Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Culture

Libertarian Feminists Ask Facebook to #FreeTheNipple

Petition urges Facebook to stop "censoring artful or political expressions of female bodies."

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 6.19.2015 12:20 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | Free the Nipple/Facebook
(Free the Nipple/Facebook)
mbl.is/Eggert Jóhannesson

Non-sexual images of women's nipples shouldn't be considered a "community standards" violation by Facebook argue members of the Association of Libertarian Feminists (ALF). 

Earlier this week the ALF Facebook page posted a link to an Iceland Monitor article about a #FreeTheNipple protest there. As I write this, the article is the most read article on the Monitor site, but you won't find folks sharing it on Facebook. The article contains pictures of women sitting in Iceland's Austurvöllur square without shirts on, part of an organized event by a campaign "to desexualize the female nipple." Facebook has been removing any links to the article and temporarily suspending the accounts of anyone who posts it, citing a violation of "Community Standards regarding nudity." 

Screenshot/Facebook Community Standards Nudity Policy

All nine ALF page admins (which includes me) had their accounts suspended, along with several individuals who shared the article. (On the same day, a friend of mine reported that her friends in the band Wet T-Shirt Contest had their Facebook page suspended, too, despite nary a nipple in sight; apparently the name alone was suggestive enough to trigger Facebook's content censors). ALF head Sharon Presley and member Julie Mastine have since launched a petition to "Tell Facebook to #FreeTheNipple and Revise Policies Regarding Nudity." 

"Facebook is exercising a double standard, allowing photos of topless men but censoring artful or political expressions of female bodies," states the petition (which I had no part in creating). "Facebook can be a leader in changing cultural norms surrounding women's bodies by taking context into account and revising its policies and filters so that women's bodies—and speech about their bodies—are NOT censored."

As libertarians, Presley et al. understand that Facebook is a privately owned platform and can enact whatever content restrictions it chooses, but they're hoping to help convince the company to make a change. Until recently Facebook also banned breastfeeding photos, but revised its policy at the urging of activists.

IMDB

Facebook—which does allow a lot of violent and XXX-if-(barely)-clothed imagery—seems unlikely to "free the nipple" completely, considering the subjectivity required in discriminating between pornographic and other content featuring female nudity and its general "family friendly" aims. (Facebook's frequently-in-the-news content standards were back so this week when it announced that it wouldn't allow sexually oriented content to be sold in the Oculus Rift app store.) Even so, the network's most recent purge of nipple-related content is providing a good opportunity to expose activism around #NippleEquity. (Hashtag for literary effect only.) In Iceland, the issue has sparked a mini-movement, with coordinated Free the Nipple days, social media campaigns, etc. From The Reykjavík Grapevine today: 

Last March, Twitter became dotted with Icelandic women's nipples as part of the international #FreeTheNipple movement. The Icelandic wave began with a post by 17-year-old Adda Þóreyjardóttir Smáradóttir, who was sick of the double standards women face when it comes to body image and what is considered appropriate to reveal. The movement received a lot of support, mostly at first by other teenage girls who wanted to stand up for Adda when she was harassed for her tweet.

Though she deleted the picture, the following #FreeTheNipple tweets and comments have had lasting effects on how Adda and other women view their own bodies. "Personally, I feel more  free to do what I want, and I know that people of my generation and those around me agree with me on that," she said. "They're  also less afraid of being judged. I think it's helped a lot of girls with their self-esteem, because we are made to think that breasts should be a certain shape and size."

Even Björt Ólafsdóttir, MP of the Bright Future Party, decided to join the movement, and posted her own nipple photo on Twitter, along with the message: "This is to feed children. Shove it up your patriarchy. #FreeTheNipple."

A 2014 documentary by American director Lina Esco (Free the Nipple) follows women fighting anti-topless laws in the U.S. and is credited with spreading the movement here, where it has attracted support from celebrities such as Miley Cyrus, Scout Willis, and Cara Delevingne. Below, Reason TV visits the 2012 "Go Topless Day" protest in Washington, D.C. 

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Reason Weekly Contest: Give Donald Trump a Slogan

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

CultureScience & TechnologyObscenityFacebookSocial MediaNudityGenderWomenFree SpeechTechnology
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (92)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Hey Nikki!   10 years ago

    Until recently Facebook also banned breastfeeding photos, but revised its policy at the urging of activists.

    Because showing your tits for some political purposes is okay.

    1. TChipperman   10 years ago

      I don't have a problem with FB having arbitrary standards for showing nudity or restricting speech. It's a private company that provides a free service in which people willingly relinquish their personal information, including personal photos, to be controlled by FB. If they want to choose which tits to show that's their business.

      Don't like it? Don't use FB.

      I think their policy is stupid and wrong, but that's their prerogative.

      1. Hey Nikki!   10 years ago

        And it's mine to criticize them for it.

        1. TChipperman   10 years ago

          Do you think FB should be tits-free regardless of the activists behind them?

          1. Hey Nikki!   10 years ago

            No, I think censoring sexual content is a revolting sop to "for the children" types, who should go suck a dick. Fuck all prudery.

            1. TChipperman   10 years ago

              I agree with you. What's hilarious to me is that people have used FB to trade naughty pics through their messaging system without realizing that anything you post on FB essentially becomes partially owned by FB.

              What is even more hilarious to me is that they have to have a department that goes through pictures that have complaints checking to see if they see nip.

              "What do you do for a living?"

              "I review FB photos to see if there are any nips showing."

              (backs away slowly...)

              1. X[redacted]s   10 years ago

                True fact: so many women used to flash the cameras on Space Mountain that Disney had to hire people whose sole job was removing the tit pics from the lineup before putting them on display.

            2. Episiarch   10 years ago

              I'm pretty sure Facebook censors dicksucking too, Nicole. Those bastards.

              1. Hey Nikki!   10 years ago

                And yet look at how many photos there are of babies! As if they weren't evidence of sexytimes.

                1. Episiarch   10 years ago

                  That reminds me, I have a few more people's feeds to hide because they won't stop posting pictures of their little brats.

    2. commodious spittoon   10 years ago

      I'm sure pro-sex work activists would enjoy similar dispensations, right?

  2. Rhywun   10 years ago

    a campaign "to desexualize the female nipple."

    No offense, but unless you can figure out a way to change the hardwiring in male brains, this will never happen.

    1. A Self-Identified $park?   10 years ago

      And I'm betting a whole lot of women would be pissed if it did.

      1. Rhywun   10 years ago

        Yup. I am pretty sure that most women, in fact, do NOT want to "free the nipple".

        "17-year-old Adda ??reyjard?ttir Sm?rad?ttir, who was sick of the double standards women face when it comes to body image"

        I'm no expert but it seems to me that men have fetishized the female breast in most cultures and at most times throughout history. This agitprop is nothing more than "women are exactly the same as men" nonsense.

        1. SugarFree   10 years ago

          ??reyjard?ttir Sm?rad?ttir?

          Does Adda have two mommies?

          1. In League with the Dark Ones   10 years ago

            Sm?ri is a male name.

    2. lap83   10 years ago

      What about breastfeeding an infant? I doubt that most guys find that arousing

      1. Florida Man   10 years ago

        Stop talking about HAWT things, I'm at work.

      2. Rhywun   10 years ago

        No. But until recently, it wasn't done in public either.

        1. lap83   10 years ago

          I remember a local story a few years ago about a woman who was breastfeeding her infant at a bar (it was also a coffee shop which transitioned into a bar in the second half of the day), which really bothered the other patrons and enough complained that the bar owners told her she had to stop. So she rose a stink with the paper and tried to sue them for discrimination or something.

    3. Antilles   10 years ago

      If you see women's nipples all the time, they'd lose their allure and sexualization. In fact, it's shocking just how quickly we become desensitized to nudity when it stops being unique.

      1. lap83   10 years ago

        Most of the US is a temperate climate. For practical reasons constant nudity just wouldn't happen.

        1. Antilles   10 years ago

          Who said anything about nudity? If topless men aren't considered nude then topless women shouldn't be either. There is no rational reason why the two aren't treated the same. None.

          1. lap83   10 years ago

            1.You make it sound like men are allowed anywhere without a shirt, which isn't the case.
            2. It may not be "rational" for straight men to be visually stimulated by a woman without her shirt, but in western cultures they are.

            1. Antilles   10 years ago

              Men who appear shirtless in an inappropriate, public place can be asked to leave--women get arrested. Straight men in the US get aroused by the sight of a topless woman because it's such a rare occurrence. Decriminalize women's nipples in public, media and advertising and they'll become as de-sexualized as their ankles (something women were forbidden to show in Victorian times). Covering something up and forbidding it only makes it more alluring.

              1. lap83   10 years ago

                "Straight men in the US get aroused by the sight of a topless woman because it's such a rare occurrence."

                Do you still not see how climate enters into the origins of our society? Do you just think it's a huge coincidence that all cultures that have women who go topless happen to be near the equator? In climates with cold weather, you're never going to have a complete familiarity with women being topless. It would never be the status quo.

                1. Antilles   10 years ago

                  I don't expect or necessarily want women (or men) in my office going topless while we're working. But I'd like to see an end of the restrictions and fines our government imposes on all forms of media regarding the sexist manner in which male and female toplessness is treated. I've been to several European countries and they show full nudity on prime-time TV and no one cares.

                2. X[redacted]s   10 years ago

                  If my wife is any indication, any place where temperatures drop below 78 is too cold for less than a sweater.

    4. lap83   10 years ago

      I do think it's stupid though. What is the idea, exactly. Flash people until they're bored so the nipple is no longer perceived to be sexual? Also, what's the point? I can see protesting the FB policy, but deciding to try to take it a step further by attempting to change human nature is just a dumb waste of time.

      1. Antilles   10 years ago

        No, they need to stop slapping movies that show a nipple with an 'R' rating, or fining TV stations that show (accidentally or not) a nipple. And stop putting magazines that show women's dreaded nipples behind the counter. I hate to be one of those people who hold up Europe as an example of something, but they don't have our childish attitudes about sex and nudity, and their people grow up better adjusted with less of the sexual hangups that people in the US do.

        1. Rhywun   10 years ago

          they don't have our childish attitudes about sex and nudity

          Their politicians openly flaunt their concubines. How advanced they are.

          1. X[redacted]s   10 years ago

            I think you're onto something!

            /Bill Clinton

          2. Antilles   10 years ago

            Concubines? What country are you referring to, and what century? And what relevance does your comment have to what I said? Are you implying that if women are allowed to show their nipples then more men will start cheating on their wives?

  3. R C Woodchipper   10 years ago

    Non-sexual images of women's nipples shouldn't be considered a "community standards" violation by Facebook argue members of the Association of Libertarian Feminists (ALF).

    And just who is going to make a case-by-case determination that a given image of boobies is non-sexual?

    Facebook made a very rational business decision that it didn't want any porn, because porn on Facebook would utterly destroy their business plan. So they adopted a policy that is actually enforceable: no tits, period.

    Plus, given the fact that males, and even teen-age males, use Facebook, I challenge the notion that there are images of boobies that are non-sexual for every single Facebook user.

    1. Hey Nikki!   10 years ago

      But "no tits, period" is not the policy. Some tits are allowed, if they support a cause (breastfeeding, breast cancer) that Facebook has been pushed by activists to support.

      1. Idle Hands   10 years ago

        I see boobs all the time on facebook.

        1. commodious spittoon   10 years ago

          Especially around election time, or after a high-profile shooting.

      2. Rhywun   10 years ago

        Does the nipple make an appearance in either of these causes?

        1. Hey Nikki!   10 years ago

          Yes.

    2. Antilles   10 years ago

      Let's see, guy tits are OK but girl tits = porn! There's nothing pornographic about the naked body. And it's the censorship and neo-Victorian attitudes that harm kids more than actually seeing nudity. As Libertarians we should understand the allure of those things deemed forbidden or naughty.

  4. Idle Hands   10 years ago

    Okay, I could get behind this.

  5. neoteny   10 years ago

    or focusing in on fully exposed buttocks

    So no T&A.

  6. Brochettaward   10 years ago

    Free the nipples is ok with me, as long as it doesn't include fat chicks.

    1. Idle Hands   10 years ago

      Or old tits, basically I'm for tits aged 18-34 everything else is pornography.

      1. Brochettaward   10 years ago

        On a related subject, I also find pants oppressive. I see no reason I should have to wear them if I have errands to run.

  7. adolphowisner   10 years ago

    I buy almost everything except food and clothing from online auctions most people arenâ????t aware of the almost I unbelievable deals that they can get from online auction sites the site that has the best deals is
    BEST PROFIT DEAL CHECK ,,,,,,,,,,,,, http://www.workweb40.com

  8. Antilles   10 years ago

    Why are so many of these Leftist tech guys (Zuckerberg and the late Steve Jobs) such uptight prudes about anything remotely sexual? Utterly baffling why they chose to use their technology to restrict basic, human expression. Plus it's 2015. Can't we get over the childish notion that women's nipples are different (aka obscene) while men's are suitable for all ages. Why not criminalize men's nipples too? At least that would be consistent.

    1. Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair   10 years ago

      Facebook is probably a business decision; if they allow female nipples, the prudes and moralists in society will raise more trouble than the free nipple crowd could dream of.

      If the free nipple crowd wants to chnage things at Facebook, they literally have to change society so Facebook doesn't think it will lose money.

      1. lap83   10 years ago

        " they literally have to change society so Facebook doesn't think it will lose money."

        This. They haven't thought their ideals through, they're just hippies.

      2. Antilles   10 years ago

        Isn't Facebook customizable? Can't they add a checkbox to block 'naughty' content for the prudes? Lefties love to shove their beliefs in everyone's faces. So, how come they're so considerate of the SoCons on this issue? Honestly, I find it truly baffling.

        1. Mickey Rat   10 years ago

          Because it is not a SoCon issue per se. Most people with kids want some media where purely adult content is kept segrated, regardless of what their political ideology is. Because that includes the broadest demographic appeal, the media dominating hst market niche is likely to be dominanting thay type of social media.

          Why does it seem to offend you that Facebook would pursue that type of customer base?

          1. Antilles   10 years ago

            Because there is NO evidence that seeing nudity (or even 'normal' sexuality) is harmful to children in ANY way. And they're perpetuation that idiotic belief through their ignorant, brain-dead policy. It's one of the MANY reasons I don't have a Facebook account.

            1. Mickey Rat   10 years ago

              They are catering to what their target customer's want. They are not obligated to shoot their business model in the foot to cater to the ideological beliefs you favor (even presuming the corporate officers of Facebook are going against their own views on the matter).

              1. Antilles   10 years ago

                Of course. It's their business and they have the right to run it any way they want (SJWs would disagree). But I'm also free to boycott them and condemn them for their Victorian attitudes that continue to perpetuate unhealthy sexual attitudes in the US. Zuckerberg (and Jobs before him) was in a position to expand liberty and expression and nudge us to a less-uptight culture. But I suppose lining their pockets is more important...

        2. Enjoy Every Sandwich   10 years ago

          I don't know if it's comparable technically, but the photo-sharing site Flickr has "safety" levels. Users can select "Safe" if they don't want to see nekkid people, and the moderators of the various photo groups can set rules such as "only photos rated Safe".

    2. Rhywun   10 years ago

      Can't we get over the childish notion that women's nipples are different (aka obscene) while men's are suitable for all ages.

      Any fathers with daughters care to offer an opinion on this?

      1. Antilles   10 years ago

        Thanks for conceding that the aversion to women's nipples are strictly emotional without a shred of intellectual honesty.

        1. Rhywun   10 years ago

          You're trying to pretend that human nature can be flipped off like a switch, and I'm the intellectually dishonest one?

          1. Antilles   10 years ago

            If a woman chooses to go topless in public it should be her choice (not her father's, not the government's, not yours) just as it is for a man. Those who can't handle it can turn their heads or close their eyes.

            1. Charles Easterly   10 years ago

              I can handle the truth, and will boldy not turn away but rather I will stand up for their right to be as Nipple-Free? as they desire to be.

      2. DesigNate   10 years ago

        My wife and I are teaching our daughter that she shouldn't be ashamed of her body but society, for better or worse, has...issues with women's breasts and nipples so we cover up when we're out in public.

        For what it's worth, I think it's bullshit that an adult female has to walk around covered up but I can walk just about anywhere with my shirt off. Although, it is my understanding that a good bra makes it somewhat comfortable to walk or run.

    3. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

      "Why not criminalize men's nipples too?"

      That's right - my nipples exude just as much dangerous raw sexuality as any woman's nipples.

      1. Charles Easterly   10 years ago

        Now I know who you really are, Notorious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_lRKMUpWjI

  9. R C Woodchipper   10 years ago

    Honestly, guys, we all know the internet well enough to know that any platform that lets you post pictures is going to turn into a pretty porny place unless you restrict nude pictures. And while porny internet sites are awesome, many business plans will not survive being porny. If you are trying to be the least bit family-friendly, or want your site to be used by people who don't want to look at porn while on your site, this is what you need to do.

    You may not like it that some/many of your fellow humans don't want to look at porn on every page of the internet, but, hey, take it up with them, not the businesses who want their trade. You also may not like it that men's and women's nipples aren't treated the same; good for you. I'm in a tiny minority myself on many issues. I don't expect businesses trying to appeal to people beyond my tiny minority to throw away big chunks of market share catering to my tiny minority.

    Did Facebook make a couple of exceptions to their policy? Sure. That's their right; its their site.

    1. Brochettaward   10 years ago

      Facebook's success is probably largely based around the fact that, unlike Myspace, it was attractive to people of all ages and ideologies. It was simple, didn't look like a bunch of crappy geocity websites with random gifs tied together through friend lists, and it came off as professional.

      I could care less how many women go topless on Facebook. Doesn't bother me any. But the political cause here is to allow showing of breasts so it's a little different than the other political causes point to above.

      1. Mickey Rat   10 years ago

        The movement is also pretty much demanding that people sexually attracted to women to NOT find exposed breasts sexually interesting. In other words, you are not supposed to find those pictures arousing.

        This strikes me as rational as Sulkowisz's intoduction to her sex video.

  10. R C Woodchipper   10 years ago

    Somebody who isn't on a work computer should check to see if "BoobBook" or "TitBook" are taken. If not, well, there's your ticket to wealth and fame.

    1. commodious spittoon   10 years ago

      boobbook.com has a disclaimer: "WE ARE COMING SOONER OR LATER." I'm sure we are.

    2. Mickey Rat   10 years ago

      I think that sort of name would uderermine their goal of desexualizing the female nipple, however unworthy an objective that is.

  11. SkippyTheMarine   10 years ago

    In cultures where the breast isn't covered up, it is considered to be less sexual than we do in the west. Like in economics, scarcity has created demand; or in this case, since you can't see bare breasts, you want to see them. When you can see breasts all day long, the demand, the ogling, and the sexual nature of them dissipates.

    Don't believe me? Take a life drawing class.

    For the first few minutes, it's like, hey, breasts! Neat. Then it becomes, great, she moved, and now the shadow off her nipple doesn't quite line up the way it used to. Groan.

    The corollary to this is of course, hey, a penis! Ugh. Then it becomes, great, he shifted his hips and now it's all hanging a different way. Groan.

    Familiarity will breed indifference. Let them go topless. Let this be the first true step in shedding the neo-victorian attitudes that tend to permeate American life.

    1. Antilles   10 years ago

      Well said, Skippy. I experienced that very feeling in a college art class. My initial excitement gave way to indifference and even boredom in a surprisingly short time. Women's nipples are shocking because most of us don't see them very often (other than our female partners, that is), and on the rare occasion we do see one everyone goes insane.

  12. SugarFree   10 years ago

    Fine. Go topless. Don't complain when men look at them.

    1. Antilles   10 years ago

      In most places in the US it's a crime for women to go topless. Something guys never have to worry about...

      1. Enjoy Every Sandwich   10 years ago

        I get why women would want such laws repealed, and I agree with that. But I don't get why anybody gets upset about what Facebook does or doesn't allow--on any subject. I know FB is popular, but it's just a website. It's just not that damn important.

        1. Antilles   10 years ago

          As I've said previously, Facebook and Apple can run their businesses any way they like. It's just such a contradiction of their Leftist, socially liberal attitudes. They don't hesitate to push things like gay rights and amnesty for illegal aliens or gun control, but when it comes to female nudity and human sexuality they're as uptight and repressed as a Southern Baptist. It's just baffling and only serves to perpetuate and worsen the sexual hangups that disproportionately affect people in the US.

    2. Enjoy Every Sandwich   10 years ago

      Yeah, that's the thing that really makes me laugh. They'll screech to be allowed to bare them, and then they'll screech even louder because men are looking at them.

  13. Rasilio   10 years ago

    Ok, I can't resist......

    ALF? So are they fans of eating kitties?

  14. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

    Women are baring their nipples in *Iceland*? Global warming is worse than I thought.

  15. Notorious G.K.C.   10 years ago

    Oh, and about the photo in the article - those ladies should see a doctor about those glowing globes on their chests.

    1. Charles Easterly   10 years ago

      I thought it was an implied type of headlight joke when I first saw the choice of concealment.

  16. Rebel Scum   10 years ago

    5138008. That is all.

    1. Atanarjuat   10 years ago

      That redhead though. Somewhere there are pics of her posing for that types topless protest. She makes up for all the rest of the fugly gingers out there.

    2. Charles Easterly   10 years ago

      My office calculator saw what you did there.

    3. Antilles   10 years ago

      You spelled it wrong. It's 'i' before 'e', except when it's not, like here...

      1. Antilles   10 years ago

        Ugh...UNLIKE here. Damn...

  17. Robert   10 years ago

    Nipples are pretty. But then, I think armpit & crotch hair is too.

  18. Robert   10 years ago

    This page must be chockablock & nested w scripts.

  19. patskelley   10 years ago

    Too easy! Grab a camera and take closeup shots of every man-made or natural living object plant or animal that hold any protuberance resembling any objectionable human protuberance. Time to party

  20. Sharon Presley   10 years ago

    For you dumbasses who say this kind of crap is hardwired: Oh so you can have an excuse to be a sexist dumbass? Freud had a name for that: projection.

    But here's what real acience says: http://www.apa.org/research/action/difference.aspx

    1. Lord at War   10 years ago

      Compared with women, men could throw farther, were more physically aggressive, masturbated more, and held more positive attitudes about sex in uncommitted relationships.

      The differences that are supported by the evidence cause concern, she believes, because they are sometimes used to support prejudicial beliefs and discriminatory actions against girls and women.

      So we will try to ignore them with the hope that they will suddenly disappear after millions of years of evolution. Meanwhile, being a cunt is just a choice...

  21. tz   10 years ago

    Milk it for all it's worth.

    Fb and twatter should just adopt G/PG/R filters so if you wish to be exhibitionists or obscene, go ahead, but I won't see it.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

A Federal Judge Says New Mexico Cops Reasonably Killed an Innocent Man at the Wrong House

Jacob Sullum | 5.21.2025 6:00 PM

Supreme Court Orders Maine Legislator Censured for Social Media Post Must Get Voting Rights Back

Emma Camp | 5.21.2025 4:30 PM

The GOP Tax Bill Will Add $2.3 Trillion to the Deficit, CBO Says

Eric Boehm | 5.21.2025 4:10 PM

A Judge Blocked Apple From Collecting These Commissions

Jack Nicastro | 5.21.2025 3:52 PM

The FTC's Probe Into 'Potentially Illegal' Content Moderation Is a Blatant Assault on the First Amendment

Jacob Sullum | 5.21.2025 3:15 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!