Boycott homophobic Mars/Snickers

[Salvor-Hardon]

Would have been a better commercial if it had ended with butt sex

Everything is better if it ends with butt sex.

 

[sophia jane]

The players reactions were not homophobic. They were grossed out. If the commercial had been a beautiful woman kissing a guy with rotted out teeth, too much facial hair, oily skin with pimples, with a lazy eye, how many women seeing it would have had the same reaction? To a straight guy, the thought of kissing another man is gross. That's not fear of homosexuals, that's just a gut reaction to something that isn't attractive to them. It's different with women because even straight women usually find other women attractive.

Here's my thing (and I'm coming from a bisexual point of view/ the pov of someone who has seen homophobia in action and understands the way it actually works in society)- you say they weren't homophobic, just grossed out. So, it's okay to say that homosexuals are gross then? Because that's essentially the message- gay men are gross. The next step is to say that since it's gross, it must be wrong. And if it's wrong, it must be immoral or illegal or dangerous. And if it's those things then gay people shouldn't be allowed to get married or have kids because they might spread it around. You can say the original commercial was meant as humor, but the grossed out reactions were wrong because they were homophobic. You don't have to be beating the shit out of a gay person to be homophobic, you just have to have the mindset that it's gross, that it's wrong, that it's not something you want to be around. That's where homophobia starts, that's where discrimination starts, that's why gay people have so few rights in this country. Because it's okay to say it's gross and it's wrong and when gay people don't like that attitude we're told we're too sensitive and we're over-reacting.

And by the way, your whole it's different for women is crap, too. Women kissing shouldn't be acceptable simply because it turns heterosexual men on; it should be acceptable because we should all be free to love who we want. And no, straight women don't naturally find other straight women attractive. Where do you get this stuff? It's ridiculous.

 

[Athena_e19]

I watched the Super Bowl, saw the ad, and laughed. Not very hard, but a little one time "ha" type of thing.

I'm proud of who I am, who I like, and what we do. I don't care about Snickers or Mars or their commercial. I only care when it leads to measures banning equal rights and eliminating a segment of the population from political discourse.

In the long run, the ad will never matter. It only matters because so many GLBT bloggers are out there using their voice to complain about it. Instead of focusing on the root of the problems and the structural characteristics of our society that make real gay bashing possible, we look at a candy bar ad.

A lot of my friends in the community told me we had won a big victory here in Arizona this past election term. But you have how many new states that defined marriage as between a man and a woman? We're 10 million strong. Our victories shouldn't be in one state and losing in all others.

We all said we won a victory with the Democrats taking Congress. But what have they done for us? What will they do for us? It seems like we're forgotten already- its just the Iraq war now.

My opinion is that we should shut up about Snickers ads that garner snickers. We need to use our voice to reach people so its not funny to be gay. When we do that, these type of things go away.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

OK, maybe the ads were supposed to make fun of homophobes. But the athletes making faces saying "that's not right" - that's nothing BUT homophobia.

OK, so everyone has a right to like or dislike homosexuality. But even if they don't like to see two men kiss, they shouldn't show their disgust in public, because they are role models, and if role models publically show their disgust regarding a sensitive subject like homosexuality, they WILL have a negative impact on society, especially those members of society are very young and impressionable.

Role models should say things like "OK, I don't like to watch two men kiss, but that's my problem, not theirs. I think they have every right in the world to kiss each other, and I think it's wrong to treat homosexual or bisexual people badly just because I myself have problems with them."

Exactly what does "That's not right" mean?

It's an expression that I use at times. And usually it's to describe something that is totally ludicrous.

I have no idea how anyone can honestly equate homosexuality to two buffoons accidently kissing while eating a candy bar.

 

[Wyldfire]

Could "That's not right" equal.......

Jumping on the other end of someone's food?

Eating someone else's food?

Hell, the whole scenario?

There are so many different ways you could see this situation that I think the Gay community jumped on this just to show they could influence the media and the public. That or they felt the need to jump on a cause because "being gay" is losing it's vogue factor. Too much of today's society enjoy the fact that they can force change with political correctness. The organizations that raise hell about these sorts of comercials are as bad as PETA or Green Peace. In the next ten years we'll be in such a state that communication between two people in public will cease to happen because someone out in public will get offended by a conversation.

 

[Athena_e19]

I'd be careful to comment on the whether or not being gay is "en vogue".

The fact of the matter is, that when something is controversial in the mainstream of society, the "it" people have to adopt the edgier side of things so that they can seem to be leading the pack. Its not the other way around. Being gay is not controversial. Gay rights is. Stars and politicians comment on it, to be en vogue.

And I don't think change has to be forced through political correctness. I don't support a federal amendment to ban gay marriage because the federal government is too big. I don't oppose the states that have defined marriage a particular way. It was done in a legal matter that was decided by a localized population, not a mob.

Our battle, and mine, is not in political correctness. Its in the grounds of someones mind. I'll never change a homophobe by suing someone or complaining or boycotting. But if I can be normal, intelligent, and rational- they can see the error of the ways. All without PC or being en vogue.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Exactly what does "That's not right" mean?

It's an expression that I use at times. And usually it's to describe something that is totally ludicrous.

I have no idea how anyone can honestly equate homosexuality to two buffoons accidently kissing while eating a candy bar.

"That's not right" in this context means; "Two men accidentally touching lips turns my stomach."

The buffoons in the ad equated accidentally kissing to homosexuality.


Sophia Jane, thank you for your clear discourse. I couldn't have said it better, in fact, I haven't been able to say it as well as you just did!

There are so many different ways you could see this situation that I think the Gay community jumped on this just to show they could influence the media and the public.

I take it you have never felt yourself to be in danger because of who you are. I am happy for you, there.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

"That's not right" in this context means; "Two men accidentally touching lips turns my stomach."

The buffoons in the ad equated accidentally kissing to homosexuality.

That's just your opinion. How do you know what they meant? I think you are jumping to conclusions here.

I think I'm a fairly average person. Like I have said previously, when I saw the two men kiss, I did not think of homosexuality, that was the last thing on my mind.

 

[Stella_Omega]

That's just your opinion. How do you know what they meant? I think you are jumping to conclusions here.

I think I'm a fairly average person. Like I have said previously, when I saw the two men kiss, I did not think of homosexuality, that was the last thing on my mind.

why do I think that? Because they ripped out chest hair afterwards, to prove they were manly.

Well, anyways, I definitely know your point of view now, and you know mine, right? So we don't need to bicker interminably over it.

 

[S-Des]

Here's my thing (and I'm coming from a bisexual point of view/ the pov of someone who has seen homophobia in action and understands the way it actually works in society)- you say they weren't homophobic, just grossed out. So, it's okay to say that homosexuals are gross then? Because that's essentially the message- gay men are gross. The next step is to say that since it's gross, it must be wrong. And if it's wrong, it must be immoral or illegal or dangerous. And if it's those things then gay people shouldn't be allowed to get married or have kids because they might spread it around. You can say the original commercial was meant as humor, but the grossed out reactions were wrong because they were homophobic. You don't have to be beating the shit out of a gay person to be homophobic, you just have to have the mindset that it's gross, that it's wrong, that it's not something you want to be around. That's where homophobia starts, that's where discrimination starts, that's why gay people have so few rights in this country. Because it's okay to say it's gross and it's wrong and when gay people don't like that attitude we're told we're too sensitive and we're over-reacting.

And by the way, your whole it's different for women is crap, too. Women kissing shouldn't be acceptable simply because it turns heterosexual men on; it should be acceptable because we should all be free to love who we want. And no, straight women don't naturally find other straight women attractive. Where do you get this stuff? It's ridiculous.

I got it from women on this board who've said it. I'm sorry that they were uninformed or lying. I didn't say homosexuality is wrong, that is a ridiculous twisting of my post. I said watching two men kiss (or have sex) is gross for a straight man to watch. I made the comment that many people would find an attractive woman kiss an ugly man gross, but I noticed you skipped that part. Would that be Ugly-phobic (I'm sure there is a word for it, but it's not worth it). I've seen women and men react in a similar way to a younger person kissing a really old person (i.e. Anna Nicole Smith). Does that mean that if I don't want to watch Larry King make out with his 25 year old wife, I'm Geriatriphobic? Lets not mix terms. Thinking something is gross to watch is not the same thing as saying it is disusting or should be condemed. For you to say that's where discrimination (and assault) starts is saying that I don't have the right to be grossed out by someone else's behavior (even if I keep it to myself). Even major gay rights activists are saying this flap is a mountain out of a molehille. You can read anything you want into it, but that doesn't mean it's really there.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

For you to say that's where it starts is saying that I don't have the right to be grossed out by someone else's behavior (even if I keep it to myself).

but (not to stir the pot or anything) this was a national advertising campaign, not a personal reaction... not exactly keeping it to oneself...

it denotes a stereotypical reaction... getting grossed out by two men kissing...

there was a commercial (I wish I could find it) a few years ago with two women kissing... it was also a beer commercial, if I remember correctly...

of course, there was no fuss about THAT one... that was just "hot"

there is a clear, clear difference in cultural perception about m/m sex as opposed to f/f sex... one's icky, the other one is "hot." so, one is undesirable, and one isn't. The judgment is implied, even if it doesn't extend to legislation.

It does have its affects.

 

[S-Des]

but (not to stir the pot or anything) this was a national advertising campaign, not a personal reaction... not exactly keeping it to oneself...

it denotes a stereotypical reaction... getting grossed out by two men kissing...

there was a commercial (I wish I could find it) a few years ago with two women kissing... it was also a beer commercial, if I remember correctly...

of course, there was no fuss about THAT one... that was just "hot"

there is a clear, clear difference in cultural perception about m/m sex as opposed to f/f sex... one's icky, the other one is "hot." so, one is undesirable, and one isn't. The judgment is implied, even if it doesn't extend to legislation.

It does have its affects.

That's true, and I wouldn't argue that point. But we're specifically talking about the players reactions here. They very well may be homophobic for all I know, but to call them that because they are grossed out by the image of two men kissing is silly. We just talked on a thread yesterday about the fact that I am grossed out by body piercings. I can be grossed out by a piercing of a sensitive body part (that I find beautiful without the ornamentation) without being afraid of the user (which is what phobia means...right?). Are we suggesting that even the reaction of not liking something is officially bigotry at this point in our culture?

Some people were offended by two women kissing, but the majority were not. As I said earlier, I've always been told (by women) that women find each other attractive. There was a thread (or a short series of posts) here that concluded a woman posting a nude body as an AV was attractive, but a man doing it wasn't. A very good friend of mine here (who's a died in the wool lesbian) told me that my Christmas AV (the one of my penis) grossed her out. I understood and didn't take offense. I didn't call her a Heterophobe. I don't believe she'll be out in bars beating up straight men. It's just not her thing. That's why she's gay. I know people have suffered discrimination in RL, so they're extra sensitive...I get it. But at the same time, the answer isn't to run around calling everyone who doesn't see everything the way you do a homophobe. I thought Athena said it eloquently and there's no point in repeating it. If you can't see the humor in a joke, it's impossible to explain it (this coming from an Irish person who's heard quite a few of them about my race).

 

[Stella_Omega]

...I got it from women on this board who've said it...

The women on this board are what we'd call sex-positive and more enlightened than most. That's why they're here! (and how lucky for me!)

I made the comment that many people would find an attractive woman kiss an ugly man gross, but I noticed you skipped that part.

Ugly straight men don't get beat up for being gay. And the ad had no beautiful women kissing ugly men. And the website didn't make a big deal about how gross it is when a beautiful woman kisses an ugly man.

 

[EllaRegina]

Honestly, humor is derived from the society in which it dwells and the stereotypes the people in that society use on a daily basis. Fact remains, whether or not it is morally right, the majority of our society is still uncomfortable with homosexuality (and in the case of straight guys, this is perfectly normal).

..........

 

[Stella_Omega]

That's true, and I wouldn't argue that point. But we're specifically talking about the players reactions here. They very well may be homophobic for all I know, but to call them that because they are grossed out by the image of two men kissing is silly.

No, people are objecting to the Mars Corporation's website showcasing their grossed- out reactions to the exclusion of any other possible reaction.

 

[S-Des]

The women on this board are what we'd call sex-positive and more enlightened than most. That's why they're here! (and how lucky for me!)

No, lucky for all of us.

Ugly straight men don't get beat up for being gay. And the ad had no beautiful women kissing ugly men. And the website didn't make a big deal about how gross it is when a beautiful woman kisses an ugly man.

If you think ugly men don't get picked on or beaten up for being ugly, then you really don't know anything about men. Stella, we're not going to agree and I know I can't change your mind. You may be right that laughing about it could hurt some people's feelings, but there is usually someone offended by almost every joke. I believe this commercial was social commentary on people's hyper-sensitivity, not something that will cause others to react the same way (i.e. be disgusted by homosexuality). I can't promise that if I was gay I wouldn't be offended, but I think I'd laugh at the oafish hetero men (who were probably so freaked out because they were afraid they might like it). Anyway, thanks for the lively debate. I'm going back to bed and try to fight this damn cold.

 

[Boxlicker101]

but (not to stir the pot or anything) this was a national advertising campaign, not a personal reaction... not exactly keeping it to oneself...

it denotes a stereotypical reaction... getting grossed out by two men kissing...

there was a commercial (I wish I could find it) a few years ago with two women kissing... it was also a beer commercial, if I remember correctly...

of course, there was no fuss about THAT one... that was just "hot"

there is a clear, clear difference in cultural perception about m/m sex as opposed to f/f sex... one's icky, the other one is "hot." so, one is undesirable, and one isn't. The judgment is implied, even if it doesn't extend to legislation.

It does have its affects.

First, I have to say that I did not see this particular commercial. However, from reading the description, I must say that the two men were not kissing. They may or may not have accidentally touched their lips together, but a kiss should be a deliberate act, by at least one of the participants.

As for two women kissing, that is a very common occurrence. My wife sometimes watches "The View" which is usually about four women sitting at a table or on a sofa. Sometimes another woman appears as a guest and, when she does, she and each of the other women exchange kisses.

As to the cultural perception about m/m sex as opposed to f/f sex, I can only respond for myself. I have seen m/m sex in movies and, although I wouldn't describe it as "icky", it leaves me cold. I have no interest in watching it, even though I have written stories about gay male sex, and I will probably write more. Gay men might or might not enjoy watching such movies. Some of them obviously do, or they wouldn't be produced. However, gay men constitute just a small percentaqge of the population.

f/f sex is another matter. Most of it, I believe, is intended for men. Personally, I enjoy it for this reason: My favorite sex act, to read about, write about, watch, or even think about, is eating pussy. This is not exactly a secret here on AH. f/f porno films show this particular act much more clearly than m/f movies. I don't know what lesbians think about f/f movies.

As for being undesirable or not, there are many people who think that ALL porn, even the written kind on this site, is undesirable. Obviously, we disagree with that, or we wouldn't be here.

 

[EllaRegina]

All In The Family used a biggoted oaf to point out how bigotry was wrong (even though the main character constantly spouted bigotry, the writers weren't afraid that kids would see it and want to be like Archie Bunker).

In fact at the time there was a great controversy over that show. The intellectual groovy liberals, who wrote it and who watched it, saw it as a parody of a bigot. It was the first time on TV they could get away with words like "nigger," "kike," and "mick." But there was a parallel audience watching, that wasn't laughing AT but laughing WITH. It provided them with just what they wanted to hear, had been always waiting to hear.

No, you cannot control how people with pre-fab prejudices will interpret something. They might interpret it other than intended.

I was thinking, in fact, a lot about All in the Family lately because it comes to mind with the movie "Borat." The same issues, all over again. Sasha Baron Cohen is a smart English Jewish boy. I think he went to Cambridge or Oxford. He can see the breadth of his satire (which may or may not happen to be your thing even if you are an intellectual groovy liberal). Anthony Lane of the New Yorker Magazine puts it better than I can, in his review of "Borat":

"There are jokes thrown at Jews, African-Americans, rodeo fans, homosexuals, and, for good measure, the rest of the population. The smart explanation for this is that Baron Cohen, who is Jewish himself, is assaulting intolerance wherever he finds it; what he cannot control is the fate of the film itself, and one wonders whether, to a late-night college audience, say, the irony behind Borat would be of much concern. Could the movie become a safety valve, encouraging its fans to let off steam?"

SnickerGate is the same thing, at least to me.

 

[CharleyH]

I can't even marshal my normal ability to explain here. http://americablog.blogspot.com/2007/02/snickers-superbowl-web-site-promotes.html

(edited to add)

The three ad endings that you could vote for were promised to be shown during the Daytona Race. One is mildly funny, one has the guys drinking anti-freeze (which will kill you in an unpleasantly long and drawn-out way) and one has them attacking each other with wrenches and car hood to prove that they are real men.

That's kind of a funny idea, of you are The Onion, or any other entity known for satire. but candy bar companies are not satirical entities. And they were planning to show the ad during the next biggest sporting event in the country.

I don't eat chocolate (well, sometimes truffles, but ...) so I guess I have been boycotting it by example (edit to add) all along..

 

[Liar]

Maybe they were reacting to the idea of having their chest hair ripped out. I'm thinking that could make a person wince.

I can vouch for that. It hurts like dammit.

 

[EllaRegina]

So...poking fun at stereotype bigotry is out of the question, because people who are the stereotype bigots won't get the point even if you whack it over their head with a crowbar?

Poke fun at stereotype bigotry all you want but I fear that there is some truth to the second part of your sentence there, alas.

 

[Stella_Omega]

No, lucky for all of us.


If you think ugly men don't get picked on or beaten up for being ugly, then you really don't know anything about men.

you are right, and i was thinking about that, actually.

Stella, we're not going to agree and I know I can't change your mind. You may be right that laughing about it could hurt some people's feelings, but there is usually someone offended by almost every joke. I believe this commercial was social commentary on people's hyper-sensitivity, not something that will cause others to react the same way (i.e. be disgusted by homosexuality). I can't promise that if I was gay I wouldn't be offended, but I think I'd laugh at the oafish hetero men (who were probably so freaked out because they were afraid they might like it). Anyway, thanks for the lively debate. I'm going back to bed and try to fight this damn cold.

the problem is NOT about "hurting anyone's feelings." The problem is provoking real physical hurt, or real emotional bullying, and sometimes, real murder, on the part of non-homosexuals, towards homosexuals.

Many of us in this thread seem to have not gotten that point. That is my point from the get-go. I haven't been at my most eloquent here, but really, my feelings weren't hurt by the stupid fucking ad. My fears were aroused.

Shake thta cold soon!

 

[sophia jane]

I got it from women on this board who've said it. I'm sorry that they were uninformed or lying. I didn't say homosexuality is wrong, that is a ridiculous twisting of my post. I said watching two men kiss (or have sex) is gross for a straight man to watch. I made the comment that many people would find an attractive woman kiss an ugly man gross, but I noticed you skipped that part. Would that be Ugly-phobic (I'm sure there is a word for it, but it's not worth it). I've seen women and men react in a similar way to a younger person kissing a really old person (i.e. Anna Nicole Smith). Does that mean that if I don't want to watch Larry King make out with his 25 year old wife, I'm Geriatriphobic? Lets not mix terms. Thinking something is gross to watch is not the same thing as saying it is disusting or should be condemed. For you to say that's where discrimination (and assault) starts is saying that I don't have the right to be grossed out by someone else's behavior (even if I keep it to myself). Even major gay rights activists are saying this flap is a mountain out of a molehille. You can read anything you want into it, but that doesn't mean it's really there.

First- like was said before me, the women on lit are not typical of straight women, so it's not really fair to assume that all straight women find other women attractive. They may be able appreciate beauty, but as far as sexual attraction- not the norm among straight women.
Second- I don't know that your analogy is totally fair and it had nothing to do with my point, which is why I disregarded.
Third- yes, you're right that many gay rights activists thought the whole thing was silly, but there were plenty who were offended as well and it was their complaints that got the site pulled.
But to my main issue: "I said watching two men kiss (or have sex) is gross for a straight man to watch." You found it gross and you contend that most straight men think it's gross. I can't speak for you, but I'm going to assume that for many of those who find it gross, they would even say it makes them uncomfortable. Which means they probably don't hang around many gay men or in places where gay men are out together. It probably also means that they would prefer not to be exposed to men kissing in public, which means they're likely to have a general negative perception of gay men. Again, I'm not speaking of you, but I'm talking generally. It's gross, it makes people uncomfortable, so it ought to be limited in mainstream "straight" society as much as possible (so says the theory). That's why gays are closeted, btw, because of that discomfort and the subsequent results of that discomfort.
What I'm getting at is this- it shouldn't be normal for it be gross. If gays and lesbians are ever going to be accepted as equals in society, then it has to get to a point where it's not gross, where you or any other straight man wouldn't really react at all because you're indifferent to it. The fact that it stirs negative reactions at all is a problem (in my opinion) because it implies judgment (in my opinion). My issue with the snickers thing wasn't the ad; it was their showcasing of the reactions, which weren't just saying "hey that's a funny ad" or "damn those guys are dumbasses" but "that's gross," and while you think that's fine because it's normal, I think it's not fine because it's normal. And right now the norm isn't all that okay for gays and lesbians. In my opinion.

 

[Svenskaflicka]

I repeat:

OK, so everyone has a right to like or dislike homosexuality. But even if they don't like to see two men kiss, they shouldn't show their disgust in public, because they are role models, and if role models publically show their disgust regarding a sensitive subject like homosexuality, they WILL have a negative impact on society, especially those members of society are very young and impressionable.

I never saw the AD, but from what I've read I would probably have found the kissing guys mildly amusing to watch, although I would have been annoyed that they had chosen two ugly guys instead of two hot ones, now that they're giving women like myself the chance to watch two guys kiss.
But I agree with Stella, the problem isn't that the two guys felt uncomfortable about their lips touching, the problem is that Snickers showed athletes reacting in a way that hinted that they found men kissing as something gross.

No, S-Des, I don't KNOW if they felt it was gross or not, I don't know the athletes in question and I haven't asked them, I make an ASSUMPTION, right or wrong, that when someone makes such a face, they don't feel positive and supportive of what they have just seen - I make this assumption based on the fact that I myself never make such a face other than when I feel negative about something.

And while it's up to all of us to think and feel whatever we want about men kissing men or women kissing women, I again agree with Stella that it's not good to on a public website show only the negative reactions of the athletes to men kissing. It's one-sided, and it IS likely to influence people to feel that it's OK to be negative about homosexuality in public.

And yes, I do believe that the more accepted it is to show that you don't like homosexuality, the higher is the risk that it will lead to serious danger for homosexual and bisexual people. A society where a judge lets off a gay-basher for putting another person in a coma because "it was just another damned queer!"

 

[Stella_Omega]

One more thing occurs to me (jeeze Stella, let it GO!)

A lot of this discussion has sued the term "Kissing" to refer to the two men's actions.

They were not kissing, in any normal way. Their lips touched accidentally. It could have been knees, or elbows, but it was scripted that this touch should occur on a particularly intimate portion of the anatomy. And, sure enough, the only word we have for that is "Kissing"

And the reactions weren't to the accidental touch, they were to that perception of two men kissing.

Just sort of interesting, I think.