Have you seen this television commercial?
It’s goal is to sell the Levi’s 501 jeans. Given. And it’s using sex as the medium to make the jeans sell. Normal.
But should it be aired?
I’m not talking about violating the Freedom of Speech. I support and understand their right to make the commercial. They did noting wrong in that arena. And I would argue if they were prevented from being allowed to air it, because of that right.
Perhaps the question I need to be asking is should they have made it in the first place.
The ad is based on the thought of ambiguous anonymous sex, and more than hints at unprotected sex at that. The kind of sex that promotes and spreads Sexually Transmitted Diseases – especially AIDS and HIV. And it’s targeting this thought on teenagers and 20-somethings.
The thought behind the ad is simple. If you wear these jeans, you will spontaneously be picked to have sex in the most unusual, and therefore potentially unprepared, places you can imagine. Wearing these jeans will get you to not wear them because of the multitude of random sexual encounters you will engage in.
If that sounds irresponsible it is. If it sounds like I got the message wrong, please look at the commercial again and tell me what else it might mean.
At no moment do we see the 2 in this video pause to ask if there is protection available. Or if they have been tested for HIV. Or any STD. Or even a hint of a condom on a pocket, wallet, or anywhere. They may not want to market another product (though co-branding couldn’t hurt either company) but just having the image can’t hurt them.
But why is there no mention of any responsible action or question?
Because it’s too sexual. Because that would be explicit. Because some mother or preacher out there would freak out that their child heard or saw something relating to sex.
Yes, an outline of a condom in the jean pants pocket is too sexual. But stripping each other and the glimpse of a woman’s bra and panties plus the jeans on the floor is NOT sexual.
People please. What the hell.
If we as a society are going to promote random, wanton sex especially among the youth of the nation, the least we can do is hint at the fact that some thought to protection from STD’s and HIV/AIDS has happened.
This commercial takes place in New York City - Manhattan specifically. There are at least some 14,400 known cases of HIV in New York City alone – 4,800 of them were new infections as of 2006. There is no way to accurately gauge the number of unreported cases. People that have not gotten tested to find out.
According to 2006 statistics Syphilis is up 60% not to mention other STD’s. That was 2 years ago.
So yes the commercial has the right to be made and shown. But it’s not responsible, and potentially it’s a deadly message that could affect you and/or your kids.
Be smart, be protected. Get tested. It’s your life after all.
4 comments:
Comment from 1800blogger, where I am a contributing author.
Mrs. H Says:
September 6th, 2008 at 2:19 am
The idea is to sell jeans, not sex. What has happened to your morals? It is hard enough to raise children in this world with out having the clothing commercials using sex to sell or should we say pimp their jeans?
Mrs. H Says:
September 6th, 2008 at 2:22 am
I don’t know about promoting HIV or AIDS but they sure are promoting sex.
Mrs. H,
Please view my post Can television commercials promote HIV and AIDS?
I address your thoughts there.
Also from 1800blogger,
jeanie kindermann,
this is absolutely ridiculous!! we were watching a movie as a family, “radio” on fx, and this commercial came on—we were appauled as parents, and we were all embarrassed—but it did bring up ther subject for us to talk to her…
this was very inappropriate behavior, dangerous, and so not true…..
you do not wear the jeans so this becomes the outcome,,,such irresponsibility to promote unprotected teen sex with a complete stranger!! why does levis want to promote aids,pregnancy, and of course immorality???
free speech at its worst!
Thank you Jeanie. I agree with you, we both see this as a problem.
Post a Comment