Academics called breastfeeding 'ethically problematic' because it endorses 'gender roles.' Their view is gaining traction. "We are concerned about breastfeeding promotion that praises breastfeeding as the ’natural’ way to feed infants."

submitted by Chipit from campusreform.org

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]LesbianOutlaw 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

So if the deluge of hormones potentially being in the milk is the issue then why is it not an issue when females use the exact same drugs to induce lactation/increase milk yields, but somehow the milk becomes poison when a male uses those same drugs?

Domperidone is considered safe for the baby when women use it. How does someone possessing XY chromosomes magically alter the domperidone so that it becomes unsafe for the baby?

Your beliefs are based on emotion, not logic.

[–]Comatoast 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I don't think it's an incredible idea for women that aren't naturally lactating to do it either, but at least women have the basic prerequisites required.

Are you saying that exogenous hormone exposure along with whatever other hormone blockers are required to keep male test levels at bay are safe at levels excreted within breastmilk?

Men don't have the same physiology. They're not going to just have naturally risen levels of prolactin or any of the other shit that rolls out from each hormone center within the human body to just up and maintain it either.

Show me long-term scientific evidence from a published medical journal that shows the safety levels for an infant of transwomen breastfeeding despite all that, and we can talk about that whole emotion vs logic thing again.

[–]bobbobbybob 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

seems to me that playing with androgen blockers is a bit... selfish:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20547585/

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/j.1939-4640.1992.tb00338.x

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016648097969628

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20547585/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0018506X81900283

there are no long term studies. In the case of the last one published, they didn't even bother to do a follow up on the baby, it was all about the 'transgernder' mum.

[–]Comatoast 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Found these on my dig. Exogenous hormone exposure doesn't appear to be good things for breastmilk.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40748-016-0040-y

In the WHO Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (MEC), Fifth Edition [23] estrogen-containing contraceptives (including combined oral contraceptives, the patch, and the vaginal ring) are considered to pose unacceptable health risks (Category 4) when used by breastfeeding women within the first 6 postpartum weeks. These methods are considered by the WHO to have theoretical or proven risks that usually outweigh their advantages (Category 3) until breastfeeding women are at least 6 months postpartum. In contrast, in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (CDC MEC), the advantages of using such estrogen-containing methods are stated to generally outweigh the theoretical or proven risks (Category 2) for women without complicating medical conditions starting 6 weeks after delivery [21] (Table 1).

https://www.nature.com/articles/7211251