Eh... pick a group... any group.  I think there is always a loud vocal minority that try to speak for the "rest of the group" and usually miss the mark.

I thought it was funny. 

Heck, I'd also find it just as funny if it was a gay man accidentally kissing a woman and then trying to recover by doing something gay.  Man.... can you see the outrage from some vocal minorities over that one?  hehehehe

I'm glad the BT folks have a sense of humor and talk as equals (most of the time ).  That's why I like this place.

Maybe all commercials should just be a photo of the product, in order to avoid stereotyping and offending anyone.

As someone married to someone who works in marketing, I find that idea offensive, and demand reparations, a plate of cookies, a public apology from the leadership of the US, France, Germany, and Canada, am now filled with self-loathing about my ancestors, and don't know if I should pee or not.

Thanks a lot, you obtuse moron. 

That sounds like a great comercial...again for the right audience...it would work well on Bravo (cable channel) if Carson form Queer eye for the Straight Guy was the gay man...or another well known gay man... 

"Kiss"  Carson looks uncomfortable for a minute...looks down at the floor and then says..."Oh my Gawd, where did you get those shoes...and that dress..."

Ok - here it is rephrased.  (not to you, to "those people".

(forgotbutton.JPG)

That makes sense...I wouldn't have found that funny...the doing something manly and pulling out his own chest hair...was funny...not sure why pulling out chest hair is manly, but oh well.

"it wasn't just the superbowl commercial that got snickers to pull the ad, it was the entire marketing package. "

Some people just don't have empathy for others, bless their hearts, but that's why companies need feedback when they put out tasteless ads.

Ty, I see attempts at humor all over the place, but actual humor? That isn;t at someone;s expense? rarely. 

No kidding.... we all know real men SHAVE the hair instead of pull it off.  (says the man who's legs still itch....)

NYT says it best :

More than a dozen spots celebrated violence in an exaggerated, cartoonlike vein that was intended to be humorous, but often came across as cruel or callous.

(whole article) 

Let’s see, a heterosexual person says something funny about a heterosexual person, I’m can laugh freely.  A homosexual person says something funny about a heterosexual person, I can laugh freely.  A heterosexual person says something funny about a homosexual person….uh oh…our society is so sensitive that I should not laugh…even if I think it’s dang funny.

Now, let’s flip the script.  If this is two homosexual men do something (read intent here…humor at the expense of a stereotype of a heterosexual male), then suddenly do something else (like it was said about Carson…”nice shoes&rdquo, that could be funny (at least the intent was to be funny) and I GUESS you would not hear much of a squawk.

“Groups such as the Human Right Campaign and the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) condemned the ad, saying it promoted anti-gay prejudice and condoned violence against gay Americans.”

That statement is entirely about a perception and making it their reality in order to squawk.  I would love a company to actually have a backbone and release a statement like, “Listen everyone, we thought it was funny, we hoped you would find it funny.  Obviously some people and groups didn’t.  We can live with that because we know we are not going to please everybody, every time.  As we said, we thought it was funny.”

If their intent was the subliminal “let’s pick on gay people with the intent of making them seem inferior” then I can understand the complaints, I would agree with the complaints.

Not sure if the written word here adequately states what I’m trying to get across.  Gave it a shot though.