For more info see boob_nazis, but taken chronologically, what happened is that some guy's default icon was reported to LJ Abuse for showing (IIRC) a naked torso. Now the rule is because your default icon shows up alongside your name, it has to follow different standards than the rest of your icons. The rule is also that LJ Abuse can't go around patrolling for bad icons, because then they're liable for any they miss. They can only respond to reports.
Now, this guy thought objections to his icon were very silly and started reporting lots of breastfeeding and I think poly-related icons to LJ Abuse. I think whichever Abuse volunteer first responded may not have done the best he could with the situation.
The LJ ToS used to say that "sexually graphic" images could not be in default icons. Now, a month or few later, it says that nudity is not allowed. And they count it as nudity if the slightest bit of areola shows in a breastfeeding icon.* And other people got into the fracas, reporting default icons to stir up more trouble. And a bunch of people temporarily deleted their journals in protest this week. And many of them have gone over to greatestjournal.com, which has no similar policy.
Meanwhile LJ and SixApart are somewhat blaming each other for this policy.
The protestors' main argument is that since breastfeeding itself is okay in [big bunch of jurisdictions, including I think the US and most of the EU], images of it should also be okay. I consider this mildly bogus, but haven't engaged any of them on the question.
But I also don't find any of the banned icons indecent. Absurdly, some of them are paintings.
* Which led to some of the protesting women to argue about racism (not just compare their situation to racism), saying that black women have darker and/or larger areolae, which are therefore more likely to be visible.
no subject
For more info see
Now, this guy thought objections to his icon were very silly and started reporting lots of breastfeeding and I think poly-related icons to LJ Abuse. I think whichever Abuse volunteer first responded may not have done the best he could with the situation.
The LJ ToS used to say that "sexually graphic" images could not be in default icons. Now, a month or few later, it says that nudity is not allowed. And they count it as nudity if the slightest bit of areola shows in a breastfeeding icon.* And other people got into the fracas, reporting default icons to stir up more trouble. And a bunch of people temporarily deleted their journals in protest this week. And many of them have gone over to greatestjournal.com, which has no similar policy.
Meanwhile LJ and SixApart are somewhat blaming each other for this policy.
The protestors' main argument is that since breastfeeding itself is okay in [big bunch of jurisdictions, including I think the US and most of the EU], images of it should also be okay. I consider this mildly bogus, but haven't engaged any of them on the question.
But I also don't find any of the banned icons indecent. Absurdly, some of them are paintings.
http://www.promom.org/gallery/banned_icons
http://www.promom.org/bf_info/mp.html
http://bfistd.greatestjournal.com/
So. Yah.
* Which led to some of the protesting women to argue about racism (not just compare their situation to racism), saying that black women have darker and/or larger areolae, which are therefore more likely to be visible.