Your statement that 'rights are endowed by our Creator", and even the spirit of that phrasing (not just the specific wording) means, basically, nothing.
You could put anything in there. You could say that rights are endowed by Godzilla, or by a tiny pink alien that only you can see. You could as easily say that rights were forbidden by any such entity. It sounds good but means nothing. You only have "rights" to the extent that you can act upon them--otherwise it's completely hollow.
I think you're glossing over the degree to which breastfeeding gets a bad reaction in the mainstream. I don't claim to have numbers, but I find your assertion that it is limited to "subcultures and subsocieties" to be both suspect and vague (after all, strictly speaking, you could divide up subcultures in such a way that no one group has exactly the same agenda, but a majority agree on certain points). Speaking strictly from experience, many folks get a bit discomforted by it. I suspect this is more due to lack of exposure than anything else, but the source is less important than the behavior (at least until you start looking at how to solve the problem).
The trick here is that these aren't breastfeeding mothers.
The item in question is simply images of the mothers breastfeeding.
You can't tell me that a mother loses her ability to safely and comfortably breastfeed her child just because she's not allowed to use a picture of it as her *default* userpic on Livejournal (despite being perfectly free to use it as another userpic--they haven't banned the pictures wholesale, they simply banned using them as defaults).
As for Rahaeli's pic, it's barely visible, but it does seem to be there. Why not report this and get upset about that?
"Allegedly" direct quotes mean little. It's just "he-said she-said", and considering the signal degradation I've seen on this whole thing, I don't trust an alleged quote here.
Similar with "seem to have characterized." I don't find it at all hard to believe that people with authority on the internet might abuse it, or make mistakes and refuse to admit it--on the other hand, I also don't trust most LJ folks to even comprehend a basic written letter on the matter, and I've seen a couple of their letters. They seem eminently reasonable and polite.
*shrug* In any case, I feel like I'm beginning to spam Joyce's journal entry here. If you want to discuss this further we can take the comment exchange elsewhere. :)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2006-06-05 05:16 pm (UTC)You could put anything in there. You could say that rights are endowed by Godzilla, or by a tiny pink alien that only you can see. You could as easily say that rights were forbidden by any such entity. It sounds good but means nothing. You only have "rights" to the extent that you can act upon them--otherwise it's completely hollow.
I think you're glossing over the degree to which breastfeeding gets a bad reaction in the mainstream. I don't claim to have numbers, but I find your assertion that it is limited to "subcultures and subsocieties" to be both suspect and vague (after all, strictly speaking, you could divide up subcultures in such a way that no one group has exactly the same agenda, but a majority agree on certain points). Speaking strictly from experience, many folks get a bit discomforted by it. I suspect this is more due to lack of exposure than anything else, but the source is less important than the behavior (at least until you start looking at how to solve the problem).
The trick here is that these aren't breastfeeding mothers.
The item in question is simply images of the mothers breastfeeding.
You can't tell me that a mother loses her ability to safely and comfortably breastfeed her child just because she's not allowed to use a picture of it as her *default* userpic on Livejournal (despite being perfectly free to use it as another userpic--they haven't banned the pictures wholesale, they simply banned using them as defaults).
As for Rahaeli's pic, it's barely visible, but it does seem to be there. Why not report this and get upset about that?
"Allegedly" direct quotes mean little. It's just "he-said she-said", and considering the signal degradation I've seen on this whole thing, I don't trust an alleged quote here.
Similar with "seem to have characterized." I don't find it at all hard to believe that people with authority on the internet might abuse it, or make mistakes and refuse to admit it--on the other hand, I also don't trust most LJ folks to even comprehend a basic written letter on the matter, and I've seen a couple of their letters. They seem eminently reasonable and polite.
*shrug* In any case, I feel like I'm beginning to spam Joyce's journal entry here. If you want to discuss this further we can take the comment exchange elsewhere. :)