This is priceless. Judith Warner, author of "Domestic Disturbances," a New York Times blog, highlights a provocative piece a mother wrote for The Atlantic Monthly called "The Case Against Breast Feeding."
It's a great article, which highlights many undisclosed facts about breastfeeding that aren't politically correct -- namely, that it isn't the Be All, End All -- at least with respect to health benefits. So there's a paragraph in which Warner compares the over-emphasis on breastfeeding with the de-emphasis on a mother's physical presence. Great, couldn't agree more. But rather suggest we spend less time as a society focused on breastfeeding and more time on encouraging mothers to stay home, she says the following:
Why, as a society, have we privileged the magic elixir of maternal milk over actual maternal contact, denying the vast, vast majority of mothers the kind of extended maternity leave that would make them physically present for their babies?
Indeed, no good feminist would ever suggest a mother stay home on her own accord. Feminists claim to put the needs of children first, but never for a moment suggest women have a choice in whether or not to stay home. Instead it's society's fault. If companies simply offered their employees the option of a three-year maternity leave, children could have their mothers at their sides. The fact that women could choose to opt out of their own free will is never entertained. After all, this would require a steadfast belief in personal responsibility.
And no modern femininst believes in that rubbish.
Is formula-feeding safe? See the Opposing Views debate.