Home / Culture and Society / Science and Technology / Facebook Bans the Breast on Behalf of Mankind

Facebook Bans the Breast on Behalf of Mankind

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Who can blame the staff of Facebook for removing any photo of a breastfeeding breast wherein the least bit of nipple and/or areola shows? After all, it’s right there in the U.S. Constitution: neither nipple nor involuntary areola, except as a product of pornography whereof the party shall have been duly aroused, shall exist within view of the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

We may bear arms, bear our religion, and bear a fifth of whiskey; we may even use bears to block our doors so troops cannot quarter themselves in our house during peacetime; but at no time shall we bare the breast. Specifically we shall not bare the female breast; specifically we shall not bare the breastfeeding breast; specifically we shall not bare the female breastfeeding breast when an infant is in the picture, because most men find it inhibits their arousal.

Think of the mayhem that would ensue if we allowed the female B-word out into the open. Just look at Europe, those threadbare heathens! Their car companies are on the verge of collapse, their currency is weaker than a spent whore, and only the richest have adequate health insurance. Oh wait — that’s America. My bad.

Nonetheless, heretofore and whatnot, breasts are bad. Horrible, disgusting, inhuman even. The male of the species and those females who have never seen their own breasts have rightfully decided in what context a mass of mammary can be displayed -– and it ain’t to feed infants. Seriously, folks, why do you think God gave us formula? Am I right, China?

The sole purpose of the breast is to be augmented, photographed in as unseemly a fashion as possible, airbrushed, placed on pages more glossy than a hooker’s lips, sealed in plastic, confined behind a barrier of particle board on a magazine stand (so children and men under 5’7” can’t reach it), and marked “Adult Reading Material.”

A public show of the breast leaves nothing to the imagination. I know when I see a fully exposed breast on the train or at the playground the only thought running through my mind is “For cryin’ out loud, I might as well be looking right into the labyrinth of the labia.” Sure, it’s true that many people, both men and women, wouldn’t know a vulva from a Volvo; but while some think this is rank ignorance, I think it’s insuring the mystique of the female form.

Unlike driving, smoking, and suing the guy whose house you broke into because he came between you and his Wii with a bat, breasts are a privilege, not a constitutional right. And with that privilege comes a unique responsibility and obligation toward its most loyal onlooker: man.

When a man kills someone, he goes to jail for murder. When a man takes money from his employer, he is charged with embezzling. But when a man does something illegal or immoral in response to seeing a bare breast — be it in the context of seeing a breastfeeding mother, spying on his neighbor, or viewing porn — he’s clearly under the influence. It’s not fair to expect men to know the difference between Heather the Harlot and Betty the Breastfeeder. It’s their biology.

Facebook is in good company with its obscenity rule, and the rest of us should take note. Airlines, local governments, and owner-operated businesses (who argue with local governments that their customers should be allowed to smoke but not breastfeed) are among the few in this country who are willing to take a stand against any customer who would dare bare.

People of civilized nations (you European and African types, I’m so not talking about you) like the United States and all Muslim countries know the real deal: if you don’t cover it, they will covet it — and that will be everyone’s undoing!

Powered by

About Diana Hartman

Diana is a USMC (ret.) spouse, mother of three and a Wichita, Kansas native. She is back in the United States after 10 years in Germany. She is a contributing author to Holiday Writes. She hates liver & motivational speakers. She loves science & naps.
  • All persons agreed to the terms when they signed up. Furthermore, they checked a box confirming that the photo was acceptable. Really, I can not find how they have grounds to bitch

  • It’s their company, so why shouldn’t they be able to set the rules as silly as they may be? I don’t remember anyone being forced to use facebook nor it being a Constitutional right.

  • Russell

    It is Facebook’s policy if you do not agree go elsewhere.

  • Facebook says they took the action solely based on user complaints.

    They didn’t say how many complaints.

    Two, maybe?

  • Jaime Anderson

    I totally agree with Facebook. I do not want to see women breastfeeding while searching through facebook. The argument that they want to “memorialize a beautiful moment in nature” should be saved for their hard drive and not the general viewing public. It’s a personal moment between mother and child. I could argue that having marital relations with my husband, sanctioned by God is a moment I want to preserve in time. Fine – but not for the entire world to see!!! Give it up, it’s their website, they can decide what gets deleted. If the moms don’t like it, then turn in your facebook account.

  • Witty deconstruction of absurd puritanical rules that keep the United States from becoming the enlightened nation our founders envisioned.

    Why are Americans in 2009 still more afraid of bare breasts than violent psychopaths?

  • @Dread, I would complain about that picture, simply because facebook is accessible by anybody over 13, and to me, those images are inappropriate for them

  • jaime, why are you comparing the act of breastfeeding to the act of sex?

  • mr. barga, do you seriously not know that many a breastfeeding mother with older children will feed her infant in the presence of those children without cover and that, if called in, no one at social services is going to take issue with that or call it “inappropriate”?

  • Jaime, you say that feeding is a ‘personal moment between mother and child’, but I somehow doubt you are offended by this photo.

    And if not, why not? After all, it makes no difference to the baby.

    And in answer to Robert: I understand perfectly that Facebook is entitled to set its own terms of service, but I am equally entitled to call them silly if I want to.

  • say you have a chick walking around in a super market without a shirt on, how is that appropriate (I say the same about a guy wALKING around, i bear no sexisim here)

    A mother with her children =/= public

  • mr. barga, are you comparing exhibitionism to breastfeeding an infant?

  • What Bicho said.

    Also: we’ve beaten every other injustice in this world and we’re onto the right for women breastfeeding in public? That’s fantastic news! I can’t wait until men are able to roam Times Square freely jamming medical suppositories into themselves without getting frowned upon.

  • You are showing a breast, how is it different?

  • if breastfeeding and exhibitionism are the same in your mind, there’s no where else to go with that…at best, that’s misguided; at worst, that’s just creepy…

  • I do not see how a breast is appropriate for public in this country.

  • zingzing

    never take your shirt off again, robert.

    meh. you must be kidding. look at the happiness to boobs-in-public indices of various countries. you will find that the less pent up you (male, you) are about seeing women’s breasts, the happier you are. shit, i’m happy to see them. makes my day.

    but a mother feeding her baby in a natural way is not in the least bit sexual and therefore, has little to do with it.

    when a doctor gives you the “turn you head and cough” or the greasy thumb, do you also equate that with sexuality?

    wait. what country are you in?

  • so is cleavage OK in public?…or should that been banned as well?

    cleavage Ok but breastfeeding not?

  • Really, this is all about public vs. private. Nobody is saying “breastfeeding is bad,” they’re saying “breastfeeding shouldn’t be something seen in public.” Other natural, non-sexual acts:

    • giving birth
    • going to the bathroom
    • checking for various cancers of the naughty bits

    Then there are some non-natural, yet still non-sexual acts involving sex organs, such as circumcision, changing diapers and inserting a tampon, all which are and should be handled away from the public eye.

    If pictures of any of those acts would show up on Facebook, I can see them taken down. If any of those acts are done in a public setting, I can see arrests being made. What I can’t see, though, is if someone posts a picture of himself pooping, and the picture is removed, I don’t envision a collection of pro-excrement activists staging a public poop-in.

  • By the way, next time I notice grown men on the Internet debating the goodness and badness of breasts, it damn well better involve cup size.

  • There’s something I don’t understand about the American public breast taboo.

    As a woman, I could walk down the street with hardly any covering at all over my breasts. The crucial cover-up spot? My nipples.

    But men have nipples. And men walk around sans shirt in public quite often. Yes, I realize that they can’t enter a variety of business establishments, but they CAN mow their lawns and walk their dogs.

    AND post pictures of these acts on Facebook.

    NIPPLES. The very naughtiest part of a woman’s breast, the only part that absolutely positively MUST BE COVERED UP. Right there in public! In front of elementary schools! Outside grocery stores! In government-funded parks!

    Seems inconsistent, right? The difference between men’s and women’s “breasts” is the amount of fatty tissue. BUT this is the part that’s apparently okay to show (cleavage, teeny tiny bikinis).

  • Great article, by the way.

  • Okay, fine, think of it like this
    if you breast feed anywhere that needs to follow the health code then it is wrong
    the park is fine

  • zingzing

    facebook has no health codes.

  • Facebook is their own site, they have the right to do it

    I think that it is obscene, but our argument on that is fallacious simply because it is an opinion. So I migrated to one only based in evidence, the health code one

    Also, at comment 17, I don’t take my shirt off in public unless at a forum fitting for it (say a pool or a beach or a locker room)

  • Diana,

    Just sign up an account on Facebook and create a group “One Million People Want to see Tits and Boobs Mothers Breastfeeding Their Children on Facebook!”

  • I joined a Facebook group with a name similar to that. Not sure how many members we have so far though.

  • If you crossed out the other part (so it was tits and boobs not crossed, mothers breastfeeding crossed) it would be popular

  • Kate Harding

    I am a mother, Facebook user, and former breastfeeder. I can say that I honestly prefer not to see other women breastfeeding and I don’t mind particularly that Facebook took down the picture.

    HOWEVER…Diana, I just had to say that this piece is exceptionally well written. Kudos!

  • Gee, I don’t know. I’ve seen much worse on Facebook. So why not outlaw girls gone wild who post their party pictures? Why doesn’t someone keep a rolling patrol on those underage drinkers who blatantly post drinking shots?

  • I agree with facebook, no breastfeeding.

  • Sherry Loucks

    The watchdog of public obscenity, is there any lower form of life? Who cares about a little FUCKING NIPPLE??

  • Carrie

    if it’s all about the nipple then Facebook is F***ing insane. If you actually LOOK at a mother breastfeeding, you can barely see anything. The baby’s head covers it up! Not to mention the clothing she’s wearing. And guess what guys? The nipple is in the baby’s MOUTH!! Gasp! So where is this “oh so inappropriate nipple for view in the pictures??”

    Facebook’s policy is stupid. I bet the formula companies are paying them off. Don’t show the natural way to feed a baby, only show babies eating from bottles.

  • Nothing in these comments that we haven’t heard before x 1,000. The article is wonderful, spot on. Meanwhile, Facebook’s thoughtlessly banned photos (with comments) are collected at the tera.ca site.

  • Momma of 6

    When has our society fallen to the point that something that is non-sexual is so threatening. I guess that is the key right. I am a proud mother of 6 who is still nursing her 25 month old toddler and I have nursed my kids for over 100 months combined.

    I think that breastfeeding is natural and if they are going to take pics of women breastfeeding then all animals who are nursing young should not be posted as well. I mean there might be people out there who find that erotic.

    I really enjoyed your article. Well written thank you. I linked it on my facebook page.

  • Patti B

    According to Facebook it is all about the showing of nipples. So I agree that if pictures showing nipples are banned, then all nipple pictures should be banned, man woman and child.

    Breasts are breasts are breasts. It is how one sees them that determines their appropriatness in the public areana. If you are very prudish about anything that is of the human body then yes breasts will make you squirm if you are in public or private. But really if you concider them an non -issue then what’s the problem? and really breastfeeding is about a baby getting some milk nothing more nothing less. And not looking really is an otion, but feel free to stare at your waitress’ clevage all you want.

    To those who think breastfeeding is sexual, step out of the box and realize we are beginning to embrace this concept of normal infant feeding and the whole purpose as to why a woman’s breast is different that a man’s.

    I DO agree that Facebook has a right to determine what content is one their site. If their ignorance as a product of the North American Society’s phobia about women’s nipples comes out, well that is their right.

    So….If you want to post a breastfeeding picture on Facebook then be prepared to set your profile security so that no one but your friends and family can see them. Simple as that. It’s a choice you are making, and yes Facebook does have a right to censor, you are posting on thier dime.

    If the persons that are offended are the ones cruising facebook and accidentally seeing your picture and repoting you, there is a way to prevent this.

    I believe it really is all about discretion on everyone’s part..

  • Jordan Richardson

    Breasts are breasts are breasts.

    Mine don’t give milk. Also, some are nicer than others.

    feel free to stare at your waitress’ clevage all you want.


  • Riss

    I am a breastfeeding mum. I bf in public without covering. My daughter hates having a blanket over head while eating, wouldnt you. I bf in public to make it viewed as a normal part of life. In Africa you will see a mom bfing her toddler without a cover, while talking to a political leader. And he wont think anything of it because that is how babies are fed. beautifully written, kudos!