I am sure you know what I mean. Prude social media. Did I hear someone say ‘Facebook’? Ding! Right in one. That one is, as far as I know, the most tight-assed, buttoned up place that allows murder and porn while being on a witch hunt against naturism, right?
Nope.
They are against nude images that show ‘too much’.
This up here is too much. Totally unsafe. You can clearly see body parts. Something that Facebook is against, unless – under conditions – it’s meant to be art. They decide what is art. Or unless it’s ‘educational’. They decide what is educational. (See, you’re picking this up quickly!)
This up here is Facebook-Safe. I hear what you say: this is bonkers, mad, crazy, bull-shit, BS, insane, unreal. In short: this is Facebook.
Nudity as a lifestyle as most of us practice it isn’t the only way the naked body is ‘used’.
The World Naked Bike Ride is a prime example of this. You probably know about it; a world wide event where, at a certain day per location, as many people as possible come together to ride bikes through a city naked, to protest car and promote the safety of cyclists. London is a famous location, as is Bristol and Brussels. Many more towns have a similar event, which is good.Continued…Read full original article…
The first time Savannah Spirit remembers Facebook censoring her work takes her back to 2011.
She was curating a show of erotic art in New York and posted a promotional image to Facebook. The social network promptly took it down, and she was prevented from posting anything else for 10 days.
While Facebook banned pornography early on, its efforts to restrict nudity extended to pictures of breastfeeding, a famous French painting of a nude woman and even a New Yorker cartoon. Adrian Lam / NBC News; Getty Images
In the coming years, Spirit, like many other artists, would move to Instagram, where her edgier art — usually with some form of nudity — would often run afoul of the company’s policies and be removed. Complaints and protests from artists and arts organizations in real life and on social media, including at least one that went viral, made little progress.
“I started to decide that it just comes with the territory,” Spirit said of Facebook’s bans.
But arts organizations kept at it. In early June, 125 people protested in the nude outside the New York City headquarters of Facebook and Instagram, covering themselves with stickers of photographed male nipples in protest of the long-argued double standard that only female nipples are against the company’s policies.
Facebook has agreed to meet with activists calling for a change to the social media platform’s standards, which ban professional nude photography, following a protest staged outside the company’s New York City headquarters.
In collaboration with the National Coalition Against Censorship for their #WeTheNipple campaign, and women’s rights group Grab Them By The Ballot, artist SpencerTunick took photos of dozens of nude models during a Sunday morning demonstration outside the Astor Place subway station in Manhattan.
Several photos show the models standing in a group gripping the signs as Tunick captures every moment
Several photos show the naked men and women holding nipple signs in the air while lying on the ground.
The women were shielding their own nipples with images of male nipples that Tunick called ‘donated nipples’.
Facebook told CNN it had been in talks with NCAC before the demonstration, but it had now ‘agreed to meet with the National Coalition Against Censorship and other stakeholders.’
‘Our conversations with the National Coalition Against Censorship preceded last weekend’s demonstration, and will continue on long after,’ a spokesperson said. ‘It’s important for us to hear directly from different communities who use Facebook and Instagram.’
At sunrise on Sunday, June 2, 2019, 125 people posed nude in front of Facebook and Instagram’s New York City headquarters at Astor Place to challenge social media censorship. In collaboration with the National Coalition Against Censorship, artist Spencer Tunick created a photographic artwork as part of their #WeTheNipple campaign.
The campaign calls for a change in the polices of both social media platforms to allow photographic artistic nudity. NCAC has written an open letter to Facebook, which owns Instagram, asking them to commit to supporting artists, rather than silencing them. NCAC has asked Facebook to convene a group of stakeholders in the arts to develop new guidelines for artistic content.
Participants in Sunday’s art action covered their nipples with stickers of photographed male nipples, to highlight the rigid—and anachronistic—gender inequality in existing nudity policies. The nipple photographs used to make the stickers were generously donated by Bravo’s Andy Cohen, artist Andres Serrano, actor-photographer Adam Goldberg, Red Hot Chili Peppers drummer Chad Smith, Whitney Biennial featured artist Paul Mpagi Sepuya and Tunick himself.
Simon Sansome, 37, who runs campaigning group Ability Access, posted an ‘empowering’ image of Vicky Balch, 23, as an example of bravery.
The activist, from Leicester, slammed Facebook’s action as ‘discrimination’ and said he was left ‘appalled’ by the decision.
Vicky Balch’s photo was branded ‘disturbing’ by Facebook Andrew Wood/Sunday Mirror
The image in question shows Vicky, 21 at the time, in a nude shot focusing on her amputated leg, which was shared almost three years ago.
Simon, who suffered spinal damage after a rugby accident four years ago and now uses a wheelchair, recorded a call with a member of Facebook’s marketing team.
The operator is believed to have said: ‘Anything that’s disturbing isn’t allowed on Facebook.
‘You have to understand, I’m sure some people find it disturbing to see pictures of disabled people. I don’t, but some might.
‘I have never come across a page that promotes disability.’
Claudia jugó con los límites de Instagram… y perdió. O perdió a medias, porque encontró un nuevo enfoque para su arte. Eso, y una comunidad entera de creadores que han convertido las redes sociales en su campo de batalla en la lucha contra la censura del cuerpo. Del femenino, sobre todo. Porque en Internet, el paraíso de la pornografía gratuita y accesible para cualquiera con una conexión, el desnudo de la mujer sigue siendo tabú, y el castigo consiste en eliminarlo.
Hay anacronismos que surgen de otros anacronismos. Si lo de quemar sujetadores nos suena muy sesentero, que esa imagen naciera de una de esas fake news tan siglo XXI no es menos chocante. 7 de septiembre, año 1968, un grupo de mujeres se manifiesta a las puertas del centro de convenciones de Atlantic City. Dentro se celebra el certamen de Miss América. En plena explosión de la llamada Segunda Ola Feminista, la traca final de la protesta prometía ser una gran pira en la que se quemaran los “instrumentos de tortura contra la mujer”, con el sujetador como eje central. Se amontonaron cientos de sostenes, se tiraron a los cubos de basura situados en el centro de la protesta… pero el fuego nunca se produjo.
La (no) imagen fue tan potente que se convirtió en símbolo. Una joven reportera del New York Post, Lindsy Van Gelder, mencionó la hoguera de sujetadores en una columna, más como un deseo que como una realidad, pero el suceso caló y los medios replicaron la noticia falsa en grandes titulares. Había nacido un mito, y medio siglo más tarde el pecho de la mujer sigue siendo el arma predilecta de la lucha feminista, y su peor enemigo, la censura.
Un sábado de marzo, la artista valenciana Claudia Sahuquillo amaneció sin cuenta de Instagram. Ningún aviso, sólo un mensaje en la pantalla: “Se ha desactivado tu cuenta porque infringe nuestras condiciones”. Casi 80.000 seguidores a la basura de un momento a otro. Su proyecto #SkinIsTheNewCanvas convertía efectivamente el cuerpo desnudo de la mujer en su lienzo. Y sí, las fotos mostraban pezones. Pintados, pero pezones. Recuperó su perfil el lunes después de justificar, a través de un formulario, que en lo suyo no había pornografía, sino todo lo contrario. Igual que se fue, volvió. Pero a ella el susto sólo le confirmó que lo que hacía tenía sentido. Continued…Read full original article…
Beales Gourmet found itself in the national news after the Daily Echo told how its dining club had been unable to post its adverts on the social media platform.
Facebook’s algorithms had rejected the ad for their “sexual or erotic” content. It turned out its algorithm had spotted two 1924 Romanesque statues in the grounds of the Italian Villa at Compton Acres. Since the Echo ran the story on Tuesday, Beales Gourmet has featured in The Times, the Daily Mail and BBC Radio Solent.
Commercial manager Justin Cohen has since had the statues’ modesty covered with Beales Gourmet aprons.
He wrote: “Dear Facebook, We’re so sorry you were offended by the fine physiques of our Herculean statues. To spare your blushes, we’ve taken the necessary steps to cover up the offending items. We trust this will be to your liking. Tastefully yours, Beales Gourmet at The Italian Villa.” Continued…Read full original article…
Facebook deleted a post this week that included an image of starving children in Auschwitz because of its policy against nudity.
The post was shared by the US-based Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect last week. It linked to an article on the DailyKos about the need for Holocaust education in the United States.
But on Wednesday, the Anne Frank Center complained on Twitter that Facebook had deleted the post.
The Facebook application is seen on a phone screen August 3, 2017. THOMAS WHITE / REUTERS
“Hi Facebook, you removed our post promoting the need for Holocaust Education for apparently violating community standards,” the organization wrote. “You haven’t given us a reason, yet allow Holocaust Denial pages to still exist. Seems a little hypocritical?”
Around six hours later, Facebook responded to the Twitter post.
“We put your post back up and sent you a message on FB,” the official Facebook account tweeted. “We don’t allow nude images of children on FB, but we know this is an important image of historical significance and we’ve restored it. We’re sorry and thank you for bringing it to our attention.” Continued…Read full original article…
The Montreal Museum of Fine Arts online ad for its big summer exhibit was blocked because it showed abstract breasts painted by the modern master.
The museum eventually had to reach out directly to Facebook in order to get the posts authorised.
Picasso paintings rejected by Facebook’s algorithm MONTREAL MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS
The painting used “wasn’t shocking”, said museum spokeswoman Pascale Chasse.
In fact, Pablo Picasso’s Femmes à la toilette was the one of the main promotional press images for the show, which looks at the influence of African art on Picasso and the artist’s subsequent impact on contemporary African artists.
It was being used in print and television ads and on the main banner hanging outside the museum in downtown Montreal. Continued…Read full original article…
Should the nude photos be censored? A photographer has been involved for months in a tough fight with Instagram and Facebook. Again and again, his artistic nude photographs have been censored.
The British photographer AdeY has decided to fight against the obviously arbitrary censorship. According to the principle “We always talk about sex, but naked bodies disturb us or disturb us” , the artist creates carefully choreographed nude photos that show the human body in all its splendor without being explicitly sexual. The social networks in which AdeY published her photos seem even more shocked by the nude works staged in an artistic way than by the depictions of bloody violence, weapons and racist, homophobic and sexist comments.
While his Facebook page has been permanently removed from the web, the photographer is at the heart of a fun debate with Instagram. Only since May 10, 2018, the profile of the artist, which is followed by more than 81,000 fans, has been deactivated four times before being reactivated. In an open letter, which Adey posted on her website , she addresses Instagram. ” I write to you as a photographer who has been silenced, and on behalf of all fellow artists who have been harassed, censored and removed on Instagram for sharing works of art. art that aims to provoke and challenge the viewer . “ Continued…Read full original article…
The sky is overcast today with just the occasional whisper of a shower from time to time. It is quite warm, regardless, and we are enjoying the day. This morning we went for a shorter walk of just over four kilometres rather than our usual ten kilometres. Rather than wearing our Kiniki bathing suits, we wore clothing for the walk along the shorter section. Since it wasn’t sunny, it almost seemed pointless to wear bathing suits. Besides, swimming wasn’t on our agenda. Now that we are back, I have time for some writing and blogging.
I wondered for quite a while before deciding the theme for today’s post, quite some time actually. It wasn’t as if there is nothing to say, but whatever was to be said had to what emerged from within me rather than be forced by my head. It was the photo I took that had me realise that it was the use of images in social media in general that needed to be addressed. This photo above obviously shows that I am fully nude. It is Facebook friendly for a photo of a male nude though not Facebook friendly if this had been a photo of a woman. My nipples are safe while a woman’s serve as triggers for some, especially the good folks at Facebook. Continued…Read full original article…
Imagine you are a gay man or woman happily married to someone of the same sex. To celebrate your love, you post a vacation photo with your significant other, kissing on the beach. None of your friends or family members object to the image, because they have known you and your spouse for many years, and they are accepting of your relationship. Except, of course, for Uncle Fred. Uncle Fred is a Bible-thumping evangelical, and he strongly opposes gay unions. For him, homosexuality is wrong. What’s more, Fred believes that the sight of two men kissing is harmful to his children. They might get the wrong idea, he argues. God forbid, his kids might even turn gay! So Fred contacts Facebook, marking your content as inappropriate. You are hence banned from Facebook for a week. In addition, you are told that if you post such an offensive image again, your account may be suspended for life. The message this sends is clear. Being homosexual is wrong, and for the “good” of the community, you must hide your perverse lifestyle from the public eye.
Kids grow up differently in Europe.
In today’s enlightened world, Fred’s complaint would go unheeded. We now recognize that anti-gay rhetoric is discriminatory. We accept the LGBT community because we know that different forms of sexual identity are not the result of mental illness, and that the sight of two men kissing will not harm our children. We have sufficient evidence that children born to gay parents turn out to be upstanding and productive members of society. Whatever harmful beliefs were once directed at the LGBT community were largely based on the Book of Leviticus, and early Judaism, and have no place in our modern world.
And yet, Facebook continues to discriminate against a minority group. Naturists were once treated with the same level of condemnation and hostility as the LGBT community. Like social lepers, early nudists lived as outcasts, in the most isolated parts of the country, and were subject to police raids and arrests, even when their activities were hidden behind closed doors. Most naturists I know do not tell people what they do on weekends. Many of us live in a state of anxiety (I know I do) over how we might be judged. I have met people who traveled outside the country just to be free of clothing, yet refuse to visit the club a mile from their house for fear of being discovered. I have known people who have lost their jobs because of their online naturist profiles. But while acceptance of the LGBT community continues to grow, naturists remain marginalized and misrepresented. By acting on our beliefs, we risk placement on the Sex Offender Registry List, to be forever associated with rapists and pedophiles. While nudists are permitted to promote their ideology in writing, we are never allowed to act upon that ideology. In being censored, we are silenced, and our arguments made ineffectual. There is no greater proof of nudism than to see whole families, on the beach, at campgrounds or in family pools, naked and innocent. Continued…Read full original article…
Of the many reasons why social media platforms should resist pressure to “voluntarily” censor their users, one stands out: history shows that they will do it badly, taking down valuable and lawful content in the name of enforcing community standards. The result: practical speech discrimination.
Facebook’s adult content policy is a textbook example. Since its early days, the platform has banned nearly all forms of nudity. But from day one, it has created reporting processes that conflate mere nudity with sexuality, and sexuality with pornography, and has applied different standards to feminine bodies than to masculine ones. Continued…Read full original article…
