thank you very much for that perspective wrena!
Printable View
thank you very much for that perspective wrena!
I really don't think it glorified FF at all. It just showed it. There was no narrative that suggested he was a hero for feeding the baby in that manner. If it were a woman on TV FF'ing, maybe I could see the point. But there was no other way for him to feed a baby that young. I think it was too far, REGARDLESS of who was the underlying instigator of getting it removed. Just my opinion, I really don't see the big deal about people seeing others FF'ing, just like I don't think it's a big deal if people see others BF'ing.
It's a government health promotion ad featuring bottle feeding. I think that's an issue.
No, the narrative doesn't suggest that he's a hero for feeding his baby but it does show a 'hero' who is feeding his baby with a bottle which normalises the use of artificial baby milk. I'm sure there are hundreds of ways they can show him as a loving father without including that particular image.
Redrobinridinghood - you have just made the two points I was going to make, but have put far more succinctly.
The father must feed the child to bond is very pervasive in our society, people seemed to think I was doing some sort of disservice to my child and husband by not providing an opportunity for DH to feed.