Breastfeeding Doll?

[SweetErika]

I heard this story (text below) about a doll that mimics breastfeeding coming to the U.S. on the radio yesterday and wondered what my fellow Litizens would think since people polled seem to have extremely strong opinions on the doll. . Here's the original video.

What are your thoughts? Would you get this doll for a special child in your life, or prefer a doll that comes with a bottle, assuming they were the same price? Do you think The Breast Milk Baby is somehow distasteful, that it could sexualize young kids, encourage little girls to get pregnant sooner, etc.? Is your opinion of the doll consistent with your stance on breastfeeding, or different?

Deciding whether or not to breast-feed is a decision every new mother makes, but should little girls playing mommy be able to mimic breast-feeding, too?

One company, Berjuan Toys, certainly thinks so and plans to release its toy doll "The Breast Milk Baby" in the United States this spring.

The doll, marketed as "Bebe Gloton" in Europe in 2009, has dropped its gluttonous-sounding name for the U.S. release.

The dolls come with a breast-feeding halter top that activates a suckling response from the doll when placed in contact with the chest area. They also emit a cry when they need to be burped.

But will The Breast Milk Baby do well in America?

So far, opinions are mixed, namely over whether playing with the doll sexualizes young girls or encourages them to pursue motherhood above other aspirations later in life.

One parent says the doll might help his daughter identify with her mom as she breast-feeds a younger sibling, according to an ABC News video. The video also shows an interview with a psychiatrist who says he sees no harm in young girls using the doll and does not believe the toys will negatively affect normal development in girls.

In recent years, more institutions, including the World Health Organization, have recommended breast over bottle, especially for the first six months. Despite more than 70 percent of women in the United States giving breast-feeding a try, only 43 percent of mothers kept it up for the first six months of their children's lives, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In reality, breast-feeding may be a more realistic portrayal of motherhood for children.

Reflecting this sentiment, a company representative told ABC News the doll is intended to feed into girls' nurturing nature and teach them that breast-feeding is normal.

On the other hand, other parents think this "magic of motherhood," as the company advertises, is too much for young, impressionable girls.

 

[vrosej10]

I heard this story (text below) about a doll that mimics breastfeeding coming to the U.S. on the radio yesterday and wondered what my fellow Litizens would think since people polled seem to have extremely strong opinions on the doll. . Here's the original video.

What are your thoughts? Would you get this doll for a special child in your life, or prefer a doll that comes with a bottle, assuming they were the same price? Do you think The Breast Milk Baby is somehow distasteful, that it could sexualize young kids, encourage little girls to get pregnant sooner, etc.? Is your opinion of the doll consistent with your stance on breastfeeding, or different?

When you look at barbie, you have got to think this is an over-reaction in regard to the sexualisation of little girls. Frankly I would rather a little girl get a positive message about breastfeeding than 'you must be pretty' shit from barbie. There is still stigma attached to breastfeeding and it hasn't normalised yet in Western society and this is the manifestation of it. I personally was brought up with nursing mums and I always pretended to nurse my doll when I was little. I just never saw babies with bottles. I grew up to be a commited breastfeeder.

 

[fuckmeat]

I don't think it sexualises girls. I think it speaks to the inner pervert lurking deep within some repressed guys and their knee jerk reaction is to denounce it as some kind of paedophile's wet dream. If the girl was old enough to have breasts and to be sexually stimulated by the toy, then it would be inappropriate but that's unlikely to happen. This toy is clearly for very small girls and no more a sexualisation than the rest of the mini motherhood crap that little girls are given.

A good friend of mine has a two year old daughter. Her little girl has all the traditional girls toys. She's always dressed in pink or purple. At two years old, she has dollies, a stroller, bottles, diapers, kitchen appliances, brooms and dusters, a vacuum cleaner, you name it. Her mother is a housewife whose menfolk do nothing around the house, zero. So already this kid is getting very very strong messages that women are destined to be wives, mothers and unpaid drudges. My friend would be horrified if I said this and as I'm not a parent, I'm in no position to criticise her choices as a mother. But to me, that kind of traditionalist pigeon-holing of kids according to traditional gender stereotypes will have a far more negative impact on a girl in the future than a dolly that breastfeeds.

Kids aren't stupid. They know babies grow in mummies' tummies. They know mummies and daddies have to make a baby together. They know infants get bottle or breastfed. What they do not know is that in adulthood the breasts are a major erogenous zone and something that adults of both genders are sexually attracted to. It's the absence of that knowledge that makes the breastfeeding dolly an innocent toy. Only the adults making a song and dance about the doll and blustering about how it's corrupting young girls at the television within earshot of little ears is going to awaken little kids to the notion that any adult or rude connotation can be inferred on it.

 

[Nasty_Deeds]

Next, can make a doll for little boys that give head. Or maybe this one does that too? Little girls can pretend to breast feed their dolls quite well without the doll looking like it is giving head.

I can see the light coming on at Mattel now: Boss, I have a great new idea, lets make a Cock-Sucking Barbie!

 

[SweetErika]

Next, can make a doll for little boys that give head. Or maybe this one does that too? Little girls can pretend to breast feed their dolls quite well without the doll looking like it is giving head.

I can see the light coming on at Mattel now: Boss, I have a great new idea, lets make a Cock-Sucking Barbie!

So you view breastfeeding as a sexual act?

 

[Nasty_Deeds]

So you view breastfeeding as a sexual act?

It’s sarcasm. Children should not be discussed on this web site in any context. If you haven’t noticed, this web site is a magnet for deviants.

 

[SweetErika]

It’s sarcasm. Children should not be discussed on this web site in any context. If you haven’t noticed, this web site is a magnet for deviants.

We're discussing a doll and breastfeeding. That's not a violation of the rules. You're the only person talking about children in a sexual context.

If you don't like the topic, move on. There are plenty of others to choose from.

 

[Eilan]

I wouldn't buy this for my girls. If they want to nurse a baby doll, they can nurse one of the dolls (that they rarely play with, BTW) we have at home.

 

[NippleMuncher]

Why do kids need toys that play by themselves? Where's the fun in that? Why do we have to force our kids to grow up so fast, rather than let them be the kids that they are?

I'm not against the doll per se, it's not much different than the ones that eat and drink and crap themselves. The question is why must a child have such a thing? Kids already know 'the joys of motherhood', particularly if they've got younger siblings. As Eilan said, if they want to mimic breastfeeding, they can do it with a doll they already have, they don't need a "nursing" doll to fulfill the fantasy. And I do think that society will use this product as just one more way to mold little girls into "housewives", rather than educating them and allowing the individual to decide her own destiny.

Also, in this very intolerant age, what happens when the doll goes to school and your darling princess bares her chest to nurse the doll on the playground? Rather than it being viewed as something innocent kids do, it will be twisted into perversion and she'll be labeled a sex offender or some other such nonsense.

 

[SweetErika]

I don't think it sexualises girls. I think it speaks to the inner pervert lurking deep within some repressed guys and their knee jerk reaction is to denounce it as some kind of paedophile's wet dream. If the girl was old enough to have breasts and to be sexually stimulated by the toy, then it would be inappropriate but that's unlikely to happen. This toy is clearly for very small girls and no more a sexualisation than the rest of the mini motherhood crap that little girls are given.

A good friend of mine has a two year old daughter. Her little girl has all the traditional girls toys. She's always dressed in pink or purple. At two years old, she has dollies, a stroller, bottles, diapers, kitchen appliances, brooms and dusters, a vacuum cleaner, you name it. Her mother is a housewife whose menfolk do nothing around the house, zero. So already this kid is getting very very strong messages that women are destined to be wives, mothers and unpaid drudges. My friend would be horrified if I said this and as I'm not a parent, I'm in no position to criticise her choices as a mother. But to me, that kind of traditionalist pigeon-holing of kids according to traditional gender stereotypes will have a far more negative impact on a girl in the future than a dolly that breastfeeds.

Kids aren't stupid. They know babies grow in mummies' tummies. They know mummies and daddies have to make a baby together. They know infants get bottle or breastfed. What they do not know is that in adulthood the breasts are a major erogenous zone and something that adults of both genders are sexually attracted to. It's the absence of that knowledge that makes the breastfeeding dolly an innocent toy. Only the adults making a song and dance about the doll and blustering about how it's corrupting young girls at the television within earshot of little ears is going to awaken little kids to the notion that any adult or rude connotation can be inferred on it.

I completely agree.

We're pretty careful about giving our son balanced ideas and toys, even at this point. My husband and i share the household duties, and we're teaching the kidlet to help both of us (like he gets a huge sense of accomplishment out of throwing his own diaper away and "feeding" us). For the most part, his toys are gender-neutral. I'm not going to buy a breastfeeding doll for no reason because he already has a couple of dolls, but I wouldn't have a problem getting one if we had another child and I thought it'd be helpful.

 

[Vixandra]

I read through the article and watched the video, which I have to admit was just out there to me. I wasn't the baby-doll type as a kid (give me My Little Ponies and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles instead) but knew a few girls that were. I probably would have laughed hysterically at the "sucker doll" and moved on.

Not yet a parent, but I don't think I'd buy this $99 toy for my daughter when/if I have one. Probably won't buy her useless Barbie either though. The breast feeding doll isn't a sexualized toy but it doesn't take much to see some pedophile perverting it. NippleMuncher raises a good point with the playground scenario as well.

On a personal note- the doll looks kind of creepy. Like one of those dead children they used to pose for photographs back in the early 1900's only with glass eyes. Add in that http://thebreastmilkbaby.com/ claims that "God supports Breast Milk Baby" and the creep factor goes up. I believe breast feeding is important for health and bonding reasons for both mother and child but dumping in religious connotations makes my skin crawl just a bit.

 

[SweetErika]

Why do kids need toys that play by themselves? Where's the fun in that? Why do we have to force our kids to grow up so fast, rather than let them be the kids that they are?

I see your point, but I also distinctly remember being thrilled with my dolls that did stuff (cry, blink, "drink" a bottle) on their own as a little girl. I think it probably enhances the creative play experience for most kids.

I'm not against the doll per se, it's not much different than the ones that eat and drink and crap themselves. The question is why must a child have such a thing? Kids already know 'the joys of motherhood', particularly if they've got younger siblings. As Eilan said, if they want to mimic breastfeeding, they can do it with a doll they already have, they don't need a "nursing" doll to fulfill the fantasy. And I do think that society will use this product as just one more way to mold little girls into "housewives", rather than educating them and allowing the individual to decide her own destiny.

I think, from my perspective, it's better to teach kids that breastfeeding is the way babies naturally eat because it has so many benefits. We don't make a stink over dolls being fed bottles, so why does a breastfeeding doll have to mean something other than 'breastfeeding is healthy'?

Also, in this very intolerant age, what happens when the doll goes to school and your darling princess bares her chest to nurse the doll on the playground? Rather than it being viewed as something innocent kids do, it will be twisted into perversion and she'll be labeled a sex offender or some other such nonsense.

The doll doesn't require a bare chest, it comes with a halter that the child wears.

And to be fair, kids could lift up their shirts and pretend to breastfeed without the doll. If they see their mother or someone close to them nursing, that's probably more of an influence than any doll.

 

[SweetErika]

Not yet a parent, but I don't think I'd buy this $99 toy for my daughter when/if I have one. Probably won't buy her useless Barbie either though. The breast feeding doll isn't a sexualized toy but it doesn't take much to see some pedophile perverting it. NippleMuncher raises a good point with the playground scenario as well.

There are certainly limits, but I think kids usually know what they really like and it's not bad to cater to that to some extent. If my kid really loved Barbie for some reason or another, I'd probably get them a Barbie and have some age-appropriate conversations about how it's just a toy, rather than a representation of real women.

I don't know if Bratz dolls are still in, but that's one concept I can't stomach since it's a personality-based thing. Likewise, my kid(s) won't be playing violent video games or have realistic guns because those go against our values regarding violence and guns being very serious business.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand what the breastfeeding doll has to do with pedophilia. Could you, or someone else, explain your concerns on that point?

On a personal note- the doll looks kind of creepy. Like one of those dead children they used to pose for photographs back in the early 1900's only with glass eyes. Add in that http://thebreastmilkbaby.com/ claims that "God supports Breast Milk Baby" and the creep factor goes up. I believe breast feeding is important for health and bonding reasons for both mother and child but dumping in religious connotations makes my skin crawl just a bit.

They look like the more realistic dolls to me, but I totally get creepy toys. My mom got our son an animated Mickey Mouse for Christmas that totally creeps me out (so he stays at her house).

I'm not a fan of the religious angle, either, though I'm guessing it has something to do with the manufacturer being Spanish and religious people who are up in arms and very vocal about the concept. "God supports breastfeeding" or "The Breast Milk Baby is more similar to the real babies that God creates" would probably be better response, but oh well.

 

[unregistered]

 

[fire_breeze]

I don't think it sexualises the act at all. After all, it's completely natural. I am curious whether or not it gives the girl a false idea about what breastfeeding is about. Granted, I'm not a parent, so I can't give a solid answer. Yes, it's play. Yes, children grows into adults who'll end up distinguishing play and reality. But with a realistic doll with realistic movements? I do begin to wonder. Does it plant subconscious seeds - even if they are told this is play? And I also am not sure if I'm a fan that it enforces gender roles as opposed to allowing the girl to grow up and make her decision what she wants to be a Mum or not.

Just some thoughts.

 

[Luna_Bella]

I really don't see any connection to pedophilia either, SweetErika. I do, however, think this toy is a huge waste of money. When my second daughter was born and I was nursing her, it was a regular occurence for my oldest daughter (2 years old at the time) to nurse her stuffed animal or baby doll at the same time. No halter or suckling baby required, just her beautiful imagination. Sometimes she would just sit and nurse her doll/stuffed animal and flip through the pages in a book...these were lovely moments.

I am in agreeance with this, our daughter never needed a special doll to mimic nursing (which was frequent after the birth of our son) not to say I wouldn't spend that kind of money on a doll since they seem to be, in our house, toys that aren't that popular after a few weeks of purchase.

as for bratz dolls they are also a no-no in our house, we find them inappropriate. We have a few barbies (which were given as presents) but they aren't very popular( i haven't seen one outside the toy box for several months),

our kids are more the outdoorsy style, spending their summers on their bicycles and the winters on their sleds, and if they are inside they'd rather pick up a puzzle, board game or a coloring book & crayons


but to come back to the nursing doll, I wouldn't judge someone who would buy it for their child, if it is something that they believe in and that the investment will be worth it for their child, why not?

 

[Eilan]

as for bratz dolls they are also a no-no in our house, we find them inappropriate. We have a few barbies (which were given as presents) but they aren't very popular( i haven't seen one outside the toy box for several months)

The few Barbies my girls have received have ended up naked and headless within an hour of being removed from the packaging.

 

[Bottomlover]

This is my favorite Barbie. She is in an underwater cavern called Dos Ojos in the Yucatan and is visited by thousands of scuba divers every year.

Kids like toys that let them use their imaginations. I don't think the breastfeeding baby doll is something that the world needs, but if you think your kid has to have it, go for it. As others have said, any old doll, or even a paper bag with a face drawn on it and stuffed with dryer lint can be a little girl's baby.

I don't know that a doll can shape a child's view of gender roles. Children are smarter than we think, and are more acutely tuned in to what we do rather than a "message" a toy sends or what we tell them. They watch how we treat each other, and that is their reality.

I am opposed to toy guns, because they are serious business and I choose to teach my children responsible gun handling when they are ready for it, but I'm not really sure that even toy guns are a problem. I grew up with cowboys on TV and lots of toy guns, and I still managed to become a responsible gun owner and sportsman, as did my siblings.

Good stuff in this thread...

 

[bailadora]

I sure as hell wouldn't pay $99.00 for a doll, that's for sure.

When my youngest was born and I was attempting to nurse, my eldest daughter did mimic breastfeeding her dolls. We'd sit there, side by side on the couch with a blanket over our shoulders. My husband was kind of freaked, but I told him to get over it as nursing is a completely natural thing. When I switched to the bottle, so did her dollies.

As an aside, while my eldest daughter is totally girly-girl, my youngest is just as likely to play with her brother's old Tonka trucks, Thomas the Train RR set, and Matchbox cars as she is the dolls, dishes and whatnot.

Ericka and Luna - I'm with you on the Bratz dolls being verboten in my house (as is "Play" makeup - she's too young for that). My eldest was not pleased when a kit got confiscated at Christmas.

 

[SweetErika]

Ericka and Luna - I'm with you on the Bratz dolls being verboten in my house (as is "Play" makeup - she's too young for that). My eldest was not pleased when a kit got confiscated at Christmas.

Apart from Halloween and other special events, I was only allowed to play dress-up at home with makeup. Apart from that, until I was old enough, we compromised with flavored and very lightly colored lipgloss, similar nearly invisible stuff, my own age-appropriate perfume (or just a dab of my mom's on rare occasion). My mom took me to the makeup counter for a lesson on applying the right stuff for my age bracket at each stage, and the "less is more" concept has pretty much stuck with me ever since.

 

[bailadora]

Apart from Halloween and other special events, I was only allowed to play dress-up at home with makeup. Apart from that, until I was old enough, we compromised with flavored and very lightly colored lipgloss, similar nearly invisible stuff, my own age-appropriate perfume (or just a dab of my mom's on rare occasion). My mom took me to the makeup counter for a lesson on applying the right stuff for my age bracket at each stage, and the "less is more" concept has pretty much stuck with me ever since.

Aside from recital, she is allowed to use Chapstick, but that's about it at this stage of the game. She's only 9 and my own personal opinion is that's too young for make up - even of the "play" variety.

That said, I've let her know that in a few of years, she'll be allowed to wear lightly colored lipgloss on special occasions. From there, we'll add products in stages, similar to what my mom did with me (and from the sound of it, like your mom did with you).

As for perfume, she doesn't have any of her own just yet, but does have some lightly scented lotions. Your comment reminded me of the first bottle of perfume my mother ever bought me - Ramillete de Novia (Bride's Bouquet). It's a very, very light floral scent and at age 12, I thought I'd really hit the big time.

 

[infinity706]

Personally, I wouldn't mind if women never grew up with makeup/perfume. I don't really mind it so much, but it should be a lot more optional, not a requirement of being an attractive woman. It's just as bad as the idea of not being good enough without titties bigger than her head and a breakable figure.

I guess on a related topic, though, there's a gigantic contraversy about a mother painting her son's nails neon pink in a magazine. Obviously, now, he's destined to be gay.

 

[bailadora]

Personally, I wouldn't mind if women never grew up with makeup/perfume. I don't really mind it so much, but it should be a lot more optional, not a requirement of being an attractive woman. It's just as bad as the idea of not being good enough without titties bigger than her head and a breakable figure.

I dunno. I don't think makeup is necessarily a requirement of being attractive. Used in the correct manner, I see it as a way of subtly highlighting a woman's best facial features. To me, it's similar to choosing clothing that best suits my figure.

Actually, I'm really liking the current trend of "barely there" makeup. It's just enough to hide the spots, and yet still look totally natural and effortless.

 

[qrayze]

As far as the doll...I wouldn't pay $99 for a doll even if it could successfully teach my 3-yr-old quantum physics. That's too much for a toy, even an educational one, especially when it doesn't actually teach proper breastfeeding. When she becomes a mother, she'll have to learn it. If all it does is mimic, then a child can use a normal doll for that.

I love make-up. I view it as a form of art and a way of expressing one's self. (girl or guy) My daughter watches me put on make-up all the time, so since she likes to mimic me, I gave her some cheap applicators that I had that she can play with without any product for them. It's a great thing for me because then she doesn't try to get into my stash. (I gave her the brushes and sponges after she destroyed about $45 worth of product.)

I'm not sure how I feel about her useing play make-up when she's a little older apart from wondering if it would harm her skin from being so cheap. I guess I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

As far as the mom who paints her son's toenails pink...she's spending quality time with her son doing something that he enjoys doing. How many parents really do that with their kids? Putting your son in a peewee football league isn't going to guarantee that he turns out straight any more than painting his toenails pink is going to make him gay. Personally, I believe that children are asexual. It just so happens that my daughter is a girly girl and loves pink and purple and princesses, so everything I get her is along those lines. Lol, to get her to behave at the dentist, all I had to say was that he was going to make her teeth pretty! She was a perfect angel the whole time.

 

[SweetErika]

Aside from recital, she is allowed to use Chapstick, but that's about it at this stage of the game. She's only 9 and my own personal opinion is that's too young for make up - even of the "play" variety.

Yeah, at that age, I my mom was getting me Bonnie Belle "lipstick," which is pretty much exactly like Chapstick in different flavors and colors (though IIRC, it doesn't color the lips noticeably).

I love make-up. I view it as a form of art and a way of expressing one's self. (girl or guy) My daughter watches me put on make-up all the time, so since she likes to mimic me, I gave her some cheap applicators that I had that she can play with without any product for them. It's a great thing for me because then she doesn't try to get into my stash. (I gave her the brushes and sponges after she destroyed about $45 worth of product.)

I'm not sure how I feel about her useing play make-up when she's a little older apart from wondering if it would harm her skin from being so cheap. I guess I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

As far as the mom who paints her son's toenails pink...she's spending quality time with her son doing something that he enjoys doing. How many parents really do that with their kids? Putting your son in a peewee football league isn't going to guarantee that he turns out straight any more than painting his toenails pink is going to make him gay. Personally, I believe that children are asexual. It just so happens that my daughter is a girly girl and loves pink and purple and princesses, so everything I get her is along those lines. Lol, to get her to behave at the dentist, all I had to say was that he was going to make her teeth pretty! She was a perfect angel the whole time.

See, I remember putting on makeup as purely creative play, not in an attempt to seem older. So, I think it really depends on the kid and kids can play with makeup and such at home without it meaning anything other than they're having fun and expressing themselves.

I agree it's ridiculous to pigeonhole and label kids. And I hate how just about everything is either "girl" or "boy" these days. I've really tried to get gender-neutral stuff when I can (partly because I don't want to push gender roles on our son, and also because I'd like to reuse stuff if we have a girl), but it's extremely difficult to find wearables in neutral colors and patterns. I will say that I greatly appreciate the way my parents raised me to enjoy a wide variety of activities. I had the Barbie Dream House and makeup, but I also had Tonka trucks and loved to get dirty and build stuff. I hope we can present our kid(s) with balanced views, and if our son wants to paint his toenails or play with makeup at home, that's fine with both of us.