(NaturalNews) If you're a woman who wants to have a natural childbirth at home - and then document the wonderful moments on your favorite social media site with comments and photos - you might want to think twice. You could be in violation of anti-pornography policies.
That's right - or it is in the world according to Facebook.
According to tech site Betabeat
, a California woman's account was temporarily suspended after Facebook Nazis complained about her pictures and the policy hacks at the site agreed that they were violations.
I guess deciding not
to click on the photos to view them is too much for a reasonable person to ask. I guess now it is official: We live in a country where we all have the right not to be offended, even if it is ginned up offensiveness
As reported by Betabeat
:In December 2013, Venice Beach resident Ruth Fowler used Instagram, Facebook and Twitter to live blog the home birth of her son, Nye. She also documented her post-delivery trip to the hospital, where she went to treat her excess bleeding. By posting the candid photos, Ms. Fowler hoped to normalize the birthing process and help spread awareness about alternatives to giving birth at the hospital.
Shame on her.'This is pornography'
Included in the photos were pics of her experiencing labor pains, preparing for the birth in a tub following the breaking of her water, then resting with and breastfeeding her newborn son and putting on an oversized diaper to catch excess blood.
Fowler told the website that she received lots of supportive emails, but she said Facebook
nannies weren't impressed or interested in her social experiment.
"I've had a few people, crazy horrible trolls, [who] keep reporting my photos as pornography, so they've actually canceled my Facebook account," she told Betabeat
According to Facebook procedures, when users report photos
on the site, they are given a number of choices to select as to why they believe they ought to be removed. The reasons range from "I don't like this photo of me" to "this is annoying" and "this is pornography."
When the offended user selects a reason, Facebook generates a message template which is sent from the offended user to the person who put posted the pics. The poster can then check a box that requests Facebook nannies look at the photo and decide whether it is in violation of site policies.
She told Betabeat
that two or three people flagged a pic of her with her baby "lying on me, conveniently covering my breasts and anything else... [s]o not even a nipple was exposed," as pornographic.
I guess Facebook's nannies probably hated this recent Time magazine cover
featuring a young mom breastfeeding her three-year-old son as part of a story about "attachment parenting."
To Fowler's surprise, Facebook nannies took down the photo, telling her that they agreed with users who reported it as porn.'I hate them. They're such fascists.'
Undeterred, she reposted the pic. Then she received this message:You recently posted something that violates Facebook policies, so you're temporarily blocked from using this feature. For more information, visit the Help Center.
To keep from getting blocked again, please make sure you've read and understand Facebook's Community Standards.
If you think you're seeing this by mistake, please let us know.
Fowler said friends of hers who have posted breastfeeding
photos have also faced pushback from Facebook nannies. Betabeat
reports that Facebook's own policies state that photos of breastfeeding are allowed, but "photos that show a fully exposed breast where the child is not actively engaged in nursing do violate Facebook Terms."
"I hate them," Fowler said, referring to Facebook. "They're such fascists."Betabeat
reported that a spokesperson for the company would not even speak on the record about Fowler's incident but instead took the cowardly route and "directed us to Facebook's policy on nudity and pornography (which the site considers to be two different things)."