My guess would be that it was rejected for suggesting a three-way, not for showing lesbians.

Images that may either degrade or idealize any health condition or body type are also not allowed.
So what about all those weight loss ads I get because I'm a 20something female? Do those get a pass on being skinny because the ad text, not image, touts the loss? Pft.

Content arguments aside - Facebook isn't "public space". They have every right to accept/reject any ads that they want without us screaming "discrimination" Remember, they are in the business to sell ads--bottom line, and there's is nothing wrong with that. Think of them as a magazine...but online. It's an editorial decision.

Cut them some slack. Right now they don't have the technology to place ads to specific profile, like when you search for something on google and an ad comes up on the side. However, once Google buys them (it's gonna happen) they're gonna have better technology. There are more important things to get up in arms about. Let's choose our battles.

Please, stop being scary.
First, Facebook is not "public space", they are in the business of selling ads, bottom line. So, they have the same editorial decisions that magazine editors have. This decision is not homophobic or discriminatory. They have to serve their "subscribers". And trust me, FB is not homophobic. Lot's of family working there.

Second, cut them a bit of slack. They don't have the same technology that google has. In that, they can't place ads with as much specification as a google search does (the ads on the side of your search results). And they won't have that ability until Google purchase them (it's coming).

Third, we need to learn to pick battles with more wisdom. Anything else more important that could warrant this reaction.

Fourth, it's a bad ad. It sucks. Come one. Let's admit that. I had no idea it was a movie 1 sheet. It looks like a personal service ad. Come on folks, if we are going to bitch about not being heard at the big table we need to learn to compete at the big table.

maybe they would have preferred them to be sitting around having tea?

Good for facebook. A photo of people making out is inappropriate for a social networking site used mostly by teenagers. They'e bombarded all day with images of objectified bodies used to sell stuff -- the longer facebook can stay free of it, the better.

It would be interesting to see if the reaction were the same if there was a guy in middle instead, being able to share a "lesbian sandwich" (as I have heard it called). Certainly brings up many a hetero guy's ultimate fantasy, no?

Also, to golikewater: FaceBook's average user's age is 35. It is not to be confused with MySpace (average age 22).

I need to add diversity for the lesbians on my blog F6. I will accept the advertisement revenue if Facebook doesnt want it...lol.

This is way more common than alot of people think. Having bought advertising for the past 10 years on the web, I've run into this type of censorship all the time.

True/real censorship can only be applicable where free speech is involved. Paid ad space is not free speech. It's an editorial decision.

You might not agree with Facebook's decision, but you can't accuse them of censorship, discrimination or homophobia. You need to find a new argument.

Another option is for us to stay in the gay ghetto where we won't be offended so easily.

Find something else to be outraged about. That ad is inappropriate for any family type sites. Facebook is used by families and friends to keep in touch. That ad is a little too much for junior to handle.