A proposed terminology change in the U.K. has stirred up conversation in the U.S. Should all parents be included in the art of feeding babies?
by Mauve Maude
February 17, 2021
It should probably be established right up front that they mostly already are. Though mamas certainly have a bit of a head start, fathers have already been allowed to feed babies for decades and have enjoyed much success. It turns out people who aren’t women are still perfectly capable of making sure a baby doesn’t starve.
But a recent proposal in the United Kingdom’s medical community has raised question, among some, over whether men or other parental units should be included in the feeding process. The question is not over their actual inclusion, of physically being allowed to feed babies, as able. The question is over terminology, in regards to breastfeeding.
What is breastfeeding?
Before discussion, for those not familiar with breastfeeding, some context: it should also be pointed out that mothers haven’t always been able to simply put a breast in a baby’s mouth and feed them. Though full-term, healthily developed newborns have practiced nursing instincts in the womb, every newborn is an inexperienced eater. Some, born pre-term, or with developmental issues, or in multiples, have added challenges. First-time mothers, or any mothers who haven’t nursed a baby previously, are also inexperienced nursers. Usually, even in the best-case scenarios, breastfeeding is a relationship-building activity that takes some time for all involved parties to learn, usually at least a couple of weeks.
Throughout history, mother-baby nursing relationships that didn’t develop in time have needed fairly immediate help, in order to prevent babies from dehydrating or starving. (Newborns also need their digestive and excretory systems flushed of meconium and bilirubin–basically leftovers from their body processes in utero that become toxic if not removed–by eating.) Throughout much of history postpartum mothers had a high likelihood of not even surviving. And many who did have decided, for whatever reasons, simply not to nurse their infants themselves.
Feeding assistance has always been provided by any combination of midwives, wet nurses, artificial feeding methods, breast pumps, and more recently, milk banks and lactation consultants. And the modern medical community continues to recommend human milk from the breast as the most nutritious and health-beneficial food for human babies, as it carries essential immunity-boosters as well as nutrition. Breastfeeding also benefits the health of nursing parents, and obviously promotes bonding. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends breastfeeding for at least the first year of life.
Breastfeeding is a relationship-building activity that takes time to learn.
The terminology change in question is over reference to the breast, when the nursing parent does not identify as a woman.
In reading some social media discussions of the “issue” (even recently brought up by Senator Ted Cruz), I’ve already witnessed some continued confusion over who’s in question here. It seems that, just like in previous discussions of things like inclusive sanitary napkin wrappers, many people still focus only on transgender women when they hear about transgender issues, with which they’re not familiar. Because of that focus tendency, there seems to be an idea that transgender women (who don’t menstruate, birth children, or breastfeed) are complaining about sanitary napkin packaging and breastfeeding references for the purpose of their own inclusion. So, to clarify, that is not the case. This discussion is about transgender men or non-binary parents, who can and do menstruate, birth children, or breastfeed, because they have the required female anatomy. They may not identify as women, but if we’re talking about female bodies and female body processes, they absolutely have a say in the matter if they want it. If we’re talking about womanhood, there may be some other things we’ll want to consider about women (more on that later).
In the U.K., it’s been proposed that the terms “breastfeeding” and “breastmilk” be procedurally changed to “chestfeeding”, “chestmilk”, or “human milk” (though, technically, breastmilk has always been referred to as human milk, which it is, without controversy). The point of these changes would be basically related to bedside manner. The idea is that medical and lactation professionals, working inside or outside of hospitals, should be sensitive to the situations of their patients or clients. Lactation professionals, such as IBCLC (International Board Certified Lactation Consultants), can see clients in hospital, in clinics after hospital release, or at any time in their clients’ own homes. Sensitivity to a patient or client’s situation is an essential piece of providing good care to any patient or client. While some people, due to a lack of resources, find themselves having to tolerate insensitive medical professionals, cultivating that sensitivity is still considered to be good practice. It’s important to good doctors and lactation consultants.
Sensitivity to a patient or client’s situation is an essential piece of providing good care to any patient or client.
I can attest to this personally. After birthing and breastfeeding my children into their second years, with some critical first-timer issues ironed out by lactation professionals, I decided to become an IBCLC myself. I worked as a breastfeeding educator in a maternity and nursing boutique for several years, and entered a rigorous IBCLC program that included a 300-hour internship. I ultimately did not complete the program, despite completing most of my internship. But from personal and on-the-job experience, I can assure you: sensitivity to clients in this immensely special time of their lives is of the utmost importance.
I also personally know transgender men and non-binary people who could birth or have birthed children and would want to feed them in the healthiest way possible, just like any other parent. So as anyone might imagine, medical and lactation professionals are already working with these parents, and see a need or at least a good reason to change their practice terminology, at least when dealing with these particular families. (But you don’t have to imagine it, because they are telling us.)
This question, by no means, indicates that the world population at large now has to stop saying “breastmilk” or “breastfeeding”. And people who haven’t been acquainted, or refuse to be acquainted, with transgender or non-binary people, most certainly won’t. But, like with anything else, the reason terminology is being discussed, is because it applies, whether we acknowledge it or not.
So, let’s talk about breasts and chests.
Breasts!
In one of my favorite movies, Sissy Spacek, dressing into a revealing, handmade prom gown, tells her ultra-religious mother, portrayed by Piper Laurie, that her “dirty pillows” are actually called breasts, and that every woman has them. And it’s so true that every woman is born with breasts. But so is every man.
Breast tissue is found on the chest of every born human being. Both males and females can contract breast cancer in their existing tissue. The inherent difference between male breasts and female breasts–the reason females can lactate–is the mammary gland. This essential gland is also the reason human beings, homo sapiens male and female, are classified as mammals. In female mammals only, mammary glands develop, and by pregnancy and delivery, they’re activated by a special set of hormones, allowing females to nurse their young. Identity as a woman is not required, and neither is a large breast size–just the glands and the hormones. The biological process is usually fairly simple.
Breast tissue is found on the chest of every born human being.
The social differences between male breasts and female breasts, however, are much more complicated. As usual, here’s where we run into controversy.
The reasons the female breast has been (figuratively) attached to women, babies, motherhood, and femininity are quite obvious, even if they don’t necessarily apply to gender non-conforming female people. The level to which the female breast has been sexualized doesn’t make as much sense, but it does make some. Because the natural function of the female breast is breastfeeding exactly, female breasts that appear “healthy” are an evolutionary reproductive (a.k.a. sexual) attraction. In addition, the sensitivity of the female nipple serves a dual function related to both breastfeeding and the sexual stimulation that may eventually lead to breastfeeding–and it knows how to handle each separate context. It’s perfectly understandable why the whole world loves the female breast; they’re quite amazing.
Less understandable though, are a couple of issues. Why do we not acknowledge, or try to eliminate the reality, that men also have breasts? Why is a man’s breast a chest, and a woman’s chest a breast, when actually everybody has both and they’re not equivalents? (The breast is only one part of the chest, no matter whose chest it’s on, or not on.) Considering that the function of the human breast and nipple in breastfeeding are not remotely sexual, why is breastfeeding in front of anybody but one’s immediate family considered to be indecent, or embarrassing, a social stigma? Why is it embarrassing for a man’s breasts to enlarge with age or weight gain, or for a man to contract breast cancer? Why, when everybody loves and reveres the breast, for all the amazing things it does–is it considered a source of shame and weakness? And why are shame and weakness so inordinately heaped on women?
It seems that sexism is afoot.
In an earlier article I referenced above, I wrote about how anti-trans sentiment exposes sexist attitudes. Thinking about this subject, I’ve found myself more dismayed than surprised that sexist attitudes can pop up in pro-trans inclusion too. Why is the word “breast” something a man or non-binary person would even want to distance themselves from?
Why is the breast considered a source of shame and weakness?
The short answer is: our society, from which we all came. But merely by living their lives in the open (I don’t mean to imply that’s a small feat), transgender and non-binary people are slowly changing our understanding of sex and gender, and this is one more step. Not that that’s their job.
Most of the pushback we see and hear against anything trans-related is based on our society’s binary methods of labeling sex and gender, in which people are strictly male or female (this actually isn’t anatomically or chromosomally true), strictly men or women (though we all disagree on who gets to define what men and women are), and that sex equals gender. A picture in one’s mind can very easily label everybody as one or the other, and gender as sex-based, and certain sexes and genders as better or worse than others–but outside of one’s mind, we have living evidence to the contrary, and always have, whether or not they ever came to light.
And actually, there is a point to be made here that has everything to do with cisgender women: females who identify as women, women who learned and fit the social roles assigned to them by the vaginas they came with. Until it came time to breastfeed. Is breastfeeding a legitimate measure of womanhood? Is breastfeeding only for “real women“? If a woman bears a child, and either can’t or won’t breastfeed her child, is she less of a woman? Does womanhood not belong to her? What about women who can’t or won’t have children in the first place? Are they not real women either? What about women who’ve stopped having periods? No longer women? Maybe, just maybe, defining womanhood by periods, pregnancy, and breastfeeding are a problem.
Our mammalian ability to nurse our children is not a function of gender, of womanhood. Our female ability to birth and nurse children is a function of sex. Our abilities do not define us as people. And breasts, we all have, until we don’t.
In(con)clusion
But alas, let us not lose sight of where this issue originated.
Contrary to inflammatory tweets from bored Senators pontificating about Orwell, while at work, on the Senate floor–this is about medical practice. This isn’t about political correctness, it’s not about the erasure of womanhood (not by trans people anyway; by other women, maybe), and it’s not even about breastfeeding. This is just about professionals paying kindness and respect to their patients, and making them comfortable so they can take care of their health. It really shouldn’t concern you or me, because it has nothing to do with us. We define ourselves by who we are. We are not defined by how another person lives their life.
But I will say this to trans and non-binary parents. First of all: congratulations! Secondly, do call a lactation consultant as soon as you need one. And finally . . . yeah, that’s all I’ve got.
What do you think? I would like to hear from you, but you won’t find the typical Comments section here. If you have given the issue some thought or have an experience to share, please enter it here, or send your response to Maude@mauvereport.com. I would like to share viewpoints from all sides.