Originally Posted by
BetCheckBet
Agree with some of your points including the shock value. But totally disagree about child porn comments. I would barely consider this sexual and certainly not in terms of the child being sexualized.
You don't consider it sexual because you aren't a pedo.
I guarantee that child porn enthusiasts are going to love that picture.
Notice that the mother, in addition to being young and pretty, has her hair done, and is wearing makeup, a tank top, and tight jeans. So the picture is trying to grab your attention because you see a sexually appealing mom with her breast out, and then notice it's being sucked by a little boy (who actually looks older because of the stool he's standing on.) I guarantee this wouldn't have been on the cover if the mom was 43 and ugly.
They are sexualizing this without directly sexualizing it, so they can fall back on the excuse that they're just demonstrating breastfeeding at a late age. However, in reality, TIME was very aware of what they were really doing.