Apple Censors: Kinky Sex and G-Spots Fine For 12 Year Olds, But Penis Bad

Compare these two covers. On the left, Spanish science divulgation magazine Muy Interesante has an article titled “Myths and Truths About the Penis”. On the right, your typical Cosmopolitan smut, from “50 Kinky Sex Moves” to “Your Other G-Spot.”

Both magazines are rated “12+” (12 years old or older) in Apple’s Newsstand. Yet, only the one with the science article about penises has been censored by Apple this month. Why?

Because, according to Apple, it’s against their content guidelines.

When Muy Interestante (Very Interesting) submitted the magazine, Apple sent back an email turning it down, alleging that the magazine content was misrepresented by its age rating. The same age rating it shares with Cosmopolitan.

We have completed the revision of your attachments but we can’t publish them in the App Store because its category ["12 years old or up"] doesn’t correspond with its content. It doesn’t comply with the App Store’s guidelines:

3.8. Developers are responsible to assign a category for their apps. Apple can change inappropriate categories.

Since your application contains suggestive adult themes, this should be reflected in your category.

Why a science divulgation magazine should be rated 16+ or 18+ while 50 Kinky Sex Moves — voted by men! — is perfectly fine for 12+ is a mystery. It just looks like Apple’s censorship corps don’t have any problem with 12 year olds learning about kinky sex and G-spots but have problems with 12-year-olds reading science facts about dicks.

The magazine has already submitted a new cover in which they have switched “Truths and Myths About the Penis” to “Truths and Myths About That Outstanding Member” which would be hilarious if Apple’s actions weren’t so stupid and pathetic to begin with.


Apple Doesn’t Like Penises

This is not the first time Apple has had a problem with male genitalia or masculine nudity. In June 2010, following the elimination of an erotic graphic novel based on James Joyce’s Ulysses from the App Store, Apple censored Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest because it showed to naked men kissing. Likewise, they censored apps showing man in tight swimsuits while passing apps showing women in tiny bikinis.

And sure, it’s not only about penises. They have a problem with bare breasts too. Or at least Madonna’s nipples.

But I digress. This is not about specific cases. This is about the same stupid and arbitrary Apple censorship that keeps happening at their App Store even if we don’t learn about it every day.

Censorship Is Bad, Period

The whole censorship machinery still doesn’t make sense. Not in its current state, because Apple’s arbitrary policies — set in the anti-”porn” Jobs era — clearly don’t work when these cases still happen.

The fact is that you can’t set a nebulous set of rules and then expect your minions to enforce whatever the hell they want to enforce, based on their arbitrary judgement or phobias.

This new episode shows, once again, that Bild Digital’s CEO Donata Hopfen was right back in 2010: “Today they censor nipples, tomorrow editorial content.”

And I’m afraid that this is what we get when we have one company dominating a new computing platform and using arbitrary judgement to rule content in or out their castrated “newsstand”. This is the reason why I want Android tablets, Amazon’s Fire and Microsoft tablets to thrive, so we — the market — can stop this nonsense as Apple apparently doesn’t want to set a clear set of rules and categories that would allow any content to exist in their platform.

Perhaps Apple’s Tim Cook would read this, pick up the phone and personally smack the idiot who did this. I like to think that, but not as much as I like thinking about him changing their policies. Not because some of their censors may be perceived as prudish — don’t touch your penis! — but others don’t give a damn about obvious sexual content reaching minors — here are 50 kinky moves to make that penis hard! — but because content should flow free in any medium.

Discuss

(13 Comments)
  • [–]

    monkeymind

    Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 9:50 AM

    Simples. Censor COSMO and the feminists will go nuts. Censor a science mag article about dicks…(sound of crickets)

  • [–]

    Richard

    Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 9:52 AM

    Is it really that surprising? Showing a penis is still quite off limits in all sorts of media. TV shows now days have no issues depicting sex, often time showing breast but its quite rare that a penis or vagina will be shown.

    Personally I don’t have a huge issue with it, it’s Apples platform and while I don’t agree with anti competitive practices (and to that extent they shouldn’t be able to simply do ‘what they want’), if they want to market their device at a certain audience then I think that is fair game.

    I haven’t and won’t read the magazines, but I’m pretty sure that ’50 kinky sex moves’ would be a pretty pedestrian article anyway. The other may be a scientific journal, but if you allow those but not material trying to pose as erotic art for instance then you introduce a large gray area open to interpretation. While there’s still much interpreting of the rules on APples part, it’s likely easier to say “no genitals, period” here.

    • [–]

      Lemo

      Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 10:02 AM

      Really Dick, really?

    • [–]

      Will

      Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 10:43 AM

      its hardly a grey area. no one complains when a scientific program shows multiple and constant images of naked man and women and even extreme closeups when its for educational purposes. and thats fine cause its information that is useful. (especially to teenages). sexual education is important thats why its taught in schools.
      the difference here is that one mag is giving emotionless information about an organ that half of us have and the other is basically trying to sell a magazine by promising a better sex life with instructions.

      • [–]

        Richard

        Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 7:00 PM

        I didn’t say these specific articles are a gray area, rather it opens up the door for it. While maybe not the perfect example, I recall there being a large divide last year or so when an “artist” had kids around the age of 13 posing nude for an exhibition he was putting on.

        Many claimed they were artistically sound and ok, others called it child pornography and erotica.

        Ultimately whats ok to show for one person will be deemed inappropriate for another. TBH I’d have no issue with slightly more mature material in the App store, but at the same time I understand it.

    • [–]

      James Ray Cox

      Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 10:45 AM

      Dick, I would not care if my daughter saw genitals, I mean, what could really happen if we removed all censorship of nudity? Cats and dogs living together? :/ Its just a penis.

      • [–]

        Richard

        Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 6:57 PM

        Neither do I….but a lot of parents do care.

      • [–]

        Will

        Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 8:06 PM

        i think your missing the MAIN part of the objection being made here. one mag has scientific grounds for its content the other is niether scientific nor artistic its just sensationalist. however its the one with the word “penis” on it that gets banned for the 12+ age group when the other gets a free pass even though the content could successfully be argued to be equally age inappropriate or in fact MORE inappropriate as it offers no education simply tips on how to have sex.

        now the other part of this is that noone is saying that both are clearly ok for 12 year olds thats another argument all together whats going on here is a basic incosistancy in the way a private company censors submitted content with a bias against anything male in terms of sexuality and nudity dispite being ok with equal amounts of both for women (not that either is good for children but it seems apple is more likly to let it slide when women are the focus…whats that teach young ladies)

        • [–]

          Richard

          Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 10:53 PM

          On the topic of being biased based on sex, my understanding was the same rules apply to showing naked women too…at least waist down anyway?

          • [–]

            Will

            Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 11:24 PM

            firsly did you read the article? secondly i specifically said (as the article did) that apples censorship is bias and the level to which they let male content is less then that of women and appears to be basically arbitrary. now that is not to say that apple is letting through softcore porn of women and killing every top off shot of men. its just that apple dont allow it to go quite as far with men then it does with women. for instance to quote the article directly “they censored apps showing man in tight swimsuits while passing apps showing women in tiny bikinis.”

  • [–]

    Craig

    Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 11:02 AM

    I’m sure once Apple release the iPenis 2.0 with wireless RFID they will stop censoring the penis in favour of G spots and kinky sex positions.

  • [–]

    paul

    Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 1:12 PM

    such a sexist position apple has taken, how can a body part that 50% of the population have be offensive. if it isnt pornography then it does deserve a lower age rating.
    actually id go further saying that pornography is less offensive than graphic violence scenes even though a movie can get away with constant violence and gore and get a ma+15 rating but if a movie shows a penis then it gets a 18+ rating. its so wrong.

  • [–]

    Thrallsman

    Saturday, February 4, 2012 at 2:23 PM

    “Apple censored Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest because it showed to naked men kissing.” – should be two. Interesting article on Apple’s standpoint.

Join The Discussion