Sammy Nickalls
February 10, 2016 3:41 pm
Facebook

And today in “reasons we’re confused by Facebook,” a painting of a woman eating ice cream has been banned from Facebook. . . for “containing excessive amounts of skin or suggestive content.”

The Philadelphia Museum of Art recently posted a painting on Facebook, but it was removed. Why? Because apparently eating ice cream is too suggestive, because everything can be sexualized nowadays. The painting was done back in 1964 by Belgian artist Evelyne Axell, one of the first female Pop artists, the museum wrote on Facebook.

“Her work can be understood as a critique of mainstream Pop Art, in which women were often depicted as passive, decorative objects,” the museum continued. “In contrast, Axell sought to depict active, confident women who pursue satisfaction on their own terms—such as the protagonist of ‘Ice Cream,’ who unabashedly enjoys her dessert.”

Various people have commented on the post, expressing the problematic nature of Facebook’s decision to take down the image.

“To the Powers that Be at Facebook: If this is ‘offensive’, then I would really like to stop seeing pictures of women in thongs, bent over,” wrote one commenter.

“That suggestions of sexuality are implied to be more dangerous or offensive than images of violence is deeply concerning for me,” wrote another. “God forbid we think about a woman enjoying her own sensuality — but sure, bring on the murder and mayhem.”

“For the same reason that breastfeeding is censored in our culture, it is outrageous that the world only wants to see women when they are NOT in control of their own sexuality,” wrote yet another.

This isn’t the only time Facebook has made questionable decisions when it comes to taking down content. The social media platform also rejected blog posts about menstrual hygiene, as well as a picture of a woman with a serious skin disorder. To which we must ask — why are these things about real, important, beautiful things censored, when suggestive ads are no problem? Why is a piece of important ’60s art “suggestive,” when sexualized advertisements aren’t?

What do you think? Does Facebook need to sort out its priorities, or is this a justified censorship?

Advertisement