Facebook Removes 'Demeaning' Photo Posted By Aussie Men's Mag

Facebook, which recently took down the elbow boobs picture, also took down this picture by men's magazine Zoo Weekly. The crass post asks Facebook users if they're a boobs or butt guy with a "clever" picture.

The reason the picture was taken down was because:

"The image, disturbing nature of having a disembodied woman and the offensive, clearly sexist and even abusive nature of some responses on a page being used to advertise this product should not be allowed. Both the pictures, the questions that are posed and the responses are regularly demeaning and unacceptable to women. Women are objectified and sexualised."

Which is true! But Zoo argues that because the Facebook post was 'editorial' material and not advertising, Facebook shouldn't have a right to take down the post. Which is also true! Taking a look at Zoo's Facebook page, every single post is demeaning to women. It's their shtick. So why single one picture -- even if its awfully demeaning -- out? [BuzzFeed]



    There are so many pages dedicated to butts on Facebook its ridiculous, but they choose to take down elbows and this ?

    "But Zoo argues that because the Facebook post was ‘editorial’ material and not advertising, Facebook shouldn’t have a right to take down the post. Which is also true! "

    How does something being editorial/non advertisement material make it exempt from being pulled down? I don't agree with it being taken doen necessarily, but not because of anything to do with their response to it. For better or worse it's Facebooks site so you largely have to put up with their form of administration, just as you can expect to be moderated here if you were to link to content the editors deemed inappropriate.

      It was the Australian Advertising Standards Bureau that ordered the post be taken down. If the post was deemed to be editorial content then it falls under different guidelines.

      This doesn't really have anything to do with Facebook policy.

        The article should state that.

        In any event, had it been Facebook, nothing really changes. There have been other posts recently about things being taken down. People need to realise they are using someone elses service and are bound by their rules, be they stupid or not.

    I was thinking the same thing... Zoo is implicitly sexist - it's pretty well it's reason for existence!

      It isn't sexist at all, people just claim sexism for everything because we live in a PC and annoying world. If this was a womens magazine posting the exact same thing about men, no one would claim sexism.

        absolutely I was going to claim the same thing, it seems to be now days you can't say anything about anyone but 18-45 caucasian men.

    FB walks a fine line. If they take it upon themselves to judge what's right and what's wrong then if a court finds something they've judged as right to be wrong they're screwed.

    disembodied vagina's ok then?


    If the question was boobs or butt shouldn't the bottom half have been facing the other way? I thought the question was would you rather talk to a woman or have sex with her.

    What a bunch of losers. The comments weren't demeaning, or offensive. They were hilarious.

    This is clearly a "sholders or girl-belly" photo.

    that'll be Gemma Atkinson then. The tangiest minx in teh world. tomboyish and with a great Bury accent .. gerthcha !

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now