But what about those women who must feed their children who join them at their place of business?
Although the numbers may not be high, it does exist. More importantly, what about the woman at home who just wants to nurture her child on a regular basis? Would a social networking site have an issue with that? In the case of one California woman, apparently so.
Last summer the social networking site Facebook began removing any photos it deems obscene, including those containing a fully exposed breast, which the site labels as "showing the nipple or areola."
On Dec. 27, approximately 11,000 protesters held a virtual nurse-in by uploading breast-feeding photos onto their Facebook profiles, and 20 or so women showed up at the company's headquarters in Palo Alto, Calif., to breast-feed there. By Dec. 30, more than 85,000 members had become members of a Facebook group called "Hey, Facebook, breastfeeding is not obscene!"
The group, founded by San Diego mom Kelli Roman, urges Facebook to change its obscenity policy. According to the petition the moms put together, "We expect you to realize that nursing moms everywhere have a right to show pictures of their babies eating, just like bottle-fed babies have a right to be seen. In an effort to appease the closed-minded, you are only serving to be detrimental to babies, women, and society."
Canadian group Topfree Equal Rights Association (TERA) began posting on its Web site photos that breast feeders claim were removed from Facebook.
Facebook, in turn, says that its company's guidelines regarding exposed flesh allow many breastfeeding photos. However, Facebook draws the line at a visible nipple or areola. The company also nixes pictures showing the gluteal cleft.
While I go look up the definition of gluteal cleft, I'll check out some of the photos the moms have posted. As I see it, the moms are in the right here. Being a guy, I know better than to argue with a breast-feeding mom.
i also dont like to see this kind of pic in facebook.
ReplyDelete