Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Something struck me yesterday

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 02:52 PM
Original message
Something struck me yesterday
and I found myself wondering. Was there ANY outrage by the religious right at the release of "erectile disfunction" medication? I don't remember any. Isn't it a little disingenuous of them to freak out about medication to prevent cervical cancer because it may promote "promiscuity" when one can easily argue that viagra could do the same thing?

I know that they hold different standards for the sexual behavior of (heterosexual) men and women, but isn't this going just a little far, even for them? It's blatant hypocrisy and I think they should be publicly called on it.

Just a notion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. More hypocracy from the Religious reich!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. Viagra = good.
Control of women = good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PetraPooh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. I would say WAYYYY more easily, viagra promotes sex directly;
promiscuous or otherwise. There seems no other purpose for it, whereas medications that may prevent cervical cancer (I'm guessing you're talking about the pill and related medication) also prevent: cramps, mood swings, may prevent cervical cancer, excessive bleeding and hemoraging during periods, and I'm sure more than that. It may stop pregnancy, but it is a "go have sex" advertised drug the way ED medications are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmejack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. They absolutely should be called.
Those lewd ads are beyond offensive as well. I was discomfited the first time I saw one of those ads and I consider myself broad minded, most consider me outright hedonistic.

Something like the cervical cancer medication is a potentially lifesaving medication, which places it in an entirely different classification of drugs than an ED drug.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I absolutely agree...
There's just something wrong with the whole mindset if this is how it operates. Blatantly wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TNOE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. Last weeks episode of the Sopranos
brought this issue to light - it was pretty good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
7. I Find Boner-pill Advertising Utterly Tastless
I do not give a royal shit about the morality of it, I just find it utterly tastless to be advertising boner-pills or rubbers on the TV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Actually a lot of ads are tasteless these days...
Most ads seem to instill fear to persuade people to buy. In my experience the ads weren't nearly as bad after we get satellite TV. Broadcasters know that people would not pay to be talked down to all the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caledesi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-14-06 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
8. Forced erections - good. Birth control - bad. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC