Last week, Trojan brand condoms started a new "evolve" campaign, which features a commercial of pigs in a bar trying to pick-up women, but to no avail.
Only when one of the pigs visits the restrooms and purchases a Trojan condom, does he transform into a good-looking, 20-something and is able to catch the eye of a cute, martini-sipping blonde.
The commercial is pure genius, metaphorically speaking. Any man without the sense to properly equip himself for a safe, happy and healthy sex life is nothing more than a sloppy, sexually irresponsible pig.
Trojan does not use their name, only their picture logo, and the commercial phrase that appears at the end of the one-minute slot reads, "Evolve. Use a condom every time."
Two major media corporations have refused to run this advertisement: Fox and CBS. The companies rejected the advertisement, although previous Trojan ads have appeared on both.
According to The New York Times, both CBS and Fox declined comment, however, both wrote letters to Trojan informing the condom manufacturer of the decision to decline running the ad and provided a vague explanation.
"While we understand and appreciate the humor of this creative, we do not find it appropriate for our network even with late-night-only restrictions," wrote CBS.
"Contraceptive advertising must stress health-related uses rather than the prevention of pregnancy," wrote Fox.
Something to note about both television companies: both air ads promoting products for erectile dysfunction.
Wouldn't it be better to put the safety on the gun before loading the bullets? Rather, wouldn't it be better to ensure protection before target practice?
Proper condom use, first and foremost, should be the responsibility of a male. This is not to say women shouldn't know about proper condom usage, but women have other concerns.
A condom is one of the very few forms of "male" contraception: the basic principle being, 'roll it over and ride on in.' Women, however, have to deal with birth control, diaphragms and spermicide.
Men: when was the last time you had to inject yourself with a drug to alter the chemical balance of your body in order to have a safe, sexual experience? Taking responsibility for both the safety of yourself and your partner does not make a lesser man, but a better person.
It seems the real problem the broadcast companies have is the lack of metaphorical comprehension and the inability to look past men being portrayed "literally" as pigs.
In our society, music, movies and the Internet cater to a populous with a right-now, face-value attitude. So it makes perfect since that channels like CBS and Fox, which show graphic violence and strong sexual content, would stifle creative commercials which address the less pleasurable side of sexual health issues.
God forbid we consider using proper protection during a hot, steamy reality television show. Who has time for a condom? Not the drunk, horny teenagers.
Carol Carrozza, vice president of marketing for Ansell Healthcare, the company that produces LifeStyle condoms, was quoted in The New York Times article as saying, "We always find it funny that you can use sex to sell jewelry and cars, but you can't use sex to sell condoms."
The issue of disease prevention, as Fox pointed out, becomes null and void if the cause is not noted, the cause being unsafe sexual practices, which mean the necessity of referring to sex.
Anyone offended by references to sex in condom commercial are missing the point. A company wouldn't advertise an energy drink without referring to the wonderful things one could accomplish if consuming their product.
A condom commercial without sex is like an Allstate commercial without car accidents. Neither concentrates solely on the actions, rather both the Trojan and Allstate primary message is they can offer you a reasonable amount of insurance.
The New York Times article also contained research statistics by the Trojan company. Apparently, only one in four sexual acts involve a condom.
These results may or may not take into account other contraception usage or the nature of the sexual relationship. However, the old proverb still remains: it's better to be safe than sorry.
Of the statistic, Jim Daniels, vice president for marketing at Trojan, said, "That's dramatically below usage rates in other developed countries. Our goal is to dramatically increase usage."
With a 75 percent corner on the condom market, Trojan, with the new "Evolve" campaign, is more interested in increasing condom use than marketing their brand. While no one can deny that the company wants consumers using their product, it is still a notable noble effort on Trojan's part to safely equip society.
With that, Trojan deserves some well earned "cheers" for their new campaign.
Fox and CBS get the "jeers" for being close-minded and oppressive of an informative and entertaining ad.
Perhaps, one day, condoms and contraceptives will no longer be a topic of controversy, or at the least embarrassment. Maybe one day - when pigs fly.
Posted: 6/27/07 on www.mtsusidelines.com
Monday, February 25, 2008
Women should decide; men should support
"Well aren't you glad your mother didn't have an abortion?"
"I suppose, but it isn't like I would be complaining if she did."
The above dialogue was held between a die-hard "Pro-Lifer" and myself. An interesting fact about the speaker - it was a male.
In our democratic society, men and women are allowed and encouraged to use the right of free speech and religious beliefs without the fear of prosecution.
As intelligent individuals, we are allotted the abilities to form our own beliefs about subjects. The issue isn't about having an opinion, but rather forcing an opinion in a battle where the instigator only has a three-legged dog.
This is not a discussion on the "rights" and "wrongs" of abortion. Abortion is currently classified as a legal, medical procedure but is held as morally and ethically wrong by certain groups and persons.
The discussion is why is it acceptable, even viewed as correct, for a man to tell a woman how to manage her body? It's like taking a car to a mechanic and telling them how to fix the problem.
Reversing roles, would a man rather have a woman picket and protest in favor of required vasectomies or support his decision to have or not have a medical procedure performed?
The problem exists when men are the forefront of the "Pro-Life" movement. The fact remains that men are unable to conceive; therefore we are unable to properly empathize with a woman's reproductive biology.
Comparing social subjects, can a heterosexual person identify with the issues faced by the Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender community? Absolutely not, because a heterosexual person does not feel discriminated against for their sexuality.
Can a straight person be a supporter and advocate for the GLBT community? Absolutely.
Again, it isn't about having opinions, but about recognizing one's place within a social issue. Men would do well to remember that it is a woman's body entangled within a complicated web of religion and politics.
Sadly for The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, this is not the case.
Of the seven directors for the CBR, four are men, including the executive director, the Midwest regional director, the southeast regional director and the northern California director.
I wonder when the last time any of them were pregnant and had to make a decision not just based on faith, but on what would be most beneficial to their physical well-being.
The only other argument to be made is in the case of a man voicing an opinion about his fetus. A man should have his opinion taken into serious consideration in the case of a fetus he helped produce.
The opinion, however, should remain just that. The decision rests entirely with the woman, unless science develops a miraculous way for men to bare children.
As a side note, the discussion of children and abortion in a consenting relationship between a man and a woman is a private matter. A relationship is private and, in theory, both partners respect each other's opinions enough to compromise their sexual lifestyle
However, this goes to the age-old argument of contraception. If the man wanted children, why isn't he with a woman who wants the same? If a man doesn't want children, why isn't he using protection? Accidents and unexpected circumstances arise, but for the most part prevention of children is tremendously easier in our modern day of medicine.
"You can have a rule-making opinion about abortion when you are able to experience morning sickness, swollen feet and breasts, aching back pain and the overwhelming responsibility of carrying a living creature within you for 10 months," sage advice that every mother should bestow on her son.
These are the bodies of women, the bodies of our mothers, sisters, aunts, friends and the only gender capable of perpetuating our species.
Men are not pro-life, nor pro-choice. Men should be pro-woman and support her decision, whatever it may be.
Posted: 9/17/07 on www.mtsusidelines.com
"I suppose, but it isn't like I would be complaining if she did."
The above dialogue was held between a die-hard "Pro-Lifer" and myself. An interesting fact about the speaker - it was a male.
In our democratic society, men and women are allowed and encouraged to use the right of free speech and religious beliefs without the fear of prosecution.
As intelligent individuals, we are allotted the abilities to form our own beliefs about subjects. The issue isn't about having an opinion, but rather forcing an opinion in a battle where the instigator only has a three-legged dog.
This is not a discussion on the "rights" and "wrongs" of abortion. Abortion is currently classified as a legal, medical procedure but is held as morally and ethically wrong by certain groups and persons.
The discussion is why is it acceptable, even viewed as correct, for a man to tell a woman how to manage her body? It's like taking a car to a mechanic and telling them how to fix the problem.
Reversing roles, would a man rather have a woman picket and protest in favor of required vasectomies or support his decision to have or not have a medical procedure performed?
The problem exists when men are the forefront of the "Pro-Life" movement. The fact remains that men are unable to conceive; therefore we are unable to properly empathize with a woman's reproductive biology.
Comparing social subjects, can a heterosexual person identify with the issues faced by the Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender community? Absolutely not, because a heterosexual person does not feel discriminated against for their sexuality.
Can a straight person be a supporter and advocate for the GLBT community? Absolutely.
Again, it isn't about having opinions, but about recognizing one's place within a social issue. Men would do well to remember that it is a woman's body entangled within a complicated web of religion and politics.
Sadly for The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, this is not the case.
Of the seven directors for the CBR, four are men, including the executive director, the Midwest regional director, the southeast regional director and the northern California director.
I wonder when the last time any of them were pregnant and had to make a decision not just based on faith, but on what would be most beneficial to their physical well-being.
The only other argument to be made is in the case of a man voicing an opinion about his fetus. A man should have his opinion taken into serious consideration in the case of a fetus he helped produce.
The opinion, however, should remain just that. The decision rests entirely with the woman, unless science develops a miraculous way for men to bare children.
As a side note, the discussion of children and abortion in a consenting relationship between a man and a woman is a private matter. A relationship is private and, in theory, both partners respect each other's opinions enough to compromise their sexual lifestyle
However, this goes to the age-old argument of contraception. If the man wanted children, why isn't he with a woman who wants the same? If a man doesn't want children, why isn't he using protection? Accidents and unexpected circumstances arise, but for the most part prevention of children is tremendously easier in our modern day of medicine.
"You can have a rule-making opinion about abortion when you are able to experience morning sickness, swollen feet and breasts, aching back pain and the overwhelming responsibility of carrying a living creature within you for 10 months," sage advice that every mother should bestow on her son.
These are the bodies of women, the bodies of our mothers, sisters, aunts, friends and the only gender capable of perpetuating our species.
Men are not pro-life, nor pro-choice. Men should be pro-woman and support her decision, whatever it may be.
Posted: 9/17/07 on www.mtsusidelines.com
A time for beginnings
Now is the time for a beginning to this blog.
I'm not quite sure what to do first. It seems this will be an extension of my opinion writing and the column in the Middle Tennessee State University's newspaper Sidelines called "Yeah, Whatever."
To give a good idea of my soon to be plethora of readers (at least I hope), I've decided to post a few of the past columns I've done for the college paper.
They aren't my best, but it's a start. And like everything else, a beginning is in order.
Enjoy.
I'm not quite sure what to do first. It seems this will be an extension of my opinion writing and the column in the Middle Tennessee State University's newspaper Sidelines called "Yeah, Whatever."
To give a good idea of my soon to be plethora of readers (at least I hope), I've decided to post a few of the past columns I've done for the college paper.
They aren't my best, but it's a start. And like everything else, a beginning is in order.
Enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
