‘Sexual’ use of eggplant and peach emojis banned on Facebook, Instagram

Post by zaccus » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 6:51 PM UTC

warent wrote: post #88

fortran77 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would make sense to respond to a complaint for a direct message that contained these emojis.

For starters, the issue isn't remotely as rampant for men as it is for women who routinely (i.e. multiple times a day) receive unsolicited sexual advances offline and online in the form of dick pics. It's also much easier for a man to physically take advantage of a woman than vice versa, so women would naturally feel much more threatened by this behavior. Men's inboxes just aren't constantly getting filled with unsol…

Post by alunchbox » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 6:56 PM UTC

wishinghand wrote: post #10

Does this apply to private chats? Because I'll send these in a joking way to my girlfriend and some of my other friends. I know that Facebook messenger parses chats and won't allow porn site links and torrent magnet links to go through.

Post by dokem » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 6:58 PM UTC

journalctl wrote: post #78

geddy wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah let's pretend guns don't exist. Knives exist too, those are weapons, better ban them. You could throw apples at someone for long enough and probably hurt them a good bit, better ban them too. The sterilized world you want to live in is not necessarily the one that everyone else wants to live in.

I don’t know, the rest of the developed world doesn’t want to live with gun violence, and they... don’t. Your argument is absurd, though, because most knives and apples aren’t designed to kill people, and serve other purposes. You can prevent access to one thing (like pipe bombs) without preventing access to other things (like knives). As always, intent and purpose matter, and it’s not all-or-nothing.

Post by mieseratte » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:01 PM UTC

notacoward wrote: post #66

deftturtle wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a shame they don’t allow female nipples but allow male nipples. Clear cut sexism, and is there no way to sue them?

It's even worse when you consider how it's based in binary gender thinking. Are a transgender person's nipples allowed, or not? It ends up being such a mess. A gender-neutral standard would be better.

Post by mieseratte » Thu, Oct 31, 2019, 7:09 PM UTC

pushpop wrote: post #67

dmix wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not Europe vs America, that's some parts of Europe vs the rest of the world. Public nudity is very much the exception globally not the rule. But it's interesting what selective stuff people give the US credit.

It’s not just Europe though. For example Australia has similar sensibilities too. Maybe a more accurate description might be: countries predominantly atheist verses countries which are not. Regardless of you want to define it, a female nipple is still no more offensive than a male one.