Posted on 06/24/2008 7:55:22 AM PDT by vimto
A mayonnaise ad that shows two men kissing has been withdrawn from television after 200 viewers complained that it was offensive. Heinz, which makes the New York Deli Mayo featured in the commercial, pulled the advertisement less than a week into its expected five week run, in response to the criticism. Viewers told the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) that the ad was inappropriate and unsuitable for children to see. The ASA has not yet decided whether to launch an investigation. snip..... It is understood that the commercial was not shown during children's television programming, because of new rules from Ofcom that restrict ads for products high in fat, salt and sugar.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
In my never ending quest to learn how to express myself in the english language effectively, I am compelled to ask...WHAT on Earth did I say to lead you to that ridiculous conclusion?
Yes it was. But those two drs. were a hoot. Help the common people but don’t live around the common people. lol
And to the various FReepers who said a week ago that this ad would go down well with "them limey faggots", well - guess what. You were wrong. This thread is open for your apologies, you mincing gayboys.
Yup. All the people I know who volunteer and donate to the needy are conservative.
The most giving state in the US: Mississippi.
bump with no comment
Of what mindset are people who find this dichotomy acceptable?
Have you ever seen the show, “Project Rungay”, er, “Runway”? Almost every contestant is THE stereotype of “gay”. Proving that, as the adage says, there is a grain of truth in every stereotype, I suppose.
But Twinkies are healthy , right ? Hehehe//
You said, after describing the commercial in your post:
"I'll have to check to see if there are other brands of mayo and catsup...ya think?"
OK... since you said it, I'll let you tell me what it means.
"OK... since you said it, I'll let you tell me what it means."
What it means is, I will see if I can buy mayo and catsup from another company...like Best Foods or somebody. The "ya think" part is a little sarcasm meaning "or is Heinz the only brand available?" I presume that most folks know it isn't.
I also do not patronize Hormel because the head of that company is a gay activist. Klinton actually appointed him ambassador to some small european country.
How you might think that sentence conveys an idea of my view of the homosexual life style leaves me puzzled.
Eating at the foundation of society. Commercial greed rules the day!
ok you get points for the play on word, but man you should warn people.
I almost puked from the Snicker ad during the superbowl and haven’t bought a Snickers bar ever since. I still like Snickers bars but everytime I see one, I think of that TV commercial. I didn’t think any other companies would be so similarly stupid to repel me from wanting their products again this way. I guess some have to learn the hard way.
I see a Snickers bar and I see those ugly guys kissing, and I just don’t want a candy bar anymore.
The hidden agenda in these commercials is to get you used to seeing guys kiss, so they can immunize you from being offended when they want to make it a common activity in public. Sure, it is supposed to be a funny, attention getting ad, but there are lines you don’t cross. It might be funny to have somebody in a situation where they have to go to the bathroom very badly, but you don’t see anyone squat and dump a steaming load on the commercial. It would be offensive and people would scream bloody murder at being subjected to it. Yet the gay agenda demands we become desensitized to seeing to homosexual men kissing.
I don’t see a joke. I see an agenda. Homosexuals are trying to desensitize people to the revulsion of seeing two men kiss. It is part of their desire to make that mainstream, and they are going to succeed. This is the way they will succeed. 10 years from now, people will say “its just two guys kissing, big deal” and the homosexuals will have won yet another round of the culture war.
It is not as if the only way to make the point in the commercial was to SHOW US two guys EXPLICITLY kissing. They could have waved goodbye and had the “cook” walk in front of a mirror with the reflection of Mom in it as he passed in front, showing the real mother.
They didn’t HAVE TO have two guys kissing. They WANTED TO have two guys kissing. And the sooner they can get mainstream acceptance for that, the happier they will be. They are going to win. They are going to get acceptance from the majority of people that it is “OK” for two guys to kiss in public. And this is just the first phase of how they are going to achieve that.
Only maybe some day it will be your son or grandson who is kissing other boys in public, since it will be “OK or even “cool” when the homosexuals get done making it mainstream.
OK, you're looking to purchase similar products from another company...
I also do not patronize Hormel because the head of that company is a gay activist.
... because you boycott companies that either employ or support homosexuals...
How you might think that sentence conveys an idea of my view of the homosexual life style leaves me puzzled.
...and given what you just stated above, it kinda looks like my first impressions were correct: You're no longer purchasing a Heinz product because there were two guys smooching in a commercial, and context be damned - they were HOMOS flaunting their lifestyle.
I understand perfectly. Thanks.
I understand perfectly. Thanks."
Close but no cigar...I still am failing to communicate.
I have no problem with homosexuals or their lifestyle.
I do take issue with general consumer businesses flaunting any sort of sexuality based sales pitches in a medium that is readily available to impressionable children.
I would dispense with the euphemism regarding "lifestyle"...virtually all of the commercials for "family" consumer products ignore sexuality...perhaps because sexuality is simply not relevant.
A commercial about mayonnaise involving pre-teens does not need a sexual component to be effective.
In my opinion, anyone who thinks it does has a sick agenda.
The only important context here, contrary to your view apparently, is that my children may want to inquire of me about things like why are those kids calling that man mom? Or why are those two men kissing like you and mom do? Or who knows what.
If I choose to teach my children about homosexuality I want it to be just that…my choice. See I’m pro-choice. I don’t want my kids to be incited to inquire about an unnatural sexual choice in the context of a mayonnaise choice.
Oh, and if the choice of the adjective “unnatural” offends you, too bad. But the context in which I use it is that the biologically natural pupose of sex, contrary to culture today, is about procreation…homosexual activity does not have that natural capacity.
Thanks for reading.
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.