TheWife wrote:

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")

TheWife wrote:

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: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".

TheWife wrote:

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:::eye roll:: Smug posts like this are why people don't like breastfeeding activists. I don't have a problem with a nurse-in; it just seems overblown, ridiculous and disruptive when the museum has already apologized and there's already a federal law in place.

What's the opposite of a nurse-in? A bottle-in? Anyone up for bottle-feeding their babies at the Hirshorn?

Anonymous wrote:Jennifer (aka "The Wife"),

You are more than enough reason for me to NOT to attend the event. And I am a huge supporter of this cause.

TheWife wrote:

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:You misunderstand me. I don't *claim* to be supportive. I am. I just don't agree with your strategy. And for that reason, you decide to criticize, ostricize, and attack me. Again, please consider a more deliberate response to an issue that includes a lot of us. You are dismissive of feedback that doesn't fit your agenda.

Anonymous wrote:

TheWife wrote:

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")

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".

Anonymous wrote:Is this "The Husband"?

TheWife wrote:

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:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixx66T-FPYM

TheWife wrote:

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)