[mojo2]

Mouth-shaped urinal sparks complaints

A Dutch McDonald's has been forced to remove a pair of mouth-shaped urinals after a tourist complained.

The branch in the south east of the Netherlands said it was removing the bright red, mouth-shaped urinals after a disgusted US customer complained to McDonald's head office in America.

Manager of the fast-food outlet Giel Pijper said the urinals, named Kisses, were works of art which he was now going to have to sell off.

The mouth-shaped urinals, designed by Utrecht-based firm Bathroom Mania!, have already caused controversy.

Virgin Airways was forced to scrap plans in 2004 to install two of the Kisses at New York's John F Kennedy airport after complaints they looked like women's mouths.

But designer Meike van Schijndel has denied they were ever conceived as anything rude and said they were designed as a fun cartoon mouth and not as a woman's mouth.

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm...rkies.badtaste

A McDonald’s fast-food outlet in the south east of the Netherlands has agreed to remove urinals that are shaped liked wide-open red lips.

Degrading to women or toilet cartoon fun?
The decision was taken after a shocked American customer complained to the McDonald’s head office in the US.

Owner Giel Pijper said on Wednesday that the bright red, mouth-shaped urinals, named ‘Kisses’, are works of art. But a different view is taken of them in America. The urinals are being removed and will be sold off. “I’m not going to harp on about a pair of urinals,” he said.

Virgin Airways was forced to scrap plans in 2004 to install two of the ‘Kisses’ at New York’s John F. Kennedy airport after complaints they looked like women’s mouth.

They are the work of Dutch woman Meike van Schijndel. She is the designer at the Utrecht-based firm Bathroom Mania!

Speaking to Expatica in 2004, she said the urinals were designed as a fun cartoon mouth and not as a woman’s mouth.

She stressed that the idea her urinals represented a man peeing into a woman’s mouth never occurred to her, nor to many men and women she had spoken to. Her company was inundated with orders after the Virgin Airlines controversy, Van Schijndel said.

http://weblog.sinteur.com/?p=14462

[baw]

Ugly.

[Zeeb]

weird and perhaps a bit suggestive, but I think they're kinda funky. In any case, I don't see why a disgusted American customer should have any say about what goes into a McDonalds in the Netherlands. What are we becoming? It's not enough that we sanitize everyting in the U.S. but every country we visit as well.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Zeeb

weird and perhaps a bit suggestive, but I think they're kinda funky. In any case, I don't see why a disgusted American customer should have any say about what goes into a McDonalds in the Netherlands. What are we becoming? It's not enough that we sanitize everyting in the U.S. but every country we visit as well.

Yup. Some of us want to make everything just like America.

Democracy should be according to local culture and sensibilities and otherwise let's allow those people and places to be as they are so we will have a reason to travel there. If I want everything to be like the USA why not just stay in the USA?

I WANT the option of peeing in a woman's mouth shaped urinal. Vive la Nederlander!

[Rumor]

Hooray golden showers!

[Kerrigan]

mojo this is like the 20th post and run job you've done today. what gives?

[analogika]

his meds are out.


that's a brilliant urinal, though.

[Timo]

I find these types of cultural "news" stories threadbare. Here's the set-up: a philistine encounters a designed object or art which is supposed to be shocking to -- guess who -- a philistine. The philistine is shocked (as he is supposed to be) while the more cultural savvy congratulate themselves on another deft deployment of épater les bourgeoisie. Irony is the backbone of the design and those who get the joke smirk at those who don't. Rinse and repeat.

You know, dada is 75 years old, and the urge to shock the general public (in this particular case, one member of the American public) as an artistic strategy dates to the late nineteenth century. One could make the agrument that it is a tired strategy; that art or design as irony is a one trick pony that at base is nothing more than a way to perpetuate the culture myths artists prop themselves up with -- another way for designers to feel better than the average boob on the street. This is turn is in reaction to the general low opinion people have of design, especially as most "serious" artists now make art only for each other.

Or, "ironically."

Sure it works, but isn't it tired? It certainly isn't very original, nor is it somehow paradigm shifting. I think the sin here isn't that the urinal is shocking to someone from Iowa, I think the sin is that the design thinking behind it is unearnest and boring.

[scottiB]

Originally Posted by Timo

I find these types of cultural "news" stories threadbare. Here's the set-up: a philistine encounters a designed object or art which is supposed to be shocking to -- guess who -- a philistine. The philistine is shocked (as he is supposed to be) while the more cultural savvy congratulate themselves on another deft deployment of épater les bourgeoisie. Irony is the backbone of the design and those who get the joke smirk at those who don't. Rinse and repeat.

You know, dada is 75 years old, and the urge to shock the general public (in this particular case, one member of the American public) as an artistic strategy dates to the late nineteenth century. One could make the agrument that it is a tired strategy; that art or design as irony is a one trick pony that at base is nothing more than a way to perpetuate the culture myths artists prop themselves up with -- another way for designers to feel better than the average boob on the street. This is turn is in reaction to the general low opinion people have of design, especially as most "serious" artists now make art only for each other.

Or, "ironically."

Sure it works, but isn't it tired? It certainly isn't very original, nor is it somehow paradigm shifting. I think the sin here isn't that the urinal is shocking to someone from Iowa, I think the sin is that the design thinking behind it is unearnest and boring.

Dude, if you don't copyright that sh!+, I will.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Timo

I find these types of cultural "news" stories threadbare. Here's the set-up: a philistine encounters a designed object or art which is supposed to be shocking to -- guess who -- a philistine. The philistine is shocked (as he is supposed to be) while the more cultural savvy congratulate themselves on another deft deployment of épater les bourgeoisie. Irony is the backbone of the design and those who get the joke smirk at those who don't. Rinse and repeat.

You know, dada is 75 years old, and the urge to shock the general public (in this particular case, one member of the American public) as an artistic strategy dates to the late nineteenth century. One could make the agrument that it is a tired strategy; that art or design as irony is a one trick pony that at base is nothing more than a way to perpetuate the culture myths artists prop themselves up with -- another way for designers to feel better than the average boob on the street. This is turn is in reaction to the general low opinion people have of design, especially as most "serious" artists now make art only for each other.

Or, "ironically."

Sure it works, but isn't it tired? It certainly isn't very original, nor is it somehow paradigm shifting. I think the sin here isn't that the urinal is shocking to someone from Iowa, I think the sin is that the design thinking behind it is unearnest and boring.

Well, sex sells... and so do female mouth shaped urinals. Boring? Perhaps. Perhaps they should add in sound effects to liven up the 'experience'.

[Zeeb]

Originally Posted by Timo

I find these types of cultural "news" stories threadbare. Here's the set-up: a philistine encounters a designed object or art which is supposed to be shocking to -- guess who -- a philistine. The philistine is shocked (as he is supposed to be) while the more cultural savvy congratulate themselves on another deft deployment of épater les bourgeoisie. Irony is the backbone of the design and those who get the joke smirk at those who don't. Rinse and repeat.

You know, dada is 75 years old, and the urge to shock the general public (in this particular case, one member of the American public) as an artistic strategy dates to the late nineteenth century. One could make the agrument that it is a tired strategy; that art or design as irony is a one trick pony that at base is nothing more than a way to perpetuate the culture myths artists prop themselves up with -- another way for designers to feel better than the average boob on the street. This is turn is in reaction to the general low opinion people have of design, especially as most "serious" artists now make art only for each other.

Or, "ironically."

Sure it works, but isn't it tired? It certainly isn't very original, nor is it somehow paradigm shifting. I think the sin here isn't that the urinal is shocking to someone from Iowa, I think the sin is that the design thinking behind it is unearnest and boring.

I can't say you don't have a well formed and articulate opinion and you may be right. You actually sound like perhaps you were/are an artist yourself. You've cleary been doing a lot of thinking on this subject anyway. Most non-artists, non-intellectuals however see a mouth shaped urinal and are either pleasantly amused or offended. Is it tired? Maybe to you, but I for one have never enjoyed using a urinal shaped like a mouth (no comments please). Those naughty artists are always deliberately doing things like this because they know some people will be offended. However, maybe in the process of being offended said individual will have to figure out why they are offended.

This is the most time I've spent thinking and discussing urinals since the invention of that little blue thing you pee on.

[hayesk]

Originally Posted by Zeeb

Is it tired? Maybe to you, but I for one have never enjoyed using a urinal shaped like a mouth (no comments please). Those naughty artists are always deliberately doing things like this because they know some people will be offended.

Uhm... you just missed his point and agreed with it in the same paragraph.

He was not saying a mouth-shaped urinal was tired. He was saying the practice of artists designing something just to amuse or offend the average joe, and then acting like it was nothing when they are offended is tired. Which I agree.

In my opinion, artists who do that are shallow and conceited. If they had any talent, they would create something that actuall makes a worthwhile statement, rather than "Oh, does this offend you? You musn't be as enlightened as I am."

[Zeeb]

Originally Posted by hayesk

Uhm... you just missed his point and agreed with it in the same paragraph.

He was not saying a mouth-shaped urinal was tired. He was saying the practice of artists designing something just to amuse or offend the average joe, and then acting like it was nothing when they are offended is tired. Which I agree.

In my opinion, artists who do that are shallow and conceited. If they had any talent, they would create something that actuall makes a worthwhile statement, rather than "Oh, does this offend you? You musn't be as enlightened as I am."

Originally Posted by hayesk

Uhm... you just missed his point and agreed with it in the same paragraph.

I didn't exactly disagree or miss it. I'm just commenting on what he said further. One of the first comments I made admitted he may be right.

He was not saying a mouth-shaped urinal was tired. He was saying the practice of artists designing something just to amuse or offend the average joe, and then acting like it was nothing when they are offended is tired. Which I agree.

That's fine that you agree because its not an arguement really. Arguing about "what art is" or "what role it should play" is about as effective as trying to prove God exists. Artists making something they know will offend some people is not tired, why? Because new artists and their admirers and detractors are born every day. Everyone is in a different place.

In my opinion, artists who do that are shallow and conceited. If they had any talent, they would create something that actuall makes a worthwhile statement, rather than "Oh, does this offend you? You musn't be as enlightened as I am."

Why, are you an artist? Has any of your work made it into a museum or a public restroom? What is a "worthwhile statement"? This is all so abstract it could go on forever. Artists can be conceited and shallow, but everyone gets jealous when they express it cleverly.

[hayesk]

What is a "worthwhile statement"? This is all so abstract it could go on forever. Artists can be conceited and shallow, but everyone gets jealous when they express it cleverly.

Very good point. It is just my opinion after all. But it's not so much that I don't think artists can't make a statement that offends people. It's the artist that makes the offending statement for the sole purpose of portraying themselves as somehow more enlightened or superior than the person offended by the art that I don't agree with.

At the same time, I don't agree that a person should complain so much to expect to get something removed. All he needed to do was say "that was disgusting, I don't think I ever want to come here again" and then be done with it. For all we know, that is all he did.

[Kevin]

This will obviously make kids want to pee in other people's mouths...

Look at video games.

[chris v]

Timo delivers the Smack-Fu.™

[BlueSky]

If you're setting out to offend anyone you should at least be tasteful about it.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by BlueSky

If you're setting out to offend anyone you should at least be tasteful about it.

Concepts of "taste" appear to vary widely.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

mojo this is like the 20th post and run job you've done today. what gives?

I thought the existing conversations in the lounge were a bit over my head intellectually and wanted something that would capture my interest and hopefully yours. Looks like I got lucky with you, eh?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Timo

I find these types of cultural "news" stories threadbare. Here's the set-up: a philistine encounters a designed object or art which is supposed to be shocking to -- guess who -- a philistine. The philistine is shocked (as he is supposed to be) while the more cultural savvy congratulate themselves on another deft deployment of épater les bourgeoisie. Irony is the backbone of the design and those who get the joke smirk at those who don't. Rinse and repeat.

You know, dada is 75 years old, and the urge to shock the general public (in this particular case, one member of the American public) as an artistic strategy dates to the late nineteenth century. One could make the agrument that it is a tired strategy; that art or design as irony is a one trick pony that at base is nothing more than a way to perpetuate the culture myths artists prop themselves up with -- another way for designers to feel better than the average boob on the street. This is turn is in reaction to the general low opinion people have of design, especially as most "serious" artists now make art only for each other.

Or, "ironically."

Sure it works, but isn't it tired? It certainly isn't very original, nor is it somehow paradigm shifting. I think the sin here isn't that the urinal is shocking to someone from Iowa, I think the sin is that the design thinking behind it is unearnest and boring.

And though everything you say rings true all of that is missed by the "Iowan" who probably finds the lips freshly disturbing. Like the joke you've told so many times it is now boring but to someone who's hearing it the first time thinks it as funny as anything, you can't help but somehow feel a half step 'ahead' of him.

Or something.

[stevesnj]

Ouch, watch those teeth!!

[mydog8mymac]

Originally Posted by Kevin

This will obviously make kids want to pee in other people's mouths...

LOL!


If only we could pee on those artists content to plagairize or ride on the coat tails of Marcel Duchamps! That would give my sense of artistic justice some symmetry.

[mojo2]

GOT GOLLUM?

Originally Posted by BlueSky

If you're setting out to offend anyone you should at least be tasteful about it.

GOT SPLOOJ?

[Eriamjh]

Apparently, the anus-shaped urinals were rejected first.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Apparently, the anus-shaped urinals were rejected first.

-t

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Apparently, the anus-shaped urinals were rejected first.

"Corn."

[Kerrigan]

Apparently, the anus-shaped urinals were rejected first.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Guys were spending more than the average 45 seconds in the mens room.

[macroy]

I'd prefer this anyways....

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by macroy

I'd prefer this anyways....

hmmm...those things remind me of a cross between ashtrays and the things that Madonna wore on her bubes on stage a while back.