It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional that this
becomes necessary.

http://tinyurl.com/3bngfu

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Dave Bugg said...

> It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional that this
> becomes necessary.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3bngfu


"If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding! How can you have any
pudding if you don't eat your meat?"
--School Teacher
"The Wall"
Pink Floyd

"Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
...
> It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional that this
> becomes necessary.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3bngfu
>
> --
> Dave
> www.davebbq.com
>
Now and then we see young mother breast feeding in a restaurant, recently,
in a very high buck restaurant. I think for most of us that's pretty
tasteless.

I've considered printing up bunch of business cards presenting myself as a
teacher of "effective parenting".

Kent

Kent wrote:
> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
> ...
>> It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional that this
>> becomes necessary.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/3bngfu
>>
>> --
>> Dave
>> www.davebbq.com
>>
> Now and then we see young mother breast feeding in a restaurant, recently,
> in a very high buck restaurant. I think for most of us that's pretty
> tasteless.

Feeding a child in a restaurant is not tasteless.

Serene

Dave Bugg wrote:
>
> It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional that this
> becomes necessary.


All they need to so is to teach the parents not to bring their kids into a
restaurant unless know how to behave in public.

Kent wrote:
>
>
> Now and then we see young mother breast feeding in a restaurant, recently,
> in a very high buck restaurant. I think for most of us that's pretty
> tasteless.

And the problem is?
Breast feeding is quite natural and most mothers are quite discreet about
it. It's not like they are flapping their books out for all to see.

Dave Smith wrote:

> ... It's not like they are flapping their books out for all to
> see.

Especially those Stephen King paperbacks. ;-)

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Kent wrote:
> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
> ...
>> It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional that
>> this becomes necessary.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/3bngfu
>>
>> --
>> Dave
>> www.davebbq.com
>>
> Now and then we see young mother breast feeding in a restaurant,
> recently, in a very high buck restaurant. I think for most of us
> that's pretty tasteless.
>
What does that have to do with this article? There was no mention of
breastfeeding in public.

There is a time and place for everything- urinating, defecating and having
sex are all quite natural and yet we don't do them in full public view- why
should breastfeeding be any different?
"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Kent wrote:
>>
>>
>> Now and then we see young mother breast feeding in a restaurant,
>> recently,
>> in a very high buck restaurant. I think for most of us that's pretty
>> tasteless.
>
> And the problem is?
> Breast feeding is quite natural and most mothers are quite discreet about
> it. It's not like they are flapping their books out for all to see.

Frankcar wrote:
> There is a time and place for everything- urinating, defecating and having
> sex are all quite natural and yet we don't do them in full public view- why
> should breastfeeding be any different?

Because breastfeeding is not smelly, obscene, or an elimination
process. It's *feeding* a *person* -- something that's perfectly
appropriate in a restaurant.

Serene

Serene wrote:
> Frankcar wrote:
>> There is a time and place for everything- urinating, defecating and
>> having sex are all quite natural and yet we don't do them in full
>> public view- why should breastfeeding be any different?
>
> Because breastfeeding is not smelly, obscene, or an elimination
> process. It's *feeding* a *person* -- something that's perfectly
> appropriate in a restaurant.
>
> Serene

Yes, the process *is* natural. But with some women it's almost like they
are defying you to object to them breast feeding so they make a big point of
letting you know they are doing it, in a public place. I really don't care
to look at some woman's boob when I'm waiting to be seated for dinner.
There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms with chairs
and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and bring a bottle for
the kid.

Jill

On Fri, 25 May 2007 23:17:05 -0700, Serene >
wrote:

>Frankcar wrote:
>> There is a time and place for everything- urinating, defecating and having
>> sex are all quite natural and yet we don't do them in full public view- why
>> should breastfeeding be any different?
>
>Because breastfeeding is not smelly, obscene, or an elimination
>process. It's *feeding* a *person* -- something that's perfectly
>appropriate in a restaurant.
>
There is obtrusive and unobtrusive breastfeeding too. J.Q. Public
doesn't want a full on view of any baby at the snack bar.

sf
who managed it in public - undetected

--
See return address to reply by email

Frankcar wrote:
>
> There is a time and place for everything- urinating, defecating and having
> sex are all quite natural and yet we don't do them in full public view- why
> should breastfeeding be any different?

Breast FEEDING.
It is not the same as urination or defecation.

"Frankcar" > wrote in message
. ..
> There is a time and place for everything- urinating, defecating and having
> sex are all quite natural and yet we don't do them in full public view-
> why should breastfeeding be any different?

I knew a guy that would not eat in public. He thought it was on the same
plane as urinating or other private body functions. We'd all be eating pizza
together and he'd be off in another place by himself to eat.
]
OTOH, I've no objection to breast feeding at any time. We are about the
only animal that shuns such a normal practice that has been practiced for
millions of years. Until fairly recent times, it was imperative that we did
so to assure survival.

jmcquown wrote:
>
>
> Yes, the process *is* natural. But with some women it's almost like they
> are defying you to object to them breast feeding so they make a big point of
> letting you know they are doing it, in a public place. I really don't care
> to look at some woman's boob when I'm waiting to be seated for dinner.
> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms with chairs
> and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and bring a bottle for
> the kid.

Almost everyone that I have noticed doing it has been discrete. I can only
think of one exception. It was in a small park in in the waterfront area of
a large city. There was a grassy knoll and a woman was seated right at the
very top of it, dressed in a skimpy gold lamee bikini was breast feeding a
large baby. It was such a ridiculous sight that it was comical.

"Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote in
t:

>
> "Frankcar" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> There is a time and place for everything- urinating, defecating and
>> having sex are all quite natural and yet we don't do them in full
>> public view- why should breastfeeding be any different?
>
> I knew a guy that would not eat in public. He thought it was on the
> same plane as urinating or other private body functions. We'd all be
> eating pizza together and he'd be off in another place by himself to
> eat.
>]
> OTOH, I've no objection to breast feeding at any time. We are about
> the only animal that shuns such a normal practice that has been
> practiced for millions of years. Until fairly recent times, it was
> imperative that we did so to assure survival.
>
>
>

It was not that long ago men's breasts by law were supposed to be covered
In the late 1920's or early 30's that changed. I see nothing wrong with
public breast feeding if done with decorum and common sense. But I'm a
man and believe that is a feeding mother's decission.

I believe all this North American body taboo crap is one reason for the
overweight problem, that we have today. If people were going to be seen
with their skin exposed they might lose weight to make it more pleasant
to view.

--

The house of the burning beet-Alan

It'll be a sunny day in August, when the Moon will shine that night-
Elbonian Folklore

jmcquown wrote:

> Yes, the process *is* natural. But with some women it's almost like they
> are defying you to object to them breast feeding so they make a big point of
> letting you know they are doing it, in a public place. I really don't care
> to look at some woman's boob when I'm waiting to be seated for dinner.
> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms with chairs
> and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and bring a bottle for
> the kid.
>
> Jill

Having breastfed for years, I can state that I rarely exposed myself
while feeding in public. I can't recall ever seeing more than a touch of
skin on other women while feeding either. I don't think it is common.
I think we need to see more women feed naturally so that uptight others
would get desensitized to it and women would grow up feeling more
comfortable doing it. Why complicate life with forced bottles when
natures packaging is already perfect?
I would give anything to have another child at my breasts as it is the
most natural, loving act a mother can perform for her child, IMO. You
just have no clue what you've missed, Jill.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

>
> I knew a guy that would not eat in public. He thought it was on the same
> plane as urinating or other private body functions. We'd all be eating pizza
> together and he'd be off in another place by himself to eat.

I notice that you said that you knew a guy like that, not that he was a
friend. He sounds like a weirdo and probably had all sorts of other
hang-ups. I once saw an interview with some guy who had trouble with women
because he was so hung up on body functions that he couldn't get past the
idea that while he was talking to a woman her body was forming stools.


> OTOH, I've no objection to breast feeding at any time. We are about the
> only animal that shuns such a normal practice that has been practiced for
> millions of years. Until fairly recent times, it was imperative that we did
> so to assure survival.

Goomba38 wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>> Yes, the process *is* natural. But with some women it's almost like
>> they are defying you to object to them breast feeding so they make a
>> big point of letting you know they are doing it, in a public place.
>> I really don't care to look at some woman's boob when I'm waiting to
>> be seated for dinner. There are ways to do it discreetly and there
>> are also restrooms with chairs and benches. Or they could just use
>> a breast-pump and bring a bottle for the kid.
>>
>> Jill
>
> Having breastfed for years, I can state that I rarely exposed myself
> while feeding in public. I can't recall ever seeing more than a touch
> of skin on other women while feeding either. I don't think it is
> common.
> I think we need to see more women feed naturally so that uptight
> others would get desensitized to it and women would grow up feeling
> more comfortable doing it. Why complicate life with forced bottles
> when natures packaging is already perfect?
> I would give anything to have another child at my breasts as it is the
> most natural, loving act a mother can perform for her child, IMO. You
> just have no clue what you've missed, Jill.

Yes, I do have a clue. Waking up three times a night isn't my choice, let
alone to the voice of a screaming infant. Potty training... well, my cat
uses a litter box. I wasn't exactly enamoured of walking my dog at 3AM.
Waking up to breast (or bottle) feed and change diapers on a child? No,
thank you. Some people aren't cut out for mothering. I'm one of them.
Recognizing this fact I did the world a favour by not having any. Just
because you're female doesn't mean you *have* to have children.

Jill

jmcquown wrote:
>
>
> Yes, I do have a clue. Waking up three times a night isn't my choice, let
> alone to the voice of a screaming infant.

That was one of my considerations that my son should be breast fed. I
wouldn't have to get up in the middle of the night :-)

Dave Smith > wrote in message
...
[snip]
> That was one of my considerations that my
> son should be breast fed. I wouldn't have to
> get up in the middle of the night :-)

And you're proud of such a lost opportunity for him? Wow...

I found feeding all three of my daughter-units in the ay-yem hours
enjoyable and a time where we could bond. Besides, I was awake
anyway: NO ONE slept when any of our infants cried.

There was only one time when I regretted having those moments: It
was a 0200 feeding where Spawn'd glued a mucus mask across her
entire upper face, gluing her eyes shut. SWMBO and I switched
feedings at that point and in a classic win-win, I got to feed her
the next two times for that one.

ObBabyFood: Beef-and-broccoli from Gerbers isn't but a quick blend
of the food wand to some warmed-up leftovers always provided a
contented kidlet.

The Ranger

"The Ranger" > wrote in message
>
> And you're proud of such a lost opportunity for him? Wow...
>
> I found feeding all three of my daughter-units in the ay-yem hours
> enjoyable and a time where we could bond. Besides, I was awake anyway: NO
> ONE slept when any of our infants cried.

For medical reasons our two could not be breast fed, but frankly, I didn't
do much of the AM bottle feeding either. Hardly ever changed a soiled
diaper either. I found other ways to "bond" than changing a soiled diaper.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>>
>> Yes, I do have a clue. Waking up three times a night isn't my choice,
>> let
>> alone to the voice of a screaming infant.
>
> That was one of my considerations that my son should be breast fed. I
> wouldn't have to get up in the middle of the night :-)

One of the things I liked about nursing was the very convenience of it.

Mary

"Goomba38" > wrote in message
. ..
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>> Yes, the process *is* natural. But with some women it's almost like they
>> are defying you to object to them breast feeding so they make a big point
>> of
>> letting you know they are doing it, in a public place. I really don't
>> care
>> to look at some woman's boob when I'm waiting to be seated for dinner.
>> There are ways to do it discreetly and there are also restrooms with
>> chairs
>> and benches. Or they could just use a breast-pump and bring a bottle for
>> the kid.
>>
>> Jill
>
> Having breastfed for years, I can state that I rarely exposed myself while
> feeding in public.

Ditto here.


> I can't recall ever seeing more than a touch of skin on other women while
> feeding either. I don't think it is common.

Double ditto. Most women I know (and have observed) are very discreet and in
fact do not want to draw attention to themselves while nursing in public.


> I think we need to see more women feed naturally so that uptight others
> would get desensitized to it and women would grow up feeling more
> comfortable doing it. Why complicate life with forced bottles when natures
> packaging is already perfect?

Exactly. I also think the public needs to be educated about all the health
benefits of b/fing (for children as well as for mothers--e.g., a decreased
risk of breast cancer), so it's better accepted and encouraged.

I find it interesting that people in here go on and on about all the junk
food that kids these days grow up eating, yet some of these same people
would much rather see a baby down a bottle of formula rather than nature's
perfect food. (And, no, pumping and bottlefeeding expressed breastmilk isn't
always possible. Anyway, why should women have to pump, when the tap is so
portable and convenient??)

Mary

Edwin Pawlowski > wrote in message
et...
> "The Ranger" > wrote in message
>>
>> And you're proud of such a lost opportunity for
>> him? Wow...
[snip]
> For medical reasons our two could not be breast fed,
> but frankly, I didn't do much of the AM bottle feeding
> either. Hardly ever changed a soiled diaper either. I
> found other ways to "bond" than changing a soiled
> diaper.

If you consider using soiled diapers as bonding that's _your_
fetish.

Every opportunity squandered is just that.

I never understood those few male bio-providers (not to be
confused with fathers) and their terror at taking on the shared
responsibilities of parenthood. Whatever. Your child(ren)'s loss.

ObFood: Tako and Ika have become Spawn's newest love (dammit! I
didn't get one piece last night) when we hit Naomi's in San Mateo.

The Ranger

On May 25, 8:26 pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
> Dave Bugg wrote:
>
> > It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional that this
> > becomes necessary.
>
> All they need to so is to teach the parents not to bring their kids into a
> restaurant unless know how to behave in public.

We may be past the point where the parents know enough about manners
to do this. About 3 or 4 years ago, I noticed a couple of Globe and
Mail articles about etiquette trainers for new university grads and
newly hired junior management types who needed the same kind of
training. You know the "This is a salad fork", "This is a soup spoon,
do not stir your coffee with it."

Also some of the strange things covered in my dark-ages school days
are not covered in schools today. Things like who to introduce to
whom or how to fold a letter correctly. There were probably more
things covered that I don't remember.

hahabogus wrote:

> I believe all this North American body taboo crap is one reason for the
> overweight problem, that we have today. If people were going to be seen
> with their skin exposed they might lose weight to make it more pleasant
> to view.

Yeah or maybe not.

Maybe some of us thin the body taboo crap is responsible for telling
us that our perfectly fine fat bodies are by definition ugly.

http://pics.livejournal.com/serenejournal/pic/00068d6r

Serene

"Serene" > wrote in message
...
> Kent wrote:
>> "Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> It's too bad that large numbers of parents are so dysfunctional that
>>> this becomes necessary.
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/3bngfu
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave
>>> www.davebbq.com
>>>
>> Now and then we see young mother breast feeding in a restaurant,
>> recently, in a very high buck restaurant. I think for most of us that's
>> pretty tasteless.
>
> Feeding a child in a restaurant is not tasteless.
>
> Serene
>
>
I said high buck restaurant. 99% of the time it is not tasteless. When you
go to the French Laundry in Napa Valley where dinner costs $500 for two,
there is something
tasteless about that. The mother is saying "I can do this wherever I want".
When I grew up, you didn't take an infant to the French Laundry. Today
95+% of mothers don't either. My complaint is about the one who does.

Kent

"The Ranger" > wrote in message
>
> Every opportunity squandered is just that.
>
> I never understood those few male bio-providers (not to be confused with
> fathers) and their terror at taking on the shared responsibilities of
> parenthood. Whatever. Your child(ren)'s loss.

Much more than middle-of-the-night feedings to parenting. I had plenty of
other opportunities and it worked out for us.

Edwin Pawlowski > wrote in message
t...
> "The Ranger" > wrote in message
>>
>> Every opportunity squandered is just that.
>>
>> I never understood those few male bio-providers (not
>> to be confused with fathers) and their terror at taking
>> on the shared responsibilities of parenthood. Whatever.
>> Your child(ren)'s loss.
>>
> Much more than middle-of-the-night feedings to parenting. I had
> plenty of other opportunities and it worked out for us.

How would you know? You never did any "middle-of-the-night
feedings" so you couldn't possibly know which opportunities
slipped by unnoticed.

ObFood: I hope the Japanese never discover Tabiko is better than
the best Russian Beluga.

The Ranger

Kent wrote:
> "Serene" > wrote in message
> ...

>> Feeding a child in a restaurant is not tasteless.
>>
>> Serene
>>
>>
> I said high buck restaurant. 99% of the time it is not tasteless. When you
> go to the French Laundry in Napa Valley where dinner costs $500 for two,
> there is something
> tasteless about that.

I don't think so, but I also think taking a baby to a high-end
restaurant is something I wouldn't do.

> The mother is saying "I can do this wherever I want".

Because she CAN, by California law. And I supported (and continue
to support) that law.

Cal. Civ. Code §43.3
1997 Cal ALS 59; 1997 Cal AB 157; Stats 1997 ch 59

"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a mother may breastfeed
her child in any location, public or private, except the private
home or residence of another, where the mother and child are
authorized to be present."

Serene

On Sat, 26 May 2007 12:01:13 -0700, "The Ranger"
> wrote:

>ObFood: I hope the Japanese never discover Tabiko is better than
>the best Russian Beluga.

Grandson gobbles it up too.

--
See return address to reply by email

The Ranger wrote:
>
>
> > That was one of my considerations that my
> > son should be breast fed. I wouldn't have to
> > get up in the middle of the night :-)
>
> And you're proud of such a lost opportunity for him? Wow...


What opportunity is that? I have a very good relationship with my son. Not
only do we get along very well but I have seen my parenting praised in
print. Sorry, but I am just not into babies. I share the attitude that a
lot of men have, that care and feeding of babies is something that women
are hard wired for, and breast feeding is a very natural, and it involves
women's breasts, not men's.

> I found feeding all three of my daughter-units in the ay-yem hours
> enjoyable and a time where we could bond. Besides, I was awake
> anyway: NO ONE slept when any of our infants cried.

How nice for you. I had to get up very early in the morning and my wife was
on maternity leave.

Dave Smith > wrote in message
...
[snip]
> I share the attitude that a lot of men have, that care
> and feeding of babies is something that women are
> hard wired for

How provincial. I'm glad the men I hang with don't hold such
notions as sacredly as you.

>> I found feeding all three of my daughter-units in
>> the ay-yem hours enjoyable and a time where
>> we could bond. Besides, I was awake anyway:
>> NO ONE slept when any of our infants cried.
>>
> How nice for you.

It was an awesome experience which I am glad I was given the
opportunities.

> I had to get up very early in the morning

Do you honestly think you were the only one that needed to rise
early and go into work? That's a non sequitor.

> and my wife was on maternity leave.

So she was on maternity leave... You got a free ride on raising
the kids.

ObFood: Toasted cheese sandwiches with French's mustard.

The Ranger

The Ranger wrote:
>
> > I share the attitude that a lot of men have, that care
> > and feeding of babies is something that women are
> > hard wired for
>
> How provincial. I'm glad the men I hang with don't hold such
> notions as sacredly as you.

Provincial???? LMAO. What a dork.


> >> I found feeding all three of my daughter-units in
> >> the ay-yem hours enjoyable and a time where
> >> we could bond. Besides, I was awake anyway:
> >> NO ONE slept when any of our infants cried.
> >>
> > How nice for you.
>
> It was an awesome experience which I am glad I was given the
> opportunities.

Good for you. I didn't play with dolls when I was little, so I guess I
never had a chance to develop my maternal instincts.

>
> > I had to get up very early in the morning
>
> Do you honestly think you were the only one that needed to rise
> early and go into work? That's a non sequitor.

If you think it is a non sequitor, why did you ask?


>
> > and my wife was on maternity leave.
>
> So she was on maternity leave... You got a free ride on raising
> the kids.

No. I got a free ride on breast feeding for a few months. I don't have a
mothering instinct. I am not comfortable around babies. I cooked more
meals for my son than my wife ever did. When he needed things sewn he
brought them to me.

Dave Smith > wrote in message
...
> The Ranger wrote:
>>
>> > I share the attitude that a lot of men have, that care
>> > and feeding of babies is something that women are
>> > hard wired for
>>
>> How provincial. I'm glad the men I hang with don't
>> hold such notions as sacredly as you.
>>
> Provincial???? LMAO. What a dork.

pro·vin·cial (pr?-vin'sh?l)
adj.
3. Limited in perspective; narrow and self-centered.
n.

The Ranger wrote:
>
> Dave Smith > wrote in message
> ...
> > The Ranger wrote:
> >>
> >> > I share the attitude that a lot of men have, that care
> >> > and feeding of babies is something that women are
> >> > hard wired for
> >>
> >> How provincial. I'm glad the men I hang with don't
> >> hold such notions as sacredly as you.
> >>
> > Provincial???? LMAO. What a dork.
>
> pro·vin·cial (pr?-vin'sh?l)
> adj.
> 3. Limited in perspective; narrow and self-centered.
> n.
> 2. A person who has provincial ideas or habits.
>
> Yeah; that'd be you.

Is that from an English dictionary for simpleton?

pro·vin·cial /pr?'v?n??l/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled
Pronunciation[pruh-vin-shuhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective 1. belonging or peculiar to some particular province; local: the
provincial newspaper.
2. of or pertaining to the provinces: provincial customs; provincial
dress.
3. having or showing the manners, viewpoints, etc., considered
characteristic of unsophisticated inhabitants of a province; rustic; narrow
or illiberal; parochial: a provincial point of view.
4. (often initial capital letter) Fine Arts. noting or pertaining to the
styles of architecture, furniture, etc., found in the provinces, esp. when
imitating styles currently or formerly in fashion in or around the capital:
Italian Provincial.
5. History/Historical. of or pertaining to any of the American provinces of
Great Britain.
–noun 6. a person who lives in or comes from the provinces.
7. a person who lacks urban sophistication or broad-mindedness.
8. Ecclesiastical. a. the head of an ecclesiastical province.
b. a member of a religious order presiding over the order in a given
district or province.


Dork:
dork /d?rk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[dawrk]
Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun Slang. 1. a stupid or ridiculous person; jerk; nerd.
2. Vulgar. penis.


Perfect fit for you.

Dave Smith > wrote in message
...
> Is that from an English dictionary for simpleton?
[snip over-pasted definition]

Such drama...

You can't edit any better than you can parent. You are such a
pathetic waste.

ObFood: Burned whole wheat and walnut bread.

The Ranger

The Ranger wrote:
>
> Dave Smith > wrote in message
> ...
> > Is that from an English dictionary for simpleton?
> [snip over-pasted definition]
>
> Such drama...
>
> You can't edit any better than you can parent. You are such a
> pathetic waste.
>
> ObFood: Burned whole wheat and walnut bread.
>

Sorry, but you just aren't worth the effort. Feel free to go and play with
the babies and explore your feminine side.

Dave Smith > whined like a little boy
trying to get the last word in through message
after I wrote:
>> Such drama...
[..]
> Sorry, but you just aren't worth the effort. [..]

And yet... Your on-going insecurity with your masculinity shows
itself in every post. Go figure.

The Ranger
--
My day is not complete unless I've made some deserving asshole
stamp his feet, turn blue in the face, and shout, "Drop dead, you
bitch!" It makes me gooshy all over.
- Lenore Levine, ap, 2001