Facebook banned a sexual health org. over this very boring female condom ad

The Daily Dot reports that Tea Time and Sex Chats, a sexual health organization at the University of Chicago, had their page pulled after Facebook received a complaint about this animated video for Fc2 female condoms.



The video itself is a snorefest overall — poorly paced and way too long. But the offending scene, I must assume, is at 2:48 when the cartoon woman demonstrates how to open her vulva to insert the prophylactic.

The Dot says that the ban happened after Tea Time and Sex Chats complied with the takedown notice, and they have appealed.

Facebook's community standard on nudity states:

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 what about health and education? These exceptions are not mentioned, which is a shame because "anti-porn" regulations have long been used to prevent healthy sexuality and safer sex information from reaching the public.

Police give Grab-N-Go bikini coffee stands free advertising by charging baristas with unlawful stripping

Via Buzzfeed

Having scantily clad women serve drive through coffee in the middle of winter is apparently a thing in the State of Washington. Grab-N-Go is one of these things, offering "entertainment with surprisingly superb tasting espresso".

Last Wednesday, Grab-N-Go made the local news in Everett, Washington, for the arrest of three baristas for "exhibition and exposure". According to police, the women (one of whom is only 16) were offering customers even more exposed views of their bodies for cash.

This isn't the first time women at the coffee stand chain have been accused of crossing the line between exploiting their sexuality to sell coffee and actual sex work. In 2009, five different baristas were charged with stripping, allowing customers to touch them, and "whip cream shows".

In a bizarre case, the owner of the chain, Bill Wheeler, went missing in Las Vegas a few months later. His family fought over the business and his son, Bill D. Wheeler Jr., eventually took over.

Like his father before him, Bill Jr. denies any wrongdoing. He told local media that he enforces strict policies for his six baristas, including no drug use, no flashing, and no personal visitors at the stands.

"They have to be dressed a certain way," he said. "Their crotch has to be covered up. They can't expose their areolas." 

On his company Facebook page, however, he was a little more defiant:

We feel this incident is a publicity stunt by the Everett PD for unjustifiable reasons. 

Our policy and procedures strictly state any employee engaging in lewd or inappropriate behavior will be terminated. We also have a zero tolerance policy for drug's as well. 

As always when it comes to any government agency question everything. 
We also thank all of our customers for there support and the Everett policy [police?] department for the free press in yet another waste of our tax payers money.

Free press, indeed. The article went international within a couple of days. Do a Google News search for "Grab-N-Go" and you'll get a bunch of mainstream media hits with headlines like "Busty Baristas Busted" with lots and lots of pictures.

It's a sleazy business operator's dream. Nobody can resist a story about sex, especially when young women are involved. (Yes, I know I am part of the problem here, no matter what I think my intentions are.)

But you have to wonder how much the owner of the business is responsible for the actions of the employees, policy or not, when he promotes his business like this:

Via Facebook

And sells merch like this:

Via Grab-N-Go

Sleazy or not, the Grab-N-Go owner may have a point about the timing of the arrests being a bit of a conspiracy. According to the Seattle Times, the 2009 arrests came on the same day as a public hearing was scheduled on a proposed update to Everett's lewd-conduct ordinance "which would declare drive-up windows a public place, making it illegal for someone to expose their breasts and genitals." While it's understandable that citizens don't want to accidentally see live sex shows at public coffee stands, the obsessive American War On Breasts seems to be complicating the issue.

Via Facebook

The current Everett Municipal Code actually mentions drive-through windows specifically. I'm exerpting it at length because it's kind of interesting.


A.    A “lewd act” is:

1.    An exposure of one’s genitals, anus, or any portion of the areola or nipple of the female breast; or

2.    The touching, caressing or fondling of the genitals or female breasts; or

3.    Masturbation; or

4.    Sexual conduct.

B.    “Public place” means an area generally visible to public view, and includes streets, sidewalks, bridges, alleys, plazas, parks, driveways, parking lots, automobiles (whether moving or not), and buildings open to the general public, including those which serve food or drink or provide entertainment, and the doorways and entrances to buildings or dwellings and the grounds enclosing them, and businesses contained in structures which can serve customers who remain in their vehicles, by means of a drive-up window.

C.    “Sexual conduct” means sexual intercourse or any touching of the sexual or other intimate parts of a person done for the purpose of gratifying sexual desire of either party, whether such persons are the same or opposite sex.

D.    For purposes of this chapter, any activity is obscene:

1.    Which the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find, when considered as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; and

2.    Which explicitly depicts or describes patently offensive representations or descriptions of:

a.    Ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated; or

b.    Masturbation, fellatio, cunnilingus, bestiality, excretory functions or lewd exhibition of the genitals or genital area; or

c.    Violent or destructive sexual acts including but not limited to human or animal mutilation, dismemberment, rape or torture; and

3.    Which, when considered as a whole, and in the context in which it is used, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. For purposes of this chapter, an activity is dramatic if the activity is of, relating to, devoted to, or concerned specifically or professionally with current drama or the contemporary theater.

10.24.020 Lewd conduct.
A.    A person is guilty of lewd conduct if he or she intentionally performs any lewd act in a public place or under circumstances where such act is likely to be observed by any member of the public. The act of breastfeeding or expressing breast milk is not lewd conduct.


I'm no lawyer, but I'm assuming the parts I bolded are why the baristas are being charged under "Soliciting for a lewd act": Every person who solicits another to engage in a lewd act in a public place shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 

If I had a business like this, I suppose I'd feel targeted too. (Not to mention feeling like I really needed a shower.)

But then again, considering the target market, you just can't buy this kind of publicity:

A New Year's Resolution for the Ad Industry

Repeat after me: "I will not appropriate women's sexuality to sell unsexy stuff..."

This will be a hard one to keep, as long as Kate Upton keeps offering her services to the big brands. But let's put aside the feminist angle for a moment and look at this as professionals: Oversexed advertising is creatively lazy. It's borrowed interest.

On one hand, it definitely increases brand awareness, because anything that primal will cause controversy and arouse plenty of views. But does sex really sell product?

Source: streetcouch.com via Tom on Pinterest

The intuitive answer is "yes". And science tends to back it up. A recent study at Yale showed that male capuchin monkeys shown explicit images of sex and power really did prefer “brands” associated with them. Social scientists Dan Ariely and George Loewenstein experimented on human males, and found that the more sexually aroused they were, the poorer their judgement became on matters of morals and self-preservation. The topics at hand had to do with their propensity to engage in risky and even criminal sex acts. But it's a fairly easy leap to assume that aroused men also make poor consumer decisions.

Source: workthatmatters.blogspot.ca via Tom on Pinterest

Or as Men's Health put it, "You act like a goof with the Hooters waitress, leaving a tip that doubles the bar bill. But why? Beautiful women cause a man's limbic system (the amygdala and other brain-stem structures, which are in charge of emotion) to fire up at the same time that his PFC checks out, leaving the judgment area vacant."

Source: workthatmatters.blogspot.ca via Tom on Pinterest

You'll note that much of this research has been focussed on men. What about women? The Next Web reports that "Women make or influence 85% of all purchasing decisions, and purchase over 50% of traditional male products, including automobiles, home improvement products and consumer electronics," and yet "91% of women say that advertisers don’t understand them."

Source: workthatmatters.blogspot.ca via Tom on Pinterest

That's not at all surprising. Only 3% of advertising Creative Directors are women. I can't find a reliable ratio for women Marketing Directors on client side, but I will note that the Chief Marketing Officers of CKE (Hardee's) and DirecTV (responsible for two of those Kate Upton ads) are men.

The conventional wisdom in advertising is that you can never go wrong using women's sexuality in ads, because men want them and women want to be them. But things could change fast.

Source: workthatmatters.blogspot.ca via Tom on Pinterest

In 2012, women started to show their democratic muscle. In the US Presidential election, unmarried women were a huge force in support of Barack Obama. They were mobilized by Republican statements and stances against reproductive choice. A teenager named Julia Bluhm got 86,439 people to help her demand the 17 Magazine to "commit to printing one unaltered—real—photo spread per month" as a statement about healthy body image. As a result, the magazine has made an even bigger commitment to "not alter the body size or face shape of the girls and models in the magazine and to feature a diverse range of beauty in its pages."

Source: workthatmatters.blogspot.ca via Tom on Pinterest

Does this mean that sex in advertising is on its way out? Unlikely. Women like sex too, after all. Most people are attracted to beauty in both sexes, and the promise of sexual fantasies fulfilled. But we, as an industry, can do it much better. Not just because we respect the awesome power of women's sexuality, but because we actually want our clients to succeed.

Here are some conversation-starters from Ira Kalb of the Marshall School of Business at USC:

For the many products that are not related to sex, using sex to sell them does not work. It can even backfire. A recent University of Wisconsin study shows that audiences view ads 10% less favorably if they use sex to sell un-sexy products. This study agrees with the data David Ogilvy accumulated over his long and storied career in advertising. In his book Ogilvy on Advertising, he says that sex sells only if it is relevant to the subject being sold. Advertising Professor Jef I. Richards from the University of Texas says, “Sex sells, but only if you're selling sex.”

Source: workthatmatters.blogspot.ca via Tom on Pinterest

Have a look at Adrants' list of "The 30 Sexiest Ads of 2012" and ask yourself, how many of them are selling sex? It would be a daunting but incredibly worthwhile task for someone more academic than me to chart the success of those various campaigns in actual sales.

But I'm not calling for censorship of any kind. In a free market, at the end of the day, it will be up to women to organize themselves as a consumer force and decide what they are willing to put up with.

Newest Miss Representation Trailer (2011 Sundance Film Festival Official Selection) from Miss Representation on Vimeo.

Call me a prude if you like. The fact is, I consider myself a very "sex positive" person.  (Some of my readers seem to think I'm a little too "positive") I have an instinctive and an aesthetic appreciation of the diverse expressions of the female form and I respect and appreciate the women around me as equal human beings who are not only defined by their sexuality.

I just don't like the way women's bodies and sexuality are commoditized to get cheap attention for brands and products. It's not helping us have a respectful and equal society.

One of the unfortunate lessons I have learned from the internet is how easy it is for people to treat others as objects for their racism, sexism, and general scorn. I can't help but imagine the worst of them jerking off to the ad with one hand while simultaneously typing "what a dumb bitch" in the comments thread with the other. Advertising may not be the worst contributor to rape culture, but why would any brand want to contribute at all?

Source: workthatmatters.blogspot.ca via Tom on Pinterest

OK Cupid hoax reminds us how stupid sex makes us

I wrote recently about research that demonstrated exactly how sexual arousal impairs male judgement. But the experiment recently conducted by Mandatory's Rob Fee on the same topic is far more entertaining.

Here's his explanation:

A friend of mine recently signed up for OKCupid (for those who might be unaware: an online dating site) and was constantly telling me about all the bizarre and pathetic lines guys try to use on her via instant message. She would very blatantly shoot them down and yet they would continue to message her. Obviously, for most women this doesn't come as a surprise whatsoever. I started thinking about it and had a thought: I wonder how far guys would go to get a date or a hook-up. And so, my OKCupid adventure began...

Rob set up a fake profile for a 23-year-old SWF in Beverly hills, using a photo donated by a "cute" friend, and gave her a bio full of alarm bells:

She comes off a dumb, superficial, self-obsessed, racist and weird. Plus, there's the last comment to scare off the commitment-phobic.

Here's the initial result:

Within 6 hours, my profile had been viewed over 400 times and 39 guys had messaged me. 

Let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say they didn't really read the bio. They just saw a cute girl and went for it. I'm not saying that's smart but I'm just hoping for their sake they didn't read that trainwreck of a description and think "OK yeah! This is what I've been searching for!"

But Rob went further. He started interacting with these guys, constantly amping the weirdness and distasteful details:

It goes on and on and on.

His conclusion?

Now, of course, I'm not saying that every guy on the Internet is desperate and creepy, but ... fellas, browse through that profile a little and make sure you aren't getting ready to message an illiterate part-time prostitute with a rubber arm and a history of vehicular crimes. Have fun out there!

I thought his inclusion of an artificial limb was a little low (the blog's other posts seem to be mostly about naked women) but the social experiment was interesting. Even if the findings fit into what everyone assumes.

Is every other male instinct (self-preservation included) completely pushed aside by the instinct for sex? Advertisers sure think so. That's why they use sexualized women to cloud our judgement so we'll buy more burgers, cars and other shit.

The more I think about this effect, the more I'm starting to wonder if we should be trusted with anything when we're impaired by arousal. Including operating heavy machinery:

A study of 2,142 drivers found 60 per cent of men admitted being distracted by attractive women while 12 per cent of female drivers said they took their eyes off the road to leer at handsome men. 

And 21 per cent of drivers also admitted that they couldn't tear their eyes away from advertising billboards featuring pictures of picture perfect models were also a major distraction on the road. 

Insurance company Direct Line discovered 17 per cent of male drivers admitted knowing their actions were dangerous but said they 'could not help but look'.

Wow. Talk about using the wrong head.

Be careful out there.

Axe says men are their hair, women are their cleavage

This Axe ad is extra weird: a disembodied male haircut falls in lust with some disembodied breasts:



But is its message true?

A 2012 study by Think Eye Tracking showed men and women these two photos:

Here's a "heat map"which shows how women stared at the image:

Here's the same, for men:

Red is "hot," meaning that those parts were stared at most intensely. Green is just a glance. (And I have no idea why they couldn't use a shot of a man looking at the camera.)

Here is the conclusion:

Women pay more attention to his left hand; he is wearing a wedding ring. Men are less interested in the marital status of the young lady and pay more attention to her face, breasts and stomach. 

Whereas the women looked at her bikini the men are frankly just not interested in what she is wearing! This level of detail would be impossible to gain from traditional market research techniques of asking people what they remember looking. 

As I said, people don’t always tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Few men would have volunteered that they looked at the man’s assets partly because it’s a social taboo but also because glances can happen so quickly that they simply did not register in the conscious mind. 

In the same way that participants who take part in research often don’t have clear insight into why they make decisions.

Interestingly, another study using sexually explicit images, found:

...men are more likely than women to first look at a woman's face before other parts of the body, and women focused longer on photographs of men performing sexual acts with women than did the males. 

Gender stereotyping: it's complicated.

Tip via AdFreak

Is your charity of choice charitable to your beliefs?

An old high school friend posted this screencap on Facebook, with the caption "note to self....find a different charity."

This got me thinking about how complicated charity and fundraising is these days, with our diverse and conflicting religious and secular agendas and beliefs.

The Salvation Army is, after all, a pretty conservative religious organization. I knew some Sally Anners growing up, and they had to sign contracts with the church that they would never do bad things like smoke or drink (which is why our neighbour stashed his smokes and beers in my parents' basement). I didn't really expect them to be down with the rainbow.

At the same time, I've learned from experience that the social media outrage of the day could be outdated, out-of-context, or just plain made up. So I did my own lookup. Here is the American Salvation Army's position paper on homosexuality, in full:

Homosexuality 

The Salvation Army holds a positive view of human sexuality. Where a man and a woman love each other, sexual intimacy is understood as a gift of God to be enjoyed within the context of heterosexual marriage. However, in the Christian view, sexual intimacy is not essential to a healthy, full, and rich life. Apart from marriage, the scriptural standard is celibacy. 

Sexual attraction to the same sex is a matter of profound complexity. Whatever the causes may be, attempts to deny its reality or to marginalize those of a same-sex orientation have not been helpful. The Salvation Army does not consider same-sex orientation blameworthy in itself. Homosexual conduct, like heterosexual conduct, requires individual responsibility and must be guided by the light of scriptural teaching. 

Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex. The Salvation Army believes, therefore, that Christians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life. There is no scriptural support for same-sex unions as equal to, or as an alternative to, heterosexual marriage. 

Likewise, there is no scriptural support for demeaning or mistreating anyone for reason of his or her sexual orientation. The Salvation Army opposes any such abuse. 

In keeping with these convictions, the services of The Salvation Army are available to all who qualify, without regard to sexual orientation. The fellowship of Salvation Army worship is open to all sincere seekers of faith in Christ, and membership in The Salvation Army church body is open to all who confess Christ as Savior and who accept and abide by The Salvation Army's doctrine and discipline. 

Scriptures: Genesis 2:23-24; Leviticus 18:22; Mark 2:16-17; Romans 1:26-27; Romans 5:8; I Corinthians 6:9-11; I Corinthians 13; Galatians 6:1-2; I Thessalonians 4:1-8; I Thessalonians 5:14-15; I Timothy 1:15-16; Jude 7 

Recommended for approval by the Commissioners' Conference
Approved for use within the USA by International Headquarters

So they don't accept any sex outside of heterosexual marriage as godly, but abhor discrimination based on the sexuality of others. It's actually a pretty friendly sort of hyperconservative sexual morality they've got there.

The Canadian version is even more smiley:

The Salvation Army upholds the dignity of all persons. For this reason, and in obedience to the example of Jesus Christ, whose compassionate love is all-embracing, The Salvation Army does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation in the delivery of its services. 

The Salvation Army believes that God’s will for the expression of sexual intimacy is revealed in the Bible, and that living fully in accordance with biblical standards calls for chastity outside of heterosexual marriage and faithfulness within it. We do not believe that same-sex attraction is blameworthy and we oppose the vilification and mistreatment of gays and lesbians. We believe that we are accountable for the ways in which we express our sexuality. 

While recognizing the challenge that this presents, The Salvation Army believes firmly in the power of God’s grace to enable all to live in a manner that is pleasing to Him. 

In keeping with our mission, we are committed to proclaiming the good news of salvation, the forgiveness of sins, and transformation by the Holy Spirit. We welcome all seekers of faith in Christ to explore Salvation Army church life. 

The Salvation Army, Canada & Bermuda, November 2011

It basically states that they don't believe in homosexual marriage or even sex (nor pre- nor extramarital het sex) but that they believe what you do in your bedroom is between you and god.

I can't really get mad at an organization that tries that hard to reconcile the impossible morality they impose on themselves with the desire to maintain a christlike relation with the outside world. I have certainly seen a lot worse.

So, in my moral opinion, you can choose to donate to a church that disagrees with your sexual ethics but will fight to protect them from discrimination, or not. That's between you and your own beliefs.

Update: Kerry sent me a link to an article about how Salvation Army organizations have, outside of policy, worked actively against gay rights.

Egyptian blogger exposes herself for freedom (nudity)

We are used to seeing all kinds of nudity in the West. But in the Muslim world, it is much different. Even fairly secular countries censor nudes in art as well as advertising.

20-year-old Egyptian blogger Aliaa Magda Elmahdy wants to change that. Last month, she started a new Google blog, called "Nude Art" which features full-frontal nudes of herself and an unidentified male, as well as a cat and some artsy underwear and embrace shots.

They're not great art shots. They look like 1940s amateur pornography. But like that, what they do have is a certain authentic and defiant naïveté from someone who wants to own her own body in a culture than denies that freedom.  The most political of the pictures features self-censorship: “The yellow rectangles on my eyes, mouth and sex organ resemble the censoring of our knowledge, expression and sexuality,” she explained.

“I have the right to live freely in any place… I feel happy and self satisfied when I feel that I’m really free,” she said.

Nothing particularly shocking to jaded Western internet eyes. But in Egypt, where the post-Tahir atmosphere is one of increasingly conservative religious influence, this is practically treason.

The responses on the blog on Twitter (#nudephotorevolutionary) are in both English and Arabic. One negative comment is translated as “a desperate act of social political suicide by a young woman”. And another: “We are defending secularism from innuendos & then we get this #NudePhotoRevolutionary Stop shocking people to the point of repulsion.”

But the comments also show that there is a new generation, globally informed, who want more than an end to political oppression. They want total freedom. Said one English commenter:

"I'm very impressed and inspired by your courage. The revolution in Egypt needs to be a catalyst for greater freedom of expression. If somebody wants to wear a hijab they should be free to do so without facing discrimination but you must also be able to express yourself any way you choose without fear. It's your body and it's entirely up to you how you choose to express yourself."

Is this how a sexual revolution begins?

Link and Arabic translations via Almasri Ayoum
Tip via FEMEN

The best (accidental) equal rights PSA you will see today

This refreshingly cool video, shared by It's ok to be Takei, works as a spontaneously-generated PSA:



It's a great answer to those who believe evolving social norms, particularly when it comes to equal marriage rights, will somehow corrupt the young.

That's just not how kids' minds work. As each new generation faces the new social reality, they learn the new "normal" effortlessly, while the rest of us struggle to unlearn our prejudices.

For example, my son has a friend at school with two dads. When I first met him in the schoolyard, and I was trying to make arrangements with his parents for a playdate, I gave him a note and told him to give it to his mom.

"I don't have a mom," he said matter-of-factly. "I have two dads."

"...well, give it to one of your dads, then."

"OK!"

Sadly, this is also a reminder of why significant social change takes decades to achieve. It requires generational turnover to fully reset perceptions.

F'd Ad Fridays: Purity Panties

Not so much an ad, as a marketing idea: underwear for teenage girls that will protect their honour by shaming any boy who comes in contact with them to back off.

You thought I was joking?

This is the offering put forward by "What Would Your Mother Do?"

"Having high schoolers of our own, we realize that at one point or another, teenagers are going to want to date. We've decided there's no reason to get uptight about it, after all, finding a romantic partner is a normal and healthy part of adolescent life. But, why not help our teens make wise choices (whatever that may be for them) while they navigate the dating scene? We created a line of underwear to use as conversation starters to help reinforce family morals as they relate to relationships and dating. One part Victorian (who are we kidding?), three parts frisky, these adorable undies put new meaning to saying it loud and proud."

A mixed message to young girls that they should look and feel "grown up" sexy, but still follow "family morals"? I guess it's par for the course these days.

Via Adrants.

Disney's The Little Mermaid's sexual coming-of-age story, as told by her hipster meme

The Little Mermaid is my favourite Disney movie. No, I am not a dirty old man. I was 18 years old when I went to see the film in the cinema with a 16-year-old female friend. We arrived at the show pretty intoxicated, and proceeded to laugh ourselves silly over all the overt sexual references in the movie. (Yeah, we were smarty pants teens.)

The movie has already been hilariously deconstructed as really bad advice for girls about how to get a guy by completely compromising yourself.

But back in the '80s, I saw more than that. As a teenage boy, dealing with teenage girls as both close friends and occasionally romantic interests, I was fascinated by how the movie seemed to capture the physical and emotional turmoil I saw among female peers as they went along the rocky road to maturity, from age 15 to about 25.

I was reminded of all this when the Hipster Little Mermaid meme started making the rounds of social media. You can generate your own captions on Meme Generator. But instead of making her talk about mainstream culture and Pitchfork magazine, I thought the older, wiser, and bespectacled Princess could walk you through Disney's most awkwardly sexualized classic.

Yeah.

 Little Mermaid lyrics.

 She really does.

Link to the "humanizing" sequence.

I actually sympathize with the guy. I was that clueless as a teen.

 Really. Those Disney animators were pretty pervy.

 In Polish, but you get the gist.

For some unknown reason, my favourite urban legends debunking site, Snopes, insists that the penis tower illustration is unintentional. I have a copy of the original VHS release. Towers are usually less veiny than that...

It's the middle one. Click to enlarge. (No pun intended.)