Principal tells teachers to hide topless mermaid on Starbucks cups

In Oregon and Washington, Starbucks has brought back its original mermaid logo -- with breasts bared -- on its cups to celebrate 35 years. One school principal has asked teachers to get a sleeve to cover the image if they bring their Starbucks cups into school. (Seattle Post-Intelligencer)

Comments

[coffeeguy]

I just checked my bag on aniversary blend to be sure but isn't there long hair covering her breasts?

[deusx]

Does this Principal also use a magic marker to make the statuary in the books on art in the library "decent" too?
I wonder if he cuts out the pictures in national geographic of the topless native women as well. This man apparently has some issues.

[Phranqlin]

I bet he crosses out all the dirty words in the library's unabridged dictionary, too.

[Eric]

Funny responses, but there's clearly a difference between literature and cardboard cups. I'm a huge Starbucks fan, and I don't have a problem with this principal asking for this. Teacher's don't need the additional distraction of kids saying "Look, boobies" in the classroom. It just helps head off one more issue.

[James the Barista]

This is old news and only applys to ONE school in the district. You got to love stores close to the mothership, you know what they say the closer you are to SCC the better the service.

[oxhead]

Boobs on a coffee cup would be a minor distraction in most classrooms, I would imagine. And I think a "look, boobies" comment from a kid could be an opportunity for a teacher to explain that breasts are not really an issue at all.

[Kenneth]

It's the original Starbucks logo. Gimme a break. School is about learning, not hiding the facts.

IMHO, I much prefer the original logo.

[D@MN]

And everyone who has said that the principal shouldn't do that, either doesn't have kids, doesn't have boys, or just do not care about their kids.

[deusx]

Why? Is seeing a topless mermaid somehow going to damage my kids? Gods, imagine how badly screwed up the millions of children who have seen LIVE boobies must be.

[Mickyfinn]

D@mn:

I hope you never take your children to a museum or art museum then.

[Mickyfinn]

Or is it a problem with mermaids, not boobies?

Shouldn't the parent decide when and what a child can see? Forcing anyone's child to see pictures that the parent has not agreed to is wrong. Just because you want to expose your children to the breasts does not mean I want mine. I should have that right, so don't take it away from me. I do not take yours by making National Geographic illegal. I would never do that. I believe in free speech, but showing breasts to my child is taking away my right as a parent.

I go to museums. I also have the right to say that the breast cup shouldn't be allowed in a school!

[deusx]

Yes anonymous, you are right, parents have a right to make their children as ignorant and backward as they are. Children don't think of body parts in terms of sex unless they are taught to. The only harm a young child could possibly gain from seeing a drawing of breasts is the harm the parent has assigned to it.

[UsedToBeAChild]

The above is so not true! Without being taught, there is an inborn sense that nakedness is wrong. A parent does not need to assign "harm" for a child to be affected.
I don't necessarily have a problem with the cups, but to cry censorship is just absurd.

[Mickyfinn]

So, it wasn't the mermaid thing.

At least we have a name for it now, "The Breast Cup".

Actually, that makes it sound like a cup shaped like a breast, which are actually produced. But I digress.

Is that logo up there actual size? Drawn boobs are far worse than the real ones.

And I'd hate to say it, but looking at the pic of the logo above, aren't we really close to making out a little 'foliage' just above that plant or whatever she's holding?

I'd venture a guess that if herr principal never mentioned anything, the breast cup wouldn't have even been noticed.

[stopeatingmysesamecake]

Deusx:

Absolutely.

America is getting more embarassing every day.

[Boston Starbucks Rebel]

I think they are obviously being very silly. The students there can easily go on the internet and see any of that stuff and much worse on TV. Like if you watch Nip/Tuck or Rescue Me you see actual sexual acts occuring. These students need to learn that this is what most women have and not to be ashamed of their bodies. The principal probably has an old Oedpius complex with "mommy" and such explaining his projection of feelings, in particular frustration in fulfilling his fantasy. Lets all be mature adults and not overreact.

[TTMYGM]

Can I get a naked Ghetto latte, or does that cost more?

[pnwgal]

So I go down to my Starbuck's to get tea this morning and darn if I don't notice the original logo on the cup! I thought that was oh so cool and had just mentioned it to my co-workers when I noticed this article.

Oh let me get oh so excited about boobs on a cup when my son can be exposed to SO much potential violence in the movies, on TV and in the video games he plays. I'd rather he learned to appreciate the beauty of the human body than 1,000 way to degrade it.

Say whatever you want, D@MN, but don't EVER assume I don't care about my son!

[deusx]

Usedtobeachild,

Before I address you, I just want to check to make certain you aren't trying to be funny and that's what you really think. So...is it?

[coffeeguy]

I do understand why a principal would do this becuase at some point a parent is going to complain.

You have to think that way to deal with those kind of situations ahead of time.

Personally if I had kids I would have no problems with explaining such things as that logo but it's not something I would expect or necessarily want a teacher of my kids to do. It really would depend on the teacher but I totaly respect a parent who feels that's not a teachers place.

The principal really was right in every way to ask this. Not becuase he feels it's wrong but becuase he has to be respectfull of the parents in his school and the teachers who feel it would be awkward to have to explain all that to a younger child.

Does anyone thinks it's kinda disturbing that the mermaid is "spreading her legs apart"? I guess that's why Starbucks "Disney-fied" their logo over the years.

[Nysssa]

I agree with CoffeeGuy that the extreme yoga posture is more disturbing than the swept-back hairstyle.

What the heck are those, anyway? Fins? Trees? Legs? Another creature's legs?

That original mermaid just looks like a fat old barfly.

I would suggest banning the cup so my children are not exposed to fat old barflies.

[deusx]

Mermaids and sirens do not have legs, they have a tail/tails. Also, the creature has no human genitalia beyond what your imagination puts there, so having the tails spread is sexually meaningless.

Yknow, I had always considered myself a bit of a perv, but my hat is off to those who can look at the fish woman and think sex thoughts...wow.

[deusx]

On further thought, has anyone considered that the drawing on the cup comes from a time far more overbearingly puritanical when it came to nudity than ours, yet it was not considered an issue then, but my god its apparently freaking fish porn today.

[danperducci]

anonymous needs to take a chill pill!

i saw that coffee cup and saw nothing overtly pornographic about it. it's a topless woman on a coffee cup! parents should encourage their child to talk about things that make them uncomfortable. instead, we shame them into keeping things secret and hidden. is it any wonder that perverts are luring our kids on the internet? we shame our youth into looking underground for guidance on such issues.

what's screwed up about this is that we could have a picture of two guys beating the crap out of each other on the cup and nobody would bat an eye.

i don't think that anybody is trying to 'corrupt' our young people with a silly retro logo. if anyone under 18 is 'turned on' by this image, they need therapy for much different reasons!

[BaristaBess]

The original logo is actually strikingly similar to a 15th century engraving, however some artist 35 years ago made small changes to remove her belly button and cover in between her "legs/tails" with more scales. Apparently 35 years ago cartoon breasts weren't that big of a deal. My, what progress we've made as a society. (tounge firmly in cheek)

ANYONE who thinks that they control what their children do and don't see in a public school has their head in the clouds. If you're that offened by a paper cup with some 15th century art on it, disenroll them right now. It will save you much heartache in the future to homeschool them.

[coffeeguy]

You know I do find it sad how little we can progress as a society with tounge in check on petty issues like this.

what ever happened to the philospohical society we are supposed to have today? No one including myself likes to open up their mind very much nowadays..it's sad to see how far religon and polotics have taken root over someone using their own heads. :(

*Disclaimer this is my opinon and is not fact.

[blonde barista]

wow, usedtobeachild, how do you explain tribes/civilizations that wear little to no clothing almost all of the time? we've all seen the national geographic pictures (which, by the way, are shown in schools and NOT covered by a sleeve), and those people don't seem to have "an inborn sense that nakedness is wrong." in fact, adam & eve were naked until the devil told them that it was wrong.

those are boobies? I thought they were empty espresso cups with a cube of sugar at the bottom.

My bad.

[cornfrost]

I am so glad I am not a sixth-grade girl with boy classmates bringing their hot chocolates to school in that cup. I would die of embarrassment.

[UsedToBeAChild]

The devil didn't tell them...they simply knew they were naked once they ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
I am not trying to spark debate, simply stating what I believe, as prudish and old-fashioned as it may be.
My point in the original post is that children are quite intuitive and do not have to always be taught when something is wrong. Read again, parents need not assign "harm." I remember as a child, turning off the TV because something bothered me. I didn't know anything was "wrong" and my parents hadn't said anything. That was my point...not that mermaids are satan. :-)
No one in their right mind is going to look at the mermaid and have perverted thoughts or even Michaelangelo's "David" for that matter. I just don't see where it is necessary to expose children to it.

[Lauren]

...because I'd rather my children see it on the side of a coffee cup and realize that it's OK. Even when they aren't pretty or perfect or beautiful...it's OK. And even though they don't NEED to be filled with silicone, if they are that's ok too.

[UsedToBeAChild]

Ah, I forgot the tribal example. Little to no clothing, yes. But keep in mind what the "little clothing" covers. Who taught them to cover their private parts? While we are on the topic of Adam and Eve, they had no parents to teach them to think of their body parts in terms of sex? How did we get here?

Now, lest you think me really strange, I should point out that I am sipping tea out of an original Pike Place mug. My intent was not to condemn the siren or nudity even. I merely wanted to point out the falacy of those who do not respect the wishes of parents and ridicule those who desire to help children. They have decades to experience all that life has to offer. Must they see it all in the first one?

[blonde barista]

yes, the little clothing that tribal people wear may cover their reproductive organs, but many of the women do not cover their breasts. the reason their genitals are covered is probably more of a health/comfort thing (who wants dirt all up in there?), but breasts, being just lumps of fat with skin over them, have no reason to be covered.

in europe, many families (with *gasp* children and even babies) frequent nude beaches. there is also more nudity and sex on TV and in other forms of media. european children are no more screwed up than american children (probably even LESS, in some cases). and, OH MY GOD, their kids saw boobies!

okay, i slipped up a little on the adam and eve reference. but the point was that they were created naked, free as birds, and there was nothing wrong with it. if god thought nudity was so "wrong" he would have created clothes from the get go. the only reason that people, like you, consider nudity to be "wrong" is because of what we have learned about it through years of living in a suppressive culture.
american culture has just taught us that it's wrong. and the reason little kids point and laugh and say "OMG boobies" is because they think it's so wrong and forbidden. if they realized that, like everything else on their body, breasts are natural, it wouldn't be so shocking.

(i probably sound like a nudist or something, but i'm not...)

[Dan Perducci]

Americans and their sexualization of the body is far more harmful than a child being exposed to a coffee cup!

I am definitely no nudist but I object to the treatment of our bodies as 'dirty.' We give our youth an automatic taboo when we treat all nudity (even incidental and artistic) as 'evil.'

The word nude always brings up very prurient connotations as a result of such attitudes. Say 'nude beach' to your average American and I bet you $$$ that they will quickly imagine a bevy of Pamela Andersons running around in their bathing suits. Au contraire! The REAL nude beach has everyday people of all shapes and sizes who look more like they belong in an Elks Lodge meeting in Peoria than at the Ivy in Beverly Hills.

The Puritans are doing the opposite of what they wish when they attack anything as being obscene. The kids quickly want to know what all the fuss is about and then they turn to their 'friends' on the street. That's definitely the place where we want them to learn it from...not!

America: going down the toilet deeper every day...

[mathematician]

complain complain complain
exposure on a starbucks cup
I say lets turn to the Amish for advice

In times were the American education system is lagging behind the principal is concerned about the logo on a starbucks cup

[Ducky]

OMG give me a break!!! if it was a picture of real breast that would be one thing, but a drawing of a mermaid?!?! LOL

[not here]

I like the boobs and how her almost 2 human legs are slit open and she is holding them apart...yes very fishy fish porn...it's fun .

[UsedToBeAChild]

Oh, lets not get started on the disaster that the American school system is in. A friend is a principal of a lower income school and is not allowed to show "Akeelah and the Bee" to her 5th graders because it has one too many "cuss" words. May I say again, I don't have a problem with the cup...I also don't have a problem with people who do have a problem with it. If the principal wants to put a sleeve on it, okay. Most of them probably put sleeves on anyway. Why ridicule someone for taking a stand just because it seems silly and is against what you believe?

[CFLsbuxfan]

Am I the only one who didn't even NOTICE the mermaid until this discussion? Maybe I should pay attention more...

[stopeatingmysesamecake]

Dan put it very well.

And I'm not a nudist either - I couldn't expose my friends or strangers to the trainwreck that is my gut.

[Mary]

I was wondering - why am I reading this? So much wasted energy. And then I saw it - "Can I get a naked Ghetto latte, or does that cost more?"

Thank you TTMYGM!

[seattle]

The essence of this issue is our American attitude towards nudity/sex, etc. Our fearful, censoring attitude and attempts to shield children from natural things is precisely why we have such a high rate of problems in this arena (see, teen pregnancy, STDs, etc.). A drawing of a mythical creature is not porn and is not going to scar children. A parent freaking out about it is going to scar them, but the parent won't realize that until the child reaches their teen years; and they still won't understand what caused the problem.

Besides, I'm thinking that the illegal drugs that have made their way even into our grade schools is probably more distracting than a mermaid whose breasts aren't even that obvious. Also pretty distracting are the dirty magazines that boys often steal from their fathers and bring to school to show their friends (magazines that usually plant the seed in their heads that women are objects and toys, not really to be respected).

Maybe we should be more worried about how these things affect the success of America's public education system. It's really no wonder that other countries laugh at us.

[CB]

Do you have any idea how small that logo is? I looked the other day I couldn't tell if she was topless or wearing just small sea shells. Give me a break.

[sbuxboy]

"look at this stuff, isn't it neat? Wouldn't you think my collection's complete? Wouldn't you think I'm the girl, the girl who has everything!"

Name that tune/movie.

[marmar]

the little mermaid!

i love starbucks and you know if that ever happened to me i think that i would start getting my morning coffee someplace else.