There is no rhyme or reason to their hunger. They eat when they want to eat. And a mother who doesn't want to lose her mind in the house will sometimes *ack* venture OUT OF THE HOUSE!!!! Oh, the horror! And sometimes we even have a baby who pulls shawls/blankets/hoods of shame/etc off of our breasts for their own amusement/learning. So spare me the "back of the bus" mentality and get over your ookiness at seeing a breast in the act of feeding. And remember to come back and post if you ever "get this" because you've been through it.

"And sometimes we even have a baby who pulls shawls/blankets/hoods of shame/etc off of our breasts for their own amusement/learning."

I've also heard quite a few mothers explain that their child will scream and/or not eat if a blanket is over his/her head. Plus, that means the kid can't see his/her mother - or anything else - which may sometimes be the real source of the baby's displeasure. Which brings us to the point that you are often asking an infant to be physically and/or emotionally uncomfortable just so that you - the adult - won't have to go to such lengths as averting your eyes in order to not see something that makes you only emotionally uncomfortable.

"After all, I'm a (straight) woman and have definitely felt discomfort in the presence of public breastfeeding -- not because I'm a prude or felt it was immodest or morally wrong, but because I felt like I was suddenly an unwilling voyeur forced into witnessing a private act."

That doesn't mean that your issue with it isn't sexual, though. Just because you aren't attracted to the breasts, that doesn't mean that part of considering it "private" doesn't have to do with our seeing breasts as sexual.

Most "private" moments that make us uncomfortable are either emotionally charged ones (responding to news of a death, etc.), sexual, or have to do with bodily fluids. Breastfeeding is tied to latter two, but really not the "emotional" bit. In fact, I'd say a part of what makes people uncomfortable is that they expect it to be very a touching, emotional moment and, well, not that it can't be, but when you do it several times a day for months on end, it's only emotional in the way that every other every day activity can be unexpectedly poignant, especially when children and relationships come into play*. And that weirds people out, because we tend to be weirded out when motherhood is demystified and knocked off it's pedestal.

Even the "bodily fluids are icky" is tied to the way we see women's bodies. We excuse bodily fluids as long as they are ordinary and necessary (sneezing) and dealt with appropriately (into a kleenex). For some reason, we don't see breastmilk as ordinary, nor do we see breastfeeding in public as necessary nor appropriate. I think that it's obvious ordinariness makes breastfeeding in public necessary and therefore appropriate, and that the extreme objectification of women's bodies is part of what makes breastfeeding seem unordinary and to the point of being taboo in public.

I also wonder if a part of feeling uncomfortable, among women, isn't also tied to sympathy. We automatically put ourselves in her shoes and consequently feel on display ourselves. Which, of course, comes back to seeing breasts as sexual objects.

*or so I've heard. The exception being at the very beginning (well, maybe not the very beginning, it sometimes takes a while for both parties to get the hang of it), for obvious reasons.

I didn't say look at the study's sponsor, I suggested readers take a critical look at the study. Put on your scientific thinking caps. You don't want me to give you the answer. Pretend you're one of the peer reviewers and try to find the glaring problem in this study. I don't want to say more and monopolize another person's blog, plus that's not the topic of this thread and you'll learn more figuring it out on your own. ;-)
Hint: it is one of the most common errors in studies purporting to find breast is best.

I'm going to bet that it's usually the first reason that gets most peoples' knickers in a twist. In this culture, women's bodies exist mostly to please men. If they're otherwise occupied, or not pleasing, they're supposed to be kept private. The breasts of breastfeeding women are both--no wonder they're so offensive.

I think people differ greatly on this issue. For example, if it were completely unidentifiable as my own, I would have no problem with a picture of my naked ass being posted on the Internet. Others would be absolutely horrified by the prospect.

Signout reader named Benjamin Langer, who himself has a very nice critical piece on intelligent design in the current edition of SCQ.

So spare me the "back of the bus" mentality and get over your ookiness at seeing a breast in the act of feeding.