Kim wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
wrote:
WEIRD!
Oh, I think you could find some pretty darned furhter
off-topic discussions than this.
Heck yes.
In fact, bottle feeding frees up a woman to pick up a mic or
slam a fist, as it were.
Or pick up a sodder arn...
it should be remembered
that for a couple of decades in the middle of the
20th century, the "professionals" and "experts" told
us that bottle-feeding was *better* for infants than
the "old-fashioned way". The newfangled "formula"
and all the attendant apparatus was "scientific" and
"progressive", they said. Of course it took a whole
pile of hardware (bottles, sterilizer pot with lid and
bottle rack, nipples, nipple rings, seals, bottle tops,
tongs) the formula itself, and a kitchen to do all the
processing to do what "the old fashioned way" did semi-
automatically.
The "old-fashioned way" was
put down as being vaguely third-world, Luddite,
"horse and buggy" and inferior both physically
and psychologically. Moms who tried to keep the
old ways met with resistance, opposition and
insults.
Uhhh . . are you "explaining" all this to me James or what? If so spare
me willya, I was raised in those days and so were my kids and those
times spanned more than just a couple decades. Yeah there was a bit of
hardware involved but the process was a no-brainer and it wasn't nearly
as complicated as you've intimated. Tongs? sterilizer pot? Bottle rack?
What? Nonsense. Never had any of 'em. By the way the handiest widgets
by far were the 'lectric bottle warmers. Didn't have any friggin'
pacifiers ether.
I had pacifiers in my generation of child-rearing, but I
didn't/don't
believe in them and took it away from my granddaughter
as quick as I could
(meaning as soon as I had her enough to literally keep
her off it until she
didn't know what one was any more when her Mom went to
give it to her, heh
heh).
Pacifier's better than a thumb.
Actually, Jim wasn't
"explaining a thing to you." What Jim is doing is conversing.
Get the
idea? Plus, you ask him that in your "tone," then proceed to
get as
involved with what you are relaying as Jim did. So, are
you "explaining"
also and, if so, let's agree that for the sake of this topic in this thread,
'splainin' might be a good thing...
After all, the "professionals" and "experts" knew
best, right?
As if!
Yeah as if. In the first place you weren't there, I was but
never mind
that little detail. The bottle-feeding days were the biggest move
forward ever in the liberation of women, especially moms.
Finally moms
didn't have to hover over their wee ones 24/7 and were able
to do
"radical" things like trudge off to jobs and even short
vacations
without the kid thus getting the ravenous little beasties out of their
lives for awhile for a break for others to feed. I sure did
my share and so did grandparents and others.
Of course - but that did not mean there was no longer any
need to do it the "old fashioned way".
Good grief. Take a breath there. I really don't know if
you're being gruff
with a reason or if you are somehow insulted by Jim's attempt
to caution at
what "experts" may say at any given time. I think the more
demonstrable
part of Jim's post was that it is the advertising that drives
what is "best"
for...well, anything. Here, it happens to be whether breast
feeding or
bottle feeding is good/better for people.
That's part of it, Kim, and well said! But there's more.
I think a lot of the "professionals" and "experts" really
bought into the idea that bottles/formula were better, and
that the "old fashioned way" was "obsolete". Not because of
$$ or advertising but because they thought "newer is better"
applies to everything.
The two problems with the current politically correct
gotta-do-the-boobs drill are (1) it puts the moms back into
the same
crippled sorts of lives the cave women lived and (2) fathers don't have
to be bothered with the feeding so they can wander off and be Real Men
again. Bull****. Lemmee clue you about the biggie which has
been lost.
A non-mom reapetedly having the sole responsibility for
feeding an
infant is by far the second most powerful bonding force there is.
Ah. So, this is going to come down to some argument for or
against the
"politically correct" angle, for you. Let me give you a clue: moms who
"gotta-do-the-boobs" drill are quite capable of doing the boobs AND all that
you mention above. I bottle fed my first baby and breast fed
my second. I
got to try both and enjoyed both. Neither method prohibited me from doing
anything and I didn't feel cave-like at all, as your
neandrathalian attitude
suggests. One thing that pretty much cannot be argued is that, in a healthy
environment where mom is healthy, breast milk is far superior to
manufactured formula.
Also less expensive, requires less preparation, and conveys some
immunities.
Given that, dads are not at all locked
out of the
experience of feeding, as breast milk can be pumped into
bottles and fed to the baby.
By *anyone*!
Moms are free to pump their breasts at work, saving the milk for
bottle feeding at the nursery, or by dad, or by gramma, or
whomever.
Feeding a baby breast milk does mean that there are any cave
relationships that have to be endured.
And there's no reason a baby can't have both formula and the real
thing, from bottles or from Mom. Another tool in the toolbox, as it
were.
A non-mom can repeatedly have the sole responsibility for
feeding an infant
AND experience the most powerful bonding force there is, simply by feeding
the baby with breast milk through a bottle.
It should be remembered that formula was not invented with the idea
that it would "liberate" moms.
I spent thousands of hours in that mode and looking back I
wouldn't
have missed it for all the world. My sons-in-laws have no
idea what I'm
talking about when the topic comes up
That's really sad.
and the grumpy old ex couldn't
agree more despite the fact that agreeing with me on any
subject galls
her no end.
You are a dedicated dad and that is admirable in terms of the
men in your
generation who wanted nothing to do with the babyhood of their children. My
childrens' father; nor any of my gal-friends husbands, wanted
to change
diapers, feed, bathe, or even watch their child alone.
They missed out big-time, then.
We dragged the kids
everywhere, were expected to maintain the home, get the food on the table
reliably, keep the "kid" quiet and, not only no, but hell no,
dad wasn't about to watch a baby while mom just took a break.
gawd - I dunno any women around here that would put up with that!
What paper diapers? Don't be silly . .
In closing here James ponder this: You've spent more than
just a few
minutes rachet-jawing with my youngest. Who was 100% bottle-
fed as
often as not by her daddy. What evidence do have to offer
which
indicates that she'd have been better off if she'd been boob- fed instead?
Watch bottle-feeding come back again and remember where ya
heard it.
You seem way too defensive, as though Jim was shunning one
style of feeding
over another. I think what Jim was shunning is the readiness
of people to
believe so-called experts, when the experts driving mechanism
is advertising or influence, etc.
You got it. I wish I had some of the books and articles from
those days that pushed bottle/formula as the *only* way for
a good parent to feed a child.
I recall cases where babies were allergic to cow's milk, and
the family had the extra cost and complexity of getting goat's
milk for the formula. The idea of using the "old fashioned way" wasn't
even considered.
And yet despite all that repression, the "old fashioned way" was reborn
in the 1960s from near-oblivion, and has increased in popularity ever
since.
Of course there's a direct connection between that example and
the "newer is always better" mindset in many technological areas...
I think bottle feeding is the preferred mode today,
isn't it? It doesn't have to "come back," because it hasn't
gone anywhere
in the past 20 years, or so. Most women I know who are having babies these
days are bottle feeding--though many more than used to are
feeding breast
milk, pumped while they are at breaks at work and refrigerating the milk for future use.
What I see the most of is "mixed mode". Some Mom, some formula, some
right from the source, some in bottles. If you see someone
feeding a baby with a bottle, the bottle's contents may or may
not be "formula".
And we're only talking about 6 months to a year before the kid is using
a sippycup or similar device.
Kim W5TIT
73 de Jim, N2EY