Talk:Erotic lactation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Erotic lactation article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
Archive
Archives
Archive 1


Contents

[edit] Founding Erotic lactation and merging from Milk fetishism

This article is a direct replacement for the Milk fetishism page. See Talk:Milk fetishism for discussion regarding the renaming and merger of these articles.

[edit] Appropriate naming

I wonder if the subject of Adult Nursing or Adult Nursing Relationship should be its own article. The reason is that there appear to be people who don't consider it erotic or sexual in nature, but primarily a relationship nurturing type thing. Of course, I don't buy that, but if there are reliable citations out there that assert it is not sexual, I think it should be split from this article. Thoughts? --Ars Scriptor 14:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The greek word "Eros" means "love" or "sensual love". Therefore "erotic lactation" isn't most bad I think - it can mean either the relationship or the feelings... --Carlo

[edit] Image removed

The article featured the image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:MiniCouple.gif , wich I decided to remove, because I found it completely pointless to feature a crude miniature, wich could even be considered pornographic (but who cares about blocky pieces of porn anyway?) Frank Miller 21:54, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted this as a kind of vandalism. --Fritz Bollmann 13:09, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I have reverted that as a display of WP:OWN Fruit Basket 04:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Comment: I personally had asked the creator of this picture and got personally his general permission. --Fritz Bollmann 20:46, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Against masculinity?

From the introduction: "But generally speaking one must assume this to be a rather strong taboo, and it can be concluded that a man suckling on a female breast is in contradiction to well established images of masculinity." If suckling a female breast was a contradiction in St Bernard's time then the tense is wrong. I don't know why one must assume this generally and there does not appear to be any evidence to support the claim. As it stands, since it is written in present tense, most people I have had cause to discuss such matters with actually believe that suckling on a female breast, whether the female be lactating or not, is a very manly thing to do that every man should be aiming to do more. Waerloeg 06:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Right, suckling/kissing the breasts/nipples isn't a taboo of course - rather it's the oppossite. But drinking the milk directly from the breast is a taboo, at least if done repeated/continuous. Might be this is a question of my insufficient english. Can any of the native english-spekers help? --Fritz Bollmann 21:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks dude. Have done so. Incidentally, if this is your "insufficient English" come set up a language school: The locals could do with a few pointers. Waerloeg 07:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving of talk page

I've archived the old discussions of this talk page. See Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines and Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page for more information. Robotman1974 10:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Well done, Thank You --Fritz Bollmann 08:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] effects of morning after pill on lactation

Is there any negative effects on the baby if the mother takes the morning after pill? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.193.45.20 (talk) 07:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Very Wide Spread?

The article says 'Lactation games:... Very widespread in the time after child birth...' Okay? Sez who? Can we get a citation please? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.157.180.136 (talk) 04:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC).

Done - thank you for the hint. I was a just existing reference ( Rogers, Lois: Earth dads give breast milk a try, The Sunday Times, March 13, 2005). --Caruso —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.190.126.226 (talk) 09:56, 12 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Adult Breastfeeding & Survival

There is a segment of the Adult Nursing Community who believe Adult Breastfeeding dates back to the early development of the human species, and that maintaining a lactation response within an Adult Nursing Relationship is not as difficult as previously believed.

The theory is that primitive men sought lactating women for supplemental nourishment during seasonal or winter famine; and that women maintained their milk supply for most of their adult lives. Women store fat easier than men, women have slower metabolisms than men, and women can initiate lactation independent of pregnancy or childbirth. This theory embraces the metabolic differences between men and women and gives a lone male hunter a practical survival reason for keeping and protecting a woman in the wilderness. It ties details of lactation, bonding, fertility, pregnancy, miscarriage, childbirth and infant mortality into the overall survival equation. It promotes the notion that Adult Breastfeeding is a survival tool unique to our species and is more about survival instincts and bonding than it is about sexual gratification or fetish. It also explains why human females have enlarged breasts, why men are attracted to female breasts, why lactation promotes infertility, why women often have too much milk after childbirth, and why the emotions generated within Adult Nursing Relationships are so powerful. Mlklvr 22:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Another option is that with death rates in primitive populations being so high, it would be reasonable to assume that one mother might take on nursing responsibilities another mother's child were that person to die or something of that sort. Such practice is common among peoples in developing nations. Just because a woman can lactate without childbirth, does not necessarily mean that such an adaptation was the result of nursing adult populations. Far more likely, I think, it was simply to allow young to survive the death of their natural mother through mutual childcare. Of course, neither theory is documented, so niether should appear here.--Lendorien 17:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed link

CCRoxtar has removed the SpicyTalk link, because the discussion page is unreachable. Because this discussion page was very informative, we should look from time to time, whether the page was down occasionally only. --Julia

I have restored the Spicy Talk link today, because it works again. Probably the site was down for some days only. --Fritz Bollmann 08:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link to Roman Charity

There's a delete-revert-delete-revert fight since some time about a link to the Roman Charity article. Deletion argument: "It's incest". Reverting argument "No censorship".

Nor the Roman Charity article or the link is from me, but let me explain the background as short as possible: The story tells a major conflict: Watch an existing taboo (incest in this case) or saving a live by breaking this taboo. The story is discussed for 2000 years and longer. Censoring it now, probably looks a bit provincial ;-) --Fritz Bollmann 07:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Apodosis: I have added a detailed Roman Charity chapter with an explanation, why this story is interesting in context with erotic lactation. Can any of you have a look at my spelling errors? Thank You. --Fritz Bollmann 10:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
The new edits to roman charity smack of original research and unsourced claims. I think that one can make many assumptions about reasons of the interest artists had in the account. But for wikipedia, assumption isn't good enough. There needs to be sourcing and documentation for the reasoning behind it or it's original research and unverified. As it stands now, it needs to be rewritten.--Lendorien 17:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I have added references to the two original text sources including english translations (the best available, others are incomplete or not as exact). These references were truely missing, thank you. Over and above that, the text is very clear, state of the art (of art sience...) and free of speculations I hope. --Fritz Bollmann 10:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:AnrLogo.gif

I notice this image keeps being removed and re-added. I have no opinion on that except to say that removing the image is not vandalism. This is a content dispute, so throwing accusations of vandalism around is the wrong way to go about this. I suggest that the steps outlined at WP:DR be followed instead. Robotman1974 16:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I'm very sorry to delete the Sweetmilk Yahoo Group link because links to closed (membership) discussion groups are not allowed. For the same reason other links to Yahoo groups have been deleted earlier, but not by me. The direct occasion was, on 1st July 2007 the admin Spartaz deleted all external links. This was accidentaly I guess, but the straight reason was supposable the "Sweetmilk" link, which was the very first in the list at this time.

Summary: Please no links to closed discussion groups, which require a membership to read the content.

--Fritz Bollmann 08:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Fritz Bollman,
I dont understand why you feel the need to delete Sweetmilk..it is free to join it, and anyone can join it, they just need to be approved first to make sure to keep spammers out. It is a very educational group about this topic.
And as you are not a part of admin here, I dont understand why you take it upon yourself to delete such an informative group.
milkmaid 00:19, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
You are right, let's try it again. I have nothing against the link, but in past the article just got problems with other membership groups, such as SNCLIST. Anyway, I'm not entirely a Wikipedia specialist, let's wait, what other admins will do in future. --Fritz Bollmann 08:27, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
It should be okay to include the links to the age-restricted yahoo sites. I have re-posted the SNC link. If there is a specific Wikipedia policy against this, please post a wikilink to that policy. Thanks, Captain Zyrain 06:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Take a look at WP:EL#Sites_requiring_registration Arthurrh 16:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

This latest reference added - How do I get my wife interested in breastfeeding?, Adult Nursing Feeding & Other Private Topics, Spicytalk.com. Sure doesn't seem to fit inside the guidelines at WP:VER. Arthurrh 16:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quality since date: 21 January 2008

Up to January, the 21th the article left a good impression to me. But the following changes read sometimes a bit speculative, sometimes a bit irrelevant and sometimes a bit like nonsense. Am I right or false?! The problem: There are a lot of changes on a lot of points in the text... --Sue —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.190.70.130 (talk) 16:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ethical?

I wonder if breastfeeding an adult is ethical or not :P Anonkawai (talk) 00:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

please fix the references: I tried but failed Anonkawai (talk) 00:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Depends on the questioner and his own ethics. Not an uninteresting question because from medical point of view nothing points against it. From religious view, christian: Proverbs 5:19 (direct translated bible) allows it, sunni islam: several fatwas allow it. However, in the 19th century several woman found breastfeeding of babies sick and harmful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.190.109.114 (talk) 08:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kabukantiki Hawaii

Article text:

Historically, induced lactation and consumption of females breast milk in the Hawaiian [Kabu-Khan] was believed to ward off evil spirits. The most fertile of tribe females were enslaved and forced to supply milk to many of the Kabu warriors. This service sometimes lasted up to 7-10 years often resulting in overtly large and quite inflated mamory tissue. Through tribe accounts, it has been implied that some women produced up to 3 gallons of milk a day. (Tibet to Mahui. p 77)

Can't find anything of this chapter using Google. Is this a very old source or a joke? --Jackon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.190.110.240 (talk) 15:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)