Comments on: Condom Marketing Evolves

By: Ashley

Ashley — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 06:03:43 +0000

Thanks for pointing out that the commercial doesn’t advocate sex to prevent pregnancy any more than it advocates sex to prevent STDs.

It’s outrageous that these networks declined to show the commercial, but look at some of the programs that they air.

By: Lya Kahlo

Lya Kahlo — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:42:02 +0000

“but two people who love each other having sex is a vulgar, condemnable act.”

ESPECIALLY if they are Teh Gay.

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 08:06:18 +0000

I just think this is pretty representative of the bullshit way we, as a nation, glorify sex to generate profits and attract attention, but at the same time become disgusted with it when it’s realistic or common. A naked woman selling beer and cars is fine but two people who love each other having sex is a vulgar, condemnable act.

By: Cara

Cara — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:59:39 +0000

Ooooh. I hadn’t even THOUGHT of that!

By: dew

dew — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:48:14 +0000

I have a sick feeling that the ads may have been rejected only because they used the term “evolve.”

I LOVE what Mark Crispin Miller said.

By: wellie

wellie — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 20:42:10 +0000

Firstly, let me just say that I don’t see how the ad is about preventing pregnancy more than STDs.

thank you. neither do i. that just doesn’t make one bit of sense to me…

By: Cara

Cara — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:29:21 +0000

I don’t know. The anti-abortion people won’t have anything to bitch about and one less way to control women if there aren’t unwanted pregnancies?

By: Stupendousness

Stupendousness — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 16:19:27 +0000

Fox’s reason for rejecting the ad is stupid:
“Contraceptive advertising must stress health-related uses rather than the prevention of pregnancy.”

Because pregnancy is soooo not a health issue, right?

But whether it’s a health issue or not, what the fuck is wrong with preventing unwanted pregnancies?