A spoonful of sugar helps the bullshit go down

So, Craigslist is now charging $5 per post to people offering services in the adult gigs list.

Nevermind that erotic services are part of the greatness of Craigslist - many women across the country rely on supplemental income from masturbating in front of a camera, and many men across the country rely on dirty videos and photographs for their source of nookie.

Nevermind that a Supreme Court ruling on Miller v. California defined pornography in such a way that most advertising contains pornographic content, as outlined below:(http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/851.html#12)

1. Would the average person, applying contemporary community standards find that the material:

• when taken as a whole,
• appeals to a prurient interest in sex (i.e., an erotic, lascivious, degrading, unhealthy, morbid interest)?

2. Would the average person find the material depicts or describes:

• sexual conduct (i.e., ultimate sex acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, lewd exhibition of the genitals, excretory functions, sadism, and masochism)
• in a patently offensive way?
  AND

3. Would a reasonable person find the material:

• as a whole,
• lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value?

If you don't agree with me, just turn on you television, or watch this:



I'm not saying we should crack down on sex in advertising, per se. I think marketing as a whole needs to be revamped, but that's for another article. What angers me about this situation is the double standard. Big corporations can get away with lascivious content in their advertising, but individuals who want to make a private video or have sexual photographs taken of them for fun, and to earn a bit of extra cash, have to pay money to post their services, disclosing their credit card information, with no refund if their post is flagged.

This just seems ridiculous to me.