Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

A biologist on BF

1 view
Skip to first unread message

A&G&K

unread,
May 8, 2003, 8:42:33 PM5/8/03
to
Some of you know that I have spent a good deal of my life pondering
biological science questions and spent a great deal of time (and money)
getting some qualifications in the field (albeit in botany / ecology rather
than zoology).
But I was reading over some of my old undergraduate notes in zoology and
found the following:

"All mammals share three characteristics not found in other animals: 3
middle ear bones; hair; and the production of milk by mammary glands.
Mammals feed their newborn young with milk, a substance rich in fats and
protein that is produced by modified sweat glands called mammary glands.
These glands are usually located on the ventral surface of females along
paths
that run from the chest region to the groin. They vary in number from two
(one right, one left, as in humans) to a dozen or more."

Which got me thinking about why so many people think that human babies
should be fed from bottles. Breastfeeding our young is one of the three
main features that links us with other mammals - generally considered to be
animals of the "highest order".
It puzzles me why some of my friends can go all gooey when they see puppies
kittens, calves, foals etc suckling at their mother's breast but find that
they
need to leave the room when I'm feeding DD.

Amanda


elizabeth emerald

unread,
May 8, 2003, 8:54:12 PM5/8/03
to
here, here!
--
elizabeth (in australia)
DS - born 20-aug-02

"A&G&K" <xgrxajwr...@xozemailx.com.au> wrote in message
news:OWCua.45$iB1....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...

Beth

unread,
May 8, 2003, 9:27:34 PM5/8/03
to

A&G&K <xgrxajwr...@xozemailx.com.au> wrote in message
news:OWCua.45$iB1....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
.
> These glands are usually located on the ventral surface of females along
> paths
> that run from the chest region to the groin. They vary in number from two
> (one right, one left, as in humans) to a dozen or more."

Hey--I am human and have three!

Well, one's a totally useless and tiny nipple to the right of my belly
button.

--
Beth
John & Theodor's mother
b.&d. 12/25/99 & b. 12/3/02


A&G&K

unread,
May 8, 2003, 9:33:53 PM5/8/03
to
He he - no accounting for variations within a species :)
I can remember tutoring taxonomy classes at uni, and a student would come up
to me with a flower they were trying to key-out and say "the book says it
should have five petals but it has six ... which do I use, five or six?"
... and the reply is always - "in taxonomy, the flower is always right".
So you have three nipples - well "the human is always right" :)
Amanda

"Beth" <mick...@chibardun.net> wrote in message
news:JsDua.1022$Ut6....@reggie.win.bright.net...

zeldabee

unread,
May 9, 2003, 4:29:43 PM5/9/03
to
"A&G&K" <xgrxajwr...@xozemailx.com.au> wrote:

> It puzzles me why some of my friends can go all gooey when they see
> puppies kittens, calves, foals etc suckling at their mother's breast but
> find that they
> need to leave the room when I'm feeding DD.

Actually, I've always found the processes of pregnancy, birth, and
lactation to be a little squicky. Now I'm 22 weeks pregnant (2nd pregnancy,
had a late m/c about 10 years ago). I am excited about having the
baby...and I plan to hopefully have a non/low-intervention birth, and to
BF, because I really feel that's the best way to do it. (Last night I had a
really ooogie BF dream.)

I know I'll get over it. It's one of those things, like, thinking too much
about the process of eating, or something. Think about it hard enough, and
it can seem pretty ooogie, too.

--
z e l d a b e e @ p a n i x . c o m http://NewsReader.Com/

cshardie

unread,
May 9, 2003, 8:35:53 PM5/9/03
to
I think a lot of it is modesty issues. Human breasts are associated with
sex in our culture. When you add a baby to that, some people get a
little weirded out.

I do think that a lot of the time people see a woman breastfeeding and
abruptly turn away, it's because they don't want to be seen as staring,
not because they're necessarily grossed out.

--
Suzanne

Chotii

unread,
May 9, 2003, 10:04:59 PM5/9/03
to

--
Queen of DIamonds, RSFC deck of playing cards.
"cshardie" <csha...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:JPXua.61834$8e7.2...@twister.austin.rr.com...

Or because, and I can't be sure this is true at all, they have an
involuntary sexual response to the sight, and don't WANT to be having such a
response, and thus turn away so they can control themselves/remove the
visual stimulus/not embarrass themselves of the woman. It's possible,
particularly I would think for some men who find lactation arousing.

--angela


elizabeth emerald

unread,
May 10, 2003, 8:02:44 AM5/10/03
to

"elizabeth emerald" <nospam...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b9eu8j$j07kr$1...@ID-140968.news.dfncis.de...
> here, here!
> --

oh and i should add that my MIL breeds champion show dogs. she assists them
to breed (that's yuk to me), helps them give birth, the mother & babies
sleep in her room until the babies are sold. FIL commented how cute it was
when the babies latch on in the middle of the night. he said you hear slurp,
slurp, slurp, burp. (yep, sounds very adorable).
and then when i discreetly BF in their loungeroom, they all run away.
hmmm......??????

A&G&K

unread,
May 10, 2003, 9:22:46 PM5/10/03
to

"elizabeth emerald" <nospam...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b9ipq1$ji9tm$1...@ID-140968.news.dfncis.de...
Its sooo wierd isn't it - how in puppies its cute, but in humans its
"embarrassing" :)
(... and ditto the yuk to the helping dogs breed ... the dogs at my inlaws
farm seem to get along just fine without help ... and even if that means
breaking a chain and jumping some fences to get together :)
Amanda

A&G&K

unread,
May 10, 2003, 9:27:26 PM5/10/03
to

"zeldabee" <zeld...@apollo.geese.com> wrote in message
news:20030509162943.426$1...@newsreader.com...

Not "oogie" to me:) I think BF is the one of the most natural and beautiful
functions a woman's body can perform ....
I guess its what you are used to. Nature is both fascinating and beautiful
to me and that includes birth, death, predator- prey relationships, and
strange little critters that lots of people get "oogie" over looking at them
(e.g. mangrove worms :)

Good luck with this pg and I hope you settle into a great BF relationship
with your Bub
Cheers
Amanda


zeldabee

unread,
May 11, 2003, 10:04:05 AM5/11/03
to
"A&G&K" <xgrxajwr...@xozemailx.com.au> wrote:
> "zeldabee" <zeld...@apollo.geese.com> wrote...
[...]

> >
> > Actually, I've always found the processes of pregnancy, birth, and
> > lactation to be a little squicky.
> > [...] I plan to hopefully have a non/low-intervention birth, and

> > to BF, because I really feel that's the best way to do it. (Last night
> > I had a really ooogie BF dream.)
> >
> > I know I'll get over it. It's one of those things, like, thinking too
> > much about the process of eating, or something. Think about it hard
> > enough, and it can seem pretty ooogie, too.
>
> Not "oogie" to me:)

Of course not, you're a biologist, right?

> I think BF is the one of the most natural and
> beautiful functions a woman's body can perform ....
> I guess its what you are used to. Nature is both fascinating and
> beautiful to me and that includes birth, death, predator- prey
> relationships, and strange little critters that lots of people get
> "oogie" over looking at them (e.g. mangrove worms :)

Sure, it's facinating, in a way, and also ooogie at the same time. I
suppose it depends partly on how sensitive one is to "squishy" things in
general...I've got an overactive imagination, and am a little obsessive.
I'm more comfortable with computers, problem-solving, numbers.
(Predator-prey relationships are always interesting--game theory, and all
that--but just not the squishier aspects of them, to me anyway.)

> Good luck with this pg and I hope you settle into a great BF relationship
> with your Bub

Thanks, I hope so, and I think I will. I am, after all, very adaptable. I
also suspect that I'll be as goo-goo as the next mommy. :o)

elizabeth emerald

unread,
May 12, 2003, 8:55:01 AM5/12/03
to

"A&G&K" <xgrxajwr...@xozemailx.com.au> wrote in message
news:VGhva.252$S92....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...

yeah. my step-brother is a horse trainer. they "help" the horses to breed as
well. like all these common animals would be extinct without some human
intervention. i don't think so! well, i know why they do it, to make sure
the female gets pregnant first go & they don't waste time/money. but ewwwww!
it's a private moment, people!

elizabeth emerald

unread,
May 12, 2003, 8:58:55 AM5/12/03
to

"zeldabee" <zeld...@apollo.geese.com> wrote in message
news:20030511100405.077$y...@newsreader.com...

FWIW, before DS was born, i always planned to breastfeed as i just felt it
was the right thing for both of us, but i thought i'd feel a bit strange &
creeped out by having a baby feed from my breast. but in reality, it was
nothing like that & it was/is a lovely natural thing. i was pleasantly
surprised. of course YMMV.

Chotii

unread,
May 12, 2003, 10:35:19 AM5/12/03
to
> "A&G&K" <xgrxajwr...@xozemailx.com.au> wrote in message
> news:VGhva.252$S92....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> >
> > "elizabeth emerald" <nospam...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

> > Its sooo wierd isn't it - how in puppies its cute, but in humans its


> > "embarrassing" :)
> > (... and ditto the yuk to the helping dogs breed ... the dogs at my
inlaws
> > farm seem to get along just fine without help ... and even if that
means
> > breaking a chain and jumping some fences to get together :)
>
> yeah. my step-brother is a horse trainer. they "help" the horses to breed
as
> well. like all these common animals would be extinct without some human
> intervention. i don't think so! well, i know why they do it, to make sure
> the female gets pregnant first go & they don't waste time/money. but
ewwwww!
> it's a private moment, people!

Except you fail to take into consideration that some of these horses are
valued at tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. In the case of some
individual horses, such as thoroughbreds, they may be worth millions of
dollars. A mare may bite, or she may kick, breaking a stallion's leg or so
hurting him that he never wants to breed a mare again. Or the stallion may
lose his balance rearing up, or if the mare moves, and again, injure
himself. Of course the owners and handlers go so far as to put the mare in
stanchions, tail wrapped, sometimes even hobbled. The stallion is led up,
helped to mount straight the first time, and yeah, I know it's all real
clinical.

As for dogs, some of the breeds have such ungainly conformation now - the
Pekinese who won the Crufts dog show on Sunday didn't look like he could
have found a bitch's vulva for all the hair he had on him, if he could even
have mounted her, or not just slid right off all the hai - and some other
breeds are at least as badly off. English bulldogs. Dachounds. You get the
picture. There's less risk of injury to the mail by the female, but I
suppose some bitches might try to bite, especially a virgin bitch, or one
who had been treated badly in a previous mating.

First time I ever saw my mare mate, loose in a pasture with a very young
Arab stallion, I thought the 20-minute courtship was beautiful. Imagine my
surprise the next time my mare was covered, this time by a registered
quarter-horse stud. She was tied, and hobbled, and the stud led up to cover
her briefly, and then led away again. It was jarringly sterile.

--angela
Queen of Diamonds, RSFC deck of playing cards.


Mary Gordon

unread,
May 12, 2003, 11:25:15 AM5/12/03
to
If you think about sex itself and whats involved, it's even oogier.

Mary G.

E

unread,
May 12, 2003, 2:02:13 PM5/12/03
to

"Beth" <mick...@chibardun.net> wrote in message
news:JsDua.1022$Ut6....@reggie.win.bright.net...
>
(newbie here :) )
I have three also. My extra one is right where the underwire from my bra
hits and can be very uncomfortable! It is mostly useless - no sensitivity
for DH to play with :) - but it did leak when I was bf'ing my first two.
when my let down reflex set in, I would have to find 3 fingers to try to
stop everything up :)
Edith
due 5/9, STILL WAITING


zeldabee

unread,
May 12, 2003, 2:04:04 PM5/12/03
to
"elizabeth emerald" <nospam...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "zeldabee" <zeld...@apollo.geese.com> wrote...
[breastfeeding is ooogie]

> > I also suspect that I'll be as goo-goo as the next mommy. :o)
>
> FWIW, before DS was born, i always planned to breastfeed as i just felt
> it was the right thing for both of us, but i thought i'd feel a bit
> strange & creeped out by having a baby feed from my breast. but in
> reality, it was nothing like that & it was/is a lovely natural thing. i
> was pleasantly surprised. of course YMMV.

For me, the reasons in favor of BF'ing vastly outnumber reasons for not
doing so, so it's not a difficult decision for me to make. The only worry I
have is, *not* that I'll be grossed-out by BF'ing, but rather that I'll
have terrible problems doing it--that it'll be a painful ordeal. I've read
about so many of the problems that can come up, and I hope I don't have too
hard a time adjusting. I *so* don't want to end up giving my baby some
inferior breastmilk substitute...that would just seem so stupid.

zeldabee

unread,
May 12, 2003, 2:04:19 PM5/12/03
to
Mary_...@tvo.org (Mary Gordon) wrote:
> If you think about sex itself and whats involved, it's even oogier.

Most bodily functions are. Eating, shitting, having sex, giving birth.
We're all just walking sacks of fluids. Still, one soldiers on. ;o)

Beth

unread,
May 12, 2003, 9:56:59 PM5/12/03
to

E <eno...@suffolk.lib.ny.us> wrote in message
news:FkRva.1150$hX1...@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...

> but it did leak when I was bf'ing my first two.
> when my let down reflex set in, I would have to find 3 fingers to try to
> stop everything up :)

Whoa! Too cool! You have an extra *breast*! I just have an extra nip,
which is as useful as a mole.

Hope you have a good birth. Break a leg :-)

Beth


A&G&K

unread,
May 13, 2003, 5:28:41 AM5/13/03
to

"Chotii" <res0...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:HiOva.547674$up3....@post-02.news.easynews.com...
Hmmm ... yet more reasons for me to love bitzers ... nothing like survival
of the fittest is there :P
Amanda


A&G&K

unread,
May 13, 2003, 5:35:28 AM5/13/03
to
>
> For me, the reasons in favor of BF'ing vastly outnumber reasons for not
> doing so, so it's not a difficult decision for me to make. The only worry
I
> have is, *not* that I'll be grossed-out by BF'ing, but rather that I'll
> have terrible problems doing it--that it'll be a painful ordeal. I've read
> about so many of the problems that can come up, and I hope I don't have
too
> hard a time adjusting. I *so* don't want to end up giving my baby some
> inferior breastmilk substitute...that would just seem so stupid.
>
> --
> z e l d a b e e @ p a n i x . c o m http://NewsReader.Com/

You've come to the right place to get lots of great info and support.
Hopefully you and your bub will settle into the wonderful, powerful
experience that is BF.
Amanda


cshardie

unread,
May 13, 2003, 9:07:52 AM5/13/03
to
A&G&K wrote:
> Hmmm ... yet more reasons for me to love bitzers ... nothing like survival
> of the fittest is there :P

It's still survival of the fittest... just not by "natural" selection ;)

--
Suzanne

E

unread,
May 13, 2003, 9:49:05 AM5/13/03
to

"Beth" <mick...@chibardun.net> wrote in message
news:%rYva.1163$Ut6....@reggie.win.bright.net...


no, not an extra breast, though I guess there must be some breast tissue
there... and it's barely an extra nipple either - very small. it's just
enough to be annoying.


A&G&K

unread,
May 14, 2003, 1:11:12 AM5/14/03
to

"cshardie" <csha...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:I66wa.10882$Sc.2...@twister.austin.rr.com...
Hmmm don't know about that ... ability to breed is pretty much right up
there at the top of the 'survival of the species - things to do' list. I
guess it depends on what is being "bred". ... but then again humans are
pretty good at meddling with nature on a grand scale if you take into
account GMOs.

Actually, one of the emerging problems with modern crops is that they have
almost all been bred for traits desired by humans and not necessesarily
selected by nature. If they lose their wild cousins then the genetic
material available for selecting any future desired characteristic (e.g.
disease resistance) may not be readily available....
Its all rather fascinating to me but I realise that I am coming dangerously
close to boring you all with plant stories :) Just don't get me started on
endangered Australian flora ; )

Cheers
Amanda


A&G&K

unread,
May 14, 2003, 8:24:25 PM5/14/03
to

"cshardie" <csha...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:esqwa.14018$Sc.4...@twister.austin.rr.com...

> A&G&K wrote:
> >>It's still survival of the fittest... just not by "natural" selection ;)
> >>
> >>--
> >>Suzanne
> >
> > Hmmm don't know about that ... ability to breed is pretty much right up
> > there at the top of the 'survival of the species - things to do' list.
I
> > guess it depends on what is being "bred".
>
> Oh, yeah. As soon as natural selection takes over again, they may not be
> the fittest any more.
>
> Don't worry about boring me. I usually have to be shut up on this topic ;)
>
> --
> Suzanne

Ohhh a fellow enthusiast :)
Don't you just love biological science!!
Cheers
Amanda

0 new messages