Strollerderby

Parents Enraged by Emergency Contraception Commercial

British parents are up in arms about a commercial for Levonelle, an over-the-counter emergency contraception pill. After the commercial was aired on three TV channels, hundreds of parents called radio shows to express their outrage.

"Even though it was shown after 9pm my teenage daughters were watching,” one father said. “The worst thing is it makes it seem normal to go and get this pill. We've crossed a moral line with this."

The commercial depicts a casual sex encounter gone wrong—a girl lies in bed next to a slobby musician; a bubble over her forehead, creased with worry, says, “The ‘condom split’ one.” Her worries are intensified by a screaming baby on the bus next to her—then assuaged by a friendly pharmacist.

There is something undeniably off-putting about the commercial—the cheesy, upbeat music, the cuteness of the animation depicting an event that is the opposite of cute. But it’s a 30-second commercial, not an informative, honest discussion of what constitutes a healthy sex life, since that kind of talk is, uh, the parent’s job.  

Unsurprisingly but nonetheless idiotically, anti-choice advocates have argued that the pharmaceutical company is promoting abortion, to which a spokesperson for Bayer Schering responded, "Levonelle One Step is not legally or scientifically an abortifacient. It is not effective once the process of implantation has begun and will not interrupt an established pregnancy."

Although most of the parents who complained about this ad focused on its allegedly casual message about sex rather than on abortion, it seems to me that if you support access to emergency contraception, you support allowing TV stations to air this ad.

What would you do if you were watching TV with your kids and this commercial came on?

Image: Brand Republic


+ DIGG + STUMBLE

Comments

 

Larissa said:

Are we looking for a wedding ring on a cartoon?  Just b/c she is up and worried while the guy snoozes away doesn't mean it was a casual sexual encounter, it simply means she is burdened in a way he is not, which is truth.  I thought it was a fine commercial, of course I think a glacier will cover North America before America got over its collective prudishness enough to air such an honest advert.

May 14, 2009 6:44 PM
 

Marj said:

If I was watching this with a teen I think that would open up a discussion about the risks of casual sex.  Accidental pregnancy, which this commercial addresses is only one of them, and I can see this being an opportunity to point out others.

May 14, 2009 7:07 PM
 

Lula said:

That's a great commercial. It's upfront, to the point, and promotes a pregnancy-prevention option that eliminates both untimely childbearing and the need for abortion. Levonelle is available over the counter in the UK, so I don't see how this is any different from an advert for condoms, yeast infection medication, or any other health-promotion product.

May 14, 2009 7:26 PM
 

e said:

Personally, I'd rather watch and have a conversation with a teen about this than I would erectile disfunction!

Larissa- I agree, there's no way to know whether or not this was "casual." Or how old the woman is. In my experience even married women sometimes use condoms (and don't want to be pregnant.)

What's the big deal??

May 14, 2009 7:51 PM
 

Manjari said:

There is nothing wrong with the commercial. We have commercials for birth control pills.

May 14, 2009 9:05 PM
 

Sam said:

I have no problem with this commercial. It seems targeted to  college-aged, or post college woman; one who can seem to spend the night with her boyfriend comfortably. It is an over the counter drug in the UK, just like midol or a yeast cream. If I had a daughter, I would certainly hope that she wouldn't find herself in the situation of needing emergency contraceptive when she was in high school; but I wouldn't want either of us to be naive about sex. I wouldn't want my teenage son to be either, so maybe it is a good thing that the commercial exists; because teenagers do have sex, and they can be very ill informed about contraception and safe sex. Not all parents talk to their kids openly about sex, and some support abstinence only education; so how else do some kids begin to learn about sex and their options? I feel like this commercial serves that purpose in a non-threatening way.  

May 14, 2009 10:03 PM
 

sam said:

"There is something undeniably off-putting about the commercial—the cheesy, upbeat music, the cuteness of the animation depicting an event that is the opposite of cute. But it’s a 30-second commercial, not an informative, honest discussion of what constitutes a healthy sex life, since that kind of talk is, uh, the parent’s job."

I don't think anyone can have an honest discussion about sex in a commercial. This is a commercial for a drug, not a PSA. Advertisers are very good at their jobs. They are marketing a drug to single women, and they are targeting a "chic lit" sort of girl. I don't think this drug is being targeted towards high school girls, or girls who need a "sex talk".  The "event" of having sex when you are 25 can be cute and still have something happen, like the condom breaking; this commercial is light because they are trying to convey a message that it will be okay, there is nothing to get freaked out about, and they do a good job of that. Advertisers are good at their jobs...

May 14, 2009 10:15 PM
 

Sabrina said:

I'm still freaked by the thought that my future 17 year old could get and use this product without my knowledge and without the knowledge of her doctor.  I don't know for sure that this drug is safe for my child, what if she has medical problems or takes other medications for which this could give adverse reaction?  The pharmacist doesn't know and can't be held accountable for that.  

Teenagers are notorious for secrecy and poor decision making.  I would *like* to think that having a good relationship with my child when they're a teen would help stave off the problem of her going to get this medication without informing me, but I'm not dumb.  I wouldn't have told my mother there was any possibility that something went wrong and I could have been pregnant as a teen, and we had a very open relationship.

As far as the commercial goes...I hope that if it's aired widely it WILL spaark discussion between teens/young adults and their parents.  Talking about the potential side effects of medication use is just as important as talking about the potential side effects of unprotected sex, or sex when you're not ready to deal with the "consequences" (which is not always just babies).

May 15, 2009 7:41 AM
 

ChiLaura said:

Ms Tennant-Moore, I recognized your writing as soon as I saw the ol' "anti-choicers" thrown in there. LOVE your condescension. Really. May I call you an "anti-lifer"?

May 15, 2009 9:00 AM
 

km said:

Really, ChiLaura? Hannah is an "anti-lifer?"  C'mon.  Unless Hannah is running around asking women if they had sex last night and then shoving levonelle down their throats, I think calling her an "anti-lifer" is pretty extreme.

May 15, 2009 12:08 PM
 

ChiLaura said:

km: Ms Tennant-Moore insists on using what she assuredly knows is inflammatory rhetoric. I don't colloquially refer to pro-choicers as "anti-lifers" (though I have been known to use the term "abortionist", but only rarely and when speaking with other pro-lifers). I may think of "pro-choice" as "anti-life", but I would never use that term when talking to pro-choicers as it only heightens the emotional tenor of a discussion and derails the issue at hand. I'm simply asking for a little civility.

May 15, 2009 1:58 PM
 

Lula said:

"Anti-choice" is an accurate descriptor, though. People who oppose abortion do not consider it a legitimate option for pregnant women, and therefore do not want abortion to be legally available as a choice for pregnant women. I don't see the inflammation inherent there, as a term.

"Anti-life" is not an accurate term for the vast majority of people who consider elective pregnancy termination to be a legitimate option for pregnant women. I doubt you'll find many individuals who support safe, legal abortion access who also uniformly oppose "life". I can't even picture what "anti-life" would look like, outside of nihilistic comic book characters such as The Joker.

Lots of us who are OK with abortion consider ourselves "pro-life", so those who want to use that term as an I.D. specifically for abortion debate might want to start looking around for another term. "Anti-abortion" is the most accurate one I can think of offhand.

May 15, 2009 3:25 PM
 

Hannah Tennant-Moore said:

ChiLaura,  "Anti-choice" is a perfectly legitimate term, used even by the anti-choice community.  It wouldn't make sense for you to call me anti-life because it's simply not true, whereas those who oppose legalized abortion are in fact anti-choice. I don't see how this is an offensive term.

I am pro-life, anti-abortion (for myself), and pro-choice for all women.  The only distinction between supporting legalized abortion and opposing it is whether you support a woman's right to choose. Therefore, anti-choice is the only accurate term to describe being opposed to a woman's right to choose.  

May 15, 2009 3:54 PM
 

ChiLaura said:

Lula: I can live with "anti-abortion."

May 15, 2009 5:10 PM
 

ChiLaura said:

Ms Tennant-Moore, I've never heard a pro-lifer refer to her/himself as anti-choice. Not saying that it doesn't happen, but, c'mon, you know that it's a loaded term. I may disagree with you, but I'm not about to call you stupid.

The difference between a "classic pro-lifer" (which I would call "abortion only in case of danger to mother's life", and perhaps in cases of rape or incest) and the loose use of the term ("pro-life, anti-abortion (for myself), and pro-choice for all women") is that the latter is CONDITIONALLY pro-life: If I have money, if I'm not too old or too young, if there was no abuse, if, if if. I find the term "pro-life" when referring to such beliefs to be misleading and duplicitous. If you support abortion, grow a pair and say that you do!

May 16, 2009 11:18 PM
 

Lula said:

... and to circle the wagon back around to Levonelle/Plan B and TV commercials...

No pregnancy = no abortion. The more options available to prevent unwanted pregnancy in the first place, the less time we all will have to spend arguing about abortion.

So when do we get these commercials on American TV? And is Plan B widely available OTC yet?

May 17, 2009 12:43 PM

About Hannah Tennant-Moore

Hannah Tennant-Moore is a Brooklyn-based freelance writer whose work has appeared or is forthcoming in Best Buddhist Writing (2008); The Sun; Guantanamo: Inside the Prison, Outside the Law; Tricycle; Turning Wheel (as the winner of the Young Writers Award); and elsewhere.

in

GROUP BLOGS

  • Strollerderby

    The smartest, funniest, most exhaustive parenting blog in the blogosphere.
  • Droolicious

    Modern design for modern parents.
  • FameCrawler

    Your daily baby celebrity fix.
back to blog homepage