LJ wants to ban default breastfeeding pics

LiveJournal has requested that a user change her default icon to one
not depicting her breastfeeding baby, because it is "inappropriate".
There's a lot of ongoing discussion on

http://community.livejournal.com/boo...s/1737571.html

Promom has a three-minute activist letter, to be sent to the company
which owns LJ:

http://www.promom.org/3min/3min_livejournal_may06.html

--
C, mama to three year old nursling

wrote in message
ups.com...
LiveJournal has requested that a user change her default icon to one
not depicting her breastfeeding baby, because it is "inappropriate".
There's a lot of ongoing discussion on

http://community.livejournal.com/boo...s/1737571.html

Promom has a three-minute activist letter, to be sent to the company
which owns LJ:

http://www.promom.org/3min/3min_livejournal_may06.html

--
C, mama to three year old nursling


Hm... Didn't have the time (and didn't want to put in the effort at this
point) to read through everything, but I did scan down...
If a picture of an infant nursing is obscene, then I think that any images
of an adult snacking on pizza, chowing down on a burger or enjoying a big
glass of cold milk and a plate of cookies is obscene...
IF the picture was meant to be disgusting, perverted, not appropriate for
all ages, THEN that would be a different case (maybe if there was a picture
of a woman with her breasts out just for the heck of it) that could very
well be considered inappropriate. But breastfeeding??? Give me a break.
The pictures aren't offensive. I see it as an infant and mother doing what
an infant needs - nourishment and comfort. Is it really all that different
from a picture of a parent bottle feeding their baby? Is it any different
from a picture of YOU or I eating a big bowl of spaghetti???
Seems stupid. I see nothing at all wrong with a breastfeeding picture. I
find it, actually, almost comforting to know that there are indeed others
who have, are and will continue to breastfeed. Honestly, I felt more
ashamed (for my own personal reasons) when I would pop out a bottle for DD
than I did nursing her in public. I felt like all eyes were on me, and that
people were judging me wondering why I wasn't breastfeeding, although I'm
sure more people did stare when I nursed, as it does seem that a good
majority of the population (over here, anyways) find breastfeeding -
especially in public - to be morally wrong...

wrote in message
ups.com...
LiveJournal has requested that a user change her default icon to one
not depicting her breastfeeding baby, because it is "inappropriate".
There's a lot of ongoing discussion on

http://community.livejournal.com/boo...s/1737571.html

Promom has a three-minute activist letter, to be sent to the company
which owns LJ:

http://www.promom.org/3min/3min_livejournal_may06.html

Thanks for letting us know. This has certainly lowered my opinion of Live
Journal staff. I submitted the letter and added the following:

"If this situation wasn't so sad, I would find the absurdity of it
hilarious. Who, exactly, are these images inappropriate for viewing by?
Children? My 22 month old views my breasts twice a day. Thankfully, she
doesn't share your bizarre hang ups. It may have escaped you, but breasts
exist primarily for feeding human young, and secondarily as a sensual body
part. In much the same way, feet are designed for walking - but that doesn't
stop the foot-fetishists. Are you going to ban photos of feet too?"


--
Amy
Mum to Carlos born sleeping 20/11/02,
& Ana born screaming 30/06/04
http://www.freewebs.com/carlos2002/
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/ana%5Fj%5F2004/
My blog: http://spaces.msn.com/members/querer-hijo-querer-hija/

"Mum of Two" wrote in message
...

"If this situation wasn't so sad, I would find the absurdity of it
hilarious. Who, exactly, are these images inappropriate for viewing by?
Children? My 22 month old views my breasts twice a day. Thankfully, she
doesn't share your bizarre hang ups. It may have escaped you, but breasts
exist primarily for feeding human young, and secondarily as a sensual body
part. In much the same way, feet are designed for walking - but that
doesn't
stop the foot-fetishists. Are you going to ban photos of feet too?"

applauds

Good job, Amy!

JennP.

Good to see that a bunch of them switched to breastfeeding icons in protest
Could be just me, but I found none of those particularly tittilating...

In Sydney, there are billboards showing a baby (probably around 6 months
old) and a breast, and promoting breastfeeding. So far, I haven't heard of
anyone complaining about it while lingerie ads get taken down for causing
traffic jams. So (partially) clothed women are out, naked breasts are in!
Woo Hoo!

wrote in message
ups.com...
LiveJournal has requested that a user change her default icon to one
not depicting her breastfeeding baby, because it is "inappropriate".
There's a lot of ongoing discussion on

http://community.livejournal.com/boo...s/1737571.html

Promom has a three-minute activist letter, to be sent to the company
which owns LJ:

http://www.promom.org/3min/3min_livejournal_may06.html

--
C, mama to three year old nursling

Mum of Two wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

LiveJournal has requested that a user change her default icon to one
not depicting her breastfeeding baby, because it is "inappropriate".
There's a lot of ongoing discussion on

http://community.livejournal.com/boo...s/1737571.html

Promom has a three-minute activist letter, to be sent to the company
which owns LJ:

http://www.promom.org/3min/3min_livejournal_may06.html


Thanks for letting us know. This has certainly lowered my opinion of Live
Journal staff. I submitted the letter and added the following:

"If this situation wasn't so sad, I would find the absurdity of it
hilarious. Who, exactly, are these images inappropriate for viewing by?
Children? My 22 month old views my breasts twice a day. Thankfully, she
doesn't share your bizarre hang ups. It may have escaped you, but breasts
exist primarily for feeding human young, and secondarily as a sensual body
part. In much the same way, feet are designed for walking - but that doesn't
stop the foot-fetishists. Are you going to ban photos of feet too?"



I wrote them as well. I got this back in response.
(I think the woman who wrote it forgot what it means to be a woman)

Jo


Dear Joanna, Thank you for your feedback. Please allow me to explain, as
the controversy surrounding this issue appears to stem from a
misunderstanding. LiveJournal has always placed restrictions on default
userpics, as the default userpic is visible in many public areas
throughout the site, including the Directory, the Schools Directory, and
the profile page.

These restrictions are detailed in
ttp://www.livejournal.com/support/faqbrowse.bml?faqid=111. We feel it's
important to strike a balance between the ideal of free expression and
the rights of, for instance, a parent to prevent their child from seeing
unsolicited material that the parent feels is non-age-appropriate or the
right of an individual to be able to browse public LiveJournal spaces
without being exposed to nudity or violence.

There are not blanket restrictions on default userpics depicting the act
of breastfeeding, and the restrictions have nothing to do with
targetting or restricting breastfeeding activism or awareness campaigns.
We must hold to as clear and consistent a guideline as possible to
determine the appropriateness of default userpics, in order to ensure
that our standards are enforced equally for every user.

Any usericon in which unclothed breasts or genitalia are visible is
therefore inappropriate for use as a default icon, and when such icons
are reported to the Abuse team, the user is asked to make that icon
non-default.

If an icon depicting the act of breastfeeding does not also depict a
clearly visible unclothed breast in which the areola or nipple is
visible, it does not fall into this category.

We do not prohibit people from using icons that are inappropriate for
use as a default icon as a non-default icon, as the issue is not with
the depiction of the icons themselves but their use in areas, again such
as the Directory and the Schools Directory, which have been designated
"nudity free".

Non-default userpics are not held to the same standard, as they can only
be visible in entries, comments, and communities, all of which are "user
space" as opposed to "LiveJournal application space". The application of
this policy to icons depicting breastfeeding is not in any way intended
to be a statement that breastfeeding is dirty, shameful, or obscene. We
fully support our users' right to make their own decisions regarding
parenting choices and styles, and we appreciate the dedication of
parents who have chosen to participate in breastfeeding activism and
education. We ask only that you are willing to extend the same support
and appreciation to, for instance, parents who choose to believe that it
is inappropriate for their children to view unsolicited nudity in public.

The physical-world analogy is not perfect in this situation;
breastfeeding is indeed perfectly legal in public places, but in a
public place, another parent is also able to cover a child's eyes or
remove a child from the area if he or she believes that such an action
is inappropriate for their child to see.

We feel that the restrictions we have always placed on default usericons
strike the best balance between individual expression and individual
courtesy. We do agree that in a perfect world, the issue would not
arise, but unfortunately, this is not a perfect world, and we believe
that our solution to the issue is a reasonable compromise between two
wildly divergent points of view regarding what is and is not appropriate
for LiveJournal -- not simply regarding icons depicting breastfeeding,
but all material which a parent or other individual might feel is
inappropriate for public.

I apologize for any miscommunications which may have given the
impression that LiveJournal is in any way "against" individual parenting
choices; the issue is not at all a political one. We welcome and value
our pro-breastfeeding users and communities, and appreciate their
dedication to and passion for their cause.

However, because LiveJournal is a community with extremely varied
standards and audiences, we must balance out the interests of all our
users, and we have always felt these restrictions are the best possible
compromise. Regards, Denise Paolucci Six Apart, Ltd // LiveJournal.com

Jo wrote:

I wrote them as well. I got this back in response.

Yeah, I got the same one, and this bit in particular really irks me:

snip

These restrictions are detailed in
ttp://www.livejournal.com/support/faqbrowse.bml?faqid=111. We feel it's
important to strike a balance between the ideal of free expression and
the rights of, for instance, a parent to prevent their child from seeing
unsolicited material that the parent feels is non-age-appropriate or the
right of an individual to be able to browse public LiveJournal spaces
without being exposed to nudity or violence.

a) The TOS said "graphic sexual content or violence" until YESTERDAY,
when they changed it to "nudity or violence".

b) Numerous court decisions have found that breastfeeding is exempt
from nudity restrictions and is neither illegal nor inappropriate in
public. Granted private companies don't necessarily have to hew to
these lines if they're not government funded in any way, but virtually
all of them do. It would be like only hiring white employees...

I'd like to know if male nipples count as nudity, or if bare feet
count. I don't have a nursing icon myself, but how can a photo of
breastfeeding suddenly become illegal, inappropriate in public, an act
of nudity, or graphically sexual when the act itself is protected under
so many laws???

--
C, mama to three year old nursling

Just as an update, xavi7734 posted on the LJ gropu breastfeeding that an
actual person from Media Relations at SixApart has been contacted and has
promised some actual attenention. She is giving them until noon tomorrow
(which would be 05/22 and Eastern time )until she sends out the media
releases and response letters and asks everyone to do similarily. Anyway
didn't see it posted and just thought I'd send an update

Melissa Walton
Mom to Connor born 05/24/05

Please forgive the typos NAK is not as easy with an almost 1 year old as it
was when he was younger!

Melissa Walton
Mom to Connor born 05/24/05

"Melissa" wrote in message
...
Just as an update, xavi7734 posted on the LJ gropu breastfeeding that an
actual person from Media Relations at SixApart has been contacted and has
promised some actual attenention. She is giving them until noon tomorrow
(which would be 05/22 and Eastern time )until she sends out the media
releases and response letters and asks everyone to do similarily. Anyway
didn't see it posted and just thought I'd send an update

Melissa Walton
Mom to Connor born 05/24/05



Thanks for posting this update for me Melissa. Somehow I've ended up
spearheading this entire thing and I'm weary.

Thank you all for your support and for sending letters. I'm still working
directly with SixApart to get the issue resolved before it becomes a huge
media event. Although I do have everything ready in case we need to go that
route too (*wink*)

I'll try to keep you all updated here as well. I'm also updating my
personal journal as I go along http://xavi7734.livejournal.com

Carrie
Breastfeeding Mama
Executive Director - ProMoM.Org
and one ****ed off Live Journal User.