Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Celebrities / Entertainment Industry and other MSM
Register FAQ Chat Social Groups Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-05-2012, 02:20 AM   #1
anyuser
Senior Member
 
anyuser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,376
Default Time's Kid Sucking On Tit Cover Causes a Ruckus

Time's Breastfeeding Cover Causes a Ruckus


I ceartainly would not mind sucking on those & thats not something I have done before. It gave me an idea. Very nice, I didn't know they made magazines like these, but if this kid can do it, well I should be able to also. (there is a thread about this somewhere on this forum also, and says that breastmilk is the best for you, so I gotta try to find some. Ima ask around.

The latest issue of Time is sure to catch your eye when it hits newsstands Friday, as it shows a 26-year-old woman breastfeeding her 3-year-old son—who is standing up. At least two commentators have expressed shock that this is Time, rather than one of Tina Brown’s predictably controversial Newsweek covers. Reactions:

“It's a bit of a jawdropper … We had to blink, rub our eyes, shake our heads and look again,” writes Adam Clark Estes on the Atlantic Wire. “We can't figure out if Time is trolling their competitor Newsweek or trolling us.”

The cover has led to some shocked Twitter reactions, and a Morning Joe co-host “was visibly upset by it,” writes Dylan Byers on Politico. Morning Joe guest and Financial Times columnist Gillian Tett called the photo “a really cheap shot” and said it made her “wince,” and co-host Mika Brzezinski appeared to agree.
On BuzzFeed, Anna North points out that cover mom Jamie Lynne Grumet's son “might regret this later,” adding that she hopes “the magazine is planning on paying this kid's therapy bills.”

Time’s blog explains that the photographer chose this particular cover image because the accompanying article is about attachment parenting, and, he says, "I liked the idea of having the kids standing up to underline the point that this was an uncommon situation."
http://www.newser.com/story/145784/t...-a-ruckus.html

Does Jamie Lynn Grumet, the extreme breastfeeding mom of two on the Time magazines’ cover have a life? Any life outside of being a milk machine for her sons, 4 and 5? Come on. Most normal, loving moms know there’s no way you need to do this to have healthy, well-adjusted kids.

Let me be clear, Jamie Lynn Grumet, I’m a mom of four and I breastfed each one of my children. I absolutely loved doing it and so did my babies. But there’s no way that children need their mothers to sacrifice all other activities for years, so they end up “attached” to their parents. That’s just another form of extremism, that will send other more laid back moms into unnecessary guilt trips.

There’s a big difference between doing what’s healthy for your babies- and that’s trying to breastfeed for the first six months or year of your child’s life and making it the entire focus of your life. When I went back to work full time after three months post each kid, I happily carried my breast pump so I could keep supplying each baby at home.

But there’s no way that it’s necessary to nurse your children through nursery school and into kindergarden in order to end up with kids who are lovingly attached to their parents. That’s just extreme nonsense.

So is the idea that you have to carry your babies and kids every single minute of the day and need to sleep with your newborns and infants in your bed, even at risk of suffocating or crushing them.

‘Attachment parenting’ addicts like mother of two Joanne Beauregard, who is profiled in the Time magazine cover story, “Are You Mom Enough?”, are slavishly devoting literally their entire daily lives to nursing and nurturing their babies and toddlers , and it’s just not necessary. I can personally testify to that.

Yes, breastfeeding is wonderful and healthy. So is holding your babies and toddlers a lot. So is pulling them up and hugging and comforting them when they cry. And so is letting them crawl into bed and sleep with you whenever they want to, once they’re passed that crushable stage.

I’ve done all of this. I never believed in letting my babies “cry it out” when they were trying to go to sleep. And when I tried ”Ferberizing” my daughter Sofia, now 21, when she was a baby, she cried so hard that she threw up. I immediately picked her up and vowed never to do that cruel ridiculousness again.

But I also believe that women are entitled to have a life and most women do need to support their families. They can’t be breastfeeding and cuddling 24/7 as much as they might like to. It’s just not realistic. Is breastfeeding extremist Jamie Lynn Grumet rich? Who who supports her and her sons while she breastfeeds all day?

How many women in all of history and in all different cultures really have the luxury of devoting themselves only to breastfeeding and cuddling all day and night long?

They may have strapped their babies on their backs, or carried them in slings, but it was so they could work while they held them. Most women have almost always had to work in the fields, in their homes, caring for their other children and families. They didn’t just sit around on the couch or on the floor playing with their infants and toddlers to ensure they wouldn’t grow up to be maladjusted freaks.

Now, I can tell you that I would categorize my four children, who are now 11, 15, 21, and 25 as very “attached” children and adults. We are a very close knit family. We see my two oldest children all the time and are super tight with our two youngest, who are at home.But my 25 year-old son Noah says he would be mortified if I’d been a breastfeedaholic who had been photographed with him suckling when he was three. “Now that would have ruined my life,”he swears.” That kid on Time magazine’s cover is going to be really pissed at his mom one day!”

What Jamie Lynn and Joanne don’t get is that there is more to being a good parent than breastfeeding and co-sleeping. Just as critical as nursing is helping your children with homework, cheering them on at all their baseball, soccer and basketball games, school recitals and theater performances, and being there to listen every time they want to talk. Real attachment parenting is being there for the long, long haul, not just when they need your breast.

And most of all, Jamie Lynn Grumet and Joanne Beauregard, being a great parent is about being an inspiring role model. So giving up your career to breastfeed and slavishly devoting every minute of your day to physically touching your kids doesn’t allow for much time to inspire them with your efforts to passionately pursue interests that can open up their minds to their own life possibilities.

To me, extreme ‘attachment parenting’ is one-note parenting. And boiling down your role of mother to milk machine, is denying you and your kids the chance to attach in a much wider way that will help them grow into well-adjusted adults that can detach from you at the right times as well as be attached. What do you think HollywoodLifers?
-Bonnie Fuller

http://www.hollywoodlife.com/2012/05...ver-mom-crazy/

Well the article says they are 3-4 but to me the kid could be 5-6 because I knew a 5 year old later turned 6 that looks like that kid in the picture (hes older now though). Anyways, Ima read through all this and try to get me some of that nipple. Looks good, and seems easy to get by the picture (the woman obviously loves getting her tits sucked so future looks good for me :-).
anyuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 02:29 AM   #2
noobcybot
Senior Member
 
noobcybot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,826
Default

Mime Lowery : Shit nigga, you at least thirty.

That is clearly no boy, but a canny little person who has scammed his way kntk that photoshoot. Stay classy Time Magazine.
__________________
The one has become many.
noobcybot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 03:03 AM   #3
Dude111
Moderator
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 15,781
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyuser
Time's Breastfeeding Cover Causes a Ruckus

I ceartainly would not mind sucking on those & thats not something I have done before. It gave me an idea. Very nice, I didn't know they made magazines like these, but if this kid can do it, well I should be able to also. (there is a thread about this somewhere on this forum also, and says that breastmilk is the best for you, so I gotta try to find some. Ima ask around.
Well yes ITS NOT P.C. WHICH IS WHY IT CAUSES A FUSS,totally unreal...

and YES breast milk IS USUALLY QUITE HEALTHY! (Organic for sure)

Last edited by Dude111; 12-05-2012 at 03:24 AM.
Dude111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 03:06 AM   #4
anyuser
Senior Member
 
anyuser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,376
Default

Why Raw? Organic RAW vs. Pasteurized Milk - Infographic by the Health Ranger

In support of the raw milk community and the education of dairy consumers, we've just released an infographic about organic raw (fresh) milk versus conventional(pasteurized) milk. This infographic, viewable below, reveals the crucial differences between the nutritional properties, animal compassion and health implications of raw (living) milk versus pasteurized (dead) milk.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035130_ra...steurized.html



http://www.naturalnews.com/Infographic-Raw-Milk.html

+ its even better than bottled milk or powder, and given that the woman looks good too to get the milk out, well count me in for raw milk. I hope its available from the tit as shown in first pic. I will be fine however just sucking on the tit, if it doesn't have milk though. :-)
anyuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 03:17 AM   #5
northern star
Senior Member
 
northern star's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,671
Default

And America wonders why its so fucked up.
Clueless.
__________________
Keep on keepin' on
northern star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 11:48 PM   #6
markas32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 513
Default Times paedo front cover

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society...m-enough-cover
shoocked appalled or part of the course of here we are headed.

Im sorry after seeing a woman (common Purpose on channel 4 news tonight endorsing breast feeding to 10 years and above to what suits the child, we are tipping over the edge on public acceptance of paedophilia
if a woman natural stops producing milk after a certain point, sucking her tit after that is both unatural and against natures own protection of the woman and child relationship.
its totally fucked up and the picture is not a three year old that kid is at least 7 + and he knows and is therefore aware he is doing something that is beyond the pail, who is the puppet and who is the master.
As for that idiot on 4 news, endosring to whatever the child decides its time to stop, a child will manipulate the parent as long as it can get away with it.
whatever happened to parental responsibility, and the adult taking control.

Insecure pathetic woman who are so fucked up about their on identity they have to mentally stay attach to their kids to regain their own identity is just wrong rong rong
whatyou all think
markas32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 11:50 PM   #7
markas32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 513
Default image attached

markas32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 12:31 AM   #8
parenthesis
Senior Member
 
parenthesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 676
Default

Yummy.
parenthesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 12:34 AM   #9
turquoisefire777
Senior Member
 
turquoisefire777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,481
Default

saw that article. it's just disgusting. now they're trying to cement incest.

turquoisefire777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 12:48 AM   #10
bauhaus
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 729
Default

Nature gives us teeth for a reason.
bauhaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 12:59 AM   #11
nobodyswife
Senior Member
 
nobodyswife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,973
Default

That's the agenda they have been pushing all along. Pedophilia. Believe me, I know, I've been badly victimised by this freemasonic satanic cult at age 5. My pseudo adoptive "mother" not only delivered me to this pedophile bunch of HIGHER UPS in a rut, to be raped ,tortured and left for dead on a sidewalk but she also had sex with my pseudo adoptive "brother" as soon as he could get it up. They think it's normal and not only that, they pass for well to do citizens, they kiss ass to the the catholic church going to church as often as they can. They pass for saints. They are monsters. I mean, an 8 year old still sucking on his mothers's breasts is a mysoginistic monster , a rapist, a wacko, a sicko in the making...

Wake up people !

Freemasonry is about pedophilia, necrophilia and snuff movies.

Whom do you think made so many women and girls disappear in Ciudad Juarez ? Think Texas. Watch the movie HOSTEL 2 . You are watching real snuff. A mexican young woman's beheading. Calling her mom to the rescue. She had a child of her own. How terrorized can you be to call your mommy to the rescue when you have a child of your own ? Bastards. There are parents out there in Ciudad Juarez suffering like hell because they have been briefed and terrorised by the police and they are not allowed to say anything because cops protect these mothers. Big names. Hollywood. Texans. Politicians.

I'll say it again ; WAKE UP !

Enough is enough ! Do not accept this shit as normal; it is not !!!
nobodyswife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 01:11 AM   #12
parenthesis
Senior Member
 
parenthesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 676
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bauhaus View Post
Nature gives us teeth for a reason.
To bite milf nipples?
parenthesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 02:27 AM   #13
the_ascensionist
Senior Member
 
the_ascensionist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 548
Default

I dont know how this falls under paedophillia
If it's the childs mother, and it's perfectly natural for a mother to feed a child like that, how is it paedophillia? Is she attracted to him?

However, I disagree strongly with breastfeeding a child this late in life. For starters, that boy when he grows up is going to be deadly embarassed and he will cringe when he thinks about it. He will be taunted and bullied.

He should learn to eat properly now that his stomach and teeth have developed. But calling it paedophillia is a bit "over the edge". I dont think she gets sexual gratification out of it. Might as well say breastfeeding a baby is paedophillia.
__________________
"Proof and evidence are tools of freedom and empowerment if they are used to reinforce a beneficial, positive belief. But if they are used to reinforce a detrimental, limiting, negative belief... Then proof and evidence are nothing more than tools you are using to make a prison for yourself and your life."- Teal Scott

Follow my blog here
the_ascensionist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 02:37 AM   #14
merla
Senior Member
 
merla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bauhaus View Post
Nature gives us teeth for a reason.
Lol, exactly.


And I kind of take exception to the 'are you mum enough?' title, there are plenty of women who just can't breastfeed even with their baby because they don't lactate enough, my mum and my gran are two of them and chances are I will be if I ever have kids, does that make me somehow not mum enough even though it will be because of bad genetics and not choice?

Also, I can't see things like this without thinking of little britain. Bitty anyone?
merla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 02:41 AM   #15
merlincove
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,514
Default

There was a thread posted about this yesterday:

http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?p=1060820664

Though it looks at the aspect slightly differently.

Breast feeding is natural, though why they have chosen to depict a 3 - 5 year old suckling up is bizarre to say the least - why not simply show a young baby there - as is more natural.

i know some women can lactate for years after childbirth - but i think the natural period is one year or so before the child needs solids in their diet?
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 02:56 AM   #16
merla
Senior Member
 
merla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,812
Default

Just read through the other thread and one thing that bothers me is that noone has though about the psychological impact this might have, health benefits sure but not the long term implications on the child's development. For the admitedly little I've read attachment parenting doesn't sound like it encourages independence or personal boundaries

I'm not sure about keeping a baby in the bed with adults either, just from a physical safety point of view. I wouldn't dare, I'm such a restless and mobile sleeper I know I'd roll over and hurt it
merla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 03:06 AM   #17
parenthesis
Senior Member
 
parenthesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 676
Default

Geniuses, this kid is not getting milk. The article is about attachment. He's sucking the nipple instead of sucking his thumb.

There is no nature to debate here. There is possibly a debate about where is the father to tell this kid and mother that it's time to take a step back.
parenthesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 05:11 AM   #18
boudica52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 417
Default

There is no link between breastfeeding and peadophilia in any literature. Breastfeeding is what mammals, of which we are one, do to raise their young. The replies to this thread are shocking in there lack of knowledge of this most natural of human acts.

Most of humanity have and still do breastfeed until around 4 years of age. The human immune system is not fully formed until around 6, milk teeth (note the name) do not all appear until around 4 years, breastfeeding naturally supports a child with their immunity and digestion until they are of an age to support themselves. Most children will start eating solids anytime in their first year if left to their own devices but there is nothing as calorie rich and as well digested as breast milk during that first year. After that time a baby will breastfeed and eat some solids until feeding has dropped down to just a couple of feeds a day. The breastmilk is still goes on providing nutritional and immunological factors at all stages.

In days gone by, women who earned their living as wet nurses, continued producing breastmilk for years. The breast produces milk as long as there is demand. Read The Politics of Breastfeeding by Gabrielle Palmer for more insight on how this most natural human act has been stolen from women, to put money in formula manufacturers bank accounts.

Breastfeeding is not just about nutrition however, it is a nurturing act, that bonds mother and child. Studies have shown that mothers who breastfeed are less likely to hurt their children and are more responsive to their child. It also provides emotional comfort for the child in what can be, a very frightening world. Studies show that children who's emotional needs are met early on, grow up to be more confident individuals.

The Times image was chosen to challenge assumptions and provoke debate, which it has obviously done. Hopefully this will lead to more education on breastfeeding and it's benefits. Here is a link to an article on natural weaning if you do wish to educate yourself; http://www.kathydettwyler.org/detwean.html

Last edited by boudica52; 13-05-2012 at 05:12 AM.
boudica52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 06:26 AM   #19
knightofthegrail
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,648
Default

It's not paedophilia, its just highly inappropriate nonsense because the child should be growing up and not retaining infantile traits. More lunatic nonsense from the realm of "progressives".
knightofthegrail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 08:58 AM   #20
alienbiketrail
Senior Member
 
alienbiketrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,864
Default

I'm on the fence with this one opinion wise,but I think they should have used a Picasso instead as the cover art.


alienbiketrail is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:25 PM.