My Social Media Meltdown: Can An Introverted Writer Conquer The Internet?

I am, without question, an introvert.  I'm not the life of the party (well, unless there are several margaritas involved), I'm not the one organizing playdates and mom's nights out, and I'm not the one chatting up somebody I've never met at the park just because our kids look to be about the same age.

If I don't know you, I'm probably not going to talk to you.

It's nothing personal, it's just my nature.  It's not that I don't want to talk to you or get to know you, it's just that I find the whole putting myself out there thing kind of exhausting.

And it turns out that I'm not the only one who feels this way.

What Is An Introvert? 

Dictionary.com defines an introvert as a "reserved or shy person."

According to the Myers-Briggs' definition, an "introvert derives energy from his or her internal world of emotions and ideas, while an extrovert draws from the outside world of people and activities for spiritual sustenance."

I even found one site that described an introvert as a person who "is drained by social interaction."

Is that me?  Um, yes.  Check, check, check.  And a lot of other people too.

The Introverted Writer  

Writing has, historically, been an excellent profession for introverts.  As a writer, it used to be that you were left alone with your own thoughts and ideas.  You didn't have to converse with other people or listen to what they had to say in order to put your own thoughts on paper.  I know, paper, right? 

You could publish what you wrote in a magazine or a book and then let your work go, let your voice float around the world without ever having to truly engage with the people who heard it.

The beauty of the system was that you could say what you wanted to say without ever really having to talk to anybody.   

Or at least maybe that's how it used to be.

Apparently, it's not like that any more.

Online Writing And The Rise of Social Media 

I've discovered recently that writing is not just about writing any more.  Maybe it never really was, but I can't help but think that the rise of socia media has fundamentally changed the writing profession to the point that it isn't so introvert-friendly.

These days, you have to aggressively market yourself and your work through every available social media outlet - Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube and I'm sure others that I don't even know exist. 

You have to interact with "friends" and readers on a daily basis, posing questions, responding to their thoughts on your work, and constantly trying to cultivate an interesting image that's going to keep people coming back for more.

As writer and media consultant Lela Davidson writes in her post Social Media: Not Just For Social Butterflies: 

"if you’re working online at all, or offline for that matter, and you’re not using social media you’re going to be left behind."

Introverts Struggle With Social Media

For introverts, social media is problematic on a number of levels. 

Case in point: me.

I enjoy writing about many different aspects of parenting.  I've written blog posts on a variety of topics and in a variety of styles, from simple how-to posts like How To Hold A Family Meeting to informative posts on hot parenting topics like Disney Develops New Marketing Campaign Aimed At Newborns to opinion pieces like Report Cards For Parents? No Way! and The 3 Things Pregnant Women Need More Than A Birth Plan.  

But whether I enjoy writing, or write well, is largely irrelevant these days.  Because online writing is all about getting people to read what you've written, and, thus far, I haven't managed to market my writing, or myself, very well. 

I should be sharing everything I write with all my friends on Facebook, and seeking out new contacts via Twitter.  I should really upload a picture so people can see what I look like.  I should be putting it all out there.

I should be the social butterfly that goes against everything that is my nature.

Sure, the constant social interaction might be draining, but it might also be a positive step in coming out of my shell and facing the world head on.

So, if you want to follow me on Twitter, I'm @stlouismartmama.  I promise there will be a picture soon.  And I'm also thinking that there will be an upcoming post here on social media for introverts, as I wade out into the water and figure out how to take advantage of all that social media has to offer. 

Ten Steps To Embracing Social Media For The Socially Challenged, maybe?

I'm thinking it will start with a tip to invest in a few bottles of vodka or tequila to get the party started. 

Or would a drunk social butterfly be a bad thing?

Photo credit: sahlgoode/Flickr

Mary Fallin and More Mommy Wars: Does Motherhood Make You A Better Political Candidate?

I'm watching The View right now.  Yes, that's pretty much how I keep up with current events these days . . .

And a discussion of how sad it is that these contentious ladies are considered a credible news source by so many aside, they do have a habit of talking about topics that interest me.

Today, the topic up for discussion is Mary Fallin, the Republican candidate for governor of Oklahoma.  Fallin's Democratic opponent, Jari Askins, is also a woman, so the state of Oklahoma is poised to elect the first female governor in it's history in next Tuesday's election.

Usually, voters would be casting their votes based on their preferred political party, their conservative or liberal leanings, their understanding and assessment of the candidates' qualifications and experience. 

Unfortunately, this race seems to have been reduced to yet another battle in the mommy wars.

In a debate last Tuesday, Mary Fallin stated that her experience as a mother of six (four of whom are stepchildren) makes her more qualified to lead the state of Oklahoma than her unmarried, childless opponent.

It's a pretty simple statement.  I think that many women who have raised families or who are in the midst of caring for young children would agree that it is an exercise in patience, leadership, and compassion, and that you learn all sorts of things about time management, how to motivate people, how to handle delicate situations, how to broker peace agreements. etc. 

I could go on and on about the skills acquired in motherhood, and yes, I do personally believe that experience as a mother can be a valuable asset for a woman in other aspects of her life.   

But . . .

The fact that you learn a lot as a mother isn't really the issue here, nor is it the reason why Ms. Fallin's statement has received so much publicity.  By playing the "mom" card, and more specifically by saying that a woman who hasn't had children is less qualified, the Republican candidate has really put her foot in her mouth. 

Feminists are up in arms over the notion that in the year 2010 a woman's worth can still be defined in terms of her marital and reproductive status.  And even people who agree that motherhood provides her with valuable experience have trouble with her assertion that this experience is more valid than the outstanding (albeit childless) resume of her opponent Ms. Askins.

For me, I believe that bearing and raising children is an integral part of many women's identities.  Motherhood alters your life and changes your perspective.  It grounds you and knocks you on your ass simultaneously.  And unfortunately, it is often dismissed in our culture as less important and less valuable than so many of the other (most often paid) endeavors that women pursue.

Motherhood should be a valid point on a resume.  Raising and caring for our next generation is important work with the potential for huge long-term impact.  But just as women shouldn't be penalized for being mothers, we also shouldn't be penalized for not being a mother.  One isn't better than the other. 

Women are a diverse group, with different strengths, passions, and interests.  We are united by our ability to have children, but we don't need to be defined by it.

Ms. Fallin should be welcome to cite her experience raising her family as one small part of who she is and why she is a better candidate.  I disagree with feminists who claim that motherhood doesn't or shouldn't impact your professional identity at all.

But suggesting that Ms. Askins is lacking simply because she has never had children is taking it too far.  Life is full of choices and trade-offs, and women have come a long way in the past few decades in ensuring that we have the right to make our own choices and choose our own trade-offs. 

Fighting amongst ourselves over who has made the right or the best ones isn't going to help women anywhere. 

Fortunately, getting elected as Governor just might.  My best wishes for each of the two women, mother or not, as she heads into election night. 

Return to the Sunday Surf: 9/12-9/25

I was hesitant to start doing a Sunday Surf in the first place because I just kept thinking about how then you have to, like, actually commit to having a post for every Sunday.  But then I remembered that:

a) it's my blog and I can do what I want and
b) very few people are reading anyway.

So chances are pretty good that, most Sundays, you'll find a Sunday Surf here.  And if I have a week like last week, you won't.  I'm pretty sure that, in those instances where I don't manage one, nobody is really going to care anyway . . .

This week, however, I have somehow managed to pull a few things together from the past few weeks on the web.

• A recall of many types of Similac infant fomula due to the possible presence of beetles and larvae has made big news in the parenting world.  In an article at The Stir, Formula Recall Brings Out the Mean in Breastfeeders, Julie Ryan Evans poses an interesting question about whether it's ever okay to use a moment like this to tell mothers that this is why they "should" have breastfed.  There are a lot of statements in the article that I don't care for -- because it's pretty obvious that all they're trying to "stir" up over there is controversy and web traffic -- but Evans' makes a valid point that catty and unproductive comments are "not really necessary when women are terrified about a product they may have given their baby that's making them sick."  This unfortunate incident does highlight the risks of formua feeding, but it also highlights the need for compassion for parents who have made choices different from our own. 
• Apparently, Katy Perry is too hot for Sesame Street.  A segment that the popular singer taped for the show will not be broadcast on television due to complaints over her "skimpy" costume.  The outfit doesn't bother me at all, but I can see why some parents complained.  It's a cute clip and a catchy song if you want to check it out.  Though you may be a bad parent if you let your kids watch it . . .

• A two-part discussion of separation anxiety at Secrets of Baby Behavior struck me as something a lot of new parents might be interested in.  (And if you're looking for some blog controversy on the issue of toddlers and separation, go back a few months and check out this post at the already controversial Peaceful Parenting blog, and then read this post post at Raising My Boychick).  The last two aren't new but they definitely provide food for thought, particularly if you're interested in attachment-style parenting. 
• A recipe for Banana-Oatmeal-Chocolate Chip Cookies that contain no sugar or butter at Weelicious.  I know the no-butter-or-sugar thing doesn't sound promising, but click on over and go look at the picture.  They look soooo good!  And the blog/website has a ton of great recipes for babies, toddlers, and older kids, plus daily lunch box pictures for those of us who struggle to know what to pack that's both healthy and fun day after day after day.
• If you live in St. Louis, you don't want to miss Come Play! at COCA on Saturday, October 2 from 9-3.  Find out all about the free event from St. Louis Kids Magazine. 
• Mom-101 always makes me smile, but I particularly enjoyed her post this week about the use of stars as a behavior/reward system in kindergarten.  Are you a star-parent or a no-star parent?  Clearly, lines have been drawn in the sand . . . 
• Elita at Blacktating shared a link to an article called Why African Babies Don't Cry.  I always find it fascinating to see how our assumptions about what to expect when raising children are so heavily influenced by cultural norms.
• A study of 253 California hospitals was released this month, showing that c-section rates are significantly higher at for-profit hospitals than they are at not-for-profit hospitals.  Um, duh.  Hospitals make a lot of money off of birth in general, and c-sections in particular.  That's why Ricki Lake's movie was called The Business of Being Born . . .

So now you've got lots to look into.  Be sure to check back next Sunday, when there may or may not be another Sunday Surf!

Sunday Surf 9/6-9/11

Once again, it's been a busy week on the web.  Here are some of the highlights that I think are worth checking out:

• In an article for The Huffington Post, Assistant Professor of medical anthropology and reproductive health Melissa Cheyney questions why doctors and midwives can't seem to work together in order to improve birth outcomes for American women.  Did you know that the United States has one of the highest infant mortality rates of any developed country?  Read Cheyney's article Why Home Births Are Worth Considering in order to find out more. 
• Visit a peek inside the fishbowl to get the recipe for what appear to be the most famous granola bars on the web.  I'll be adding a healthy dose of semi-sweet chocolate chips to mine - because in our house we firmly believe that everything is better with chocolate!
• The New York Times has officially announced that it will stop printing it's paper edition "someday."  As someone who absolutely hates her digital subscriptions and would much rather curl up in a cozy chair with a real magazine or newspaper and not a laptop, I'm disappointed.  Though I suppose it would be worse if I actually read The New York Times . . . 
• Jake at Sustainable Mothering alerted me to an interesting post over at the blog Owning Pink entitled Want A Raise? Wash Your Vagina.  I'm not going to comment on this one -- I'll let you check it out for yourself and form your own opinions . . .    

Surf away - I'm off to watch a football game!

Can Children Teach Themselves?

I'm always fascinated by new and seemingly radical ideas about education.  This may explain why I was so intrigued when I came across this talk from education scientist Sugata Mitra.

Mitra's premise:  that children, if motivated by their own curiosity, can teach both themselves and others.

Watch his talk below.  What can we learn from his ideas and techniques to improve the educational system here in the United States? 

Would our children learn more if we offered guided instruction less?   



If you enjoyed the ideas in this video, or are interested in reading more from someone who questions the goals and values inherent within the American public school system, you might also like John Taylor Gatto's book Dumbing Us Down:  The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling. 

My First Sunday Surf: Real Food, Religion, Babble, and A Guest Post

It's been a busy week, complete with a toddler smashing his face in at Super Wal-Mart, a sister headed back to college, and, finally, today, the big move into our new home.

I had already forgotten how much work it is to unpack all your stuff and turn an empty house into a place that feels like home.

So I decided to take a break from deep thinking and just post some stuff that's already been posted.  Call me a slacker, I guess . . .

One of my favorite posts of the week came from Jenny at The Nourished Kitchen.  I've recently discovered Jenny's popular blog where she writes about real food and shares wholesome, traditional recipes, and her food philosophy intrigues me.  Probably because she believes that eating things like meat and butter, which I could never do without, can be part of a healthy diet. 

I don't know what my own food philosophy is right now, but Jenny's post 10 Tips For Real Food Newbies has me thinking that real food may be the way to go.

The story about the mother who revived her premature baby through physical touch after he had been declared dead has also made the rounds in the news this week, and Amy at Crunchy Domestic Goddess has a great post explaining both the story and the meaning and benefits of the term "kangaroo care."

I also really enjoyed the post Religion, The Things That Define Us, and Goodness over at Breastfeeding Moms Unite.  It's always impressive to me when bloggers share their personal thoughts and feelings because it automatically seems to make them more vulnerable to criticism and unsubscribing fans. 

Be sure to read the comments, too -- I was amazed by the intensity of the religious conviction held by so many of the people who responded, and also found the back-and-forth discussion of religious issues to be quite fascinating.

PhD in Parenting has a disappointing post at the moment -- not that I'm disappointed by the post itself, but I am disappointed that it had to be written.  In Similac and Babble Team Up To Dupe Breastfeeding Moms, Annie writes about the new Similac Breastfeeding Guide that is prominently displayed on the popuar parenting website. 

I realize that not all moms breastfeed, but don't those who do deserve to find reliable and accurate resources on any parenting website or in any parenting magazine that wants to be considered credible?  Formula companies aren't reliable breastfeeding resources.  They're just not.       

And if you're interested in birth stuff or have ever considered having a baby at home, check out my guest post over at Birth Activist on the subject of Husbands and Home Birth.  I talk about my own personal experience convicing my husband that home birth was a good choice for us, and offer my own personal theories -- which of course hold absolutely no scientific validity --  about why birth at home (and often birth in general) can be so terrifying for the men in our lives. 

Happy surfing!!!

Spreading the Word: Postpartum Depression, AOL, and Mothers Who Harm Their Children

I've never experienced postpartum depression. 

I've experienced some pretty dark moments as a mother, moments when sleep deprivation and anger and frustration and exhaustion and despair and the stresses of everyday life seem overwhelming. 

Moments when I've wished to be anywhere but here with this screaming, endlessly needy infant.

But I've never come close to experiencing postpartum depression.  I can't even imagine how truly terrifying it must be for a mother to endure.

And, like Annie at PhD in Parenting wrote, there are other women, women who have been there, whose voices need to be heard.

An article appeared on AOL today about the recent murder of two young South Carolina boys by their mother.  It included a comment made by a criminal profiler, a woman named Pat Brown who stated that postpartum depression is a "crock." 

And there are some very smart, very strong women who have been very pissed off by this blanket statement about what is a very real illness.

I don't know the specifics of the case in South Carolina, but, in this situation, they don't seem to matter.  Pat Brown wasn't just speaking specifically about this one case.  She was making a blanket statement about women everywhere.

If you're interested in this story, you can read the AOL article here.  Keep in mind, however, that it has already been edited to remove the controversial comments. 

If you're interested in some smart, serious discussions from women who have battled depression first-hand,  then here are the links that you really need to read.

Read this post from Postpartum Progress.

Or visit Catherine at Her Bad Mother and read her post The Monster In the Closet.

You can also read An Open Letter to Pat Brown (the profiler who made the offensive statement) at the Pretty Babies blog.  And the post has been updated to include Pat Brown's response.

These women, and women like them, are the experts.  They may not be professionals, and they may not  have all the answers, but they've been there.

They've been there.  In my mind, that gives them a very real right to a very valid opinion.

The criminal profiler?  Maybe, and that's a big maybe, she has a valid opinion in the specific case that she has been working on. 

But an opinion on postpartum depression in women everywhere?

No way in hell.

And AOL should know that.        

Why I Find The Stir Annoying As Hell -- or My Response to the Giselle/Breastfeeding-Should-Be-A-Law Controversy

Giselle.

Supermodel extraordinaire.

Once-upon-a-time girlfriend to Leo, wife to NFL superstar Tom Brady. 

New mother.

And a member of the breastfeeding police force.

Okay, not exactly.

I used to dislike Giselle, for no other reason than that she's married to Tom Brady.  And I hated Tom Brady, because if you're from St. Louis you might remember that thing called a Super Bowl that he singlehandedly stole from the Rams and Kurt Warner back when he was a nobody. 

And then he quickly became a somebody and the Patriots went on to dominate the NFL while the St. Louis Rams marched into oblivion.

Okay, that may not be quite how it happened, and it's probably not be a good reason to dislike the woman, but in my mind, that's how it went.  Throw in the whole Bridget Moynahan debacle, and Tom and Giselle just didn't seem like people I should like. 

But then she went and had that natural home birth in a bathtub.  Which is something that I did too.  You can call me crazy -- lots of people have.

So, in my eyes, Giselle's stock went way up.  And I started to hate Tom Brady a little less.  It isn't every man who is secure enough and smart enough to see the benefits of home birth, or to support his wife in her desire to have one. 

For some reason, moms seem to bond with celebrities who are vocally supportive of their own parenting choices.  Or even with celebrity moms who are simply pregnant at the same time.  I could say something witty and insightful here about our country's national obsession with celebrity culture, but, hey, it is what is.  I didn't say that it's right.

So now, Giselle is in the news again, for stating that mandatory breastfeeding for six months should be a "worldwide law."  Now to be fair, I'm not sure exactly what her words were.  It was said during an interview, when words can be taken out of context.  But, man, has she been flamed. 

The Stir published a blog post entitled Why I Find Giselle Bundchen Annoying As Hell, which I hated and which tempted me to write my own blog post entitled Why I Find The Stir Annoying As Hell.  You can't criticize someone for being judgemental when you're in the midst of judging them yourself.  Giselle may not have expressed herself very well, but playing the "empty-headed supermodel" card is just lame. 

And, no, Linda Sharps, it was not Giselle's ATTITUDE that got her a complication-free birth.  Preparation and knowledge do, in fact, make a big difference in birth outcome, and Giselle's decision to labor at home went a long way in getting her the birth she wanted. 

Hers was not the decision of an empty-headed supermodel, thank you very much.

Okay, so now we know that I'm annoyed by the The Stir . . .

I'll be the first to admit that Giselle needs to choose her words more carefully.   I can completely understand why so many people have been offended by some of the things she has said; she doesn't appear to have a lot of tact.  And while I support breastfeeding to 6 months and beyond, I absolutely do not believe that women need any more pressure than they are already under. 

A breastfeeding law would do nothing but create more stress for new moms who are constantly told that "breast is best" but rarely given the support and information that they need to breastfeed successfully.  Women in our culture are caught in a catch-22, and silly statements from celebrities, even celebrities I like or agree with, don't help the situation.

Although I also don't understand the thinking of one commenter who said that after hearing Giselle, it "makes her want to formula-feed."  Come on, trying to stick it to a celebrity who doesn't even know you exist is not a good enough reason to use formula.  It's just not.   

In response to all the controversy, Giselle has issued a statement on her blog, clarifying what she meant.  Giselle writes:

"My intention in making a comment about the importance of breastfeeding has nothing to do with a law.  Becoming a new mom has brought a lot of questions, I feel like I am in a constant search for answers on what might be best for my child."      

So I'm conflicted as to what my ultimate response to this whole situation should be.  I agree with most of what I think Giselle has meant to say, though I don't think that she has articulated herself very well.  She has come across as judgemental in many situations.  I don't like that. 

But I do like hearing from celebrity moms who parent in a less than mainstream way.  And I do think that she should be allowed her opinion.

Because, in the end, it's just that.  An opinion.  From a woman who is new to motherhood and still trying to figure it out.  A woman whose thoughts and feelings really have no bearing on my life or yours. 

As moms, we get opinions from everybody -- our mother-in-law, the busybody neigbour down the street, and, yes, celebrities.  But I stopped listening to my mother-in-law years ago.

And if you don't like what a celebrity says, you can stop listening to her too.

Keeping Up With the Kardashians

Last month, Kim Kardashian made headlines when she tweeted about her discomfort with public breastfeeding.  And then Kim tweeted again, this time referencing her breastfeeding sister Kourtney and saying that women should cover up.

(For an excellent take on the situation, far more nuanced than my own, check out this post from Her Bad Mother). 

A few weeks later, Kourtney wrote a post on her own blog about her experience breastfeeding her son Mason.  And then last Wednesday, Kourtney added a blog entry about co-sleeping with her son.

It's no wonder the title of their show is Keeping Up With the Kardashians.  They're a busy bunch . . .

So why am I writing about this? 

I'm not a big fan of reality shows or silly celebrities.  I tend to not watch people like the Kardashians.  But I have a lot of respect for many of the things that Kourtney writes about in her recent blog posts.  She's open and honest about how much he loves breastfeeding her son Mason.  She talks about the benefits of nursing exclusively for 6 months before starting solid foods, and is open about the fact that she doesn't plan to stop any time soon.  She even writes about nursing Mason on an airplane during takeoff and landing -- which can be hugely helpful when flying with an infant because the jaw motion helps with ear popping as the air pressure changes.  It's like the baby equivalent of gum chewing.  And not something that a lot of moms know about.

In her post about co-sleeping, Kourtney writes about how at first she thought the idea was crazy.  And about how she reached the decision that it was something she wanted to try.  She says that she loves the time snuggling up with him at night when she's had a long, busy day.  I share many of her feelings, and I think it's really neat to see a celebrity who is willing to open up about making parenting choices that are not exactly mainstream.  I imagine that many of Kourtney's fans are young women who don't know anything about breastfeeding, and didn't even know that co-sleeping is an option. 

No matter what your opinion of the Kardashians, I think that Kourtney is having a tremendously positive impact by bringing these ideas to her mainstream audience.  Any time we see a more complex image of motherhood in the media, it's a good thing. 

So why again am I writing about this?

The dates. 

Her first post was dated 6/22/10.  Her second post was dated 6/29/10.  Both appeared right on the heels her sister's tweet and the ensuing anti-Kim controversy among the natural parenting community.  Maybe I'm too cynical, but it seems like a little more than a coincidence that the Kardashian's need for positive parenting press just happened to coincide with Kourtney's desire to share details of her own experiences. 

You know, these people are skilled at PR.  I mean getting publicity is pretty much all that the Kardashians are skilled at, right?

Tell me that it doesn't look like Kourtney wrote these posts to take the heat off of her sister and draw in a whole new audience of mamas who may not have followed the Kardashians before . . .

I would like to believe it's not true.  For some strange reason I can't fully understand, I like the Kardashians.  I particularly like Kourtney.  I like that she's talked openly about aspects of motherhood that most celebrities don't share, and I like that she's been candid about the fact that she's had doubts as to whether what she's doing is right.  It all just seems so honest.

Except that maybe, it's not.

**********

What do you think?  Are Kourtney's blog posts genuine?  Or are they just part of a larger PR stunt within the family?

News Flash: Celebrities Say Stupid Things - In Defense of Kim Kardashian

Another day, another celebrity making stupid remarks.  This time it's Kim Kardashian backpedaling as fast as her thick thighs will carry her about a tweet she made regarding public breastfeeding.

Her exact tweet: on 6/18/10:

EWW Im at lunch,the woman at the table next 2 me is

breast feeding her baby w no cover up

then puts baby on table and changes her diaper

After receiving a storm of criticism, she followed by it with this tweet on 6/19/10:

My sister breast feeds!  Its a natural beautiful thing.

there's nothing wrong w it, but she covers herself, not w her boobs exposed

I'm fairly certain that tweet #2, which appears designed to appease some majorly pissed-off breastfeeding moms, only made her situation worse.  By explicitly saying what she implied in tweet #1, that moms should cover up when nursing in public, Kim became an instant hypocrite in the eyes of many.  The irony of a Playboy model who is famous for appearing scantily clad complaining about women showing their boobs is hard to miss. 

But . . .

I still don't quite think she deserved what she got.  I mean, she really made some people angry, and they made some really nasty comments, on Twitter and all over the Internet.  Lactivists in particular were fired up, and blog post after blog post rolled out on the subject.  References to the sex tape she's got floating around out there came up repeatedly.

Now, I'm a mom who has logged a lot of years breastfeeding.  I believe that babies need to eat, and that people in our culture do need to get over the notion that there should be any restrictions on when and where this can happen.  In other words, I'm all for women nursing in public, and I don't think that they should have to cover up just to make other people comfortable.  I also believe that anyone who has never actually nursed a baby has no concept of how difficult it can be to "cover up."  Most babies don't like blankets over their heads.  They may be small, but they're people, and they have opinions just like anybody else. 

Kim Kardashian obviously doesn't get all this. 

But is she supposed to?

What is she?  A model?  A playmate?  A woman who is famous for being famous?  She's not a rocket scientist people!!!  If all she has ever been exposed to is the idea that you're supposed to cover up when you nurse, has she ever given any thought to the idea that maybe you don't need to or that sometimes it isn't feasible?  I'm guessing that the irony of her telling women to cover their tits never even dawned on her, and I'm seriously wondering if she even understands the term irony.

I agree with most of what's been said, and particularly loved this post over at Code Name: Mama comparing pictures of Kim "fully dressed" with pictures of moms who are nursing.  You can probably guess who was showing more boob . . .

But celebrities aren't known for being the smartest of the bunch.  (I'm guessing that all those Hollywood publicists are really loving Twitter and all the stupid things that their celebrity clients tweet).

Is it really fair to blame Kim Kardashian or any other celebrity for making an ill-informed comment when it's really a problem that exists in society at large?

If anything, such comments present an opportunity to start conversations about the issue at hand -- for example, nursing in public and when and if women ever should cover up.  Yes, somebody needs to make sure that Kim understands why these comments are unnecessary, and why she in particular should not be making them. 

But is it fair to vilify her when she didn't know any better?  Is it really her fault?  Going off on a woman who is practically a porn star might feel good, but it isn't going to solve the greater problem of our culture's fear of lactating breasts. 

Don't get angry at Kim Kardashian.  Get angry at the culture that made her famous.  Get angry at the culture that rewards her for looking like a porn star.  Get angry at the culture that gave her the idea that what she does with her breasts is acceptable, but that feeding a hungry child with them is not.

She's a celebrity.  She said something stupid.  So what?  She's not the issue. 

I say we leave Kim Kardashian alone.  We have bigger battles to fight.