Did Time magazine go too far?

Did Time magazine go too far?

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 47.6%
  • No

    Votes: 9 42.9%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 2 9.5%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    21
Three is too old to be breast feeding a child in you live in the USA. The kid can use a cup, why not pump instead of breast feed if you want the kid to continue to get the benefits of breast feeding. Something wrong there with the Mom not Time.

If you live in the US ???

Yeah that's what I ment to say. In poorer countries children breastfeed longer.
Why would it be bad for kids here but ok for kids in other countries? Would it be ok for poor people here to breastfeed longer?
 

the cover photo was posed, and is imho gratuitous and very close to salacious.
they could have gone more than a few ways with this in a graphical sense, but they are media ghouls....*shrugs*.

What about the kid? That is what I say.
This child is two years from entering school. No doubt he is going to be the brunt of 1000's of jokes....for years.
 
Must be difficult to sell magazines these days. Particularly "news" magazines with old news.
 
What do you think? Appropriate? Or wrong? Or something else?

time-600x428.jpg
 
It's a shameful attempt to bring attention to the magazine to increase sales. The cover has no redeeming social value but only "shock" value to draw attention...
 
That was my first gut reaction too BBD not to mention a shameless exploitation of a chld who will be horribly embarrassed when his friends throw it in his face a few years down the line.

I can't imagine a mother doing that to her child.
 
That's a million times worse than breaking out the baby book in front of your child's prom date.

Unfathomable to me that a parent would put that sort of picture into the public domain like that. Like naming your son Sue.
 

lol... reminds me of my son when he was three years old (now 35)...

he'd walk up to his mother sitting in a chair, plop his arm on the arm of the chair, open his mouth, and wait for his mother to pull out her tit (no matter if we had company or not)...

yeah, we were kinda free and easy like that... but even then, it seemed kinda, um... strange...
 
I don't think breast feeding is wrong but the exploitation by the magazine might be. As far as the women who are on the cover, they signed up for it and will have to explain to the kids when they get older why they did allowed their image to be on a national magazine.
 
I guessing and hoping that the issue here is not the bare breast(s) or the idea of breastfeeding in general, but those two children are too doggone old to be sucking on the teat!

Well, maybe the boy is too doggone young to be doing so again.

Either way, the only inappropriate thing is the age of the children.

Immie
 
My first reaction is if my nephew was a breast feeder.... he will still be breast feeding when hes 30.

I think they are psychologically harming their children.
 
meh... isn't there another thread regarding this subject...?

no matter... here's my first post to put up this tune...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46EbjMkeghE]Loudon Wainwright "Rufus Is A Tit Man" - YouTube[/ame]
 
It's a shameful attempt to bring attention to the magazine to increase sales. The cover has no redeeming social value but only "shock" value to draw attention...

Sensationalism at it's worst. Shame on Time and the mother, who is also a model, as they stoop so low, for temporary gains. They needed to exploit a child, in order to promote their own selfish agendas.

I have just heard of this topic and was reading about it by a psychiatrist I don't always agree with, but this time I do. Here is what he has to say, and with which I agree.

Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team. Dr. Ablow can be reached at [email protected].


Read more: Time magazine cover -- forget the breast, what about the boy? | Fox News
 
Honestly, all of this shit is being started over nothing.

Breastfeeding is normal, even natural. Get over it.
Just be glad that she has some nice boobs :thup:
 
It's a shameful attempt to bring attention to the magazine to increase sales. The cover has no redeeming social value but only "shock" value to draw attention...

Sensationalism at it's worst. Shame on Time and the mother, who is also a model, as they stoop so low, for temporary gains. They needed to exploit a child, in order to promote their own selfish agendas.

I have just heard of this topic and was reading about it by a psychiatrist I don't always agree with, but this time I do. Here is what he has to say, and with which I agree.

Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team. Dr. Ablow can be reached at [email protected].


Read more: Time magazine cover -- forget the breast, what about the boy? | Fox News



Bull's eye!
 

Forum List

Back
Top