Super Moms Do The Darnedest Things

Long gone TV personality Art Linkletter had a segment on his show House Party called “Kids Say The Darnedest Things.” Well, now its mom’s turn. Just in time for Mother’s Day, Time magazine has created a stir with its Are You Mom Enough cover.

Here’s what Time has to say on its website:

The subjects on this week’s TIME cover aren’t models in pose. Jamie Lynne Grumet, photographed by Martin Schoeller with her 3-year-old son, is a mother from Los Angeles who subscribes to attachment parenting, the subject of staff writer Kate Pickert’s cover story. Attachment parenting has been on the rise over the past two decades, since the publication of The Baby Book by Dr. Bill Sears and his wife Martha in 1992. Its three main tenets are extended breast-feeding, co-sleeping and “baby wearing,” in which infants are physically attached to their parents by slings.

Capturing various attached parents — and their reasons for attachment parenting — was Schoeller’s biggest goal for the sitting. “It was important to show that there’s no stereotypical look for a mom who practices this kind of parenting,” Schoeller says.

Time, which has covered many taboo themes, is literally busting one now. Who said print is dead?

6 thoughts on “Super Moms Do The Darnedest Things

  1. joey

    I can find only three errors in the title of this post:
    The plural of Mom is Moms; “the” ought not be capitalized in a title; and “darnedest” is the correct spelling.
    Also, I enjoyed SNL’s Weekend Update joke: Seth Meyer said that if TIME wanted a great cover, they would’ve Photoshopped out the chair.

  2. Pingback: The Pen is Mightier Than the Pixel — Imprint-The Online Community for Graphic Designers

  3. Multi-medium

    Obviously the cover works on one level, as vandeleun has pointed out, that it doesn’t take much in this day and age to both stir the pot, and allow everyone to offer knee jerk reaction/opinion without consideration of the facts.  

    I have been involved in the Attachment parenting movement, and try to limit my disapproval of their statement by only adding that perhaps if people didn’t react or act based on perceptions of how they were percieved by others and society, a cover like this would not be shocking – just as we are now used to the People magazine celebrity “I’m Gay..” covers.  

    I find it sad someone would even not consider healthy or emotional alternatives for children based on what others might think. On the other hand, I’m not sure how I feel about a cover like this. It is nothing shocking to me, rather what is shocking is the roar of those who disapprove without reading.  

    We Americans are often loudest about the things we are most ignorant. I’m not quite sure why a breast in a child’s mouth is offensive, but have them displaying a diamond necklace, or advertising clothing, is acceptable.I think if anything this speaks volumes to Americans double standard.  

    It may not help make a case for attachment parenting either, as it doesn’t inform, rather shows a seemingly “defiant” mother.  So therefore the cover becomes reactionary as well.  

    I’m just not sure I’m happy with what constitutes a dialogue these days, as every “argument” seems to employ scorch and burn tactics.

  4. zafarrano wolffe

    An amazing expression of motherhood expressed through a beautiful photograph that tells of love in this bleak, technological age. My compliments to the lady and child — and Time’s courageous editors.

  5. vanderleun

    Print’s not dead. Time is. This is a cry for help from more than one direction. The sad thing is going to be the life of the kid. The fun thing will be being one of the hundreds of other kids that will get to make his life a living hell. The sadder thing will be when, as a teenager, he wakes up one morning and parts him mom out with a hatchet. Time then for a second Time cover…. if Time is still around.