The idea of being able to breastfeed at work is quite progressive and a really great thing. I hope it gets passed. But the idea that they need to pass legislation to allow women to breastfeed in public . . . um, why is this an issue again? The fact that it takes unil 2007 to address that sort of prejudice in legislation is pretty frightening. Though I'll probably say the same thing when serious legislation finally gets introduced in the U.S. around the year 2050 . . .

That's great news, but I might take refuge in a media-proof bunker because while it's "under discussion" there's going to be a ton of asshattery in the papers.

And yes, why do we even have to have a manifesto and discussion. Baby steps, I suppose.

Awesome

I seriously never understood why it was considered so controversial for a woman to breastfeed in public. People always want to make something sexual out of it, but it's so natural.

Count me in as another one who has always been utterly agog that public breastfeeding has ever been any kind of an issue!

Would love to see a similar manifesto passed here...

The crazy think is how the media deamonizes women who DON'T breast feed and makes them into Bad Women. Talk about a double standard. You can't win. I think that it really has to be some point of ploy to keep women domesticated and out of the public sphere. "Care for your child the Right Way or you'll be a Bad Mother, but please, don't care for your child in public!!!"

This is great news for women and children in Britain as the rates for breastfeeding and extended breastfeeding in Britain are even lower than the rates in the US.

Currently in the US, this change in the law is happening on a state by state basis. La Leche League and numerous women's groups are very active in getting state's to pass this kind of protection. The initial poster of this information implies that the US legislators would laugh it down. On the contrary, numerous states have protections for women and children to nurse publicly and protections for women to pump at work. Here is a link from La Leche League that provides information as to each state's law. http://www.lalecheleague.org/Law/LawUS.html?m=0,1,0

Breastfeeding is so important to both mothers and children, especially breastfeeding beyond what our societal norm defines (typically 6 months). We should encourage all new mothers and mothers alike! Way to go Britain!

I think it's great as I am currently breastfeeding my 9 month old. I've had to do it in public before and it was never a problem for anyone, except perhaps the one teenage boy who seemed very interested in what I was doing. Here in Al the breastfeeding law only took effect last July so there are still places that are a bit behind with the times.

Cara -- I don't think it some sort of organized ploy. I think there are several complicated factors at work. First, in the 1940s and 1950s the medical industry was attempting to establish its power over the natural and took control of parenting and endorsed formula over breastmilk. At the same time corporate interests became involved and the media blitz that continues today concerning the benefits of formula and the convenience of formula are very convincing and overwhelming. Then at the same time there is the increasing sexualization and making public of women's body parts. Now, in the new millenium we have finally established that nature got it right and no amount of messing with formulas can one up breastmilk. But the advertising blitz continues.

I believe now there is the pull of perceived convenience, the obsession and sexualization of breasts (which women accept), the continued advertising blitz and a confusion over what is really best (grandparents and people in the earlier generation usually don't understand the push to breastfeed, new moms/parents can be confused).

So our society is currently in a phase of readjusting to bad medical advice and trying to resist commercial advertisements while all in the same topic/subject matter of an "object" that is highly sexualized. It is difficult. I speak as a women who has spent years breastfeeding her three children, including pumping at a highly demanding job.

MINISTERS are considering new laws to give women a right to breastfeed their babies in public and take statutory breaks at work to suckle their infants.

Women bring their babies to work with them in the UK?

Employers would also have to allow mothers to take breaks each working day to breast feed. In France women with a baby under 12 months are entitled to two 30-minute breaks a day. In Italy, new mothers can take two one-hour rest periods.

I'd be fine with this as long as everyone gets the breaks, not just new mothers. Otherwise it doesn't seem fair.

And the cynic in me thinks this will lead to less women being hired, if nursing mothers will be working one or two hours less per day than everyone else.

on that note:
http://gawker.com/news/femiladyism/maggie-gyllenhaal-nursing-pix-spark-momtroversy-258339.php

Perwinkle, I don't necessarily think that it's a "conspiracy" as much as a set of cultural ideas that have this effect. I think the effect isn't really PLANNED, but more of an unconscious thing.

I know that breast feeding is much better for infants. The problem is the way that women who choose not to breastfeed are judged. Some women have a lot of trouble breastfeeding and are made to feel like bad mothers when they can't. Some women can't breastfeed because they work and breast pumps don't work for them. There's a lot of reasons, actually, why women don't breastfeed, but instead of trying to look at those reasons and resolve them and work with these women, it seems like the majority of society and the mainstream media just brushes it aside and wags their finger (before cutting to a commerical for formula).

is there some intrinsic difference between breastfeeding and being topless? i ask because in Ohio, it is legal for women to be topless, so how could it be ILlegal to breastfeed?

does this question make sense?
i have to wonder why there is a fuss, when in so many places anymore it is as legal for women to be topless as men? if you are already topless, what the hell is the big damn deal?

i think i will NEVER understand these things. playboy is fine but breastfeeding is not?

It's my impression that in the US there are extremely few places where it is legal for women to go topless and even fewer where women would actually do so on a regular basis.

And the difference between Playboy and breastfeeding is that looking at Playboy is a choice, only for adults, and to be used for sexual pleasure, where as with public breastfeeding you'd be subjecting innocent children and unsuspecting adults on the horribly indecent site of a woman providing nourishment to her child. *rolls eyes*

There is also the issue that many nurses and pediatricians are not up to date on the benefits of breastfeeding. In another online community for breastfeeding, there are frequent stories about doctors and nurses telling mother's to formula feed or suppliment breast milk with formula.

There are also frequent stories about women being told to leave a public place because they are NIP (nursing in public), despite the fact that there are state laws on the books stating a woman can NIP wherever she has a right to be. One recent indicent took place at the Ronald McDonald House in Houston where a mother with a sick child was told to not nurse her other child in the family cafeteria.

Society needs to be re-educated as to the benefits of breastfeeding, and re-educated that the breast is not a sexual, but a working piece of anatomy.

I agree with whomeve said that we need to provide support for those women who have a difficult time breastfeeding. They need support at home, at work, a in public.

It really is a no win situation. I got the "you shouldn't bottle feed your baby" crap and my best friend got the "you shouldn't breastfeed in public" crap. I think it really comes down to another way to make parents - and particularly moms - feel as though they just aren't good enough.

Breastfeeding moms need support and the freedom to feed their babies when and where necessary. Bottle-feeding moms need to not be looked down upon. Unless someone is doing something that actually harms their child, people really need to learn to mind their own damn business and respect others' parenting choices.

Thought you might be interested to know that the Scottish Parliament passed legislation in 2004 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4021137.stm) which makes it illegal to prevent a woman breastfeeding in public. Looks like the rest of the UK is thinking of catching up with us ;-)

Denelian,
"because in Ohio, it is legal for women to be topless"

It is? When did that happen? Is it only in certain cities, because I didn't think it was legal here.

An account by a Member of Parliament about breastfeeding in the House of Commons - there's still a long way to go... http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1554071,00.html

Cara -- the reality is that the problem is not breastfeeding and teaching women to do the best by their infants is a good thing. The problem is that the medical establishment and support networks new mothers normally rely on (their mothers, aunts, etc.) are still behind the times and don't know how to adequately help a new mama breast feed. Most OBs, family doctors, and pediatricians do not know much about breastfeeding because details regarding the support of it are not taught in medical school. So women are forced to do their own research to learn how -- buy books, attend seminars, hire lactation consultants if they run into problems, get on the internet (no wonder the majority of breastfeeding women are highly educated and elite women) -- in other societies these aren't issues because the support is there (grandmothers breastfed and can lend support -- you see other women nursing in public and you can see how it is done, there is a societal knowledge about breastfeeding that doesn't exist in our culture -- it is all behind closed doors, women need to cover up, it is embarrasing -- thus hard to pass on history and skills).

Breastfeeding itself is not hard and is actually easier and more convenient to nursing -- I have had a whole score of issues to work through (working, supply, illness, skin and I still strongly believe this). Even when pumping at work it is easier. What creates the problem is not providing enough support and education as how to and allowing people to think that initial setbacks justifies switiching from breastmilk to formula. It is really hard when you are a new mom. Harder when no-one around has ever breastfed -- then add to that dealing with sore nipples, latch problems and your OB and ped can't help you.

So it isn't that it is hard -- support is lacking and the alternative (formula) just seems so easy. Finally, the same can be said about pumping at work. It isn't that pumping doesn't work for women -- it is that an expensive pump is needed to do the job efficiently and women need adequate space/time/privacy to pump. Pumps aren't covered by insurance and only some employers provide them to employees.

I disagree that how to make it easier isn't being addressed. We cannot rely on Parents magazine to do it for us -- they are sponsored by advertisers and have no incentive to help. We can't rely on doctors to teach this. So we need to forge our own communities and connections. Mothers are and have been doing this.
The conclusion -- it is setbacks in our society that make things difficult, not the act itself. And mothers are organizing and do give each other lots of support. I am very active in La Leche League (women just need to reach out to it), Attachment Parenting groups (both online and IRL), www.mothering.com/discussions, www.thebabywearer.com -- if women seek support it is there. But once again, the failing is the societal gap and knowledge so women have to look for it. If we do this, create new connections we can do the best by each other, for our babies and create a society where women can do this in public spheres and can have time (and the support) to do it at work. Once upon a time when a woman was pregnant and had a baby she was surrounded by other women -- neighbors, family members -- who had knolwedge about breastfeeding and passed this info down. Now we are so separated from our families, neighbors and the past generation didn't breastfeed so the info isn't there.

Raging moderate -- the reality is that working mothers of babies under the age of 1 are under a different kind of pressure than other people. It is not necessarily more pressure, but there is a physical need to breastfeed their child, a mother needs a break to either nurse or pump. We all go through phases in our life when we are not 100% and that does not mean making the entire society 2 hours less efficient, but applying it where it is needed is the point.

One of the big problems with how feminism evolved in the 1970s and 1980s and played out in corporate America and mainstream society (note, this was not how it was in theory) was that women were forced to play on men's playing field rather than creating a new playing field for women. Women and men are not identical. Men do not get pregnant. Men do not breastfeed. Acknolwedging these differences shouldn't lead to discrimination if we choose to not de-value motherhood or childrearing. In the US motherhood and childrearing is very de-valued, when it shouldn't be. Motherhood is not the role for all women, but women who either choose to be mothers or find themselves as mothers should not be forced to pretend they are not and pretend as if they are single man! I am currently working in corporate America -- and that is the working standard. Work as if you have no obligations or responsibilities at home. Work long hours pretending like you don't have to tuck someone in at night or get up in the middle of the night to nurse them. Should this really be the goal? Where did this pretending that we are all the same get us? We don't need to be the same to get equal opportunities and our sisters in Europe are proving this to us.

The Scotish Parliament already passed a Breastfeeding Support Bill that made it illegal to tell a woman to stop breastfeeding in public or to move along a breastfeeding woman.

This got me to thinking -- (in response to Raging Moderate's comment) why do women in the US feel the need to prove -- that we can work as hard as men, play just like men -- in order to deserve equality and a violence free existence? As a general rule (I know there are exceptions) women and men are not alike -- but the difference should not render us inequal.

Is it this mentality that has de-valued childrearing? Or is the low value placed on childrearing so low because it is asscoiated with being a woman (which it shouldn't be -- for example my husbaned is a stay at home dad)?

Quote from helena: An account by a Member of Parliament about breastfeeding in the House of Commons - there's still a long way to go... http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1554071,00.html

Definitely. That is just so sad. :( Another thing that I thought was sad, that the assumption she should stop nursing at 4 months -- when most major medical bodies (e.g. WHO) state that women should breastfeed for at least 2 years. The American Pediatric Association recommends at least (and longer if comfortable) 1 year. Additionally, there are numerous health benefits to women -- the longer one breastfeeds the lower the rate of breastcancer.

This is a worker issues as well. It comes down to maternity leave -- we are one of very few countries in the world with no mandatory (much less paid) maternity leave. It is very hard to establish a breastfeeding relationship and then rush off to work after a few weeks or even months. The answer is not to not judge women who choose to formula feed (obviously we shouldn't judge them) but the answer should be to re-define maternity leave and working weeks in the US -- that is a must.

We all go through phases in our life when we are not 100% and that does not mean making the entire society 2 hours less efficient, but applying it where it is needed is the point.

But what about equal pay for equal work?

Wouldn't the child-free woman be getting screwed here if she recieves the same pay for eight hours of work that the new mother is getting paid for six hours?

And back to my original point: if, as a business owner, I knew that I would have to pay a new mother for two hours a day when she isn't working, I might refrain from hiring young women.

Unintended consequences.

If you purposely refrained from hiring young women, you would be breaking the law. And there are currently many, many employers who do engage in such practices. Breastfeeding legislation wouldn't exactly start a new trend in that area.

Ragin Moderate - the reality is that the overwhelming majority of women will be mothers at some point in their lives. So either we create an environment that accepts this and makes it livable and workable to do both or we continue with the status quo and demand women to pretend they aren't really mothers or require them to leave the work force all together. Which is preferable?

Women are already different and that different is a good thing if women choose to procreate (or end up procreating regardless of choice) they should not be punished for it because of biological make-up out of their control.

There is already the potential that a female employee can get pregnant and take leave (whether paid or not). Women already have that "against" them. The answer is not to force women to suck it up in the name of corporate America and pretend to be men. But rather create an environment where it is acceptable to have a life, live your life and if an employer discriminates on that basis -- then the employer suffers the consequences (similar to race based, age based, and sex and gender discrim we already have). And all of us should understand that if we have the type of society that makes room for us to take breaks during a certain time in our lives -- that is a more liveable society. I think Italy is way ahead of us in enjoying life and not living to work. 2 hours is great, but in order to successfully pump at work, women just need 3-4 breaks for an 8-10 hour period of 20 minutes each. Not a huge amount of time, not a huge cost to any employer at all. And this dedication of time is only for a small fraction of a woman's work life. And really, as an employer it doesn't make sense to create an unfriendly environment to women and nursing mothers -- because in the end they will lose workers and have a higher turn over -- thus higher cost.

As a society where we have a high infant death mortality rate, where we have a high breast cancer rate, where obesity is a problem -- we should be doing everything we can to encourage breastfeeding since it is a strong factor in reducing all of these problems.

You say you support discrimination of women in these circumstances? You support the fact that women should be treated differently? That is just accepting the concept of work trumps everything else. Americans today work longer days than anyone else in the world. We have one of the longest work weeks in the world. We take the least amount of vacation. It is an entire framework that we are addressing here which should not accepting without questioning it.

Is it then okay to not hire women with children because they may take a sick day when their child is ill or their babysitter is sick? Is it then okay to refuse to hire married women for the same reason? Should we allow employers to give pregnancy tests?

The point is that we shouldn't accept people's prejudices and a framework that is harmful to everyone.

RagningModerate-
If a woman is pumping for a newborn baby-she is going to be pumping a lot more than 2 hours (all the more reason for maternity leave and PAID maternity leave).

Most women return to work after about 6 weeks, longer if they can manage. By that time, the infant's needs are not as demanding and women will only need to take three to four 15-20 minute breaks a day to pump. Ideally she will have a supply of frozen breast milk already on hand. If she can get away to the day care center, she can take advantage of her lunch break to nurse her child.

Where I work, I get an hour lunch and two 15 minute breaks a day. That would only be about half an hour that I would not be avaialbe to work due to pumping. However, I have a private office where I can shut the door, pump and still attend to emails or other work. Unlike a friend who has a cubicle and had to go pump in the restrooms.

Also, preganancy is not limited to young women. Women are still having children into their late 30s and early 40s. These women may also want to breastfeed their children.

As an aside: A number of years ago I read an amusing short fantasy story about women warriors who were pissed at the king because he wouldn't cover the cost of their "brass bras" but would cover the "brass cups" for the men. They got the king's wizard to make a magical storage unit so they could store their breasts in, not have to pay for extra armor, were even more agile in battle. When the king needed to storage space and the wizard couldn't provide, the king capitulated and covered the armor.

WOO HOO PERIWINKLE!

I am a nursing mom (of an 11 month old) and last week I went out of town for work overnight for the first time. It was hard-I had to travel the first day, stay overnight, and then my meeting was the next day- and there was nowhere private to go to pump (hotel checkout is at noon). By the time I got home, I was one hurting person...

Anyway, I hate to promote governmental control, but someone has to legislate and make mothering valued to society. I guess we need to look to our country's leadership here in the U.S. to deal with those issues. I think we would do well to follow the example of many European countries.

Perwinkle, I obviously don't think new moms should be discriminated against, but I think some things you ask go to far. A new mother should not be paid the same for 6 or 7 hours of work as someone is paid for 8. If she can breastfed or pump while she's working or use the same amounts of break time everyone else gets that's great, but she shouldn't paid for time she isn't working. And while it's not our fault that people have prejudices, we shouldn't make those make those prejudices have weight by having employers pay new mothers eight hours worth of pay for 6 hours. That's insane. Yes, women only breastfeed for a short time in their lives, but when many people (especially young people) only stay at their jobs for a year or two the employer doesn't care how productive she'll be in 5 years.

It's equal pay for equal work. We have to hold up our end of the equation to get the other.

California already has that protection in place for female workers. Most European countries do as well. So it isn't insane, it is a reality that more than several government has decided to impliment.

You really think it makes sense to pay new mothers the same for doing less work than others?

This is ridiculous. I remember one jackass on a local radio show saying that if mothers need to nurse in a restaurant or other public areas, they should take the kids to the restroom. I called and asked if a mother of a 3-year-old should take the kid to restroom to finish his Happy Meal. He said no, it's not sanitary. I swear I wonder if these morons' mothers didn't nurse them on castor oil and drop them on their heads.

Marle -
hrm. i know that it is legal in Columbus, because i used to work in a BDSM bar (lighting people on fire, of all things) and we had to cover nipples because alcohal was sold - but on night when there was no alcohal, we were clear.
IF i remember correctly on my prostitution paper (if... it was 3 years ago) it IS legal state wide, but some (okay, many) city ordinances overide it.

funniest application of this law that i've ever seen - my (model) friend walking topless, in a G-string, at a "focus on the family" rally. well, after someone had complained that she was wearing a sticker over each nipple that said "Theocrats Suck!
with the complaint, she removed the stickers

"Is it then okay to not hire women with children because they may take a sick day when their child is ill or their babysitter is sick? Is it then okay to refuse to hire married women for the same reason?"

...or for that matter, to not hire women who are probably fertile because during our heavy flow days we usually need more bathroom breaks than most men and menopausal women need?

"A new mother should not be paid the same for 6 or 7 hours of work as someone is paid for 8."

Now that reminds me of workplaces with flex time. Wouldn't that make it easier for lactating women* to fit in 40 hours of work a week around her pumping breaks (and that longer working day might be easier to take if her partner gets a turn at parental leave too)?

"If she can breastfed or pump while she's working or use the same amounts of break time everyone else gets that's great, but she shouldn't paid for time she isn't working."

What about jobs paid per other unit instead of per hour?

* This seems like more than a "new mom" issue. Wouldn't someone who's been a mom for 10 years but just had her 2nd kid probably need to nurse and/or pump often too?

How is it that corporate America gets the peons to duke it out among themselves? squabling over who's taking too many breaks and not working a 60 minute hour! not only are lots of jobs not paid by the hour, but people make different hourly wages. complain about your CEO who gets a golden parachute for failing to get the job done and stop timing my bathroom breaks!

Change the corporate model and let us life and work humanely.

There seems to be this assumption that breastfeeding mothers won't be working the same number of hours as their colleagues when they take breaks to pump. But mothers, on the whole, tend to work harder while they're in the office than non-parents or than dads. Why? Because their performance is judged differently than that of others. The expectation is that they'll show up late, leave early, be on the phone with kids and sitters, and so on. Research just doesn't bear that out. So if we're concerned about equal pay for equal work, rest assured that nursing moms are doing their fair share.

"But mothers, on the whole, tend to work harder while they're in the office than non-parents or than dads."

I'm not saying that mothers don't work hard. But the article was talking about legally-mandated extra breaks (in France an hour, and in Italy 2) which I think is wrong. I'm all for flex-time, I'm all for family leave and nursing in public and a lot of things that would help mothers, but I'm not for legally mandated them extra breaks above and beyond what everyone else gets.

This is one of the rare issues where Mississippi is more progressive than the norm--we already allow public breastfeeding, and I think the same piece of legislation requires feeding breaks.

Cheers,

TH

Don't forget about all the smokers who take ten minute breaks every hour...

Or the folks hitting the office coffee pot/water cooler.
Or the people testing their insulin levels.
Or those who have constant diarrhea.
etc. etc. etc.

Or the folks hitting the office coffee pot/water cooler.
Or the people testing their insulin levels.
Or those who have constant diarrhea.
etc. etc. etc.

somehow, tom, your comment that mississippi ALLOWS women to breastfeed annoys the heck out of me.

"Don't forget about all the smokers who take ten minute breaks every hour..."

While that's annoying (I've actually had jobs where I've been reprimanded for taking breaks with the smokers when I'm a nonsmoker) I don't believe there's a law anywhere that says that smokers are legally mandated X amount of breaks that other people aren't. I'm not saying we should time the breaks of nursing women and time the breaks of everyone else so we can be all judgmental, but I think it's a bad idea to legally require one group to have extra breaks, especially when it's by as much as 2 hours.

I see childbirth/rearing (and, frankly, any of the more grueling aspects [like periods] of reproduction) as a social service, one I'll never perform. It's a social service I can see the value of, though, perhaps because I bleed every month and can empathize with what it means to build something up within your uterus and expel it. It isn’t pleasant.

I see mothers the same way I see people who are given time off to fulfill their duties in the Reserves or volunteer with the fire department. I don't begrudge the Reservesperson her 2 weeks off a year, 2 weeks they've always gotten in addition to their annual vacation time in my experience. I know I'd rather be sitting at my desk than doing what she's doing any damn way. If you ask me, time off to perform social services shouldn't have to be justified by allowing others time off to twiddle their thumbs.

Of course, breastfeeding is a part of the social service that is childbirth/rearing, since I didn't make that clear in the above post.

Well, with the Reserves, I don't believe your time off is paid, since the reserves pay you. But that's more comparable to family leave than lactating breaks. Family leave can also be taken by more than just new mothers, new fathers can take it as well as people with sick parents, spouses and other family that need temporary constant care. Do the breastfeeding laws allow a new father to take up to two hours of breaks to feed his kid in the company child care center? I know, that's not a fair comparison, because lactating women *need* to nurse, but I'd be happier with a law that said employers have to reasonably accommodate a lactating employee's needs (which could differ from woman to woman and job to job) instead of specifying a set amount of break time. Earlier in this thread a woman was mentioned who closed her office door and then pumped while working. Should that count as her break?

I think what's more important than mandatory breaks is the facilities to take advantage of them, nursing rooms and child care centers (maybe more Italian workplaces have these, I don't know). Without those, the law is just saying that you have the right to sit on a dirty toilet and pump for two hours. That doesn't sound like fun to me. However, with an actual nursing or pumping room the women will be comfortable (assuming the rooms are comfortable, which would be the point) and then pumping can be seen in the workplace culture as acceptable as taking a random break to make coffee or go to the bathroom, and if the baby's actually there (in the child care center) then nursing could actually be expected. Maybe it wouldn't work like that, and Italy has found that workplaces with nursing/pumping rooms and child care don't let women actually use them, and if that's the case then I take back everything I said, but if not, let's work on getting the facilities before mandating that women be allowed a set amount of time to do things in uncomfortable, dirty, impractical or even impossible circumstances.

In many ways, this is an issue that goes back to the fact that in Western culture, being male is still considered the norm, and being female is an aberration from that norm, rather than a perfectly standard model of being human. So women's physical needs are considered special aberrations, and reasonable accommodation to those needs is considered making special allowances, because men don't need them. But if we took women as the standard, normal model of humanity, I doubt many of these things would be an issue. Sure, there are many women who will never lactate, but there are many, many more who will--in a world where we understood being a woman to be a normal model of being human, wouldn't making it possible for them to lactate in a way that doesn't force them to leave the workforce or switch over to formula against their will be a standard part of workplace protocol? Wouldn't that make more sense than forcing co-workers to pick up all the slack from a woman who had to leave her job and then to train someone else? Or putting the baby's health at risk (certainly many healthy babies are bottle-fed, but study after study shows that in the aggregate, breast-feeding is better for the kid's health--if the mother wants to breastfeed, and I say if because what's healthiest for a kid is a happy mother, I rather think it's immoral to pressure her not to).

We don't see the workplace accommodation to men's needs and proclivities because men's needs and desires are understood to be "universal," to be "human." Denying the normal activities of women's lives is another example of women having to act like men in order to be recognized as valid adults.

EG--YES! you have made the point that needs making; the point that can finally change the workplace if we carry it through. Thank you.

backing up on the thread a bit--regarding day care in Italy:

there's no model there for us! my husband's family lives in and around rome and the pattern there is clear. mothers work and grandmothers provide child care, after working herself for years. There's no retirement for women when it comes to child care. And working mothers do all of the cooking, cleaning, laundry, including making their sons' beds, etc.

It's almost funny that women can't breastfeed here in the States without getting convicted of public exposure. It's like breasts aren't mammary glands at all, they're male-titillators!

Do men here just not know the actual biological purpose of breasts? Or is everything (including our bodies) all about them?