First I’d like to say, I think Time accomplished exactly what it wanted. The world in yet another battle of “Mommy Wars.” However, this time the source is coming from their magazine, hence giving them recognition. Whether it being positive or negative recognition, it really doesn’t matter. The fact is, they’re getting noticed. It’s a simple, yet unfortunate, clever way of marketing.
And you know what? By me writing this post, I’m in a way giving them what they want, which is why I contemplated even writing this post. But, I’m a blogger. Writing is what I do, so I felt like I had to.
For starters, if you don’t know, I’m a proud formula feeder. Why we decided to use formula for Lincoln, really doesn’t matter. The bottom line is, it’s what worked for our family. Plain and simple. My baby was getting fed, and he was 100% healthy and thriving.
Although I chose to feed Lincoln formula, I absolutely no doubt EQUALLY support breastfeeding Momma’s. They did exactly what I did for my baby. They chose what worked for their family. That’s the bottom line.
There is no, “but this one is better than the next.” We are all mother’s doing what is best for our family. There’s no ifs, ands or buts about it. That’s it. Plain and simple.
So, what is wrong with this cover of Time magazine?
For starters, who the heck has their child stand on a chair to feed them? I think the posing of this photo is seriously asking for trouble.
Also, the caption reads, “Why attachment parenting drives some mothers to extremes – And how Dr. Bill Sears became their guru.”
If that’s not implying negativity, and asking to unleash a huge debate, then I don’t know what is. It is putting a negative tone on breastfeeding, as well as attachment parenting. I’m sure Dr. Sears isn’t too fond of the connotation either.
What do I think should have been on the cover?
How about two mothers. One mother breastfeeding her child, and the other feeding her child with a bottle….with the mother’s shaking hands!! Heart warming smiles on their faces. Putting an end to the never ending mommy wars battle.
Unfortunately, I don’t think in today’s society that marketing strategy would have accomplished what Time was looking for.
Enough is enough. And really, we are all just doing our best.
I agree, it was totally an epic fail on Time's part.
I think it was a huge fail on Time's part. 🙁 Breastmilk IS better for baby, period. End of story on that chapter. I think someone not stating that is absurd. BUT… We mothers are all doing our best. Breastfeeding, bottle feeding, pumping, formula… We are doing what is right for us and we should all support each other.
I just found this post after randomly stumbling upon your blog from topbabyblogs so I have no idea what your story or beliefs are, but I do want to point out that this woman and her son had been posing for the cover for FOUR HOURS and had initially agreed to a close up photo from the waist up with his arms wrapped around her, an intimate picture of breastfeeding at an older age, but the son got tired from posing in this awkward way (set up by time magazine photographers. I seriously doubt she stands him on a chair every time they nurse) and dropped his arms. This was an out take shot and was used against Jamie Lynne Grumet's wishes. She did an alternate Pathways cover and interview where she was given creative control ( http://pathwaystofamilywellness.org/PW35_PressRelease.pdf ) and I think it accurately depicts breastfeeding a toddler. Anyway, I agree with you, Time was being manipulative. I also agree that we all do what's best for our families. I just feel bad for that mother.