The LGBTI community is actively working to reconstruct the institutions of gender and marriage around the globe, tearing apart the most fundamental unit of society: family.
Countries which have redefined marriage are now witnessing the consequential domino effect, as other fundamental structures of society are affected. By redefining marriage, the traditional concept of a parent is inevitably changed, so as not to exclude the many new genres of ‘parents’. Birth certificates in some countries now read ‘Parent 1’ and ‘Parent 2’ instead of ‘Father’ and ‘Mother’, so as not to be ‘offensive’. And in Ontario, Canada, the All Families Are Equal Act removed all references to “mother” and “father” from the law. Children have been turned into expensive accessories, and denied basic rights such as access to their biological roots, to pander to the whims of adults.
Now, authors Jessica Martucci and Anne Barnhill are decrying the concept of breastfeeding in their thesis ‘Unintended Consequences of Invoking the “Natural” in Breastfeeding Promotion’. In the piece, published in a notary medical journal, they claim that breastfeeding should not be seen as a ‘natural’ way to feed infants. Why? As Georgi Boorman, a writer for The Federalist, points out, breastfeeding might be too exclusive for today’s politically correct culture:
“Coupling nature with motherhood, however, can inadvertently support biologically deterministic arguments about the roles of men and women in the family (for example, that women should be the primary caretakers of children). Referencing the “natural” in breastfeeding promotion, then, may inadvertently endorse a controversial set of values about family life and gender roles, which would be ethically inappropriate.”
The authors go on to argue that “Invoking the ‘natural’ is also imprecise because it lacks a clear definition,” and that various health organizations “should avoid using the terms natural, unnatural and nature.”
The authors want to ditch the promotion of the “natural” because they don’t want traditional values and beliefs—usually consistent with natural human behavior, like breastfeeding and composing organic families—shaping health decisions.
Why is such an article that throws biological fact to the wind appear in a medical journal? Martucci and Barnhill are merely using the medical field to advance LGBTI ideology. Such tactics are common with the LGBTI agenda, which promotes ‘natural’ practices until they no longer suit their agenda. At that point, they dispose of it, denouncing such fundamental truths are being ‘archaic’ or ‘outdated’.
The same holds true for breastfeeding, which is a classical expression of motherhood and the female gender’s role. Admitting that it is natural is to tacitly admit that not all genders were meant to be mothers, that men cannot become women (since men can never perform the biological functions of the female role), and that there are sexual distinctions built into the universe.
As Georgi Boorman summarises so succinctly how the change in language will affect the promotion of breastfeeding which, before the Thought Police arrived, was encouraged because of its benefit to children:
As these paradigms shift, our culture embraces language modifications pushed by the totalitarian left, in its efforts to make the tiny “transgender” population feel less uncomfortable. We’ve replaced “mother” with “birthing parent,” and created the term “chest-feeding” to be inclusive of women attempting to live as men. Certain subjects, such as menstrual cycles, must be approached with the utmost sensitivity to “women” who are biologically incapable of having them.
As the obscuration of biological distinction continues, breastfeeding naturally becomes a target for political correctness. Thus, the case for breastfeeding will soon be dismantled. It won’t be a full out attack or denial of its benefits. Those benefits will simply be downplayed, just as these authors state that “a spate of recent work challenges the extent of these benefits.” Posters will be removed. Pro-breastfeeding campaigns will be defunded. OB-GYNs and midwives will no longer be encouraged to share the benefits of breastfeeding with patients.
Conversely, the emotional toll breastfeeding advocacy take on trans women will be played up. Trans women will declare they’ve been shamed, or that breastfeeding culture contributes to their feelings of exclusion from mommy circles. Perhaps they’ll assert they’ve missed out on some government benefit, such as no-copay breast pumps, and demand to be subsidized elsewhere.
But as we see all too often when the LGBTI agenda is pushed, the rights of children – even infants – are subordinated to the feelings of adults.