Just a'wondering about Breast milk

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:43 pm

It's been a topic aired on 'Seinfeld' and 'Friends' and numerous other sitcoms . So I'm wondering and this is mainly for the men on the board.

Have you ever tasted Breast Milk. (yes from a human) did you find it a weird circumstance or experience? Or did you find it an exceptional earthy mothering experience? Did you like it ? And what did you think it tasted like?

I see when the topic is brought up some cringe and others are quite open about it . Personally I believe that if we are accustomed to drinking the milk from a cow why would we be overwhelmed by drinking milk from a human or at least tasting it? If it's good enough for our young then why are we ashamed to admit tasting it from an intimate other?

Is it linked to the suppression of women breast feeding in public? a revulsion of some sort to the most natural (second to childbirth ) of human supplement?

Yes I thought the board needed a controversial topic. but is it controversial?

Could we bottle it ? could it be an asset/commodity to women? Breast milk is already donated to hospitals around the world and we have had wet nuses since the dawn of time.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:47 pm

Its cannabilism.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:51 pm

How is it cannibalism? Are our babies cannibals? How does that fit? ARE all young cannibalistic in this sense?

Interesting answer. I take it you've never tasted it then?

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:52 pm

ewwwwwwwwwwwww bodily fluids.:-5

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:57 pm

Hmmm I like this . but you'll drink bodily fluids from a cow where the teets are near it's arse. You do know they poo when they are being milked?

nah, you probably didn't want to know that.:yh_rotfl

Post by **Betty Boop** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:02 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317198 wrote: Hmmm I like this . but you'll drink bodily fluids from a cow where the teets are near it's arse. You do know they poo when they are being milked?

nah, you probably didn't want to know that.:yh_rotfl

:yh_rotfl You are evil lol don't forget though, the teats get cleaned and then nowadays the milking machine is held on by suction which forms a seal around the teat, then remember how much treatment that milk goes through before it actually arrives in your fridge

I have tasted breast milk - grim 'orrible taste that made me want to gag, I guess it's an aquired taste

Post by **spot** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:04 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317194 wrote: How is it cannibalism? Are our babies cannibals? How does that fit? ARE all young cannibalistic in this sense?

There is, I'm quite sure, an inbuilt mammalian instinct to prevent it. Otherwise adults in the wild would selectively harm the prospects of children's survival despite the obvious nutritional benefit to themselves. Lots of biological instincts can be overcome by the conscious mind choosing (or even wanting) to break through them. I expect it's a strong repulsion though.

Post by **Betty Boop** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:06 pm

spot;1317203 wrote: There is, I'm quite sure, an inbuilt mammalian instinct to prevent it. Otherwise adults in the wild would selectively harm the prospects of children's survival despite the obvious nutritional benefit to themselves. Lots of biological instincts can be overcome by the conscious mind choosing (or even wanting) to break through them. I expect it's a strong repulsion though.

Are you saying that men are programmed not to want to taste or consume breast milk because it would be seen as stealing and possibly stunting their offspring?

Post by **spot** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:11 pm

Betty Boop;1317206 wrote: Are you saying that men are programmed not to want to taste or consume breast milk because it would be seen as stealing and possibly stunting their offspring?

Not "seen as", no. It would be a sufficiently frequent result in pre-agricultural societies for it to be detrimental to the chances of long-term group survival though. Else dogs and cats and little fluffy rabbits would do it.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:19 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317194 wrote: How is it cannibalism? Are our babies cannibals? How does that fit? ARE all young cannibalistic in this sense?

Interesting answer. I take it you've never tasted it then?

No I have not. I possibly could see myself making an attempt with my wife were she pregnant as a kind of symbolic bonding thingy.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:21 pm

spot;1317203 wrote: There is, I'm quite sure, an inbuilt mammalian instinct to prevent it. Otherwise adults in the wild would selectively harm the prospects of children's survival despite the obvious nutritional benefit to themselves. Lots of biological instincts can be overcome by the conscious mind choosing (or even wanting) to break through them. I expect it's a strong repulsion though.

So what you're saying is, it is Taboo? So why do so many husbands and men do it then?

Well you know me, I go everywhere on the net, and I came upon an ABF ANR site . Was very interesting . Not sexual in any sense at all . So what would be the underlying want or need for a man to want a purely platonic relationship but based on the suckling of a female? I'm finding it difficult to put this behaviour into any kind of 'fetish' because of the non sexual characteristics of the act.

And then at the other end of the scale a male intimately involved with a partner to at least taste her purely out of curiosity? You see I've heard women talk in circles about the drying up of their milk "If only hubby would leave me alone". It's interesting to see women openly admit this, but not men.

Is it really taboo or is it taboo to talk about it?

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:23 pm

Nomad;1317213 wrote: No I have not. I possibly could see myself making an attempt with my wife were she pregnant as a kind of symbolic bonding thingy.
I trully respect that Nomad.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:37 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317217 wrote: So what you're saying is, it is Taboo?

Taboo, as best I understand it, is culturally conditioned and all I've mentioned is a biological evolutionary conditioning. I'm sure that the two are independent of each other and don't overlap, though they might occasionally apply in the same contexts. Taboos, in my book, exist to be broken; evolutionary traits are a different matter until you reach post-industrial societies. At that stage, we've taken control from nature and we can do anything we want to. We can even go short-sighted and not be a detriment to our fellows, something that we'd never have got away with in the savannah grasslands.

Post by **Betty Boop** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:42 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317217 wrote: So what you're saying is, it is Taboo? So why do so many husbands and men do it then?

Well you know me, I go everywhere on the net, and I came upon an ABF ANR site . Was very interesting . Not sexual in any sense at all . So what would be the underlying want or need for a man to want a purely platonic relationship but based on the suckling of a female? I'm finding it difficult to put this behaviour into any kind of 'fetish' because of the non sexual characteristics of the act.

And then at the other end of the scale a male intimately involved with a partner to at least taste her purely out of curiosity? You see I've heard women talk in circles about the drying up of their milk "If only hubby would leave me alone". It's interesting to see women openly admit this, but not men.

Is it really taboo or is it taboo to talk about it?

I asked Spot that question because it initially occured to me that the more there is a demand for breast milk the more the mother's body produces it. Considering I have had first hand experience of it not being just about demand I should have remembered! I dried up when my son was in SCBU, I was expressing day and night but the production was getting less and less because the baby was not there with me as the stimulus, so therefore at a guess, a womans partner is not the right kind of stimulus either. When you are breast feeding the sound of a crying baby provides you with a most uncomfortable ache and heaviness in the breast as the milk starts flowing in as a response to the cry.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:46 pm

Betty Boop;1317227 wrote: When you are breast feeding the sound of a crying baby provides you with a most uncomfortable ache and heaviness in the breast as the milk starts flowing in as a response to the cry.

Now you're talking. That's my favourite party trick.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:48 pm

Have you ever tasted Breast Milk. (yes from a human) did you find it a weird circumstance or experience? Or did you find it an exceptional earthy mothering experience? Did you like it ? And what did you think it tasted like?

Well, yes, but I don't remember much about it.

It was, like, around sixty years ago.

Post by **Betty Boop** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:50 pm

spot;1317229 wrote: Now you're talking. That's my favourite party trick.

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl Someone shove a dummy in Spot's mouth quick!!

Post by **spot** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:50 pm

Nomad;1317213 wrote: No I have not. I possibly could see myself making an attempt Nomie, you know there are under-the-counter preparations which can start male lactation? It's not an offer, I'm just mentioning it.

Post by **Betty Boop** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:51 pm

LarsMac;1317230 wrote: Well, yes, but I don't remember much about it.

It was, like, around sixty years ago.

Hmm lol I don't think I even got a taste at birth, was put straight on the bottle

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:52 pm

Betty Boop;1317235 wrote: Hmm lol I don't think I even got a taste at birth, was put straight on the bottle

And youve been on the bottle ever since.

Post by **Betty Boop** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:52 pm

spot;1317233 wrote: Nomie, you know there are under-the-counter preparations which can start male lactation? It's not an offer, I'm just mentioning it.

You're all set then, buy your preparation, cry like a baby and Bob's your uncle, you can hire an expressing machine if you can't reach

:D

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:58 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317198 wrote: Hmmm I like this . but you'll drink bodily fluids from a cow where the teets are near it's arse. You do know they poo when they are being milked?

nah, you probably didn't want to know that.:yh_rotfl

my goodness you haven't changed and that's a good thing!:wah:

milk from a cow has been pasteurized.:p

and I don't wanna talk about any poo eh?:yh_rotfl

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:59 pm

Considering the fact that oral sex is universally practiced and accepted why would anyone be turned off by consuming human breast milk? I was breast fed as a infant an up to age 2 1/2. As a first time father I tried breast milk from my wife after the birth of the first child. However, this was the 50's and the trend was to not breast feed in order to keep the breast shapely and firm. Similac and other artificial products were in vogue. It was later proven and is a fact today that breast feeding a child caries important antibodies and enhances the baby's immune system and does not negatively alter breast configuration.

Post by **Betty Boop** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:03 pm

Lon;1317244 wrote: Considering the fact that oral sex is universally practiced and accepted why would anyone be turned off by consuming human breast milk? I was breast fed as a infant an up to age 2 1/2. As a first time father I tried breast milk from my wife after the birth of the first child. However, this was the 50's and the trend was to not breast feed in order to keep the breast shapely and firm. Similac and other artificial products were in vogue. It was later proven and is a fact today that breast feeding a child caries important antibodies and enhances the baby's immune system and does not negatively alter breast configuration.

I know some women that would disagree with that, but then again they would not have not breast fed their babies. They were just dismayed that post feeding they found themselves much reduced in size to pre pregnancy.

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:07 pm

Betty Boop;1317247 wrote: I know some women that would disagree with that, but then again they would not have not breast fed their babies. They were just dismayed that post feeding they found themselves much reduced in size to pre pregnancy.

Depends on the woman I suppose. My wife is 65 years old, breast fed three girls and is very proud of her ample and shapely breasts. ---------------I am too!!

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:09 pm

Lon;1317254 wrote: Depends on the woman I suppose. My wife is 65 years old, breast fed three girls and is very proud of her ample and shapely breasts. ---------------I am too!!

If you had breast milk Id grab thiose teets and gnaw on them like nobodies business.

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:28 pm

nomad;1317258 wrote: if you had breast milk id grab thiose teets and gnaw on them like nobodies business.

ouch!!

along-for-the-ride · Post by **along-for-the-ride** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 5:00 pm

:wah: How do you like this ad?

Post by **LarsMac** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 8:26 am

Odie;1317243 wrote: my goodness you haven't changed and that's a good thing!:wah:

milk from a cow has been pasteurized.:p

and I don't wanna talk about any poo eh?:yh_rotfl

Well, having grown up on a farm, and having milked my share of cows, I can tell you with a certainty that pasteurization ruins the flavor a lot more than any contamination that might occur from flying poo.

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 8:38 am

LarsMac;1317379 wrote: Well, having grown up on a farm, and having milked my share of cows, I can tell you with a certainty that pasteurization ruins the flavor a lot more than any contamination that might occur from flying poo.

why would people keep the poo in the bucket?

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:09 pm

If you work in a dairy it usually lands on you ......never thought of catching it in a bucket.:yh_rotfl

pasturization and homogonization ruins milk...Cow milk is supposed to be creamy.

Well thanks for your answers everyone . it' gives an insight as to where western society is still at in regards to what we think about purely natural things.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:09 pm

now I have to think of another topic.

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:55 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317454 wrote: Well thanks for your answers everyone . it' gives an insight as to where western society is still at in regards to what we think about purely natural things.
I'll ask a question to which I don't know the answer. Does eBay ban the auctioning of breast milk? That would give a hint as to social acceptability.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:57 pm

I know women do actually sell it, but I'm not sure about Ebay.

I think it's only acceptable to donate it.

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:01 pm

I was thinking more of the fetish market, though the sales blurb would invariably say "babies".

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:07 pm

See, that's what has me confused. Is it a fetish? Unless some sexual desire stems from this action it's certainly not a sexual fetish and already some here have mentioned intimacy.

could we <------ ha I made a funny............as a society be so mysoginistic that we find the intimate bonding of such an act purely revolting to our senses. Taking in the fact that more women than men object to breastfeeding babies in public.

Are we afraid of the power of the female human.?

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:13 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317487 wrote: See, that's what has me confused. Is it a fetish? Unless some sexual desire stems from this action it's certainly not a sexual fetish and already some here have mentioned intimacy. I didn't say sexual. Absolutely any act or object can be performed or regarded or treated as a fetish, just as any act or object can be beheld as pornographic. All it relies on is an imagination and a supplier.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:25 pm

hmmm I just can't see a fetish in this because if a woman breastfeeds her young although there are multiple resources and choices to otherwise feed her young...is she indulging in a fetish? It is not 'nessesary' in our day to breastfeed, we have other sources. so taking the subject away from men for a moment is a woman engaging in a fetish?

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:27 pm

Of course she isn't, she's fulfilling a biological necessity.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:42 pm

ummm you sure?

traits are a different matter until you reach post-industrial societies. At that stage, we've taken control from nature and we can do anything we want to. We can even go short-sighted and not be a detriment to our fellows, something that we'd never have got away with in the savannah grasslands.

It's not a biological necessity anymore. Otherwie all mothers would 'have to' breastfeed to be psychologically and physically sound. Milk after child birth can dry up within a week. (depending of course on the particular woman.)

so how is it a biological necessity

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:23 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317514 wrote: ummm you sure?

It's not a biological necessity anymore. Otherwie all mothers would 'have to' breastfeed to be psychologically and physically sound. Milk after child birth can dry up within a week. (depending of course on the particular woman.)

so how is it a biological necessity

Perhaps you're taking a Western view and I'm looking at the majority of humanity in 2010. Even in wealthy households the predominant deciding factor in breast feeding vs bottle is economic - shall I go back to work yet - rather than emotional - gosh this is fun, pass the baby back please.

I think the distinguishing phrase I used earlier was post-industrial. Post-industrial society can do absolutely anything it wants, there's no necessity to any of it and doubtless cultural preference will drift in as a guide to behaviour. Then we'd be into your "taboo" area instead of my hard-wired genetic repulsion.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:31 pm

Do you honestly think the repulsion is genetic? Seriously ?

So you say even in a wealthy household it is an 'ecomoic choice' so therefore not a biological necessity? So that brings me back to my point, that if someone does have a choice could it be deemed as a purely selfish act on the part of the woman? ie could be construed as a fetish.

BTW I'm not arguing I'm trying to get to the bottom of a very western and dare I say world view of breast feeding and also breast milk as a commodity and a natural asset to women. Considering you don't have to be pregnant nor have had to had a baby to produce milk I'm wondering if it can be used as a form of .ummm what's the word?

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:36 pm

Of course it's not a fetish, it's a choice. The word "fetish" invariably implies an unnatural act that a significant element within society looks on with moral prudery. If we ever reach a point where public opinion is revolted by natural feeding then yes, at that stage it takes on fetish overtones. Until then it simply can't.

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:38 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1317530 wrote: Do you honestly think the repulsion is genetic? Seriously ?

I'll copy what I wrote in at this point if you want to take it up.There is, I'm quite sure, an inbuilt mammalian instinct to prevent it. Otherwise adults in the wild would selectively harm the prospects of children's survival despite the obvious nutritional benefit to themselves. Lots of biological instincts can be overcome by the conscious mind choosing (or even wanting) to break through them. I expect it's a strong repulsion though.

By all means explain to me why I'm mistaken.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:55 pm

spot;1317226 wrote: Taboo, as best I understand it, is culturally conditioned and all I've mentioned is a biological evolutionary conditioning. I'm sure that the two are independent of each other and don't overlap, though they might occasionally apply in the same contexts. Taboos, in my book, exist to be broken; evolutionary traits are a different matter until you reach post-industrial societies. At that stage, we've taken control from nature and we can do anything we want to. We can even go short-sighted and not be a detriment to our fellows, something that we'd never have got away with in the savannah grasslands.Don't kid yourself. Any animal in the wild can be killed by a falling rock caused by another animal's actions along a hillside. The human brain is an organ just like any other that was designed by our genes for the sole purpose of enhancing survival. The brain therefore fulfills that function very, very well, to the point of informing us how to create medicines and anything else we create for the purpose of survival, and has done and is still doing exactly what it was designed to do.

We haven't taken control from nature because we are a part of nature itself.

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 5:00 pm

Ahso!;1317537 wrote: We haven't taken control from nature because we are a part of nature itself.

Perhaps you should look at live birth rates and child survival, plotted from pre-industrial society to post-industrial. That's where evolutionary restraint happens. That's what we're free of from now on.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 5:01 pm

spot;1317533 wrote: I'll copy what I wrote in at this point if you want to take it up.There is, I'm quite sure, an inbuilt mammalian instinct to prevent it. Otherwise adults in the wild would selectively harm the prospects of children's survival despite the obvious nutritional benefit to themselves. Lots of biological instincts can be overcome by the conscious mind choosing (or even wanting) to break through them. I expect it's a strong repulsion though.By all means explain to me why I'm mistaken.Good call, Spot, you're probably right.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 5:04 pm

spot;1317541 wrote: Perhaps you should look at live birth rates and child survival, plotted from pre-industrial society to post-industrial. That's where evolutionary restraint happens. That's what we're free of from now on.Considering thats been the game plan all along, what other event could we have expected, in retrospect?

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 5:05 pm

spot;1317531 wrote: Of course it's not a fetish, it's a choice. The word "fetish" invariably implies an unnatural act that a significant element within society looks on with moral prudery. If we ever reach a point where public opinion is revolted by natural feeding then yes, at that stage it takes on fetish overtones. Until then it simply can't.

And that's exactly why I'm talking about this . How many people do you know that are repulsed by women breastfeeding in a shopping centre or restaraunt? Are not those people seeing it as a repulsion and to an extent offensive and therefore ....seeing it as unnatural?

Otherwise adults in the wild would selectively harm the prospects of children's survival despite the obvious nutritional benefit to themselves.

Unfortunetly I could only find the info in an erotic sense on wiki....but it shares some very poignant information.

could breast milk actually cure ailments in adults? It seems that it was quite common at one point in history but christian taboos and the immasculinity of men seems to be a big issue. which I find personally strange.

Erotic lactation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 5:32 pm

There are limits to what I want in my head, fuzz. I'm not going to click that link.