Apple's "Boobie Apps" Banning Resulted In the SuicideGirls' Removal

Suicide Girls

Apple claims they removed those 5,000 boobie apps because women were complaining over the "degrading" and "objectionable" content. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the removal of the SuicideGirls' app--which actually empowers women--seems most questionable.

Sure, the free app features nudity. If you count nudity as being of the bras 'n knickers kind. But when the site was set up by a woman, and populated entirely by women, it just means Apple really does have to define what criteria an app has to meet before it's pulled down. Tarring all titillating apps with the same brush, yet allowing some cases such as Sports Illustrated's app to remain on the App Store will end up backfiring on Apple--and I'm sure this won't be the last time we hear about the SuicideGirls' app, with the community being very, very vocal. The app actually had over 5 million downloads before it was pulled this week.

SuicideGirls co-founder Missy Suicide is going on G4's Attack of the Show to discuss the removal of the free SuicideGirls: Flip Strip app today at 7 p.m. EST, which used the iPhone's accelerometer to remove the girls' clothes when the phone is tilted. Without straying too much on Jezebel's turf, Phil Schiller's comments about Sports Illustrated's app allowed to remain in the store because it's "a well-known company with previously published material available broadly in a well-accepted format" shows he's never acquainted himself with the many SuicideGirls books available.

[SuicideGirls via Gizmodo]

Add New Comment

5 Comments

  • D P

    Here's an article about the SG from a news weekly in my area from 2006.

    http://www.metroactive.com/met...

    The article makes it sound like the "by/for women" stuff is dishonest. It talks about how some of the most popular contributors faced censorship and had their writings deleted when they said things the owners didn't like. Of course, they still displayed the photos, which the company owned. To me it is disingenuous to say claim empowerment and not actually empower, by compensating or at least giving the contributors the right to say what they want.

    It's a longish article, but I recommend it.

  • John Connors

    And, while "by women" may be true, "for women" is a joke. That is not SG's market, and anyone even being slightly honest would admit that.

    I'd advance that "women exploiting women for men and profit" is a far more accurate description of SG.

  • John Connors

    Volunteering to sell your sexuality to men doesn't make you any less of a commodity, it does nothing to raise you above the level of property.

    That's not taking control, it's buying propaganda, and it's sad.

  • Julie Davis

    Victoria-- Suicide Girls is a "by women for women" kind of empowerment. The site features real women, albeit of a certain flavor, and is built around a community of women who identify with alternative culture.

    It really is a shame that Apple feels like a few complaints is enough to take away the voice of a whole subset of society. We're looking at start of some sort of new age digi-clean reformation-- a world where you can't access porn (or whatever else is deemed inappropriate by a select group of boisterous prudes) privately because, well, privacy has ceased to exist.

  • Victoria Knight

    I'm just not sure what to think about this app (since I have a bberry.) How exactly does it 'empower' women, is my question?