Printable View
I just came across this WAGS shoot from V magazine
V Magazine - Soccer WAGs - PHOTOS | Styleite
One of the photos is a breastfeeding photo. Putting aside the fact that it's totally photoshopped WDYT? Is it good to have BF styled and made into 'fashion' because it helps to mainstream it or do pictures like this just make it harder for BF Mums who don't have the benefit of airbrushing, stylists and have actually given birth not just had a baby photoshopped onto their boob?
Is that photo even real? It kind of looks like they photoshopped the baby in?! :o
I think it's good to normailse BF'ing at every opportunity. If someone see's that picture and then decided it's great to BF, then it's a good thing. Women in media are always photoshopped, so that doesn't really bother me. I think my brain is programmed to think 'oh yeah, well she's not real anyway' I love watching that dove beauty campaign. ;)
Yeah, the baby is totally photoshopped in. I'm not even sure that it's a real baby :o
Lol when I read you post I imagined black and white, beautiful bf shot. It is so trashy :rofl: I don't know if it'll make bf fashionable, to be that ladies boobs still look very sexualized, as does she and all the other women. Seems really outta place to have a bf pic in a sexy calendar, like they are trying to make bf seem more socially acceptable by putting in a context 'the majority' will understand; sexy :dunno: I don't really like it tbh, just because it looks so fake but each to their own I guess.
I find that weird?!
If the photo is taking the **** i find that a little offensive, but if the idea was to genuinely show a BF'ing baby then i think it's great.
What do you think?
I don't think it's taking the **** (except of WAGS) but I guess it is meant to look fake and tacky because that's kinda how WAGS are perceived but simultaneously WAGS are also celebrities with all that entails.
So it's taking the **** out of her? Ohhh, i didn't really read the details, just looked at the picture *rolleyes* :p ...... either way it think it's good to get pictures of BF'ing out there. Wish i was famous so someone would snap me with my norgs hanging out, trying to feed my 15 month old and wrestle my two and half year old in the middle of a busy shopping centre. :p
It's tacky, it's fake, but whatever. It ain't no thing... if she were eating a sandwich, there would be no discussion. Why isn't b/f as normal an activity as eating a sandwich?
Mmmm, might go make a sandwich.
^ because there hasn't been a billion dollar advertising campaign to try and replace sandwiches with an inferior product.
For some reason I'm always intrigued by the way that motherhood is styled by the fashion industry. Not the stuff where they are trying to sell to mothers but the fashion shoots and advertising that are trying to sell fashion.
My favourite ad of all time is still the Diesel white trash mum from the mid 90's.
:rofl::
I honstly thought it would be a nice bf pic...but any bf pic is a good pic imo ;)
Hmm. Kinda torn on this one. Like PZ, I clicked on the link hoping to see a gorgeous *real* BFing shot (complete with Photoshopping, hair makeup and lighting, as they do lol)... not sure how I feel about the photo I saw. I guess as far as I'm concerned, I'm stoked to see BFing represented in any way, just to get it out there and in people's faces and at least get them talking/thinking about it. I'm even okay with the blatant 'sexy' feel of the pic itself (fitting in with all the other 'raunchy' photos), I just don't know that I think it's 'great' because it looks like a doll instead of a real baby, kwim?
If it were a really overdone photo of an actual WAG BFing her baby, I'd probably lean much more toward it being a great idea, but because it looks so fake I kind of feel like it's just taking the mick and therefore, what was the point?
Just asked DH's opinion - he reckons its trying to show a glamorous young WAG supporting her husband on the field while taking care of her baby. Said straight off that it was a fake baby, and then drooled slightly at the overall picture. :rolleyes:
I'm all for normalising breastfeeding, but I really think this coulda been done better :)
It's not a baby & it's not photoshopped in..... It's a doll, have a look at this larger image.
Larger Photo
The site I found it on has a discussion going on whether FB would remove the photo, considering there is no nipple & it's a doll....
The link wont work for me sarah...
why would you have a pic of bfing a doll :rolleyes: Like Glam said, any pic getting bf out there is a good thing but I think this is tacky, showy, and trying to be controversial for the *sake* of being controversial.
I agree it's a doll
Junglemum it takes a little while to come up
The whole article is there as a joke, mocking the WAGs.
I agree that it's a doll, but it's unlikely that it's photoshopped in (lighting is waaaaay too consistent and there's certain other 'tells'). But that's kinda neither here nor there anyway. Most of the gorgeous, softly lit bf-ing shots (or pregnancy/maternity shots, or any shot that is taken for a professional purpose) have had some retouching work, even if they don't 'look' like it.
What I find interesting is the dichotomy this image shows - it doesn't show bf-ing in a positive light at all. On the one hand - mum is breastfeeding. Yay. On the other, everything about her suggests a huge disconnect between her and baby. She's texting, looking away from her baby (obviously at hunky partner strutting his stuff on the field), blowing bubblegum, holding her baby away from her (despite the 'baby' looking directly at her face she is not making eye contact) - her entire posture suggests disconnectedness.
I don't think that it is the 'page 3' girl aspect of the shot that is disturbing, but that she may as well be absentmindedly pushing the child in a stroller whilst it sucks down on a bottle for all of the maternal connection it shows.
Post it on a FB page and see if it gets taken down for being obscene - that would be interesting as it is clearly highly sexualised, not an actual baby (so not actually BF) :p
I think you hit the nail on the head Suse, it's good that it is a picture of a woman breastfeeding but the whole presentation is just wrong... the way she is holding the baby... just wrong, wrong, wrong
oh dear...me thinks we are going to see a paris hilton style 'puppy in the handbag' craze going off with 'BF your "must have" new accessory' item LOL!
totally tacky, but that's the point, but hey at least they did acknowlege that some babies (even by celebs!) can be BF in public!
Ew....it kinda reminds me of tacky porn to be honest.
In the May edition of US Vogue there is an article about and photo of sculptor Rachel Feinstein BFing (well she's sitting on a couch in a Zandra Rhodes frock with a boob hanging out and her bub on her knee, so I guess it's what they're implying ;)) well anyway it looks sexy and bohemian. Nice to see in a magazine which usually has way too many photos of 28 year old models who have the physique of a pre pubescent girls.
i think it's great. it's obviously taking the **** out of WAGS, and i think it's a crack-up.
there are definitely times where i am bfing and texting, watching tv, eating, having conversations with friends, even sleeping and i'm not making eye contact with my baby. doesn't mean i'm disconnected from him. just means i have other stuff going on in my life but still realise the importance of breastfeeding him. of course, i do still have loved up breastfeeding sessions where we gaze at each other......but i can tell you this wouldn't be happening if i was watching my dh play in the world cup ;)
....now how do i put in on my fb page? LOL
I think it reinforces the opinion that bf'ing is somehow a sexual activity. So with that in mind I say - FAIL!