I didn't come to an art museum to watch you nurse a toddler

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A speaking toddler can wait for his boobies. We’re not talking about an infant who is ebf.

Can? Maybe. But doesn’t have to just because op is big mad.

Doesn’t have to - but if mom makes this choice she is going to be judged as gross, rude and as having poor parenting skills.

Only by judgmental twats. So not worth worrying about.

Seeing entitled children inspires revulsion. This kind of behavior is really on the same spectrum as a child screaming and tantruming in a store to get candy and being given it. Or seeing a child that hits their mother and swears. It is extremely permissive and inept parenting and it makes people mad to see. because more broadly we are a society, and poorly raised children impact all of us.

Except none of this happened. If breasts weren’t involved this would be the equivalent of a child asking for a water bottle and being handed it.

But breasts were involved, that is the point. A walking, talking child was allowed to demand that a grown woman expose her breasts in public all because the grown woman cannot stand up to her toddler and have it wait 5 minutes. It’s honestly kind of disturbing.

Grandma, it’s 2025. Breastfeeding in public is fine. Even for a toddler. Grow TF up.

No it’s not fine for a toddler to demand “boob” and pull down his mother’s shirt in public. As much as you want to claim it is.

It is fine.

If you can’t handle being in public you should stay home.

If your toddler can't handle being in public without nursing, that family should stay home.

See how that works?

The toddler and mother handled being in public just fine.

OP is the one who was triggered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A speaking toddler can wait for his boobies. We’re not talking about an infant who is ebf.

Can? Maybe. But doesn’t have to just because op is big mad.

Doesn’t have to - but if mom makes this choice she is going to be judged as gross, rude and as having poor parenting skills.

Only by judgmental twats. So not worth worrying about.

Seeing entitled children inspires revulsion. This kind of behavior is really on the same spectrum as a child screaming and tantruming in a store to get candy and being given it. Or seeing a child that hits their mother and swears. It is extremely permissive and inept parenting and it makes people mad to see. because more broadly we are a society, and poorly raised children impact all of us.

Thanks for proving my point.

Judgmental twats who build up baseless narratives to defend their asshatness certainly aren’t worth worrying about.

The irony in the room is so thick.

It's funny how the permissive parents think saying the word "twat" is somehow making an argument.

I don’t get why people just make up random narratives to debate. I guess it’s easier to defeat strawmen than engage in reality.

Judgmental and dim-witted. Sounds MAGAy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Should a mother have to leave a public space because her 12 year old is eating?

Of course not.

The mother and child were fine.

OP is issue here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frankly bringing babies and toddlers to art galleries is stupid. They don’t care. They disturb the patrons who do care, many of whom might have just this one chance to see these things.

Because the only reason parents go to art galleries is for their kids. We should just all stay home and do nothing until our kids are old enough to appreciate it all.

You can stay away from art galleries until they can behave properly. It’s not forever.

You can move to the next room over and MYOB for free. Take care of yourself; you're not a toddler who needs other people's mommies to cater to your whiny little self, are you?

You think because YOU want something everyone else should accommodate you. It’s not a playground. Lots of people save for a long time to come and see these things, To consider the history and culture around them. Have some consideration for other people. Not everyone has the luxury to just pop in because it’s hot outside.

The National Gallery is free and huge. You can actually just pop in for a few minutes and then leave and then come back at your leisure. And if there are people in any gallery who are bothering you, you can easily move on to one of the other hundreds of galleries in the museum and then return a bit later, at very little inconvenience.

You, on the other hand, think that breastfeeding mothers should simply not be allowed in the museum at all, or should have to leave entirely when their children get hungry, because the mere thought of being in the same building as a woman breastfeeding her child is upsetting to you. Where is your consideration for other people???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's uncool. I have no problem whatsoever with women nursing infants but a verbal toddler is old enough to be told, "no eating in an art gallery" or "wait for milk until later". It's entirely different than nursing an infant.

This. No food or drink in an art gallery. That includes BOOB, imo.

The law says differently.

Yes, the law says that for an infant who needs its mother’s milk to survive. A walking toddler who has teeth and eats solid food is a different story. The toddler needs to have ‘boob’ somewhere other than in an art gallery, just like the rest of us!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's uncool. I have no problem whatsoever with women nursing infants but a verbal toddler is old enough to be told, "no eating in an art gallery" or "wait for milk until later". It's entirely different than nursing an infant.

This. No food or drink in an art gallery. That includes BOOB, imo.

The law says differently.

Yes, the law says that for an infant who needs its mother’s milk to survive. A walking toddler who has teeth and eats solid food is a different story. The toddler needs to have ‘boob’ somewhere other than in an art gallery, just like the rest of us!

Can you link to the text of the law that says it's only for infants?

The DC law that seems relevant specifically uses the word "child". If they had meant "infants" they could have used that term.

(c)(1) A woman shall have the right to breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, where she has the right to be with her child, without respect to whether the mother’s breast or any part of it is uncovered during or incidental to the breastfeeding of her child.


https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.82.html

[Anonymous]

Uh but that doesn't address the courtesy issue in exercising that right. Slurping snorting slurping loudly is just rude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Uh but that doesn't address the courtesy issue in exercising that right. Slurping snorting slurping loudly is just rude.

Infants and toddlers do all sorts of things that we recognize as rude in adults and not in children who are still learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's uncool. I have no problem whatsoever with women nursing infants but a verbal toddler is old enough to be told, "no eating in an art gallery" or "wait for milk until later". It's entirely different than nursing an infant.

This. No food or drink in an art gallery. That includes BOOB, imo.

The law says differently.

Yes, the law says that for an infant who needs its mother’s milk to survive. A walking toddler who has teeth and eats solid food is a different story. The toddler needs to have ‘boob’ somewhere other than in an art gallery, just like the rest of us!

Can you link to the text of the law that says it's only for infants?

The DC law that seems relevant specifically uses the word "child". If they had meant "infants" they could have used that term.

(c)(1) A woman shall have the right to breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, where she has the right to be with her child, without respect to whether the mother’s breast or any part of it is uncovered during or incidental to the breastfeeding of her child.


https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.82.html

Ok then go ahead and take your shirt off and breastfeed your 7 year old in the National Gallery!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's uncool. I have no problem whatsoever with women nursing infants but a verbal toddler is old enough to be told, "no eating in an art gallery" or "wait for milk until later". It's entirely different than nursing an infant.

This. No food or drink in an art gallery. That includes BOOB, imo.

The law says differently.

Yes, the law says that for an infant who needs its mother’s milk to survive. A walking toddler who has teeth and eats solid food is a different story. The toddler needs to have ‘boob’ somewhere other than in an art gallery, just like the rest of us!

Can you link to the text of the law that says it's only for infants?

The DC law that seems relevant specifically uses the word "child". If they had meant "infants" they could have used that term.

(c)(1) A woman shall have the right to breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, where she has the right to be with her child, without respect to whether the mother’s breast or any part of it is uncovered during or incidental to the breastfeeding of her child.


https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.82.html

Ok then go ahead and take your shirt off and breastfeed your 7 year old in the National Gallery!

“Take your shirt off”?

You’re doing it wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's uncool. I have no problem whatsoever with women nursing infants but a verbal toddler is old enough to be told, "no eating in an art gallery" or "wait for milk until later". It's entirely different than nursing an infant.

This. No food or drink in an art gallery. That includes BOOB, imo.

The law says differently.

Yes, the law says that for an infant who needs its mother’s milk to survive. A walking toddler who has teeth and eats solid food is a different story. The toddler needs to have ‘boob’ somewhere other than in an art gallery, just like the rest of us!

Can you link to the text of the law that says it's only for infants?

The DC law that seems relevant specifically uses the word "child". If they had meant "infants" they could have used that term.

(c)(1) A woman shall have the right to breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, where she has the right to be with her child, without respect to whether the mother’s breast or any part of it is uncovered during or incidental to the breastfeeding of her child.


https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/code/sections/2-1402.82.html

Ok then go ahead and take your shirt off and breastfeed your 7 year old in the National Gallery!

Have you been to the National Gallery?

[Anonymous]

I am wondering why people take toddlers to places like art galleries. Seriously. Are you having a nice time enjoying the art while keeping up with a toddler? Why not go on your own or with friends instead of bringing a toddler who nurses on demand if you want to see the art?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering why people take toddlers to places like art galleries. Seriously. Are you having a nice time enjoying the art while keeping up with a toddler? Why not go on your own or with friends instead of bringing a toddler who nurses on demand if you want to see the art?

How do you think breastfeeding works if you think it impedes the ability to see art?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Id be willing to bet that there are examples of breastfeeding in public that everyone who has commented on this thread would agree was over the line. But who cares? It happened, it’s legal, it’s not my kid, not my breast, not my art, not my problem. Move the f along. Everyone is so focused on the activities of other people. If you dont like something, don’t do it. And likewise if you dislike the internal code of others, cool - it’s not your code… you don’t have to live by it.

These stupid issues command way too much of your attention.

OP came here to complain, which she can certainly do. And you're berating her for spending time complaining about what someone else is doing that doesn't have to affect her?

Pot, meet kettle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering why people take toddlers to places like art galleries. Seriously. Are you having a nice time enjoying the art while keeping up with a toddler? Why not go on your own or with friends instead of bringing a toddler who nurses on demand if you want to see the art?

I'm sorry your relationship with your toddler was so poor that you don't understand how walking around and talking about what they see in pictures would be enjoyable, and good for their development. It might be related to the fact that you seem astounded by a young child asking for something with words, since poor parenting can lead to significant language delays. Many kids are walking and asking for things with words and able to enjoy looking at pictures by their first birthdays.