Wow...where do I even start?
There are so many things wrong with this message that I don’t even know where to begin.
First off, I can't quite figure out if the editors did this for shock value or if someone actually thought it was a good idea. Either way it was in poor taste and offensive in my book.
Let's start with the mother. As far as I can tell she seems more concerned with her sexy looks than she is with breast-feeding.
I can happily tell you that any breast-feeding mothers I have been in the presence of, whether they were family, friends or strangers, did it with love and class. It was a nurturing and maternal process strengthening the bond between mother and child. They showed modesty and dignity while delivering essential nutrients to their children.
Another issue is the age of the child. As far as I'm concerned, if the child is wearing camouflage pants and can stand on a chair next to his mom, he is too old to breast-feed. The child in this image is at a developmental level where he is learning essential coping skills for life and he has reached an age where he will retain his memories. I don't know about you, but I certainly don't want any memories of being latched to my mother’s breast, especially on the cover of a national magazine.
Last, but certainly not least, is the message "Are you mom enough?" Mom enough for what, exactly? To breast-feed a child who is clearly too old? “Mom enough” to pay more attention to your own body than to your child’s? To make sure everyone is looking at you and that you are the center of attention?
What does this message say to moms who cannot physically breast feed? Does it mean they aren't “mom” enough?
Overall, this cover set breast-feeding and attachment parenting back a decade.
My final statement on this topic: This is a bad cover, a bad image and a bad message. Bad job Time magazine; I am finished with you and will not be reading you in the future.