Breastfeeding is the best thing for a child until it eats solid food. Women who have breastfed have a lower incidence of breast cancer. Why do you insist on pretending that is not true?
I don’t think it’s important to say if it is a “necessity” or not.

Because, as I have pointed out already, the emphasis on how nothing comes close to breastmilk excludes those who can’t or don’t want to breastfeed from the good parent club by default. It leads to shaming of mothers who don’t breastfeed on the grounds that they are denying their babies something absolutely essential. It creates a narrative where mothers are obligated to stay home with their babies because of the invented obligation to breastfeed. It reinforces gender-essentialist claims about women being designed to be primary parent. And it is not supported by the science, which suggests that breastfeeding provides some immunity from certain types of minor infections, but absolutely does not prove it is some kind of magical panacea that fixes everything from obesity to low IQ. It’s just not important enough to justify the amount of pressure put on women to do it — at significant cost to their careers and mental health. And it is unique in being singled out this way, unlike many other things parents do that make a much greater impact on their babies’ health. Which suggests that there is something else going on under the surface of the breastfeeding advocacy movement, such as a desire to tie women to their biology and reinforce the claim that women belong at home with the babies.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Mirah Curzer’s story.