Comments on: Facebook 1; Boob Neurotics 0

By: Sybil

Sybil — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:27:09 +0000

U lid-David ta’ Michaelangelo tinsewx taghmlulu werqa __ tat-tursin!
:p

By: janine

janine — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 20:39:06 +0000

It’s just an excuse for these women to expose their boobs and nothing else.

By: kev

kev — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 19:37:45 +0000

oooooo, bare bosoms u nipples ukoll! Kemm huma psataz!

By: kev

kev — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 18:40:14 +0000

Granted that these mother-geeks act in ways that differ from the norm. But what’s so offensive anyway?! I think those who take offence are by far the weirder lot.

[Daphne – It’s not all suckling pictures that have been banned, but the highly exhibitionist ones showing bare bosoms and nipples.]

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 18:17:25 +0000

I think it is a little weird to put up a photo of yourself breast-feeding on Facebook. Then again I do NOT agree with the way Facebook handled this. It is not illegal in the US (Facebook is a US corporation) to breast-feed in public, thus why should it be illegal to post a photo of oneself doing it? My guess is that someone found it offensive. I’m sure there are a lot of people who find it offensive that women should be allowed to post photographs of themselves without covering their hair. Should we pander to them too?

If someone thinks it’s somehow cool to post a picture of themselves breast-feeding, go ahead is what I say. I’ll make my own judgment of their state of mind.

“I may disagree with what photos you post, but I’ll defend to the death your right to post them” (sorry Voltaire!)

By: H.P. Baxxter

H.P. Baxxter — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:27:29 +0000

Same as the “I’ve just had a baby” photos. Literally. With the mother lying half naked on the hospital bed. Why? Just why?