Nurse-in at Hirshhorn on 2/12 from 10-12

[Anonymous]

The Hirshhorne is not subject to DC Laws, but there is a law also giving the right to bf on Federal property.

Breastfeeding in Federal Buildings and on Federal Property.
Federal appropriations legislation has affirmed the right to breastfeed on federal
property or in federal buildings.23 The most recent affirmation of this practice was
contained in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005:24
Sec. 629. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a woman
may breastfeed her child at any location in a Federal building or
on Federal property, if the woman and her child are otherwise
authorized to be present at the location.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Hirshhorne is not subject to DC Laws, but there is a law also giving the right to bf on Federal property.

Breastfeeding in Federal Buildings and on Federal Property.
Federal appropriations legislation has affirmed the right to breastfeed on federal
property or in federal buildings.23 The most recent affirmation of this practice was
contained in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005:24
Sec. 629. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a woman
may breastfeed her child at any location in a Federal building or
on Federal property, if the woman and her child are otherwise
authorized to be present at the location.

Thank you. DCUM has received so much negative press recently, and I hope the "journalists" at the Washington City Paper don't take this issue on as their next cover story. This discussion, and the rational points being raised, deserve deliberate, credible coverage by media that will educate, and not sensationalize what appears to be another "mommy war."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. It turns out that the Hirshhorn is aware of what happened, and hasn't issued a response yet because their policy is in opposition to federal law. Should be interesting to see how they reconcile policy with law, and how long it takes to happen.

PP again. Let me clarify (as a huge supporter of the Hirrshorn.) It is not their specific policy, but the Smithsonian's. And I am not sure how the policy reads, but apparently it isn't pro-breastfeeding in public. Let's keep an eye on this, and see how we can affect change without coming out looking like crazy lactivists.

Signed,

A breastfeeding mom who prefers not to pump before visiting museums with my infant.

Wow. That is disappointing. I'm a nursing mom who figured it would likely end up to be a training issue (i.e. that HH/SI understood the law and welcomed nursing moms as a matter of policy, but that the employee in question hadn't been aware of the policy and law). Can you share more about the SI policy?

I would, but fear that I don't know enough details to share without creating confusion if I am wrong. So at the risk of spreading misinformation, I will wait until I know more. But the fact that there has been no public or prviate apology should tell us something.

Completely understand. Will keep an eye on this thread for updates.

[Anonymous]

A google search for "smithsonian breastfeeding" found this very interesting Congressional Record from 1999 that discusses breastfeeding in public and the amendment to the FY 2000 Interior Appropriations Act, and specifically mentions the Smithsonian. It includes both an anecdote of a woman asked to leave a Smithsonian museum, and mention that the amendment would allow breastfeeding at Smithsonian buildings (among other federal buildings). So I am particularly interested to know how the Smithsonian would have an official policy that is not in support of breastfeeding. (I believe it, I'm just astonished.)

http://books.google.com/books?id=3iJ2-MFx9E4C&lpg=PA16314&ots=zqMLQrG2CV&dq=smithsonian%20breastfeeding&pg=PA16314#v=onepage&q=smithsonian%20breastfeeding&f=false

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I were still nursing I'd attend - and I'm a mother who was so paranoid I never nursed in public, ever!!

Go anyway. Support them and next time you can breast feed in public and you need not be paranoid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can;t wait to hear all the comediana. You are all going to be the laughing stock of the late night shows.

as long as i can feed my baby in public without any asshole asking me to move you can laugh as much as you want.

Yes, in fact they like that. People responding with disgust at the sight of them with their infant at the breast is even better. Really, really weird. I would not want to be laughed at or looked at with disgust, certainly not when I was nursing my infant, but that's just me.

Did you click on the link above? There are paintings at the Hirshhorn of completely naked, very well endowed women, in sexual poses. DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT? OMG what are you tight assed prudes doing, exactly, at the Hirshhorn? Are you actually looking at the art? Honestly I'm sure it's doubtful that most of you naysayers are even really aware of what the Hirshhorn really is, but this whole convo could almost be an installation piece. I could just see it...woman quietly nursing baby, sour faced prude giving her the side eye looking on, while behind them both a man dressed like a clown screams and eats his own feces.

Why is it that the posters who think breasts are sexual are called uptight prudes while the ones who think that the public should simply yawn, look bored and turn the other way are not?

Find me the straight man who doesn't think of breasts as sexual objects. The only time a woman nipples are not considered lewd in public is when she is BFing. If you pulled out your breast, without a baby, you would be arrested and I am absolutely certain that a large number of you would do this just for the hell of it to show solidarity with nursing mothers. I think you should round up all your friends who believe as you and let them bare their breasts and see what happens. Think of all the publicity for your cause and the rest of us would have a LOL. Any woman who believes that it is all right to BF anyplace they like is a coward if you don't join this nurse in and bare your breasts..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A google search for "smithsonian breastfeeding" found this very interesting Congressional Record from 1999 that discusses breastfeeding in public and the amendment to the FY 2000 Interior Appropriations Act, and specifically mentions the Smithsonian. It includes both an anecdote of a woman asked to leave a Smithsonian museum, and mention that the amendment would allow breastfeeding at Smithsonian buildings (among other federal buildings). So I am particularly interested to know how the Smithsonian would have an official policy that is not in support of breastfeeding. (I believe it, I'm just astonished.)

http://books.google.com/books?id=3iJ2-MFx9E4C&lpg=PA16314&ots=zqMLQrG2CV&dq=smithsonian%20breastfeeding&pg=PA16314#v=onepage&q=smithsonian%20breastfeeding&f=false

Glad to know I am not the only one who went this route. (researching precedent.)

Interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can;t wait to hear all the comediana. You are all going to be the laughing stock of the late night shows.

as long as i can feed my baby in public without any asshole asking me to move you can laugh as much as you want.

Yes, in fact they like that. People responding with disgust at the sight of them with their infant at the breast is even better. Really, really weird. I would not want to be laughed at or looked at with disgust, certainly not when I was nursing my infant, but that's just me.

Did you click on the link above? There are paintings at the Hirshhorn of completely naked, very well endowed women, in sexual poses. DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT? OMG what are you tight assed prudes doing, exactly, at the Hirshhorn? Are you actually looking at the art? Honestly I'm sure it's doubtful that most of you naysayers are even really aware of what the Hirshhorn really is, but this whole convo could almost be an installation piece. I could just see it...woman quietly nursing baby, sour faced prude giving her the side eye looking on, while behind them both a man dressed like a clown screams and eats his own feces.

Why is it that the posters who think breasts are sexual are called uptight prudes while the ones who think that the public should simply yawn, look bored and turn the other way are not?

BF moms are excluded from the public indecency law because of people like you. if it bothers you so much you can always look the other way, you know...

and if the mother is feeding her child only if you stare at her you'll be able to see her nipples and i guarantee you'll only see it for a split of a second.

get a life.

Find me the straight man who doesn't think of breasts as sexual objects. The only time a woman nipples are not considered lewd in public is when she is BFing. If you pulled out your breast, without a baby, you would be arrested and I am absolutely certain that a large number of you would do this just for the hell of it to show solidarity with nursing mothers. I think you should round up all your friends who believe as you and let them bare their breasts and see what happens. Think of all the publicity for your cause and the rest of us would have a LOL. Any woman who believes that it is all right to BF anyplace they like is a coward if you don't join this nurse in and bare your breasts..

[Anonymous]

I completely support women's rights to breastfeed in public, but the whole point of a nurse-in is to be disruptive and get attention. Being disruptive and getting attention is not a good way to prove that breastfeeding in public is not disruptive. Hordes of women showing up just to whip their boobs out does the rest of us, who are just trying to feed our babies, a disservice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hirshhorne is not subject to DC Laws, but there is a law also giving the right to bf on Federal property.

Breastfeeding in Federal Buildings and on Federal Property.
Federal appropriations legislation has affirmed the right to breastfeed on federal
property or in federal buildings.23 The most recent affirmation of this practice was
contained in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005:24
Sec. 629. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a woman
may breastfeed her child at any location in a Federal building or
on Federal property, if the woman and her child are otherwise
authorized to be present at the location.

Thank you. DCUM has received so much negative press recently, and I hope the "journalists" at the Washington City Paper don't take this issue on as their next cover story. This discussion, and the rational points being raised, deserve deliberate, credible coverage by media that will educate, and not sensationalize what appears to be another "mommy war."

No offense but have you read all of the posts? I just did and am truly amazed by the belittling posts from anti-public bf'ing posters. I would say that the mommy wars are alive and well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I completely support women's rights to breastfeed in public, but the whole point of a nurse-in is to be disruptive and get attention. Being disruptive and getting attention is not a good way to prove that breastfeeding in public is not disruptive. Hordes of women showing up just to whip their boobs out does the rest of us, who are just trying to feed our babies, a disservice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I completely support women's rights to breastfeed in public, but the whole point of a nurse-in is to be disruptive and get attention. Being disruptive and getting attention is not a good way to prove that breastfeeding in public is not disruptive. Hordes of women showing up just to whip their boobs out does the rest of us, who are just trying to feed our babies, a disservice.

no way.

we have to let people know we have the right to feed our children. even the claustrophobic babies that won't eat undercover.

there's no need to be disruptive. we can all go and have a good time at the museum and feed our babies while we enjoy the artwork there.

[Anonymous]

I'm going to reiterate this again, if there is NOT a negative response to a written complaint, you are doing more harm than good. I can pretty much guarantee if someone ACTUALLY contacts The Smithsonian, they will happily comply and send a retrain memo out to comply with the law. You are jumping the gun by planning a nurse-in, please handle this in a professional manner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to reiterate this again, if there is NOT a negative response to a written complaint, you are doing more harm than good. I can pretty much guarantee if someone ACTUALLY contacts The Smithsonian, they will happily comply and send a retrain memo out to comply with the law. You are jumping the gun by planning a nurse-in, please handle this in a professional manner.

Read the whole thread. There won't be a "retrain memo" because the museum's policy is to not allow bf-ing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. It turns out that the Hirshhorn is aware of what happened, and hasn't issued a response yet because their policy is in opposition to federal law. Should be interesting to see how they reconcile policy with law, and how long it takes to happen.

And where are you getting this information? You can't make this kind of inflammatory statement without backing it up. You've got a community of mothers here ready to go rabid and attack at the slightest word, they need documentation. Everyone needs to calm down and organize this in a reasonable manner. First step, phone and written complaint. Document the discussions, discuss the law, ask for an apology and a retraining of staff. Offer to provide materials to help with the retraining. DON'T come ready to attack and put the PR person right on the defensive. This is a federal institution and NOTHING moves quickly. Work for change not for press.