You won’t find these at Albertson’s…

The October issue of Seventeen magazine’s been yanked off the shelves at Albertson stores in 11 western states, including Oregon. Why?

A ‘Vagina 101’ feature – apparently, teenage girls shouldn’t see illustrations of normal genitalia, or read about possible health concerns. The Albertson’s public affairs director for Oregon stated that “the company received several complaints that the material was explicit.”

This Tucson TV report throws around viewer comments like ‘pornographic’ and the inevitable comparisons to Penthouse or Playboy.

Let’s see – teen pregnancy continues to be an issue, teen access to birth control is increasingly difficult, and teen STD rates are on the rise. Cutting off access to a fluffy teen magazine offering a vaginal owners manual solves these problems…how?

6 Comments so far

  1. Banana Lee Fishbones (unregistered) on September 29th, 2005 @ 9:59 am

    Because if I don’t know I have a vagina, I won’t have any reason to allow anything near it but my Strawberry Shortcake undies until my wedding day. Geez Betsy, don’t you know anything? (:

    My favorites are the people who protest teen access to condoms. Your little abstinence programs were such a roaring success, of course there’s no need for them. Tards.

    This country’s attitude towards naked never ceases to amaze me. “Look look look, Bob Dole is all worked up over Britney Spears, DON’T YOU SHOW THAT BOOBIE ON THE TV!”

    I have ranted on this at length in the past. I know how you feel. What I wouldn’t give to have had an owner’s manual! Nobody talked about it in my house, it would be nice to know if I have a weird pain if it’s just weird pain or something more serious…

  2. Banana Lee Fishbones (unregistered) on September 29th, 2005 @ 11:41 am

    and now that I think about it, I want to go buy that issue of Seventeen just to show em. (:

  3. Penny (unregistered) on September 29th, 2005 @ 3:51 pm

    Albertson’s is cowardly. Their parent company, Jewel/Osco, allows their pharmacists to selectively fill prescriptions based on their personal beliefs (e.g., no “morning after” pill).

    … Maybe I should take this rant to the Ethical Shopping thread?

  4. Isaac Laquedem (unregistered) on September 29th, 2005 @ 4:11 pm

    It’s the other way around: actually Albertson’s is the parent company of Osco.

  5. Claire (unregistered) on September 29th, 2005 @ 7:43 pm

    Playboy? Penthouse? Huh? Maybe it’s just me, but a closeup of a vagina strikes me as more clinical than pornographic (which is exactly what Seventeen was going for, if I’m reading this right). I mean, if the whole naked girl was shown, I could maybe understand comparisons to porn. It’s not like a girl can’t just grab a mirror to check out her own parts – or is that also dirty and unacceptable now? Sheesh. I think I’ll buy a copy just to show some support for Seventeen – even though I’m not crazy fond of them in general.

  6. Ryan Knapper (unregistered) on October 4th, 2005 @ 11:42 am

    What if they received even more complaints from people who don’t like thier options censored by those who are more close-minded?

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.