Victory:
By on Feb 5th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Two straight guys are repulsed by kissing each other, and this has what to do with gays? The next Snickers ad will feature a hot girl accidentally kissing an ugly oaf and being equally disgusted, by which the commercial will then be deemed heterophobic. Yeah. I can see it.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:27 pmYou call that homophobic? For God’s sake, grow a sense of humour!
February 5th, 2007 at 10:30 pmYou call that homophobic? For God’s sake, grow a sense of humour!
Comment by dreamer_marie
God didn’t think it was funny either.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:35 pmI enjoyed the commercial. SOme of the alternate endings were disturbing, but you could say they weren’t beating the gay out of each other, but rather that they were doing what men do at work. Hitting each other on the balls with a wrench, getting slammed in a car hood, and drinking draino and oil. You know, guy sh*t.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:40 pmPlenty of other things to laugh at than somebody’s sexual preference.
So we’re laughing at these guys’ sexual preference of being straight? How does that become homophobic? Can anyone explain?
So if there was a commercial with a gay guy accidentally kissing a straight woman, and he was repulsed by this since he likes men, the commercial would be heterophobic? Sexist?
I need some guidance here. :)
February 5th, 2007 at 10:44 pmVictory for who? Me. I suppose you can call it that. I can now resume to eat my favorite candy bar without that grosser than hell image going through my head.
They didn`t do it for you minority gaywads. They did it to keep the majority of America happy and wholesome where it belongs. Again the world does not revolve around you gayf*cks. SURPRISE!
Get over yourselves and go back to doing whatever it is you do with Snickers bars gay fagg nots, and keep eating Snickers bars.
To the rest of the world besides the gays and lesbos.
You may now resume eating your beloved Snickers.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:49 pmThe Great All American Treat.
Lucifer, by your comment you may not understand this little thing called loving those for who they are.
Gay person – love them.
Straight person – love them.
We are all in this together and have such a short time on this planet. Why not accept people instead of the implied hatred and violence?
February 5th, 2007 at 10:50 pmThe only thing I found disturbing about that commercial was that someone could be so desirous of a Snickers bar to bite the other end while it is in another person’s mouth. Normally, one would simply ask for a piece or just simply whine about not having their own candy bar.
So it was just a stupid commercial. Retarded actually. What is manly about pulling out your chest hair?
And lastly, how many of you after seeing the Snickers ad, wanted to go out and buy a Snickers bar?
February 5th, 2007 at 10:55 pmAnd lastly, how many of you after seeing the Snickers ad, wanted to go out and buy a Snickers bar?
I wanted to go out to the airport and slug down some 2380 turbine oil
February 5th, 2007 at 11:03 pmI wanted to go out to the airport and slug down some 2380 turbine oil
Comment by Jet Mech
Yummy.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:17 pmboy, the phys ed teacher sounds like one of guys that makes young men feel really good about themselves, comfortable about their bodies and nurturing of those who aren’t interested in how much they can bench press…
one day, someone’s gonna get a hold of your email messages and you will be fired for your hating ways, and you’ll end up sucking c*ck to support yourself
one day ahole, one day
February 5th, 2007 at 11:40 pmso, ed the phys ed psycho ‘american patriot,’ I admire your dedication to the promotion of candy bars to prop up the “all-American” image, but it’s people like you who are encouraged by the ad in itself.
Now, if America didn’t have many different viewpoints, and happen to be Democratic, you, and the people you view as “unwholesome” would be screwed; if the ad involved different ethnic groups, and it showed the white guy being beaten down by another race, you’d find no harm in that, either right…if he’s white straight and a “christian,” I’m sure that would be offensive to you, and you’d be yelling reverse discrimination.
You can’t have your cake, and eat it too…and I love it when groups of people try to turn the “free speech” thing into something it’s not; a platform to harm, induce harm, suggest harm, advocate harm, or just use their right to free-speech in a manner not very American at all.
I’m a liberal, most definitely, I do get tired of hearing extreme points on both sides, and alot of times I get sick of big mouths always whining, on both “sides,” but comments like yours, might just warrant a public lashing of Mars.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:49 pmThe comments on this blog make me sick to my stomach. You bigots are depressing.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:49 pmThe ad wasn’t gay bashing. It was making fun of insecure, macho, homophobes.
February 6th, 2007 at 2:15 amBy the way, there was a scene between Steve Martin and John Candy somewhat similar to this advertisement in the movie “Planes, Trains and Automobiles”. Was that movie homophobic? I don’t think so.
fyi – the scene in the movie was when the John Candy character and the Steve Martin character wake up snuggling in bed after sharing a motel room. After they both are shocked to realize that they aren’t at home snuggling with their wives, they jump out of bed and say and do “macho” things. Funny and not homophobic scene.
February 6th, 2007 at 2:30 amI think a lot of people miss the point of this ad. Just because an advertisement is about homophobic people doesn’t make it homophobic. Apparently the “shocking” nature of this ad disturbs a lot of people so that they don’t realize that the ad is actually making fun of homophobes. I would suggest that the people who believe that this ad is homophobic are themselves homophobic. All I see is an ad making fun of homophobic people.
February 6th, 2007 at 2:51 amThis site continues to slide into the toilet, following non-stories like this while the country slides further into the Bush abyss.
And no, that wasn’t meant as a pun.
February 6th, 2007 at 3:15 amglass half full: Lucifer, by your comment you may not understand this little thing called loving those for who they are.
Gay person – love them.
Straight person – love them.
Again, where does the gay person enter into this ad? There are no gay people involved in this ad. There are two straight guys. I cannot emphasize this enough.
We are all in this together and have such a short time on this planet. Why not accept people instead of the implied hatred and violence?
Implied violence and hatred of straight guys who don’t like kissing each other because they’re straight? Are you seriously this dense that you cannot cut through Think Progress’ mind rays and see this for what it is?
As Willy points out, this ad is making fun of homophobic behavior, not endorsing it. It is making fun of two guys worrying about appearing gay, because they are both straight.
Although as someone else points out, the ad doesn’t exactly make me want to buy a Snickers, and I don’t really understand the marketing idea behind it. What, I’m supposed to want to buy a Snickers watching two straight guys kiss each other? Ehm, what?
February 6th, 2007 at 6:23 amI am gay and I was not offended, but then again nobody asked me for permission to do this on my behalf.
February 6th, 2007 at 6:27 amI would have to agree that the commercial was a display of homophobia by the characters, because the men didn’t act repulsed by each other specifically, but instead desparately sought some way to demonstrate their heterosexuality.
The commercial WASN’T gay bashing, but WAS homophobic.
February 6th, 2007 at 8:12 amJeez, the ad was mocking homophobia, not promoting it. Wow.
February 6th, 2007 at 8:35 amThe ad wasn’t gay bashing. It was making fun of insecure, macho, homophobes.
Comment by Willy
Exactly, if anything it was making fun of straight guys and some of their stupid reaction.
People need to just get over it. Stop worrying about being PC. Just as people say you should accept a different lifestyle, people should accept what others call humor. IF you are offended by something on TV, change the channel. If you do not like an ad for a product, don’t buy the product. In short, be responsible for yourself and quit telling other what they MUST accept.
Enough of the pussification of the US.
Get over it.
ok, I am ready for the name calling and ad homonym attacks to begin in 3….2…..1…
February 6th, 2007 at 8:37 amMuch ado about nothing.
February 6th, 2007 at 9:02 am[/end of debate]
February 6th, 2007 at 10:19 amSo much for the exchange of ideas and open dialog. TP has deleted what were posts 25-30 becasue the kids didn’t play nice.
This is what you call truth?
February 6th, 2007 at 10:20 ami called you all sorts of bad names as well Bob, damn.
did you know i suggested that you be “re-educated” once the military industrial complex has been dismantled?
February 6th, 2007 at 10:41 amThe ad wasn’t gay bashing. It was making fun of insecure, macho, homophobes.
Comment by Willy
February 6th, 2007 at 10:49 amThank you, Willy. If anything, it was offensive towards car mechanics. Enough with the car-mechanicophobia!
Comment by CarlX
#28, nope, missed that one. I agree with the re-education as I am a victim of the public education system.
Seriously, my main point (that was deleted) said that while there are certain words that all self respecting humans find offensive, if someone is so overly sensitive, maybe they are not comfortable with themselves.
February 6th, 2007 at 10:50 amyou might want to tell them thanks for pulling that STUPID ad…
February 6th, 2007 at 10:55 ami did…
http://www.snickers.com/contact.asp
Thanks, Ed the Phys Coach, for single-handedly demonstrating why people were correct for protesting the ads.
Saved me plenty o’ work.
February 6th, 2007 at 11:31 amEvery so often a major company comes up with an ad campaign that is so disastrously wrongheaded and just about guaranteed to backfire in a HUGE way, that you have to wonder, “Just what the hell were they all THINKING?”
I still remember with no fondness at all Coca-Cola’s boneheaded “No Coke?” ads – which aired briefly a few years ago and were then yanked and buried after an “unexpected” surge of protests (I objected also). THEIR idiocy was to mock various traditional “family” moments by saying they were nothing without Coke. The killer was probably the returning vet who turned on his heel and walked away when finding the family had no Coke to welcome him with(!!!). I think that one aired ONCE, and the whole series was yanked soon afterward.
IMHO sometimes the ad folks get hold of such a “cute” idea that they can’t step back and see that it IS offensive and WILL offend people – and then they pitch it so enthusiastically that they snow the people whose job it is to say “No, that won’t fly, go back to the drawing board”.
It’s just typical corporate stupidity.
February 6th, 2007 at 12:08 pm#30 Bob
I’m a victim of an over priced private college education, if i ever wnat to make the bg bucks i’ll have to go back to school, you can’t do anything with a BA (other than be a wage slave of the american empire)
i suggested re-educating you in an institution built much like a prison, where all the former soldiers wear grey suits, and are trained on sustainable energy and civic duty, water boarding for those who decry global warming as not human induced, a sort of clock work orange senario
alrigt, way off track; the real idea behind it was put most of our military spending into infrastructure and (re)training for national health care and a sustainable society
February 6th, 2007 at 12:56 pmi suggested re-educating you in an institution built much like a prison, where all the former soldiers wear grey suits, and are trained on sustainable energy and civic duty, water boarding for those who decry global warming as not human induced, a sort of clock work orange senario
Ok, a vast majority of the soldiers are trained on civic duty. Part of sivic duty is serving your nation in the military. Just like helping the poor and disenchanted. As for the global warming thing. Hey, it is happening. You can not deny facts. Humans are a major contributor. But it is not exclusivly a human creation.
alrigt, way off track; the real idea behind it was put most of our military spending into infrastructure and (re)training for national health care and a sustainable society
Comment by CarlX
I am all for that, but you can not do any of that without sustaining a military protective force. (yes, I am aware we are currently being used in an offensive manner)
February 6th, 2007 at 2:34 pmA love note to “Ed the Phys Ed Coach” (a/k/a Ray not Gay, a/k/a Who Me Gay Never It’s A Sin”): I thought you might enjoy a little name calling your way, since you believe name calling equates polite debate: Gaywad, gayf*cks, gay fagg nots — these are all names I would never level at another human being. I will say, however, that it is quite clear to everyone on this planet that you are a latent homosexual. You see, Ed, real heterosexual men do not care whether another man is gay or not. Real heterosexual men do not fixate on the sexuality of another man, because it would not cross a real heterosexual man’s mind to give one second’s thought to such a topic. Real heterosexual men are not threatened by gay men. Your fixation on all things gay just indicates to everyone here that you yourself are gay. And you hate yourself because of it. What a sad, pathetic little waste of skin you are.
February 6th, 2007 at 3:40 pm