[trian1]

A former AG's wife documents her massive weight loss on Facebook, and paid to "Promote" a post of her in her old "fat pants."

Facebook claimed that she is advertising a weight-loss product, thus has to limit exposure to only those under 18 years of age.

However, the e-mail from Facebook ALSO specifically mentions that the the image "promotes idealized physical appearances" and "are policy violating."

http://www.king5.com/news/local/Facebook...40281.html

If they had left it at a removal of an ad selling a weight-loss produce to non-adults, I could at least understand that (She isn't really selling anything, though)

But as the video shows, they actually said it violated policy for promoting an idealized self-image.

Fat shaming, or thin celebrating, is officially a violation of Facebook policy, and grounds for content removal.

[trian1]

By the way, you need to watch the video. It is where the actual language in the e-mail describing "promotes idealized physical appearances" appears. I am not sure why they didn't include it in the story itself.

[trian1]

Screenshot of the email from the video.

[Bacchus]

So Facebook wants to prevent children from hearing paid messages about losing weight. The logic is there for advertisements for tobacco or alcohol because of their effects. But fat kids can develop type 2 diabetes and heart conditions, which makes overeating a more serious 'eating disorder' than anorexia or bulimia. The harm for children is hearing the message of body acceptance, not of somebody promoting a healthy lifestyle to achieve weight loss.

[Glock]

(01-11-2014 12:20 PM)Bacchus Wrote:  

So Facebook wants to prevent children from hearing paid messages about losing weight. The logic is there for advertisements for tobacco or alcohol because of their effects. But fat kids can develop type 2 diabetes and heart conditions, which makes overeating a more serious 'eating disorder' than anorexia or bulimia. The harm for children is hearing the message of body acceptance, not of somebody promoting a healthy lifestyle to achieve weight loss.

Facebook as become totally feminist. It is at moments like these that I feel vindicated by my decision not to be on Facebook.

It won't be long before something better, and less ridiculous, comes along to replace it.

[tmason]

(01-11-2014 01:10 PM)Consul Wrote:  

It won't be long before something better, and less ridiculous, comes along to replace it.

Ditto; everyone I talk to hates Facebook. Won't be long before a more autonomous form of Facebook comes out and everyone starts dumping it like MySpace.

[not_dead_yet]

So does this mean that I can complain about every fatty touting fat acceptance on FB for "promot[ing] idealized physical appearances"?

[speakeasy]

Notice this hatred toward "ideal body type" imagery is only for women. I've seen women circulating around images of dolls that have what they consider "realistic" body proportions and not the thin Barbie figure which is now an anathema.

Yet you don't hear men whining about giving their sons action figure toys with yoked up arms and chests.



Isn't this also devastating to the self-esteem of boys who don't have this body type without working hard for it? Of course it isn't. But god forbid you give a girl a doll of a thin woman. The double-standards and hypocrisy make me sick.

[Mr. Butterworth]

Speakeasy, this is funny because when I was a child for some dumb reason I thought that I'd just grow into having those muscles that are on the super hero action figures..

I'd also see older men that were jacked and thought "cool, I'm gonna look awesome when I grow up" ..... no, you must work for that shit

[StrikeBack]

A thin woman wearing clothes for people +120lb heavier is a violation of Facebook policy and bad for children.

Yet millions of fatties wearing yogapants for people -120lb lighter and posting their photos all over Facebook is a-okay.

[Patriarch]

(01-11-2014 08:59 PM)StrikeBack Wrote:  

A thin woman wearing clothes for people +120lb heavier is a violation of Facebook policy and bad for children.

Yet millions of fatties wearing yogapants for people -120lb lighter and posting their photos all over Facebook is a-okay.

Not only is it ok, it's "you go girl!"
In the past week I went through and deleted 90% of my "friends" on Facebook. Then I realized the only ones left were people I actually talked to...so I just closed my account instead. If anyone actually takes a second to really think about what Facebook is, no one would have an account. It's a blue pill version of a notch count, to some extent.

[Bad Hussar]

Haha.

Sounds like a strange policy. I don't know how Facebook can police minutia like this. Do they really have the resources? But if they insist, don't let it stress you. Just an opportunity for others to fill the (reality) gap. I like to call it "reality arbitrage".

It's like how they completely dropped the ball as as far as professional networks is concerned, essentially giving LinkedIn and Reid Hoffman Billions of $'s. I believe Facebook considered allowing users to set up separate professional profiles to be used for work, business and other professional reasons, but rejected the idea. Zuckerberg apparently thought that everyone would be happy to have just one profile for all purposes. You know, since being "congruent" is so important. Suuuure, people would be completely happy giving employers, employees and business associates full access to their regular Facebook account, with all the inane nonsense that filters through there...

Anyway, the above literally cost Facebook and Zuckerberg $Billions. If they are really committed to creating a virtual "nanny state" on their site policing minutia like body image issues, they will similarly pass the opportunity to others who have more liberal views.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Incredible. Now Facebook will be responsible for actual, measurable harm, instead of just vague accusations of inciting narcissistic personality disorders.