Editorial: Apple should abstain from sexy apps

By now, most of us have seen the range of smartphone apps — from the handy ones to the… By now, most of us have seen the range of smartphone apps — from the handy ones to the inventive and the downright zany ones. Some are a testament of technological prowess, while others are more mindless fun.

Sex has made its way to the smart phone, too. It’s presence, though, isn’t entirely welcome. Apple recently removed 5,000 sexually suggestive apps from its online App Store after numerous complaints from customers who found them distasteful. But they didn’t purge the selection in full. While Apple cut some smaller companies’ sexually suggestive apps, Playboy and Sports Illustrated’s swimsuit apps were left alone, according to The Huffington Post. The apps that were removed included one in which a scantily clad woman “cleaned” your iPod screen and one that allowed users to undress a woman to reveal her undergarments. Supporters of Apple’s decision say the apps were degrading. Detractors see this as corporate censorship. By taking down the popular apps made by smaller developers, Apple has opened up the field for richer interests such as Sports Illustrated and Playboy.

Apple is no stranger to controversy over its app policies. The iPhone began its life as a closed platform until Apple bended to the pressures of an annoyed market threatening to go elsewhere and hackers dedicated to opening the software floodgates. In May of last year, Apple yanked a Nine Inch Nails app because it featured music with offensive lyrics — apparently Apple was not a fan of doing it like an animal — but approved an app where users shake a virtual baby, reports msnbc.com. Eventually, the baby shaking app was taken down, as well.

Now, all of these Apple mis-apps have sparked talk about everything from free speech to sexual liberation. The issue is much simpler. Apple cares most about its bottom line and its family-friendly image.

Furthermore, It would be puritanical to say that sex isn’t prevalent today in all forms of media and still hold a grudge. Simply put, sex is everywhere. But the subject matter of these apps isn’t so much the issue as the way that apps are traditionally used and the way they’re portraying sexual behavior. There’s a big difference between checking out some dirty web sites from the privacy of your bedroom than doing so on a device that’s usually used in public.

But as cell phones — and smartphones — are becoming more ubiquitous, kids are getting cell phones at earlier ages. No, dirty apps won’t cause nearly all the hubbub on par with sexting, but it would be reasonable to say that stricter parents probably wouldn’t want their kids getting their hands on such lewd material even if they can encounter more graphic material online. It might not accomplish much, but — with the iPad on the way adn the school hardware market a goldmine — it’s the effort that counts. At least to parents and school boards.

Yes, there will be that stereotypical guy who downloads a sexy app to provide a good laugh or a more engaging conversation piece to show to a few buddies. In that sense, these apps aren’t much different than the range of brainless apps already out there. As crude and scorned as most pornography on the tube and the Internet is, some of the more “mainstream” historic installments like Deep Throat have been heralded for their artistic value.

Conversely, these apps are the polar opposite: a tacky portrayal of sexuality that provides no value beyond a few giggles. Comparing them to other apps, they’re not especially creative or inventive. An app that features a pair of breasts shaking simultaneously as the user jiggles his smartphone? It might be amusing for the first minute but is it really necessary?

These apps are a testament to the age-old money-making notion: sex sells. There are just more profitable ventures for apple.