I think the most important thing to point out is this: breastfeeding itself was not the issue. Neither story was ever critical of the act of breastfeeding. The doctor was completely supportive of it. The debate focused on whether breastfeeding should be shared so publicly, and the use of discretion.
Many posts emotively suggested the doctor to be a pervert, as he was clearly feeling uncomfortable because he viewed the breast in a sexual context. Others went on to accuse him of wanting mothers to starve their babies to death. Even if this was the case, which it wasn't, it would take more than missing one feed to starve your baby. But it goes to highlight just how much of an emotional issue is it.
The most common argument was: it's a natural bodily function. Yawn. Well, so is urination, defecation, masturbation and fornication, but that doesn't mean I want to be confronted with images of these deeds being performed on a daily basis, so that old chestnut needs too be put out to pasture with the old nags who swallow it.
I personally don't have a problem with breastfeeding, providing it's done with discretion, but I can also sympathise with those whose views are more conservative than my own.
In the Facebook case, the pic was removed due to the "nudity" guidelines it fell under and, to be honest, I understand where they are coming from. The mother could have shared the photo with intended family friends in a variety of ways that didn't involve posting on a worldwide, free-for-all-to-see forum. She later went on to post it on a specially dedicated site and received thousands of hits. Why she went to the press and cried victim, I'll never understand. She wanted her needs, and only her needs, to be considered. She gave no consideration to those who may not be comfortable with it.
About now, people will be jumping up and down and saying the usual ... "if you don't want to see it, look away". But when you have curious kids, for example, we all know it's not that easy. There are many families with vastly different moral compasses who, rightly or wrongly, are just as entitled to have their needs considered and met. This is, in my opinion, the very real issue, that unfortunately does not come with a one-size-fits-all solution.
We want everyone to be sympathetic to our needs but we're not prepared to be sympathetic to the needs of others. Not exactly a level playing field, is it?
It makes me think of my column from two weeks ago, about how basic human kindness has just about become a collector's item. With social media, we just do/ say/ post whatever we like, in that moment, and hit Enter. Many later regret the decision or, upon reflection, wish perhaps we hadn't been so hasty.
The first step is to stop and consider. Can our needs be met another way? In the case of the mum on Facebook, she, for example, could have emailed the pic just to those she wanted to see it. Or, as she later did, posted it on a breastfeeding site, where no one could or would be offended, showing her consideration of others with differing values. Everyone gets a happy ending.
The doctor, well, I'm not sure that he did anything wrong, other than voice an opinion that many didn't agree with. It's the comment posters, however, who could learn a lesson here. Think before you launch into attack mode. Most of you made it about breastfeeding when that was never the issue and your subsequent misinformed judgments of him made you appear very hypocritical.
We have this almost primitive "us and them" mentality, where anyone who doesn't share our opinion must be viewed as a mortal enemy. We get defensive and instinctively attack ... hence the bullet-proof vest and armour. Do I really need it? We'll have to wait and see.
Kate Stewart is an unemployed, reluctant mother of three, currently running amok in the city ... who appreciates feedback at investik8@gmail.com.
