Facebook lifts ban on graphic beheading videos

[Revoltingest]

Yes I have. We live in a culture that tolerates violent images, and finds meaning and/or lessons in them, while condemning sexual imagery and discussion. I remember back in my childhood, naked breasts were allowed in PG rated movies (Sixteen Candles, Clash of the Titans, etc.), and therefore not considered vulgar imagery. On the other hand, violent imagery was too much for general audiences (though Poltergeist offered at the time some disturbing images). Heck, "Halloween" when it came out was considered too violent and was given an R rating. That's tame now compared with the imagery in movies with more lenient ratings, but nowhere will you see a naked breast unless it's in an "R" rated film.

While I understand that Facebook is being pro-active in its decision to lift the ban, and not just reactionary, I don't agree with their policies considering what is appropriate for all audiences over 13 and what is considered inappropriate for its members.

It's progress.
Today, falling heads....tomorrow, falling tops.

 

[Me Myself]

But of course, naked breasts are too graphic. Such is the current point of the ire FB is receiving currently for its decision to lift the ban.

Apparently the decision to share was (and continues to be) a difficult one, with the intent not to protect free speech and distribution of content, but to condemn the violence and other similar acts of violence that occurs in various parts of the world.



Did the people in charge at Facebook make the right choice in your opinion?

I share your sentiment of how idiotic it is that you cant share a mother breastfeeding her child but you can show beheadings.

I remember when I managed (for a brief time and not long ago) the communication of a brand about baby stuff in Facebook and On posts supporting e healthbenefits of breast milk I had to turn down a lot of beautiful pictures of mother and child in favor of something way less to point as a generic baby smiling.

Seriously, its idiotic.

Then again, I can half understand the reasons. Facebook could easily become a porn website if they allowed for breast images, not because all of them ar eporn but because they can easily turn to porn and I can assure you such pages would appear the second it ceased to be baned. While Facebook would need to. Eserve its right to outright close any pages they decide look pornographic there could be a constant monitoring necessary for that and it could be a pain. Meanwhile, parents would be concerned about their kids and facebook. They already are, but it could get more... Complicated.

 

[Me Myself]

Yes I have. We live in a culture that tolerates violent images, and finds meaning and/or lessons in them, while condemning sexual imagery and discussion. I remember back in my childhood, naked breasts were allowed in PG rated movies (Sixteen Candles, Clash of the Titans, etc.), and therefore not considered vulgar imagery. On the other hand, violent imagery was too much for general audiences (though Poltergeist offered at the time some disturbing images). Heck, "Halloween" when it came out was considered too violent and was given an R rating. That's tame now compared with the imagery in movies with more lenient ratings, but nowhere will you see a naked breast unless it's in an "R" rated film.

While I understand that Facebook is being pro-active in its decision to lift the ban, and not just reactionary, I don't agree with their policies considering what is appropriate for all audiences over 13 and what is considered inappropriate for its members.

There is a very popular newspaper here in guayaquil called "El Extra"

El Extra is basically a lot of "he died with 89 stab wounds on his face naked in a public swimming pool" (I am exagerating a bit) and "Look at this beautiful woman in bikini!"

A study about consumer habits showed that parents would hide the frontcovers of the newspapers from their kids when there was the full page sexy woman with emphasis in her body (and the bodies are allright! ) and seductive gaze, but they would not flinch at the boy looking at the horror movies but actually real life scenes of blood displayed on other pages.

In other words, yes, for some reason, here also it is seem as we more acceptable for a kid to look at violence or the result of exteeme violence before something deliberately sexy.

On the other side, here women breastfeed in public with no problem i havent even ever seen one with a blanket over her boob while they do it even. In the rare case I see it they just flip out the boob and feed their babies. No stress, no prob and no one bothering them about it.

As it should be

 

[dust1n]

Yes I have. We live in a culture that tolerates violent images, and finds meaning and/or lessons in them, while condemning sexual imagery and discussion. I remember back in my childhood, naked breasts were allowed in PG rated movies (Sixteen Candles, Clash of the Titans, etc.), and therefore not considered vulgar imagery. On the other hand, violent imagery was too much for general audiences (though Poltergeist offered at the time some disturbing images). Heck, "Halloween" when it came out was considered too violent and was given an R rating. That's tame now compared with the imagery in movies with more lenient ratings, but nowhere will you see a naked breast unless it's in an "R" rated film.

While I understand that Facebook is being pro-active in its decision to lift the ban, and not just reactionary, I don't agree with their policies considering what is appropriate for all audiences over 13 and what is considered inappropriate for its members.

I figured you have. They seem like similar situations to me. A female orgasm is more dangerous than depicting incredibly vivid scenes of torture of women, and beatings, and explicit degradation of women, apparently.

I don't use Facebook anymore, and it will undoubtedly pass as some point from being a topic of interest for people. Considering their very essence is the mass harvesting of human souls for economic gain, I would be surprised if they ever made some form of reasonable, ethical decision. Meanwhile, I expect they will continue to lobby the government to prevent regulation of companies on the internet, while contracts so easily give away all of information for whoever can pay to take advantage of it.

 

[Jeremy Mason]

Can I show my nipple on Facebook?

 

[Me Myself]

Yu know what would be fun? Post a bunch of photos on facebook of close up nipples and a message below saying "some of these nipples are women nipples. Guess which ones are"

 

[InformedIgnorance]

The reason for the posting is supposedly to condemn the behavior, so the target audience of the material is likely those who already disagree with the behavior. So the purpose is not to inform people about something they were not aware of - why then is there a reason to post it to begin with other than to rally condemnation. This is a policy designed to gather people for certain highly confronting topics for which one side will be presented and a hate fest then ensues - it is designed to elicit fervor; both for the disgust in perception of the behavior and hatred of the people involved.

If they allow posting such material in order to discourage the activity does that mean that they will allow posting material depicting other behavior a large number of people find objectionable? Necrophilia? Pedophilia? Bestiality? etc. No; of course they wont. But why the difference in treatment compared to other topics such as rape? Now there is a far more interesting question we should ask ourselves. Is there something that makes it perceived as more acceptable to host material depicting beheading than depicting rape? Does this indicate something about FB management or users or the general public?

 

[Penumbra]

Actually, I do agree with the decision. It is important to allow violence to be denounced. There is no particular need to encourage breasts to be seen.

There's no particular need to encourage bare male chests to be seen either.

 

[Me Myself]

I assume facebook disallows boobs for the same reason RF does.

Mind you, I would prefer this not being the case and think at least there should be an exception for breastfeeding, but inking about it well I do understand the policy. Facebook does not exist on a vacoom. Actually, it exists everywhere.

Which makes it so that if they allow boobs its very possible they will get porn pages (not saying all boob showage is porn page, but... Come on, do you think it wont happen?)

Then parents will get concerned for eir kids, and make a lot of PR problems for FB.

Again, I personally doot at all think people should have problemss with their lids seeing either boobs or deliberately sexual display of boobs or women, but it is a PR thing.

 

[Me Myself]

I think it says more about culture in general than about Facebook.

 

[Dingbat]

Time to flood my family and friends feeds with decapitated heads. Thanks Facebook!

 

[DallasApple]

Women who have had mastectomies are not allowed to post their post opt non breasted chest on FB.

 

[DallasApple]

The beheading (it was Pearl) was on the internet when it happened before it was banned years ago. I chose not to watch it. I listened to the accounts and read the account.

I don't need to see it..I know my limits..the helplessness and anger I felt just reading it with no where to put it does no one any good. I also felt I was somehow disrespecting him if I sat back and watched. Just no..

If others want or "need" to watch that to get it its none of my business. I just can't take it .

I saw the planes hit on 9-11 (the second one) on t.v..I saw the buildings fall..I saw the tapes later where you could hear the bodies hit the ground .That's enough for me. I get it.

I have heard about that kind of stuff since I was a tiny tot. I didn't grow up in any war but my father died in a plane crash. I saw the pictures..I just don't need to see someone being beheaded as they cry out..I can not take it.

 

[DallasApple]

Do you really want to see a human being have there head chopped off ? He wasn't "just beheaded" he was alive as they chopped and sawed his head off..he screamed in agony.It wasn't over in a "second" ..this went on ...hacking and sawing his head off ...while he screamed.

I lose my ability to walk..I wouldn't treat an animal like that...Never..its evil..

 

[Me Myself]

Time to flood my family and friends feeds with decapitated heads. Thanks Facebook!

This went gloriouslh with your Deadpool avatar

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Personally, I think it would be better if Facebook didn't censor anything. There should maybe be a warning system, though, like they have on YouTube.

 

[Dingbat]

Do you really want to see a human being have there head chopped off ? He wasn't "just beheaded" he was alive as they chopped and sawed his head off..he screamed in agony.It wasn't over in a "second" ..this went on ...hacking and sawing his head off ...while he screamed.

I lose my ability to walk..I wouldn't treat an animal like that...Never..its evil..

It was more morbid curiosity more than anything especially since people were questioning whether it was actually done by Iraqis in the first place. I am familiar with Chechens and their mode of execution and it fit the bill. Wouldn't surprise me if Chechen Mujahideen or someone who had served with them decided to do the job. To me it was more something I figured I should review since they were obviously trying to send a message of some sort. A lot less brutal than the Russian video circulating since the Chechen Conflict.

This went gloriouslh with your Deadpool avatar

After review it was rather glorious as it is probably something Deadpool would do himself.

 

[averageJOE]

Personally, I think it would be better if Facebook didn't censor anything. There should maybe be a warning system, though, like they have on YouTube.

Porn and all, right!

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Hmmn personally Id prefer a tag filter based system, where viewers can associate tags to content (and indeed accounts) and select filters to screen out (or indeed prioritise) based on tags.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Makes total sense.

Cause you see boobs will impact male children, and then these male children will grow up to be sexual deviants who rape...cause that's what males do...rape things. Like right now I'm at my computer and I'm just raping away, i stepped outside today and tripped over someone rapping the sidewalk. By cutting down the boob exposure we are cutting down the rape exposure.

God ol' fashion beheadings though are historical. I mean look at the French Revolution, I'm sure a lot of heads rolled, as well we want to get people more riled up about...

Nah I can't even go on, this is stupid.