Golden Globes Gift Booby Trapper

January 19, 2010 by Heidi Green

iStock_000000534111XSmallWas it with a note of irony that the woman in charge of selecting products for the gifting suite of the Golden Globes chose to include The Booby Trapper?

We will never know, but that’s exactly what happened. Canadian Nancy Armstrong headed to Hollywood several days ago to show off her uncomfortable-sounding Booby Trapper, the latest in a long line of covers marketed to breastfeeding women.

What’s to like
Unlike other such covers, Armstrong promises that the Booby Trapper will not flop on the baby’s face. In fact, she doesn’t bill it as a breastfeeding cover so much as a breastfeeding tent.

Also, it is nice that the mother can maintain eye contact with her child while breastfeeding in public. Breastfeeding children often want to be able to engage their mothers while getting their sustenance at the breast.

What’s not to like
Armstrong’s marketing pushes the product as essential to breastfeeding in public. In fact, Armstrong recounts that when her baby daughter refused to nurse because of a competitor’s cover “flopping in her face,” Armstrong “quit nursing in public.” While it is industrious of her to develop a product to overcome this challenge, it seems far-fetched to suggest that public breastfeeding ought to be quit if it can’t be done with a cover.

Although the Booby Trapper’s site suggests that it “makes for a visible, truly happy baby,” the emphasis here is on the product’s ability to “ensure the modesty of nursing moms.” That Armstrong quit public breastfeeding due to a cover malfunction speaks volumes to her motivation for this product, that it is all about the mother’s insecurities and not about the child or the mother-child relationship.

But just as with other nursing covers and hats, the Booby Trapper serves to appease general public unease with breastfeeding. “It’s ok for mothers to breastfeed in public,” the implication seems to be, “as long as they keep those boobies under wraps.”

Arguably, any product that enables mothers who might otherwise choose not to breastfeed, to do so, is good. But I’ve said it before,  and I’ll say it again: Until breastfeeding is seen—often and everywhere—it won’t be accepted as normal. I have no interest in exposing myself—breasts, abdomen, or any other normally-covered body part—when I am in public. But even without a breastfeeding tent, babies can breastfeed without breasts being exposed if a mother chooses.

This product falls prey to the problem of many other breastfeeding aids: Mothers may grow dependent on them and then stop breastfeeding when the products no longer suit their lifestyle. A mother who is concerned about her privacy to the point that she might purchase a cover-up product would probably be better off building her confidence in public breastfeeding by going through baby gooroo’s tips or practicing her own strategies in front of a mirror or with close friend. That way, no matter what—if she is out without her tent when her baby becomes hungry, if the baby becomes resistant to the cover, if something spills on her tent while she is travelling—she is still able to breastfeed.

That’s what’s important—and too often forgotten—in the heated exchanges over breastfeeding in public. Breastfeeding mothers need to be able to feed their babies anytime, anywhere. It’s a normal part of parenting, of life.

According to Armstrong, some of her customers are “still using it (and their babies are) nine, 10, 11 months of age.” She notes that this is “a difficult age to keep a child under wraps in public.” This only begs the question: Why try?

  • Comments (2)
  • Retweet