Google Stops Ads For "Cougar" Sites 319
teh31337one writes "Google is refusing to advertise CougarLife, a dating site for mature women looking for younger men. However, they continue to accept sites for mature men seeking young women. According to the New York Times, CougarLife.com had been paying Google $100,000 a month since October. The Mountain View company has now cancelled the contract, saying that the dating site is 'nonfamily safe.'"
Disgraceful, if true! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:We do not care :( (Score:5, Interesting)
I sometimes can't decide whether comments like this are supposed to be funny (which they admittedly are) or whether they're an honest expression of deep self-loathing.
It seems to be google being sexist (Score:5, Interesting)
Google has simply labelled "cougar" to be an adult term, and adult ads are not allowed on its network. Yet other ads with the same or even stronger adult theme are allowed. The same company has a site for older men seeking younger women, and that one is allowed.
So it seems Google is being very sexist about it. Probably not a high level decision, just someone who let his/her own personal views put a word on the banned word list. I don't think Google really wants to ban all the adult themed ads, it is a lot of money they would be throwing away. 100k in advertising for one site only. Even Google is going to feel it if its puritans stance is now going to force it to block all the sites aimed at men as well.
They have FamilySafe backwards! (Score:4, Interesting)
A coupling of an older man with a younger woman has a greater chance of bearing children than that of an older woman and a younger man.
It seems to me that the Cougar scenario contains more safety from creating a Family than the other
Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
Raising money for big cats (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It seems to be google being sexist (Score:3, Interesting)
I bet it boils down to one man who has ego issues about women sleeping with younger men. Perhaps he feels it is "gross" as I've heard some say, perhaps his wife or girlfriend left him for a younger man.
This is a dumb choice. Especially with a TV show called "cougar town".
Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
Theres a guy in every group thats into cougars. He may not admit it, but he's there.
And why not? Of that group of friends, the one that 'takes' the cougar is definitely going to get lucky. The others get the thrill of the hunt, sure, but only maybe half of them will successfully hook up.
Bird in the hand, and all that.
nonfamily safe... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Honestly, I don't care about their motivation (Score:4, Interesting)
No, it's not about the effects. Terms that imply bias are about intentions. There's a huge difference between giving a cookie to every male, vs. flipping a coin and giving a cookie every time it comes up heads, even if by random chance it happens that I end up giving each male (and no females) a cookie.
Drumming up emotions by using terms that imply deliberate bias to situations where there is none is a disservice to everyone involved, most of all those who advocate against true bias.
Re:"nonfamily safe" (Score:5, Interesting)
In contrast, an older man dating a younger woman is much more likely to end up in a relationship or marriage, and while an older man actively looking for a younger woman is clearly looking to hook up as well, he is also much more likely to be looking for something more substantial, which means he's in a position to do so - meaning, not married and not in a situation where the outcome of the services provided by [his dating site of choice] will be a threat to his family.
I have several friends who are what is euphemistically known as escorts, and who have worked with dating sites of the Sugar Daddy sort. They have met many men who are very willing to engage in the transactions such sites facilitate, and they have all been married. According to one friend, who has made a tidy high-five-figure income doing this for several years as she works her way through college, at least 80% of the men on sugardaddy sites are married and looking for multiple somethings on the side, preferably multiple somethings at the same time.
Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
of course they weren't called cougar. They where called horny 30 years old women.
That particular group is still called that. Cougar (to me, and to most of the people I know) is more on the order of 40 to 50. Sometimes even higher. Jane Seymour is 59 now and I still would like to get acquainted with her.
Re:Well... (Score:2, Interesting)
also... they say thank you and make breakfast for you in the morning. Been there, done that.
I highly recommend it ;)
Re:It seems to be google being sexist (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Well... (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess it depends on your definition of "evil". From the point of view of some people, what courgarlife.com advertises is evil, therefore not advertising it is not doing evil. According to others censorship is evil, so by censoring the ads, they ARE doing evil. This is the problem with basing your business model around a nebulous concept like "evil"
Actually no. (Score:3, Interesting)
Cougar Life has run adverts on the radio here in Chicago.
Their tag line is "Wouldn't you like to **** a cougar too?"
As such, it's pretty obvious that they're not going to pass the "No Adult Content" caveat in place with Google.
Re:It seems to be google being sexist (Score:3, Interesting)