Completely inappropriate comment for this thread.I'm sure if the mothers advertised on usedvictoria...
Public Breastfeeding
#41
Posted 28 July 2008 - 11:46 PM
#42
Posted 29 July 2008 - 06:37 AM
I don't know about the oxytocin thing but a happy, well-fed baby and a bonded mom makes for a happier home all around.(Incidentally, guys -- and I bet gumgum knows this: a less stressed-out, easy-going nursing mother makes for a much more loving spouse <ahem>. Those hormones -- ocytocin? -- that kick in with the let-down also work to make "just a little lovin'" an all-around event ...whether early in the morning or late at night or whenever...)
I should also say that those of whom don't have kids don't and will never understand how incredibly difficult parenting is - however rewarding. And if a small thing like a breastfed baby, instead of the bottle-fed baby, makes things just that much easier, then the choice goes without question. And yes, once baby and mom figure it out, it is much easier to breastfeed than bottle feed - not to mention all of the other benefits spoken for above.
#43
Posted 30 July 2008 - 02:39 PM
There was a mother that was asked to leave recently and there was a story on CBC on how they are not allowing it anymore. Apparently the customers were going to be offended.
Pardon me for asking again...but I not only can't find any reference to this incident; and a representative from the Bay Centre has apparently never heard about it either.
They are also saying they were misquoted in the TC. So either they are trying to to do PR damage control, or they got some seriously bad media coverage.
#44
Posted 30 July 2008 - 03:01 PM
"I'm sorry Ms. Martini, but we at the Bay Centre have never heard about the instance you are referencing. Further, we strongly disagree with the TC for quoting us about the instance that we still have never heard about".
Sipowitz would have hit that guy with a phonebook in the interview room.
#45
Posted 30 July 2008 - 03:10 PM
Soooo....they guy from the Bay Center never even heard about the incident that he was mis-quoted about.
"I'm sorry Ms. Martini, but we at the Bay Centre have never heard about the instance you are referencing. Further, we strongly disagree with the TC for quoting us about the instance that we still have never heard about".
Sipowitz would have hit that guy with a phonebook in the interview room.
There is one alleged incident that CBC may or may not have covered, then more recently the TC quoted on the next incident, that Bay Centre says was miquoted.
#46
Posted 30 July 2008 - 03:29 PM
There is one alleged incident that CBC may or may not have covered, then more recently the TC quoted on the next incident, that Bay Centre says was miquoted.
Yes, thank you for clarifying I was talking about 2 separate media stories.
Sipowitz...:D:D
#47
Posted 30 July 2008 - 08:15 PM
Why is such an event necessary when there have not been any cases of mothers' rights being violated. I see breast-feeding all the time, in Starbucks and other places and no one shows any sign of disapproval. And few people need education on the benefits of breast feeding - it is the "NORM."
Hey ladies, no need to protest for rights that you already have.
#48
Posted 31 July 2008 - 07:06 AM
#49
Posted 31 July 2008 - 10:06 AM
Just to be 100% clear ... It is fine to breast feed your child at the Bay Centre? And this comes straight from the management?
#50
Posted 31 July 2008 - 10:18 AM
Just to be 100% clear ... It is fine to breast feed your child at the Bay Centre? And this comes straight from the management?
That's my understanding from a letter sent in response to the TC article, and the alleged incident asking a mother to leave.
The Cadillac-Fairview rep. said she had not heard about any such incident, and even checked with mall security.
I'll see if I can find out more.
#51
Posted 31 July 2008 - 11:06 AM
So I am even more curious where the conflicting information came from.
In some ways it seems the TC created an issue where there wasn't one.
If any C-F mall doesn't cater to large groups period, they should not be singled out for not catering to this event.
And my issue was specifically the comments quoted in the TC article by a Bay Centre rep. So were they misquoted, or didn't think before they spoke?
#52
Posted 31 July 2008 - 01:51 PM
#53
Posted 31 July 2008 - 04:31 PM
I dunno, seems to me that the "rights women already have" are more tenuous than we thought. Look at how many people would prefer it to be banned in public places... even just on this thread.
Just to be 100% clear ... It is fine to breast feed your child at the Bay Centre? And this comes straight from the management?
From reading the article I concluded that the managers were against this event. I didn't see any indication that they were against a woman here and there breast-feeding in the mall. No example of a woman being banned and ejected was given in the article.
I think breast-feeding is a natural and intimate experience and that 200 women doing it in a mall is going to annoy those who have not accepted the individual's right to do it in public. It won't convert them.
That right is not even up for debate in my opinion. Every mother has that right. The article was about a group protest being denied.
#54
Posted 31 July 2008 - 04:41 PM
My apologies for blurring the two events. The issue of a mother being asked to leave stemmed from a post of G-Man's on page one:From reading the article I concluded that the managers were against this event. I didn't see any indication that they were against a woman here and there breast-feeding in the mall. No example of a woman being banned and ejected was given in the article.
There was a mother that was asked to leave recently and there was a story on CBC on how they are not allowing it anymore. Apparently the customers were going to be offended.
But the TC article comments and the incident of the mother being asked to leave were both addressed in the response letter from the Bay Centre.
I hope This makes sense now. It has been confusing.
#55
Posted 31 July 2008 - 05:04 PM
Seems to me like too much attention is going to this topic and not enough attention to really serious matters like the Art Deco on the former Kresge building. < snicker >
#56
Posted 31 July 2008 - 05:27 PM
Makes sense Martini. Was it because of martini indulgence?
Seems to me like too much attention is going to this topic and not enough attention to really serious matters like the Art Deco on the former Kresge building. < snicker >
No, but I seriously think I need one!
#57
Posted 07 August 2008 - 10:46 AM
http://www.cbc.ca/ca...-west-jet-.html
http://www.theglobea...0807.wbcnurse07
#58
Posted 07 August 2008 - 11:17 AM
#59
Posted 07 August 2008 - 01:57 PM
Well here we go again. Except now in Vancouver and in mid-flight.
http://www.cbc.ca/ca...-west-jet-.html
http://www.theglobea...0807.wbcnurse07
LOL-BigTime™.
Here's why:
"[She] came up and said quietly, 'You know, some men find the sight of a bare breast quite offensive. Can I offer you a blanket to cover up with?" Tarbuck said on Wednesday.
Who are these men? And what did their mothers (it's always the mother's fault, isn't it?) do to them that made the sight of a bare breast offensive?
This is one of those occasions where I really, really wish I was sitting in a near-by seat.
I have $5(CAN) for the first VV member who can guess what my reaction/response would have been.
#60
Posted 07 August 2008 - 02:15 PM
Or maybe that's what I would have done...I get so confused in the afternoons.
Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users