Queerty is better as a member
Okay, who the hell kisses like that? That does NOT look comfortable. In fact it looks like they slammed into each other and broke each others noses o.O
But yea, prolly has more to do with the fact that theyre pornstars than gay men. Facebook is generally pretty gay friendly right? Not that its ok for them to treat pornstars like this ejther, but id just imagine its anti-porn bias as opposed to anti-gay. The comments from “Christians” should have been the only thing removed. But what can you expect having a public account as opposed to friends only? Maybe im just not familiar with how FB works since i dont use it…can just anyone post on anythingyou say nowadays? O.o
Well, I must admit I don’t know who this guy is (Yeah, I know. One gay guy who has no idea about any of these porn stars…really), he does have a point if this is all true. Getting rid of love instead of hate? If that is the case, that’s messed up. As the poster above mentioned, I thought Facebook was pretty gay friendly.
I hate anti-gay Christians. I truly…HATE them
So “straight” people who were looking at a gay porn stars facebook page and pictures were writing nasty comments and death threats? I wonder if they actually thought about that before posting.
What’s even more ludicrous than this “banning” is the other material that FB allows to stay. Recently a video went viral of a man in Norway, who strips naked, gets erect and then approaches random female strangers with the intent to hug them and cause them to react to his erection. The censored YouTube video is on FB and HAS IT’S OWN PAGE. Of course, in the USA we would consider that sexual assault among other things, but apparently those wacky Norwegians think it’s all good fun. Apparently so does FB.
If they allow hetero kissing, then they have to allow this… but I don’t know what goes on on FB. Maybe kissing isn’t allowed (with your shirt off).
Here’s what FB says:
Nudity and Pornography
Facebook has a strict policy against the sharing of pornographic content and any explicitly sexual content where a minor is involved. We also impose limitations on the display of nudity. We aspire to respect people’s right to share content of personal importance, whether those are photos of a sculpture like Michelangelo’s David or family photos of a child breastfeeding.
But despite these rules, they allowed the threats to stand:
Facebook does not permit hate speech, but distinguishes between serious and humorous speech. While we encourage you to challenge ideas, institutions, events, and practices, we do not permit individuals or groups to attack others based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability or medical condition.
Bullying and Harassment
Facebook does not tolerate bullying or harassment. We allow users to speak freely on matters and people of public interest, but take action on all reports of abusive behavior directed at private individuals. Repeatedly targeting other users with unwanted friend requests or messages is a form of harassment.
Even in the heavily censored 1950s, when married couples on TV sitcoms slept in twin beds, a kiss was just a kiss.
It didn’t become “pornography,” or even sex, until two guys did it.
Funny how these stories keep happening, and no matter how many times it is pointed out Zuckerberg and his staff are Anti-Gay Republicans it is ignored.
So glad I don’t use facebook. Can people please do the same, it’s had it’s boring run.
I see this picture as a very sensual kiss. A kiss with great passion and freedom. A kiss that would remain in ones memory. I see it as the two of them had not seen each other in a long while. Very romantic.
Do you suppose that the banning may have had something to do with the advertisement for “TitanMen”, the porn site they both work for, in the upper left hand corner of the photo?
Is it no that no one should kiss or just gay men that is the policy?
Looks like two WWF wrestlers kissing and making up after their performance.
how do you know that is the reason? you don’t and never will.
this story is kinda late since his page is already back online.
Seriously guys?! All this uproar would be validated if they had removed a regular picture of this guy kissing his boyfriend. Of course they removed it. Not only was it a still from a porn scene; but it had the name of the porn company in the picture. We seriously need to learn how to pick our battles.
@Taurox: So true! Great point!
I guess none of you know about complaint bots. People there at facebook has no time to actually monitor every pages, pictures, videos, useless rants. When enough people flag an image or a page (could be 10 people, could be 1000000) and file a complaint facebook will automatically block, ban, remove said image/page until a human can gets to review it. If the content really is against the TOS they’ll get a lifetime ban/deletion. Since there are hundreds of millions of contents on facebook and just as many useless trolls, the 12 hour ban seems reasonable. Go look at this guy’s page now it’s probably back on.
JFABZ thanks for explaining that. i didn’t know about bots but it makes sense on FB…often i get “recommendations for new Friends” on the site as i have over 3000 already. When i follow up on some of them, despite having mutual Friends in common (which is probably where the algorithm–sp?–got the “recommendation” to begin with) if those asked to Friend me aren’t careful and answer “yes” when asked if they know me “away from Facebook”, then sometimes i get a ban on sending Friending requests. Yep, it’s their policies at cross-purposes, but the result is that of the programming, not of individual judgement calls. Facebook employs so many different programmers as well as bots that sometimes the HTML coding conflicts. That being said, i’d agree that the picture is not really that borderline; the whole “TitanMen” logo tangent is comparable to an R (or even PG) rated movie still of extreme violence or romance that might have the film’s logo or website on it…would THAT be banned? It’s not like the porn company’s moniker is “Sodomy & Rough Sex”. If the boyfriends also perform together in porn is irrelevant; the content of the photo itself, unless they show genitals, is not pornographic unless the viewer has internalized aversion to same-sex coupling.
Facebook has strict rules hate messages are permitted. The stronger the hate rhetoric the more welcome. But..shows of affection well must be removed it might contaminate the reader. We can’t have this. No, no… Arbiters of public morality ?????
IF IT HAD OF BEEN A SHOT OF A DUDE SHOOTING ANOTHER DUDE WITH AN ak40, ( OR WHATEVER THE FUCK IT MAY BE), OR, KNIFING ANOTHER DUDE OR DUDETTE TO DEATH, THE SITE WOULD HAVE DEEMED THAT BEHAVIOR TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE, I’M SURE ! WHAT THE FUCK IS UP WITH THIS ?? GET YOUR HEADS OUT OF UR ASSES, REMEMBER THE OLD, ” MAKE LOVE NOT WAR” ! THAT IS WHY THEN PEOPLE THIS WORLD IS SO FUCKED, AND, I AM NOT REFERRING TO ANYTHING GAY IN ANYWAY HERE ! NEVER KNEW “SAME SEX” TONSIL HOCKEY CARRIED A SENTENCE PUNISHABLE BY THE POWERS THAT BE. WHY NOT AT LEAST GIVE THESE 2 GUYS LIFE IN PRISON, OR, FUCK, GO FOR THE ELECTRIC CHAIR. AFTER ALL, THEY ARE INFLICTING HURT ON SO MANY OTHER PEOPLE LIKE SO MANY OTHERS IN SO MANY PLACES IN THE WORLD !
AND YES THE CAPS INDICATE I’M SHOUTING AS SHIT LIKE THIS ANGERS ME !!!
Please log in to add your comment.
Need an account? Register It's free and easy.
PHOTOS: Broadway Gets Into Winter Burlesque With Calendar Girl
PHOTOS: Prohibition Returns to NYC With the Roaring New Twenty Something Party
PHOTOS: The Sundance Queer Preview — 2014 Edition
Long, Loose and Colorful: Fashion Trends For 2014
Most Talked About Model Interviews Of 2013