One of the most beautiful things I've seen all day are the photos (like the one pictured here) from the Breast Cancer Awareness Body Painting Project. In each portrait, a breast cancer survivor poses with a brightly painted chest. The women in the pictures say that the experience has been enlightening and therapeutic, and has reignited their spirits. But unlike me and probably you, Facebook isn't a fan.
Not long after the pics were posted on the social network, they were taken down by the site. Facebook blasted the photos as pornography, citing inappropriate nudity, which is a violation of the terms of use. Gone also were the many supportive, uplifting comments that had been left under the photographs. Wow. Facebook really knows how to be a total buzzkill, huh?
Making the situation even more dismaying is the fact that the artist, Michael Colanero, who is the creator of the project, said he took care in making the images "child-safe." He elaborated:
I want them to be in oncology clinics and children's hospitals. I've gone out of my way to make them nonsexual. People come into the gallery and put their hands on the pictures, crying. They can empathize and just learn and be more aware.
Wow, that doesn't make Facebook look totally inhumane AT ALL, huh? Heh! Really, what's going on here is simply more of the same. Every so often, the site automatically takes down a photo that is completely harmless, because on the surface, it's breasts, nudity, whatever. It's almost like they've got some kind of code that is programmed to detect breasts on the site and then immediately remove the photo. Like it's not actually humans monitoring the site. Eerie!!
I don't think that's necessarily the case, but Zuck & Co. need to start showing us there really are humans behind the social network. As in, real people who can tell the difference between porn/unnecessary nudity and art. It wouldn't be that difficult. All they'd have to do is carefully consider photos like these on a case-by-case basis instead of defaulting to knee-jerk electronic censorship. Facebook is about real people connecting with one another after all, right? So why aren't the people running it showing their humanity?
Here's a video of more of the body painting if you'd like to check it out ... uncensored!
What do you think about the censorship of these photos?
Image via Uncommon Gallery/Splash News
Tie-Dye for the Fourth of July!
Mom Survives Horrific Domestic Abuse
Kim and Kanye's Baby Name Predictions!
Moms Love Birthday Parties, Too!
Comments 88
Just like the taking down breast feeding photos but its perfectly fine for some slutty ass girl to post nasty half naked pictures of herself no one has a problem with that....absolute bullshit fb
I think saying these pics are disturbing is really rude,the things these women have been through is unbelieveable,and the pics represent that,I think they're beautiful, and FB is ridiculous.
Nudity is nudity, even w/ paint on it. Girls may show themselves wearing next to nothing, but fact is they are still wearing something. If a guy lost a testicle to cancer would FB accept a photo of where his ball used to be with a painting on it? I think not.
So Facebook allows pro-rape and pro-violence against women groups (hello, "kicking sluts in the vagina" page), allows bare-ass baby pictures, and thousands of women are fighting for breastfeeding photos to be allowed, yet these are too disturbing? I think everyone has a backwards view of this. As for this being used as fapping material for horny people, who cares? These women will never know and it's not doing anyone any harm. It's not exactly respectful, but masturbation rarely is.
It's probably Facebook users flagging more so than Facebook censoring. Facebook staff doesn't st and monitor photos all day, they get flags from FB users and they act from there. Do I agree with the photos being removed? No, but they can probably be reinstated after an investigation by FB.
I don't get what the difference is between body paint and a picture of a woman going braless in a tank top. Seriously. I think the pictures are beautiful and empowering.
to me the roses look creepy
I have see some women on facebook that are excessively explicit on FB showing their big bare butt as a profile pic and barely covered nipples and they stay on. I guess too many perverts starring and not reporting.
I understand that facebook is a private company and can make whatever rules they choose, but I'm honestly puzzled why they are so averse to boobs. Even boobs completely hidden by babies, or, in the case of the rose photo above, the space where boobs used to be prior to mastectomy.