top of page

Your account may be deleted

Updated: May 13, 2023

Do you notice any difference between these photos regarding nudity?

Not me, yet many photos of naked women are not censored on Facebook and Instagram, and instead my men's photographs are.

Do others pay for advertisement maybe? How can I promote my artwork?

... if most of the times I post a photograph, algorithms are ready to delete my account

For the umpteenth time, both Facebook and Instagram have sent me intimidating messages telling me that the photos I posted on their platform have nudity and that I have to abide by their rules under penalty of the closure of my account.

But what does 'nudity' mean for these algorithm-driven social channels?

If I do some researches on Facebook and Instagram I see that many women are completely naked and still living on accounts without being censored.

So why do they censor the "Virgin Mary's photos" and not the woman with open legs on an Instagram account of 60,000 followers? There must be something wrong.

Why my photos are continually judged and threatened as pornography when there are photos of naked women, in "doggy style" happy to show themselves, both on Facebook and Instagram or the Internet in general, with a smile on their lips, uncensored?

Strangely enough, the same women also offer themselves in a captivating way to the male sex, to please them.

They have accustomed us to the vision of the concubine and submissive woman and probably still want to keep open today, and we have the proof, the image of the woman considered in this way, as 'object of masculine desire', inferior to man, a donor of the pleasure.

Because, in any case, men are men, and we speak of men. And certainly men do not want to see submissive men. And the women? What do women think about the submissive man? The figure of the submissive man is not accepted by the men themselves and it is dangerous. Sexuality is something sacred. And primitive cultures knew it well. Their symbolism has come down to us: the Mother Goddess is depicted with a breast and a butt but without a head: I had the idea that women have been hated since prehistoric times!

Mother Goddess depicted with breast and butt without head
Mother Goddess depicted with breast and butt without head

The woman ... without a head, and men? The man's head is always respected. And, therefore, implicit that in every society there are rules of common coexistence that require to be respected through an acceptance, more or less passive.I can't rebel, if I want to exist on Socials I have to respect the rules.

Society would tend to marginalize those who diverge from the dominant opinion and the latter fear isolation. This simple reasoning allows us to understand that the individual, in order to avoid social exclusion, will tend to adapt his opinion to the one he considers to be dominant in the reference group.

Behaviour will be influenced by the prevailing climate and minority opinions will have difficulty in being expressed. The influence of socio-cultural norms is such as to envisage forms of labeling and stereotyping towards those who behave in such a way as to threaten these rules, ending up marginalising deviants through a process of stigmatisation. Stigma acts as a strong tool of conformism that targets those who do not adapt to the expectations spread in society. Therefore, the social group that is dominant in a given epoch largely makes use of this tool to maintain the status quo and the privileges that derive from its social position.

Group dynamics have led to great historical conflicts and still continue to produce them. What we want to highlight is that one of these dynamics has always been present and still struggling to reach a resolution: the gender issue.

In Western societies we boast of living in a democracy, respecting the values ​​of equality and individual liberties. We celebrate our civilization and set ourselves the goal of continuous progress and cultural advancement. Despite this, we are still so tied to an idea, as primitive as it is not functional, of the existence of a natural division of roles between man and woman.

What prevents the female gender from having the same opportunities, the same treatment at work, the same credibility and respect for men? It is well established that a dominant group, which has been such for millennia, hardly renounces its status voluntarily, it is equally true that growing up in a society like the Italian one, anchored to a conception, developed in the twenty years of Berlusconi, of the woman-object and legitimized by the media and from political language, it certainly does not facilitate progress in a democratic sense.

Gender studies have allowed us to look at masculinity and femininity with different eyes and to take them for what they are: mere social constructions. The social construction of a sexualized identity involves the traditional division into roles, highlighting the differences and dampening the similarities between the sexes. When we talk about 'machismo' we mean the set of those models and behaviors that involve the subjection of the female figure.

The term 'feminism' arises in opposition to this, but does not mean a desire for male subjection. Instead, it intends to develop society in an egalitarian sense, so that a substantial equality between the sexes is achieved, at all levels. According to some anthropological studies it is the entry into the Neolithic period that brings with it the advent of male chauvinism and the birth, therefore, of the patriarchal society.

Previously, in the Paleolithic, civilization was founded on agriculture and the division of tasks was equal. A mother goddess, generative, identifiable with the earth was worshiped. It was the discovery of the male function in reproduction that determined its passage.

Until then it was believed that only the woman was the generator of life, but with the new awareness of her own role man knocked down that feeling of inferiority that had accompanied him until that moment. He discovered that, not only did he contribute with his seed to procreation, but that, alone, he could fertilize more than one woman. This led to a radical transformation in the collective structure.

With the entry into the Neolithic a society that distributed resources and tasks equitably became a patriarchal society. The goddess was replaced by a god. The woman was relegated to her home and from that moment on she was given the roles of caring for the family and home, became a possession of man and lost all decision-making power. This cultural heritage has also been adapted to the societies that have followed one another over the centuries. It was a real work of building male superiority over women, then justified by a succession of ideologies.

The legitimacy of the patriarchal society was, with time, established by law. The classical world sanctioned its triumph: in the Greek polis the free man was at the top of the hierarchy, above slaves and women, beings considered non-rational. But it is in the 1700s that machismo took on the modern connotations of the last centuries.

The Napoleonic Code, promulgated at the beginning of the nineteenth century, increased the differences between the sexes and deprived the women of those few civil rights they enjoyed, decreeing their inferiority and constituting the family as a small monarchy, of which the man was in everything and for all the king.

But nowadays women have changed, the balance between genders has changed. The genres have changed. The family has changed. Sexual practices have changed. There is the submissive woman and the submissive man, there is the naked body of the woman and the naked body of the man, there is the vagina and the cock, and as you see naked women in doggy style so you have to see naked men, doggy style .

Let's end with the cultural heritage of the superiority of man to woman.

By now the dominance of man is slowly disappearing.

So Facebook or Instagram you can put all the complaints you want, to enforce the rules. But what rules are you talking about? There are no rules, I don't see these rules respected by everyone.

There is what you decide and those who like you are dissatisfied, frustrated, like this poor fellow down here.

These are not rules. They are impositions. You can monopolize the communication on socials without leaving to the other the possibility of answering back, but in real life you are just frustrated people, because you are not respecting the freedom of the others. And to respect the freedom of others we must respect ourselves.

by Loredana Denicola - Thoughts and Reflections


bottom of page