“I don’t want my son or husband to accidentally see a breast they didn’t want to see,” said the horrified woman, appalled at seeing a round, firm breast on the cover of a magazine.
Trust me, woman. There is no breast in the world your husband and son don’t want to see. Men and boys spend 95 percent of their time trying to get a glimpse of boob. If it weren’t for the possibility of glimpsing strange breasts, most males could not make it through the day. The chance of mammarian serendipity is one of the primary motivations for male survival.
Frankly, I don’t know how I feel about this storm of outrage. While I am among those males who enjoy an unexpected glimpse of boobage, there is something shocking when the boob in question happens to be feeding a small child. It is the epitome of conflict. The male thought pattern goes like this: “Hey! A naked boob! I’m going to call my friends! But wait! There’s a small child attached to it! I’m not calling anybody! But I’m still looking!”
But enough out of me. Behold the controversial C cup.
NEW YORK – “I was SHOCKED to see a giant breast on the cover of your magazine,” one person wrote. “I immediately turned the magazine face down,” wrote another. “Gross,” said a third.
These readers weren’t complaining about a sexually explicit cover, but rather one of a baby nursing, on a wholesome parenting magazine — yet another sign that Americans are squeamish over the sight of a nursing breast, even as breast-feeding itself gains greater support from the government and medical community.
Babytalk is a free magazine whose readership is overwhelmingly mothers of babies. Yet in a poll of more than 4,000 readers, a quarter of responses to the cover were negative, calling the photo — a baby and part of a woman’s breast, in profile — inappropriate.