Posted in: Entertainment

Jamie Lynne Grumet Defends Time Magazine Cover Photo

time magazine

You may not know Jamie Lynne Grumet but you’ve probably seen her picture. She’s the mom on the cover of Time Magazine breastfeeding her 3-year-old child.

The photo has stirred up a lot of controversy, which according to Grumet, was exactly the point.

Grumet said:

“I do understand why Time chose this picture because…it did create such a media craze to get the dialogue talking. We knew exactly what we were going to get in to.”

Grumet did say, however, that the photo doesn’t depict how she actually breastfeeds her son. The 26-year-old said that when she breastfeeds at home her 3-year-old son Aram is sitting on her lap, not standing on a stool. Grumet said that most people aren’t taking issue with the fact that Aram is too old. Instead, breastfeeding advocates argue that the picture shows a shocking example of breastfeeding and not a natural one.

Grumet said:

“I understand some of the breastfeeding advocates are actually upset about this… This isn’t how we breastfeed at home. It’s more of a cradling, nurturing situation.”

Time Magazine editor-in-chief Rick Stengel said that several photos taken during the shoot were less shocking. The photo of Grumet and her son was chosen for the cover because he knew that it would get people talking. Grumet said:

“It’s certainly an arresting image. It’s an image to get people’s attention about a serious subject. Judging by the reaction on Twitter this morning, some people think it’s great, and some people are revolted by it. That’s what you want. You want people talking…”

What did you think about Jamie Lynne Grumet’s photo on Time Magazine?

Articles And Offers From The Web

Comments

12 Responses to “Jamie Lynne Grumet Defends Time Magazine Cover Photo”

  1. Ashley Branson

    Healthcare professionals say you can breast feed as long as you and the child feel comfrontable doing

  2. Ginger Strader

    That is just wrong. Sorry but you breast feed BABIES not toddlers and certainly not 6 or 7 year olds. Take a look at dogs, cats, cows and other mammals, when their babies are old enough to eat food, they no longer nurse them! DUHHH!!!!!

  3. Sherri Tatum Hebert

    It's the photo. She KNEW and Time KNEW it would get a rise out of us. What is she going to do when it gets a RISE out of the boy? Will she think that's enough or not? SHe is STUPID and you can't fix stupid. We don't know what the other poses were. You can't tell me he won't wonder WHY in 10 or 12 years his mom made him take the photo. She will have to answer to GOD for posing "arrestingly" Time said. She may get arrested or fines…you never know do you??? THAT would be greatl! I will be the FIRST to laugh.

  4. Tracy Ariza

    Wow, there are some ignorant comments about this story, but Ginger's was my favorite. Maybe she should do some research before writing. Just google "Natural Weaning Age," and you'll find several ways that they have tried to calculate an age of when humans should wean by comparing with weaning ages of other mammals. It's always much later than the average US weaning age. These, of course, are looking at animals in the wild, and not a litter of puppies that you unnaturally pull away from their mothers to get rid of them as quickly as is considered somewhat humanely possible. Here's an example page that explains some of the ways they've tried to compare… http://voices.yahoo.com/natural-weaning-age-science-extended-breastfeeding-2610957.html

  5. Tracy Ariza

    I'm not saying I love the photo shoot, but I get annoyed with people who are judging a mother for letting her son self wean. Breastfeeding is a great way to assure that a picky toddler or sick child is getting nutrients and antibodies to help his or her immune system. There are many established benefits to both the mother and the baby. So, I have a hard time understanding why people are so nasty about a mother who is trying to do what is best for their child. I just don't understand.

  6. Tracy Ariza

    Too bad your "fact" about other mammals is completely false. You are free to wean your child when you feel fit, and I bring no judgement to those who choose to wean earlier or later. It is a personal decision. On the other hand, if you are going to be judgmental and criticize other mothers, at least get your facts straight before you make silly comparisons. If you compare with other mammals, we would all be breastfeeding much longer.

  7. Lee Dworshak

    First, I'm not a prude. Growing up in the '50s and '60s I got to see my share of Hugh Hefner's Playboy magazines and later on Bob Guccione's even racier Penthouse. Even with my vast experience reading "men's" magazines I find myself uncomfortable today as I look down on my coffee table and see a newly arrived copy of the much discussed May, 21st edition of Time Magazine. Its cover features a young attractive blond with a large boy firmly attached to her left breast. The caption under the photo reads," Jamie Lynne Grumet, 26 and her 3-year-old son." It should be noted that the actual cover wasn't blurred out like my version here.

    I haven't even opened the magazine yet, but I'm sure, if I can just get by the cover, I'll eventually read the article "Are You Mom Enough?"

    "Where should I hide it?" was the first thing that came to mind when I spotted the magazine on the table. While my wife and I are empty nesters, we still have frequent and sometimes unannounced visits from our very young great nieces and nephews. How will I explain this to some of our favorite 10-12 years olds I thought? I didn't even want to consider going there.

    Somewhere in my mind growing up, I came to understand that pretty much everything in the world had its time and place. The universe as I knew it was aligned. We had karma. Playboy, Penthouse and all the others like them certainly had their place in society and serious print media had theirs. While the actual printed periodicals produced by the giant mega media magazine/newspaper business would sometimes blur the line; even Playboy and Penthouse quite often had well written serious articles from top writers, main stream media still stayed where they belonged; in the main stream.

    It now appears that we, like Caesar, have crossed the Rubicon. There's no turning back now. When respected main stream media like Time Magazine feels that it has to titillate the masses (no pun intended) with a racy, controversial cover just to sell their rag, all is lost. Breast feeding our young, how long and where it should be done, has long been a subject of debate. Let's further the discussion without the sensationalism. The May 21st cover of Time, at best, was unnecessary and largely an insult to most people's intelligence.

    I was a long time proponent and subscriber of the magazine. Not anymore. I'm cancelling tomorrow.

    First, I'm not a prude. Growing up in the '50s and '60s I got to see my share of Hugh Hefner's Playboy magazines and later on Bob Guccione's even racier Penthouse. Even with my vast experience reading "men's" magazines I find myself uncomfortable today as I look down on my coffee table and see a newly arrived copy of the much discussed May, 21st edition of Time Magazine. Its cover features a young attractive blond with a large boy firmly attached to her left breast. The caption under the photo reads," Jamie Lynne Grumet, 26 and her 3-year-old son." It should be noted that the actual cover wasn't blurred out like my version here.

    I haven't even opened the magazine yet, but I'm sure, if I can just get by the cover, I'll eventually read the article "Are You Mom Enough?"

    "Where should I hide it?" was the first thing that came to mind when I spotted the magazine on the table. While my wife and I are empty nesters, we still have frequent and sometimes unannounced visits from our very young great nieces and nephews. How will I explain this to some of our favorite 10-12 years olds I thought? I didn't even want to consider going there.

    Somewhere in my mind growing up, I came to understand that pretty much everything in the world had its time and place. The universe as I knew it was aligned. We had karma. Playboy, Penthouse and all the others like them certainly had their place in society and serious print media had theirs. While the actual printed periodicals produced by the giant mega media magazine/newspaper business would sometimes blur the line; even Playboy and Penthouse quite often had well written serious articles from top writers, main stream media still stayed where they belonged; in the main stream.

    It now appears that we, like Caesar, have crossed the Rubicon. There's no turning back now. When respected main stream media like Time Magazine feels that it has to titillate the masses (no pun intended) with a racy, controversial cover just to sell their rag, all is lost. Breast feeding our young, how long and where it should be done, has long been a subject of debate. Let's further the discussion without the sensationalism. The May 21st cover of Time, at best, was unnecessary and largely an insult to most people's intelligence.

    I was a long time proponent and subscriber of the magazine. Not anymore. I'm cancelling tomorrow.