Bear baiting? Dwarf tossing? The rendering down for spare parts of the entire England football team?*
No. It appears that expressing an opinion that contradicts perceived wisdom can't be allowed:
On the pro-breastfeeding website Lactivist, one woman wrote: "This surely cannot be allowed, for a woman in her position to be so unapologetically negative regarding breastfeeding and generally spreading misinformation."Poor Kathryn Blundell, deputy editor of 'Mother & Baby' magazine, thought this was a free country.
Many vested interests now seem intent on showing her how wrong she is.
Blundell's piece has electrified parenting websites and six people have complained to the PCC. Many are furious at the anti-breastfeeding message being sent out by a journalist in a senior position at a magazine read by new mothers. Others are more angry at the tone of the article and the reasons the author cites for not breastfeeding, rather than the fact that it is pro-bottle feeding.Luckily, she has an editor who isn't (so far) backing down:
Miranda Levy, the magazine's editor, said: "Mother & Baby is a constant and vocal supporter of breastfeeding."Which, I suspect, will not go down too well with the harridens and 'lactivists'...
Of Blundell's article, she said: "This was her personal experience, and has a place in the debate. We have been inundated by emails applauding her 'refreshing' point of view: we have made readers feel 'normal' and less of a 'failure' for not managing to breastfeed – a situation which is incredibly common.
"The way you feed your baby is not a moral issue and at Mother & Baby we seek to support all new parents in what is a glorious, but often difficult and emotional, time."
*OK, I'll give you that last one probably should be allowed...