Topic: Angry breastfeeders scare the shit out of me
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc started this discussion 15 years ago #15,699
Buhhhh. What's so had about doing this in private?http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/28/target-nurse-in-chicago_n_1172506.html
Chicago-area mothers joined a nationwide demonstration against restrictive corporate breastfeeding policies Wednesday morning at Target stores citywide.
The "nurse-in" is an increasingly popular tool for breastfeeding advocates and nursing mothers to highlight alleged violations of Illinois law, which does not classify public nursing as indecency. Whole Foods stores were recently targeted after an employee reportedly told a nursing mother to cover up, and Wednesday's demonstration was inspired by a recent incident at a Houston-area Target store, Time reports.
Michelle Hickman was reportedly nursing her baby at a Target Nov. 29 when several employees asked her to move to a fitting room. Hickman says one employee intimated that she could be cited for public indecency, although her infant was covered with a blanket.
The "nurse-in" is an increasingly popular tool for breastfeeding advocates and nursing mothers to highlight alleged violations of Illinois law, which does not classify public nursing as indecency. Whole Foods stores were recently targeted after an employee reportedly told a nursing mother to cover up, and Wednesday's demonstration was inspired by a recent incident at a Houston-area Target store, Time reports.
Michelle Hickman was reportedly nursing her baby at a Target Nov. 29 when several employees asked her to move to a fitting room. Hickman says one employee intimated that she could be cited for public indecency, although her infant was covered with a blanket.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later[^] [v] #273,504
> Buhhhh
That's a funny noise.
Anyway, I agree. There's no reason why they can't do this in private.
That's a funny noise.
Anyway, I agree. There's no reason why they can't do this in private.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,505
@OP
> Buhhhh. What's so had about doing this in private?
It's so had because the mother is probably already having a had day, having to go about her routine with an infant. Before you blame her for having a baby, remember that the baby could be the product of rape. It's a had decision for a mother to make to have a baby that is the product of rape. Don't be a had ass and blame a rape victim. I'm sure it is already had on the mother, having to have a baby suckle really had on her nipple. I'd imagine that her nipples get sore from the had sucking. If you ask me, there is nothing had about doing it in private but they shouldn't be oppressed by had liners who cannot deal with the fact that someone is breast feeding their baby.
> Buhhhh. What's so had about doing this in private?
It's so had because the mother is probably already having a had day, having to go about her routine with an infant. Before you blame her for having a baby, remember that the baby could be the product of rape. It's a had decision for a mother to make to have a baby that is the product of rape. Don't be a had ass and blame a rape victim. I'm sure it is already had on the mother, having to have a baby suckle really had on her nipple. I'd imagine that her nipples get sore from the had sucking. If you ask me, there is nothing had about doing it in private but they shouldn't be oppressed by had liners who cannot deal with the fact that someone is breast feeding their baby.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,507
angrybreastfeeders.com is available! :D
I have this vision of a photo gallery of pissed-off looking women snarling and screaming while breastfeeding their children. Could be big...
I have this vision of a photo gallery of pissed-off looking women snarling and screaming while breastfeeding their children. Could be big...
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 20 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,508
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 21 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,510
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 41 seconds later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,511
@OP
> What's so bad about doing this in private?
What's so bad about doing it in public?
> What's so bad about doing this in private?
What's so bad about doing it in public?
(Edited 36 seconds later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 40 seconds later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,512
@273,508 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
If you're planning anything like Angry Birds, I'm a little scared to hear the details.
If you're planning anything like Angry Birds, I'm a little scared to hear the details.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 27 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,513
i have no problem with breastfeeding in public at all. breasts are not dirty and seeing them while not harm children, the breasts function is to feed a child! also i don't expect those new mothers to spend precious free time hiding in a public bathroom. if it were me, i would use a small blanket to cover the area, but if someone doesn't, that's fine as well.
Dead !Pool7hVoC2 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 23 seconds later, 27 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,514
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 24 seconds later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,515
@273,511 (E)
What's so bad about pulling your tit out in public and getting it suckled?
No one wants to see that shit. I'm sorry it's inconvenient to have to put a blanket over it or god forbid, go to the bathroom, but that's not really my problem. I didn't ask to see your udders in action.
What's so bad about pulling your tit out in public and getting it suckled?
No one wants to see that shit. I'm sorry it's inconvenient to have to put a blanket over it or god forbid, go to the bathroom, but that's not really my problem. I didn't ask to see your udders in action.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 29 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,516
@previous (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
why would you say udders? do you have problem with breastfeeding in general?
why would you say udders? do you have problem with breastfeeding in general?
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,518
Anonymous H double-posted this 15 years ago, 55 seconds later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,519
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 53 seconds later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,520
@273,513 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Most people don't want to see it, and the people who do are perverted.
Also, as innocent as the breast's actual function may be, it has become a very sexual body part in modern society, so it's reasonable to ask that they're covered in public.
Most people don't want to see it, and the people who do are perverted.
Also, as innocent as the breast's actual function may be, it has become a very sexual body part in modern society, so it's reasonable to ask that they're covered in public.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 46 seconds later, 33 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,522
@273,515 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
> I didn't ask to see your udders in action.
Yet girls have paid their way through Stanford because people love to see udders in action. Why do you hate women? Your kind has fought long and hard for advancement in our world, don't shun progress.
> I didn't ask to see your udders in action.
Yet girls have paid their way through Stanford because people love to see udders in action. Why do you hate women? Your kind has fought long and hard for advancement in our world, don't shun progress.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,524
@273,515 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
> What's so bad about pulling your tit out in public and getting it suckled?
Yes? Nobody is going to be traumatised at the sight of a tit I'm sure.
> I didn't ask to see your udders in action.
You could always just... not look?
@273,520 (B)
Prude.
> What's so bad about pulling your tit out in public and getting it suckled?
Yes? Nobody is going to be traumatised at the sight of a tit I'm sure.
> I didn't ask to see your udders in action.
You could always just... not look?
@273,520 (B)
Prude.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 15 seconds later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,526
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 33 seconds later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,527
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,529
@273,519 (H)
> May I please suck on your waffle tits in public?
> waffle tits
I'm not horny but hungry. Do they come with molasses?
> May I please suck on your waffle tits in public?
> waffle tits
I'm not horny but hungry. Do they come with molasses?
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 40 seconds later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,530
hamfist !0WA0VxNDIE joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 43 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,532
> giving a shit
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 22 seconds later, 43 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,533
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,534
i think some people don't like seeing this, because it reminds them that humans are just animals.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,538
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,540
Dead !Pool7hVoC2 replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 50 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,543
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 25 seconds later, 50 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,545
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 56 seconds later, 51 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,546
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 7 seconds later, 52 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,547
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 23 seconds later, 52 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,548
hamfist !0WA0VxNDIE replied with this 15 years ago, 31 seconds later, 52 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,549
@273,533 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
I just think getting involved in a public breastfeeding demonstration to fight guvment uhpreshun is idiotic, as is getting upset when someone breastfeeds in public
It's all so arbitrary
I just think getting involved in a public breastfeeding demonstration to fight guvment uhpreshun is idiotic, as is getting upset when someone breastfeeds in public
It's all so arbitrary
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,552
I'm going to join in with these mothers and drink milk from their breasts to show my support for the rights of women everywhere.
Dead !Pool7hVoC2 replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 55 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,557
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 3 seconds later, 56 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,558
@273,549 (hamfist !0WA0VxNDIE)
they aren't fighting the government, but individual companies. i do agree that this doesn't really tackle the big issues that have caused these strange attitudes towards pregnancy in general.
they aren't fighting the government, but individual companies. i do agree that this doesn't really tackle the big issues that have caused these strange attitudes towards pregnancy in general.
(Edited 41 seconds later.)
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 57 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,561
hamfist !0WA0VxNDIE replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 59 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #273,565
Dead !Pool7hVoC2 replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,573
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 42 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,576
@273,565 (hamfist !0WA0VxNDIE)
yeah, breastfeeding is just a secret plot to make men feel uncomfortable. reminds me of crumb.
yeah, breastfeeding is just a secret plot to make men feel uncomfortable. reminds me of crumb.
hamfist !0WA0VxNDIE replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,578
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,582
It's pretty gross really. That's like saying that pissing in public should be alright because it is a natural function.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,583
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,584
@previous (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
In a survival situation, Bear Grylls has taught me that drinking your own piss can save your life.
In a survival situation, Bear Grylls has taught me that drinking your own piss can save your life.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 32 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,585
protip !!pMmAiEwOm joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,586
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 44 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,587
@273,585 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
You've probably never even watched Born Survivor.
Anyway, that isn't the point. The point is I don't want some maggot-haired grimy fat hambeast getting her rotten tits out and spraying the area with her fluids with reckless abandon. Personally I'm all for doing a Herod but since that won't happen I'd have to settle for having this be illegal.
You've probably never even watched Born Survivor.
Anyway, that isn't the point. The point is I don't want some maggot-haired grimy fat hambeast getting her rotten tits out and spraying the area with her fluids with reckless abandon. Personally I'm all for doing a Herod but since that won't happen I'd have to settle for having this be illegal.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,589
@previous (J)
your comfort is not that big of a priority. children need to eat and you need to deal with it.
your comfort is not that big of a priority. children need to eat and you need to deal with it.
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 9 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,590
@273,586 (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
> This man is the hero of our times.
I cannot disagree. And I'll be honest, sometimes it isn't always easy but I always find a way.
> This man is the hero of our times.
I cannot disagree. And I'll be honest, sometimes it isn't always easy but I always find a way.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,602
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,610
@273,589 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
> your comfort is not that big of a priority.
I disagree. My comfort is of the utmost priority.
> children need to eat
I don't care about children.
> your comfort is not that big of a priority.
I disagree. My comfort is of the utmost priority.
> children need to eat
I don't care about children.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,620
@previous (J)
we need them to continue the human race. many things make me uncomfortable, but i would never try and make them illegal. especially not a basic function of life! maybe people shouldn't pass gas or sneeze in public either?
we need them to continue the human race. many things make me uncomfortable, but i would never try and make them illegal. especially not a basic function of life! maybe people shouldn't pass gas or sneeze in public either?
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,625
@previous (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
> we need them to continue the human race
I personally don't see why this is such an important thing to strive for, but I accept this facet of your argument.
> maybe people shouldn't pass gas or sneeze in public either
Of course they should try not to, but such things are unavoidable for the most part, and there are accepted customs of what to do if they are unavoidable. There are, however, many alternatives to the unsanitary practise of whipping your stinking breasts out in the middle of the shop and shoving them in the shit machine's mouth.
> we need them to continue the human race
I personally don't see why this is such an important thing to strive for, but I accept this facet of your argument.
> maybe people shouldn't pass gas or sneeze in public either
Of course they should try not to, but such things are unavoidable for the most part, and there are accepted customs of what to do if they are unavoidable. There are, however, many alternatives to the unsanitary practise of whipping your stinking breasts out in the middle of the shop and shoving them in the shit machine's mouth.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #273,626
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,627
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 22 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,628
@273,625 (J)
maybe we should make not washing your hands after using a public toilet illegal is well. in fact maybe no one should ever be topless outside of the home.
maybe we should make not washing your hands after using a public toilet illegal is well. in fact maybe no one should ever be topless outside of the home.
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,629
@previous (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
> maybe we should make not washing your hands after using a public toilet illegal is well
Oh my god, this so much. It's always horrible when you are in there and somebody walks out of a stall and straight out the door.
> in fact maybe no one should ever be topless outside of the home.
I would very much like this as well. Maybe we could also ban vests and make wearing deodorant mandatory.
> maybe we should make not washing your hands after using a public toilet illegal is well
Oh my god, this so much. It's always horrible when you are in there and somebody walks out of a stall and straight out the door.
> in fact maybe no one should ever be topless outside of the home.
I would very much like this as well. Maybe we could also ban vests and make wearing deodorant mandatory.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,630
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,631
This thread has gone to the point of splitting cunt hairs. Someone needs to post pics of elephant cocks. Seriously, I'm almost there, I just need that extra push.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,633
@273,524 (E)
Not traumatized, but uncomfortable.
@273,589 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Sure, and no one is preventing them from eating--in a changing room, with the mother covered up, etc. Why is it necessary for them to breastfeed in public view, in a private business that has asked them not to, when there are other places where they can breastfeed instead?
Not traumatized, but uncomfortable.
@273,589 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Sure, and no one is preventing them from eating--in a changing room, with the mother covered up, etc. Why is it necessary for them to breastfeed in public view, in a private business that has asked them not to, when there are other places where they can breastfeed instead?
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 58 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,634
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 27 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,635
@273,620 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Holy shit, what part of "not waving your tits around in public" is preventing anyone from continuing the human race?
Holy shit, what part of "not waving your tits around in public" is preventing anyone from continuing the human race?
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 16 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,636
Leo Vegas !gNoGoD5HzQ replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,638
@273,635 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
> Holy shit, what part of "not waving your tits around in public" is preventing anyone from continuing the human race?
The continuity of the human race can be attributed to public tit waving. Once again, you blame the victim.
> Holy shit, what part of "not waving your tits around in public" is preventing anyone from continuing the human race?
The continuity of the human race can be attributed to public tit waving. Once again, you blame the victim.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 16 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,645
@273,633 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
why make babies eat in the toilet for no reason. i've something bothers you, but doesn't hurt you,ignore it. why make laws about it?
why make babies eat in the toilet for no reason. i've something bothers you, but doesn't hurt you,ignore it. why make laws about it?
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,646
@273,633 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
Yes, women should be reasonably discreet, but does it really matter? So what if it makes people uncomfortable? Lots of things make me uncomfortable, I just ignore them, and expect others to do the same.
Yes, women should be reasonably discreet, but does it really matter? So what if it makes people uncomfortable? Lots of things make me uncomfortable, I just ignore them, and expect others to do the same.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 5 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,647
@273,635 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
how is breastfeeding waving around "tits? breasts are not dirty. they don't hurt society. they don't hurt you.
how is breastfeeding waving around "tits? breasts are not dirty. they don't hurt society. they don't hurt you.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,648
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 26 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,650
@273,645 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Well this story is actually talking about a private business's right to tell breastfeeders to take it elsewhere. Do you think they shouldn't have that right?
Well this story is actually talking about a private business's right to tell breastfeeders to take it elsewhere. Do you think they shouldn't have that right?
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 41 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,651
@273,646 (E)
Are you still mad at me?
@273,647 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Society frowns on people getting their private bits out in public. That's just the way it is.
Are you still mad at me?
@273,647 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Society frowns on people getting their private bits out in public. That's just the way it is.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 25 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,652
@273,650 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
they have those rights, and those people have the right to protest as well.
they have those rights, and those people have the right to protest as well.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,653
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 4 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,654
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 5 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,655
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,656
@previous (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
I think that they ruin society. Everything would be great if the world was childless.
I think that they ruin society. Everything would be great if the world was childless.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,657
@273,655 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
As is the corporation in the OP. Not sure I see your point.
@273,654 (E)
Take all the time you need, friend.
As is the corporation in the OP. Not sure I see your point.
@273,654 (E)
Take all the time you need, friend.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 2 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,659
@273,653 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
though i appreciate your concern about illegal protests, you;ve based all of your previous arguments on puritanical nudity laws. these women probably should have protested from the sidewalk like everyone else.
though i appreciate your concern about illegal protests, you;ve based all of your previous arguments on puritanical nudity laws. these women probably should have protested from the sidewalk like everyone else.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 28 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,660
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 31 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,661
Ph !SQAJbBZk/o joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,662
This is retarded, a business has every right to tell a woman they don't want them breastfeeding in their store. I have no issues with breast feeding in public, but if I owned a business and didn't want that happening, I am well within my rights to tell a woman to take it somewhere more private or leave.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 5 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,663
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 50 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,664
Ph !SQAJbBZk/o replied with this 15 years ago, 38 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,665
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 23 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,666
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 second later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,667
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 43 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,668
cunt you just really seem to like laws made to control people. like you and prostitution for instance.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,670
@273,662 (Ph !SQAJbBZk/o)
> This is retarded, a business has every right to tell a woman they don't want them breastfeeding in their store.
Nope.
http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/ShowPressRelease.cfm?SubjectID=1&RecNum=3291
> This is retarded, a business has every right to tell a woman they don't want them breastfeeding in their store.
Nope.
http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/ShowPressRelease.cfm?SubjectID=1&RecNum=3291
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,671
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,672
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,673
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 29 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,674
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,675
@273,670 (E)
> > This is retarded, a business has every right to tell a woman they don't want them breastfeeding in their store.
> Nope.
>
> http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/ShowPressRelease.cfm?SubjectID=1&RecNum=3291
Oh ffs. I hate liberals.
I'm curious though if the law has been interpreted to allow business owners to request they move to a changing or mother's room. It doesn't say either way in the law itself.
> > This is retarded, a business has every right to tell a woman they don't want them breastfeeding in their store.
> Nope.
>
> http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/ShowPressRelease.cfm?SubjectID=1&RecNum=3291
Oh ffs. I hate liberals.
I'm curious though if the law has been interpreted to allow business owners to request they move to a changing or mother's room. It doesn't say either way in the law itself.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 0 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,676
well, so how do we all feel knowing that Target actually broke the law?
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,677
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,678
maybe target should ban menstruating women next.
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,679
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 14 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,680
@273,676 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Dumbfounded. It should be up to the proprietor what goes on in the store. They shouldn't be forced to allow anything, especially when it causes discomfort to the other customers and may be detrimental to business.
Dumbfounded. It should be up to the proprietor what goes on in the store. They shouldn't be forced to allow anything, especially when it causes discomfort to the other customers and may be detrimental to business.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 57 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,681
@273,679 (K)
i'm clearly not being the irrational person in this thread. it had already been used several times, but most won't call becky on her shit.
i'm clearly not being the irrational person in this thread. it had already been used several times, but most won't call becky on her shit.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,682
@273,680 (M)
i'm pretty much okay with businesses kicking out whoever as long as they are willing to handle the backlash.
i'm pretty much okay with businesses kicking out whoever as long as they are willing to handle the backlash.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,683
@273,676 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Surprised they weren't more aware of it. Looks like it's only a civil action though.
@273,678 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Reasonable argument. Got any more?
Surprised they weren't more aware of it. Looks like it's only a civil action though.
@273,678 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Reasonable argument. Got any more?
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 2 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,684
99 get
(Edited 10 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 14 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,685
100 GET
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 57 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,686
@273,683 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
why do you hate liberals for making legislature like this when you want to prostitution illegal yourself? shouldn't you just want to government to but out?
why do you hate liberals for making legislature like this when you want to prostitution illegal yourself? shouldn't you just want to government to but out?
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,687
@273,680 (M)
These laws are fucking stupid. Illinois' only allows for the recovery of attorney fees/litigation expenses (and forcing the business to let mothers wave their tits around in the future), so it's pretty toothless as far as things go thankfully.
@273,681 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Cry more.
These laws are fucking stupid. Illinois' only allows for the recovery of attorney fees/litigation expenses (and forcing the business to let mothers wave their tits around in the future), so it's pretty toothless as far as things go thankfully.
@273,681 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Cry more.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 15 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,688
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 11 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,689
if this same company had banned black people and they had a sit in, how would you have reacted?
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 38 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,690
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 12 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,691
@273,689 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
If Adolf Hitler walked into a Target, shouldn't they be able to ask him to leave?
If Adolf Hitler walked into a Target, shouldn't they be able to ask him to leave?
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 6 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,692
@273,678 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Only if they start menstruating all over the floor or whip out their pussy so passers-by can see them menstruating.
Only if they start menstruating all over the floor or whip out their pussy so passers-by can see them menstruating.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 25 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,693
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 38 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,694
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 51 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,695
@273,692 (J)
so only if they start spraying milk all over the place? the breast is a feeding tool first, sexual object second.
so only if they start spraying milk all over the place? the breast is a feeding tool first, sexual object second.
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 20 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,696
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 25 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,697
@273,693 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
why is it okay for the government to control people for your own causes, but not other's?
why is it okay for the government to control people for your own causes, but not other's?
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 31 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,698
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,699
@273,697 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Isn't that basically the way everyone thinks? There are some laws they agree with, and some they don't?
Isn't that basically the way everyone thinks? There are some laws they agree with, and some they don't?
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 2 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,700
@273,693 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
She wants to know if you would like to prostitution illegal yourself.
She wants to know if you would like to prostitution illegal yourself.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 18 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,701
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,702
@273,699 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
no, some people don't want the laws at all. if something doesn't hurt you, ignore it.
no, some people don't want the laws at all. if something doesn't hurt you, ignore it.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 18 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,703
@273,698 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Yes, civil rights should be protected regardless of the location. I don't consider breastfeeding a civil right.
I'm okay with laws that require some concessions, like providing a mother's room. Forcing a business to allow women to wave their nipples around anywhere is not the same as saying no blacks allowed.
Yes, civil rights should be protected regardless of the location. I don't consider breastfeeding a civil right.
I'm okay with laws that require some concessions, like providing a mother's room. Forcing a business to allow women to wave their nipples around anywhere is not the same as saying no blacks allowed.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 12 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,704
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 5 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,705
@273,699 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
Yeah, but usually people are consistent with which laws they agree with and which they don't.
Yeah, but usually people are consistent with which laws they agree with and which they don't.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 43 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,706
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 15 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,707
@273,703 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
how is breastfeeding not a civil right? you are scared of seeing nipples, who knows why?
how is breastfeeding not a civil right? you are scared of seeing nipples, who knows why?
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 22 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,708
@273,704 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
You're really trying to say that banning breast feeding is the same as banning black people?
You're really trying to say that banning breast feeding is the same as banning black people?
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 53 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,709
@previous (B)
it's not the same, but the law is. becky remarked about their "illegal sit in", and how companies can ban whoever they would like.
it's not the same, but the law is. becky remarked about their "illegal sit in", and how companies can ban whoever they would like.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,710
@273,695 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
> so only if they start spraying milk all over the place?
No, see the second part of the post you quoted. The equivalent for menstruating all over the place is spraying milk into a babby mouth anyway.
> so only if they start spraying milk all over the place?
No, see the second part of the post you quoted. The equivalent for menstruating all over the place is spraying milk into a babby mouth anyway.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 34 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,711
@273,709 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
I don't think that banning an act and banning an entire race would be considered the same legally.
I don't think that banning an act and banning an entire race would be considered the same legally.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,712
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 9 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,713
@273,707 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
It offends some people, and there are very reasonable accommodations that can be made so that offense doesn't occur (setting up a mother's room for instance) which would ensure they can still breastfeed, and still have full use of the facilities/services as a group.
There aren't any reasonable accommodations a person can make to say, "no blacks allowed!" without impinging on their rights.
It's a very basic difference between drawing lines around a particular activity and drawing lines around a particular group. I'm surprised you don't see this and I'm sure you'll reply with some twaddle about Martin Luther King, but I'm trying anyway to explain.
And yes, God knows nipples scare the shit out of me. Thanks for pointing that out.
It offends some people, and there are very reasonable accommodations that can be made so that offense doesn't occur (setting up a mother's room for instance) which would ensure they can still breastfeed, and still have full use of the facilities/services as a group.
There aren't any reasonable accommodations a person can make to say, "no blacks allowed!" without impinging on their rights.
It's a very basic difference between drawing lines around a particular activity and drawing lines around a particular group. I'm surprised you don't see this and I'm sure you'll reply with some twaddle about Martin Luther King, but I'm trying anyway to explain.
And yes, God knows nipples scare the shit out of me. Thanks for pointing that out.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 14 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,714
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,715
@273,713 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
don't put words into my mouth. you clearly have a weirdo complex regarding the human body. at least own up to it. i'm speaking strictly of company rights which you seem to care about. i mean, that was your whole problem with this sit in, right?
don't put words into my mouth. you clearly have a weirdo complex regarding the human body. at least own up to it. i'm speaking strictly of company rights which you seem to care about. i mean, that was your whole problem with this sit in, right?
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 38 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,716
@273,709 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
I said companies can ban whoever they'd like?
I said they can ban a specific act and request that person leave.
Yes, the civil rights sit-ins were illegal and at the time the companies had every right to force them out. The inhumanity and lack of logic in this is exactly why the laws were changed.
Please try to argue with things I actually say rather than make shit up.
I said companies can ban whoever they'd like?
I said they can ban a specific act and request that person leave.
Yes, the civil rights sit-ins were illegal and at the time the companies had every right to force them out. The inhumanity and lack of logic in this is exactly why the laws were changed.
Please try to argue with things I actually say rather than make shit up.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,717
@273,715 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
But lots of people object to public nudity. Society at large objects to it. It's not the same as being "afraid"of the human body".
But lots of people object to public nudity. Society at large objects to it. It's not the same as being "afraid"of the human body".
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 14 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,718
@273,716 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
you acted like your whole problem with this was the illegal sit in.
you acted like your whole problem with this was the illegal sit in.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,719
@273,717 (B)
it might be the same. why object to something that can't hurt anyone? which probably means that they feel the nude form can hurt some people.
it might be the same. why object to something that can't hurt anyone? which probably means that they feel the nude form can hurt some people.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 19 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,720
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,721
@273,713 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
> prattling on about how scary nipples are
> not providing photographic evidence of your supple, perky nipples
> 2012
> prattling on about how scary nipples are
> not providing photographic evidence of your supple, perky nipples
> 2012
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 31 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,722
@273,689 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
That doesn't really work. The only way that would work would be if the black people are naturally white and have the ability to become black at will, and when they become black they make other people uncomfortable, and the owner of the shop asked them that if they want to become black can they please do it in the bathroom ten feet away, and there are many viable alternatives to becoming black at all.
If that was the case then I would not support the black people's sit in.
But that is not the case. Black people do not have a choice whether they can be black or not, so telling them they cannot come in for that is wrong.
That doesn't really work. The only way that would work would be if the black people are naturally white and have the ability to become black at will, and when they become black they make other people uncomfortable, and the owner of the shop asked them that if they want to become black can they please do it in the bathroom ten feet away, and there are many viable alternatives to becoming black at all.
If that was the case then I would not support the black people's sit in.
But that is not the case. Black people do not have a choice whether they can be black or not, so telling them they cannot come in for that is wrong.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,723
This thread is confusing the fuck out of me.
What are we even talking about.
What are we even talking about.
(Edited 10 seconds later.)
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,725
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,726
I got some friends together, and we have planned an outing for today.
We are going to go around to stores with No Shirt No Shoes No Service signs and walk around barefoot. If we are asked to leave, we will sit around and try to prevent that store from doing business. If challenged about our actions, we will claim that anyone who questions us has some weird repressed sexual hang-ups about seeing people's feet.
I will report back to let you know how it goes.
We are going to go around to stores with No Shirt No Shoes No Service signs and walk around barefoot. If we are asked to leave, we will sit around and try to prevent that store from doing business. If challenged about our actions, we will claim that anyone who questions us has some weird repressed sexual hang-ups about seeing people's feet.
I will report back to let you know how it goes.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 57 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,728
Dead !Pool7hVoC2 replied with this 15 years ago, 42 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,730
I didn't read the last 75 posts
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 8 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,731
i think that maybe i'm just not getting the mindset behind being offended by breastfeeding. is it the milk tha'st the issue? would it be okay for breast milk to be in a bottle? is it the cleavage because i've seen people in target and many other places showing a lot of boob flesh. is it the nipple itself that's gross? fill me in, because i really don't understand.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 36 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,734
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 12 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,736
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,738
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,740
@273,731 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
It is incredibly vulgar. I would not let adults eat food in my store either. A store is not a place for eating. They have rooms where people can go for that if they seriously cannot wait until they get home.
It is incredibly vulgar. I would not let adults eat food in my store either. A store is not a place for eating. They have rooms where people can go for that if they seriously cannot wait until they get home.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,741
@previous (J)
targets have snack bars and people are free to walk around in stores while consuming food or drink.
targets have snack bars and people are free to walk around in stores while consuming food or drink.
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 20 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,750
@previous (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Only an uncultured oaf would actually do that.
I thought target was a clothes store anyway. Here, all clothes stores ban food and drink.
Only an uncultured oaf would actually do that.
I thought target was a clothes store anyway. Here, all clothes stores ban food and drink.
(Edited 40 seconds later.)
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,751
@previous (J)
most targets here have groceries,garden centers, snack bars, etc. so you're against breastfeeding in public because you hate all public eating? interesting.
most targets here have groceries,garden centers, snack bars, etc. so you're against breastfeeding in public because you hate all public eating? interesting.
Anonymous J replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,752
@previous (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
> so you're against breastfeeding in public because you hate all public eating? interesting.
...no.
I've already said why I am. I'm not doing this circular bullshit with you. Why don't you address @273,722 (J) instead of ignoring it, anyway.
> so you're against breastfeeding in public because you hate all public eating? interesting.
...no.
I've already said why I am. I'm not doing this circular bullshit with you. Why don't you address @273,722 (J) instead of ignoring it, anyway.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,755
@previous (J)
i agree with you on that, they are not exactly the same situation. do this mean that stores have less of a right to ban certain people? i don't know. which part of breastfeeding actually offends you? i'm not trying to fight, just learn.
i agree with you on that, they are not exactly the same situation. do this mean that stores have less of a right to ban certain people? i don't know. which part of breastfeeding actually offends you? i'm not trying to fight, just learn.
Dead !Pool7hVoC2 replied with this 15 years ago, 36 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,766
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 6 hours later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,974
Totendie !UuOO./0k.M joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,976
Are nipples full of tiny microscopic holes?
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,981
Totendie !UuOO./0k.M replied with this 15 years ago, 38 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,991
@previous (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
I saw a video of a woman breastfeeding a the milk came out of the nipple in many different streams.
I saw a video of a woman breastfeeding a the milk came out of the nipple in many different streams.
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 13 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #273,994
i have a solution to the whole problem. legalize being topless; it's pretty messed up that women don't have the equal right to go topless. If it's an issue of displaying secondary sexual characteristics, then men should be forced to wear tops as well, and stop showing their pecs and chest hair in public.
cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 11 hours later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #274,157
http://msn.foxsports.com/nascar/story/Kasey-Kahne-apologizes-for-breastfeeding-remarks-122811
NASCAR star Kasey Kahne apologized Wednesday night for an outburst on Twitter in which he blasted a mother for breastfeeding in a supermarket.
The incident occurred Tuesday when the 31-year-old, who lives in Mooresville, NC, saw a woman nursing her child.
"Just walking though supermarket," Kahne tweeted. "See a mom breast feeding little kid. Took second look because obviously I was seeing things. I wasn't!"
Kahne added, "One boob put away one boob hanging!! #nasty.
"I don't feel like shopping anymore or eating."
His tweets caused outrage on the social networking site, with one woman named Deana P., posting, "I hope someday you have a kid and someone tells your wife that feeding your child looks nasty."
Kahne caused further furor by responding, "And your a dumb b*tch," to which she countered, "Stay classy a**hole."
Kahne later deleted his tweet and Wednesday took to Facebook to apologize for his remarks.
"I understand that my comments regarding breastfeeding posted on Twitter were offensive to some people," he wrote. "For that, I apologize. It was in no way my intention to offend any mother who chooses to breastfeed her child, or, for that matter, anyone who supports breastfeeding children. I want to make that clear.
"In all honestly, I was surprised by what I saw in a grocery store. I shared that reaction with my fans on Twitter. It obviously wasn't the correct approach, and, after reading your feedback, I now have a better understanding of why my posts upset some of you."
NASCAR star Kasey Kahne apologized Wednesday night for an outburst on Twitter in which he blasted a mother for breastfeeding in a supermarket.
The incident occurred Tuesday when the 31-year-old, who lives in Mooresville, NC, saw a woman nursing her child.
"Just walking though supermarket," Kahne tweeted. "See a mom breast feeding little kid. Took second look because obviously I was seeing things. I wasn't!"
Kahne added, "One boob put away one boob hanging!! #nasty.
"I don't feel like shopping anymore or eating."
His tweets caused outrage on the social networking site, with one woman named Deana P., posting, "I hope someday you have a kid and someone tells your wife that feeding your child looks nasty."
Kahne caused further furor by responding, "And your a dumb b*tch," to which she countered, "Stay classy a**hole."
Kahne later deleted his tweet and Wednesday took to Facebook to apologize for his remarks.
"I understand that my comments regarding breastfeeding posted on Twitter were offensive to some people," he wrote. "For that, I apologize. It was in no way my intention to offend any mother who chooses to breastfeed her child, or, for that matter, anyone who supports breastfeeding children. I want to make that clear.
"In all honestly, I was surprised by what I saw in a grocery store. I shared that reaction with my fans on Twitter. It obviously wasn't the correct approach, and, after reading your feedback, I now have a better understanding of why my posts upset some of you."
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #274,183
@previous (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
He sounds gay.
> NASCAR
Definitely gay.
He sounds gay.
> NASCAR
Definitely gay.
(Edited 22 seconds later.)
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #274,185
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 52 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #274,186
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 15 years ago, 51 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #274,187
@274,157 (cccuuunnttt !CaTLdYmooc)
he should have just kept his mouth shut. now he looks like a tool.
he should have just kept his mouth shut. now he looks like a tool.
(Edited 16 seconds later.)
Anonymous K replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #274,188
Anonymous N replied with this 15 years ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #274,367
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #274,380
@274,183 (E)
To watch some of the interviews with him, he does kind of cause a blip on the gaydar. I wouldn't be surprised.
To watch some of the interviews with him, he does kind of cause a blip on the gaydar. I wouldn't be surprised.