Friday, January 16, 2009

Improvement?

So a few people have seen this article. I wanted to clarify my position. I was probably talking too fast on the phone interview for the reporter to get what I was really saying (she told me this was her first story ever).

In November, when my picture was removed, I don't think Facebook had a stance. I think they were just saying "this is obscene" and removed pictures.

About mid-December when talk of nurse-ins and such started happening, Facebook decided to get a stance. Their stance was "no fully exposed breast."

That is, of course ridiculous- when you're breastfeeding, the baby's head is in the way. There is no way to have a fully exposed breast.

When pressured more near the end of December, they came out and said, essentially, "Ok, by "full breast" we mean "nipple or areola."

I told the reporter that I was glad that Facebook actually came up with a policy- it means they've been thinking about it and giving it consideration. I still don't agree with the policy though- breastfeeding is simply not obscene. Maybe I didn't emphasize that enough.

2 comments:

  1. How did I ever manage to spend four years at BYU? And find a husband who wasn't a complete tool like that Owen Toolsen?

    It is a freaking miracle.

    And you, Heather, you are a shining goddess of light.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I had no idea the policy was evolving throughout November and December. I thought it was explicitly "no areola/nipple" all along. How interesting! And this explains quite a lot.

    ReplyDelete

Please review my blog comment policy here before commenting. You may not use the name "Anonymous." You must use a Google Account, OpenID, or type in a name in the OpenID option. You can make one up if you need to. Even if your comment is productive and adding to the conversation, I will not publish it if it is anonymous.