Read this article. You know, if Rick isn't watching over your shoulder. It's not inapropriate for work.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060804/od_afp/afplifestyleussocialbreastfeeding
Readers of a US parenting magazine are crying foul over the publication's latest cover depicting a woman breastfeeding, with some calling the photo offensive and disgusting.
Really? Offensive AND disgusting? Maybe you all need to look those words up again. Racism is offensive. Maggots are disgusting. A breastfeeding baby gazing up into its mother's eyes is neither.
"I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine," one woman from Kansas wrote in reaction to the picture in Babytalk, a free magazine that caters to young mothers. "I was offended and it made my husband very uncomfortable when I left the magazine on the coffee table."
Look again. The breast is not giant. It's taking up about 15% of the cover. The baby's enormous head is the focus of the shot. And, if you really were so SHOCKED, then why did you leave it on your coffee table? Where was the logic in that decision? Gee, I'm really offended by this, I guess I'll share it with the rest of the family. Oh, and by the way, your husband wasn't uncomfortable. Guys love boobs. In fact, if they really want guys to read those parenting magazines, they would add a centerfold. The only thing he was uncomfortable about was you being offended about it. He would have much prefered that you said, "wow honey, look at the boob - do you think we should get more pictures of boobs in the house?"
Several readers said they were "embarrassed" or "offended" by the Babytalk photo and one woman from Nevada said she "immediately turned the magazine face down" when she saw the photo.
"Gross, I am sick of seeing a baby attached to a boob," the mother of a four-month-old said.
Again, vomit is gross. Pus is gross. Dog bombs are gross. Babies are not gross. And, you're currently the mother of a small baby?! Even if you aren't choosing to breastfeed whatever you spawned into this world, how can you possibly be offended by something that is fundamental in nature? And embarrassed? Why? What are you hiding? Seriously, it may be time to put your kid up for adoption and get your tubes tied because you clearly have been in the desert too long and need to remove yourself from the genepool.
Another reader said she was "horrified" when she received the magazine and hoped that her husband hadn't laid eyes on it.
"I had to rip off the cover since I didn't want it laying around the house," she said.
Horrified? Try watching the news sometime. Or do a search online for "pictures of dead people". That's horrifying. Or how about that woman who has killed in the Boston tunnel a few weeks ago? To think that you could be killed so quickly and suddenly because of shoddy workmanship, in America - that's horrifying. And why are you worried about your husband seeing it? What would he do? Run away? Jerk-off to it? Either way, you should be examining the current health of your marriage. Ripping off the cover is a good solution, too. Way to go on that one. What were you planning on saying to your husband when he asked,"hey honey, how come this magazine doesn't have a cover?" Were you going to lie?
Unbelievable. People are so stupid. Instead of working to solve problems, we're spending our time writing letters to a FREE magazine - yes that's right, we're not even paying to be offended - to complain about a photo that isn't any more offensive than any of the celebrity pictures on the magazines in every supermarket register in America and beyond.
Okay, I'm done now. Enjoy the rest of your day.
Willem
