Me So Holy app rejected

[swindmill]

Wow, this thread is still going, eh?

It's like this. Society has deemed it inappropriate to mock people's religion. It causes huge bad feelings, if you do. In practical terms, think of it like insulting your mum.

Sure, some people here hate their mothers. Some of your mothers are probably crack addict hos. You insult her all the time, so it's no biggie if others do. But most people would be upset if Apple approved an app called "iHumpedYerMom", allowing for the user to superimpose a photo of your mother tied by her wrists on a bed (as an example).

Why? Because you don't go there. Mothers are inviolate. So is religion. End. Of.

I can't say I follow your analogy, and I don't need an analogy because I perfectly understand what it means to mock religion. Nonetheless, we will just have to disagree. Society has not deemed it inappropriate to mock religion, you have. In fact, religion is mocked all the time.

Again, the point here is that Apple should not be blocking apps because they are concerned it might offend people. TV stations air content that many would consider offensive (including shows that mock religion), and people are free to watch it or not.

 

[Eso]

Oh yeah, plus it's stupid.

You just described 90% of the app store. Go take a look at the top 100 paid/free apps.

Apple should have stuck to rejecting apps based on malicious code, but they have clearly taken the position of approving app content as well. When they reject an app like this because it's offensive, they simultaneously put a stamp of approval on anything they have approved. Then, when something like baby shaker gets approved, instead of being able to direct the outcry to the app creators as it was due, they have to come up with some PR excuse so now no one even remembers who made the app in the first place.

If you think the policy will change with 3.0, you're living a fantasy.

 

[DreamPod]

Maybe it wasn't rejected for religion, but the fact that its name is a play on a racist joke phrase?

 

[Fe1]

Maybe it wasn't rejected for religion, but the fact that its name is a play on a racist joke phrase?

Sir Mix-a-Lot is racist? Say it ain't so!

 

[Sehnsucht]

All I have to say is LOL.

 

[redman042]

I think the developer needs to abandon this project and develop "Mesohorny" instead. Put your face on your favorite porn star using screenshots from your favorite adult flicks. Now THAT would sell, and it would offend all religions equally.

 

[lord patton]

Oh well, the app got rejected. Now we'll just have to stick with Animalizer and put Mohammed's face on a pig. No wait...

 

[larrybeo]

I Agree! Way too subjective of a word!

This is where Apple is running into problems (which I'll be the first to say I doubt I could do any better) but 'offensive' is too subjective of a word to use. I find no offense with this app (and have even done it on my own with photoshop in the past). I certainly understand why some people WOULD be offended but I just don't like that Apple is making these kind of calls (there have been rejections that I'm ok with... or at least understand... like the tethering apps).

I find the farting apps completely offensive. You know what though? I don't download them! Works for me.

 

[iansilv]

Indeed. And since they have extremists who might react with actual physical violence, it's a no-brainer why Apple rejected this. Just ask Denmark.

EDIT BEFORE POSTING: Actually, I just went to the Me So Holy link. The app is predicated on choosing a religion, then superimposing a photo, all in good fun. I had no problem with it, until now. I see Christian images. I see Jewish images. But what about Muslim, Hindu, etc. etc. images? Holiness isn't just Christian, you know.

It's all very well to josh, poke fun, and have a laugh, but it's always Judeo-Christianity, isn't it.

amen.

 

[iansilv]

Sir Mix-a-Lot is racist? Say it ain't so!

The phrase "Me-so-horny" did not originate from Sir Mix-A-Lot. He sampled it from the song "Me So Horny" by 2 Live Crew. They had sampled the sound and processed it slightly from the movie Full Metal Jacket where the Vietnamese prostitute propositions the lead GI right before his camera is stolen.

And its origins were not some original racist joke either- its the movie. People began repeating it from the movie.

Know your pop culture rap sampling mixing history!

 

[synth3tik]

I stopped buying apps because I really can't figure what criteria Apple uses to reject apps, IMO I don't think Apple knows either, until then I can not justify pulling more crap into my phone.

 

[diesel]

Another one of these threads, but as far as i'm concerned, it's apple's app store. They can do what they want and decide what gets in and what stays out, just as if you owned your own business you will decide what you sell and how you sell it. And honestly, apple doesn't need to explain anything to anyone as to how and why they do things. Of course, due to public relations purposes, they try to explain policies once in a while, but I think apple should just not try to explain anything, especially since they don't necessarily do a good job of it. Bottom line is that the app store is a PRIVATE entity, and not a public one. This is not a matter of free speech as some people would make it out to be, but a private business dictating what they want sold in their store. All businesses do it on some level, apple is no different, but a much more "visible" entity and therefore a higher profile "target" for those out there who just want to rant against the corporate machine.

 

[cypher23]

Another one of these threads, but as far as i'm concerned, it's apple's app store. They can do what they want and decide what gets in and what stays out, just as if you owned your own business you will decide what you sell and how you sell it. And honestly, apple doesn't need to explain anything to anyone as to how and why they do things. Of course, due to public relations purposes, they try to explain policies once in a while, but I think apple should just not try to explain anything, especially since they don't necessarily do a good job of it. Bottom line is that the app store is a PRIVATE entity, and not a public one. This is not a matter of free speech as some people would make it out to be, but a private business dictating what they want sold in their store. All businesses do it on some level, apple is no different, but a much more "visible" entity and therefore a higher profile "target" for those out there who just want to rant against the corporate machine.

I agree. People keep crying "foul" when Apple rejects certain apps and accepts certain apps. Just like what diesel said...they're a company and they run things the way they see fit. I don't think it's offensive but at the same time I wouldn't download it.

 

[jman800]

I third that. Its your submission to THEIR App Store. They can do WHATEVER THEY WANT!

Get over it, Bitching about it here will NOT get it any closer to being accepted. Have a good day.

 

[Fe1]

And its origins were not some original racist joke either- its the movie. People began repeating it from the movie.

Know your pop culture rap sampling mixing history!

Ahhh, sooky sook oh!!

 

[Michael CM1]

Apparently this developer missed the whole rioting over a cartoon depicting Mohammed (sp?) a few years ago. Apple turned this down because Apple is not stupid and doesn't want to get on the bad side of the wrong people. I'm as liberal as the next dude on letting apps go through, but this is an obvious "nuh-uh."