As you are aware, on Friday we sent out a request to a member of this community asking her to remove her default user picture because it was found to be in violation of our standard restrictions for default userpics after being reported by a fellow LJ user.
Enforcing these restrictions is not a fun or enjoyable part of the LJ Abuse staff’s job, but it is important to maintain consistency throughout our service so that everyone (kids, adults, and parents) can know what to expect when they use LJ. We do our best to have as few restrictions as possible. With any restriction we attempt to make sure that we have a clear, objective test.
To use an analogy, this is like a police officer having to enforce speed limits in neighborhoods where kids play. When enforcing these policies, sometimes you end up catching someone who is in fact a very law abiding citizen, but who just happened to be driving over the speed limit.
That being said, we’d like to sincerely apologize for the following:
-
The lack of sensitivity our procedures appeared to show toward the right for women to breastfeed their children.
-
The confusion and perception that LiveJournal and/or Six Apart is against mothers who choose to breastfeed their children.
-
The impression that we simply were not willing to listen, when in fact we are.
-
The lack of clarity on the policies, which was possibly made worse when we updated our FAQ on Saturday. We updated the FAQ to clarify our policy, not to change it in response to this specific situation.
Simply stated:
-
LiveJournal is in no way against breastfeeding or breastfeeding mothers. We salute your dedication to raising happy, healthy children.
-
In the process of enforcing our policy, we are not saying in any way that userpics showing breastfeeding are wrong or inappropriate.
-
We appreciate your voices and your use of our service.
At present, we have agreed to review both our policies and our enforcement procedures to ensure that we are acting both consistently and fairly. Along with this, we want to add appropriate detail to our online FAQ so that it accurately reflects our policy. I look forward to involving ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
xavi7734 in this process.
By way of background, our Abuse team revisits these policies regularly to make sure they're the right solution for our users and for the company, and we'll be looking for ways that we can better address grey areas (like userpics supporting breastfeeding). We've always believed firmly in free expression, and we think that our policy of being strict about what's allowed in default user icons but lenient about what's allowed in non-default icons is a good balance between two very different points of view. We'll be working in the upcoming weeks and months to make absolutely certain that we have the right policy and the right way to handle issues.
Finally, we very much appreciate your support of LJ and the value that your community and those like yours bring. As I have conveyed toxavi7734, it’s because of users like yourselves that LJ exists, and we want to continue to run a service that enables you to create community, connect with others, and express yourselves in a free, safe, and positive manner.
I look forward to reading your feedback to this post as a temporary member of the community.
Thanks
Father of 4 breast fed children,
Doug Bryan
VP of Business Operations, Six Apart
Profile
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif)
boob_nazis- Exclusive & Extended Breastfeeders
Page Summary
- xavi7734 : (no subject) [+3]
- pernwebgoddess : (no subject) [+0]
- ectv : (no subject) [+0]
- unlegal : (no subject) [+5]
- beyondinsanity : (no subject) [+0]
- simplymelodious : (no subject) [+0]
- dwa20 : (no subject) [+38]
- joy_disaster : (no subject) [+4]
- stellarstarrise : (no subject) [+2]
- marliah : (no subject) [+18]
- yonmei : (no subject) [+23]
- joy_disaster : (no subject) [+7]
- bopeepsheep : (no subject) [+6]
- housepoet : (no subject) [+26]
- runawaybunni : (no subject) [+4]
- hisrisingstar : (no subject) [+1]
- stellarstarrise : (no subject) [+0]
- witchbaby33 : (no subject) [+2]
- witchbaby33 : (no subject) [+1]
- talula_fairie : (no subject) [+1]
- dwa20 : Suggestion [+2]
- pelageya : (no subject) [+6]
- assfab : (no subject) [+3]
- ceeinjax : (no subject) [+6]
- thecranewife : (no subject) [+0]
Comments
I am also looking forward to working with you directly in order help clarify and solidify the wording in the FAQ.
"Breastfeeding Promotion InitiativeThis program provides technical assistance and information to health care professionals and assists in the development of local breastfeeding task forces.
Breastfeeding Rates in Iowa
Breastfeeding rates were up in 2002 with 64.9% of babies being breastfeed at birth according to the Iowa Newborn Metabolic Screening Profile. Iowa has seen a steady increase in breastfeeding rates since 1991. The following table shows rates for the past 8 years:
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
56.4% 57.7% 59.9% 61.6% 62.7% 63.1% 64.6% 64.9%
WIC National Breastfeeding Promotion Project and Evaluation Report
The WIC National Breastfeeding Promotion Project was a cooperative agreement between USDA/Food and Consumer Service and Best Start Social Marketing. The goals of the project were to increase:
Breastfeeding initiation and duration among WIC participants
Referrals to WIC for breastfeeding support, and
General public acceptance and support of breastfeeding.
Carefully targeted messages, materials, and other media interventions were developed by Best Start based on social marketing research. The project strategy included a media campaign, pamphlets, posters, and resource materials for program staff. While developed at the national level, the project was implemented at the state level.
The project kicked off on August 1, 1997. Paid television ads and outdoor billboards appeared in selected media markets in August and September of 1997. A second phase of paid ads are were used in 1998 and include some new media markets. In addition to television ads and outdoor billboards, radio ads were also featured in 1998. Newspaper advertisement was added in 2000 with both daily and weekly papers being utilized statewide.
The project evaluation showed an increase in awareness of the breastfeeding messages targeted in the campaign and more positive attitudes on breastfeeding.
Read the complete evaluation report:
Iowa's Implementation of the WIC National Breastfeeding Project
Breastfeeding Resources:
Several breastfeeding resources are available for download. If you would like to adapt these materials for distribution within your program, please contact Jewell Chapman at (515) 281-4919.
Counseling Guides for Health Care Professionals
One-page guides intended for use by health care professionals when counseling mothers.
Breastfeeding in the 1st Week
Breastfeeding at 2 Weeks
Breastfeeding at 4 Months
Breastfeeding at 6 Months
Breastfeeding at 9 Months
Breastfeeding Promotion and Support Guidelines These guidelines were developed by the Iowa Lactation Task Force and the Iowa WIC Program. Divided into five chapters, the guidelines are intended for use by health professionals who provide support to generally healthy mothers and babies.
For more breastfeeding information:
Call (515) 281-5024, or
You may also use the "Contact Us" page to submit questions online.
"
as you see, billboards and posters, visualizations of nursing mothers were and are very important in this campaign.. the images on lj are a part of that, and the more people, children as well as adults, exposed to these images, the BETTER.. so protecting children?? thats like protecting them from vitamins, or education... protecting them FROM their own good, not FOR it.
With Love,
Marie
I do hope this can be a constructive dialogue.
I still think that the "no breastfeeding" icon issue is pretty silly, but I really appreciate you actually taking the time and energy to address our concerns and feelings in this matter.
p.s. - Make sure to give your lovely breastfeeding wife a hug tonight :)
It is wonderful to know that we are being heard, and that you care about this issue, and want to resolve it fairly.
Thank you, again.
It's nice to finally get a real response from someone,as opposed to the blanket letters we've recieved up to date.
It's nice to know that sixapart is really paying attention to our concerns.
Thank you for taking time to listen to us and look into matters.
It is so good to know that we've been heard and you are willing to work with us all.
I would be more content with the decisions made by Live Journal if the "police" were targeting the true offenders. This analogy bothers me in the same way that a speed trap bothers me. You apprehend the individuals who are honorable and the "criminals" as usually slip through the net.
If you go to directory search and type in any offensive term and ask that the users be displayed by user pics (aka default icons) you see photos of overt sexuality and sexual acts that are truly horrific. Here you will find images available to children that truly have the potential to harm them.
Why not utelize the wording in the state breastfeeding laws, and make and declare breastfeeding an act of nutrition and exempt it from the "nudity/sexuality" guidelines?
Set up the speed traps in the neighborhoods where the "criminals" reside, not in front of the church on Sunday morning.
It would be very simple to do as the above commentor suggested, and include wording in the LJ Terms of Service or FAQ that reflected state and Federal laws exempting breastfeeding from indencency statutes. With such a policy, LiveJournal would be at no risk of exposing any viewer to truly indecent material. They would simply be acting in accordance with pre-established state and Federal standards of decency.
I would also like to see some deadline established for coming to a decision on this issue.
The designation that a breast (clothed or unclothed) is primarily sexual is offensive to me. I agree that offensive acts could possibly be performed with breasts, and I also agree that I'd prefer not to have my own daughters see such acts. But I must disagree and say that the sight of an infant nursing has never been offensive to me, and in fact, may require the active interest of a large population of people before it becomes mainstream: like the women of the 20's, displaying dimpled knees under short skirts, we are pioneering a new American (the rest of the world's not so regretfully behind in this matter) fashion.
Knees were once scandalous. Breasts are now scandalous (but only if they're in use, it seems.) The media's fascination with these knees made them seem commonplace, then a war made them seem completely normal. You'd never be caught dead staring at my knees now (unless there was something on one.) In ten years, if we're lucky, you'd never blink at seeing my baby (well, in my case it'd be babies, but they won't be nursing at 10!) at my breast. It would seem normal to you.
Many children live in a place where they may never see a woman nursing a child. Some of them might be curious enough to access our community, I'll admit that. Still, if one types "breasts" into the search, the first response of the search engine isn't "breastfeeding." There are some images (and some image communities) floating around out there (and I applaud them) that have the capacity to make me blush at 26, never mind 12 or 13. These images would be considered acceptable by many: note their proliferation in the movie industry, where even a PG-13 feature can feature naked breasts.
I think I'm trying to say that our pictures are meant to inform, and not to offend: I am, therefore, completely confused about the degree of censorship (and I do realize that they can be secondary icons) being afforded to such an act, which should be commonplace and unremarkable. This "taboo factor" is influencing many young couples against breastfeeding, even here, in one of the last-ditch places to turn for nursing help.
I think the behavior in this community regarding this policy has been rediculous and immature and just want you to know not all boob nazis are LJ haters.
I do appriciate your post here and I hope it will shut some people up ;)
Thank you for taking the time to post here and apologize. I'm sure you realise how upset and insulted members - and non-members - have been about this issue. We appreciate the clarification and discussion you're prepared to put into this.
There are some continuing niggles.
- LJ Abuse responses over the last few days have been variously inconsistent, rude, hostile, contradictory, offensive, discriminatory, illogical, and mendacious. Daring to complain about their attitude has resulted in even more unpleasantness, and threats.
- The FAQ updating was done very badly - not changed in British English until well into Sunday afternoon, nor French/Italian/German. It was then implied or blatantly stated in several LJA responses that it had "always been thus" (anyone there read George Orwell lately?). While it is true that TOS effectively say you can enforce any policy you like, the point of FAQs is to clarify those policies so that people can apply them appropriately. You cannot honestly expect people to abide by a policy you haven't published. "Graphically sexual" does not and never would mean "nudity", there are legal and societal distinctions we all understand. Changing the wording in the middle of an argument smacks of desperation in most situations, and it's how it came across here too.
- the implication in the original responses that breastfeeding was being viewed as 'graphically sexual'. I don't think we need to tell you how wrong that is.
- "secondary sexual characteristics" were cited as unacceptable in an LJA response by LJA team member Carson. That includes breasts, yes, but also beards... are we going to see a clean-shaven ruling?
- the grey area that is the new ruling. Areolae vary greatly in pigmentation and size and this is a discriminatory policy, however reasonable a compromise it sounds. Male areolae are acceptable. Images of men with large amounts of breast tissue are acceptable. Images of cartoon breasts are apparently acceptable. Images of women in bikini tops smaller than the average hamster are acceptable. Images of women with 2 pixels' worth of areola visible are not? Women with small or pale areolae will get away with it (I'm not showing you mine right now but I bet you'd never spot them in an icon), women with darker pigmentation/larger areolae will not?
It's all been extremely maddening, not least because it all sparked from a diversionary tactic by someone who'd been "caught by the speed trap" themselves. I bet there hasn't been a single "oh no I saw what might be an areola" complaint from anyone viewing the schools search or doing an interest search. (And hey, if you're using LJ at all aren't you supposed to be old enough to see that kind of thing anyway? It's not like it's hardcore porn.) It would be much better if you'd put the searches back to returning just text, they'd take a lot less time to load and be much easier to read. But I guess that's a case of style over substance, and while it would be good to go into that now, it's probably not an appropriate place to do so...
So what is it? If you're willing to work with us and we have ceased fire on our side, shouldn't you show the same consideration for us?
The first is your analogy. Your TOS was clear - no sexual/violent images. Nursing photos are neither. It wasn't that this person just happened to be 'driving over the speed limit' - they didn't do anything wrong.
It wasn't that your procedures appeared to show a lack of understanding. They DID show a lack of understanding and most of them were downright rude. You may sit here and say that you are willing to listen - and I don't doubt that you are - but when we got an email back saying things like "letter campaigns don't acheive anything" (I'm paraphrasing) it was inherently clear that you weren't willing to listen.
A no nudity rule is reasonable - excluding male breasts but not nursing ones is not. The message that sends is that a breast that is nursing is inherently more offensive than a totally bare male breast. If a male breast is not inappropriate, then surely a breast that is nourishing a child cannot possibly be.
Especially this one:
"Finally, please be aware that write-in campaigns are never effective in swaying the opinion of the Abuse Team or LiveJournal administrators, or in focusing attention on a particular issue. A flood of requests concerning the same issue only serve to slow down the responses given to valid inquiries such as your request for policy clarification."
and this one:
"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."
Telling us to shut up and cover up because a mother can't shield her child's eyes from viewing our nursing photos is pretty...offensive. I was in shock when I read that coming from a major company.
In fact, I've been saying that very same thing since 2001...
I've asked LJ abuse that about other things once or twice. They don't like it much.
I sincerely hope that Live Journal will allow all breastfeeding icons, regardless of weather they are showing areola as this is standard for the community in the US. Weather people find it offensive or not is moot really, considering that a mother breastfeeding her child is exempt from indecency laws even if she is showing areola/nipple. If more companies like Live Journal would allow images of breastfeeding, it might change the tide towards having people view it as normal, which is how it should be viewed. By Live Journal restricting photos of breastfeeding in any way, you ARE sending a message that breastfeeding is somehow inapparopriate.
I also hope that you will reconsider suspending those users who have images of breastfeeding that include areola as their defult icons. I will lose many friends (and you will lose those customers) if you suspend them, and many women will suffer without their good helpful advice in the breastfeeding communities.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. It should be normal for people--children or adult--to see breastfeeding infants in public with regularity. It is policies like this, which clearly send the message that there is something inherently shameful about breastfeeding in public, that contribute to the huge number of babies in this country who are fed formula.
"A woman's breast feeding, including breast feeding in any place where the woman otherwise may rightfully be, does not under any circumstance constitute an obscene or lewd act, irrespective of whether or not the breast is covered during or incidental to feeding."
In fact, classifying any part of the breastfeeding breast as indecent or in appropriate is harmful to society. A visible areola surrounding the mouth of a breastfeeding baby does no harm.
This is the crux of the entire argument, IMO. Photos depicting a breastfeeding child are not inappropriate. Period. There is absolutely no need to work diligently to define this "grey area" because breastfeeding is NOT a grey area. It is not sexual. It is feeding a human child in the manner nature intended that children should be fed.
There is really no need to waste a lot of time "in the upcoming weeks and months to make absolutely certain that we have the right policy and the right way to handle issues." There is only one *right* policy and only one *right* way to handle this particular issue. That is to have LJ's policy reflect federal laws and legislation in a growing number of states so that breastfeeding (and, by extension, photos depiciting mothers and children breastfeeding) is *protected* from labeling as "indecent" or "inappropriate". The issue of whether nipples or areolae are visible in the photographs is irrelevant.