Editor's comment re: Jordan OK! article

[boogiewoogie]

I don't know whether this has been mentioned already but I read this yesterday from the Times.

Melanie McDonagh

Sounds as if she feels guilty about not being a "successful" breastfeeder. I am pro choice and do not have a problem with formula feeders but it's the smug and sanctimonious tone of the article that annoys me as well as the sloppiness in accuracy re breastfeeding. Is the point of her article the reason why women formula feed is because they're selfish? An insult to many who do ff. Also misses the point about the Jordan OK! debate that's going on.

[ladymac]

I read the article late last night and it made me so cross.

I too am pro choice but this came across as a dig at women who enjoy breastfeeding.

[ladymac]

Loved the bit where she refers to bottle feeding as 'handy'!

[barbamama]

Think it is a shame she is not breast feeding and the advertising was so blatant in ok - but really what else would you expect from that publication. Still not entirely convinced that formula advertising is any worse that any other advertising - think I am capable of not falling for it. I tell you what though, the worrying thing about that article is how she refers to Jordan's daughter as a he - not a good sign for a well researched article!

[boogiewoogie]

Yes BM, I noticed that she called the baby Harvey!

[mummydoit]

She also calls the NCT chief executive Brenda Phipps when her name is Belinda. I find it very difficult to take her opinions seriously when she's such a sloppy journalist.

[filchthemildmanneredjanitor]

oh well-what can you expect from someone produced such a facile publication as ok?

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[aloha]

Melanie McDonagh has nothing to do with OK. She's a columnist in the Times.

[boogiewoogie]

Hence the quote marks Pruners.

But why else would she need to justify her decision to ff? There is no need to justify your actions if there is nothing wrong with it. And also state all the negatives of bfing? Some which are not even true.

What I don't like about the article is that the tone is very anti bf.

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[harpsichordcarrier]

I always find it quite amusing when women columnists take a pop at breastfeeding and they can pretend to be terribly brave and unconventional and going against the social norms, whereas in truth they are just pandering to the nasty prejudices of the majority. saying, urgh breastfeeding is a bit yucky isn't it, and the people who preomote it are a bit weird and hairy and anyway my baby is just fine and my tits are still perky so there.
it's not radical it's a raging cliche.

[tallulah]

Anyone else spot the deliberate mistake "the child contentedly sucking from his bottle"

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[harpsichordcarrier]

accused of any of what?

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[doggiesayswoof]

Agree harpsi.

Bottlefeeding is the norm in the UK, as the majority of mothers do it...

I loved this line

'She could have admitted to a couple of abortions and people would have minded less.'

Er...yes... wtf is your point Melanie??

[harpsichordcarrier]

but she is Pruni
Actually, that makes me sound like a fanatic, like the Maenads from the NCT, which I?m not.
we are all fanatics with nothing better to do with our time.
and she does say it makes your breasts go all funny.
and For the past eight months I have not spent most of my time as a human version of Dairy Crest.

so we are all cows in a dairy herd.

and midwives promoting bf are an army of hectoring midwives.

and that the orthodoxy is that not bf your baby is tantamount to child abuse. which we all say, of course. all the time. the words are never far from our lips.

[harpsichordcarrier]

it's not that bad an article really, a bit lazy and tired and sloppy but OK
but I wish it would be possible to talk about the upsides and positives of formula without having a dig at the breastfeeding fanatics and our unperky tits and without resorting to such cliches.
it's all a bit Daily Mail if you ask me

[filchthemildmanneredjanitor]

i think using the word maenads is quite offensive really. just that on it's own.

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[Pruners]

Message withdrawn

[policywonk]

I'm an extended BF-er and bow to very few people in my bloody-minded determination to BF my 2-year-old wherever and whenever I need to. However, I do think that there are big problems in the national dialogue about infant feeding, and not all the problems are caused by those who don't BF.

As someone who always intended to BF, I did feel hectored by midwives and their one-note approach to BF-ing, especially their insane insistence that BFing is easy to establish and never hurts if you're doing it right (what a load of bollocks). BFing is increasingly seen as a middle-class cult, and I really believe that there are many women who refuse to BF because they see it as a class identifier.

I don't like the tone of this woman's article, and she is insulting to those of us who choose to BF, but then BFers are frequently insulting about those who choose to FF (unless there is some demonstrable medical need).

[doggiesayswoof]

I thought the maenads were generally quite cool, no? Bit idiosyncratic and scary maybe.

Bored of reading this kind of article actually.

Why can't one say that ff is good enough, which is her whole point really, without automatically slagging anyone who tries to promote bf? Prob because it would make dull reading I suppose.