Friday, November 15, 2013

That Obamacare Ad

What’s wrong with this picture?

As it happens, a lot.

First, it is promoting risky behavior. It allows young people believe that if they have insurance or use birth control they can do anything they want.

Of course, the ad tells them, in the small print, that they should use condoms, but, seriously, this message has been drummed into the minds of the young for decades now. The result: something like half of them are happily indulging in unprotected sex.

Besides, if young people are so thoroughly protected against the medical consequences of their actions, why do they need insurance?

Second, the ad has indulged in gender-bending. It has reversed the gender roles and made the woman the one who is aggressively trying to pick up the guy, wondering whether she can get him into bed. Cute, don’t you think?

This requires three remarks.

First, it is nigh unto impossible to find a man who will turn down a woman who offers him what seems to be free love. He will usually go along because he does not want to turn down a woman who is so desperate. Do you honestly think that he is worrying about his modesty or his reputation? He will lose more reputation for say No than he will for saying Yes.

Second, however, if the woman is that desperate the man might suspect that she is slightly unhinged. He might reject the offer because he sees it, not unreasonably, as a threat.

In all honesty, the woman in the add looks more like a stalker than a temptress.

Third, I regret to inform you that there is one circumstance where a woman initiates sexual contact and where a man can choose freely to accept or reject her advance: when he might have to pay for it!


Sam L. said...

"First, it is nary unto impossible..."

Nary? Perhaps 'nigh"?

Anonymous said...

My first thought is "Is this a real ad?" Apparently so!

I guess they say in advertizing there is no such thing as bad publicity?

I'll cringe, but I also don't have a sense of humor in regards to people acting like idiots, even if its supposed to be funny. I'll just keep my distance.

Fox, who graduated from Pacific University in 2007, said that many of the ads are motivated from personal experiences of the people in them. All of the people in the ads, he said, are either personal friends or people they know through various networks.

"We wanted to come up with a campaign that would attract attention and inject a bit of humor, and try to approach educating people about health insurance a little bit differently," Fox said. "It was really just brainstorming, 'OK, what are some of those risky activities we could work with that would tie it all together?'"

Anonymous said...

Target market: People who believe the pleasures of life are available without consequences. Science has all the answers. Science will protect you from your choices. And such people believe that religion is based on childish fairy tales for gullible, non-thinking people? Ha!

Ultimately, at the core of it all, is the belief that a woman getting pregnant is an unhealthy, undesirable consequence of sex. Consenting, anti-conjugal, casual... you name the kind of sex we're talking about here in this ad. This is not rape or incest we're worried about, correct? This describes a relationship full of love, compassion, respect for the partner, right? After all, he's "hot." Wow. That's certainly an important consideration. I'm sure the other 50% who aren't engaging in unprotected sex are ugly and, thus, irrelevant. Thank goodness natural selection is preventing the ugly from breeding!

This is brought to you by the Obama administration, "Change you can believe in." If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period. If you like your nuclear weapon, you can keep your nuclear weapon. If you want to abort your inconvenient baby, you can abort your inconvenient baby. In fact, please do. It's less costly. After all, the Earth has enough degenerate, poor human beings who can't care for their offspring, and so many are below average intelligence... which, by definition, is half of them (a mere 3.55 billion persons). After all, this is why the Supreme Court wrote into law that it's critical that abortion be available in case contraception fails.

Just wait until it's the government that has to pay for the consequences of this profligate activity between the covers. Medical intervention costs money. And STDs are getting harder to combat with antiviral medications. So the government may have incentive to impose some consequences of its own. One might think it's in the form of penalties, but I'm sure Chief Justice Roberts will rule they're taxes and make it all okay. Yet in the technocrat's world, the value of human life is reduced to mathematical significance, which is an abstraction, worthy of no inherent significance at all. Reproduction is solely evaluated by subjective economic utility on the part of the female and, supposedly, her doctor.

Human beings and their irrational behavior are such an inconvenience. Maybe if all humans went away we wouldn't need to deal with these kinds of unsettling nuisances. There's so much on TV that's interesting!

Anonymous said...

And in case you thought my post immediately above was to crass, sarcastic, cynical or otherwise harsh:

For real.

Dennis said...

The mere fact that the ads are not taken seriously by a significant number of people indicate its actual affect of people's thinking. The "is this for real" first impression speaks volumes. I am not sure that if I was a young woman I would want to be depicted this way. Though it does amaze me how cheaply it seems that they will sell themselves.
It might behoove young women to understand that most of this redounds to young men and that they will be making decisions that they may not want to do if something happens. These decisions will stay with most of them for the rest of their lives and be there for instant reply at the most inopportune times.
We are all worth the price we put upon ourselves. We do have a choice at how much we value ourselves. Is one there to be used or to use other people? One wonders the respect that much of this engenders. Life is not a TV show called "Girls."
I would disagree with Stuart here. There are women who are so repulsive to us personally, for one reason or another, that we would not touch them with a ten foot pole. Most of us do have standards. Let us not feed into the idea that some young women have is that they deserve our attention just because they exist.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

Susie the prostitute; Nate the john; Obama the pimp; and taxpayers are a captured audience of this little freak show.