Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think the Time picture criticism points out how far the public objectification of Breasts has gone, while actually showing their purposeful use, those that see it as bad or uncomfortable are possibly coming to grips with the fact they think they are primarily for amusement and eroticism .
Last edited by Ibginnie; 05-11-2012 at 06:35 PM..
Reason: response to deleted post
I don't see anything that is cringy at all .Everything today is acceptable .You have gays thinking they have "rights",interracial marriage among others .I don't see what is wrong with a magazine cover ? It is acceptable,everything is .All I see is a woman breast feeding a four year old?IF you were to come out against anything that I have metioned you would considered a racist .So please tell what is wrong with the cover ,when I see nothing?
What is perverted about breastfeeding? The fact that you see breastfeeding as perverted is an issue that is worth exploring and suggests that you are hiding some extremely traumatic experiences from your past.
This issue further reveals how uncomfortable conservatives are with freedom and demonstrates how they want to control everything. The conservative mind is a very sick mind indeed.
No, I just have standards . Putting a woman on a ragazine with a boy who does not look like a baby by any stretch of the imagination is nursing with a mother who displays herself to be the ultimate mother, this is off the wall .
I must know many normal people for they are no way tolerant of it at all. It is called having moral standards and what is exploited as motherhood as being provocative.
Many people think it is so cutting edge to accept this. I have been around the block and have known all kind of people and from knowing the standards of many and this is an exercise to what is tolerated by the masses.. Time ragazine is testing the waters of what is tolerated.
At this moral rate soon, everything will be acceptable.. there is nothing new under the sun as far as going into moral depravity.
The article says it is provocative.
provocative (prəˈvɒkətɪv)
— adj
acting as a stimulus or incitement, esp to anger or sexual desire; provoking: a provocative look ; a provocative remark
It is expected that the hypnotic repetition of media portrayal in regards to breasts is very sexual, and that most of the cleavage and use of Breasts is done in a sexual manner, while hiding their primary use from public consumption as a culture.
Well, confusion can set in, and cause a disrupt in what boobs are for.
I think the Time picture criticism points out how far the public objectification of Breasts has gone, while actually showing their purposeful use, those that see it as bad or uncomfortable are possibly coming to grips with the fact they think they are primarily for amusement and eroticism .
How about the kid pulling down his mothers shirt in a store and suckling.. would that be appropriate for all to see? it is ok for it to be on the cover of a ragazine.
No, I just have standards . Putting a woman on a ragazine with a boy who does not look like a baby by any stretch of the imagination is nursing with a mother who displays herself to be the ultimate mother, this is off the wall .
I must know many normal people for they are no way tolerant of it at all. It is called having moral standards and what is exploited as motherhood as being provocative.
Many people think it is so cutting edge to accept this. I have been around the block and have known all kind of people and from knowing the standards of many and this is an exercise to what is tolerated by the masses.. Time ragazine is testing the waters of what is tolerated.
At this moral rate soon, everything will be acceptable.. there is nothing new under the sun as far as going into moral depravity.
The article says it is provocative.
provocative (prəˈvɒkətɪv)
— adj
acting as a stimulus or incitement, esp to anger or sexual desire; provoking: a provocative look ; a provocative remark
A normal healthy response to the Time Magazine cover photograph is to not care very much about it. I don’t find the photograph to be provocative in any way.
If you are outraged by the Time Magazine cover photograph it is pretty clear that you have not been out of your house, let alone around the block.
No, I just have standards . Putting a woman on a ragazine with a boy who does not look like a baby by any stretch of the imagination is nursing with a mother who displays herself to be the ultimate mother, this is off the wall .
I must know many normal people for they are no way tolerant of it at all. It is called having moral standards and what is exploited as motherhood as being provocative.
Many people think it is so cutting edge to accept this. I have been around the block and have known all kind of people and from knowing the standards of many and this is an exercise to what is tolerated by the masses.. Time ragazine is testing the waters of what is tolerated.
At this moral rate soon, everything will be acceptable.. there is nothing new under the sun as far as going into moral depravity.
The article says it is provocative.
provocative (prəˈvɒkətɪv)
— adj
acting as a stimulus or incitement, esp to anger or sexual desire; provoking: a provocative look ; a provocative remark
I agree with yours and other like points of view in here on this. The kid is too old to be nursing. He is even standing on a chair to reach her breast. What was the point of that? My main objection is that Time Magazine felt the need to put this picture on the cover of their magazine. Yes, breast feeding is natural but so is sex. Should they next put a picture of two people having sex on their cover? Those things are private matters. Really, tasteless IMO.
How about the kid pulling down his mothers shirt in a store and suckling.. would that be appropriate for all to see? it is ok for it to be on the cover of a ragazine.
An adult would not be bothered by what you describe and nothing would be inappropriate about it.
My friend was breastfeeding her child in public on Miami Beach and some conservative had to make a comment to her. I informed the conservative that I was turning the safety off and I was prepared to stand my ground.
I agree with yours and other like points of view in here on this. The kid is too old to be nursing. He is even standing on a chair to reach her breast. What was the point of that? My main objection is that Time Magazine felt the need to put this picture on the cover of their magazine. Yes, breast feeding is natural but so is sex. Should they next put a picture of two people having sex on their cover? Those things are private matters. Really, tasteless IMO.
How do you know the child is too old to be breastfeeding?
Putting a picture of two people having sex on the cover of Time Magazine would be fine and acceptable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
