Facebook bans breastfeeding pictures.

Post Reply New Topic

Those tribes have their own taboos, you're forgetting that. And mens' attraction to the female breast is more primal than any religion. It's actually hardwired into our male brains. It's racial memory.

My picture shows a side view of me peeing in a cup. I was practicing my aim. Apparently when I use the toilet, I pee all over the toilet seat and people don't like that.

In most states it is a woman's civil right to breastfeed in public (even if an establishment is privately owned). For instance if a woman is asked to leave an eatery because she is breastfeeding, she has grounds to sue just as if she were asked to leave because she were black, or gay. Facebook is not being just puritanical, it's being outright discriminatory. Legally someone cannot discriminate because they feel it's "their business."

Of course I understand the necessity of breastfeeding, but why must it be made into a public statement? Why must a woman be allowed to breastfeed in public as opposed to in private? Does it matter where the breastfeeding takes place?

This reminds mre of the woman's right to have the toilet-seat remain down at all times ...

But the child's face is showing, isn't it?

I have to agree that the real problem is that western society sexualizes breasts too much.



It has been argued that a baby has to have eye contact with her mother while being fed, although breastfeeding in public wouldn't be something they would be doing always, but in some situations it would be necessary I suppose, then it wouldn't be much of an a issue.

hmmm, because of the necessity?

- How many women do you think do it just because they want to show off?
- How many women do it on public because they want to feed a hungry child that happens to be hungy at a given time and place?
- Why is it so wrong to breastfeed in public?

I believe the problem lies more with the one who watches rather than the one who does it.



well, perhaps, but the level of accuracy of that can be debatable, if women were more freely allowed to go barechested as men do, then our views on female breasts would be different, as we would be so used to seeing them, we wouldn't have the same reaction towards them as we have now, they wouldn't be so eroticed because of that.

If the female breast were no longer eroticized, something else would be. In every culture, something is erotic, something is taboo. Makes you wonder about those African cultires where everybody is naked. What are the men trying to look at when the women walk by?

damn NTs and their eye-contact thingy I don't care, I don't want to see stuff like that in public places. babies eat every 3 hours, they get enough eye-gazing ;p

You know what else you find when you look at many "untouched" tribes? A little thing called female genital mutilation, also known as clitoridectomy. For the record, this happens to be a practice largely known to African countries, oddly enough the same areas these untouched tribes that walk around bare-breasted are found.

When you are done arbitrarily using actions of another culture under the pretense that such cultures are in some way more advanced, you can educate yourself and rethink your argument here.



Yes of course, men had no idea that breast had any sexual association until religion told them so.




I'm well aware of the law and just because something is acceptable under the law doesn't make it necessarily right--check into the issue of slavery to see my point.

First, property rights trump--even if the law fails to acknowledge this.

Two, discriminatory? You do realize that being black is inherent and one cannot change that; while on the other hand, someone can change whether or not they breastfeed in public. They can leave the restaurant, they can go to the car, the bathroom or give the baby a bottle.

I'm not saying that they should do that, but they can, which makes the discrimination argument pointless.

For the record, if that last post sounds a bit aggressive, that wasn't the intent so please forgive if that's how it comes across.

It may be getting less and less puritanical, but it still is. Why is the breast considered a bad thing to be showing on facebook or anywhere else? Isn't the human body beautiful (besides mine) ?

I don't really care one way or another what Facebook does. The real problem here is noted quite well in the original article:



If this were some small website doing this no one would care because of the prospect of finding a suitable alternative elsewhere. But instead, people chose to use Facebook and have invested a lot and now realize they can't just up and move when Facebook does something they disagree with. So what do they do?

Claim discrimination.

For all you people worry about breasts being too sexualized, what about body parts that are de-sexualized? Showing your ankle in public used to be taboo, now it's not. But if Facebook says, "Hey, no ankles in your photos, it's supposed to be FACES ONLY! Hence FACEbook!"

I'm sure people would still complain they can't show their ankles.