Tits, Tits, Tits – What are they For, Anyway?

– or more importantly, WHO are they for?  The Guardian has just launched a campaign to get offensive sexual images off our high streets:


and people have been campaigning for decades on the right to breastfeed in public.  Breastfeeding is a known factor in helping the immune system and aids bonding between mother and baby: yet it is on the decrease.  This is partly because more women are going back to work – though in many office-based jobs could theoretically cope with a feeding baby (I will always remember footage of a ‘Friends’ editorial meeting where a couple of the editors were feeding babies) and I suspect a baby or two around the place would calm a lot of testosterone-fuelled atmospheres.  On the other hand a continually screaming baby would definitely not help… but workplace creches could deal with that.

No: it’s not so much women at work, it’s the idea that milk is a product.  The very worst culprit here is undoubtedly Nestle, who have been marketing formula in the most unscrupulous ways, particularly in Third-world countries:


Breast milk is not a product – it’s a relationship: a bonding between mother and baby which is beneficial for both.  And what makes me incandescent with rage is that tits on page 3 are OK but breastfeeding is not.  Women should never feel embarrassed about feeding in public.  Why the hell should we have to go to the toilet or to a special room?  Take your sub-pornographic mags into a special room because they offend me.  and not only me but most women and a number of men.

So join the campaign and tell Facebook that breastfeeding is OK in public!  And that tits on the High Street are not!

Kirk out