Posted on 02/11/2009 7:29:28 AM PST by Red in Blue PA
Salma Hayek was so taken aback by the plight of an African woman in Sierra Leone who was unable to breastfeed her child that the star breastfed the newborn herself.
The 42-year-old actress, who was nursing her own daughter Valentina at the time, offered to help when the baby's mother stopped producing milk.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
But I do envy that kid.. LOL
“What men often don’t realize is that breast-feeding feels really good.”
I think most men realize it feels really good all the way around.
Since when is this news. Many Hollywood types have been doing this for years. Sean Penn, To Cruise, John Travolta. And many more.
It does appear that she nursed this baby out of the goodness of her heart. But... I'm not sure it was the right thing to do, as heartfelt as this gesture may have been.
As a woman who nursed her own babies, I know that one feeding isn't going to help this baby much. He's going to be hungry again in a couple of hours. Will there be another wet nurse available? Do they have baby formula to give him?
Why doesn't the mother have milk for her baby? Normally, not nursing (enough) is what leads to not enough milk. Nursing is what creates more milk. If a baby receives his nourishment elsewhere, even for one meal, that's less milk the mother will produce. I remember family members wanting to bottlefeed my baby - for their own enjoyment - and offering, "Let us give you a break." In reality, that doesn't give a mother a break; it makes matters worse because if she doesn't expel that milk, she will produce less the next day and then will have to nurse more to make up for it.
So, I'm not sure this kind gesture was the right thing to do.
now that’s my vast!!! ; )
Hey Selma, I’m hungry!
I’m a man so I caveat my thoughts here by saying I can’t have experienced what you have.
I’m reminded of the old adage, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” Tremendous truth in those words. But when we prosperous Westerners come across a person in need we are usually not in a position to teach them how to fish, but only feed them at that very moment.
So I think she should have done what her heart inspired her to do. Here are some potential benefits:
The baby gets a days’ worth of nutrition.
The mother and the village are warmed, maybe convicted, by such a loving act. Far more loving than just ladling rice out of a large pot (which happens elsewhere).
The publicity from the act might bring gifts from the West to that very village. Perhaps a church in Hayek’s home town. Perhaps one of the baby formula conglomerates will donate free formula for a year. Maybe the Gates Foundation will allocate some resources to that village.
And even if none of that happens, the baby will be happy and calm for another day. There is no down side there.
If a baby had a soiled diaper, would you not change it because you weren’t sure there would be a clean one tomorrow? Our church builds houses in Mexico — modest ones, mind you — and even though we know that the poor people may not appreciate it, or trash it, should we not do it?
The Bible (yes, we’re Christian) commands us to not worry about tomorrow. While that doesn’t mean we don’t buy life insurance and save for retirement, it does mean we live today doing the right things with joy in our hearts. That means giving, giving, and giving, and not fretting about what happens after that.
Caveat: had you told me that Hayek risked her own life by breastfeeding the baby — e.g., she could get infected or even AIDS — that’s a different story.
So, sorry, I disagree with you.
Please explain how you find it “gross.”
Breast feeding is not gross. The satged event like Obama’s Oprah hour in FL yesterday is a liberal photo op.
Salma was like oh these poor Africans let us white or hispanic women breast feed your children. If she did it without cameras then it MAY have been a noble gesture but it is creepy lib propaganda. Be prepared for a new Africa welfare initiative where your kids or grandkids get hit with another $1 trillion welfare package.
Maybe feed the poor woman some food to allow her to feed her kid.
I said the same thing and people are bashing me. It is a set up to get those nice Americans to send Africa $1 trillion. An Oprah moment. You watch for the Africa bailout.
You will be helping...you can count on that. Expect a $500 billion to $1 trillion aid package that you and your kids will be paying for. It was a photo op setup and it was a staged as everyone in Florida yesterday asking Obama to give them a house.
Those people were picked in advnaced and were given the questions and we will pay for it. Hayek is a UN ambasssador and the event was staged.
What you say is quite possible, and knowing Obama it probably is going to take place whether Hayek breastfeeds a hungry baby or not. The question is, why do you think breastfeeding is “gross,” to use your word, when the rest of the world regards it as a healthy, normal, and God-given way for women to nourish their children?
I’ll let Frantzie speak for himself, but if this was staged as many assert, it was gross, very gross.
That grossness is based on the fact that breastfeeding is a very personal and beautiful thing, and this photo-op has twisted it into an ugly political act, shoving it into the face of decent people everywhere..
“wonder how many people under fifty know what a “wet nurse” is?”
I’m 37 and was wondering the same thing. Publicity stunt or not, she literally gave of herself for another. That’s more than most would do. Frankly, there’s nothing wrong with it nor is it gross.
Mike
No no no. The act is not. Poor choice of words. It is a private matter that should be respected.
Doing it with a team of camera people there in a staged event is awful.
Bash they will. Until we stop buying the Liberal goods as Conservatives, they’ll keep on trying to sell them.
Many government Liberals, Hollywood, and the Media are very small people. Their universe is the Look Good, Feel Good, Follow the current Fashions kosmos.
They really believe in the moral superiority of some light personality-—say Barbra Streisand-—over a Winston Churchill or a George Bush.
...We have mourned unto you and you have not wept. We have piped unto you and you have not danced...(Quote not exact).
There's a big difference there. I probably didn't explain the situation well enough in the first post:
In order to produce milk, the mother has to nurse. If the baby receives, say, 4 ounces from any other source - another mother, a bottle of formula or water - during a feeding, that's 4 ounces less milk the mother will produce for her baby the next day.
Yesterday, I thought what Hayek did was out of the goodness of her heart, even though it was the wrong thing to do. Today, I'm convinced that what Hayek did was not only wrong but self-serving.
I checked the story further. The baby was healthy. The stories say he was hungry because his mother "ran out of milk." With a quick reading, the stories make it sound as if she could no longer nurse. But, apparently, she was still a nursing mother. She must've ran out of milk just for that one feeding.
Hayek would've done the baby a bigger favor by feeding the mother a bowl of rice and giving her water to drink, so that she could produce more milk, and encouraging her to nurse longer.
The baby looked content at that moment. What about the next day when the mother has even less milk because Hayek fed him the day before? I had three baby boys. Midwives, lactation consultants, and other nursing mothers - the ones who have your baby's best interest at heart - will advise: If you begin supplementing your baby's feedings with another source, you will produce less milk. In order to produce more milk, you have eat, rest, and nurse your baby around the clock.
Hayek wanted to have an experience; that's why she did what she did. She wanted to do what she'd heard her grandmother once did, and she let it be filmed so that she could tell the story. She herself may not realize it, but that was a very self-serving act.
These sorts of comments are the reason I stopped posting on FR.
People ask me sometimes why I don't want to go back to the Divided Hates of America. (Haven't been back in almost 20 years.)
I usually just tell them the USA I was born into doesn't exist anymore. But stuff like this is a pretty good example if I wanted to point at something.
Do any of you realise how bizarre you've become? There is so much more to life than hating each other. F*** politics. F*** Republicans vs Democrats. F*** liberals v conservatives. It's all just stupid and hating each other is a stupid waste way to spend a lifetime.
There is nothing that could be more natural than breast feeding. I mean, it doesn't get any more basic than that. You have to be a pretty sad and twisted individual to see something cynical in it.
Flame away. I don't care. I won't reply.
You are as naive as a suckling infant my friend.
You are nuts if you think anyone is attacking breastfeeding.
We are attacking the vacuous duplicity of the media and those who inhabit it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.