This could be a riff on the old “Why do women make such bad carpenters” joke. Maybe he’s never seen a real breast, if you now what I mean.
What heads will be exploding? What point will be made? 
Or just sick of having had a baby attached to her boob the past four months. I know I would be.
I’m telling you, that guy has a sock drawer full of porn and it’s probably something weird. The more repressed the wife, the more secretly horny and pervy the husband.
My God, but people get offended easily. This one is right up there with Janet Jackson. OMG, a partial breast is exposed. The horrors!!!
It’s not there, just as it should be. Fun sex is the Devil!
Just as the night follows the day, the parody covers have arrived (bottom of page).
No, more likely that she’s taught her daughter that breasts are nasty things, too, and that her sexuality is a thing to be feared and hidden.
The most absurd part about this is that the woman (not the magazine company) left the magazine out on her coffee table so her husband could see it.
I can see being crabby about perhaps seeing this magazine prominently displayed on a newsstand where prude mommies and daddies and other people might be offended, and then writing a letter to the mag saying “that was in poor taste.” I wouldn’t be surprised or outraged.
But…this woman got the magazine with the boob on the front. Saw there was a boob on the front. Thought nothing of it. Put the magazine on the coffee table not only for her prudish husband but any other guests to see. Then prudish husband got upset over seeing the tastefully-done baby-attached-boob on the coffee table…so the she writes an angry letter to the magazine.
How is this the magazine’s fault?!?!
If you subscribe to a magazine and it does something you completely object to, throw it out and cancel your goddamn subscription!
Can you imagine if a guy brought home a Playboy, put it on his coffee table, and his wife said “I am offended by the boobs on my coffee table!” and the guy wrote an angry letter to Playboy saying “how dare you offend my wife?!”?
Playboy would simply say “dude, that’s what sock drawers are for.” It wouldn’t cause a national media frenzy.
When Daddy doe’s it? 
I apologize. I should have been more clear in my post. I was thinking of a couple of specific women I know. Which is why it’s frightening. I work with them, and their hubbies and little Lord Fauntleroy’s are protected, nurtured, and waited upon hand and foot. These particular women speak of the virtue and holiness of the men in their lives. The daughters (ages 12 and 14) are groomed to be the next Cosmo cover models, entered in pageants where they wear bikini’s and sing “Genie in a Bottle” as their talent portion of the competition. I can’t believe that there aren’t more women like them out there, but maybe those two families are anomalies.
I’ve seen the daughters of the women you reference, too. It’s a shame to see either scenario happen.
It depends on what magazines you look at . . .
Or just do a Google search of “lactating”. You’ll learn a lot about what can be a sexual thing. Education is fun!
:eek: You don’t think she had her breasts uncovered at the time, do you? What kind of harlot are you?
Of course, we’ve seen more of your breast than that woman’s . . . 
I am one! I mean, I was raised like that…“sleep with your hands out of the covers. Don’t touch yourself. No, you don’t needa gynecologist, why would you need that? Are you having sex? :dubious: :mad:”
Ah well. Least I got over that.
Wow, smiley overload. Didn’t realize it would look so bad. Sorry.
Apparently I need to spend more time in MPSIMS.
Wait… what’s the distinction again?
Testicles aren’t as big as toy balls. Unless you OD on Viagra.
Me too. How’s about a link for those of us who don’t dive into all the picture threads?
I’m not offended by the cover, just confused about the angle. In all my years of breastfeeding I can only remember one time a baby attached at that angle, and that child was standing up (long story).
[soapbox]
You know, this is a classic case of squeaky wheels getting greased. A vast number of people must have seen this image and either were not offended or ignored it altogether – only a handful of people were offended. That handful was so disproportionately outraged and so vocal about it that an otherwise harmless photograph was removed in shame.
The last time I checked, the majority rules in this country. Going by the sentiments of this board and my own, there was absolutely nothing wrong with that photo; indeed it was downright sweet and only portraying a natural act of motherhood. Babytalk magazine was wrong to pull the cover. In fact, they should re-issue the cover and state in an editorial that they will not pander to a shrill minority.
I am really tired of prudish, selfish busybodies with nothing better to do than make trouble where no real offense has occurred. These people can go jump in a lake.
[/soapbox]