Emily Clarkson campaigns to ‘free the nipple’. Sponsored by Lovehoney. Hypocritical?

Good for Em Clarkson :+1:

Does seem a bit odd that Lovehoney have sponsored this when no nipples are allowed on their own forum though :thinking:


It does beg the question.
There has to be boundaries of course , but an odd nipple isnt going to corrupt anyones mind.


When I read the whole thing, it does come across as somewhat hypocritical.

Now I’ve never had a problem with the rule on the forum, but I do feel if they support her campaign, they should put their money where their mouth is.


My understanding is that the rule applies on the forum because search engines class the site as pornagraphic and lower it’s rating if female nipples are shown (which obviously being a business Lovehoney can’t afford to do). As a result of the gender bias @Lovehoney_Brenna extended the rule so men’s nipples couldn’t be shown either - it was a statement of equality.

I think Emily Clarkson and Lovehoney are doing a great job promoting that women having nipples out is no different to men doing it which is perfectly acceptable to society.


The forum, and the sales site have different websites so will feature differently in a google seach.

Do you think if the forum was slightly lower on the first page of a google search it would have any effect on sales?

It is hypocritical to publicly have one view, but a different rule on their own forum.

1 Like

I think until this bit is sorted, what they’re arguing for and what they can deliver is different.


@KinkyMira . Well said.!!

I never understood the banning of the nipple especially with men, yes I know its the equality argument but when all websites selling mens clothing, ie underwear, show the nipple because its not classed as pornographic or sexual it makes no sense for Lovehoney to have this policy to liberate the nipple!!
And then ironically they’re trying to free the nipple when they’ve gone over the top banning the nipple which is what they should have done in the first place!!

1 Like

The ‘no nipple regardless of gender’ rule is specifically to highlight the disparity. Think of it like censoring an elbow. It’s meant to be seen as ridiculous to demonstrate the overall inequality.


I’m not sure this is true, yes, they’re different sites but probably hosted on the same server and as such get in some way grouped together. That bit might be wrong and I’m happy to be over ruled however, the shopping site certainly has links to the forum and from the Google Developer’s Documentation Pages:

SafeSearch is designed to filter out pages that contain images or videos that contain naked breasts or genitals. It also is designed to filter pages with links, pop-ups, or ads that display or point to explicit content.

@Yes_man , you’re missing the whole point of the ban on male nipples! It is ridiculous female nipples are banned but because of Google SafeSearch and other search browser’s rules they are. The ban on male nipples was to highlight how stupid this is and promote equality and while female nipples remain banned I’m all in favour of this.


Yeah sorry, I get that and maybe I didnt make myself clear enough, for me it’s counter productive to ban all nipples on this site as thats only reinforcing the ban the nipple argument, you know how these things work instead of liberating all nipples these companies will use actions like this to only strengthen their argument. For me LH should have gone the opposite way just like the campaign they are backing and liberated the nipple.

1 Like

If the campaign is successful, the forum will be allowed to lift the no nipples rule. It would only be hypocritical if the law is changed but the forum still keeps the rule.


Not necessarily. Supporting something in principle is useful even if you can’t be pro-active or physically support it yourself.


I hadnt quite realised the reason for the nipple ban on the forum , but i can see the point now.
Hopefully the campaign is successful and the double standards can be erased.


I seen Lovehoney sponsored posts for the campaign on Naomi Natives and a few other Instagram pages, and it isn’t “free the nipple”. I believe that Yahoo article took one thing Emily Clarkson said about an old campaign (“Free the nipple”, started in 2012 by a filmmaker named Lina Esco) and ran with it. The article makes Lovehoney seem hypocritical, but the article got it wrong (accidentally, probably) in my opinion.

It seems to me that the International Women’s Day 2022 campaign -“Break The Bias” is against all bias in the censorship on various platforms. Lots of platforms use automated systems and algorithms to censor posts and are often bias against minorities and marginalised groups. Of course the nipple rules on these platforms are biased too, but at least they are usually clearly understood as rules and are usually enforced fairly - as opposed to some people getting censored for posting certain things where other people do not. I personally don’t agree with the censorship of nipples, but that article appears to touch on why they are often banned on some platforms and would be reason enough for companies that rely on profit from sales or advertising.

I think if allowing all nipples is not an option, then Lovehoney censoring all nipples is a fairer option than being bias and only censoring only female nipples. On this forum we also have real human moderators who I’ve seen to be fair, as opposed to automated algorithms which can often be racist, fatphobic, ablest or bias against any number of marginalised groups. This lovehoney forum is probably the least bias social platform I’m on.

TL;DR: The article got a crucial detail wrong which makes lovehoney seem hypocritical and that couldn’t be further from the truth in this case.

P.S. Sorry if this doesn’t read well, I’m quite tired and I think it’s probably a longish post.


I thought it was a bit weird that the photo of Emily Clarkson in the article didn’t have nipples in it. I thought it was perhaps an editorial choice.

This one doesn’t mention ‘free the nipple’, but that’s from August last year:

There doesn’t seem to be a press release though, so I don’t know when this story is originally from?


Lovehoney sponsored some IWD 2022 posts on Instagram (and probably other platforms too) campaigning to “Break The Bias”. https://www.instagram.com/p/Ca1_YolLWvh/?utm_medium=copy_link

Emily Clarkson referenced an old campaign “Free The Nipple” in her post, saying something like “the nipple isn’t free” or “the nipple still isn’t free”. Emily Clarkson has been hot news as of late so various sources probably follow her and write about her. And I think they sort of missed the point this time.


Ah, yes, I think I see. I got a bit lost in the googling. :slightly_smiling_face:

Good question but I guess there has to be some boundaries although not sure how it can’t be seen sexual if you show a boob without a nipple compared to one with a nipple… it’s kinda the same thing right?! :thinking: surely it’d make sense to have the rule, no boobs on show all together.

Not to mention certain social platforms what allow you to show all sorts yet selectively delete posts for silly reasons when there’s a dozen other provocative posts from other accounts who no doubt pay promotions, and are overlooked :thinking:

But on the flip side there are artists who photograph naked bodies in a tasteful creative manner which gives off no sexual intentions at all so maybe it’s down to the manner of how a photo is taken to which determines its reactions…

And with that I’ve now gone lost myself in deep thoughts lol :sweat_smile:

I think this is a great campaign and i think we should all join the fun nipples are nipples me & womans should be equal i hardly ever wear a bra