I present this commercial idea to you. And believe me I'm not saying this product needs advertising other than in a doctors office.
-Opening scene-
Man and woman getting into bed and the man reaches over with the "honey ya wanna fool around?" notion. She turns to the bedside table and pulls out a bottle of the little blue pills and says, "I got you a little something today from the doctor, (he smiles wide) so dear, you can't say if you don't use it you'll lose it (his smile turns to concern). So now dear, I'll tell you when you can use it."
Close with her putting the pills back into the bedside drawer and resting her head on her pillow, closing her eyes with a sweet smile, and a look on his face of OH my goodness, this pill thing is a problem I hadn't thought about.
-Fade to dark-
Now that men have the prostate issue under more control, and those old theories of ''getting some'' on a regular basis will help you in warding off prostate problems, they come up with Viagra. Let's look outside the box here: men talk about getting it more than they actually get it, so is the little blue pill really for women? For when THEY want it and not a limper? Or the occasional man looking, stroking at his manhood in the mirror type. These commercials that show an adoring wife/girlfriend/partner gazing at their strapping man like they just can't wait to bed him are driving me nuts. Is anything sacred? I can't help going... euuuwah... do they do it everyday? Twice or three times?? Who is that couple???? It's confusing to me, because that's the message I'm getting. Sex sells? What category do these fall under? I'm no prude but when they come on the boob tube my 14 yr old gets that geeez there's that embarrassing commercial again leave the room kinda feeling. Kids never want to think their parents actually still "do it" and need not have to think about it. What are they thinking when they find that little blue pill in their parents bedroom and decide to pop one themselves to see some big results. Dangerous issue this Viagra. Knowledge is wonderful, but come on...
Is that silly look on their face secretly saying I'm so glad I'm not in a personal hygiene commercial?
10 comments:
An erection is a happy misadventure with Viagra, which was originally intended to be used for high blood pressure and angina. No drug company is going to waste a drug they can market just because it doesn't do what they thought it would, so long as they can sell it to do something else. Pfizer really hit the jackpot with Viagra.
The part that I like about these kinds of commercials isn't so much the idea that middle aged and older folks are still horny, it's the warning about the 4+ hour erection. Seriously, what man is going to call a doctor, when they have friends they can call and brag to?
The only people who have sex multiple times a day are the ones in a brand new relationship. Six months later those days are gone and things settle down to something more normal. I've long wondered what the real average is for people in long-term relationships. I'll bet for those not trying to have children, or those over 40, it isn't 2-3 times a week, like we've been told for years.
Also, I really resent the fact that insurance will pay for Viagra, but not for birth control. I don't want to hear about how men are supposed to get erections, so it's a medicine for correcting an abnormality. Men aren't supposed to get the same erection when they are 60 that they got when they were 20. Get over it.
About ten years ago I got a sample of Viagra from my doctor. I had a reluctant member and I was trying to build a relationship at the time. It worked OK but my face and shoulders got severely flushed, my heart rate and breathing were affected too. It wasn't going to be much fun. So even though I have experienced a diminishing ability to get it up I found that my periods of horniness did not abate correspondingly. It would have been convenient to resort to an "aid" if it didn't affect me negatively and cost so much.
Soon after my recent prostate surgery I discovered that, with the surgery's messing around with my uro-genital system, it was not only tender and sore due to the injuries it had sustained, but my apparatus proved sensitive also to sexual stimulation. Alas, that sensitivity has diminished as things healed up in there. But I still get horny. I'm sixty-five. I doubt that I'm physiologically abnormal.
So I asked the doctor what was the prognosis for my sexual recovery. Obviously time was a factor in allowing nerve tissue to heal. He also prescribed Cialis; he admitted that my response to Viagra a decade ago was among the known side effects. Cialis was not supposed to do that. The Cialis was intended, he said, to stimulate blood flow to the area. The prescription called for three 20 mg. tablets weekly. I learned that Cialis too was quite expensive but that my group insurance would cover only six tablets per month. So in consultation with the doc we compromised. I take a half a tab, ie 10 mg, twice weekly. The effect ranges from nominal (a small but noticeable effect) to minimal (almost no effect) to none at all. I've taken a full tablet twice "for effect." It's not radically more effective.
All this attention and effort seems to make me hornier than ever. It's frustrating not to be able to do much about it.
All the complaints you and many other women have about men's orientation to sex is probably one of the reasons that I am blissfully happy to be out of any sexual relationships. I suspect that all men become sometime subject to such complaints, whether vulgar, selfish boors, or civilized, considerate gentlemen. While I have never asserted that I need to use it or lose it, I still like to use it from time to time. I now have the liberty to do so whenever, although I regrettably seem almost to have lost the capacity. I understand that a lot of women following a radical mastectomy suffer a sort of loss of their self image. It seems a kind of equivalence to the little experience that I am passing through; and this hit to the ego (or whatever it is) applies only with respect to myself alone. I need not attend to looking or behaving especially "manly" for anyone else. That's my two cents.
disclaimer: the following is a vast generalization and is not intended to be taken personally by anyone in particular, except by the one person who should have taken it personally and chose not to, and thank god I don't have to deal with that lying piece of crap anymore.
-------------------------
I don't think it's a matter of complaining about frequency so much as getting sick and tired of the nagging. On top of that is the "you owe me" argument, or at least the not-too-subtle hint of the same. That sort of crap is really off-putting.
Maybe I expect too much, but I want someone to pay attention and figure shit out. I don't want to be told "just tell me what you want, just tell me what to do". No, thank you. If I can make the effort, so can you, and if you don't bother, don't come whining to me about why you feel neglected. Think about it, maybe I feel neglected, more than you.
I'm so fed up of hearing all the myriad excuses, especially from women, and mostly of the "well they're just men, they can't help it" variety. Of course they can help it, but we've trained them to believe they don't have to. We have nobody to blame but ourselves.
I'm not sure your comparison with a mastectomy is a fair one. Women are culturally surrounded by the young, thin and yet amazingly busty air-brushed stereotype that is impossible to live up to. [And before we go there, too fucking bad that men have the same pressure now, for what, the last 10-20 years? Suck it up.] Again, women have to take responsibility for this image, since we buy into it (thinking implants and various other surgeries). Like I've already said, not getting the same erection at 60 that you got at 20 is a natural progression. Living without your breasts is not, although it's better than the alternative.
Well, for what my two cents worth is ... talking to other women about this whole issue has become much more than just interesting.. Since it is a natural process as men get older, older women are just fine with it, believe me from what I'm told. Bladders drop, cervix lowers and some women end up having to have it all tied back up into place. That also is a natural process, so who is the extra needed strength for? If a man is on the smaller side an older woman knows how to work around that... The problem begins when an older man has intrigued a younger woman, perhaps one that uses her vaginal muscles everyday? He want's his performance to be at it's best I suppose, as does she? Older women who neglect these mussels find they too are in the limp category ... yes, this is talked about in circles of girlfriends. Where is the pill to harden these muscles up some ask secretly, not wanting to exercise them... hmmmm... a man can't exercise to get results, but a woman can.
I'm looking forward to my honey checking out the product soon ... and even more so when I'm in my 90's and having him pop a pill to do a slow dance at a family wedding or such occasion and have that secret smile between us...
>>Seriously, what man is going to call a doctor, when they have friends they can call and brag to?<<
When priapism occurs, it hurts. It's not fun. Bragging is not appropriate.
>>I've long wondered what the real average is for people in long-term relationships.<<
Statistics seem to represent that people are all over the spectrum. I suppose it's the top of the bell curve we're interested in. I thought that was 2-3 times weekly for kids in their twenties ands thirties (adjusted for the disruptive presence of children. My kids seem to do it in something like that range; but I'm reading between the lines.). In the forties, fifties, etc. a bunch of people get sick. They affect the curve.
>>Also, I really resent the fact that insurance will pay for Viagra, but not for birth control.<<
I agree. Almost all sexually active single women and all non-Catholic married women use birth control — for HEALTH reasons.
>>I don't want to hear about how men are supposed to get erections,... Men aren't supposed to get the same erection when they are 60 <<
Close your ears.
>>I'm not sure your comparison with a mastectomy is a fair one.<<
Ok. Comparing the two, you noted that "Women are culturally surrounded..."
The statement I made distinguished that the erection/impotency thing at least in my example occurs in an asocial situation. The loss of breasts anticipates oneself being observed in a social situation even if the situation never were to occur. Certainly social stigmata are not necessarily considered as medical issues until some shrink gets involved. On the other hand, is a persistent, normal but unremediable physical urge to get off a medical issue? I dunno. What about the healthy young couple where the male element is dealing with a disability?
My guess is that there are not many women who know what it is like being a man, and not many men who know what it is like being a woman. Transgendering probably doesn't lend much awareness either I expect. I suppose that the issue needs resolution within the parameters of psychiatry and medicine as far as coverage is concerned. Otherwise is Us against Them as it's always been.
>>Key Dear says, Where is the pill to harden these muscles up some ask secretly, not wanting to exercise them.<<
The Kegel exercises I've been doing since getting the catheter out has helped a lot - my posture and lumbar health for sure, my bladder control yes, albeit not my woodie. But it's all good. I'm likely to continue annoying you guys for quite a while. If I can get Cialis or whatever at an affordable cost, I'll probably use it (if it helps), and I'll continue to be amazed and interested in what's going on as I grow older or peradventure encounter other health challenges.
Perhaps I'm not making my point effectively. The effect of the loss of your breasts doesn't happen in a vacuum. Those cultural "norms" are imprinted on us from a very early age. It doesn't matter whether you are exposed as being breastless in public, the stigma is there nonetheless, and is no less devastating that a man aging normally and losing some of his vim and vigor. How in the world is that any more a medical issue than the results of a mastectomy?
What about the healthy young couple where the male element is dealing with a disability? That's a completely different thing, not what I was talking about at all. (Is this where Michael Palin steps in and explains why it couldn't just have been pulled off in an accident?) And you know perfectly well that there are other ways to go!
This is one of those topics where the people who have no reason to get defensive, get defensive anyway, and those who should be learning something don't pay attention and are never part of the conversation.
btw, it isn't that I think there is no earthly use for a drug like Viagra. I don't think Key Dear meant that either. But do we need to see it in TV commercials all the time? And why do those same commercials make men feel better about themselves by making women feel less adequate? The subliminal message tells women of a certain age that if they don't want to have sex as often as their male counterpart, that there is something wrong with them. I wonder how would TV commercials pushing saltpeter be received?
Yes, I know saltpeter never worked for that purpose. It's just an example.
This is the kind of discussion that will keep me single.
>>How in the world is that any more a medical issue than the results of a mastectomy?<<
It isn't. I alleged that the two instances may be seen as equivalent, where impotence stands in as a man's version of that sense of loss a mastectomy causes. It's true that there's a distinction between things that go wrong on account of aging, and those that have traumatic causes. I lost my teeth, my eagle-eyesight, and other functionalities of my youth. I got "aids" to simulate those old functions. But the loss of sexual function or equipment (breasts or the male member) seems to have a more powerful effect psychologically - or so I speculate. I doubt that we disagree substantially.
Anyhow there are larger issues. Check out www.atlasoftheuniverse.com. : = )
Well.. having an orgasim is a very healthy thing for the body as many studies will tell you.
Women do like to be pursued.
Women do like a nice stiff one.
Women can make a man feel less of a man psychologically in an instant by one comment on his sexual performance.
Women can fake so they have the edge.
Women have complained endlessly about how he "gets off" then rolls over, and now that can change.
Women should be grateful for this tiny little blue pill.
on and on... but again, no matter how they advertise this pill, it anoys me to see it on television, it belongs more in an info-mercial.
Key Dear, why do women fake? Because they've been warned not to upset the fragile male ego, not because they like NOT having an orgasm. You said having an orgasm is healthy (which is true), so how is not having one and faking it an advantage? Must women do even that for themselves?
Further, how is Viagra going to change the "slam-bam-thankyou maam" behavior? If that's what a man is doing, it's because he's selfish and thoughtless, not because he isn't getting it up and on. That's as bad as the "not now, I have a headache" excuse.
Anhaga, I still think that a man's diminished sexual function is more like a woman post-menopausal lack of fluids (and desire, not to mention everything gets wrinkled and sags). Nothing works as well when we are older as it did when we were younger. I couldn't run a 2 minute half-mile if my life depended on it. That's the way it goes. But breasts don't just fall off naturally. The sense of loss men feel about diminished sexual ability may be comparable to a woman's sense of loss for her perky breasts or vaginal fluids or favorite handbag, but I don't agree that it's the same as the loss of the breasts altogether. So maybe we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
Post a Comment