It's the inconsistency between the very suggestive, sexual shots which are allowed up - as profile photos, and in photo albums -- yet removing photos or profile pictures which show an infant eating. What could ever be possibly obscene about an infant eating? Ever? I really want to know, what is obscene or offensive about that?
So they cling to this "nipple/areola" defense. But it is quite obvious that many of the photos which have been removed, have shown neither. Furthermore - not all areolas are the same size. I could easily post a photo of me nursing my child where no areola would show at all; my sister, whose areolas are much larger - certainly could not, at least not 'til her child is much older. So we women with small areolas are not obscene, but mothers who have larger areolas but are doing the same thing in their photos (feeding their child) are obscene? Where is the logic in that?
One of my favorite photos of my sister, ever, is immediately after she gave birth. She's topless, nursing her baby, and luminous with joy and the effort of having given birth. It's not sexual and it's not obscene. In fact, there's no areola showing and no breast showing (this sister is quite flat-chested). But if someone complained on Facebook, I'm sure it could be taken down.
When we allow feeding our children to be considered obscene and sexual, we contribute to a social atmosphere which stifles and restricts breastfeeding, an atmosphere where some (many?) women will continue to be afraid to nurse in public, afraid to nurse around friends or family - and will restrict and shorten nursing duration overall because of these social strictures.
Breastfeeding is normal. It's part of everyday life for me and for my sisters and many of my friends. Photos happen - where baby is engaged, or latched off looking at something else. Why shouldn't those photos go online? If what I am doing is legal, if I could do it in the middle of town in January without getting in trouble -- then why is Facebook saying it's wrong and obscene?
Most states now have laws specifically protecting breastfeeding in public; some have started putting in enforcement provisions, even. Yet Facebook thinks that it's OK to restrict photos which show this normal, healthy, recommended human behavior? I could sit in the office of the CEO there and nurse with impunity, per CA law - but can't post a photo of it online? There's just a serious disjunction in logic there.
It's fine for people to choose not to put their breastfeeding photos up, or even not to take them at all. Women can choose to only nurse at home, only nurse under a cape, or etc. It's up to each woman to decide what is comfortable for her within the misogynistic social strictures we live with -- how far or even if she want to buck those expectations. But the bottom line is that breastfeeding is not wrong, it's not sexual, and it's not obscene. And to treat it that way, whether in person or in regards to online photos, is offensive. It should offend women who only nurse in their bedrooms and not even in front of their husbands, as much as it offends women who are comfortable nursing in public without any qualms at all - because they are telling us that what we do, as mothers who breastfeed, is obscene and sexual.
:
:
