Notices
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 201 to 229 of 229
Like Tree88Likes

Thread: The hypocrisy of Western society

  1. #201  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    I didn't wiggle out of your question. There are a lot of children over 5 who still breastfeed.
    You just did it, and again. Everybody knows that there is "a lot", if a few thousands 5 year old is a lot, even if it is still totally insignificant versus the total 5 year old population.
    I hope you will forgive me to again try to bring some science, and precise number, to this conversation. I strongly urge you to read that article from which this graph is the tipping point:

    A lot of women allow the child to wean themselves and some go beyond 5 years of age and for those children, it isn't about the nutritional value, but the comfort and closeness they feel with their mother when they breastfeed. There is nothing wrong with that.
    Not a lot, and the bold part alarms me. Introducing "comfort" into the notion a feeding, has lead the corporate food chain to threaten the health of our children by nearly eradicating the natural product available for them (which has the nasty property to be free of charge).
    Back them it was a comfort for women, to be able to go to work. One of those win win situation probably (<-- that is sarcasm).

    I have never heard of any child still breastfeeding when they are 14+, perhaps you have?
    I haven't' either. So far so good. And I will respond for you then. 5 year old is the definitive limit were we can say it is wrong if you care to believe the studies above.

    Or have you pulled a number out of thin air?
    Usually those who breastfeed their children through their childhood do so for a variety of reasons, but those children usually wean themselves off by the time they reach puberty - probably around the time they can no longer suckle and breath at the same time at a guess.
    I did put it out of thin air, and with a purpose. I suppose you were joking about puberty which is again 14.


    And again breastfeeding has nothing to do with comfort. It has to do with feeding with breast. I you think that it is more efficient (that means not wrong) for a child to make its food pre-processed by another body, at an age where he could do it much more efficiently(quantity AND quality wise) by himself, with the body that mother nature has given him through millions year of evolution, then you are wrong.

    I suppose you can only see it as bad or claim that it would send you to jail if you see breastfeeding as something sexual?
    I also like jesting. So if you breast feed your "primary school" child or your "adolescent" child you'll go to jail. In a lot of countries.
    Do I also see it as bad ? Ho yes, I do. Do I see it has sexual ? No, quite the opposite, I find that disgusting.
    Should I find that sexual ? Because you seem to insist a lot that people would find that sexual...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #202  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,499
    Boing is on my ignore list for obvious reasons. I noticed this comment that he/she/it made in someone else's post:
    Quote Originally Posted by boing
    You will also, I still assume, understand that even in the privates of your house, breast "feeding" a 14+ child would send you right into jail ?
    Can anyone sane comment on this. Is it really a criminal offence in some jurisdictions to breastfeed someone over some age limit? I have never heard such a thing before.

    Also, it is frequently claimed that Puyi ("The Last Emperor") was breastfed by his wet nurse into his teens. I'm fairly sure that is not historically accurate - it may have been Japanese/Nationalist/Communist propaganda. Or just exaggeration.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #203  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
    The limit is when the mother and/or child no longer wishes to continue.
    That is not a limit, it is wishful thinking.

    It's quite common for toddlers to self wean between 2 and 3 years old, for others it may take longer.
    Absolutelly correct (see the graph)

    Breastmilk doesn't magically lose it's nutritional value overnight.
    That depends on the fridge

    The milk is uniquely designed for the child's needs. How many other sources of nutrition can we say that about?
    ALL of them. Because it is the other way round. There is no design in evolution. But you know that. I stress that point because it contradicts the second sentence.
    Apple, carrot, and even meat, are MUCH better (un-)designed to nourish a child (not toddler, that is why there is two different word)

    As toddlers get older they feed less so by the time they are about 4 or 5 they are probably only one 1 feed a day, most likely a comfort feed at night or morning.
    Yes again, but what is that to do with comfort ? It is just the weaning transition.

    Breastfeeding is incredibly comforting for babies and toddlers and can instantly sooth any pain.
    Yes it is. So what ?

    Again, it seems very odd that we are all perfectly ok with consuming the breastmilk of cows, goats, sheep etc but heaven forbid a child consumes human breastmilk.
    Everybody on this thread find absolutely natural that toddlers consume breast-milk (even toddler cows, just to be complete)
    Some hindrance has been said about the public'icity of the process (quite curiously, and hypocritically).

    Heaven forbid nothing, you may as well milk yourself and sell it in the Walmart, I think it is perfectly authorized. I you join that new business model you may find that if heaven forbid nothing, the physical law of the universe will make it a "niche market" at best, especially if we feed toddler cows with "that"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #204  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    2. Neverfly seems to equate personal bodily function with private bodily function. Breathing is also a personal bodily function. Should we only do this behind closed doors?
    That guy have never take of, and has no intention to, and is proud of it. Can you agree with that ? No. Because you are an hypocrite.
    Unless you explain what you mean in English I have no way of meaningfully agreeing, or disagreeing with you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #205  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Call me it. Or E.T.
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Can anyone sane comment on this.
    I can.
    Is it really a criminal offence in some jurisdictions to breastfeed someone over some age limit? I have never heard such a thing before.
    Me neither. The point is breastfeeding after 5 does not exist. It is something else. Would it said you to jail ? Ho no, probably not. Beating child and all other form of "natural" abuse are never handled with such severity.

    Also, it is frequently claimed that Puyi ("The Last Emperor") was breastfed by his wet nurse into his teens. I'm fairly sure that is not historically accurate - it may have been Japanese/Nationalist/Communist propaganda. Or just exaggeration.
    Probably so, and people were fucking their children. I am pretty sure it is NOW forbidden by law. I hope you and I can agree it is a better state of affair.

    To stay on OP what is hypocritical is not to find wrong abnormal behavior.
    What is hypocritical is when one accuse others of seeing sex everywhere when it is one that is doing that.

    Back to the ignore list, I suppose.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #206  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    2. Neverfly seems to equate personal bodily function with private bodily function. Breathing is also a personal bodily function. Should we only do this behind closed doors?
    That guy have never take of, and has no intention to, and is proud of it. Can you agree with that ? No. Because you are an hypocrite.
    Unless you explain what you mean in English I have no way of meaningfully agreeing, or disagreeing with you.
    That guy has never take of (meaning he does not learn well), has no intention to (meaning it is a constant), and is proud of it (like his many "I'll take you down with me" metaphors show).

    Can you use the same standard of policing toward a totally negative persona (and his band wagon) that you have displayed in the past to totally unobtrusive, polite, people, whose 'experiment' on the forum was not to perfect his trolling abilities ?


    I hope this helps... and I am deeply sorry to hurt English so much, but it is in no position to complain. That's the price to pay for an empire language
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #207  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    That guy has never take of (meaning he does not learn well), has no intention to (meaning it is a constant), and is proud of it (like his many "I'll take you down with me" metaphors show).

    Can you use the same standard of policing toward a totally negative persona (and his band wagon) that you have displayed in the past to totally unobtrusive, polite, people, whose 'experiment' on the forum was not to perfect his trolling abilities ?
    Thank you for your clarification. Here is one statement and one question.

    Statement: I am not acting as a moderator in regard to any posts by Neverfly because of past public and private disagreements with Neverfly. That is exactly the same standard of policing I have used on other occassions.

    Question: What standard of policing do you claim I have displayed towards totally unobstrusive, polite people...etc.? If you were unhappy with any of my moderator actions why did you not report them at the time?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #208  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    I haven't' either. So far so good. And I will respond for you then. 5 year old is the definitive limit were we can say it is wrong if you care to believe the studies above.
    They address frequency with certain ages, but do not cast a moral judgement which is what "wrong" infers. At best you might use such data to define normal and abnormal--to label it as wrong requires a demonstration that it's harmful in some way--a much higher standard often difficult because it's intertwined and involved more with qualitative measures. In most States, late breastfeeding could only result legal actions that would stick if otherwise linked to some other type of abuse, such as sexual abuse or perhaps neglect if the child isn't eating normal foods.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #209  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Question: What standard of policing do you claim I have displayed towards totally unobstrusive, polite people...etc.? If you were unhappy with any of my moderator actions why did you not report them at the time?
    But I did, at the time. The fellow that teach me about technocopians, you must remember him, I am sure.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #210  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    I have no idea who you are talking about. At any rate this is off-topic for this thread. I would be interested in receiving a pm from you detailing when and in what thread this supposed abuse, or imbalance of moderator power occured.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #211  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    They address frequency with certain ages, but do not cast a moral judgement which is what "wrong" infers.
    I didn't cast any moral judgment either. I am doing science. I measure ab-normality. If people like to call it wrong, I will use that word to converse with them.
    I do cast moral judgment if it so way beyond any "normal" that I will truly call it wrong. You may say likewise for "zero slap on the butt" vs "breaking you child bones". Both are wrong. Both hurt the child.

    At best you might use such data to define normal and abnormal
    That is the least anybody can do. Beyond that, there is only hunch and what not.

    to label it as wrong requires a demonstration that it's harmful in some way--a much higher standard often difficult because it's intertwined and involved more with qualitative measures.
    I agree, if you think of some kind of mathematical proof, that is impossible. That is why "wrong" used in that context is an appropriate word. "Outrageous" or "Intolerable" would have been somewhat silly (ab-normal).

    In most States, late breastfeeding could only result legal actions that would stick if otherwise linked to some other type of abuse, such as sexual abuse or perhaps neglect if the child isn't eating normal foods.
    I supposed so. And extreme late breast feeding (after 5) is definitively harmful for the child. It is ab-normal, un-natural. That is the proof, there is no need of other. Abusing child for the sake of comfort has nothing to do with sexuality. It has to do with wrongness.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #212  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    All are unsubstantiated value judgements. Please define what is wrong about about breast feeding a six year old child. Please note I make no comment on whether or not it is wrong, I simply note you have not offered any justification for saying it is wrong.
    Abnormal does not equal wrong.
    Unusual does not equal wrong.
    I don't like it does not equal wrong.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #213  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    728
    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    I didn't wiggle out of your question. There are a lot of children over 5 who still breastfeed.
    You just did it, and again. Everybody knows that there is "a lot", if a few thousands 5 year old is a lot, even if it is still totally insignificant versus the total 5 year old population.
    I hope you will forgive me to again try to bring some science, and precise number, to this conversation. I strongly urge you to read that article from which this graph is the tipping point:

    A lot of women allow the child to wean themselves and some go beyond 5 years of age and for those children, it isn't about the nutritional value, but the comfort and closeness they feel with their mother when they breastfeed. There is nothing wrong with that.
    Not a lot, and the bold part alarms me. Introducing "comfort" into the notion a feeding, has lead the corporate food chain to threaten the health of our children by nearly eradicating the natural product available for them (which has the nasty property to be free of charge).
    Back them it was a comfort for women, to be able to go to work. One of those win win situation probably (<-- that is sarcasm).

    I have never heard of any child still breastfeeding when they are 14+, perhaps you have?
    I haven't' either. So far so good. And I will respond for you then. 5 year old is the definitive limit were we can say it is wrong if you care to believe the studies above.

    Or have you pulled a number out of thin air?
    Usually those who breastfeed their children through their childhood do so for a variety of reasons, but those children usually wean themselves off by the time they reach puberty - probably around the time they can no longer suckle and breath at the same time at a guess.
    I did put it out of thin air, and with a purpose. I suppose you were joking about puberty which is again 14.


    And again breastfeeding has nothing to do with comfort. It has to do with feeding with breast. I you think that it is more efficient (that means not wrong) for a child to make its food pre-processed by another body, at an age where he could do it much more efficiently(quantity AND quality wise) by himself, with the body that mother nature has given him through millions year of evolution, then you are wrong.

    I suppose you can only see it as bad or claim that it would send you to jail if you see breastfeeding as something sexual?
    I also like jesting. So if you breast feed your "primary school" child or your "adolescent" child you'll go to jail. In a lot of countries.
    Do I also see it as bad ? Ho yes, I do. Do I see it has sexual ? No, quite the opposite, I find that disgusting.
    Should I find that sexual ? Because you seem to insist a lot that people would find that sexual...
    Your posts make me wish I could drink a glass of wine or possibly 5 glasses.

    In regards to the exact number. No one knows how many mothers who breastfeed past the age of 5 there are. Had you watched a video I posted earlier, in the US alone the number could be quite high because few advertise it for fear of being abused by others.

    The average age is around 2.5 to 3 years of age. No one is disputing that. So I don't quite understand how or why this is such a problem issue for you. Perhaps if you could be a bit clearer on what you are asking?

    Comfort

    Interviews with mothers who prolong breastfeeding cite comfort as a major reason for breastfeeding children beyond age 5. There is nothing wrong with that. We all take comfort from certain foods. Is this a problem for you?

    Age Limit

    I don't understand why you feel there needs to be an age limit. Perhaps you can elaborate on that? There is nothing wrong with feeding past the age of 5. If the mother and child and the family are happy with it, what is wrong with it exactly? Why do you wish to impose an arbitrary age?

    The studies you provided show that there is no detriment to long term breastfeeding. So I fail to see how you believe the studies say it is wrong.

    Do you believe that the child is not eating because they are breastfeeding? Or do you think they are only breastfeeding? Because the children do eat. Babies start on solid at around 6 months of age, whereupon breastmilk becomes a part of their diet. But again, as the mothers and even the children themselves say, breastfeeding much older children is more about bonding and nurturing and comfort for the child with the mother. They aren't going to jail. It isn't illegal.

    So perhaps you can explain exactly, why you see it as being bad. Why do you find it disgusting?

    What disgusts you about it?
    Busy Bee likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #214  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    All are unsubstantiated value judgements. Please define what is wrong about about breast feeding a six year old child.
    This is quite substantiated, here is my quote
    I haven't' either. So far so good. And I will respond for you then. 5 year old is the definitive limit were we can say it is wrong if you care to believe the studies above.

    Maybe the post
    #213 helps you to see the substance ?

    I should stress again at this point, that it is very hypocritical to ask substance to someone without even to bother quote the lack of substance/mistake done by others.
    I, by that mate phrase, substantiate my judgment that your post was hypocritical.

    Please note I make no comment on whether or not it is wrong,
    That is true
    I simply note you have not offered any justification for saying it is wrong.
    That is true, you definitely write that. That is false, i factually did not do that.

    Abnormal does not equal wrong.
    No, they do not equate, but they are close enough. 5 year old is were wrong begins (small wrong). I still wait your (or others) input to were it ends. The number 14 has popup somewhere, by me. I let a very very strong margin of error. Totally unacceptable "wrong" begin way before then (in my point of view). But it is only my opinion, and I am waiting for yours...
    Maybe 42 is also a good one ?

    Would you care to substantiate a little this thread by inputting your own substance into it ?

    Unusual does not equal wrong.
    Thank you for confirming that. Unusual is probably reserved for around 10% of a population. That would make it above 3.8 and below 1.8 in the graph below (the traditional society, the efficient natural one). All done by eyes, I am sure you'll forget my proverbial inaccuracy.

    I would have trouble to compute that number for the "modern western USA" like curve, which is somewhere after 1.
    Yes there is no low limit, it is right to abuse your child by not breastfeeding it, in our "modern" society (second time I have to make this point now)

    I don't like it does not equal wrong.
    I am happy to learn that you don't find me wrong.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #215  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    All are unsubstantiated value judgements. Please define what is wrong about about breast feeding a six year old child.
    This is quite substantiated, here is my quote
    I haven't' either. So far so good. And I will respond for you then. 5 year old is the definitive limit were we can say it is wrong if you care to believe the studies above.

    Repeating an opinion is not a substantiation of that opinion. The studies you show do not demonstrate that it is wrong to breast feed older children, they show it is uncommon. Some adults are less than 4'6" tall. This is unusual, it is not wrong. You cannot use a statistical description of practices to deduce a moral standpoint.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    I should stress again at this point, that it is very hypocritical to ask substance to someone without even to bother quote the lack of substance/mistake done by others.
    I, by that mate phrase, substantiate my judgment that your post was hypocritical.
    I find this offensive and incidentally foolish. This is a public discussion forum. I am free to discuss whatever points interest me. Your attack on me was interesting. I've dealt with the nonsense from NF earlier in the thread. I've noticed no other posts with which I have a strong disagreement with. You may think I should be disagreeing with some of them, but I don't. that's not hypocritical, it's just the way it is. Live with it.

    And please stop the unwarranted accusations of hypocrisy. Next to being called a liar that is the one thing likely to earn my enmity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #216  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    The nonsense of NF? You didn't deal with anything.

    Ironic that Boing3000 took a potshot or two, as well. Yet, Boing3000 is contending with the same political response where pointing out absurdities results in angry retorts because how DARE anyone say something that's not fully politically correct... and yet, it's not even politically correct.

    The entire thread is a hypocrisy. The behavior of many that attack the character of anyone that they imagine opposes their worldview is Disgusting.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #217  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    728
    Oh the delicious irony.

    Anyway, moving right along:

    The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) states in its position paper on breastfeeding:


    "NURSING BEYOND INFANCY: As recommended by the WHO, breastfeeding should ideally continue beyond infancy, but this is not the cultural norm in the United States and requires ongoing support and encouragement. It has been estimated that a natural weaning age for humans is between two and seven years. Family physicians should be knowledgeable regarding the ongoing benefits to the child of extended breastfeeding, including continued immune protection, better social adjustment, and having a sustainable food source in times of emergency. The longer women breastfeed, the greater the decrease in their risk of breast cancer." They include that "If the child is younger than two years of age, the child is at increased risk of illness if weaned." (AAFP 2008)"



    Breastfeeding basics: benefits of extended breastfeeding - National Breastfeeding | Examiner.com

    Note, this is the natural age, where children may wean off the breast by themselves.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #218  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    All are unsubstantiated value judgements. Please define what is wrong about about breast feeding a six year old child.
    This is quite substantiated, here is my quote
    I haven't' either. So far so good. And I will respond for you then. 5 year old is the definitive limit were we can say it is wrong if you care to believe the studies above.

    Repeating an opinion is not a substantiation of that opinion.
    That is right, and that is why I don't do it. Instead you do it(**) by repeating that I do not substantiate observation, while I was just doing it.

    The studies you show do not demonstrate that it is wrong to breast feed older children,
    Indeed, they measure facts, with some kind of accuracy. They transform vague hunch and opinions into factual measured reality (with error margin include).
    They explain to you that breast feeding beyond 5 does not even register on the radar. If it does it IS WRONG to call it breast feeding. The wrongness begin at 5 and became somewhat an absolute wrongness above 42. It is not opinion, it is facts (actual facts, because they'll change next measurement).

    they show it is uncommon. Some adults are less than 4'6" tall. This is unusual, it is not wrong. You cannot use a statistical description of practices to deduce a moral standpoint.
    You are the only one that is speaking from and about a moral standpoint(**)
    You have an uncommon use of the word uncommon. Rare is rarer then uncommon, wrong is rarer then rare.
    So next time a cat will fall from a cliff, I'll not call it an uncommon flying cat. It would be wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    I should stress again at this point, that it is very hypocritical to ask substance to someone without even to bother quote the lack of substance/mistake done by others.
    I, by that mate phrase, substantiate my judgment that your post was hypocritical.
    I find this offensive and incidentally foolish.
    Please, be so kind as to substantiate why. Stating your opinion without the fact (**) they are based on is not very useful for the reader.
    This is a public discussion forum. I am free to discuss whatever points interest me.
    I totally, ultimately wholly agree with that, ... at post #177

    Your attack on me was interesting.
    Attack on you ? That IS ludicrous. I am not interested in your persona, and NF's one even less. I am interested in facts, and some of your comment and qualified(by me) hypocrisy. Take responsibility for your writings, AND try to live with that.

    I've dealt with the nonsense from NF earlier in the thread. I've noticed no other posts with which I have a strong disagreement with.
    hmmm, yes, but what does it have to do with my "attack" on you ? I was not speaking of NF nonsense, I was speaking of his WRONG trolling, about which you've done nothing.
    I also signal errors in your post.

    You may think I should be disagreeing with some of them, but I don't.
    I may, if I did understand what that is supposed to mean. If it was a question, I don't think that at all.
    that's not hypocritical, it's just the way it is. Live with it.

    And please stop the unwarranted accusations of hypocrisy.
    Yet there is some other blatant hypocrisy at (**). Stop doing them, and those fabled attack will vanish right away

    Next to being called a liar that is the one thing likely to earn my enmity.
    Lying is totally different than being an hypocrite. Lying can stop, when the incentive to do it is gone.

    Thinking that only other people are doing unwarranted unsubstantiated attack while it is you making them up it is not lying. It is a much more vicious mental process, called hypocrisy

    And I don't care about your enmity less then being the enmi of 1+1=3. You are wrong.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #219  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    The entire thread is a hypocrisy. The behavior of many that attack the character of anyone that they imagine opposes their worldview is Disgusting.
    Did I really read that ? That is indeed sweet irony ... on steroid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #220  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Irony? Nonsense. Scroll up and read and you see me defending my character from people that repeatedly attacked mine, while misconstruing what I was saying; not me attacking others character.
    I even quoted all the character attacks in one list.


    Nifty trick- keep repeating the same falsehood and maybe people will begin to believe it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #221  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    728
    Indeed, they measure facts, with some kind of accuracy. They transform vague hunch and opinions into factual measured reality (with error margin include).
    They explain to you that breast feeding beyond 5 does not even register on the radar. If it does it IS WRONG to call it breast feeding. The wrongness begin at 5 and became somewhat an absolute wrongness above 42. It is not opinion, it is facts (actual facts, because they'll change next measurement).



    You are the only one that is speaking from and about a moral standpoint(**)
    You have an uncommon use of the word uncommon. Rare is rarer then uncommon, wrong is rarer then rare.
    So next time a cat will fall from a cliff, I'll not call it an uncommon flying cat. It would be wrong.



    What are you on about?

    This doesn't even make sense.

    The average age of weaning is 4.2 years of age - world wide. That may vary slightly from year to year. But 4.2 average would mean that 5 years of age would register on the radar. Also, as one of the videos I posted above states, that many women who do extend breastfeeding may not discuss it in the public or disclose it.

    And could you please answer my questions to you in post 215?

    You had earlier said that extended breastfeeding disgusts you and said it was wrong. Why does it disgust you? Why do you disagree that babies and children draw comfort from that closeness with their mother when they breastfeed? Why is it wrong?
    John Galt likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #222  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,440
    I have known women who breastfed till their kids were 6 years old. That wasn't my cup of tea. Six months was my period of nursing. Depends on the person. I had milk 3 years AFTER stopping breastfeeding, still.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #223  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    What are you on about?
    Is it a serious question ? 20 posts down the drain ?

    This doesn't even make sense.
    I register you inability to make sense of very simple facts.

    The average age of weaning is 4.2 years of age - world wide. That may vary slightly from year to year. But 4.2 average would mean that 5 years of age would register on the radar. Also, as one of the videos I posted above states, that many women who do extend breastfeeding may not discuss it in the public or disclose it.
    I have to keep that quote for reference purpose.
    BTW pick a number. You may change it after if you want to, so I'll answer in your stead: 7 is wrong for you (not 5).

    And could you please answer my questions to you in post 215?
    Sorry I miss that one, I'll be happy to obliged.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Your posts make me wish I could drink a glass of wine or possibly 5 glasses.
    I hope that it is not your typical reaction when confronted with statistics, or social debate. If it is, it is not wrong. Not even unusual.

    In regards to the exact number. No one knows how many mothers who breastfeed past the age of 5 there are. Had you watched a video I posted earlier, in the US alone the number could be quite high because few advertise it for fear of being abused by others.
    That is why science has been invented, with its annoying fixation with numbers, and total hatred for hypocrisy.
    Number are always fuzzy, but anyway cherry picking them is badly seen (it is even wrong). You may quote google video, if a scientist is speaking in it. You may quote studies sponsors by "breast organisation" (not speaking about Huslter) but I will stick to universities studies. Bias is something important to understand, if you want to use the word "hypocrite" without "I am a" just before.

    The average age is around 2.5 to 3 years of age. No one is disputing that.
    You are (scroll UP until you see big blue bold font). Are you gonna try to make sense ? And stop the emotional whining ?

    So I don't quite understand how or why this is such a problem issue for you. Perhaps if you could be a bit clearer on what you are asking?
    A number. It is something composed of one or more digit.

    Comfort

    Interviews with mothers who prolong breastfeeding cite comfort as a major reason for breastfeeding children beyond age 5. There is nothing wrong with that.
    Interview with public peeing man cite comfort as a major reason for doing it. Should I draw the same conclusion than you ?

    We all take comfort from certain foods. Is this a problem for you?
    Problem ? A problem is something you want to solve. I don't give a S*** If people want to sick themselves to death, I am all for it, we are 6 billions above our population envelope anyway. That is another number.

    Age Limit

    I don't understand why you feel there needs to be an age limit. Perhaps you can elaborate on that?
    I am not an hypocrite (or more specifically I am trying hard not to be). That is why I need number to have a rational and UN-passionate conversation.

    There is nothing wrong with feeding past the age of 5. If the mother and child and the family are happy with it, what is wrong with it exactly? Why do you wish to impose an arbitrary age?
    Why do *I* want to wish to impose anything ? It is YOU doing that. You are the hypocrite here. It IS wrong, and I am not the one that judge that. I merely reports facts to you. Don't blame the messenger of your shortcomings.

    The studies you provided show that there is no detriment to long term breastfeeding. So I fail to see how you believe the studies say it is wrong.
    Long term equals what ? Come on, get out of your closet.

    Do you believe that the child is not eating because they are breastfeeding? Or do you think they are only breastfeeding? Because the children do eat. Babies start on solid at around 6 months of age, whereupon breastmilk becomes a part of their diet.
    lol. Sorry, I did not know all those mysteries.
    There is a big yellow hot ball in the sky, can you explain that to me ? I feel like I need a comforting breast right now.

    But again, as the mothers and even the children themselves say, breastfeeding much older children is more about bonding and nurturing and comfort for the child with the mother. They aren't going to jail. It isn't illegal.
    No, not to jail. Still, your video still show she got into trouble.

    So perhaps you can explain exactly, why you see it as being bad.
    I don't find it bad. I report to you that millions years of evolution "find" that totally out of bound (wrong)

    Why do you find it disgusting?What disgusts you about it?
    Waow ! you seem to have a fixation on disgust. Twice the same question.

    I don't know, I find disgusting when someone pee in the middle of the street, even so it is way more frequent than breast feeding of 14+ child, or even 7+
    I find that disgusting even so I have done it. Go figure, nobody's perfect.


    Seriously though, disgust is not an absolute quantity that got pulled out of a scripture. It is a relative quantity formed an informed by the local available consensus that science like to approach using the notion of distribution . If you want to be out of bound and pretend it is not wrong, your are going to face problem.
    The first one is a cognitive dissonance that would be alleviate by developing hypocrisy.
    The second one will hit your DNA, because millions of years allow some of those consensus to actually select brain circuitry that would react instinctively to some of those out of bound condition.

    This thread is not about hypocrisy of modern western society, it is made of modern hypocrite western libertarian/egotistic sociopathy.
    Last edited by Boing3000; July 18th, 2013 at 10:36 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #224  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,440
    Neverfly.....oh heaven forbid!! That could cause acute blindness!!!! *chuckle*. Yes, breastfeeding is natural and healthy for mother and baby. It can be done discreetly, and with respect for those around you.
    Neverfly likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #225  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,440
    Neverfly.....oh heaven forbid! That could cause acute blindness!!!! *chuckle". Yes, breastfeeding is natural and healthy for mother and baby. It can be done discreetly, and with respect for those around you
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #226  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Boing3000 you are derailing the thread with your incoherent trolling about numbers.... try to stay focused--this thread is already bad enough without your disruptions.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #227  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    'tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool
    than to...............(sigh)
    hmmm
    "Training bra"
    training?
    for what?
    is there a boobolympics?
    boobaliscious?

    My uncle Fritz had a training halter for one of his plow horses....
    kept the beasty from moving about too much while putting on his harness.....
    damned unruly, but he was easy to lead once the harness was on
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #228  
    Forum Sophomore Busy Bee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    106
    This is a story of about breastfeeding in Mongolia. Apparently they have a saying that "the best wrestlers are breastfed for at least six years".
    peaceful parenting: Breastfeeding in Mongolia

    But I think this will always be my favourite picture of a breastfeeding Mumma. I dare anyone to tell her to that she shouldn't be breastfeeding...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #229  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
    This is a story of about breastfeeding in Mongolia. Apparently they have a saying that "the best wrestlers are breastfed for at least six years".
    peaceful parenting: Breastfeeding in Mongolia

    But I think this will always be my favorite picture of a breastfeeding Mumma. I dare anyone to tell her to that she shouldn't be breastfeeding...
    It would be quite daring indeed, especially on a thread where everybody says breast feeding is the right thing to do. Maybe everybody is even not enough encompassing a word.
    The picture is beautifull, I'll like to know if it is extracted from a study/reports, and have a link to it.

    How old do you think the child is (the 5-7 range?) ? Here is what I see in the picture: the 'mother' is in fact ready for a rough walk, not because she have a machete, but because of the strap she have to carry the child. So my guess is the child is really feeding, nothing in the picture talks about comfort. If she is willing to carry such a weight in such an environment, you can already infer that it is the most efficient thing to do.

    But I'd like to make that in perspective with this quote in the article you linked
    Tsetsgee had a different approach. At the first murmur of discord, she would lift her shirt and start waving her boobs around enthusiastically, calling out, "Come here, baby, look what mama's got for you!" Her son would look up from the toys to the bull's-eyes of his mother's breasts and invariably toddle over.
    Maybe you can understand now, the difference between breastfeeding, and breastcomforting. Maybe that difference is crucial when you are going to throw "hypocrite" to the face of the world (if you have, I am not sure)

    Maybe a lot of men, will also start not to feel so guilty, as the reason why they are so obsessed with boobs, especially when "in discord". And likewise, why a lot of women, are behaving just the same.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. A lighthearted look at the Elderly in western Society.
    By westwind in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: February 16th, 2012, 11:24 AM
  2. Hypocrisy of the Religious
    By KomradRed in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2009, 09:38 AM
  3. The hypocrisy of the religion sub-forum
    By organic god in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 117
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2009, 06:57 PM
  4. The Hypocrisy of Paul
    By Jon in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: May 16th, 2007, 04:21 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •