I don't see any difference relevant to the discussion.

I was responding specifically to the argument that several people have made that it should be allowed because it's "natural and non-sexual". You totally ignore that and offer a completely different argument. So, I will assume that you concede that "natural and non-sexual" isn't a good argument; otherwise, you would not have felt the need to bring in a completely different one out of the blue.

Now, to respond to your new argument, which (as best as I can tell) is "it's OK to show it online because you can see it around town".

Well, there are at least two major flaws I see with that argument.

#1 it's factually flawed. Breastfeeding isn't allowed everywhere. There are still plenty of places where it's prohibited. Likewise, other forms of public nudity are not universally forbidden, even when talking about walking around town. Several major cities in both the US and Canada are now top-free. So, if "you can see it around town" is the only requirement for allowing it on a site, then some other forms of simple nudity would also need to be allowed

#2 Even assuming that breastfeeding should be given special consideration compared to other forms of nudity in public settings, there is no reason for that special treatment to extend to pictures posted online. Breastfeeding enjoys it's special position among other forms of public nudity largely because of a compelling and (somewhat) urgent need to do it at a given time and place.

When "walking around town", there is a need involved in breastfeeding that is not present in someone who just feels like walking around with their boobs out. It's totally understandable that laws might allow for one and not for the other.

But none of that applies to posting pictures online. A desire to show that pictures of you and your little leech is no more immediate and necessary than anyone else's desire to show any of their pictures with naked bits. Having special privileges and allowances often derives from special circumstances, but there is no reason to believe those privileges extend into other situations where your special circumstances no longer apply.

Non-sequitur.

Breasts are breasts whether your little mite is feeding off of them or your just letting them hang free. Everyone has different sensibilities and in general we try not to offend people if we can avoid it, breast feeding mothers in public over here generally attempt to cover themselves up as best as they can so as to be respectful to other peoples feelings.

On face book though it’s basically a business run site that pretty much anyone can get access to and you agreed to a contract, I assume, about not showing your breasts. Think about it more like getting turned away at a club or a bar for not wearing the right shoes :p and if I go into a place and agree at the door not to take my shirt off then I’m not going to be too pissed off when they come and tell me to put my shirt back on, (It has happened before :p)

Out of interest what’s wrong with a kid in a bar or a pub?

I used to work for a mad italian who considered breastfeeding anywhere she was a woman's god given right. If you disagree, feel free to try to explain to an infant that it should be patient. I'd love to watch you.

No, seriously?

Bars aren't safe. They're full of drunk people you don't know. If you're responsible for a tiny, helpless human, you should refrain from putting them in such a dangerous position.

They don’t seem that dangerous, I mean I’m not talking about taking a baby to a crazy night club or disco or what ever you call them, I mean a pub or a bar with stools and chairs at a time during the day, morning or the early evening. Doesn’t seem dangerous to me really.

I'd say that the likelyhood of something violent happening or dangerous is significantly increased when you add alcohol and strangers to any situation. That said, I don't think that people should be barred from bringing there babies to a bar (except when I'm feeling facist), I just think it's foolhardy.

I don’t know, I’m still not seeing the threat really and a lot of bars are very family orientated anyway with kid’s playgrounds and things like that. Worrying that a drunks going to do something stupid and hurt your kid seems akin to worrying about a waitress spilling a cup of hot tea on them, accidents happen and you have to be careful everywhere.

A little off topic, but I think the bar argument can be stopped by pointing out that bars/pubs/etc tend to be different in different places. I've been to bars that were crazy full of drunks throwing darts haphazardly, and I've been in bars that were like an Applebee's restaurant.

Also, breastfeeding is awesome. And I can see Facebook's side, but it's the mamas' right to complain to them in an attempt to get them to change their mind on the issue. It's Facebook's right not to listen. It's somebody else's right to be an ass, I suppose. I guess I'm just sayin' that "why are you complaining, they can do what they want" is kind of a stupid argument. I don't think anyone is saying that Facebook can't delete the pictures/accounts, they're just saying they shouldn't.

And if "no nipple" is going to be a rule, that should go for guys, too. They have nipples, no? (And don't give me that "guy nipples are different" argument... I've known guys who've been much more excited about nipple play than some girls...)

Well, guy nipples are different. They don't have the dual nature of nourishment and entertainment.

Also, I'm rubbing my nipples as I type this.

-TM

Let's stop to point out that pubs and bars are two different things - especially in the UK... hell, half the pubs have freaking playgrounds for the kids to play in.

Actually, pretty much every example I wrote about followed the "natural and non-sexual" argument... I'm not sure how you missed it.

Where is breastfeeding banned? I breastfed in a lot of places during my time feeding my three kids, and not once was I ever asked not to. Is that more of a US thing?

It's very simple - breastfeeding is not nudity. Therefore, it shouldn't fall under "no nudity" guidelines. Facebook obviously doesn't consider men with their shirts off a problem, so why should breastfeeding be a problem? Especially considering the baby's head is typically blocking the majority of the breast?

Again, this comes back to breastfeeding not being nudity. Besides, you're ignoring the fact that nobody is forcing anyone to look at these pictures - if you pop into a group called 'Breastfeeding Moms, Unite!' you should expect that there just may be pictures of breastfeeding in the group. As for pictures in personal profiles - again, nobody is forcing anyone to look at any of the pictures. If someone is going to be nosy and go searching through my pictures, then they get whatever they get, whether it be a pic of me breastfeeding, or one of my overweight aunt in her string bikini.

Very observant - probably why it was in a paragraph on it's own and not connected with my previous statements.

Breast feeding is partial nudity, so are the topless guys on Facebook that your talking about. Nudity is just the lack of clothing for what ever reason sexual, non sexual, practical etc etc

Maybe Facebook is being sexist allowing men to get away with partial nudity but not women. If they want to ban nudity and partial nudity on their site then they should perform equally banning topless guys and topless women.

That is a bad argument, no ones forcing me to look at graphic hardcore porn right? (I wish ) So by this arguments logic a kid on what ever site who clicks on a link called hardcore xxx hardcore deserves what he gets again, nobody is forcing anyone to look at any of the pictures. If someone is going to be nosy and go searching through other peoples pictures, then they get whatever they get, whether it be a pic of a woman breastfeeding, or one of my overweight aunt in her string bikini or of two people having anal sex or giving fellatio.

It just doesn't work and it's why sites that allow minors on such as facebook and other public sites have rules about nudity with varying levels of strictness. Hell I wouldn't care if my kid (If I ever had one) saw someone breastfeeding or half naked women or men, I don't care if I see it myself or not, On the other hand I do know that some people would not want their kids or themselves seeing breast feeding or half naked men or women so you have to respect their feelings on the matter. Maybe facebook could implement a better system, with age restrictions or more controls but at the moment they don't have that system in place so a general blanket ban is the easiest thing for them to do to keep it legal for them and prevent kids seeing what their parents think they shouldn't see be it a pic of a woman breastfeeding, or one of my overweight aunt in her string bikini or of two people having anal sex or giving fellatio.

Just out of curiousity, doesn't Facebook have a minimum age? I know a 14-year-old who wasn't able to get an account... did they get rid of that?

I guess what it comes down to is people's comfort levels. Most of the people I know don't have a problem seeing breastfeeding, so I look at it differently than some. I do agree though, that if women can't show their breastfeeding pictures, men shouldn't be able to show their chests either.

Any pics I don't want people to see/I don't think random people should see, are not included on my public profile. If more people did this, we likely wouldn't even be having this discussion!

I believe they removed the age limit, probably in order to compete with MySpace.

Why can't more people be as sensible as you?