Facebook’s prude police are out in force yet again, this time threatening action against a Sydney jeweller for posting pictures of an exquisite nude porcelain doll posing with her works.

Victoria Buckley, who owns a high-end jewellery store in the Strand Arcade on George Street, has long used dolls as inspiration for her pieces and hasn’t had one complaint about the A3 posters of the nudes in her shop window.

But over the weekend she received six warnings from Facebook saying the pictures of the doll, which show little more than nipples, constituted “inappropriate content” and breached the site’s terms of service.

The warnings said Facebook would remove the images and Buckley is worried she will be banned from the site if she posts them again.

I’ve noticed nipples disappearing all over the place in the media. Why do these people find the human body so offensive?




  1. Lou says:

    Nothing wrong with nipples.

  2. Luc says:

    Nipples are too closely related to sex, sex is too closely related to pleasure and joy, pleasure and joy are evil. You may only have sex by means of marriage, so that it’s full of strings attached and downright miserable. Because suffering is related to beatitude. The church has lots of respect for people who suffer and nothing but contempt for those who live carefree. The poor, stupid masses don’t want to think that the oppressive rich have a chance of going to Heaven. The afterlife has to be some kind of payback for whatever goes on Earth. The church knows that, therefore associates grief with Heaven and pleasure with Hell.

    You’re welcome.

  3. I says:

    You got it in one, Luc !

  4. catfud says:

    Nothing wrong with the human body, though everyone has their own personal limit to what is acceptable for viewing; a common threshold being goatse (damn you!!)

  5. interglacial says:

    I too follow the Gospel According to Luc.

  6. sargasso_c says:

    Nipples lead to desire. Desire leads to jealousy. Jealousy leads to anger. Anger leads to the Dark Side.

  7. RobLeather says:

    I can just hear Adam Curry saying “… Yeah… but is she hot” right now :-)

  8. freetos says:

    Exquisite? L0L

  9. bobbo, what values/double standards are shown says:

    From the group consensus, I take it that a porcelain Ken doll with a dick is just fine for general viewing?

    Its “easy” to draw a line regarding nudity that has nothing to do with the presented subject: ES VERBOTEN!

    Now back to that Russian Spy.

  10. M0les says:

    She got a warning?!

    Things HAVE changed at BookFace after all!

    I just got banned outright, no explanation (Tho I’ve got a hunch), no warning, no contest allowed. Which is akin to “Your money is no good here” and that’s just fine by me. I was looking for a valid reason to shop elsewhere anyway.

  11. Dallas says:

    It’s rather disturbing at the least

  12. fulanoche says:

    I’d hit on it.

  13. RTaylor says:

    They always fall back on the poor children. It’s odd that in many tribes all over the planet children are raised in nudity, and in close quarters with open sex. Many studies show that in such situations psychological aberrations hardly occur, like Margaret Meads. If anyone ever goes back in time, find that Abraham chap as a boy and use the disintegrating ray on him.

  14. Animby says:

    China doll pasties?
    Probably better than Cornish pasties.

    Maybe tassels…

  15. drpiper says:

    I seriously doubt that a human at facebook actually looked at that picture. A computer algorithm does not know the difference between real, animated or art nipples. It just thinks it sees nipples and sends out a notice to ban the supposed offending content.

    The problem is that there is no dispute policy. The computer is always right.

  16. Steve S says:

    I have no problem with showing fake nipples as long as its not done during that big final “Super” American football game shown each year that we are not allowed to call by its real name. That would be against God, football and the American way!

  17. Angel H. Wong says:

    “I’ve noticed nipples disappearing all over the place in the media. Why do these people find the human body so offensive?”

    It’s the U.S.A. where Christian parents claim that Janet Jackson’s 1/4 of a second nipple exposure has permanently scarred their children.

  18. deowll says:

    #2 You can blame it on the church if want to but this sort of weird prudishness seems to be rampant among people that are agnostic and atheistic.

    I call it weird because the sight of nursing mothers should be considered normal, not something restricted to back rooms. It may have something to do with low birth rates. The birth rate in the US is not high enough to keep the population stable without immigration.

  19. bobbo, to the left of Obama says:

    #18–do-ill==you’re kidding right? Even if you “kinda” thought that in your heart of hearts you still had to think about posting something so retarded? No? Post it anyway because thats the only way to autoerroneous yourself?

    You sure it isn’t really just atheists who voted for Obama?

  20. Skeptic says:

    re #18…
    deowll, I’m sorry about your accident. That blow to the head really did some damage!

    Get well soon.

  21. Cap'nKangaroo says:

    Jenilee Harrison from “Three’s Company”. Now there were some nipples!

  22. DeeHexi says:

    # 18…sick thinking. I guess in Germany are nothing but agnostics and atheists since it is perfectly normal. You see nipples on magazines on the shleves, go sunbathing topless in the public parks. Kids can swim in the pools naked and nobody seems to care (or look).
    Wake up … this is 20ten!!!

  23. stopher2475 says:

    I have a friend who got banned for a suggestive closeup of a ceramic pig. Apparently the zoomed in shot of the figurine resembled a piece of human anatomy.

  24. ray says:

    honeyman,

    its because facebook is publicly accessed by people of all ages (i.e. kids underage). would u show your kid naked pictures of men, or women? naked dolls r on the border, but i guess facebook didn’t like it. meh. who really cares?

  25. John E. Quantum says:

    Three thoughts come to mind in view of the posts above-

    http://tinyurl.com/2687e5z

    and

    http://tinyurl.com/2c9notp

    and

    http://tinyurl.com/26tv3to

  26. Steve Harris says:

    DOH! It’s common knowledge that exposed nipples cause instant, en-masse ejaculation in the observer.
    It a very bad, messy social disorder. KEEP IT BANNED!

  27. honeyman says:

    #24 Ray

    I want to know why nipples, and why they are disappearing from our screens even when covered by clothing. This seems extreme to me.

    No doubt this is a result of moralizing busybodies who think it their business to protect children from the horrors of reality, and whom bombard Facebook with these trivial complaints on a regular basis.