L’Origine du monde, Gustave Courbet, 1866.
L’Origine du Monde, The Origin of the World, is a famous and well known painting by Courbet. It’s a beautiful work, and housed at Musée d’Orsay, Paris. Facebook France decided that a small thumbnail of this work was deserving of censorship.
The dispute around Gustave Courbet‘s graphic 1866 oil painting “L’Origine du Monde” (The Origin of the World), has escalated with teacher is taking Facebook to a Parisian court over allegations of censorship. Frédéric Durand-Baïssas says the social media network blocked his account without notice when he posted a thumbnail with footage and information about the painting.
The incident took place in 2011 but it has taken years of wrangling to establish whether or not Facebook is liable to French law, as it regards itself as a U.S. company. The art-lover posted a clip of the Courbet work after the account of Danish sculptor Frode Steinicke went down for a similar violation of the website’s rules on nudity. The company reactivated Steinicke’s account, although without the allegedly offending piece.
“On the one hand, Facebook shows a total permissiveness regarding violence and ideas conveyed on the social network,” the teacher’s lawyer, Stéphane Cottineau, told the Associated Press in 2016. “And on the other hand, [it] shows an extreme prudishness regarding the body and nudity.”
I would think, at this point, with Facebook being up to their neck in unethical and questionable activities they refuse to do anything about might have given them a bit of a wake up call over their astonishing prudery. They don’t care about threats. They don’t care about people being harassed. They don’t care about people using their service to steal. They don’t care about fakery of any kind. Oh, but if there is even an implied nipple, they are on the case, you betcha! There isn’t even an attempt to understand that the rest of the world does not have such puritanical views. There is nothing wrong with the human body, and it’s past time Facebook stopped acting like it’s the biggest shame of all.
Via Raw Story.
I agree with you and at the same time I am glad this post did not coincide with my luch break at work, because it would be awkward :).
Sorry ’bout that!
The level of sexualization of the painting wouldn’t IMHO change significantly if the vulva was covered with a piece of plain cloth. Yet, the visibility of body parts seems to be a common test for sexual content. Granted, it’s an easy rule to implement.
And how many Americans self-righteously sneer at the prudish muslims?
Ice Swimmer:
No, it wouldn’t. The painting encompasses a great deal more than sexuality though, and it’s not in any way lewd or salacious. Of course, as you say, the rule is an easy and lazy one. Given all the money FB rakes in, I have no doubt they could find a much better way to deal with nudity. FB gets close to crazy not only over art work, but on a photo of a parent breastfeeding, even when the nipple is not visible, and they are draconian about it too, suspending people’s accounts and so on.
Marcus:
Any excuse to feel self righteous…
I’m definitely against censorship, but a NSFW tag would be appreciated. That was an awkward afternoon in the office. Its art, I swear!
Oh lord, I am sorry, Dave. I’m on the heavily medicated side today, and not thinking clearly.
A NSFW tag is kinda useless when the picture isn’t “below the fold”, as it were.
And, come on! There’s an exposed nipple in that painting! HIDE THE CHILDREN!
Dave
Don’t make Caine do your homework.
My homework? The hell does that even mean?
I read FTB during my lunch break. I navigate via the “Recent Posts” list in the sidebar. I know enough French to translate the title, but it doesn’t tell me anything about the content. So I don’t recognize the titles of famous(?) nudes, not my thing, we can’t all be experts in everything. The NSFW tag is a simple, convenient way to know not to click on something until I get home. Its not a lot to ask.
Caine, thanks for adding the tag, no worries. I just don’t want to have to take Affinity off my regular break time reading list.
I think the intent was pretty smutty. I heard tell it’s real small and Courbet kept it in a drawer, to titillate visitors or some such. Tho I have zero citation for that. Art history word of mouth?