...or at least a chance at one.

"Two senior professors also commented (separately but in almost identical words) that women who breastfeed feel sexual, which is no different to being a paedophile," Dr Goode said.

"This is a widespread belief among the paedophile community. As a woman who has breastfed her children (unlike either of the professors), I know from direct experience what rubbish this is, but they naively continue to promulgate it because it serves the purpose of blurring distinctions and normalising the concept of adult sexual experience with children."

facepalm.jpg

I wonder how hard the interviewer had to push to manufacture that one?

The phrases she was looking for were the parenting ⚠️ ↗ and women's studies ⚠️ ↗ communities. 'n as is a fundamental axiom of women's studies (or any related field, such as 'wid's experience library) the fundamental axiom is that experience is individual and unique, not projectable.

We, on the other hand, can just observe that breast feeding exists to start picking at the sociological construction of gender and the sociological construction of unreasonable taboo - both the wholly irrational social assumption that breasts are classed as genitals in english-speaking posteuropean society (?!) and then the fact that, once that social construct has been propogated, the social construction of gender roles... yeah. Doesn't really need women's studies.

Thank God Ms. Goode never read any of the information about orgasm during childbirth ⚠️ ↗; god only knows what bizzare sexual wonderland she would have projected. Nonetheless, it was a little irresponsible; I'm guessing she never ONCE heard what she claimed in a reply nor on the boards, and if she's trying to piss off the womens' movement against the ignorant villagers, well... consider the means.

/facepalm.

Nonetheless...

Social scientists tended to regard her studies with suspicion. "People refused to work with me and said things such as: 'You have no idea how naive you're being and the damage you could cause.'"

...am I the only person for whom that doesn't exactly sound like a discussion of the study per se, but of some dark politics?

I mean... every time I've heard a warning like that, it's involved some sort of veiled neofascist dystopia, or at least the firm belief in one. Especially when "naieve" is used to precede "right or wrong, these things just can't be done here" doom-and-gloom prophecying.

Personally, I'd like to know exactly what is feared. Mostly, so I could drop a hand grenade on it; when the going gets tough, the tough join the french resistance...

She said that some of these doubts were "a covert expression of 'tabloidophobia' - a horror that the more aggressively anti-intellectual tabloid newspapers could come knocking and embarrass everyone".

Hmm. Guess I'm not the only one to think the same thing. Except people don't usually pull the whole "he whom must not be named" crap on tabloids alone, per se.

Hmm...

...well, thank you for an interesting article. I find myself deeply wondering what organized criminal behavior looks like in the UK right about now...

Thanks for posting it.