Why Is It…?

“Why Is It…?” was designed by Dr. Steiner to address readers’ questions about human behavior from a social psychological perspective in order to inform and stimulate dialogue about the ways in which our thoughts, feelings and behaviors are influenced by the presence of other people. Dr. Steiner holds a Ph.D. in Applied Social Psychology. In addition to working as a university professor over the last 15 years, she conducts individual and group consultations in matters of social relationships and behavior. Readers are invited to submit their questions anonymously in one paragraph or less to Dr. Steiner at [email protected].

Q: Why is it that breast-feeding in public has received so much negative attention? A friend of mine has been harassed on several occasions while attempting to feed her newborn. Isn’t breast-feeding a natural and beneficial practice?
A: It seems that every year we hear about experiences of mothers who have been harassed or discriminated against while breastfeeding in public places. In 2006, an entire family was removed from a Delta Airlines flight because the mother refused to stop nursing her infant. In 2008, a United Airlines pilot literally stopped the plane while taxiing down the runway after a flight attendant informed him that a nursing mother refused to stop breastfeeding her baby. And while these incidents may be extreme examples of the trials nursing mothers face, the social distain for public breastfeeding runs rampant in American society.

Few would disagree that breastfeeding is enormously beneficial to the health and wellbeing of mother and child. So why are nursing mothers/infants the targeted victims of public ostracism and punishment? The issue highlights two basic social forces: a foundation of puritanical social values and the commercialized sexual objectification of women that when combined expose obvious and inherent contradictions.

From a puritanical standpoint, public displays of sexuality and nudity are considered inappropriate or sinful. Therefore, it’s wholly unacceptable for a woman to "bear her breast" in public. However, in contrast, images of mothers and infants are routinely used as traditional (if not religious) icons of "purity." On one hand, mother and child symbolize all that is "wholesome and good" – unless the child is hungry – in which case, this wholesome duo is relegated to unsanitary public washroom stalls, closets, parking lots, or other remote corners hidden from public view!

The irony is truly staggering. A friend of mine who works in the dairy industry recently attended a required seminar designed to teach workers how to maximize the milk production of their cows. Careful instruction was given to ensure the cows enjoyed a peaceful, stress-free environment to facilitate the "let-down" of milk. It was even suggested that classical music be played in the parlor, while the workers avoided shouting, shoving, or otherwise disturbing the cows during the milking process. While the plight of dairy cows is best left for another column – this scenario poses an interesting paradox. Why is the comfort, health and well-being of our nursing human mothers not offered the same consideration and respect as their bovine counterparts? Perhaps if we were generating dollars per gallon for breast-milk we would be offering new mothers Mozart-installed MP3’s upon delivery and providing "milking-parlors" in malls and grocery stores across the country.

Economic incentives bring us full circle to the commercial value of the sexual objectification of the female body. Equal in frequency and magnitude to "puritanical values" is the male sexual fascination with female breasts. It is difficult, if not impossible, to span one day in American life, without being bombarded with breasts! Television, movies, video games, checkout counter magazines and billboards proudly display ample and scantily clad breasts ad-nausea. The fashion industry promotes clothing that is ever more revealing and enhancing of cleavage, so that in order for the modern-day woman to be "fashionable," she must ensure that her breasts are readily displayed for all to see. With an estimated 150,000 women seeking cosmetic breast implants annually, this emphasis on large and obvious breasts has become the physical imperative of the American female. Camera angles that slowly pan across exposed bosoms in film, or fixate on the bouncing breasts of cheerleaders and female fans at sporting events appear to be standard fare. So the message appears clear. As long as our breasts are utilized and exploited for economic gain and male sexual arousal the exposure is encouraged and condoned. But the moment women use their breasts as nature intended all hell breaks loose! And while "sex sells," we are grossly underestimating the hidden costs associated with hindering and discouraging the most effective means of providing our young with a free, healthful and timely means of nourishment.

As a society, we must reconcile this grotesque distortion in reasoning. How can we label breast-feeding as indecent exposure on one hand, but glorify and condone the gratuitous and pervasive presentation of breasts when framed in the context of male sexual gratification and economic gain? I don’t know about you …but there is no doubt in my mind, which practice should be considered "obscene."