Facebook ban of breast-feeding photos sparks protests

Shogun

Free: Mudholes Stomped
Jan 8, 2007
30,528
2,263
1,045
By Belinda Goldsmith

CANBERRA (Reuters) - Are photographs of a mother breast-feeding her child indecent? The social networking site Facebook has sparked a massive online debate -- and protests -- and after removing photos that expose too much of a mother's breast.

Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt said the website takes no action over most breast-feeding photos because they follow the site's terms of use but others are removed to ensure the site remains safe and secure for all users, including children.

"Photos containing a fully exposed breast (as defined by showing the nipple or areola) do violate those terms (on obscene, pornographic or sexually explicit material) and may be removed," he said in a statement.

"The photos we act upon are almost exclusively brought to our attention by other users who complain."

But Facebook's decision to ban some breast-feeding photos has angered some users, including U.S. mother Kelli Roman whose photograph of her feeding her daughter was removed by Facebook.

Roman is one of the administrators of an online petition called "Hey Facebook, breastfeeding is not obscene!" which has picked up speed in the past week after protesters organized a virtual "nurse-in" on Facebook and held a small demonstration outside Facebook's office in Palo Alto, California.

The petition has now attracted more than 80,000 names and over 10,000 comments, reigniting the old debate about the rights or wrongs of breast-feeding in public.

Organizers of the petition said some women had been warned not to repost photographs that had been removed from their pages or they would face being kicked off Facebook.

One breast-feeding mother, called Rebekah, said Facebook removed a photograph of her feeding her child.

"I find it offensive that (Facebook) can remove my photo but not the close up picture of a thonged backside I (have) seen on a friend's page or remove the "what kama sutra position are you?" quiz application," she wrote.

Facebook, which has more than 120 million members, is standing by its decision.

Schnitt said the company had called many U.S. media groups during the course of the protest to ask to place an advert related to breast-feeding that showed a woman breast-feeding her child with a fully exposed breast. None agreed.

"Obviously, a newspaper and Facebook are different things but the underlying motivation for the content policies are the same," he told Reuters.

(Editing by Miral Fahmy)


Facebook ban of breast-feeding photos sparks protests | Technology | Reuters
 
Not saying there isn't stranger out there....just curious what would prompt someone to post a picture of themselves doing something so intimate and private..... esp on facebook of all places.
 
It wasn't actually a ban of "breast-feeding" photo. What they objected to was the areola or nipple being visible. I have no problem with a woman breastfeeding in public as long as she has a scarf to cover up most of the breast.
 
Not saying there isn't stranger out there....just curious what would prompt someone to post a picture of themselves doing something so intimate and private..... esp on facebook of all places.

It is kinda odd for someone to have photos of such, as for private or intimate I don't see it that way. To me it's just nature in action.

I'd say breast feeding doesn't bother me, but because it doesn't I would never notice it even if I was talking to someone who was feeding their offspring.
 
It is kinda odd for someone to have photos of such, as for private or intimate I don't see it that way. To me it's just nature in action.

I'd say breast feeding doesn't bother me, but because it doesn't I would never notice it even if I was talking to someone who was feeding their offspring.

What if the nipple or areola was exposed without concern at the a restaurant? Isn't that going a little overboard?
 
It wasn't actually a ban of "breast-feeding" photo. What they objected to was the areola or nipple being visible. I have no problem with a woman breastfeeding in public as long as she has a scarf to cover up most of the breast.

careful.. any restrictions on breast feeding will arouse the lactivists to have a.. uh, feed in...

:lol:


My take is that no one forces anyone to use facebook. It's the same with Starbucks when they had the gal to make policy decisions that a scorned breeder didn't agree with. enjoy the consumer liberty to take your business elsewhere... but, thats not how lactivists see it.
 
If someone is looking that close then shouldn't they be more concerned with why they are thinking about it in such a perverted manner?

Perhaps in Europe, such behavior might be acceptable, but I think a woman needs to take care if she is in a public place like a restaurant. It's not about arousal concerns. I just don't want to see an exposed breast when I'm dining out. As far as Facebook, I think they took the right approach. It's a breast issue not a breastfeeding issue.
 
Perhaps in Europe, such behavior might be acceptable, but I think a woman needs to take care if she is in a public place like a restaurant. It's not about arousal concerns. I just don't want to see an exposed breast when I'm dining out. As far as Facebook, I think they took the right approach. It's a breast issue not a breastfeeding issue.

Here is why I like nudists more than others. Why is it soooo offensive? Is there some strange disease you can catch just by being in the same area as a visible nipple? Are they spraying milk into everyone's faces and I am just not seeing it? If it's not sexual then the breast is no different than an arm or leg, the nipple no different than a finger or toe. It's just people being over sensitive and it all begins with banning one stupid thing before sooner or later we are all dressing like ... well ... muslims.
 
Here is why I like nudists more than others. Why is it soooo offensive? Is there some strange disease you can catch just by being in the same area as a visible nipple? Are they spraying milk into everyone's faces and I am just not seeing it? If it's not sexual then the breast is no different than an arm or leg, the nipple no different than a finger or toe. It's just people being over sensitive and it all begins with banning one stupid thing before sooner or later we are all dressing like ... well ... muslims.

women should be able to walk around without shirts, just like men...I have no issue with breasts or even breast feeding...my issue is with people who seem to want to put their entire lives on display like every minute is for public consumption...it's just strange.

Next will they want to stop closing off stalls in the public restroom so you just take a shit right out in the open, I mean it's just nature in action, right?
 
Here is why I like nudists more than others. Why is it soooo offensive? Is there some strange disease you can catch just by being in the same area as a visible nipple? Are they spraying milk into everyone's faces and I am just not seeing it? If it's not sexual then the breast is no different than an arm or leg, the nipple no different than a finger or toe. It's just people being over sensitive and it all begins with banning one stupid thing before sooner or later we are all dressing like ... well ... muslims.


I dont' need to see naked people. If I want to see naked people: I can look at myself in the mirror, look at my husband, watch porno. I don't need to see ordinary people naked. Most people are not in shape and I have no desire to see them sans clothes.

I'm not offended, I'm not aroused, I'm not worried about contracting disease. I'd rather see most people clothed.

Let's not go overboard and start comparing our culture to those of muslims.
 
women should be able to walk around without shirts, just like men...I have no issue with breasts or even breast feeding...my issue is with people who seem to want to put their entire lives on display like every minute is for public consumption...it's just strange.

Next will they want to stop closing off stalls in the public restroom so you just take a shit right out in the open, I mean it's just nature in action, right?

I still would have no argument against it, I wouldn't do it myself, but no matter how it's worded the truth of the matter is that people are being over sensitive and they keep getting closer to forcing people (mostly women) to completely cover themselves as they do in arab nations.
 

Forum List

Back
Top