Time magazine, long suffering from decreased sales, seems to be following the lead of magazines like Cosmopolitan, Playboy and Penthouse, but stopping short of Hustler.
I have no problem with Mothers breast feeding, even in public. I believe if she can, breast feeding babies if preferable and beneficial for the baby. I also think Mothers can breast feed in public and be discreet, not just flopping the boob out, but gracefully cover themselves with a baby blanket as they have done for so long before.
Of course, different people have different views on just when a baby should stop breast feeding and move towards more solid food.
A controversial bill & debate came up in Tennessee about government setting an arbitrary age limit on public breast feeding, an obvious over reach in my estimation. Such decisions should be left with Mothers, not politicians.
But this cover Time chooses to promote the issue is, in my estimation, tasteless. Not because a child is breast feeding, but because they choose a young attractive Mother, with her 3 or 4 year old standing on a chair sucking on her boob.
There is no discernment, no discretion, no legitimate reason to feature such a photo, other than to titillate to sell magazines.
I personally feel the child shown is a little too old to still be sucking on Mommies boob, but if a Mother wishes to breast feed until adulthood, that’s her business, if done at home.
I’m sure 12 year old boys all over will be flocking to magazine stands to stare endlessly at the very attractive Mom letting her son suck on her boob, being too young to buy Playboys that are hidden from public view in most areas.
I’m also pretty sure older boys will go home with the vision in their heads and wonder why they were cut off as youngsters.
The Atlantic Wire’s Adam Clark Estes labels the cover trolling.
I label it soft porn to sell magazines, not to promote better caring for a child.