| 0 comments ]

Progressives have always had mixed emotions about breastfeeding. We support a healthy diet and natural living, and breastfeeding is as natural as it gets. We also have a low tolerance for chemical additives, including those found in infant formula. On the other hand, breastfeeding has been used to oppress women. Feminists recognized this in the 1960s and labeled infant formula "liberation in a can." With formula, daddy could get up in the middle of the night for feedings and mom could get some sleep, and the infant could be fed while in child care during the day, so mom could work for pay.

Since then, moms have gone to work in record numbers (see Figure 4), while the U.S. government and advocacy groups have gone on a mission to promote breastfeeding. The movements have clashed and, so far, work seems to have won: We have yet to reach the modest Healthy Families 2010 target of 50 percent of mothers breastfeeding until an infant is at least six months of age. Some folks actually revel in the clash, hoping to reverse women's economic gains by sending the message that good mothers opt out of employment (as documented by Pamela Stone). Breastfeeding promotion provides a powerful tool in these efforts. Of course, when this crowd wins, women become more financially dependent on men: Stephen Rose and Heidi Hartmann found that women's hourly wages drop 22 percent for even one year out of employment, and drop even more steeply for more time out (see Table 2).

More...

0 comments

Post a Comment