Facebook Policy Angers Nursing Moms

[Ruby Tuesday]

By JESSICA MINTZ
AP
posted: 7 HOURS 52 MINUTES AGO

(Jan. 1) - Web-savvy moms who breast-feed are irate that social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace restrict photos of nursing babies. The disputes reveal how the sites' community policing techniques sometimes struggle to keep up with the booming number and diversity of their members.
Facebook began as a site just for college kids, but now it is an online home for 140 million people from all over the world. Among the new faces of Facebook are women like Kelli Roman, 23, who last year posted a photo of herself nursing one of her two children.
One day, she logged on to find the photo missing. When she pressed Facebook for an explanation, she got form e-mails in return.
Facebook bars people from uploading anything "obscene, pornographic or sexually explicit" — a policy that translates into a ban on pictures depicting certain amounts of exposed flesh.
Roman responded by starting a Facebook group called "Hey, Facebook, breastfeeding is not obscene!"
"There is nothing about bottle-feeding a child that has to be discreet," said Roman, who lives in Fallbrook, Calif., in an interview. "With breast-feeding, it should be the exact same way."
Today the group — part petition, part message board, part photo-sharing hub — has more than 97,600 members.
One of them, Stephanie Muir of Ottawa, was new to Facebook when she stumbled across the group last year. Muir, a mother of five, does volunteer work related to public health and breast-feeding and said the issue is important to her.
"I think it's time we all get over this notion that women's breasts are dangerous and harmful for children to see," she said. So she organized a Facebook protest last weekend against the site's policies, which she believes are arbitrarily enforced and discriminate against women.
Muir said more than 11,000 people participated in the group's "virtual nurse-in" by swapping out their regular profile pictures on Facebook and uploading ones depicting breast-feeding.
At Facebook's headquarters in Palo Alto, Calif., 23-year-old mom Heather Farley, who was visiting from her home in Provo, Utah, led a real-world nurse-in to complement the online event. About 10 women showed up to breast-feed their babies outside the front door, drawing attention from local media if not Facebook employees, who were scarce on that Saturday after Christmas.
A member for almost four years, Farley has nearly 400 friends on Facebook, a network she'd be hard-pressed to replicate if she moved to a smaller site with more lenient photo policies. She uses Facebook more than e-mail to stay in touch with far-flung high school and college friends. She especially likes to check out pictures of their babies and share photos of hers. But with a 9-month-old, "it's almost hard to get a picture of me not nursing," she said.
This fall, Farley changed her profile photo to one that showed her breast-feeding. Someone probably objected, because Facebook deleted it. It, like MySpace, generally relies on members to point out when others break the rules.
Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt said the company's guidelines regarding exposed flesh allow most breast-feeding photos. However, Facebook draws the line at a visible nipple or areola, he said. Facebook also nixes pictures showing the gluteal cleft.
Facebook doesn't generally go looking for nudity, but it does respond quickly when someone on the site flags another person's photo as inappropriate. Schnitt said the policies were instituted years ago, when Facebook was much smaller, but they reflect common practices on mainstream Web sites.
"We decided nudity was something we didn't want on the site. It doesn't matter the context. We would agree that there are absolutely many contexts for nudity where it is not obscene," Schnitt said, but emphasized that Facebook can't practically convene a panel to decide on a case-by-case basis.
John Palfrey, a Harvard Law School professor who specializes in Internet issues, called Facebook a victim of its own success.
"As we wrap more and more of our lives into a single environment on the Web, the feeling that civil liberties ought to be protected there continues to grow," Palfrey said.
But it's really just that — a feeling. Online hangouts might simulate a public place, but they're still private Web sites where the company is king, not the Constitution or the myriad state laws that apply to breast-feeding outside the home.
News Corp.-owned MySpace, which prohibits nudity, also has sparked online protests over photos taken down of breast-feeding mothers. A company spokeswoman did not return messages seeking comment.
One contrast is LiveJournal, a popular blogging network, which made an exception for nursing in its no-nudity policy. The rule came in response to feedback from users and an advisory board comprised of Internet scholars.
While Schnitt said Facebook's policies predate a recent push by law enforcement agencies to better protect children from online predators, the whole field of Web hangouts may be skittish about anything that might expose kids to nudity, said Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney at the free-speech watchdog group Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Facebook already curtails the activities of some members based on age and the networks they belong to. For example, adults can't look at profiles of kids under the age of 18, even if they're members of the same regional network.
Palfrey suggests a middle ground might emerge, in which networking sites like Facebook can better satisfy diverse constituencies without creating strife. That will require honing the technology to make it more certain that only people within specific networks and groups could see, say, a breast-feeding photo, while keeping children from seeing nudity.
Palfrey describes the goal as making "a site that is good for everyone, or good for the largest number of people, rather than the fewest."

Personally I never got what was the big deal about people and breast feeding. I am not one for gratuitous nudity but if I'd rather sit next to a breast feeding woman then a screaming child. I think people need to realize that nudity doesn't always equal sexuality.

[Purgatory]

Jesus, just let her put pictures up of her kids sucking her tits unless she's ugly

It's not like she's trying to show off her birthday suit or anything.

[ninjaneko]

My Chouji boobs drawings are allowed :awesome
Do not want :D:

On topic, breastfeeding is no big deal, or shouldn't be, though I can see some people acting in an inappropriate or "obsene" manner in response to said pictures. I'm kind of ambivalent, though, especially if it's only certain pics being taken down. Still, how is feeding a baby sexual? :S

[Platinum]

People complain about everything don't they :beardthing.

[Koi]

Breasts may be sexual, but the act of breastfeeding to nourish a baby is not. This is a pretty stupid policy, but at the same time, how many people want to jump on Facebook and see pictures of nursing mothers?

[deidara_wannabe]

I can see their reasons.

A lot of people will be upset if they take it down and they have to see breast feeding and people'll be upset if they can't post the pictures.

I guess that I agree with banning them.

[Zapdos]

I don't see what the big deal is either way.
If a site doesn't allow it then get the fuck over it. Who the fuck cares your baby can suck your tits. I for one don't.
And if a site allows it then good for you, I still wouldn't care because it's just breast feeding, nothing anyone should get excited about.

And if they want to show all their friends so badly they can breast feed then they can just send them the pictures in a message. Or from what it looks like take another picture without showing any nipple.
The bottom line is if Facebook or Myspace wanted to they could just delete your ass. It's not a right to have a profile there, they just need to get over it.

[Casyle]

I'm beyond sick of hearing women whining about this. If a site restricts sexual material, then you're going to get your photo banned if you show your nipple, breastfeeding or not!

Unless I mis-read they aren't deleting breastfeeding pictures in particular, but only photos showing the nipple. Big deal.

[Last Shadow]

Well, if it's under the TOU, then this course of action should be expected.

Personally, if it's in a non sexual context, like breastfeeding, then I think it should be okay. But if a site says that it's taboo upon registration, then it's fair game.

[Tokoyami]

Lol facebook.

Seriously thats not sexual and your once again being morons. Then again I don't expect anything less of the new failspace.

[Starr]

Well, I for one would not post a photo of me breastfeeding my baby, but thats just me, exposing your BREAST to the public eye is embaressing period, unless your a stripper or porn star :LOS.
Them feeling all butt hurt about it is just silly... yea breastfeeding your baby is a good thing, but do you really have to go out there an post it where a bunch of perverts will most likely get off at.. c'mon this is the world we live in, get over it.

[Tokoyami]

Thing is estrella there probably not thinking of it that way.

[Xion]

Everyone else who likes free MILF breast pics agrees with these moms. :(

[ZeroBlack]

I don't see how breastfeeding a baby is sexual. If it is to someone, they kind of have probs. =/

[DragonHeart52]

Breasts may be sexual, but the act of breastfeeding to nourish a baby is not. This is a pretty stupid policy, but at the same time, how many people want to jump on Facebook and see pictures of nursing mothers?

Breasts exist for the primary purpose of feeding/nourishing the young; any sexual aspect is actually secondary. I get tired of hearing that that part of my body is obscene while some guy with huge man boobs can bare the same part that is as big as many women's breasts and looks just like them and no one says a damn thing.

As far as pics of breastfeeding moms, I have to agree that it isn't absolutely necessary to see that. I mean, you can't see the kid's face, so what's the point? To prove the apparatus works? Of course it does! Biology works (especially when a couple decides they can forgo protection this one time and she ends up pregnant :P).

[Kyasurin Yakuto]

Well it is a bit harsh because I don't see breast-feeding as something sexual. Of course maybe the mothers should think that maybe pics like that shouldn't be openly posted and should just be sent privately to a few friends and family via e-mail or something. I don't think there's anything wrong with pics like that but if I was a mother I'd figure that some people might not like those pics and I'd personally consider them kind of private so I wouldn't post them in a public place.

[Deamiel]

I certainly support showing pictures of you nursing... but I'm bewildered by the fact that so many women wanna flash their tits everywhere by breastfeeding in public or posting pictures of it.

It's almost as if women want to make a scene of it.

[Keile]

Pictures of nursing babies are considered examples of pornography regardless of their original intent. In being as such, it would make sense for Facebook to protect itself from criticism by deleting pictures that showcase material that can be considered controversial.

[syrup]

why do women care so much about being able to show off breast feeding...

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

Breasts may be sexual, but the act of breastfeeding to nourish a baby is not. This is a pretty stupid policy, but at the same time, how many people want to jump on Facebook and see pictures of nursing mothers?

Remember though, it is a pretty common fantasy of men to find lactating women and...you know...

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

"Nuthin brings pity like seein a baby suckin it's momma's titty"

quote via my uncle in texas :oh

but on topic: why SHOW breastfeeding on a public website like Facebook? regardless if theres a reason for it, it's unecessary doing so :facepalm

That's true, there are plenty of natural and neccessary functions I can't do in a picture on Facebook.

[Lain]

I still don't think it's anyone's place to tell facebook how to run their website. They make the rules for their website, if you don't like them, go take your little club somewhere else.

[chaosakita]

lol, breastfeeding wank

I should have paid more attention on LJ so I could have something witty to say about this.

Oh yes, he actually does in some of them :awesome

ewwww lactation in mpreg~~

Yeah, I actually read that stuff, but I like to keep as much realism as I can.

[Camille]

Big fucking deal, Facebook. It's just a breast :D: A half- uncovered breast.

[Trash]

Wow showing breasts doing what they were made for how awful.:laugh
Time for facebook to grow up.

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

Wow showing breasts doing what they were made for how awful.:laugh
Time for facebook to grow up.

Actually I think you need to consider what this would mean.

If we can post things because on face book just because they are used for they're natural function, then that means we can post pictures of sex, its natural. Or if you wanted to post your penis while you were peeing, that is what it does most of the time. I could post explicit birthing videos from my wife then...despite the blood and all that stuff, that's one of the vagina's main functions...

So see how horrible that argument was.

[Tasmanian Tiger]

Nothing wrong with Facebook trying to protect it's ass.

Anyway I don't see what's the big deal - just some crazy women :facepalm

[fightoffyourdemons]

Why does she think anyone wants to see her breastfeeding? It may not be sexual, but who gives a shit?

[Hitomi_No_Ryu]

I hope someday the United States as a country will realize nudity does NOT always equal sex...

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

I hope someday the United States as a country will realize nudity does NOT always equal sex...

And I will hope one day people realize that just because you do something, doesn't mean you have to be able to do it anywhere, especially online.

I mean what's the point in putting up pictures of women breast feeding?

[1mmortal 1tachi]

Nobody made a big deal about National Geographic depicting native tribeswomen running around with their boobs hanging out.

Why should this be any different?

:awesome

[Psallo a Cappella]

I honestly cannot believe they did this when they have pictures and videos of tweens and teens half-clothed at drunken parties. Really. Illegal activity posted for the world to see, and still they are going to remove the picture of the woman breastfeeding.

I don't want to see fugly tweens trying to look cool as they take their drunken Myspace-esque pics, but I couldn't say that, now could I?

[Cirus]

I can see why they are removing. Though I don't actually care but people can see it as an easy way for kid/teens to see boobs on the net of people. Though it should matter if they are removed or not because it is the facebook site staff that can say what they allow for pictures to be shown publicly as long as they don't violate the rules they already set forth that people follow.

[Johnny Rotten]

Why a woman would feel the need to let everybody know her child sucks on her boobs is beyond me.

[Drunkenwhale]

I hope someday the United States as a country will realize nudity does NOT always equal sex...

Not with prudish soccer moms and their government allies in the way...

And besides... You can't stop some people from thinking that way, it's natural and worldwide, not limited to the USA.

I thought facebook already had problems with people and partial nudity, guess I was wrong...

[Kusogitsune]

Well I say the website should have the right to do what they want. It's not like they're preventing women from breastfeeding their kids. Nobody's actually getting hurt here.

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

I honestly cannot believe they did this when they have pictures and videos of tweens and teens half-clothed at drunken parties. Really. Illegal activity posted for the world to see, and still they are going to remove the picture of the woman breastfeeding.

I don't want to see fugly tweens trying to look cool as they take their drunken Myspace-esque pics, but I couldn't say that, now could I?

That's their prerogative, especially considering that facebook isn't quite as bad as myspace with that. On top of it, its one of those things that while natural doesn't need to be photographed on a site where someone might complain about it.

Its like I said earlier, sex, peeing, pooping and other things like that are totally naturally. But you can bet if I took a picture of myself peeing and put it up they'd take it down.

[Last of the Arrancar]

Go moms!!! Seriously why would you even bother being offended, policy is no bare breasts, they know it, they think they're special because they're high on motherly hormones, we get it, you're procreating and you're important, but I for one don't wanna see the milk factory on display.

And breastfeeding at 9 months? Get a life.

[Aiolia]

There is no use whatsoever for putting up a picture of a woman breastfeeding her child. Which doesn't take away it's a stupid rule ofcourse.

[Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki]

Actually I think you need to consider what this would mean.

If we can post things because on face book just because they are used for they're natural function, then that means we can post pictures of sex, its natural. Or if you wanted to post your penis while you were peeing, that is what it does most of the time. I could post explicit birthing videos from my wife then...despite the blood and all that stuff, that's one of the vagina's main functions...

So see how horrible that argument was.

Well they are allowed to post pictures of excessive drunkenness...

[Dragon]

:facepalm I really do not see why the hell can't a mum post pictures of her feeding her baby. Damn. Sometimes policies can be quite stupid. And what if you need to show somebody in another country photos coz, well, it lives in another country :blink??

[vervex]

I agree that breast feeding is not obscene. However, I don't understand why would anyone try to upload a picture of that on Facebook.... :|

[Serp]

Ok its not obscene but they probably have certain policies on everything and are not in the habit of breaking or bending them. But still why would you want to upload those pics on facebook of all places, and then complain so much when its taken down.


Ok let me ask you guys a question :ho If someone were to post images of themselves breast feeding on NF outside of the BH, do you think the Mods would take it down?

[Cindy]

She just as easily could have posted a picture of her and the baby without breastfeeding. While I don't think it's obscene, I do think it was unnecessary. Reminds me of that episode of Married with Children where the ladies complain about not being able to breastfeed in the store.

Meh, I don't know. I just prefer that it be kept a private bonding moment between mother and child.

[Moonshine]

I don't think its obsence or sexual posting a picture of a woman breastfeeding. But i myself would never post a picture of mme doing that, I find it just weird:oh

[sworder]

lol women

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

Well they are allowed to post pictures of excessive drunkenness...

Is there any nudity in them? Then where's the issue?

:facepalm I really do not see why the hell can't a mum post pictures of her feeding her baby. Damn. Sometimes policies can be quite stupid. And what if you need to show somebody in another country photos coz, well, it lives in another country :blink??

Because there's nudity in them and the pictures are uneccessary. If you can't email the photos like any reasonable person would do, then just put them up somewhere like photobucket or some other site and then send the link to the person...its not that hard to think. What you posted wasn't even a reason that made sense, there's no real reason women need to be able to do this.

She just as easily could have posted a picture of her and the baby without breastfeeding. While I don't think it's obscene, I do think it was unnecessary. Reminds me of that episode of Married with Children where the ladies complain about not being able to breastfeed in the store.

Meh, I don't know. I just prefer that it be kept a private bonding moment between mother and child.

Women can feed their kids in public, I don't mind it because it makes sense and is neccessary. The baby has to eat and no one wants to hear the baby scream. I think its wrong to tell a mother to leave a store or something because she is feeding the baby. She can't help that the baby has to eat and neither can the baby.

[Cindy]

She can always pump her milk and bottle it.

Pumping milk does make the breasts sore, but I'd do it if I had to take the baby out with me in public. I'm not exposing Ruben or Jose to the world. :pek

[Chee]

...why would anyone want to post pictures of their baby sucking on their tit anyways?

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

She can always pump her milk and bottle it.

Pumping milk does make the breasts sore, but I'd do it if I had to take the baby out with me in public. I'm not exposing Ruben or Jose to the world. :pek

True, but then you lose that closeness and some women hate to use the bottle unless they absolutely have to.

[@lk3mizt]

go mums, go!!

srsly, whuts up with facebook? :pek

[Altron]

Though it seems we all forget that in the end Facebook has the right to decide whatever they want no matter how stupid it is. Since they make the rules and when you sign up you agree to the terms of service.

[Gunners]

Once again people are complaining because they can.

Facebook is within their rights to take down images, as the site isn't owned by the people uploading images for one. If you want those images set up your own site and place it on there.

Really now, why do you want to put such images up anyway? Well I can see why people would want to, I cannot see why people would be pissed off that they can't. Such things are left closed door because it will open up a can of worms. There are many other images they can place of them bonding with their child, hugging them for example.

Also I'm sure the child will be grateful for those images when he is older. Him/her sucking on their mums tits every child wants images to remember those events............................

[Psallo a Cappella]

Is there any nudity in them? Then where's the issue?


The issue is that there are clearly underage children drinking, which is just as illegal as anything obscene.

Because there's nudity in them and the pictures are uneccessary. If you can't email the photos like any reasonable person would do, then just put them up somewhere like photobucket or some other site and then send the link to the person...its not that hard to think. What you posted wasn't even a reason that made sense, there's no real reason women need to be able to do this.

The only people choosing to look at her pictures would be people that cared. If random people are clicking through photos and considering it obscene and they do not know who the user is, why does it matter? Again, there are plenty of things no one wants to see in photos, but we do. We see illegal things, and no one minds.

It's not obscene, I will agree. But if they do not know the person, why do they care?

Their rules are their rules, I just believe choosing this to remove is a show of inconsistency.

[Cindy]

True, but then you lose that closeness and some women hate to use the bottle unless they absolutely have to.

Which is a case I'd consider where I'd absolutely have to. Like I said, I'm not exposing a boob in the mall for the sake of my baby's hunger. It'll get pumped milk when we go out.

Will it develop problems latching? Maybe. Maybe not. It's not like I go shopping for 4 hours a day every day. Which also seems detrimental to the development of that "closeness" to begin with what with mom and baby being surrounded by lots of people.

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

The issue is that there are clearly underage children drinking, which is just as illegal as anything obscene.



The only people choosing to look at her pictures would be people that cared. If random people are clicking through photos and considering it obscene and they do not know who the user is, why does it matter? Again, there are plenty of things no one wants to see in photos, but we do. We see illegal things, and no one minds.

It's not obscene, I will agree. But if they do not know the person, why do they care?

Their rules are their rules, I just believe choosing this to remove is a show of inconsistency.


Because it might not obscene, but not everything needs to be documented on face book...

Here's a good example of the kind of problem with could allow. There are girls out there who are 16 or 17 years old with kids...what if they want to put a picture up? What if they want to put this up and have it out for all to see, people will take pictures, save them and spread them all over the internet...could get facebook in trouble.

Also, the drinking thing isn't illegal everywhere, so for facebook to regulate this they would have to know where you were drinking and what...its too much work to go country to country and take that kind of thing down.

Plus it provides evidence for court cases...so if people want to risk it they can.

[Himemiya]

Facebook won't allow it? Oh well. I don't see the huge problem with it - there's tons of other ways to send/display the pictures (email, messaging, sites that allow it, etc). If Facebook decides it to be inappropriate, then just leave it be.

On the issue of breastfeeding in itself, I don't mind if a woman wants to breastfeed in public. Every woman has their own opinion on what is appropriate and not appropriate and their actions will reflect that. (I.E. Some women may choose to pump milk and bottlefeed their child in public while other women will just breastfeed, regardless of location).

I don't find breastfeeding sexual, nor do I think that women should be barred from it. However if a site/location has a problem with it, or posting pictures of it, just deal with it - don't try to fight everything.

[Psycho]

if they don't mind the possibility of some weirdo jerking off to them else where in the world, let them do it, any 5 year old with a baby brother has seen his mum breast feeding, i don't see how that's a big deal

[1mmortal 1tachi]

Who cares. Where do you think the milk you buy at the store comes from? Breast feeding, good enough for babies, good enough for everyonee