Won't somebody PLEASE think of the children....!?!

It couldn't have been timed any better.

Just twenty-four hours after I published my epic tome on my history on the internet—where I mused (in part) that the internet was a much more enjoyable place back when it was relatively sparsely populated, free of regulations and your real life friends couldn't care less about your website—I was notified that I've been banned from Facebook for the next 24 hours.

What did I do to incur the wrath of Facebook, you might ask?

Basically, they came across one of my photos, of a burlesque performer, removed it while citing it as "pornography," (even though the performer's important parts were all covered as per stage rules), and came down hard on me because it was my second offense. The irritating part is that the first offense was pretty much the exact same thing. Do the Facebook censors really feel that uncomfortable about breasts, that breasts with the nipples fully covered with decorative pasties qualifies as pornography?

Because it was my 2nd bust, I was blocked from Facebook for the next 24 hours. I can log in and I can like status updates that others make, but I can't make status updates myself, upload anything, comment on any posts or use Facebook chat. Facebook also finished strong in their letter to me by threatening to delete all of my accounts. I'm instituting a rule from this day forward that I don't post online pasty photos of the talented burlesque performers I shoot; instead, I'll let the show's manager limit them to Flickr.

Dottie Lux, Red Hots Burlesque
It's not like the world has ended (OH GOD HOW ADDICTED TO FACEBOOK AM I? AM I GOING TO DIE? MOMMY?), but let me put it this way: man, what a major, grade-A buzz kill.

Somewhere at the Facebook compound, contract legal adviser Buzz Killington is congratulating his friendless ass on another job well done. Well, Buzz Killington, this in a nutshell is what I hate about the internet these days. You can say that I agreed to the ToS when I signed up, and that's true; but when the ToS are left intentionally vague, then interpreted in the harshest way possible, you can't help but feel duped or played.

Plus, it's a gorgeous photo (as you can see on the right—and please don't report me to Blogger, in case that wasn't clear!). This photo was taken during a tribute night to the punk band The Cramps, hence the shrunken heads and the fake blood pouring out of her mouth. It was a really adorable, creative & funny performance, and obviously not pornography. 

I take full responsibility for choosing to post the photo, but I still maintain that it isn't pornography, and the brainpower they have at Facebook should be intelligent enough to get that a blanket black & white policy doesn't work for shades of grey. I post my photos as friends only on my business page, comment in the gallery header that the snaps are NSFW—after that, as far as I'm concerned, it's up to each individual to monitor the types of media they consume. Are we really so uptight and prude? So worried about lawsuits? Our society is ridiculous.

I understand that the photo is provocative. The last one they removed and dinged me for wasn't nearly as provocative as this one, so at least they're going for the most extreme shot, I guess?

I will be changing my ways from now on; I can't afford to lose my account. But does that mean I've bowed to the very evil forces that have helped change my beloved internet into a rule-ridden, congested  regulation-choked behemoth? Really not sure how I feel about that, but I can only move forward.

And until tomorrow morning at 8am ... you can find me in the panic room, obsessively refreshing Pinterest.


Popular Posts