Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  cliches

Homosexuals In Advertising Were Not Entirely Absent From Super Bowl Sunday

[stream provider=youtube img=x:/www.queerty.com/wp/docs/2010/02/motogaysBIG.jpg flv=http%3A//www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DqffDaLmDinw embed=true share=true width=650 height=340 dock=true controlbar=over skin=dangdang.swf bandwidth=med autostart=false /]

Does it matter that it took a spot featuring rabid heterosexual mascot Megan Fox to include a pair of gays during a Super Bowl ad? And does it matter that, in an ad obviously aimed at heterosexual men, the representation of the gays comes down to bitchy queens slapping each other?

It’s like we have to complain about everything!

By:           editor editor
On:           Feb 8, 2010
Tagged: , , , ,

  • 34 Comments
    • Lance Rockland
      Lance Rockland

      Stupid stupid stupid.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 11:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fredo777
      fredo777

      didn’t even bother watching. the still shot is enough.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 11:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kieran
      Kieran

      Sadly, America doesn’t produce very much nowadays, but nobody can beat us when it comes to producing Wars and Stereotypes.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 11:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • rf
      rf

      The most offensive thing about it is the overexposure of Megan Fox’s freakish thumbs.

      Normally I couldn’t care less about these things, they don’t usually offend me, I think. But its bothersome that the underlying message is that gay people can change. yes I know Fox is so F’n hot that anyone would succumb, hahaha. But with the prop 8 trial going on and 32 states banning gay marriage because people who vote think gay people choose to be gay, I think its irresponsible to even joke about this stuff on national TV. after we have equal rights? have at it. Until then, pick on black people and women.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 11:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Geoff M
      Geoff M

      I’m not super sensitive about these things, but I admit this feels like a slap in the face…..whups, poor choice of words, but still true.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 11:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      I don’t think the message is as deep as some of you are making it out to be. Really, it isn’t. It’s more of a commentary on a celebrity, in my opinion… “OMG, look at the way all these people are reacting seeing me in a bathtub!” I didn’t get any inference that “gays can change”, I just saw a goofy ad trying to find a couple of totally silly situations involving people who may or may not react to a naked pic of Miss Fox. Whatever.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 11:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hardmannyc
      hardmannyc

      Two queens bitch-slapping each other. I thought it was funny.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 11:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DEREK WASHINGTON
      DEREK WASHINGTON

      One of the very few commercials that I found interesting and/or funny.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 12:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bi-Shawn
      Bi-Shawn

      Are world is to P.C,.It was too funny and please lighten up.

      Read more: http://www.queerty.com/homosexuals-in-advertising-were-not-entirely-absent-from-super-bowl-sunday-20100208/#ixzz0exylrunt

      Feb 8, 2010 at 12:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • romeo
      romeo

      This is pretty much the only way gay guys are portrayed in mainstream media. Where’s the beer drinking hot marine lovers? If we can get some balance, then we won’t have a legitimate gripe.

      @Bi-Shawn: It’s “our” not “are.” Also, “too P.C.” not “to P.C..”
      But never mind that, do you mean it’s okay for us to make fun of “bi’s” now? Thought not. LOL

      Feb 8, 2010 at 12:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Metacognate
      Metacognate

      Would anyone suggest that folks who object to an ad in which two black men were portrayed as thieving, lazy, shuffling, and dim-witted were too “PC” and should “lighten up?”

      The ad under discussion used an oppressive,false, and caricatured stereotype of males who are same-sex erotically attracted. We can either accept continuing to be the scapegoat du jour or we can reject and resist it and demand that it cease. To propose anything else is to accept being relegated to the back of the bus while being reminded that we ought to be thankful and never forget that we’re lucky to be able to ride the bus in the first place.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 12:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Felix
      Felix

      @hardmannyc

      Gays finding this commercial funny makes me understand why a woman like Sarah Palin might become President of this country.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 1:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)
      sal(the original)

      well cbs is showing its true colors,yeah sensitive selection my ass….and megan fox ,really?girl can ya sell ya soul for shit

      Feb 8, 2010 at 1:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B Damion
      B Damion

      @ Metacognate ..UUUUMMMM honey I’m not sure if you know this but!! that’s alreay in motion. come harder or go back to work baby.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 2:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dvlaries
      dvlaries

      Well, of course, they weren’t missing from the Super Bowl. There have to be near a half-dozen just in the two teams, don’t there…?

      Feb 8, 2010 at 2:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mike
      mike

      I think you’d have to be a dysfunctional, self-loathing gay to find this funny.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 3:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      And yet, there is a screaming backlash against CBS for not airing the “gay GoDaddy” ad featuring a limp-wristed, effeminate former football player who decided to become a fashion designer focusing on lingerie.

      THAT was ok, and some blogs are pointing to that ad not being aired as an example of CBS’s “homophobia”. Yet you all would react to that ad the same way you’re reacting to this.

      Talk about mixed messages. These guys are damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 4:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hephaestion
      hephaestion

      Megan Fox should be ashamed of herself for being in this ad.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 6:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • James P. P.
      James P. P.

      I thought the ad was fun (not really funny). But I couldn’t understand WHY the two gay men were in it. Everyone else made sense… masturbating, wife finding the pic on the phone, etc. etc.

      So can someone please tell me what about a picture of Megan Fox in a bathtub would cause two queens to slap each other?

      Feb 8, 2010 at 7:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Aaron in Honolulu
      Aaron in Honolulu

      Jesus, it was just a joke! Do we need to hide gays in the media if they come across as feminine? Should the couple have been butch? Or normal looking? …Does that even exist?

      It was humorous. Get over it.

      Feb 8, 2010 at 7:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)
      sal(the original)

      @Aaron in Honolulu: “Do we need to hide gays in the media if they come across as feminine?”that’s not the point.a legit ad for rights for gays was turned away but an ad with a gay couple with no context i can get are put in for some stupid ignorant straights “humor” im pissed.im not a jester with no human needs,cbs seems to think we are a joke full stop

      Feb 8, 2010 at 7:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)
      sal(the original)

      …in real life that gay couple have little if any rights,we’re not angry.hell life is good ,an ad with gays “askin” for their rights and thats threatening to cbs but gays as the cheap laugh for the straights ,ok!yay,i feel good

      Feb 8, 2010 at 7:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)
      sal(the original)

      ..again megan fox here’s a hint ya wanna be a strong actress (something u always seem to want in interviews)dump the slut for all american teen boys jobs and suffer to do mature roles,honey you wont catch dead Meryl Streep in a shit ad like this

      Feb 8, 2010 at 7:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)
      sal(the original)

      ..Honey u will make a whole lotta money but as a wise woman said(judge judy)beauty fades,dumb is forever.your looks will go, be smart dont set yourself in that mold and hate on it when people tell u about it

      Feb 8, 2010 at 7:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David in Houston
      David in Houston

      It’s gotten to the point where the “effeminate queens” are the equivalent of a white guy in “black face”. If you want to make sure the audience “gets” that those are two gay men slapping each other, you better make them over-the-top effeminate queens. Otherwise no one will get the joke, right?

      So if they used two straight-looking men in business suits, would the public would be too stupid to understand that they are suppose to be a gay couple? Is it because gay couples like that don’t really exist in real life; or is it because they’re rarely portrayed that way on TV? Why are the two men in that commercial the only representation of a typical gay couple?

      Had the advertiser used the “men in business suits”, it would have been a clever approach that would have made the viewer actually think about the situation. “Oh! They’re a gay couple! That’s why they’re slapping each other. Clever.” Instead, the advertiser took the safer, obvious, stereotypical route: make them effeminate queens dressed in pink and purple. That will get the message across immediately… and bitchy queens are hilarious too. Except they’re not. Not anymore.

      Feb 9, 2010 at 8:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)
      sal(the original)

      @David in Houston: “if they used two straight-looking men in business suits”they would be a “threat to society” not just a “hahaha look at those fags” moment

      Feb 9, 2010 at 10:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thomsen
      Thomsen

      It was a funny premise, but to see that some people take this way too seriously. Anyway those type of guys exist, and you kind of invalidate them by saying they are just an awful stereotype.

      Feb 9, 2010 at 10:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)
      sal(the original)

      @Thomsen: a “stereotypye” that’s ok when we are a joke but when we want rights we are a threat

      Feb 9, 2010 at 10:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)
      sal(the original)

      @Thomsen: why was it the norm to put a certain view of the black person in old movies?as savages,uneducated people.black face ,making a joke of a black person with “nappy” hair big lips and really dark skin,people that look like that exist but the problem is that THAT is make a joke.THAT is the issue

      Feb 9, 2010 at 10:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Washingtion Guy
      Washingtion Guy

      are we trying to create controversy out of thing air here? I liked the commercial when it arid I though it was funny, I sill think it funny. any way CBS seems to be damned if they do damned if they don’t when it comes to adds as when they don’t put a “gay content add” with the same sorts of stereotypes in its bad, but when they put an add with a scene with one stereotype in then its bad because they included it, and they we wonder why networks don’t want to touch gay issue with a ten foot poll. It seems like no matter what they do the “angry gays” come charging at them for it.

      Feb 9, 2010 at 3:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill
      Bill

      If you are not offended by this advertisement, you are either NOT gay or you are gay and hate yourself.

      Feb 9, 2010 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Metacognate
      Metacognate

      I certainly didn’t use the term “awful stereotype.” I said that it was a false and oppressive stereotype – it was and it is. Calling it what it is neither “invalidates” nor denies the existence of anyone.

      The ad reinforces the false concept that all males who are same-sex erotically attracted look and act like the characters in the ad when, in fact, there are as many ways for individuals who are same-sex erotically attracted to act and to express themselves as there are people who are same-sex erotically attracted.

      However, the media is hellbent on using stereotypes of the kind depicted in the ad to represent males who are same-sex erotically attracted or they use the image of maladjusted, emotionally stunted, and unhappy individuals – when they don’t fall back on the tired, but still serviceable, “they’re all pedophiles” standard.

      Stereotyping is a form of heuristic thinking, a shortcut which bypasses critical thought and analysis. When individuals who are same-sex erotically attracted are portrayed in the media in a stereotypical manner, it pigeonholes them and reinforces ALL of the wider society’s assumptions about them.

      When marginalized people step out of the stereotypes that society has imposed on them, society becomes frightened. That’s why CBS didn’t object to the ad. It was comforting and non-threatening to people who are other-sex erotically attracted because it reinforced their stereotypes. All the ad left out is every male who is same-sex erotically attracted and who doesn’t fit the caricatured stereotype.

      Stereotyping is the heart of all bigotry and oppression. It was the basis for all of the laws which were used in the past to oppress Americans of aboriginal African ancestry. Today, it’s the very foundation of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, DOMA, and all of the other existing and proposed legislation aimed at abridging the civil and human rights of everyone who experiences and expresses any erotic attraction which isn’t exclusively toward the other sex.

      If we’re supposed to passively accept these false, one dimensional portrayals of males who are same-sex erotically attracted, then we should expect individuals who are African American to passively accept the portrayal of themselves on the 1950s and ’60s “Amos n Andy” television show or Americans of Latino and Meso-American ancestry to embrace the character, Pepino, from the 1950s television show “The Real McCoys.” I’m listening but can’t hear their laughter over the deafening silence.

      Feb 9, 2010 at 5:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Doug Kahn
      Doug Kahn

      @Metacognate: I’ve been searching the web for opinions on this ad and the gay couple. Thanks for posting your thinking, you’ve helped me think through the issues raised by various portrayals of gays on TV.

      Of course I agree that stereotypes are harmful reinforcements. I imagine you’d offer the same opinion of various tv shows with gay characters, gay couples. I don’t watch prime time tv anymore so I can’t refer to shows being made currently.

      I’ve got a question for you: are there previous tv ads for major corporations with a gay couple? I’m wondering if this ad isn’t kind of a breakthrough?

      True, there’s no real compelling reason to have them stereotyped. On the other hand, wouldn’t it be correct to describe the underlying theme of the ad to be that sending out a photo of Megan Fox might cause trouble for various ordinary people? In that sense, the ad contradicts the ‘gay people are the other’ thinking that is the basis for DOMA, DADT etc.

      Okay, maybe Motorola isn’t trying to sell phones to gays; and that would be the real breakthrough ad. But I think the single most important thing that has to happen in America, for equality is to be achieved, is for straight men to tell other straight men that gays are real people, there’s nothing wrong with gays, there’s nothing wrong with being gay. That is most certainly part of what this commercial does.

      It’s great that there are gay characters and gay couples on tv dramas. But the real test is this: when will corporations develop the spine to openly sell products to openly gay people? When will they challenge the backlash? American society is capitalistic, highly commercial; inclusion in commercial sales would very quickly move public opinion towards acceptance of equality.

      The ad for the gay dating site wouldn’t have done that, even though airing it would have been a clear communication from the corporation that owns CBS.

      Feb 10, 2010 at 12:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • bujo
      bujo

      Gee, “The requested video has marked as private.”

      Ohh: “The requested video could not be found, or has been marked as private.”

      What’s the matter, girls?

      Oct 24, 2011 at 10:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.