That's evasive of my question. Again, what if for some unexpected reason (e.g., your bag was stolen) you didn't have a bottle?
The young woman in my anecdote seemed really frustrated because the baby was crying very loudly and passionately. As I said, that went on for five minutes after I boarded the train but I have no idea how long it had gone on before I boarded, and I have no idea how far she had to go.
She did wait for an empty seat at the end of the car, and she did turn herself toward the wall, which shielded her pretty much from two thirds of the passengers. So she wasn't flagrant in her action and, as I said, most of the passengers ignored her. (Those closer to her were glad the baby stopped wailing.)
What would you have done?
I would have had a bottle. Why is it that liberals have no concept of planning ahead. If my bag was stolen, I would have already called the police to report the theft and asked for assistance.
Suppose it was a man. Some daddy taking his baby out. Would he flop out a tit? Is there some law that prohibits having possession of an infant while not having tits?
Men can't generate milk.
The question was what if for some inexplicable reason you didn't have a bottle what would you do. Well, it's not like men never go anyplace with their babies! What do they do without a bottle. How about a babysitter? No milk, no bottle. The entire concept is ludicrous. There is no reason, no earthly reason why a woman would have to flash her tits to the world unless she really want to do that and anything else is a good excuse. Someone should drop a dollar down her cleavage and tell her what a good show it was.