Advanced search

article in the sunday people re. facebook and bf pics

(32 Posts)
divastrop Sun 16-Sep-07 21:24:39


dont know if its already been posted,apologies if it has.i realise its a tabloid but there's a quote from an MNer in it so thought it was worth a mention.

pyjamaqueen Mon 17-Sep-07 06:52:44

bump - worrying stuff

Monkeytrousers Mon 17-Sep-07 08:30:54

I’m not sure I fully understand - if the policy is not to show exposed breasts then that’s fine - the site is too big to allow exceptions (maybe - the logistics of separating the two without the loophole being exploited by porn barons is certainly a debate to be had) but where is the evidence porn star breasts are actually really on show, as apposed to scantily clad or pixelled out breasts?

I am on facebook but have never heard of this – where are the actual discussions being had?

RubberDuck Mon 17-Sep-07 08:39:36

I actually feel quite sorry for Facebook while understanding completely where the mums are coming from.

In the past I have been a moderator for a photo community and the amount of porn I have had to delete on a regular basis is quite disturbing. Worse, that you have to have a clear policy of X is good Y is bad so you can make split second decisions (due to volume) and be seen to be consistent (or you get your mail box filled to the brim of saying "look, you allowed A to show a tit, why did you delete MY picture".

Then you get the sheer size of the site. Our photo site was pretty small, but it soon became a full time job keeping on top of the moderating. Drove me up the wall. I'm guessing Facebook's financial model DOESN'T give them huge sums to pay full time moderators to go through everything and relies on people to report offensive material.

Not an easy solution either way, tbh. I think a clear policy of "if nipple is exposed, delete otherwise fine" might be the route to go.

divastrop Mon 17-Sep-07 17:10:04

monkeytrousers-are you in the mumsnet group on facebook?i got invited to join the 'breastfeeding is not obscene' group when i joined the MN group.

i can understand if there are exposed nipples,but i dont see why there would be in bf pics?

RubberDuck Mon 17-Sep-07 17:15:30

Yes, from reading into it though (in other sources) their cut off point is higher - any exposed breast. Which I would say is probably harder for them to police (so would a low cut dress showing lots of cleavage and heaving bosom violate their policy or not?). That's why I think it'd probably be easier on them to have a "no exposed nipple" line drawn rather than "no exposed breast".

TheBlonde Mon 17-Sep-07 17:15:55

I think this link will take you to the group

sazzybee Mon 17-Sep-07 19:38:06

Well it's estimated that facebook's revenue's are around $150m a year so I'd expect they could afford to pay the odd person (or two) to check the images their members post. I reckon that they are keeping themselves squeaky clean so that if they go public (which is what the pundits predict) they won't upset the 'moral' majority in the US.

I can't see how images of women bfing could possibly be considered offensive - I think I might have to add some pics wink

smallwhitecat Mon 17-Sep-07 19:44:22

Message withdrawn

whiskeyandbeer Mon 17-Sep-07 20:23:22

don't really see the problem as (as far as i know) facebook is a privately owned company and as such can set their own policies and standards. if you disagree with them then vote with your (methaphorical internet) feet and stop using the site.

foxcub Mon 17-Sep-07 20:27:12

Surely FB can tell the difference between a topless soft porn pic and a photo of a mum BF her baby, with no nipple exposed!!!

They've actually banned some Mums for posting perfectly decent pics of BF their babies !!

sazzybee Mon 17-Sep-07 20:28:27

I think that's a bit defeatist whiskeyandbeer. I'd prefer to lobby them to change their policy

whiskeyandbeer Mon 17-Sep-07 20:32:35

but i don't see why they should change their policy as they are a private company and should be allowed set their own standards as long as they operate within the relevant laws.
and i don't see why mothers who want to put up pictures of breastfeeding would continue to support a company who deem it as obscene.

smallwhitecat Mon 17-Sep-07 20:33:39

Message withdrawn

smallwhitecat Mon 17-Sep-07 20:35:29

Message withdrawn

whiskeyandbeer Mon 17-Sep-07 20:37:42

mental illness? surely just different standards.

foxcub Mon 17-Sep-07 21:07:27

What do you mean by "standards" W&B? I don't understand your comment.

Just because its a privately owned company doesn't mean they should be exempt from public criticism surely?

whiskeyandbeer Mon 17-Sep-07 21:14:39

i simply meant that while the other poster might think that someone who would find breastfeeding obscene and page 3 not was mentally ill, they may simply have different standards to her.

moljam Mon 17-Sep-07 21:19:50

a friend of mine had her pics of her bf her dd removed on myspace.

Mossy Tue 18-Sep-07 09:04:15

Just to add, the point in the People that I was trying to make about the Walker Art Gallery wasn't (as it appears) that there are "raunchy" images in there. I don't think I've ever used the word "raunchy" grin

I was trying to point out that there are many images in the Walker of breastfeeding that aren't at all discreet (paintings of Madonna & Child in the main) and many of them show lots of exposed breast. So, there is a long tradition of pictures of breastfeeding babies and children.

Hope that makes sense!

[off to my next topless shoot for a tabloid now] wink

Pan Tue 18-Sep-07 09:07:52

I'm a little confused as to why anyone would want to show pictures of themselves and little one's in the intimate act of breastfeeding.

Mossy Tue 18-Sep-07 09:10:05

Yes it is an intimate and loving act and that's precisely why women want to show pictures of it; it's the same reason, as I said in my previous post, that there is an incredibly long tradition of art depicting women breastfeeding their baby (mainly madonna & child images but also images from greek and other mythologies).

Pan Tue 18-Sep-07 09:14:29

In that case let's see piccies of them having sex, or masturbating, or anything else that can be deemed intimate or loving??

Pan Tue 18-Sep-07 09:16:11

A tad me me me.....and the opinion of the little one's? Whose piccies of being breastfed could be around forever?

Mossy Tue 18-Sep-07 09:17:38

Pan would you have a problem with someone showing a picture of a baby being bottle fed?

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: