Anti Militant Lactivism arguments are often countered with statements like this.....
"For premature infants breast milk can be life saving"
Quite possibly, but doesn't that rather prove the Anti Militant lactivist's point ?
Because the statement about premature babies supports "Breast is best....for some of the babies...some of the time...kind of depends on the circs"
Which is a bit different from the big stick known as "Breast is Best" (fullstop) used to wallop all of the mothers, of all of the babies, all of the time.
If pro breastfeeding activists wish to continue to lose credibility by making unsubstantiated overstatements then that is up to them. But they should not then go on to whinge about the backlash caused by the strategies that they have chosen DESPITE a wealth of human history pointing to how hectoring and less than honest soundbites tend not to go down well in the longer term.
You'd have though the lack of anticipated uptake in breastfeeding, despite the money, time and energy poured into promoting it, would have acted as some kind of feedback re the strategies used.
But no, instead it has become as exercise in proving "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"
Despite it not working, Militant Lactivists seem loath to give up the judgmental, finger wagging, self satisfied misinformation.
What does that tell us ?
Perhaps that breastfeeding has nothing to do with their primary motivation ?
That the object of the stratagy is less thrilling than the mode of the stratagy ?
NB, I breastfed for a year, I liked it, he liked it, it worked for us, but I am REVOLTED by the strategies and tone of the Militant Breastfeeders, cos their need to undertake the role has jack shit to do with milk.