三河マルシェ【MARCHE】三河エリアのコミュニティポータルサイト

Which one do you think was banned from Facebook: an ad for generic Viagra that declared “Get hard or your money back,” or one that said “You can have stronger pelvic floor muscles and more bladder control in a week” If you guessed the Viagra ad, you’d be wrong.To get more news about Sex Toys, you can visit pinkkittytoys.com official website.

In January, the Center for Intimacy Justice, a nonprofit that fights for equality in women’s health advertising, released a report showing that Instagram and Facebook rejected ads for vibrators, along with breastfeeding and menopause products, while accepting ads for erectile dysfunction products.

This double standard has riled sex-toy companies for years. Before Oct. 7, Meta’s policy established that “ads cannot promote the sale or use of adult products or services,” but didn’t give many details, aside from generic examples of ad text that would be banned (“buy our sex toys for your adult pleasure”). On Oct. 7, a few weeks before Meta’s stock tanked, partly due to a slowdown in ad spending, the language of Meta’s advertising policies got more specific. Now, Meta bars ads “that focus on sexual pleasure or enhancement, such as sex toys or sexual enhancement products.” Currently allowed: ads for “erectile dysfunction products” and products “for the prevention of premature ejaculation.”
Meta’s newly articulated standards also allow ads for birth control, menopause products, and products for pain relief during sex, as well as ads that “promote sexual and reproductive health or wellness, as long as the focus is on health and not sexual pleasure.” Meta’s message is clear: Sex toys—with a global market worth more than $35 billion—are not considered a part of sexual health.

Restrictions on advertising sex toys are not new. In 1873, the Comstock Act made it illegal to advertise sex toys, as well as contraceptives, abortifacients, and anything “obscene.” That made it difficult to market dildos. Vibrators—which have existed since the 19th century—and their ads, however, were safe under the law, because companies presented them as medical or beauty devices. In fact, ads for vibrators were more prevalent in the early 1900s than they are today. In the first two decades of the 20th century, the New York Times and the Chicago Tribune carried regular ads. One 1908 Chicago Tribune ad for the Arnold Vibrator claimed that Mark Twain and the governor of Chicago were Arnold users. The ad featured a drawing of a woman in a low-cut dress massaging her face with a vibrator. “Is Your Body Poorly Developed?” read the ad. “By using the Arnold Vibrator every day, you send the rich, red blood flowing healthfully through every tissue and muscle in your body, developing your body as beautifully as nature intended it to be.”

This, however, wouldn’t last forever: Once second-wave feminists began openly discussing the power of vibrators for masturbation in the 1960s and 1970s, media policies changed, and ads mostly went back into the closet, where they’ve largely stayed ever since. Because vibrators are often used by women to masturbate, they’re viewed as threatening to the fabric of society—the idea is that a heterosexual woman with a vibrator doesn’t need to rely on a male partner for sexual pleasure, and therefore is less inclined to marry.