Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (54356)	9/3/1999 12:13:00 PM
From: Edwarda	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Good afternoon and thanks for the clarification, E. On the issue of breast feeding in public, once again, I keep finding myself in the middle. As I posted earlier, I was more than a bit thrown the first time I saw a woman at a bus stop just open up her shirt and show the world feeding time. Despite the beauty and naturality of it, this is not the way it is usually done in our society. We tend to do it as privately as possible and I can understand a person's feeling uncomfortable about a blatant public display.

To: E who wrote (54356)	9/3/1999 12:14:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

My dear E, I disagree with the assertion in your post that Neo did not make the analogies. He did not make them explicitly, I agree, he did not say, "breastfeeding in public is like urinating in public." However, the analogy was implicit. The arguments went something like this (and I am paraphrasing): "Breast-feeding in public is nothing more than the satisfaction of a baby's hunger, a natural urge and a natural act." Neo: "Pulling out my wang and urinating all over the restaurant is merely satisfaction of a natural urge, too." And he most certainly did say that breast-feeding in public is an example of loosening standards, explicitly, repeatedly. Which I don't think is tactful, and I do think is belligerent. Your opinion may vary, of course, but that's mine. Neo comported himself very well in the argument, and doesn't need defending, but of course you have a right to defend him if you think he needs it. I don't see how "naturalness" and "other-cultural acceptance" are fallacious arguments. They may be ineffective refutations of Neo's position, that women should not breastfeed in public because some find it offensive. However, the dog-eating argument was made by Neo in response to my comment that "Americans are weird." Thus, I would say that in that context, Neo's dog-eating argument was an ineffective refutation of my comment that Americans are weird. The cultural argument was a side-show. Neo remains convinced that breast-feeding in a public restaurant is a breach of decorum. As decorum is in the eyes of the beholder, a matter of taste, it's impossible to prove that he's wrong in his belief. That he's in a distinct minority refutes his position that his belief is so widely held that it must control social behavior in the United States.