Connect with us

Breastfeeding In Uniform: Latest Battle In America’s War On Women

Published

on

In January, a few women in the military got together and formed a support group designed to spread the word to women in the military and women spouses of military personnel that breastfeeding infants is a good thing. The Mom2Mom Breastfeeding Support Group even got a professional photographer to take pictures of women –some in uniform — breastfeeding. Tasteful, beautiful, life-affirming photographs.

And then on May 22, they took their message to Facebook. In just days, there was outrage, and some called the women a “disgrace to the uniform” and labeled their actions “conduct unbecoming.”

The Today Show” picked up the story and felt the strange need to offer a warning to viewers before airing it: “A few of you may find it too revealing.” Seriously? Is America so prude that the act of feeding a baby causes “controversy”?

The Today Show story includes a Washington State National Guard supervisor stating that it is a violation of regulations for the Mom2Mom Breastfeeding Support Group women to be in uniform and endorse a product or further a cause or ideology. Yes, according to Keith Kosik, State Public Affairs Officer, Washington National Guard, breastfeeding is a “cause” and an “ideology.” Would Kosik say that bottle feeding too is a “cause” and an “ideology”?

Via MSNBC:

“A lot of people are saying it’s a disgrace to the uniform. They’re comparing it to urinating and defecating [while in uniform],” says Crystal Scott, a military spouse who started Mom2Mom in January as a breast-feeding support group for military moms and “anyone related to the base” at Fairchild AFB outside Spokane, Wash. “It’s extremely upsetting. Defecating in public is illegal. Breast-feeding is not.”

It was Scott’s idea to ask photographer Brynja Sigurdardottir to take photos of real-life breast-feeding moms to create posters for National Breastfeeding Awareness Month in August. One of the moms photographed in uniform, Terran Echegoyen-McCabe, breast-feeds her 10-month-old twin girls on her lunch breaks during drill weekends as a member of the Air National Guard.

“I have breast-fed in our lobby, in my car, in the park … and I pump, usually in the locker room,” she says. “I’m proud to be wearing a uniform while breast-feeding. I’m proud of the photo and I hope it encourages other women to know they can breast-feed whether they’re active duty, guard or civilian.”

She said she’s surprised by the reaction to the photos, which also feature her friend Christina Luna, because it never occurred to her that breast-feeding in uniform would cause such a stir.

“There isn’t a policy saying we can or cannot breast-feed in uniform,” Echegoyen-McCabe says. “I think it’s something that every military mom who is breast-feeding has done. … I think we do need to be able to breast-feed in uniform and be protected.”
The Air Force has no policy specifically addressing breast-feeding in uniform, according to Air Force spokesperson Captain Rose Richeson, who added, “Airmen should be mindful of their dress and appearance and present a professional image at all times while in uniform.”

Except, they’re all wrong. Why?

Part One

In “We’re Seriously Debating Whether It’s Okay for Military Moms to Breastfeed While in Uniform?,” Erin Gloria Ryan at Jezebel writes:

Apparently, this was a grievous offense to the respectability and professionalism of the military, and, by extension, to America and freedom and Jesus. These colors don’t run! Or lactate!

A nice cross section of shitty reactions to military breastfeeding can be found on the blog of ex-military mom turned breastfeeding advocate Robyn Roche-Paull, who has spent much of her post-military career trying to convince the sausage fest that is the US military that they should really think about drafting a policy that allows women to breastfeed while in uniform. As it stands, there’s no such policy, and as a result, women like Echegoyen-McCabe and Luna face criticism and reprimand should they choose to breastfeed.

So, what’s the big deal? According to comments on Roche-Paull’s blog that frequently begin with “As a… ” (general rule of thumb — if a sentence starts with the words “As a…” then 75% of the time, the implied third word is “shithead know-it-all”), breastfeeding is akin to peeing in your uniform in front of everybody. One commenter said,

As a former Marine, Active Duty, I am appalled by the notion that any service woman would feel it is appropriate to breast feed a child while in uniform. I believe it is an utter disgrace to all women before us who made many sacrifices for the roles we have today. I believe it is an honor to be a woman, a mother, and a Marine. I believe those who chose to breast feed in uniform are only making a joke of the hard work and dedication of service women in the past. You wanted to participate in a career that is slightly more demanding than that of say a receptionist, housewife, lawyer, doctor, writer, etc. so you should adhere to a more professional standard and take your job more seriously.

Because the natural process of feeding your damn kid that you made with your body isn’t serious.

Another commenter added,

I feel very strongly that respect for both the uniform and for women would be compromised should women breast-feed in uniform in public. Women have fought the battle for equal rights and must be cognizant of the fact that they are still in the stage of proving themselves as equals in society and should always remain professional while in uniform. Professional women do not breast-feed in public, and female soldiers, who are professionals, should not either.

And now they drag feminism into this. Advocating for equal opportunity for men and women isn’t the same thing as demanding biological sameness — being granted the right to serve in the military alongside men doesn’t erase the fact that women are still the ones who bear children, still the ones who feed children.

Others echoed the concern that they’re worried that breast feeding in uniform could lead their male counterparts seeing them as less worthy of respect. To this I say: if the sight of a woman breastfeeding leads men en masse to think that women are inferior or not worthy of respect, then the problem isn’t with the women or with breastfeeding — it’s with a rigid culture that encourages acting like a dick. Why accomodate that?

Part Two

In “FACT: U.S. Air Force and DoD Officially Endorse Breastfeeding,” the website Look Dumbass picks up on the Washington National Guard’s State Public Affairs Officer’s comments in the Today Show video and notes:

Kosik went on to state:

“If you look at the press coverage that’s out there right now, it has been misconstrued as a battle against breastfeeding. It leads one to believe they are being persecuted for breastfeeding. The fact is they’re not being persecuted. The fact is breastfeeding was never an issue for us.”

So breastfeeding in uniform is NOT an issue at all. The issue seems to come from AFI 36-2903, Section 1.4.2, which states:

When NOT to wear the Air Force Uniform …
1.4.2. While participating in public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, or rallies or in an public demonstration when participation may imply Air Force sanction of the cause.

Or maybe DoDD 1334.1 Section 3.1.2 which states that wearing of the uniform is prohibited “when an inference of official sponsorship for the activity or interest may be drawn.” A claim which is being made by the bigwigs in a memo on Wednesday to all Fairchild AFB personnel to support this sort of smackdown on the women.

Were the women using their uniforms to further their cause or imply Air Force sanction of the cause?

No!

In fact, the women were essentially following a recommendation and direct order of the Secretary of the Air Force by breastfeeding their children.

Air Force Instruction 44-102, January 20th, 2012

BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE
COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY

4.16. Breastfeeding and Breast Pumping

4.16.1. Breastfeeding provides optimal health benefits for both mother and infant throughout their life spans. Exclusive breastfeeding is optimal nutrition for the first 6 months of life. Gradual introduction of solids begins in the second half of the first year and complements human milk, which remains essential to nutrition during this period. Extensive medical research has documented that breastfeeding has significant health, nutritional, immunologic, developmental, emotional, social, and economic benefits to mother and baby. The AFMS recommends that supervisors of AF members who are breastfeeding work with the member to arrange their work schedules to allow 15-30 minutes every 3-4 hours to pump breast milk in a room or an area that provides adequate privacy and cleanliness. Restrooms should not be considered an appropriate location for pumping. The AF member must supply the equipment needed to pump and store the breast milk.

You CAN’T accuse the women of exploiting their uniforms to further their cause and you CAN’T accuse the women of exploiting their uniforms to “imply Air Force sanction of the cause” and you CAN’T rightfully silence the women nor should they face disciplinary action for exploiting their uniforms to imply sanction of the cause.

Why?

There is nothing to imply when the Secretary of The Air Force issues an order for which compliance is mandatory, an order which specifically endorses and recommends breastfeeding and breast pumping. A picture of a woman in uniform breastfeeding her child is a direct reflection of the recommendations, values, and orders from the Department of Defense.

There is no cause. There is no implication that the Department of Defense and Air Force are in support of breastfeeding.

It’s a STATEMENT OF FACT.

Part Three — Earth To Tony Perkins… Where Are All The “Pro-Life” And “Pro-Family” Groups?

As for public reaction, it’s offensive to suggest women — in uniform  or not — go to a restroom to feed their children. Would you want to eat in a restroom?

Of course, we aren’t seeing any of the so-called “pro-family” and “pro-life” groups like the American Family Association, Family Research Council, or the National Organization For Marriage come out in support of these women who started the Mom2Mom Breastfeeding Support Group, military women who need to feed their children while they happen to be in uniform, or women in general breastfeeding in public.

Where are Tony Perkins and Bryan Fischer and Robert P. George when women need them? For that matter, where is Maggie Gallagher — who loves to tout that she was a needy single mother at one time?

Nowhere. Silent. Crickets…

Why? Because they’re all too busy attacking gay people for wanting to get married, or for being in the military, and they’re all too conservative to actually take their heads out of their asses and recognize that breastfeeding a baby is about as natural and as pro-life and pro-family as you can get.

Hypocrites.

For more, read about the Child’s Right to Nurse Act.

Then head over to the Mom2Mom Breastfeeding Support Group on Facebook, and show your support.

Image: Brynja SigurdardottirPhotography & Mom2Mom Breastfeeding Support Group 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation

Published

on

Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.

Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”

“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”

In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”

He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”

“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”

“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”

“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”

The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.

“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”

Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”

Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.

Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.

Continue Reading

News

Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs

Published

on

President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.

“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”

The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”

Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”

TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”

Critics blasted Trump.

“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.

One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”

Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”

The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.

According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.

Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”

“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”

Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”

Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.

Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.

The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.

“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.

The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.

“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.