Angelina Jolie Breastfeeding: What's the Big Deal?

Aida Ekberg
How did W magazine score so big? Why was this magazine the one that obtained the rights to publish a grainy black and white photo of Angelina Jolie breastfeeding? Well, apparently Brad Pitt took the photo himself, along with a few more intimate photos that this lottery-winning magazine will feature. But as for the reason why the couple wanted their photos published there, that is a mystery.

Another mystery surrounding this photo is: whose little hand is that on Angelina Jolie's breast? Which twin made the cover? We may never know the answer to these pressing questions, but we do know one thing: this photo has America talking about breastfeeding again.

I definitely have no problem with the photo. Sure half of Angelina Jolie's boob is hanging out, but most Americans have seen a lot more of her than that by now. And we also don't actually see the baby breastfeeding; we only see a tiny resting on her breast with Angelina's knee covering up the rest of what's going on (Great censoring job, Brad!). So the cover is very natural and tasteful, but it's probably getting the hardcore feminists all riled up about breastfeeding in public again.

Am I against breastfeeding? Absolutely not, and I'm also not completely against breastfeeding in public. If your child is hungry, it is the most convenient snack to carry around with you, as well as the healthiest. But I can tell you what does bother me: women who are breastfeeding exhibitionists.

I swear that it gives some women a thrill to breastfeed in public, especially if they're doing it in an area with a lot of other people around. They make this big production of unbuttoning their blouse and cooing at their baby while taking secret glances around the area to see who is watching. They're always on the look for a pervert or someone confrontational, and they seem to enjoy loudly dealing with these situations. Basically, these women are abusing their right to breastfeed in public in a twisted attempt to get attention. Maybe it has something to do with just giving birth and not feeling as attractive, or maybe the mother is even envious of all the attention her baby gets and wants some of her own. Who knows? But for whatever reason it happens, this demented practice is extremely annoying to experience, especially if you are somewhere like a restaurant.

I see breastfeeding a lot like urinating: it has to and should be done, but it's not something the public really wants to see (I wouldn't want to watch anyone go through the "natural" act of peeing while eating at a restaurant, either). However, it is great that Angelina Jolie's photos could be encouraging more mothers to choose breastfeeding over dangerous baby bottles and not-as-nutritious baby formula, and if you must breastfeed in public, then go ahead and do so. Just act as if you are urinating in public (in other words, be discreet), and don't make a Broadway production out of it.

http://www.wowowow.com/post/angelina-jolie-breastfeeding-cover-november-w-magazine-photo-120970

Published by Aida Ekberg - Featured Contributor in Arts & Entertainment

Aida Ekberg is an avid fan of celebrity gossip whose articles have been featured on Yahoo! omg!, Yahoo! Movies, Yahoo! News, and Yahoo! TV. She won a 2011 Yahoo! Contributor Award for her many celeb-centric...   View profile

1 Comments

Post a Comment
  • jcorn 10/11/2008

    I think the fact that people make a big deal out of it is the most noteworthy thing. Why all the controversy about a photo of a woman, smiling and looking happy (and even a bit tired), who is breastfeeding on the cover of a magazine (and not even as revealing as Brittney Spears on the cover of Esquire, revealing her bottom)? Although I may not have seen an enlarged version of the cover, Jolie seemed to be showing relatively little, with the baby's hand reaching out to her. What is so terrible about that? Is it any worse - or better - than Demi Moore revealing her pregnant belly on Vanity Fair? When I was a kid, National Geographic used to show topless women in the magazines. Guess that didn't count because they weren't celebrities or sex objects?

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.