"I put these pictures out on Facebook to put a message out to women – check your breasts regularly and do not ever be ashamed of a mastectomy. For Facebook to claim they were ‘sexual and abusive’ was absurd. There is nothing sexual about them."
After 45-year-old cancer survivor Sharon Adams underwent a mastectomy, she decided that the best way to raise awareness was to post her mastectomy scar on Facebook. The picture is graphic, scary, and far removed from the airbrushed soft core porn images of breasts we see everyday. In a way, it was her personal public service announcement to women.
Facebook's response? They took the images down, claiming they were "sexual and abusive." To find out what happened after this, read more
This sounds remarkably similar to the furor they created when breastfeeding photos were taken down and Facebook spokesperson Barry Schnitt said, "Photos containing a fully exposed breast (as defined by showing the nipple or areola) do violate those terms (on obscene, pornographic or sexually explicit material) and may be removed."
Adams won in the end, and Facebook issued an apology after nearly 900 furious people joined an online group calling for the ban to be lifted.
These cases bring up an interesting issue about gender and representation. There seems to be only one prevailing meaning of the female breast — it's "obscene, pornographic or sexually explicit" because that's the way it's represented in our culture. When a woman presents a nonsexual image of breasts, in the context of certain women's issues — motherhood, illness and recovery — there's a refusal to see it from her point of view.
When Facebook told Sharon Adams her mastectomy scars were "abusive," maybe they meant abusive to men who only want to see breasts that turn them on.
Ben Sherman
Hanii Y
House of Fraser
I don't know. In a women's only space (like TresSugar) we could all look at breasts in an educational, non-sexual kind of way. But, Facebook isn't women only space. It's sort of boneheaded, but it's also understandable.
Bri
1Wow, I'm surprised Facebook did that. Its not like we're looking at nipples.
2I applaude this woman though. Not enough women check their breasts, and too many women fall victim to cancer because they don't want to spend a few seconds doing something a little "uncomfortable."
I check mine every month or so to make sure there are no odd lumps or bumps and that everythings ok with my body. It's like getting a mole checked at the doctors office.
That's heartbreaking. There are plenty of fairly sexually explicit photos of young women (the parties, the attention-wh*res, I know some of them...) on Facebook, and I don't think this deserves to be labeled as such. I don't know what we're protecting ourselves from.
3She was trying to shed light on a real life event that could possibly be prevented. Please get over it.
4I just think I shouldn't have looked at the picture. I am sick now... I don't do well with stuff like that...
5I don't think Facebook were right to delete the pictures but I think the user could put a warning on them as they are quite graphic. This picture is not in the slightest bit sexual, friends of friends on my Facebook have properly sexual pictures on theirs, in just their pants, boobs out, posing seductively-THAT is sexual.
6"When Facebook told Sharon Adams her mastectomy scars were "abusive" maybe they meant abusive to men who only want to see breasts that turn them on."
This is true, and in effect, abusive of women. I'm so mad and tired of breasts being defined by size and men's oedipal complex/mother adolescent mind-set. And all the women that fall for it and "alter" themselves. This culture wears me out.
7Kim, I could hug you.
8Hugs to you, Pistil, right back.
9I'm with the commenter who suggested a warning that the content is graphic. Although, at the same time, there's a part of me that thinks facebook isn't the platform for this, period.
10I just looked at her pictures. They're in no way sexual. I've seen tons of more suggestive pictures with clothes on Facebook. She was obviously trying to raise awareness for her cause. I don't think these violate Facebook's terms. It's just a really ridiculous situation.
11What about all of the scantily-clad, wanna-be porn stars posting their pics all over facebook? I'd much rather see a mastectomy scar than those hookers.
12Facebook's response was just stupid. There are tons of sexual pics of girls on facebook. You don't even have to look to hard for them. And half the time, the girls showing their goods are like 13!
13Kudos to Sharon though! Such a brave move.
Hey all, I did warn you: "The picture is graphic, scary..."
14Scary? No, what's scarier is actually having cancer. My mum has breast cancer for the second time in twelve months but still has both breasts. However, many times she's said if it meant she'd survive, she'd get a mastectomy, and she would NOT be ashamed. No, the picture is supposed to be scary for a reason; to make you think and check. To save your own life. Scary sh*t right there, right?
Yes graphic. It's a boob. What's not graphic about that. :facepalm: We women normally see two boobs everyday, ohhh we're graphic pornstars.
This woman, going through the struggle of her life, only has one boob left, and is having the other removed to survive. What's happened to perspective, respect, and common sense and decency...
15I think boobies need a degree of de-sexualization. Just not to the point where boobs are no longer sexy, but to the point where people can be mature enough to see a boob and NOT freak out.
I'm a straight woman. I love boobs. I think they are fun to play with, look at, and learn about. Everyone that knows this about me accuses me of being a lesbian. Which isn't true. I just think boobs are awesome in a completely non-sexual manner and the only ones I want to play with are my own (because they are squishy! Funbags for a reason!).
Boobies aren't just sexual, they are awesome lumps of fat and glands.
16(yes, I like calling them boobies, breasts sounds to medical, imo, and "boobies" is fun to say).
Its a sad reflection on our society that something educational and not sexual has to be band due to the deviants out there. It seems on models who have perfect bodies (even if they are made with silicon and air brushes) can dare to bare their breast. The rest of us who are less than perfect can't be exposed or educated for fear we might offend someone.
17Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.