THE writer of the letter headlined, 'Use pump' (South China Morning Post, March 2), finds breast-feeding in public deplorable. But I find his/her attitude deplorable.
Mother's milk is well known to be better than any formula for infants and breast-feeding is well known to be superior to bottle feeding, even with the same milk.
Why should a normally breast-fed baby be denied his/her due when both the mother and the baby are together at feeding time? Does that letter writer realise that marvellous nature has synchronised the biological clocks of the mother and the baby - when the baby wants to suckle, the breasts are normally full and the mother wants the baby to suckle? Does he/she also realise that a breast-fed baby would reject an artificial nipple? Aesthetically, a mother breast-feeding her baby is one of the warmest scenes on earth.
Why would anybody consider that unsightly? I am all for 'Breast-feed anytime, anywhere' (a slogan frequently seen on TV in some countries).
Perhaps I should add that ours is not an expatriate family.
R. S. TSE Ap Lei Chau IT really is monstrous how one can be misquoted. Mr Roderick Parkes' letter headlined, 'Warped thinking' (South China Morning Post, March 13), reveals that his interpretation of my letter headlined, 'Breast-feeding a fact of life' (Post, March 8), was itself rather warped. I did not equate breast-feeding, which I wholeheartedly approve of, with loutish behaviour.