Anonymous wrote:If I am able to bite my tongue, it will be because of the example you have set. You sound like what my mom would've called "a real lady".

Ah, again kindness. Slightly ill-informed and misplaced, but appreciated none-the-less.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:Keep on keepin on people.

But I won't be there. And I wish you didn't speak for me as a breastfeeding mom.

Don't worry -- I don't. I will speak for those that want an end to discrimination, who want to ensure the rights of breastfeeding moms, who want to be able to peacefully feed their children without fear that they will be criticized, ostracized, condemned or attacked. Especially not by other moms who *claim* to be supportive, but refuse to stand up for the rights of others.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:I hated nursing in public. Not because there is anything inherently unpleasant (quite the contrary), but because I was always aware of people staring. I was always waiting for someone to be offended. I wanted to be as small as possible while doing it. That's so wrong. And that's why nurse-ins are important. The more we do it, the more we see it, the more normal it becomes.

I'm sorry. I never, ever, want a woman to feel that way. I never want my daughter to feel that way. In 2011, in a progressive area such as DC, this should be a non-issue. This should be something that no one raises an eyebrow at. It should be common place and acceptable.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:Dear Jennifer, I have been posting on this thread and I wish sincerely that I could respond as eloquently and politely as you have. I've been more confrontational, asking why people are offended by a beautiful and necessary act, sarcastically inquiring who should determine standards of decency when it comes to BFing and suggesting that anyone who thinks BFing is offensive is in 'dire need of education'. Reading back my own words, I realize that I haven't helped the cause that much because I've stooped to the level of the naysayers and turned an important issue into a back and forth silly argument. Again, I admire the way you have taken the high road when trying to explain all of this to people instead of resorting to snark. It's obvious we both feel strongly about this issue-I just wish I could have expressed myself as well as you did.

What a kind thing to say! Thank you.

Hopefully, from now on, you'll be able to bite your tongue a bit better.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:In response to "The Wife,"

After reading your multiple posts, I understand your purpose in orchestrating this nurse in. I still take issue with your tactics. Ostensibly, you hope to educate the populace about the rights of BF mothers. I think it also might be about your need to advance a cause that is a big part of your identity. (Thanks btw, for all the links about your previous efforts.)

As a breastfeeding mom, I wish you would head the advice of some very smart women who have posted before me. Your tactics aren't warranted, and quite frankly, piss me off. I support the same cause you do, but feel that you are doing me a disservice.

Even if you don't agree with those of us who take issue with the nurse in, please try to consider where we are coming from.

It's kind of hard for me to take into consideration where you're "coming from" when no one will give me a straight answer about what they "take issue" with. What "tactics" am I employing that are inappropriate? Handing out useful documentation? Gathering together with other moms to garner awareness? What aspect of this, after these detailed explanations to clarify the concerns, appears confrontational or inappropriate? Again, I ask, what tactics would you prefer I take? (Ones that would provide an equal platform to raise awareness and publicly educate.) The only suggestions I've seen are:

Hand out the documentation, just not there. But that doesn't quite explain how I'm supposed to accomplish that, or who I'm supposed to be giving it to, given that there aren't otherwise large congregations of breastfeeding moms easily accessible. Should I troll LLL groups? I think, given that (as I said) I haven't breastfed in 3 years, that would be a little weird, don't you?

Write letters. Well, that is only useful if I'm made aware of the circumstances I need to address. Without publicity, I'm not going to get that information easily, for sure. And writing letters certainly doesn't raise awareness among the general populace, since they're not exactly going to be seeing those letters. Besides, I already do that.

Sign petitions. See above. And, of course, the fact that those petitions are (again, as I've said) situation specific and limited in scope. Oh, and I do that, too.

Forgive them. Well, sure. I do. I hold no animosity towards the Hirshhorn, or the Smithsonian. I just want to make sure that other women are not subjected to confrontations like this, and I don't see how to make that possible without drawing attention to the cause. Certainly this is nothing new, and if it is continuing to happen, over a decade after the federal law took effect, then the status quo isn't good enough.

Don't hold the nurse-in. But... um... that solves what? It doesn't draw attention to the situation. It doesn't educate the masses. It doesn't force the Smithsonian to follow its own policies. Again, as I said, one person being unaware of the law/policy is bad enough, but two being so ill-informed is evidence enough that what they're currently doing to enforce said policies and laws isn't working.

So... what should we do? Let this continue to happen? Say "okay, they said sorry, that's good enough for me!"? Except, that doesn't change anything, does it? Change is made by taking action and it has always been that way. Whenever public opinion must be swayed, vocal response is the only effective measure. If there were another way, I'd be more than happy to take it.

I've provided a single link to an instance (nearly 6 years ago) of an article that I was quoted in (the other links were OT and related to a humor blog that my husband and I run). Participating in ~6 instances of social change (where I was once interviewed for radio) does not equal a "big part" of my "identity." My husband suggested that I not respond to this, saying that he feels it, much as the "I agree, but you're pissing me off" statement, is designed to be inflammatory, but I have chosen to address it anyway. This is no more a part of my "identity" than any cause that I choose to support. I'm not a racial minority, but I support racial equality. I'm not in a wheel chair, but I support equal rights for those that are. I am not a homosexual, but I choose to support the rights of the LGBTQ community. And just as feminists before me, I want my daughter to grow up in a world where people aren't afraid to make waves in order to effect change, especially for topics that could potentially effect her. I never, ever, want her to have to justify doing what's right for her own children (should she choose to have them).

Throughout history there have been those that have been "pissed off" at the efforts others have employed in the name of progress. Oddly enough, those same people never seem to hesitate when taking advantage of the privileges that others have struggled to secure. *shrug* I am content that what I am doing is right, I am content that the steps I am taking are not harmful or inflammatory, and I can live with that. Given that I'm an inherently selfish being (as all humans are), that's what really matters.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:I am a great proponent of breast feeding, public or otherwise. I even came to the defense of a lady sitting next to me at the DMV recently who was told by a member of staff that she could not nurse her baby in the DMV.
I have to say though that I cannot support this action since the museum has apologized. I believe it will feed the negative stereotype that we are all a bunch of breast wielding  whack jobs that cannot be taken seriously.

That would entirely depend on what you expect the outcome of the "nurse-in" to be. If it is a protest of bad behavior, then no, it isn't particularly necessary under these particular circumstances. However, if it is meant, as I believe it to be, to bring awareness of the rights of breastfeeding mothers, to educate the populace, and to bring attention to the discrimination that (despite laws to the contrary) is still being perpetuated, then it can (and hopefully will) serve a valuable and important service. The Hirshhorn museum has been given an opportunity to participate in the nurse-in, to show their acceptance (very publicly) of a cause they claim to support, and to assist in doing what the Smithsonian is known for -- educating the masses. My intended actions, distributing an educational tool that is designed to prevent further... misunderstandings, are also meant in an educational and supportive way. Perhaps it's because of my own involvement, but none of those outcomes seem negative to me. I can validate my own reasons, and I am fairly confident of the reasons offered by others involved (although, of course, who is to say what goes through the private recesses of one's mind?), and none of them are confrontational, argumentative, or malicious.

I've asked for clarification about what is so disturbing, I've provided specific explanations for the actions being taken, and I have made myself available, publicly, to answer any specific questions about the intent and reasoning behind the nurse-in. There is nothing disingenuous about what is being done or said, and I would greatly appreciate it if those arguing either side of this topic would behave in a civil manner. (Although, to the poster I've quoted above, I have not taken offense to what you've said. I am merely using this opportunity to speak, in general terms about the discussion.) But, really, that's an afterthought and not a necessity.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:You can write as many long posts as you want, I am still not understanding the purpose of this nurse-in.

The guards were misinformed. The museum has apologized. The Smithsonian does not appear to be ignorant of the law.

If I were an expectant mother waffling about whether to breastfeed this would definitely turn me off. You are giving breastfeeding moms (including myself) a bad name.

And your screen name is a little creepy.

Perhaps if you read the posts it might be more clear. Despite their length, I don't believe that they're particularly difficult to understand, and if there's something that I've written that you don't understand, I'm more than willing to answer questions. Consider me at your disposal.

Question: What is "this" that would turn you off? What have I said/done that would be disturbing to anyone? Again, I ask for clarification.

I am sorry that you find my screen name "creepy" -- it is a name I use because of the blogging network that my husband and I run. We write several blogs, 2 of which are related to romance novels (http://covers.unclewaltersrants.com/ and http://romance.unclewaltersrants.com/), and it is how I've come to be known in most internet circles. It was originally coined by my husband (who goes by the pseudonym of "Uncle Walter") in an effort to refer to me without using my given name. That was probably a futile effort on his part to begin with, but it was a sweet gesture none-the-less, and I know that he meant it in the nicest possible way. Because it is now associated with me, I tend to use it in online forums. However, if it bothers you, I have provided my name (Jennifer), and with the smallest amount of poking around (heck, just read the link I provided), it is quite easy to determine my full name. I have a web-presence and I am completely comfortable corresponding as "myself."

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:Are all societal norms and expectations discrimination then?

And to the PPs who continue to say that anyone who believes that mothers who breastfeed in public should be discreet think breastfeeding is disgusting and need 'educating', I breastfed in public myself, discreetly, and if I couldn't have managed to do it discreetly then I wouldn't have done it. Most people can manage it just fine. Most people support breastfeeding. Most people think adapting to societal norms is important.

I support breastfeeding. I breastfed in public, discreetly. I support a woman's right to breastfeed in public. I am glad it is legal -- it should be. And I find the attitudes of the pro 'nurse-in' posters bizarre and off-putting and just plain obnoxious.

I'm wondering how many of you realize that this is not an issue of "discreet" vs. "indiscreet" breastfeeding? I would ask if you read the article I posted a link to (http://www.myrna.info/2009/02/i-rock-too.html), but given my blog stats and referral history, it's clear that no one has bothered to. So, I'll state it here: When I was approached at IKEA about breastfeeding my son, I was doing so quite discreetly. In fact, not one fraction of my breast was exposed in any way. However, it is still relatively easy to distinguish when someone is breastfeeding, and the salesman who approached me figured it out. When he asked me to move, I explained that I did not have to and was within my rights. He let me be at that point. What did I do? I spoke to the manager and sent an email to the company. They responded back appropriately and politely. I did not organize a nurse-in because the situation and the response did not warrant it. In this instance, the security guard did not follow the law even when advised of it. When Nori did not do as he asked, he approached her a second time. When, despite the law, she still did not comply with his wishes, he had another security guard attempt to intimidate her. They made her so uncomfortable that she felt she had to leave. See the difference in the circumstances? The salesman at IKEA responded appropriately when advised of the law. My contact with IKEA was not to get him in trouble, and I never even bothered to learn his name. It was solely about allowing the company to enforce not just the law, but its own policy. If the Hirshhorn museum, or the Smithsonian in general, adequately trained their staff about appropriate behavior (and the law) then the first guard would not have approached her and the second one would have refused to. One person being ignorant of the law and policy is a fluke. Two is indicative of a problem that needs to be addressed, and this is a very good opportunity to do so.

Now, you've asked a question about societal norms vs. discrimination. "Societal norms" are "the behavioral expectations and cues within a society or group. This sociological term has been defined as 'the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors.' These rules may be explicit or implicit,""rules or standards of behavior shared by members of a social group," "rules developed by a group of people that specify how people must, should, may, should not, and must not behave in various situations."

Based on the very understanding and definition of societal norms, something that is legally protected is an accepted societal norm. If, as one prior poster wrote, "most people support breastfeeding," then it is not only a legally protected right, but a socially accepted right as well. In which case, there is no issue whether or not it "should" be allowed -- it is, and is accepted as such. The reality, of course, is that it isn't truly accepted, as evidenced by the reactions in this thread. It is accepted so long as it falls into a narrow and arbitrary definition of "discreet," or so long as it is done in a specific area in a specific manner. The fact that a mother using a bottle would not have been asked to move, the fact that a woman wearing a tank top (ie showing much more skin than a mother nursing her child, discreetly or not) would not be asked to cover, is illustrative of how "discrimination" is an appropriately used term. The discrimination is when "distinction" is made "in favor of or against a person or thing" based on the "group, class, or category to which the person or thing belongs" (ie breastfeeding mothers), "rather than according to actual merit" (appropriateness of the actions, legality of the situation, rights allowed), which are all part of the very definition of "discrimination" -- ergo the word applies and the actions are indicative of it. The simple fact is, a socially and legally accepted action was targeted for disfavor, not based on whether it was appropriate or inappropriate, but based on the personal preference of the observer, despite being socially acceptable.

Lastly, I must say, I rather think I've been insulted. Pray tell, when have I been obnoxious? What is "bizarre" about what I've said? When have I been "off-putting"? Personally, I have found posters on both sides of the issue who fit that description, but I have tried very hard to be as polite as possible in this conversation. My husband, who acts as my conscience in most situations, has assured me that none of my posts could be considered confrontational, rude or insulting. I trust his opinion.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife)

Anonymous wrote:God, the poor security guard...you're all nuts.
How about protesting the fact that nearly 50 percent of DC schoolchildren go to bed hungry every night? Where's the outrage there? Where's the action plan?

That is another of my causes. I grew up very poor and empathize completely with the children suffering. I'm the first in the school to donate time and effort to helping needy children. However, that is a cause that a vast majority of people will happily get behind. One where it is simple and easy to garner support. My efforts are merely a drop in a bucket that many others are willing to help fill. But breastfeeding rights are important, too. Unfortunately it does not have the numbers to back it up that other causes do. And so some of us choose to support it -- because it should be supported.

As for the security guard... he's incidental. I don't know who he is or what his name is, and I have no animosity towards him (or the second guard). The "target" of the nurse-in, if you will, is the Smithsonian Institute, and the purpose is to ensure that all of their staff will protect the rights of their visitors. It bears repeating that this isn't personal.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:A nurse-in is aggressive. It is 'in your face.' The 'education' aspect is an excuse. There are much better ways to 'educate' people that there are laws on the books that allow breastfeeding in public that do not involve alienating people. WHY is that alienating? WHY does it make people uncomfortable? Who knows -- and who cares. It would be a lot easier to take the time and effort for a few people to learn to be discreet than it would take to change the attitudes and feelings of the majority of society.

What would the "excuse" behind the "education aspect" be? What reason would I, as a non-lactating mom, have to support breastfeeding mothers, other than a desire for the discrimination to end? While I do, indeed, enjoy looking at a nice breast once in a while, I sure as heck would rather do it without a baby attached.

Of course it's easier to teach a minority to change their behavior than to teach a majority to change their outlook. But that doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. While people don't seem to like the comparison to other anti-discrimination causes, the comparison must be made in this case:

It would have been much easier for blacks to stay at the back of the bus, and learn to be happy with it, than to change the country's mindset and allow them equal freedom. Surely it would be easier for a homosexual to hide his sexuality, rather than convince a nation that he has the same rights that they do? For hundreds of years misogyny ruled -- and the status quo was acceptable to a lot of people, so why put forth the effort to ensure that women had equal rights? I'm not in a wheelchair. Why should I worry about whether someone who is will be treated fairly?

Every single person has a vested interest in seeing an end to discrimination, no matter what form that discrimination might take. If you're not a fighter or an activist, I certainly can't force you to be -- but someone must be one, and I've volunteered. While I'm not going to ask you to stand up with me, I would certainly ask that you not stand in my way.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:Converge on the Hirshhorn and pass out the cards or info. You're willing to do it to have a nurse-in; why not do it to 'educate' the public a normal way?

It is a "normal" way. A "nurse-in" is a term used to describe an organized group in support of breastfeeding. It is not necessary to breastfeed (I certainly am not going to -- I haven't lactated in over 3 years), nor is it necessary to even have children there (mine won't be). The effort is meant to draw attention to the situation, and that involves people. However, when you have a group of breastfeeding women, the odds are great that many of them will, during a 2 hour period, need to feed their children.

I can only assume that people picture a nurse-in to consist of women sitting around with their child(ren) at their breast. However, just as NIP is necessary because children do not always eat at convenient times, you can't *force* a child to breastfeed when they're not hungry. Of the nurse-ins I have attended, I only personally breastfed twice -- because my children didn't need to be fed at the time.

If the concern is only that it will be a situation where everyone will be "forced" to see breastfeeding, rest assured that whatever breastfeeding that takes place would be the same amount that would be taking place during the same time period anywhere else. Although, not being naive, I am certain that there will be many women who will at least try to encourage their children to nurse while the event is in progress, but that doesn't work very well, and any attempts with a reluctant child will soon be abandoned, I assure you.

So, be happy! We're taking your advice. We are going to "converge on the Hirshhorn and pass out the cards or info." Some women will have their children with them, as they normally would on a Sunday morning when visiting the Smithsonian. Some women, such as myself, will not. Some women will breastfeed. Some will not. And hopefully there will be a positive outcome, resulting in further awareness and education of breastfeeding rights. Hopefully the gathering will garner enough attention and support to further the anti-discrimination cause.

Given your own suggestion, it sounds to me as if we're on the same page. What is the problem?

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

Anonymous wrote:Passing out laminated cards, as PP already said; mailing letters, starting letter-writing campaigns; signing petitions; posting experiences here on DCUM. And the guard at the Hirshhorn has already been educated, so something already went right here.

How would one go about handing out those laminated cards without a grouping of people available to receive them? Posting anecdotal accounts is useful, but limited. I had not visited this forum before, and only did so in reaction to this specific incident. I have signed hundreds of petitions. I have written letters and complaints. Signing a petition doesn't spread the word to the public and it is limited to the specific cause. Writing letters and complaints does not bring awareness to the public and certainly it does not force a company or organization to adequately address the problem. While it is nice that the Hirshhorn has provided some response, quite frankly I don't have any reason to trust that they will do anything more than they have always done... which is clearly not enough.

For every woman willing to come forward with her experience, there are dozens, if not hundreds, who keep their mouths shut. Either out of embarrassment, a wish to avoid confrontation, or maybe out of fear that others will react with the same vitriol that has been evidenced in this single thread.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

I'm a first time poster, although I have registered, so I hope that this will show up with my proper user name et al.

A few things about me:

I have 2 children, an 8 year old girl and a 6 year old boy. I stopped breastfeeding over 3 years ago. I am actively involved in assisting LJ in the organization of this event. In the 5 years that I breastfed, there were several incidents in which I was asked to move or leave while NIP. Oddly enough, while it was easy to tell what I was doing, there was absolutely no exposure of my nipple or areola (at most simply the skin at the top of my breast -- no more than seen when wearing a relatively conservative top). However, I never made an effort to hide what I was doing, even when no exposure was made. And so, in my experience, what made people uncomfortable wasn't any actual or possible nudity in the act, but the act itself. While I'm sure many will argue that they don't feel that way, I can only share my own, albeit anecdotal, experiences.

I have participated in at least a half dozen nurse-ins. I have been interviewed several times and have appeared in articles and radio shows regarding my support of breastfeeding rights. It is something that I feel passionately about. As someone else mentioned, there are many topics that are important (LGBTQ rights and child-abuse prevention to name just two that I am also actively involved in). That does not, however, negate the importance of protecting a woman's right to breastfeed, and raising awareness of those rights.

What exactly do I hope to accomplish on the 12th? Well, personally I will be distributing hundreds of laminated business cards that feature the federal and (local) state breastfeeding laws. The purpose of these cards is purely educational. A woman can carry this card with her and, should she find herself in the same position that Nori was in, she can produce the card to easily explain and illustrate her rights. My intent is to assist women who are not comfortable in confrontations, or women who are hesitant to speak up to someone in "authority." I can easily imagine that if the security guard had been presented with the laws at the time (not just having them recited to him), he would have backed down immediately.

The Hirshhorn has apologized and said they will do better. That's great! So why don't we drop it? Well, think about this: If no publicity had been brought to this, if a "big deal" had NOT been made, would you have known that this had happened to someone? How do we know that this isn't a regular occurrence? Do you think that the Smithsonian would ever advertise that it's happened to others? But if the public is made aware, if we all now know that this has happened, then if it *does* ever happen again, further steps can be taken. Since Nori has come forward, I have heard other mothers discuss their own experiences at the Smithsonian. I can't help but wonder, if they had stepped forward at the time, would Nori have had this experience? If a single nurse-in can prevent other women from facing discrimination, then it is certainly worth it to me. I abhor discrimination in all its forms, and strive to ensure that no one faces it, whether it is due to the color of their skin, the person they love, or their ability to provide sustenance to their child.

Contrary to what is being said, a nurse-in is not a drastic and last-course measure. It is a step to be taken in raising awareness and protecting rights. It is a method of educating the public. It is part of the process of making breastfeeding acceptable, common, and frequent. I have never considered a nurse-in to be a protest. While it can be, its primary objective is to draw attention to the issue at hand and to make the public (and the "offending" companies) aware that discrimination against breastfeeding mothers will not be tolerated. Sit-ins, despite being protests, were not inherently disruptive, and a nurse-in is not either. It is only the response to them that led to violence or negative behavior. And while breastfeeding rights don't have the same immediate impact as racial protections, the long-term benefits of making breastfeeding acceptable and commonplace are very important. Rather than trying to make a one-on-one comparison of the two issues, we should accept the importance of both and be willing to make room for the rights of everyone, even if they don't effect everyone in quite the same way.

Jennifer (aka "The Wife")

If you'd care to see one of the articles I appeared in, you can read it here:
http://www.myrna.info/2009/02/i-rock-too.htm