I feel like I should come back and respond. You see, he responded. So now I feel like responding.
The Rabbi’s camp apparently received many angry emails on Sunday, so he posted a message on his website acknowledging that he’d received said emails. He also reposted his original response to his original article, which was written a few months after the article from Beliefnet.com was posted.
Go read it here. But it’s long.
Here’s what I think rubs me the wrong way about this guy.
He uses completely loaded language regarding the negatives of breastfeeding and still expects his audience to believe that he believes breastfeeding is best.
Let me give y’all a little writing lesson, okay? You too, Rabbi Shmuley.
Loaded language is language that is MEANT to spark an emotional reaction in readers.
And words like that were CERTAINLY used in his original article from the summer of 2006. They were used again in the response he wrote in an attempt to let his audience know that he supported breastfeeding, because, after all, his wife breastfed their children, so sure he supports it.
The thing about this that is just sitting so wrong with me is that, in general, after perusing many of the Rabbi’s articles, I tend to agree with him on many of the points he makes about parenting and the values we should strive to instill in our children. I agree with him when he counsels parents to speak to their children’s hearts in punishing or disciplining them instead of being quick to strike physically. I agree with him when he says that the Gosselin children do NOT need to be on television right now. He and I agree on many points.
But this? This response to his article about breastfeeding ruining marriages that is meant to prove that he supports breastfeeding? This I can’t agree with.
For starters, he says that it’s okay to supplement with a bottle in order to go out on a date with your husband. Okay, cool. I can agree with that. But what about babies who refuse bottles?
Raise your hand if you’ve got one of those babies. Because right off the top of my head, I can think of four babies I know of who won’t take a bottle. And I’m not talking about formula. I’m talking about expressed breastmilk. These are babies who won’t take it unless it’s coming straight from the tap.
What’s a mother in that situation supposed to do?
Rabbi Shmuley fails to address this common situation. And if he did, I feel quite confident that he’d use loaded language and this would somehow be the woman’s fault, even if that wasn’t his intention.
In his follow-up, Rabbi Shmuley says that he never said that breastfeeding was the equivalent of committing adultery. No, not in so many words. But the implication was that the feelings one spouse might feel upon discovering that the other spouse has committed adultery are the same feelings a husband might feel when he is no longer able to be intimate with his wife as frequently or as regularly as he would like due to her breastfeeding their child. It’s not hard to see how people would infer that he meant that breastfeeding is like having an affair.
He, again in this response, says that breastfeeding is made an obsession for some. An OBSESSION. Talk about your loaded language. Obsession, that word, the connotation implies something unhealthy. Something bad. Breastfeeding, and being determined to do so, is not an obsession, nor should it ever be seen as such. Because in order to be successful at breastfeeding, especially the first time around, a great deal of determination is required.
Short on time? Save this post for later.
No more lost tabs, random screenshots, or digging through your browser history. Save this post and do future-you a favor.
(It's like a bookmark, but...not.)
He goes on to use an example of a family who relies on the woman’s income in order to provide for that family’s basic needs and how she’ll feel guilty for having to return to work and not being able to breastfeed.
Let me introduce you to my friends the Medela Pump in Style Advanced and the LAW. It is illegal for a company to deny a nursing mother time and space (and it cannot be a restroom) to express milk during the workday. A mother does not have to quit her job in order to continue providing her child with breastmilk (and this assumes, of course, that the baby will take a bottle).
When I went back to work, I made quite certain that those who needed to knew that I’d be spending the first half of each of my two free periods pumping, and that occasionally, I’d do so before work, too. And each evening, MY HUSBAND and I made Joshua’s bottles of freshly expressed breastmilk. Joshua went on a nursing strike right about the time that I went back to work. But I was emotionally (and financially!) attached to giving him breastmilk. So I did what I had to do. With my husband’s support.
The argument Rabbi Shmuley makes that a woman will be too rushed to pump in the morning before she leaves because she’ll also be getting her other children ready and making lunches assumes that the woman is doing everything in the house. Where is her husband? Why can’t he get the other children ready? Why can’t he make the sandwiches? Why can’t they do it together the night before?
Then he goes on to say the following, which irks me.
“Then there are all the women who simply cannot breastfeed do to medical considerations. Many moms simply don’t have enough milk. And every time they read one of these article about how cruel it is not to breastfeed, they feel like inadequate mothers.”
And every time a mother who is doing what she believes is best by breastfeeding her child reads your articles they make her feel like an inadequate wife.
Women give each other enough guilt and grief over the myth of perfection. And we already get enough pressure from men to be supermodel beautiful. We don’t need guilt about our mothering and wiving coming from men, too.
Rabbi Shmuley makes a point of saying that the breastfeeding “issue” of the young couple he counseled on Shalom in the Home, (the couple he referenced in his first article) was left out of their show. While I realize I’m speculating, I’d say that it was left out because either he or TLC KNEW the ramifications and backlash that would come from airing such anti-attachment parenting advice on national television.
Later in this article he writes that parents shouldn’t feel guilty about going out as a couple without children and leaving the child/ren with a babysitter. He even says the parents should go away once or twice a year as a couple and leave the child/ren with family or friends.
Are you sharing the seeds to that money tree growing in your back yard and would you like to mail me some of them?
And what about couples who don’t have access to family who can or are willing to watch their children overnight or for an extended weekend? What about couples who live across the country from their families? I’d venture to say that many of my friends who are parents wouldn’t feel comfortable placing the responsibility of caring for their toddler with a friend. Even a close family friend. That is a huge responsibility. ENORMOUS.
I will also maintain that there should be some de-eroticization of breasts in American culture in particular. There’s far too much “allure” surrounding breasts which is part of the reason that women in America (in particular) have so much difficulty gaining respect when they tell people they are breastfeeding. Breasts were MEANT to feed human children. That is part of what makes us mammals. (And I could get ALL SORTS of Freudian on you and say that part of the reason men are attracted to breasts has to do with latent Oedipal Complexes, but since Freud has been denounced by many as a…well…he doesn’t get much credit when perhaps he should. Not all of his theories were cuckoo.) The fact that breasts, for some, are an erogenous zone is secondary, or perhaps tertiary, to their primary purpose.
I can agree with the Rabbi when he says that the greatest gift parents can give their children is to let their children see them love each other. Children need to see that their mothers and fathers love each other. I can get behind that. But he’s veering just a bit too close to Dr. Ezzo and On Becoming Toddlerwise for my liking.
In the long term, yes, marriages in which the children come before the spouses will suffer irreparable harm. However, in a child’s first and perhaps even second and third years, it is my belief that it is the duty of BOTH parents to put the needs of the child before their own needs, and sometimes that includes the needs of their spouses. The infancy and toddlerhood of children is a short, short time in the long, long marriage many couples hope to have. And I’d much rather have my son see us together and happy in 30 years than neglect fostering in him a sense of security while he’s so small.
Excellent response!
I love everything you said. I have one of those babies who refuses a bottle. Absolutely freaks the hell out if you come anywhere near him with one. And yet I'm am amazingly still married after 14 straight months of feeding the baby straight from the tap on demand. We have been out to dinner baby-free exactly once, and gone other places (one movie, one, uh, shooting range) only 2 other times. We haven't even CONSIDERED taking a baby-free trip during this stage of our son's life and now that #2 is on the way it will probably be 2012 before our first child-free vacation.
You know what does help us connect? Doing fun stuff as a family. Sharing the joy that comes from raising a child. Helping each other out. Alone time after the baby goes to bed. Alone time before the baby wakes up. Alone time when the baby naps.
I know YOU don't need to hear this, since obviously you're on my side. I can only hope those who DO need to hear it eventually come across these post.
YOU ARE AMAZING!
Hey girlie! I love you! ((huggles)) And I love most of what you've said/been saying on this topic and this Rabbi guy's articles. However, I feel the need to say something 😉
What I'm hearing from the Rabbi – who I've never heard of before your blog – is his concern for the family and marriage. Obviously, he has no idea how to express his concerns in a friendly manner – as you pointed out the loaded language is… well… just stupid 😉 And anyway, I don't think he really cares who he offends. That's sad – especially for someone with such a platform.
Anyway, I had two points I wanted to make. First, as a Christian, God's word guides my life… or at least I TRY to let it guide my life 😉 I do believe His word teaches what our priorities are to be in life. First is to be the Lord, then (if married…) your husband, then the children, extended family, and so on. Here is a good website that helps explain where I'm coming from on that – with the biblical references so if anyone is wondering where all that is in the Bible 🙂
http://www.gotquestions.org/family-priorities.html
As a result of this belief, I do not feel badly taking a weekend away by myself for a ladies retreat or time with my husband. In fact, I think these things should be priority in my life. I feel by doing this, I will be happier, my husband will be, my God will be, and as a result my little girl will be. When I don't do this, I feel everything in my life suffers, including my little girl. It's kind of like the saying, "If momma ain't happy, ain't nobody happy!" LOL
So when you say, "And I'd much rather have my son see us together and happy in 30 years than neglect fostering in him a sense of security while he's so small," I would ask you to pause a minute and consider that statement. First, neglect is a bit of a loaded word 😉 I don't think by taking time out for me and my God or husband I am "neglecting" my girl – quite the opposite. And I do see it, in a way, as fostering her sense of security while she is so young in that my Beth knows that when mommy says she is going away for an hour, a day, or two, she knows and says, "My mommy will be back." 🙂 It's kinda cute. She trusts me, and all the while I'm setting a good example for her. There are times when you need to take time for you and the one you've become "one flesh" with. Also, in this way, there is a better chance she will "see us together and happy in 30 years."
Then there was one other thing I wanted to comment on. It was something someone also said on facebook. "Breasts were MEANT to feed human children. That is part of what makes us mammals." And someone on facebook said that was their (breasts) "sole purpose." Sure, they can be used to feed 🙂 but they can also be your husband's delight. Proverbs 5:19 "A loving doe, a graceful deer [speaking of the wife]–may her breasts satisfy you always, may you ever be captivated by her love." You want more, go read Song of Solomon. hehe Anyway, just wanted to throw that out there too. 🙂
Have a blessed day!
::Waves hand wildly::
My baby is a straight from the tap type of girl.
Jamie!
Hiii! Hope you're enjoying the break! I'm so glad to see you comment!
Basically, I agree with you 🙂 I do believe that the order of priorities should be God, husband, children, me. But sometimes that's not practical. If Joshua and Dan are both hungry, I'm going to take care of Joshua's hunger first. Dan's a big boy! He knows where the pantry is. (But I know you're speaking in larger terms here…so I'm getting there!)
I totally agree with you that there's NO reason a woman should feel guilty for taking time for herself, either alone, with another group of women, or with her husband. If I didn't get away on occasion by myself, I'd lose my mind, even if that "away" is just to Target to browse the shoes! Taking time away makes me a better mom. But again, it's not always practical. Sometimes people DON'T have family available to help out. Sometimes people DON'T have friends they feel they can trust to watch their child (especially for a weekend, and at Joshua's age!). Sometimes people don't have the finances to afford a sitter and dinner. Or a weekend away.
The Rabbi leaves no gray area here, and as someone with few options, this bothers me. It makes couples, or wives, feel that they've done something wrong by not taking time away with their husbands, either for dinner or for the weekend.
When I used the word "neglect" I didn't mean to imply overt neglect of the child. We practice facets of attachment parenting, and attachment parenting believes that children foster a sense of security and trust through close relationships with their parents. By feeling that we are there for his needs, he learns to trust the world around him. Thus, he becomes independent and secure.
To read more about Attachment Parenting, go here:
http://www.attachmentparenting.org/principles/principles.php
(and no, we don't practice all of the principles)
So, I don't think parents are neglecting their children by going on an occasional date, or even a weekend away. But if I don't foster his sense of security, then I'm not helping him learn about and gain independence, so I'm "neglecting" to foster his sense of security. Perhaps we're splitting hairs here.
As for the scripture, I've read that chapter in Proverbs before and I read it again today, and while it does literally say the man should delight in his wife's breasts, the chapter is a metaphor for choosing between good (the wife) and evil (the adulteress, or temptation). "Satisfy" in this context can also be taken to mean "sate," and that doesn't just mean sexually. It can also mean emotionally or mentally. Or even just to provide nourishment (obviously not ACTUAL nourishment…although there is the end of The Grapes of Wrath…)
There are many, many more scriptures in the Bible that uphold the positive, nurturing aspect of breastfeeding than there are those that discuss how a woman's body is for her husband's pleasure (and what of the man's body being for the woman's pleasure?). And many of those scriptures are in Song of Solomon, and we know how Solomon loved his women 🙂
I'm not trying to debate scripture here, or anger you by saying what I've said. Promise. I'm just trying to foster one of those good ol' discussions we enjoyed so much during 3rd period.
First of all, I’d like to say… You make me smile! Your tone and clever wit make for such an easy reading, non-threatening blog… You said, “I totally agree with you that there's NO reason a woman should feel guilty for taking time for herself … If I didn't get away on occasion by myself, I'd lose my mind, even if that "away" is just to Target to browse the shoes!” You make me LOL when I read your blog and your facebook statuses 😉 Thanks! ps. We have to go shoe shopping, when we get our furlough days back!
You say… “It's not always practical. Sometimes people DON'T have family available to help out…” To that I say, AMEN! I know what you mean. With all my family in Indiana and only Michael’s older and ailing parents over in Acworth (and a crazy brother-in-law I would never ask to keep Beth), finding time for me or my husband away from our independent, strong willed beautiful blessing is, well, almost impossible. However, the YMCA has a parents’ night out once a month, and our church does some parents’ nights out. Beth has some favorite babysitters, but with the furloughs still coming for teachers, I’m sad to say affording a weekend away with hubby is not on the agenda anytime soon. Anyway, all that said to say, I’m having a hard time with the getaway with the man of my life too – but striving for it all the same. 🙂
You also say… “The Rabbi leaves no gray area here, and as someone with few options, this bothers me. It makes couples, or wives, feel that they've done something wrong by not taking time away with their husbands, either for dinner or for the weekend.” Well, I think it’s only wrong if we’re not TRYING to overcome the obstacles toward making more time for our hubbies. As someone also with limited options, I may not be able to get out as much as another mom, but I still need to try. Even if it’s for a couple hours at the park watching the sun set and talking ((mental note to myself to take my own advice there)) we need to try harder ((( taking a minute to chastise myself ))).
I love when you say… "Satisfy" in this context can also be taken to mean "sate," and that doesn't just mean sexually. It can also mean emotionally or mentally. Or even just to provide nourishment (obviously not ACTUAL nourishment…although there is the end of The Grapes of Wrath…)”
LOL!!!! I’m dying here! ROTFLOL! And if someone is reading this and hasn’t read the ending to The Grapes of Wrath, you are totally missing why I’m laughing so hard! See – this is one of many reasons why I love your blog!!! Hehe Anyway, I also love your word study of the scripture I used. You are right; it could mean more than just sexually there – which just means there is more to those tatas than meets the eye 😉 (winking) As for Solomon, I guess we should point out to the Rabbi that as far as this king of Israel was concerned, breastfeeding didn’t turn him off to women – cause I’m pretty sure they weren’t bottle feeding back then and we all know how many wives this guy took, and how many children he had by them!
Well, I’ve enjoyed our 3rd period discussion! Let’s have another soon!!! Love ya!
See, I'm smiling as I read this, because we DID understand each other! WOOHOO!
And yes, I agree that we have to try harder to make time for our husbands, to reconnect, despite the fact that our governor thinks it's okay to have us teach more children for less money. What's that? Did someone say election year!?!?!
And Solomon? I'm not sure there was much that DID turn him off, to be honest, at least not as far as women were concerned.
Love you too!
I enjoyed the intellectual aspect of this entire post! Good for you, Miranda.
And, the Grapes of Wrath reference brought me back to my Freshman year of High School in an Honors English class when we discussed the ending to the book. My response was "he (the starving man) was satisifed" and the whole room got silent and the teacher looked like I knocked the wind out of her. I will never forget the discussion that ensued.
Hey! I found you among the comments at http://www.exploitsofamilitarymama.com/ and I'm adding you to my Blogroll! Keep up the great writing. 🙂
Wow – I just came across your blog recently and I really appreciated this response to Rabbi Shmuley's response! I wrote about it too, but you hit on some very important points that I wasn't able to articulate myself! Thanks so much!
You know my hand is high up in the air…that's my no-bottle-taking kiddo! Two years worth of tap!
Glad you posted this…didn't know he'd posted a response. I'm glad you can respond in a logical way, because all my thoughts on him are so furious and jumbled that they make no sense.