First, do no harm*
I’m not going to dissect the statements made by Facebook with regard to their terms of use and the supposed violation of those terms by the posting of breastfeeding pictures. Per the quotes at It’s Not A Lecture, a fully exposed breast violates those terms. I haven’t combed through Facebook accounts looking for other fully exposed breasts - probably because I’m not a twelve year-old boy - but I’d bet there are a few, and they were most likely posted to showcase the breasts themselves, rather than a baby drinking from them.
(I do have to wonder how a baby can nurse from a fully exposed breast, since the nipple has to be in the baby’s mouth. At least that’s how it worked for my girls and me. But I digress.)
What I do want to dissect is the absence of a definitive statement from Facebook regarding the pro-ana groups on their site, and whether or not the presence of such groups constitutes a violation of the site’s terms of use.
Apart from the medical data regarding anorexia and other eating disorders - medical conditions, not lifestyle choices - and the research on the impact of pro-ana sites summarized at Women’s Health Matters, the basic question is whether or not pro-ana groups violate Facebook’s terms of use.
As with most T’s and C’s online, users rarely read through them. We merely check the box saying that we have, because we assume that our intended use of the site or the product in question falls within those terms and conditions.
From Facebook’s terms of use (emphasis mine):
In addition, you agree not to use the Service or the Site to:
- upload, post, transmit, share, store or otherwise make available any content that we deem to be harmful, threatening, unlawful, defamatory, infringing, abusive, inflammatory, harassing, vulgar, obscene, fraudulent, invasive of privacy or publicity rights, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable
- upload, post, transmit, share, store or otherwise make available content that, in the sole judgment of Company, is objectionable or which restricts or inhibits any other person from using or enjoying the Site, or which may expose Company or its users to any harm or liability of any type.
How can Facebook legitimately argue that pro-ana groups do not violate these terms?
The message of pro-ana groups is not one of health, but one of appearance. While members argue that the group provides a haven of understanding, others - both recovering anorexics/bulimics and medical professionals - note the potential and actual misuse of pro-ana sites as a means of encouraging continued unhealthy behavior. Even pro-recovery sites like Something Fishy can be misused, but their message is one of health, self-acceptance, and reintegration.
I don’t expect anyone to adequately quantify the potential harm of pro-ana groups. However, I don’t expect anyone to adequately justify the message that they send, intentionally or otherwise.
We laypersons can (and should) continue to speak out in whatever forums we’re able, but what I’d like to see next is some input from the American Academy of Pediatrics on the topics of eating disorders, pro-ana and pro-ED sites, and the potential impact of such sites on those who are at risk or have already been diagnosed. If they won’t respond to their users (past and present), perhaps Facebook (and other social networking sites) will listen to the medical community.
And maybe while they’re at it, the AAP will weigh in on the supposed obscenity of breastfeeding and change Facebook’s mind on that point too.
*Not part of the Hippocratic Oath, but appropriate nonetheless.
September 20th, 2007 at 7:17 am
isn’t “first do no harm” one of the tenets of wicca?
not that it’s relevant, i just always impress myself when i recognize crap like that.
September 20th, 2007 at 7:56 am
ROCK ON MOTHERGOOSEMOUSE.
September 20th, 2007 at 9:40 am
If that isn’t a most perfect example of hypocrisy I don’t know what is.
September 20th, 2007 at 10:34 am
Your post? Rocks.
That photo? Nauseates.
Julie
Using My Words
September 20th, 2007 at 10:49 am
Well said. And these pro-ana groups really truly scare me.
September 20th, 2007 at 11:46 am
Right on. I would like to see Facebook defend this; and also answer your question about how it is physically possible for a baby to feed from a “fully exposed” breast. I was wondering the same thing. Because if there is some breastfeeding method that doesn’t require a baby to be latched on to the nipple, I’m sure there a lots of sore new moms out there who would really like to know about it.
September 20th, 2007 at 11:52 am
I am completely shocked by that photo. It is so disturbing. You are on the money though.
September 20th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
I had never heard of pro-ana before. I am really disturbed by this.
September 20th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
That photo is downright frightening. Shudder.
I agree. Those groups are harmful. It is scary that some people can’t see that…and that some do see that, but don;t care.
September 20th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
I went on a little rant in my blog too. Thanks for your inspiration, sister!
September 20th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Obscenity can be defined in a variety of ways. It’s obscene that there are sites that glamorize a deadly disease like anorexia. It’s obscene that Facebook has objectified and sexualized breastfeeding.
It’s obscene that more of us aren’t angrier about this issue.
September 20th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
Mmm-hmmm, less skin is exposed when I am nursing my girls than you’ll see on billboards, mannequins, or from the gum chewing waitresses at burger joints.
September 20th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Never even heard of Pro-Ana before. Holy crap. I need to get out from under my rock more often.
That said, nobody could have defended this point better than you. Thank you for reminding all of us that we need to pay more attention. And stand by our convictions.
September 20th, 2007 at 10:53 pm
[...] going to weigh in on the whole Bill Maher thing* because about a zillion people have done it already…and better than I could ever do. [...]
September 21st, 2007 at 8:18 am
Amen.
September 21st, 2007 at 2:46 pm
Great post!
Sadly, I pretty much look like the girl in the pic…which is why people constantly look at me suspiciously. Ugh.
September 21st, 2007 at 2:50 pm
You know that I’m totally with you.
I’m on the verge of shutting down my Facebook account. For their positions on BF photos, AND on pro-ana.
My sister was anorexic. If this had been around when she was struggling with it, she wouldn’t have made it. Something that I wish I could write about, but it’s a deeply shameful thing for her. Something that almost killed her.
facebook sucks.
September 22nd, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Those pro-ana sites are so upsetting to me, especially as the mother of two girls. How Facebook can justify this is beyond me.
HBM, and others, please shut down your account and let Facebook know why. They should feel this where it hurts.
September 23rd, 2007 at 8:10 am
Mitzi,
I think you are correct…but I remember it best as part of the Hippocratic Oath (father of modern medicine).
September 23rd, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Facebook was created by and for young college kids. I honestly don’t think the youthful folks in charge realize that breastfeeding is natural, not pornographic. Do they know how widespread and dangerous the pro-ana sites can be? Ignorance is not an excuse; thanks for exposing this issue.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:06 am
I know this post is over a year old- but I’ll comment anyway. thank you for writing about this. this subject infuriates me. I am a counselor, I’ve been working with eating disorders for the past 9 years, and feel like I’m climbing an impossible mountain sometimes… this pro ana phenomenon is horrific. would facebook have a site on how to abuse someone? or a group on how to commit suicide? I think not. but they are the same thing. eating disorders if left untreated can be fatal. they have the highest mortality rate of any psychological illness. and they are becoming an epidemic. the more people we have speaking out about this, on the right side, the better…