The Beginning of the End Started Here
A guest post from Ruth Lewis who was ejected from a mother-to-mother breastfeeding support charity for being concerned about fetishistic men
Ruth Lewis was a La Leche League (LLL) Leader from 2007 until she was first suspended and then had her accreditation removed in 2024. She was an LLLGB trustee from 2023 to 2024.
She was the editor of “Breastfeeding Matters” (the members’ magzine for LLLGB) in late 2018 and continued until she stepped down from the role on principle because of the change in language in the summer of 2023.
I wrote the Facebook post below back in August 2023, well before I had my accreditation as an LLL Leader removed (according to the LLLI Board, it was for “disparaging LLL” and “talking to the press” back in the spring this year when I was suspended along with half of the LLLGB Council of Directors (CoD) ‒ I dispute that those are the real reasons) and before I was elected as a trustee later that year. It was also before we gained absolute clarity both that what LLLI are expecting Leaders to do includes supporting male lactation and that doing so conflicts with the charitable objects of LLLGB and would therefore not be lawful. I shared the post in the private LLLGB Leader Facebook group; as I expected, it did not stay up very long. I was first “given the opportunity to edit it”.
I was told at the time: “It is not acceptable to have a debate in this Facebook group over whether trans parents should be able to access LLL support. LLLI policy clearly states we need to support anyone who comes to us for breastfeeding support. Saying we should not support a transwoman to feed their child since they were born a man is discriminatory. We would not say that about any other group of people e.g. those with hormonal differences, and it is not acceptable in an LLL space to say that about trans people either.”
The post was later cited in a complaint against me to LLLI, with the note that it was “removed as it is discriminatory against trans folk” and that “since joining CoD, Ruth has given no indication that her view on this topic has changed, despite clear explanations that this is discriminatory and directly in conflict with LLL policy.” Too right I haven’t.
This was the post I shared in the private Facebook group for LLLGB Leaders:
“As you are probably aware, I have decided to step down as editor of Breastfeeding Matters, after almost five years in the role. I want to share some of my reasons for doing so. There have been various things building for a while, mostly around language. Preserving the writer’s voice is vital, especially around such personal stories as the ones that I have had the huge privilege to edit, and it’s something that I take very seriously. While with Breastfeeding Matters articles I have only rarely had issues, my concerns around our own materials and the well-meaning but I believe misguided attempts to be inclusive through additive language remain.”
“Language choices affect our ability to advocate for the mother-baby dyad; they impact on clarity and meaning. For example, if we talk about 'mothers and parents need skin-to-skin with their baby', it is perfectly reasonable for someone reading that to assume that a father having skin-to-skin with a newborn is just as important as the mother doing so, no matter how either of them identify. I have spoken to Leaders who have reported exactly that happening more and more frequently to the detriment of breastfeeding. How many of the families that we share our information with are not aware that by ‘parents’ here we mean those who have given birth but do not identify as mothers? And how much more difficult is it for those with a lower level of literacy or whose first language is not English to understand the core of what we are saying?”
“It is written into LLL philosophy that the “Mother and baby need to be together early and often to establish a satisfying breastfeeding relationship and reliable milk production” and it is the mother who “the baby has an intense need to be with”. We should, of course, all use preferred language in any individual support situation, and I don’t know any Leader who would not do so. However, for any information that is aimed at a general population, clarity should be key. I would encourage everyone to read Karleen Gribble et al.'s article here.”
“On numerous occasions now, any attempts to raise concerns about one particular issue have been shut down. We are told that we need to educate ourselves and that we are causing harm. The idea that CoD has, that those who are raising concerns are either trying to cause trouble or are ignorant and not wanting to learn about this ‘new’ thing, is frankly both hugely concerning and insulting. Everyone I have spoken to has concerns as a result of research, rather than lack of it. There is no solid research to suggest that a transwoman breastfeeding is safe for the baby. In a conversation recently, I was told that transwomen use the same protocol as women for inducing lactation, so there is research. I pointed out that male and female physiology are different, so the research is utterly irrelevant. Minoritised groups should absolutely be protected from harm, but LLL has always been about advocating for the most vulnerable group of all ‒ newborns. We are not being allowed to do that.”
“As Leaders our role and remit are to offer support with the normal course of breastfeeding. Even if trans-parents of either sex giving their baby their own milk does turn out to be safe when taking hormones or medications, it will never be part of the normal course of breastfeeding for a male to do so, so it lies outside of our remit anyway.
“When the CoD seems to be coming from the point of view that Leaders, including those with years of experience both as Leaders and as IBCLCs, are raising issues in bad faith or from a place of ignorance, where do we go from here? How many quiet Leaders who have similar concerns feel unable to ask any questions? I sincerely hope that the responses to the questionnaire will show how important a place to ask honest questions and share sincere concerns is and that those asking the questions will be assumed to be in good faith, as I believe is the case.”
The questionnaire I mentioned in that post had the feeling of being asked to put questions in order that we could be told how and what to think. It consisted of the following questions:
Do you have any questions about equity, diversity, inclusivity and restorative justice (EDI-RJ)?
Do you have any questions about LLL policy and the direction LLLGB is taking?
Do you have any questions about how the Facebook group is moderated?
Do you have anything else you would like to share or to ask us?
The LLLGB Council at the time published an article as a result of the responses to that questionnaire. It was far from reassuring. It included comparing supporting a breastfeeding mother who smokes (something about which there is plenty of research on) with supporting a “trans parent”. It was however the first time I saw it clearly said that LLL Leaders were expected to “support people who were born male to breastfeed”.
There never was a place where this issue could be talked about properly, where genuine concerns could be aired and questions asked. During our time as trustees, we tried, but any attempt to do so led to complaints, LLLI policy was invoked and conversation shut down. (Note from Lucy Leader: there still is no place for an honest discussion about this divisive issue. The trans agenda “no debate” policy reigns supreme.)
I am now in a position to speak freely about the huge safeguarding implications of male lactation and the obfuscation of the safeguarding issues that unclear language brings, whether it is desexed or so-called additive language. Policy was used to stop the conversation within LLL. We were told that the words we used were “harmful”, but that really is flipping the script. Lack of clarity around sex and gender identity is harmful, in healthcare and especially in maternity and breastfeeding. I can speak out and I am doing so and will continue as long as it is necessary.
My sincere thanks to Ruth for telling her story. Ruth is not the first person to share with me why she has parted ways with LLL and its embrace of a flawed and destructive philosophy. Here is another former Leader who chose to leave as she was not prepared to pretend that gender is more important than sex, along with pandering to the feelings of adults:
The global publicity around one of the Founders of LLL resigning from the organization that she had worked in for nearly 70 years has not gone unnoticed either:
If you want a bit more of the background story around what happened to Ruth and her whistle blowing colleagues, it is discussed here:
Those members of the LLLI Board who are so blinded by their adherence to the cult of trans that they see no problem with endangering the welfare of babies in pursuit of adult desires will also bear the responsibility of the loss of breastfeeding support that millions of women have relied on since 1956.
I am so sorry about what they did to you, Ruth. The tide is turning . . . hang in there!
Thank you Ruth Lewis for your detailed explanation. I was well supported by LLL Leaders when I was a young mother and I managed to breastfeed much longer than I expected thanks to LLL. I am very sorry to read what is happening now.