Breastfeeding Pics Pulled From B.C. Woman's Facebook

First Posted: 01/11/12 07:10 PM ET Updated: 01/13/12 11:27 AM ET

Breastfeeding


A Vancouver mother is calling foul after Facebook pulled pictures of her breastfeeding off its website, calling the photos sexually explicit.


Emma Kwasnica, a breastfeeding advocate, said the social networking website recently pulled two pictures of her daughters — now two and four years old — being breastfed because they contravene the site's strict no-nudity policy.


"The most recent time it happened is when I logged in Saturday morning and there was a message, a clear message, saying that, 'We have removed sexually explicit content from your account,'" she said.


Kwasnica said Facebook is discriminating against nursing mothers, something she calls outrageous.


"I really don't understand the issue with this. The World Health Organization suggests that babies and children should be breastfed up to two years of age minimum and beyond as long as mutually desirable for the mother and child," she said.


"In public policy, everyone pressures women — breastfeeding is great, you need to breastfeed — but then when women do, they're told that's disgusting or that's gross."


'No sexual connotation'


Kwasnica said categorizing the photos as sexually explicit is ridiculous.


"I mean, this is a baby or a child eating. There's no sexual connotation here whatsoever. This is just what babies do," she said.


"We need to support mothers in this. This is a protected legal right. Facebook has now moved into the realm of public domain ... and laws of discrimination should apply on Facebook as they do in the real world and a nursing mother has a right to breastfeed in public. It should not even be an issue on Facebook."


Kwasnica said she initially posted the pictures to help other mothers.


"The more that women see photos of breastfeeding, the more it becomes normal and the more it's easier for them to breastfeed their babies," she said.


"This isn't about attention-seeking. This is about normalizing breastfeeding and helping the health and well-being of our future, our children and our babies."


Breastfeeding 'needs to be left alone on Facebook'


Kwasnica is calling on Facebook to amend its policy and allow images of breastfeeding to appear on the site.


In an email to CBC News, a Facebook spokesperson said the company does allow breastfeeding photos, but only those that are compliant with the website's standards as expressed in Facebook's statement of rights and responsibilities.


"However, photos which contain a fully exposed breast do violate our terms and may be removed if they are reported to us," the spokesperson said.


Kwasnica said that distinction is unacceptable.


"All breastfeeding images need to be left right alone on Facebook," she said. "That's the only acceptable policy and that's the only way we will stop."


FOLLOW HUFFPOST DIVORCE

A Vancouver mother is calling foul after Facebook pulled pictures of her breastfeeding off its website, calling the photos sexually explicit. Emma Kwasnica, a breastfeeding ad...
A Vancouver mother is calling foul after Facebook pulled pictures of her breastfeeding off its website, calling the photos sexually explicit. Emma Kwasnica, a breastfeeding ad...
Filed by Christian Cotroneo  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 231
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
06:33 PM on 01/18/2012
Facebook needs to get a dose of commmon sense. Nursing is wholesome and it's what breasts are for, for, for heaven's sake. Nursing photos don't have exposed breasts, so chill. Keep in mind breastfed girls have a lower chance of getting breast cancer themselves (25% reduction) and moms who nurse lower their own risk of breast cancer. This is an important health issue, so grow up and get over the ick factor. Learn to nurse discreetly anytime, anywhere and support mothers who do. :)
12:38 PM on 01/16/2012
This is so stupid. Yes, everybody promotes breast feeding, but 1) NOT in public and 2) WHY would you take a PICTURE of it? It's an intimate thing, and also a part of the body that SHOULDN'T be allowed to be on facebook. They take down pictures of topless women, and so it's only fair that they take down breast feeding pictures.

PS WHY WOULD YOU TAKE A PICTURE AND THEN POST IT ON FACEBOOK??? Who wants to see that? That's so gross.
04:15 AM on 01/14/2012
I see the militant Le Leche League loons are out in force.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AC Fraser
bend before you break
01:04 PM on 01/13/2012
Proving once again that Facebook really is run by a bunch of pubescent "adults" who automatically think a bare breast is a sexual image.
06:15 AM on 01/13/2012
So, I just opened my facebook. On the side panel, where there are ads, there is a women in skimpy lingerie in an advertising for a discount lingerie shop. She is probably showing way more cleavage, and showing plenty of leg, and exhibiting FAR more nudity than a woman breastfeeding would. How did that ad get there? Hmmmm. Facebook seems to be not very consistent.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alicks
06:48 PM on 01/12/2012
While I don't really agree with Facebook pulling her pictures, it's funny that she thinks they're discriminating against nursing mothers. It's not discrimination if they're pulling any and all nudity pics, no? Maybe the problem is the term "sexually explicit", when I think they just mean nudity.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AC Fraser
bend before you break
01:08 PM on 01/13/2012
A bare breast is not sexually explicit, in and of itself. Many North American municipalities (including the entire province of Ontario) allow women to go topless - period. An image of a bare breast doing what it is DESIGNED to do shouldn't shock or shame any grown-up person.
12:40 PM on 01/16/2012
I have been all over the US, and NONE of the places I've been to have allowed toplessness for women. And if you believe that breasts should be allowed to be seen, why not just have everybody go nude?
02:16 PM on 01/12/2012
Its called FACEBOOK for heaven's sake!
photo
Karissa36
Saving lost boys and fighting pirates.
10:13 PM on 01/14/2012
LOL
02:05 PM on 01/12/2012
I breastfed two children and made a point of being discreet as to not reveal any 'skin' and offend someone. I NEVER felt I was doing anything offensive, myself, but realized there were those who would no matter what. They were put there for that purpose and even 34 years later (my son is now 34) we haven't progressed as a society one iota. It's a shame this has to be in any category remotely close to "sexually explicit" for heavens sake. I think it's in the eyes of the beholder.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marianproletarian
01:00 PM on 01/12/2012
The more we see it, the less of a stigma there will be attached to it, the more mothers of babies will choose it. I'm all for breasts not being considered "dirty pillows" by the puritanical/hippocritical masses anymore.
12:49 PM on 01/12/2012
I'm sure that Facebook didn't just take the pictures down for no reasons. One of her friends probably flag the picture as inappropriate because they were offended. Breastfeeding is something that should be done in private and not posted on a social network for your friends to see. Think of how your children are going to react when they see a picture of themselves on the internet being breastfed at 2 or 4 years old. It's like posting a picture of your kid naked in a bathtub. Some things should be kept private!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Randy Morris
11:59 AM on 01/12/2012
Honestly, it says a lot about a society when basic primal functions are demonized in this way. Most of this perversion comes from religious fanaticism and teachings that demonize normal behavior and teach shame. Actually, it is this teaching that contributes immensely to the creation of perverts.

So we have the "nipple" police "protecting" us from a glimpse of, God forbid, a woman nursing. Unbelievable. Thanks FaceBook. You saved me from this lewd exposure and spared me from getting all worked up and visiting the seedy part of town searching for sin. Those lactating mammalian protuberances are just too steamy....they have to be banned.

Give me a break. This "Nanny State" mind set with FaceBook is annoying and unnecessary.

Conversely, there is a petition going on right now to urge Sesame Street to bring breast feeding back to the show. Just Google "Sesame Street breast feeding" to see the news feed on it.
04:32 PM on 01/13/2012
I doubt the folks at Facebook are religious fanatics. They're just feeding in to the concept of boobs as sexual objects for men's pleasure.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Randy Morris
06:20 PM on 01/13/2012
They are not religious fanatics, I am sure. What I meant was their preemptive action was nothing more than pandering to those that might be offended.......the one's that are taught shame.

And BTW....they are not only regarded as sexual objects by men.
photo
Jay from Ottawa
sovereignty sale, 1.3T OBO
11:50 AM on 01/12/2012
I --- really don't care. I'm all for breast feeding, much better than using formula, but hey, facebook is a free service, and if they want to get all high and mighty, then whatever, that's their perogative. Now if you had to PAY to use facebook, then I'd feel differently about it, but as long as it's free to use, then they're free to impose whatever stupid rules they want, even if they make no sense.
04:34 PM on 01/13/2012
So as long as something's free, it's allowed to be discriminatory?? What if someone owned a free community centre and said that only white people were allowed to use it?
photo
Jay from Ottawa
sovereignty sale, 1.3T OBO
09:28 AM on 01/16/2012
A community center would be owned by the community, municipality, city or province, and therefore wouldn't not be legally allowed to discriminate because it's owned by the public through their municipality / city. If the 'community center' was a privately built center by a company or corporation, it would be allowed to fly by different rules than something publicly owned.

I'm not trying to back up FB, I personally don't like FB, but hey, if they want to take down pictures of breastfeeding mothers, that's their prerogative, and they're free to do it. Doesn't mean that people aren't free to dump facebook for an alternative that won't blacklist such benign pictures.
11:29 AM on 01/12/2012
Unless all photos of shirtless men are removed, this is total discrimination. Breastfeeding is not sexually explicit. Breasts feeding babies is a good and wonderful thing and should be supported and encouraged. It supports the health of baby, it cuts the cancer risk for mom, and is an awesome bonding experience.
11:50 AM on 01/12/2012
But this is just dandy?? HAHAHAHA!! I HYPOCRITES!!!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1051905133633&set=a.1551792390502.73905.1105899495&type=3&theater
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
peegan
Silence like a cancer grows...S/G.
12:16 PM on 01/12/2012
"page currently unavailable"
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bluelynx
10:45 AM on 01/12/2012
This is Facebook, not Boobbook. We've seen enough of this undignified, look-at-me behavior. As my sainted Irish mother used to say about people who vandalize things by carving their names or initials: "Fools' names, and fools' faces, are often seen in public places." Fools' boobs, too.
12:45 PM on 01/12/2012
Looks like boobbook to me !

https://www.facebook.com/financiallyhung
04:36 PM on 01/13/2012
Breastfeeding is "undignified"?? This "undignified" behaviour keeps children alive. Human beings are designed to feed their children from their bodies. It's the co-opting of breasts as sexual objects that's undignified. It's the sexualization of women for profit that's undignified. Grow up.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
J5K
06:24 PM on 01/18/2012
There are tribes who believe that for boys to mature properly, they must "nurse" from the men in the tribe. They do this by "taking nourishment" from the mens' penises, considering it a vital sustenance. The name is failing me, but I can provide reference material this afternoon if you want to read about it.

Do you think this should be permissible, out of respect for their culture? If so, should they be allowed to do it in public or post photos of it to Facebook?

The simple fact is, photos that are in violation of their terms of use should be removed. Repeated violations should lead to your account being suspended. If you don't like it, don't use Facebook. It's not some inalienable right.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jon Malone
focus your mind on the here and now.
10:19 AM on 01/12/2012
i don't have a problem with breastfeeding. but why would you post that on facebook? sorry, i don't need to see that in public or on your facebook page. it's a natural act i get that, but so is pooping but you don't see me putting that on facebook, or doing it in public. i mean, it's nothing to get too excited about like this woman was. what does the World Health org have to do with this issue? and how is this discriminatory? some things just should not be done in public. you can't like...idk, put your breast milk in a bottle? also, there are some sick people that would get some sexual thing out of it.
10:47 AM on 01/12/2012
Are you mad? Some of the best memories are of the incredible bonding experience that comes with breastfeeding. There is no more beautiful sight. How you can equate that with poop implies that you -- well, I'll leave that up to the readers.
11:06 AM on 01/12/2012
"...incredible bonding experience that comes with breastfeed­ing" that are intimate and therefore private! My mom breastfed me without the use of posting pics of it on Facebook! just sayin'...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jon Malone
focus your mind on the here and now.
11:16 AM on 01/12/2012
i was refering that it's something to be done in private. if your ok with doing that in public then more power to you, but in my opinion it should be done in private. i sit arround the house naked...when no one is arround. that a better example? lol