Me Myself and I ([info]janisfan) wrote in [info]pregnant,
@ 2006-05-31 13:07:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood: It's on!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


Popular Blogging Site Restricts Use of Breastfeeding Photos:
LiveJournal cites images as 'inappropriate' and sends mothers to the virtual restroom.

Contact:
Carrie Patterson
Executive Director, ProMoM.Org
http://www.promom.org
carrie@promom.org
678-513-6329

Popular Blogging Site Restricts Use of Breastfeeding Photos:
LiveJournal cites images as 'inappropriate' and sends mothers to the virtual restroom.

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006 - Women on the popular blog site LiveJournal are calling foul at the company’s decision to brand images of breastfeeding as ‘inappropriate.’ Many users of the site have joined together to urge LiveJournal’s parent company SixApart to address their concerns and reevaluate the policy.

Small "userpics" of no more than 100 by 100 pixels represent LiveJournal members throughout the site. Users can define one of these icons as "default icon" which plugs it into the user's public profile. These default icons were originally not permitted to be ‘sexually explicit or graphically violent.’ Recently, icons which depicted breastfeeding were cited as being ‘inappropriate’ by the LiveJournal abuse team, a group of volunteers who monitor complaints on the site. After clarification was requested, LiveJournal changed their FAQ to reflect a no nudity rule and is claiming that icons with visible areola or nipple are not permitted. Whether or not areola is visible in a photograph is dependent on a number of factors, including skin tone of the mother and physical changes during pregnancy.

Claimed Live Journal Abuse Staffer 'Erin' in a post on the site, "That's really a matter for the FCC to decide. LiveJournal's policies on this mirror what would be allowed on primetime TV or in a PG-13 movie." However, this is not true. The FCC does not consider the act of breastfeeding on television to fall under the definitions of indecency or obscenity.

Breastfeeding is exempt from nudity laws throughout the United States as well as countries such as Canada. Advocates are urging LiveJournal to adopt the same criteria. "It is regrettable that LiveJournal has chosen to target breastfeeding mothers instead of standing up for the protection provided them by law," says Carrie Patterson, executive director of ProMom.org, a non-profit organization dedicated to increasing public awareness and public acceptance of breastfeeding. Advocates state that the feeling that breastfeeding should be hidden only fosters the idea that the natural act of nourishing a child is scandalous.

Breastfeeding bloggers who have refused to change their default icon have been suspended from the site. These users, as well as others questioning the policy, have been treated poorly by the site’s volunteer abuse team, something that is not unusual according to other site users.

More than 1,000 LiveJournal users complained, and SixApart issued an apology to the group. However, the company refuses to consider modifying their policy and continues to suspend users whose default icons are deemed inappropriate. Although LiveJournal stated a clarified rule, mothers are still reporting major inconsistencies in its application.

The breastfeeding debacle is only the most recent in a long line of incidents that have people wondering if the abuse procedures as a whole should be reviewed for fairness and propriety. Complaints have been raised about users' privacy, inconsistent enforcement of the Terms of Service, conflicting information and responses from abuse team members, and discourteous replies to users seeking clarification on the rules.

Activists are now working together to get this policy changed and to clarify the policies and procedures of the LiveJournal abuse team. While some are refusing to continue paying for the service, others have moved to different journaling websites to protest what they feel is a violation of their rights. For more information, contact Carrie Patterson at 678-513-6329 or carrie@promom.org or visit http://www.promom.org/bf_info/mp.html.


###



Feel free to repost and forward. These press releases will be sent to every major newspaper and television station across the United States. We have a team of people currently working on getting them out.




(Post a new comment)

confused
[info]beebeebeau
2006-05-31 08:30 pm UTC (link)
I must be the only member of [info]pregnant who doesn't care to see nipple in default icons. I really don't care either way...
laws, censorship, blahbitty blah, I know we all know breastfeeding is great...

I mean it's like 2 square inches of the body they don't want on a default icon. We can have 114 other icons with nipple but just not the default. Why is this such a big deal?

(Replies frozen)(Thread)

Re: confused
[info]cassandrakfreaq
2006-05-31 09:14 pm UTC (link)
how many breastfeeding icons have you seen where there is straight up nipple in your face.....its more the babys face than anything

(Replies frozen)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: confused - [info]beebeebeau, 2006-05-31 09:16 pm UTC
Re: confused - [info]barefootmomma, 2006-05-31 10:54 pm UTC
Re: confused
[info]azwildcat
2006-05-31 09:42 pm UTC (link)
You aren't the only one...

(Replies frozen)(Parent)

Re: confused
[info]two_roads
2006-05-31 09:46 pm UTC (link)
I think what people need to understand is that the areola/nipple is NOT the issue. The issue is that LJ banned these icons under a rule in TOS that banned "sexual or violent" icons, and then changed TOS when it blew up in their faces and people started writing them letters stating that breastfeeding is neither sexual OR violent.

So no - who really needs a default icon with all sorts of boob showing? Nobody, really. But that's not the point. The point is that it's breastfeeding and it should be allowed. Period.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: confused - [info]piccadillywhore, 2006-05-31 10:52 pm UTC
Re: confused
[info]elusion
2006-05-31 10:06 pm UTC (link)
Youre not. Im neutral on the subject.. but then again, if I cared, thered be a LOT of icons I hate, lol. so I dont bother.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)

Re: confused
[info]mertonfanatic
2006-05-31 10:33 pm UTC (link)
Nope, you're not. I don't see the big deal either.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)

Re: confused
[info]riecy82
2006-05-31 11:33 pm UTC (link)
I agree - the act of breastfeeding isn't sexual or violent to any logical person. BUT the breast itself is seen as a sexual object, like it or not. I know we're all supposed to "emancipate" our boobies and take away the possession from men and give it back to our children...yadda yadda yadda

But titty is still titty whether there's a child attached to it or not. You can't really blame lj for that, blame society.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: confused - [info]indighost, 2006-05-31 11:52 pm UTC
Re: confused - [info]riecy82, 2006-05-31 11:59 pm UTC
Re: confused - [info]indighost, 2006-06-01 12:00 am UTC
Re: confused - [info]riecy82, 2006-06-01 12:11 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)
Re: confused - [info]riecy82, 2006-06-01 12:12 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
Re: confused - [info]riecy82, 2006-06-01 12:21 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
Re: confused
[info]sarakenobi
2006-06-01 01:24 am UTC (link)
i agree.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)


[info]kinky_bri
2006-05-31 08:53 pm UTC (link)
Personally I agree with how Sixapart has handled this and sent letter of support.

YOU can HAVE the icons - just not as DEFAULTS. (And that only applies if it shows ANY nipple)

But I don't think this community is the appropriate place to post this IMO.


also - when you agreed to the TOS it stated that it can change at ANY time without warning, and you agreed to that. And that is what they did. So...?

(Replies frozen)(Thread)


[info]kinky_bri
2006-05-31 08:56 pm UTC (link)
I just saw the media comment... wow. You really think any major news station will care about Livejournal and usericons? =\

I guess some people take this internet crap seriously.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]cassandrakfreaq, 2006-05-31 09:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-05-31 09:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cassandrakfreaq, 2006-05-31 09:39 pm UTC

[info]janisfan
2006-05-31 08:57 pm UTC (link)
I posted this press release to communities I am a member of which deal with parenting.

I am not attempting to start a debate here or in any other community. Everyone has the right to their opinions.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)


[info]lechardon
2006-05-31 09:22 pm UTC (link)
I'm neutral on this issue but I don't agree with how Sixapart handled it, especially in the beginning. They've had a lot of inconsistencies with the policy and a few of those inconsistencies made it seem like they were targeting breastfeeding, rather than nudity. Prior to the editing of the terms of service, they said it was inappropriate under the TOS, which was, at that time, categorizing it with 'sexually graphic' materials.

Even more stupid, the icon that started the whole thing by being threatened with suspension had no nipple OR areola. Some of the users that have gotten suspension threats recently have, again, had icons without nipple or areola, even now that the policy's straightened out.

But at this point, I think it's time to let go. Their policy does make sense, even if it's an annoying situation, and that's all there is to it. I don't think there's a way to argue it.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]lovely_lunarian, 2006-05-31 09:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lovely_lunarian, 2006-05-31 11:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-05-31 09:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ppplmgwiw, 2006-05-31 09:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lechardon, 2006-05-31 09:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cassandrakfreaq, 2006-05-31 09:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-05-31 09:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cassandrakfreaq, 2006-05-31 09:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mamru25, 2006-05-31 09:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-05-31 10:05 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cassandrakfreaq, 2006-05-31 10:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-05-31 10:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cassandrakfreaq, 2006-05-31 10:31 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cassandrakfreaq, 2006-05-31 10:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-05-31 10:50 pm UTC
Re: confused - [info]kaebele, 2006-05-31 11:40 pm UTC
Re: confused - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-05-31 11:47 pm UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
Re: confused - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-06-01 12:01 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
Re: confused - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-06-01 12:39 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
Re: confused - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-06-01 01:15 am UTC
Re: confused - [info]kaebele, 2006-05-31 11:51 pm UTC
Re: confused - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-06-01 12:06 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]two_roads, 2006-06-01 01:39 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]pernwebgoddess, 2006-06-01 02:36 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
(no subject) - [info]kinky_bri, 2006-06-01 02:49 am UTC

[info]ppplmgwiw
2006-05-31 09:01 pm UTC (link)
I think this community is a great place to post this and will circulate it to others I'm a member of. Thanks for taking the initiative.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]cassandrakfreaq
2006-05-31 09:14 pm UTC (link)
SECONDED

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]two_roads
2006-05-31 09:47 pm UTC (link)
Thank you for posting this here!

(Reply to this)


[info]callingthemoon
2006-05-31 09:51 pm UTC (link)
boo hoo. it's the internet. if you don't like LJ's rules, go somewhere else.

(Replies frozen)(Thread)


[info]kaebele
2006-05-31 11:43 pm UTC (link)
Why? Some people have had established accounts for well over five years that they have paid for (many paid for permanent accounts as well as others who've paid for lesser amounts). Women campaigned and laws were enacted to force businesses to accept breast-feeding women to not be asked to leave the premises. Why can't women complain and ToS be changed (back to what it was before this whole debacle)? Livejournal is a business; customers are entitled to express their opinions.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)

(Reply from suspended user)

[info]mamru25
2006-05-31 09:57 pm UTC (link)
Thanks for posting this press release.

Many may agree. Many others may disagree as well. I have seen many default icons that people have that are far worse than a woman feeding her own child.

I think the LJ abuse team should go after those offenders before they even consider messing around with a breastfeeding icon.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]pernwebgoddess
2006-06-01 02:41 am UTC (link)
did you know that an icon of a dead "infant with a severe manifestation of a congenital disease" is acceptable, but not a breastfeeding mother's nipple? How nice is THAT?

It's true.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]mamru25, 2006-06-01 03:24 am UTC

[info]ingenious_one
2006-05-31 09:59 pm UTC (link)
New News plz this is so old.

(Replies frozen)


[info]riecy82
2006-05-31 11:35 pm UTC (link)
I'm going to leave before some idiot starts comparing not being allowed to use a breastfeeding picture as your defualt icon to racism.

(Replies frozen)(Thread)

(Reply from suspended user)

[info]kaebele
2006-05-31 11:45 pm UTC (link)
I guess that's the main point. If there's a crack-down necessary on icons that violate the ToS, why are breast-feeding women being attacked first and foremost? Why the lack of attention to other offensive, sexual, violent icons? On the spectrum of what is decent/indecent or legal/illegal, would it not make the most sense to go after breastfeeding icons as a LAST priority?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]two_roads
2006-06-01 01:36 am UTC (link)
Excellent point!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - [info]pernwebgoddess, 2006-06-01 02:42 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kaebele, 2006-06-01 06:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cheshyre, 2006-06-01 02:46 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kaebele, 2006-06-01 04:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ladydouji, 2006-06-01 05:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ladydouji, 2006-06-01 05:05 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

[info]the_lissa
2006-06-01 03:04 am UTC (link)
Actually, lots of people have left and more are leaving as soon as they back their journals up with ljbook, etc. But even those who don't choose to leave may be doing other things.

The whole raising their children argument is overdone. Children do sleep you know.

(Replies frozen)(Parent)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

[info]chilifinger
2006-06-01 03:59 am UTC (link)
I do wonder though, if LJ gives in on THIS, then what's next?

What if a mom wanted her icon to be of her child at birth (head coming out pic)? Is THAT acceptable? Because it's the same premise-a perfectly natural event that a lot of people do not want to see, and one that does in fact show nudity.

Seriously, what's next?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(Reply from suspended user)

[info]eilantha
2006-06-02 08:16 pm UTC (link)
I don't really care one way or another. One, it's just LiveJournal. Two, the issue isn't anything new, and has taken worse tolls. For instance, a few years ago, a couple had their baby taken away by CPS. The reason? They developed photos of the mother breastfeeding. The person developing them cited them as child pornography. Apparently, CPS agreed.

If you want to fight something, take up that. It's a better cause. This? We can all either switch to Wordpress, or one of the other free journalling sites.

(Reply to this)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…