Can't we all just get along! hehehe
Posted on 02/06/2007 2:41:10 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
We need to go back for one more bite of that Snickers Super Bowl ad.
Monday a blogstorm kicked up over the ad that showed two mechanics fighting over a Snickers bar and inadvertently kissing, with the largest gay civil rights group calling on the Mars Inc., the candy company, to pull several alternative endings and related material from its Web site.
And before the day was done, the material had been pulled, as were plans to show one of the alternate endings during the Daytona 500 telecast.
Here was Ameriblog's mid-day headline: "Snickers Superbowl Web site promotes violence against gays and lesbians. Bears & Colts players react in disgust, on camera, to gays."
The ad, which aired during Sunday's game, showed two guys working on a car. One is leaning over the hood, eating a Snickers bar. The other can't help but start chewing on the free end. They work their way toward the middle until they realize their lips have touched. Then, calling for a manly act, each rips a clump of hair from his chest.
But that wasn't the problem.
"You ain't seen nothin' yet," writes John Aravosis, a DC political consultant on his Ameriblog site. Aravosis, who had advocated against anti-gay actions in creating the StopDrLaura.com site and the Matthew Shepard Online Resources, took issue with the now-down Snickers site's showing the reactions of three Bears and two Colts players who had watched the ad. He also questioned three alternative endings to the spot.
I didn't see video of the player's reactions before the site was changed. Aravosis reports that one player said, "That ain't right." A second made a face twisted with disgust.
"These guys are role models for kids, and they're telling America's kids ... that two guys kissing ain't right," Aravosis writes.
One of the alternative endings had a third guy approaching after the close encounter. Brushing his hair from his eyes, he asked "is there room for three on this Love Boat." In another, instead of pulling out chests hair after the kiss, they drink motor oil and anti-freeze.
Aravosis writes, "They guzzle it down, screaming at the top of their lungs, making them sick to their stomachs. The ad is vaguely violent - better to die than be gay."
The next one might be worst, by Avarosis' account. After the kiss, one picks up a wrench and attacks the other. Then the second slams the hood of the car of the head of the other. Aravosis: "Yes, the appropriate reaction to a guy kissing you is to beat the crap out of the guy who kissed you. Maybe Snickers should rename this ad 'Matthew Shepard."
He concludes:
The entire thing is absolutely sickening. And while I can appreciate that Snickers didn't overtly think that promoting violence against gays and lesbians is "funny," they knew what they were doing. They were gay-bashing for fun. And they didn't just cross the line - they left the line in the dust.
My first reaction when I read this, was that he was making much ado about nothing. Particularly when the progressive blogger noted that the family that owns Mars is a big supporter of the Republican party. Leaving his feet to the throw a punch, I thought.
But what was up with showing ball player after ball player react to the video? And after watching the now-pulled alternative endings, which can still be seen here, I'm wondering what the ad agency and Mars officials were going for. Making fun of rednecks? As some Ameriblog readers concluded.
Not everyone reading Ameriblog was as outraged. A commenter, signing his opinion Just Some Guy, wrote:
Now I realize that with the new Democratic majority in Congress, and the rising liberal sentiment in this country, that some people are going to want to flex their muscles. And rightfully so.
However, wouldn't it be best to use some form of restrain, rather than picking knee-jerk fights over every little thing which may offend someone? The entire air of "political correctness" from the '80s is exactly the vehicle the neofascists rode in to power, and it's resurgence was used by GWB to rally his base.
There's a difference between a racist tirade by Michael Richards or Michelle Malkin, and a joke by Sara Silverman or Lisa Lampinelli. The difference is malice, and I just didn't see the malice in the commercial.
I would suggest shrugging off things said in jest. Otherwise you are going to end up crying wolf, and that's the same reason people are currently tuning out GWB and his fearmongering. Please, don't set yourself up to be tuned out- it weakens us all.
Well, I wouldn't want to charge the football jocks who said "That ain't right!" with latent homosexual tendencies.
FYI, I'm eating a Snickers right now. YUM!!!!
All one has to do to find proof is just cruise our FR forum for about 5 minutes and you'll see all sorts of xenophobia, homophobia and bigotry.
"Not that there's anything wrong with that" -Jerry Seinfeld ;^)
the premis is that they are homosexuals in denial but the candy bar brought them "out".
feel free to be freudian on the symbols.
Can't we all just get along! hehehe
Hey, WhiteGuy, longtermmemmory has a very good reply at 104 that you might find interesting.
metrosexuals are homosexuals.
But you are the very definition of a homophobic moron for suggesting it. ;^)
Excellent. Thank you. Totally agree with you, hubby and I.
the premis is that they are homosexuals in denial but the candy bar brought them "out".
NOW I get it.
wrong, the whole laughable marketing spin of metrosexual is that they are essentially closseted homosexuals. Just like this commercials which was pushing the broken back snickers. Perhaps you should visit more often on FreeRepublic.
Resorting to such childish name calling only proves the lack of intellect behind your argument.
LOL! Oh...that's rich!
Metrosexuals get manicures, pedicures, hair color, plastic surgery and take care of their bodies and health.
They can dry themselves after a shower with a white towel and leave no 'stains'...if you know what I mean. ;^)
If they were homosexuals, they'd be called homosexuals. Therefore not all metrosexuals and homosexuals.
Thanks for playing, though.
I have found the much-anticipated Super Bowl commercials to be dull and unfunny for well over a decade now.
It's really something that the marketing whizzes and network execs have convinced Americans to look forward to stupid commercials.
This thread is quite revealing to say the least.
Stupidity and ignorance are alive and well here on the forum.
If it were normal people offended by the add showing two men kissing do you think they would yank the add??
As soon as they realized their lips met....you know the rest of the story.
The commercial ad was a huge success because of the publicity. Pulling the ad just piles on the interest...as we're still discussing it.
You weren't?
Question. Which are worse, the callouses on your knuckles or on your palms?
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.