No Censorship Here

I threw in the towel.

Facebook disabled my profile again, claiming that I had photographic content that violated their terms of use, which (I copied this from them) are: Photos containing drug use, nudity, or graphic or sexually suggestive content are not allowed on the site, nor are photos that depict violence or that attack an individual or group.

The strange thing is that my profile was disabled after I had locked all my photo albums so nobody could see them and, thus, report any of my photos as indecent. While they were locked, I began deleting the photos I thought might be considered offensive.

These are the photos that were deleted... (and some others of this nature can be seen in previous blogs on this blog, about this topic).

The above photo of Xavier never offended me. I thought it was art.

This photo of Lisa-Gabrielle exposes far less of her breast than pictures I have seen on other peoples' Facebook pages, in the pages of magazines and on museum statues.

The same can be said of Keath's breast in the photo below, too.

I admit I may have been pushing the envelope with the photo of Jerry's bare backside... but for me the photo is about Jerry's laughter. And besides, I removed it from the page; but they booted me anyway.

My two best friends stood over my shoulder while I was making my deletings and when they saw the photo below they both cried out "pubes!" and so I hit delete... even though there are many photos on Facebook that show Fire Island party boys in far less clothing...

I certainly didn't want to offend anyone by the sexual nature suggested by a naked boy in overalls, though I have always thought this to be a sweet and unassuming look.

I often wear my overalls without underpants.

It's a shame that this pretty photo of Laurelle's alabaster skin and muscular toning could cause censorship of any kind. I like it.

I always thought this picture of this actor preparing for his life in the theater was very clever; but I suppose it could be considered dirty. Here's a secret though (and I hate to give away my secrets): he was totally covered up behind those Tonys.

I was a little worried about the implications of a naked man with an American flag touching his junk .. even though it is just an American flag body wrap...

So I cut this picture of Gabe.

I saw a statue by Michelangelo that looked like these photos of Steve -- only you could see the statue's bizness and Steve's is covered up.

That's my husband. He's beautiful. There's nothing dirty about this gorgeous photo of him. I think every man over 40 wants to look good and show it off - and should be allowed to.

I cropped Chris's junk out of this photo - but maybe I didn't crop enough. It's awfully close to the baseline, isn't it?

I know you can't see any nipple or bush in this photo of Laurelle; but maybe it's the photo that someone found objectionable.

Here's another photo of Xavier that may have been the offending picture. I can't imagine why - but apparently, you can't be too careful on Facebook.

There are some other photos that I removed from Facebook that aren't being shown here because they are in other stories further down on my blog (and because some of them are being featured, this week, on http://marcharshbarger.blogspot.com/ ). I don't find a single one of these photos in violation of the Facebook rules.

My big curiosity in all this is that I see photos on Facebook in peoples' profiles that are far more suggestive, that show more sexuality, that show actual vulgarity, that show full breasts and buttocks. I've seen quiz results people have taken that show men with erections. I have seen a lot of things on Facebook that are offensive, including a lot of political and militant religious preachings; and yet those people are allowed on Facebook. I have decided to NOT try too hard to get my profile reinstated. I will live without.

I feel persecuted.

Ah. The life of an artist.