Alex Minksy Photo Gets Michael Stokes Banned From Facebook… Again

David Toussaint
Authored by
David Toussaint
New York Guyd/Features Writer
November 28, 2013
6:06 p.m.

Here we go again.

Back in February of this year, GuySpy ran a story of an image of war veteran and amputee Alex Minsky that was blocked from Facebook. The photographer, Michael Stokes, was banned from Facebook for three days. The photo eventually resurfaced, with no apologies, after it had been removed from approximately 4,000 people’s pages who posted it in a sign of solidarity. Read the story here.

And here’s the image.

IMG_8092versionaWM1

The more things change…

This week Stokes was banned for thirty days for posting the below photo of Alex Minsky.

IMG_834711X17WM

Oddly familiar, no? If you’re siding with Facebook on this one, well bless your heart. However, a quick 30 second perusal of the social network’s pages found these two female images that would seem to be a tad more sexual in nature than the above Minsky pic. You can find plenty more yourself if you look up sites like Girls With Big Tits.

1380196_447930415316099_1218968313_n

Tres artistic?

And how about this one?

971005_453247524764402_656856459_n

The photographer must have spent hours getting the light just right to capture this Botticelli-esque image.

Seriously, Facebook’s nudity “rules” and Facebook’s endless blocking of photographers of the male form, of people who post photos of the male form, and of the removal of sensual photos of the male form, is ludicrous and homophobic and absurd.

We’ve sent an email to Facebook asking why the Michael Stokes photo of Alex Minsky was removed, and have sent them the above images to show what we perceive as a double standard. We’ll let you know if and when we get an answer.

Oh, before you go, be warned: The below photo was also removed, and the post-er, Linda Patricia, has also been banned from Facebook for thirty days. (The picture is in an ad for Rufskin.) Patricia should have played it safe and posted more breasts. Cause everyone knows that tits are for kids.

1388714_205982029573812_30802225_n

 Follow David Toussaint on Twitter and Facebook…

Comments

Anonymous User
Holly Dugas (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Indeed a double standard. The female body can be viewed in much more explicit ways that somehow seem to be overlooked by the Facebook picture posting police. Don’t dare post a photo of a man in any natural form, by himself and done tastefully. Heavens no. That will set the Facebook censors all a flutter. Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.

Anonymous User
TATIANA NYOMI ROSA (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

COMPLETE BULLSHIT!! HOW ABOUT WE JUST PERCEIVE THE BODY AS PURE ART OF NATURE. EVERYONE SEES PICTURES OF FEMALES HALF NAKED AND EVEN A NIPPLE OR MORE. NOW MALES ARE GETTING UPSET CAUSE THERE ARE PICTURE OF MALES ALMOST NAKED POSTED UP, ITS ART. YOU CANT SEE HIS PENIS CAN YOU? ABSOLUTELY NOT. STOP ACTING LIKE A BUNCH OF BABIES. LET THEM DO THEIR JOBS AND IF YOU DONT LIKE IT THEN DONT LOOK. AS A MARINE, A FEMALE MARINE I LOOK UP TO ALEX FOR BEING THE HERO THAT HE IS AND PRIDING HIMSELF FOR WHAT HE HAS DONE TO SERVE THE COUNTRY, NOT BECAUSE OF HIS BODY. JUST LIKE TATTOOS, PICTURES OF THE HUMAN BODY IS ART. SO GET OVER IT. SEMPER FIDELIS.

Anonymous User
Courtney H (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Sexy boob pics are ok on facebook but not Alex or breastfeeding pics…Definitely a big double standard.

Anonymous User
kathleen (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

This is the most one sided piece of bull I’ve read in a long time! It truly boils my blood.the photos of Alex are pure art! The pic of the dude in rufskins is art. take down the provocatives pic of food down too! People are scared of their senses being tickled and that is a damn shame.in the meantime, take that trash off the internet they are using as examples here. It really is sad that sensuality by suggestion is such a no no but some silicone plastic additions in Torr face mammories some how get the homogenized pass….wtf

Anonymous User
susan cubach (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

It’s disgusting that these beautiful, tasteful pictures were removed, and if anyone thought anything sexual about them they need to address their own thoughts. Is like to see more

Anonymous User
Steven Gibson (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Stop banning banning partial male nudity while allowing images that objectify women! Michael Stokes’ images celebrate the male body without denigrating his subjects.

Anonymous User
Nicole (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

22 year veteran… Seriously disturbing that I have fought for so many rights… But the only rights are for hype/social norm. Fb can pull their misogynistic heads out of their sensoref @$$!

Anonymous User
i'd like to see your blog page:) (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I’d like to see your blog page:)

Anonymous User
DanNation (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

My blog page gets reprimanded on a weekly basis, especially if I post boys kissing

Anonymous User
Sharon (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I can only imagen the people responsable are male sexest pigs with small dicks!! Bloody disgrace xx

Anonymous User
Dionisio (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

FB is getting crazy! I support Alex!!!!

Anonymous User
Jack Cornell (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Apparently Facebook has a double standard when it comes to erotic pics.

Anonymous User
Dawn (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Probably the creep that has been stalking me.. He has been going around to anything I post on and reporting it. I can’t get facebook to listen to me about this creep and he has over 100 fakes on facebook… Why is it okay for an adult to stalk another adult and no help out there for any of that.. If I was a child everyone would be all over this creep.

Anonymous User
Bekah (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

This is absurd, but let me guarantee you that it really isn’t just guys, I regularly get banned for ‘side boob’, nipple pastie and one one occasion side bum! A lot of my photographer friends have experienced the same and are just as outraged as I’m sure Michael is :-(

Anonymous User
Rob (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

What’s wrong? I can just access his page.

978083166
978083166
3 years, 9 months ago

te amo

Anonymous User
Rob (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

What’s wrong? I can just access is page.

Anonymous User
TK (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

An what was the lame reason for banning this image? I for one, did not see anything wrong with it, aside from his prosthetic leg. Big whop. He’s very attractive, well proportioned physique. I don’t think any fella or gal would kick him out of bed for eating crackers. Facebook is just whacked and anyone who had the burning urge to see to it removed. Shame on them! If you don’t like it, move on and go bother someone else.

Anonymous User
Raquel Santiago (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Facebook has always had a double standard when it comes to postings and pics. They need the public (users) to put pressure on them or a lawsuit suing them also works. Sometimes legal is the only way to stop their bs.

Anonymous User
david black (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

at the risk of being banned for 3 or 30 days, FB is run by men. straight men it would seem. narrow minded ones at that -

Anonymous User
wwendy (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

FB has to be run by men from the 18th century where no skin shows. there is alot of straight men i am sure that wouldn’t get upset over these type of photos. some probably use them as a role model.
Man or woman find pictures like this relaxing to look at. Not as if a ball or foreskin is showing.
Wake up FB and listen to your users

Anonymous User
Steve (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

This underscores FB’s actual standards about the content you put on your page: They own it all and control what they do and don’t want to see. Does this really surprise anyone, given that the company is owned and run by an immature geek with limited social skills?

Anonymous User
Nella Durham (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

You have got to be kidding?! Alex’s pic are always presented in a tasteful manner. They are beautifully done without being vulgar while leaving us with a lovely image. He has a lovely physic & his body art is absolutely gorgeous. I agree…the boob pages can be very vulgar, especially the examples you have shown. The human body is beautiful & when properly presented is a “feast for the eye”. But Facebook need to decide if they are to ban one then ban the other. Don’t be bias & continue with your double standard. && you people who have a problem…quit picking on Alex & stay off his page & posts. No likey…no looky!

Anonymous User
Glenn (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

If you don’t want to see it, don’t look. I am an amputee myself and I am proud of how he had maintained his beautiful body despite losing his leg above the knee. I am double above knee amputee, workout 5 days a week , no small feat. It takes a lot more work to have his type of body than it takes to get implants in your breasts. FB censors should be in awe not in contempt, the human body is God’s purest and most beautiful creation.

Anonymous User
Kathy (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Some People Just Don’t Get It.. I Think It’s Awesome .

Anonymous User
jason (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Bullshit

Anonymous User
Josephine Miller (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Seriously? Come on a Facebook. You can let female pics like ones above slide? Michael Stokes’ photo are tasteful! Wake up!

Anonymous User
alicia (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

hes not showing anything hes ashamed of and I think if people can post pics af full on naked ass women or some of the much racier stuff he can post as he wants people jealous cause they don’t look even half that good . post what u like it is ur page to do with as u will keep up the great pics love them all

Anonymous User
Jennifer (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

IT also seems to be a problem when jealous people will report pictures for nothing more than spite and negativity. if you don’t like then don’t ever again would be my suggestion. A lot of sites are that way now and sadly its does appear bias double standard because its most likely men that do it instead of women. This man is a constant inspiration as well as Michael Stokes for sharing true beauty especially a veteran that inspires people every day and keeps it Real! Facebook needs to re evaluate their actions pershaps a block with a note from them and let their members be a majority vote see where the truth lay!

Anonymous User
Julia Bowman (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

FB is run by guys, thus is where the problem stems! They are soooo envious and threatened. It is truly that simple! Get a grip FB guys….

Anonymous User
Jason A. Quest (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

They don’t just block photographs. Sexy *drawings* of men (which are rather obviously “art”) are enough to get a user put in the Facebook time-out corner.

Anonymous User
Danielle (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

This is ridiculous. My son hhas pics on his wall of women actually masterbating. I will post this pics all day everyday. Mr. Stokes is a genius with a camera. Keep up the great work sir!

Anonymous User
Shereen (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Seriously….. I love michaels photos all of them especially the photos of Alex and Christopher. I have my children on my Facebook and I think there is nothing wrong with the images he portrays .

Anonymous User
Phillip (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Well, tits actually are for kids

Anonymous User
jackson photografix (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

As a homoerotic fine art photographer, (www.facebook.com/jackson.photografix.page) I deal with this all the time. I have been banned on more than one occasion for similar content for what Facebook describes as “implied nudity” which means that NO you can’t see any dick or ass crack but the pundits/censors at Facebook deemed that it is in violation of their community standards. They have even gone so far as to explain that “children” now access Facebook and my photography was considered offensive by someone (obviously homophobic) who had viewed it thereby I would have to be banned. After more than a month of email exchanges, Facebook finally restored my page when I questioned whether the same actions would have been taken if my subject matter had been heterosexual. In regards to Michael Stokes, I think this is outrageous — he is an internationally recognized artist working in the medium of photography. Yes, he too takes photos of naked men but they are far from anything pornographic. I am in frustrated beyond belief regarding Facebook’s stupidity on what constitutes art. I’m certain if someone posted a photograph of Michelangelo’s sculpture of David Facebook, in their infinite wisdom, would ban that user as well. All I can do is shake my head.

Anonymous User
Adam Dalton (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

This is crazy! Michael Stokes photos are beautiful art and not smutty in any way. It is a major double standard.

Anonymous User
Michael (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I agree, there appears to be a double standard when it comes to art involving male bodies. There is beauty in ALL bodies; male and female, and can be appreciated equally by both sexes. This is 2013 Face Book get with the times.

Anonymous User
Becki Smith (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Such bullshit. Art is art. Personally, I think the Michael Stokes photos are much more professional than the pictures of those women. The women’s photos are just trashy.

Anonymous User
carol wrubel (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I agree with you guys they throw those tits at us some I have seen men kissing them nothing isdoneabout the women its always the men we get a sneak peek of pubic hair and we makea joke about a peek I block when isee these women

Anonymous User
Christine (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

WTH? The tattoo pages I’m fans of are more graphic than this. But- all the pics are of beautiful women. Alex gets banned for ARTISTICALLY showing BEAUTIFUL MEN in similar states of undress… The people in charge need to get their heads screwed on straight and realize the people who complain are homophobic, anti-vet or just so wrapped up in themselves that it’s disgusting !!! Maybe they should look at “50 Shades of Hot”- handsome country men sensually photographed and never reported. Man these censors really suck manure!!!!

Anonymous User
Tania (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

The girly pics are sexual, the other is artistic, fb has always held double standards, boo fb, dislike, we love Mr Minsky and everything he stands for

Anonymous User
Ray Born (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Facebook sucks plain and simple and is very homophobic and should be shut down asap!

Anonymous User
Laurence Hutchins (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

PUT MORE TITS & C—S ON F/B SO THE MALE PRICKS WHO SENSOR F/B CAN JACK OFF AT THEIR DESKS .

Anonymous User
wendy (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Maybe that is why the censor the male photos, if they didn’t they would spend all day jerking off and not working,this is why tit get put threw, they don’t notice them.

Anonymous User
Beth Readd (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Absolute double standard. I love Michael Stokes photos. They are tastefully done and show nothing that should cause them to be banned. What a shame that this happened. I hope the posts come back soon!!!!

Anonymous User
Belinda Johnson (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

It is a disgrace when they ban true hero from Facebook we love his pics and he should be allowed to stay on

Anonymous User
Jasper Tuijnman (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Totally ridiculous! Facebook sucks!

Anonymous User
joan (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Love these picts of a beautiful man. Not perverse of sexually suggestive.

Anonymous User
Suzanne (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

omg his photos are so artistically and tastefully done I cant believe that again it all ok for big boobs to be shown not for a man to show his stomach sweet jesus are people making these decisions all men ????? i cannot believe that the can say that its ok to show women like this and not men come on its nearly 2014…. i support Alex love your work xx

Anonymous User
Derek (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Michael Stokes is one Hot ASS MAN!!!!! 1, 2 or 3 legs he is still a hot, handsome man!!! i would be proud to have him on my arm (or me on his arm.) If you could get me off my knees.

Anonymous User
Gazza (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Photos are awesome, artful and very well done

Anonymous User
Arnold (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Only proves that FB don’t know what Art truely means…

Anonymous User
Dayle (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

i think it is bs to do tht becuz he isnt showing anything. He is cupping his jewels for crying out loud. ive seen worse pix on facebook n you dont see them being banned for posting. well alex ur pix is amazing n thank you for serving =D, god bless you.

Anonymous User
Ken Carpenter (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

This isn’t pornography it’s art. I know I am a photographer. The only thing I would change would be to move the subject further away from the background so that it was less distracting and use an infinity curve to join the background to the floor. By this standard Google would have banned Michelangelo’s David, the Laocoon and most of the work of Classical sculptors like Myron and Praxiteles. This is a fine example of 21st Century portraiture and will be seen as such by future Art Historians. I am not Gay but Google is ignorant.

Anonymous User
Matt (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

It’s ludicrous, biased and a complete double standard, but I don’t think it’s homophobic.

Anonymous User
Yasmina Milovanovic (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

FB heirachy are probably jealous coz they dont ‘measure up’ to these beautiful men…mite have to pray for women to grow dicks for these guys to get a fair go…Mark Z,the human body is a work of art,regardless of size or shape…i feel like uploading a naked pic of me with a strap-on with a note saying ‘which part of me gets cropped’….keep in mind i have tits so u mite have ponder on it a while,wouldnt want u backtracking on ur double standards…cheers

Anonymous User
Geri Creque (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

The photos of the nude soldier do not seem to be sexual to me. They did not arouse me in a carnal way, but rather to find out about his story.

Anonymous User
Kat Hall (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Just to add in all the pictures of the males were posted on a site that has a colection of guys with tattoos. These pictures are taken for art not to just give some guy/ladie a turn on (such as the one of the girls in soapy water). Its only purpose for these pics was to show these guys wonderful art and for some show support for the amputees or military that they post!

Anonymous User
Tiffany (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I have seen pics of women that show the whole butt, and sitting with legs up that show butt and all but the lady parts, nothing happens to them, it is very much a double standard. Most of the pics I’v seen of the men are tastefully done and most of the women also they are all nice to look at but the ones of the men and the sites they are on get suspended and the pics have to b removed. I don’t know why it is such a problem, if you don’t like don’t look.

Anonymous User
Brenda Wilkins (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I’m SO glad that the Facebook police think it’s okay to block a very tasteful picture of Alex Minsky after he wad injured fighting to protect our rights and freedoms even if said freedoms of said facebook police ARE freaking stupid. I’d much rather see more pictures of our vets especially Alex than the disgusting pictures of womens tits hanging out simply because they can. There’s no character value in that but a war veteran who can display courage AND sex appeal…give me that any day. Get a grip Facebook.

Anonymous User
tracy (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

its ridiculas,out of protest after seeing one of these male images banned previously which of nothing could be seen [only via one hell of a dirty imagination...droolllllll] ehmmmm side tracked- i purposely looked for a selection of womens pics that shown nipples the top of a pussy which was obvious unless she had a c section and the surgeon cut the wrong direction….all of which to no suprise didnt violate their rules of nudity,yet a hunky good looking inked guy in boxers without as much as a hard on are frequently removed……

Anonymous User
Lisa wittenburg (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I like looking at all bodies,women or men. If they post bs tits shots than why not men, if your not liking what’s on the site just leave!!! Even if you join a site than it’s for a reason for dumb ass people can’t see and report!! What cas you don’t how beautiful a body looks and your not comfortable with sex or your sexuality than get the Fuck off of fb or any site and oh get a life!!!! Them taking micheals pic down was omg!! Stupid!he is awesome. He embraces everything!!

Anonymous User
Craig (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

They’re ok with allowing sick videos, yet not beautifully shot photos of heroes? What a f***ed up set of values they have!

Anonymous User
Anon (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Pictures like the one in the rufskin ad (and even more revealing) pop up on your computer (IN FACEBOOK) when naturally browsing if you have a history of purchasing underwear. Definitely a double standard even if this example is indirectly a separate issue.

Anonymous User
Marlene (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

yes there pictures are sexy, but so what, there beautiful pictures and if facebook can post all this other crap and say you cant post Alex Minsky get a clue fb, you let people post alot worst!

Anonymous User
donna kenyon (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I think it’s wrong there are more explicit pictures of women and that’s ok????? How??????? If people have a problem with these pictures dont look at them simple. Getting these phenomenal pictures banned is petty and childish oh and I think maybe a touch of the green eyed monster. If there banning this then ban all of it stop being pathetic.

Anonymous User
Sarah Messina (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Total Double Standard. Most of the Girl Pics are more revealing and sexual in nature, with 2 females touching each other. Then we get a picture of a Male, Alone with everything covered and its not OK? Hypocrites it you ask me!

Anonymous User
jennifer (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Give it up Facebook
I would rather see men especially Alex Minsky he’s a beautiful human being
There are just as many women on Facebook as men and I’m pretty sure we would much rather see men

Anonymous User
Lori (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

FB LIkes to play games I guess, I just saw a female full nude tattoo photo on a FB page and I guarantee there will be no repercussions there!!

Anonymous User
Riley (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Umm what some people are forgetting here is that Facebook is NOT YOUR PERSONAL WEB SITE, it is theirs and it’s up to THEM, not you, what goes on THEIR SITE. You agree to their terms and conditions, which basically say they can do what they want. Don’t push their buttons and you won’t get your stuff or account deleted. Simple as that.

Anonymous User
Lisa Seach (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Nudity ? – all I see is a beautiful body & lovely ink – I sat here & admired his art-work & then thought about all the time & hard work he must’ve put in to achieve his perfect body – him being all but naked wasn’t the first thing I noticed. I’ve seen more in those nasty paparazzi photo’s & videos which are published everywhere & at the beach !

Anonymous User
Holly (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

How about Facebook banning those disgusting pics of people abusing their pets or children?! So sick of seeing them pop up on my newsfeed!

Anonymous User
Claire Dawson (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

The removal of the photo is ludicrous. As mentioned there are so many sites with females degrading themselves that are allowed. These photos are of good taste and professional. Double standards.

Anonymous User
Liza (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

How bloody ridiculous obviously the Facebook police are men and get off on images of women so therefore allow them. I’ve also seen equally suggestive pictures of men as the above that don’t get removed and I’ve found out its because those pages pay to have there sight on Facebook. I think as long as your page has a warning there may be provacative pictures then facebook should leave them alone. Too bloody politically correct and double standards.

Anonymous User
Ashley (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

You can definitely tell what kind of ppl the “moderators” of FB are. They will quickly take down and ban anyone who posts pics of a mother breastfeeding her babies too. Its sick how they actually promote the objectification of women by taking down only photos of men and breastfeeding moms. Meanwhile they have no issue if a page puts up pictures without the subject’s consent or pictures like the ones you posted.

Anonymous User
Kelly (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I think these pics of alex are beautiful and tasteful, and consideringt he horrible viral videos and pics of nasty stuff can be left on !!!!!!!!! More alex I say x

Anonymous User
joy (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I see nothing wrong with the pictures, the human body is a beautiful thing, it is constipated people with no life who wants everyone else to be as boring and dull as they are. well I hope the artist keeps posting his pictures, im for you alex minsky, if everyone else can post naked ladies, why cant you show a beautiful man with a missing leg as a model,

Anonymous User
Lynn E (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

What a bunch of horse shit… the photographs of Alex are exquisite. The fact that we live in a double standard society really pisses me off. SHAME on fb for conforming to this bullshit. Whatever happened to accountability? No one if forced to look, if you don’t want to see, scoll by and let those of us who appreciate the artistic view have our constitutional right to choose to look at these beautiful pictures.

Anonymous User
jennifer Gallagher (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

I am shocked and disgusted with Facebooks attitude to the Alex Minsky’s photo getting Michael Stokes banned… AGAIN !!!!
I find nothing offensive in either photograph.. yet I am with he womens photos.. they are way too suggestive.. and I am no prude .. but they have overstepped the boundaries I have seen worse photos if women hat should have been banned but are still there.. guess there are different rules for the woman..this is totally insame

Anonymous User
lutfi (Guest)
3 years, 9 months ago

Wow.

Anonymous User
Turner McCullough Jr. (Guest)
3 years, 6 months ago

Without a doubt, this a double standard. Actually it’s even worse because the swiftness of FB punitive actions over exposure of more than the upper male torso reeks of puritan prudishness. Exploit the female body and they can’t be bother but OMG, it that a belly button that man is exposing? Quick hide the kids! Shelter the delicate womenfolk, the very same womenfolk you allow to be objectified in abandon. This is ridiculous.

Anonymous User
Kaycee (Guest)
2 years, 2 months ago

So true. Honesty and everything rengdcizeo.