Posted on 06/29/2005 8:26:17 AM PDT by Scarchin
Okay - I'm a teacher on vacation and watching Fox news.
It's 11:00 in the morning and an ad comes on for "KY massage and personal lubricant." The husband lights up when the wife says "personal lubricant" and she says it again at the end of the ad and winks. There is a clear sexual tone to the ad.
Is it me or is this out of bounds?
Anyone else see it?
I'm calling FOX and I'll post what happens.
Freeper sees KY jelly advert on FOX News - freaks out over "gay" product
Silly LW Moonbats. Everyone knows gays use Crisco.
I guess where I live, it's always been a distinction without a difference.
Where do you live, Cuba?
Don't tell people not to "lecture" you when you admit you can't tell the difference between broadcast TV and subscription-based TV.
We can't get any TV reception without cable.
Then you subscribe to cable. Just don't expect the government to then regulate/censor what other adults choose to pay money to see. There are many tools available to block out shows and channels you find offensive, including not buying cable in the first place.
SD
That may be true for some things, but I don't think personal dryness is something that advertisers mind-voodoo couples into experiencing. It's real.
SD
I don't live in Cuba, I live about 60 miles south of Seattle, in tall tree country. We never had good success with rooftop antennae.
I don't expect the government to do a thing for me. I don't have a problem with this commercial, nor have I even implied annoyance with it. I'm a grownup, like South Park, and have no kids to worry about explaining things to.
My point was that in the day and age when 'broadcast' stations are no longer recieved by 'broadcast', will this distinction continue?
Your success with antennae is irrelevant. A public broadcast is different from a private network.
My point was that in the day and age when 'broadcast' stations are no longer recieved by 'broadcast', will this distinction continue?
Brodcast networks are spending beaucoup bucks to upgrade to broadcasting digital signals. They are not going away.
The distinction from a political point will depend on how many Americans wish the gov't to be their nanny. If cable networks were treated by the FCC like broadcasts, South Park would cease to exist, as would HBO showing uncut movies, etc.
Maybe a lot of mothers would like help censoring info for their own kids, but I don't see the gov't successfully stepping in to do so. The market in general would revolt.
SD
For that matter, so are your replies to me, since they argue issues like I need to be taken to the woodshed for opinions I've not voiced.
I asked a flippin' question. "Why the distinction?" I might wonder why the networks are apparently limited by censorship standards they shouldn't be. I really don't have a dog in this fight.
And FWIW, you asked me a question "do you live in Cuba" implying everyone can recieve broadcast TV. I thought I was politely answering ~your~ question.
i don't know that anyone is screaming for censorship or banning of advertising, i am certainly not. but do you recognize the problem and its impact on our society? and where does it end? will there be tv ads for vibrators or maybe S&M paraphanelia also, as the societal decline progresses?
I really hate the 'except after "C" rule and I think we should ban it.
I asked if you lived in Cuba because you said where you lived that between public and private there was no distinction.
SD
I'm sorry. :-(
Ah~ I guess what I meant was, because there is no option for free reception of TV, the accessibility and rules of cable versus the rules of 'broadcast' have always been a distinction without a difference.
I don't think I ever said anything like that.
I am doing two things here. Trying to educate people who think KY is something only for gays and other perverts.
And arguing that the public airwaves are something different than private subscriber-based networks.
it has only been in the recent past and with the degradation of sexual mores and the attendant hypersexualization of society that has occasioned the advertising of sexually related products.
True, and I don't enjoy the sexualization of everything any more than the next guy.
will there be tv ads for vibrators or maybe S&M paraphanelia also, as the societal decline progresses?
I guess we part company here. I really don't see KY as an offensive product. As has been noted, it is a standard medical accessory. It's not purient. They're even being coy about it. I could see objecting if it was blaring out about VAGINAL DRYNESS or some such.
SD
Fair enough. I see you are not calling for censorship, so I probably should have given you less grief.
SD
I think it's good to err on the side of less grief ;~D
this goes beyond this ad, as i have tried to say, the KY ad is a symptom of the problem, all i am asking for is an acknowledgement from those that say turn the channel, shut off your cable, send your kids outside to play, etc. that this is a societal problem that has huge ramifications and averting one's eyes from it doesn't make it go away. the decline will continue and if we allow the market to dictate, that will speed the process along.
I see your point. I guess I am surprised ~this~ is the ad that got a thread posted and inspired all this hand-wringing, and not one of the more blatent "strong happy penis" ads.
hey, i haven't even seen the KY adr! the point is not this particular ad. i feel very strongly about this issue because of having kids at this particular age. i know what i tell them and i know what their friends are NOT hearing at home from their parents. i have my daughter, who attends an all girls catholic HS come home and tell me that the son of a friend of our's is NOT really the nice guy that his parents think he is, bc he is a recipient of casual BJs from a girl in her class. of course, we can't tell our friends that, bc it is hearsay, the GIRL herslf is telling tales, but my daughter didn't SEE this taking place and so we don't feel comfortable saying anything. yet if it was OUR son, we would want someone to tell us. THIS is what i am talking about, KY ads, happy penis pills, rap songs about sex, sex in movies etc. This is what the popular culture is injecting into our kids. i am innoculating mine the best i can, but believe me the majority of parents today are self involved and oblvious. and their kids are my kids classmates and potential DATES!
I agree with that.
I think complaining to the network is the way to go, though as you noted, there are far better examples of ads that should be shelved. Complaining about KY because you think it's gay is not going to do much more than make us look like idiots.
if we allow the market to dictate, that will speed the process along.
There's no reason I can think of why networks couldn't decide to be family friendly in terms of ads and when they run. There could even be an independent verifying group, all voluntary of course. This would be the market working in a positive way.
SD
Bet the food went down easy though...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.