9 of 18

No

Write now Article Tools

I guess on this one I'm in the minority opinion. I guess I'm a little lost as to the public at larges hypocrisy in regard to the issue. At the risk of sounding Ashcroftish, in respect to how the now debunked attorney generals disdain, for dear lady justice exposing her breasts. So much so that they covered her up, so as to show some modesty. I can't really see at to just why it is, that the majority of folks out being upset at the boobie seen around the world in the emphasis and famous now Janet Jackson Super bowl half time performance of Super bowl (XXX)VIII. Now known as nipplegate. In which so many were so outraged, falsely apparently, as it is OK for breast to be exposed for any duration of time in public. While a mother feeds her child. As opposed to a nipple exposed for a nanosecond.

Was not the out cry than, we've got kids watching for Pete sake!? Now all the sudden, not so applicable in regard to a woman feeding her child. For is not, or is not a boobie a boobie or not? Here is the hypocrisy that I'm at a loss to understand. Those making a big deal about the exposure of a female breast for a fraction of a second, as apposed to the revealing of a breast for a substantial extra amount of time, of course. Unless the child being feed has some super extra ordinary inept Popeye like ability to consume the needed nourishment from the bosom of the mother in a substantial shorten amount of time. Was there a memo some where I missed? If so let me know, because I for my part feel that if you're going to go to exemplary links, so as to to say that one is bad as apposed to the other. I'd certainly like to know why.

Doesn't Junior not only watch the Super bowl, but also eat out on occasion with his family at Denys? More over in regards to the Super bowl. Can not those offended turn way, and not look, if in fact it's offensive. In the same breath don't tell me though to turn away from the lady breast feeding the kid in the booth across the way from me. Are, or are we not hypocrites, and is that or isn't that the essence of hypocrisy? Take the kids to the can and feed them. Your baby also craps and that's a natural function too. You don't change your kids dipper out in the dinning area, do you?

Anyone that is going to tell me that this is acceptable on the pretense that it's natural is got to be kidding. Give me a real reason to support your argument. Please! I do mean real, and you're going to have to do better than It's natural. If that arguments has substance than I guess I've got the absolute and a certifiable right to do the following; on that very same pretense. I can take a burp excessively and receptively in plan and open observance of everyone present. Why? Because it's a bodily function and it's natural. I can at random take dump at free well openly before the publics taking offense to the action incurred, and the rest of you have to be OK with it. Why? Because it's a natural bodily function. I can urinate at my own times choosing without regard for the fact that yes others will indubitable appalled by my actions. But why? It's just a natural bodily function. Do you see just how absurd, and just how ridiculous the argument is in lending credence to the argument itself, on such foolish a pretense is?

Learn more about this author, Kevin Zarbock.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should women be allowed to breastfeed in public areas??
We want to hear your view. Write now!