Feminists found out about the subreddit r/FacebookCleavage, largely due to this Huffington Post article which, like most of the reactions to the subreddit, avoids any sort of meaningful discussion. Said reactions have been mostly posting all sorts of inane minutaie to said subreddit, mainly pictures of geological cleavage and male asscrack. Which, posting pictures of scantily clad individuals without their consent is certainly a great way to express your disdain for people that post pictures of scantily clad individuals without their consent.
First of all, it’s not illegal or harmful if a stranger masturbates to a thought or a picture of you. It might be creepy (depending on your definition), but it’s not illegal or harmful and therein lies the problem. You have a right to escape from illegal and harmful, you do not have a right to escape from creepy (unless it becomes one of the former, and the subjectivity in all of this is through the roof anyway.) When you accept Facebook’s terms and conditions and start posting pictures you’re essentially saying EVERYONE LOOK AT ME. You acknowledge that literally everyone may look at you, and you certainly don’t have any right to control what people think when they look at you no matter how gross it is. That’s not victim blaming. If I go out in public and whip my dick out and a hundred people take pictures, I am a victim of my own actions. I don’t have a right to privacy because I am IN FUCKING PUBLIC. Facebook is IN FUCKING PUBLIC, regardless of how much you attempt to restrict access to your content.
But…the terms above are subjective and because of that a greater effort needs to be made to allow people to ascertain their privacy. Facebook is notoriously lax on privacy, and allows free downloading of images, something that other sites don’t do. Not all sites that allow mass distribution of content are created equal, thus the acceptance of the terms and conditions are not equivalent. It should at least be more difficult to transfer images from one site to another which is impossible to actually implement or enforce, but Facebook could modify their terms and conditions to give their members legal recourse when it happens.
My main beef with the HuffPo article is that it didn’t even make an attempt at any sort of useful discussion, like the harm in objectifying women, the unfortunate cultural norms that lead to such things, the laws and policy that allow them to happen, or potential solutions. It’s easy to find awful shit on the internet. Illuminating it, as this writer did in their article, is only the first step and a bare minimum one at that. Criticizing is easy, solving is hard.