Facebook is evil
June 2, 2014
*** Warning – pornographic images from Facebook are used in this post.
I know – we all know – that Facebook is evil, but I feel a line has been crossed with their ‘Community Standards’ practices and I’ve just about had a gut-full.
Before one starts typing the tired, clichéd counter argument of, ‘If you don’t like it, don’t use it’, let me just say that:
1) I think Facebook is a fantastic tool for staying connected with loved ones (esp overseas), friends we’d love to see but can’t and equally fantastic for things like blogs, businesses etc.
2) if I were to stop using it, myself and many other amazing warriors out there, would not be there to stand against the tsunami before us; because ignorance, naivety or turning one’s back (something this culture excels at), has never changed a single thing for the better.
I am livid with Facebook.
Last week I (along with so many others) continually sent complaints about the Elliot Rodger is an American hero page, petitioning it be taken down every time it popped up….over and over. Every single time I was told it was dandy for general viewing – as the screenshot below shows. Eventually, with so much pressure, Facebook took down all the pages glorifying Elliot Rodgers – and finally informed me that it was taken down.
But this begs the question: So why were all the other protests rejected to start with?
One of Facebook’s suggestions is that one can complain about a particular photo or post, rather than the whole page. OK, I thought, I’ll try that. As you can see above, I reported posts, such as the following, for hate speech:
Facebook thought it wasn’t hate speech against females. It’s dandy for general viewing.
Last night I stumbled across an ad for…well, let’s see if you can guess. What do you think this is for?
Coffee. It’s for coffee.
I complained about the above image and the following one (for nudity or pornography); one which degrades a woman to the floor of a toilet cubicle, to give a male ‘head’ and couples it with a disgusting tag line:
You guessed it. Dandy.
There are more images like these on the page – sexualising and objectifying females on different levels.
Funnily enough, the only photo using a male with a sexually implied text, is this:
An ordinary man – who is showing his face; an honour the sexualised females aren’t afforded as they’re merely objects – doing something stupid. And is that a coy arm covering himself up a bit?
And what, exactly, is being SHARED, when applying the sexual double-meaning in the ad; Women? Girls? That is shite. And all to make some money; like pimps
The thing is: males don’t live in fear of being raped by females for being represented as stupid; but females fear males raping them for being represented as hyper-sexualised.
Question #207: Can people not see the danger in this sort of ‘advertising’ about women?
Yes, it’s just one ad. But there a millions – billions – of images like the females above; shaping our psyche.
So why does the world then reel in shock when atrocities happen? I mean, REALLY? We are smack bang in the middle of an insidious culture which now confidently drives forward this misogyny and females are ultimately paying the price.
WHAT CAN YOU DO?
Complain.
Write on this corrupt Perth coffee brand’s Facebook page here (or any other Facebook page promoting misogyny)
Write to the Advertising Standards Board here as the above images are ads for coffee.
Now, what about Facebook?
Facebook is dictating what pornography is and according to them, the above isn’t. I decided to look at the wording of their ‘standards’ and we’re ultimately screwed:
‘Facebook has a strict policy against the sharing of pornographic content.‘
So a woman with her had on her clitoris, between her spread legs, in heels, on a bed, with bare breasts (except for little boxes with the brand name covering the nipples) with a head seductively thrown back with the word ‘Ecstasy’, is not pornographic?
Well what the fuck is?
It wouldn’t matter if you answered that – it still wouldn’t cross Facebook’s Community Standards.
The worst part is that Facebook has taken away the chance, one used to have, to write a response to their ruling. Now they just say no and that’s that.
I feel that that is so very wrong.
Question #208: Can anything legal be done about this?
I’m shouting out to any ‘legal eagles’ because with every fibre in my being, I feel this needs action and we have to start somewhere.
Otherwise how?
If you have complained about a page or a post/photo on Facebook and have been knocked back – keep a screenshot of the page or copy the photo. I think we need to start collecting evidence.
Deep Breath.
Humbled and distressed
February 22, 2013
*MASSIVE TRIGGER WARNING – graphic images in this post*
I’m not sure how to feel after yesterday’s events. Numb, I guess.
After publishing my last post about my love/hate relationship with Facebook – predominantly about the content they allow to infect – I started to receive comments on my QFW Facebook Page from women, protesting about the number of times they have reported hateful and violent images only to be told by Facebook, that they deem them appropriate.
In yesterday’s post, I discussed the graphic meme of a woman – appearing to have been stabbed over not doing the dishes – which caught the fury of Karen Pickering when she was told it was fine by Facebook.
A friend sent me the following image she had reported and was told did not breach Community Standards:
It says:
* know your place
* shut up when a man is talking
* proper fellatio technique
Facebook states in their ‘Community Standards’ in the section of Hate Speech:
Facebook does not permit hate speech, but distinguishes between serious and humorous speech. While we encourage you to challenge ideas, institutions, events, and practices, we do not permit individuals or groups to attack others based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability or medical condition.
So they have distinguished this as humorous speech (hahahahahaha) and NOT an attack on gender. Interesting to know what they would deem an attack.
Under Graphic Content:
People use Facebook to share events through photos and videos. We understand that graphic imagery is a regular component of current events, but must balance the needs of a diverse community. Sharing any graphic content for sadistic pleasure is prohibited.
This image is not for sadistic pleasure then?
Sadistic means to derive pleasure from extreme cruelty and this image ticks that box. It’s funny right? Funny = pleasure.
When I saw the image above, I was filled with such indignation, that I started a FB page where people can post the images they’ve reported, but told it didn’t breech Facebook’s Community Standards.
After only a few hours, I shut it down. I couldn’t look at one more photo.
The most haunting one I received, of the young toddler below, came from a site called ‘Anti-slut Patrol‘. I immediately reported it to Facebook for Graphic Violence.
Facebook were quick to reply that it was fine:
What I just noticed, however, is that they have – since last night – changed their Standards. I reported this photo under Graphic Violence (as it says in the screen shot) and now it’s called Graphic Content. I wrote them a response to their ‘ruling’ asking them to explain how the image is not graphic violence and what, to their standards, is.
I guess they just answered; change the Standard to comply with letting people publish this toxic waste.
I asked Facebook what they wanted their legacy to be – obviously it’s ensuring that depravity prevail and keeping those masses happy.
I am now humbled by the massive, unfathomable enormity of this.
And again feel helpless.
Victims of violence not only have to live with the horror that is their life, they must also reconcile with the fact that companies with no soul, like Facebook, will never have their back – or anyone else’s for that matter – because they would rather make money off malice and pass it off as humour.
Question #146: How can we create change, if our pleas continue to be ignored?
I finally want to add that I know many of you may think – it’s OK, it’s just a joke – and that if every picture that was reported was taken down, we’d live in a Nanny State.
My response to that is – WE NEED BALANCE.
Noone is saying that we have to have a dictatorship run by ‘mummies’, but a respect for the unimaginably, abhorrent lives some people have to live, without making a ‘joke’ of it, would start us on the road toward OUR LEGACY – one that we can leave for our kids to continue with.
Deep Breath
x
Facebook and misogyny – just kidding!
February 21, 2013
I have a love / hate relationship with Facebook.
I love my private page as I have family and friends around the world and this fantastic tool affords me the opportunity to stay in contact, see precious photos, share articles and funny memes etc. etc. etc.
I also love my Questions for Women FB page – I can put up articles and quotes to inspire and give a different perspective to life, as well as put up my blog posts.
What I hate, is how Facebook instills a feeling of insecurity and untrustworthiness.
I do not feel like they have our back.
They are always skulking around for your info – to share or sell to the highest bidder. We’re constantly having to change settings – which have been automatically been set to ‘Public’ as a default – when they reshuffle the way their site works.
Always leaving us none the wiser and exposed.
What I hate the most, however, is that they also do not have our back in protecting us from hateful and misogynistic content being posted. Horrible sites and images just being permitted to spread – their toxic nature infecting; normalising. And why?
Because it’s just a joke, crazy lady! Relax.
Sshhhhhhh….
The thing is, though, who exactly IS the person (or people) who make the final call?
I picture a bunch of young guys in a smoke-filled room, eating fast food, surrounded by empty food wrappers, snorting at all the crazy things that are being posted.
Haawww Haawww Haawww!
The reason I say that is because they don’t permit photos of breastfeeding mothers (eeewww – gross!) – but allow pages called ’12 year old slut memes’, which I wrote about in a previous post – That’s not misogyny. THIS is misogyny.
Yesterday Karen Pickering posted the following passionate rant about Facebook:
She writes about an abhorrent image she saw on FB (it’s in there *Trigger Warning*), which she reported – twice – but was ultimately deemed appropriate for viewing, by FB.
Karen wrote the following, which struck a chord with what I feel:
I reported it despite being fully aware of a number of truths:
- that the internet is full of this shit
- that the world is full of this shit
- that this shit really happens
- that we can’t stop it from happening
- that we can’t stop people joking about it
- that people laugh because they’re conditioned to dehumanise women to the extent that they do
- that the people posting it feed off the persecution complex they get that feminists are out to get them
- that you’ll get one taken down and an even more hideous image will take its place
- etcetera ad nauseum
Yes, yes and YES! to all the points above…etcetera ad nauseum.
The image, as of today, has FINALLY been removed – but as Karen says, the world is full of it.
It’s hate. It’s misogyny. And Facebook thinks it’s OK.
Facebook must be a man.
So, if women are labelled as a bunch of hysterical banshees, who need to chill-out when they protest misogyny and violence against women, then –
Question #145: What label do the men inherit?
Let me know what you think of the quote below. My interpretation below.
In what way do I think men are stupid?
By seeing what’s happening and keeping silent.
That makes me crazy.
Deep Breath.
x
PS I know many of you would suggest that we all get off Facebook and be done with it. I think that’s easier said than done due to established connections…but if everyone I know and love switches to Google, I’m IN!
Questions for Us 