Parents like getting worked up because it’s easier than parenting.

The latest topic bothering clueless parents is the erectile dysfunction ads.

In an MSNBC article titled “Erectile dysfunction ads too hot for primetime?” every adult interviewed was convinced that children’s road to sexual deviancy is paved with erectile dsfunction ads.

“Aubin Parrish cringes and then grabs the remote every time an ad of that ilk pops onto the screen as she watches primetime TV with her kids,” says the article.

“The commercials give the impression that the only thing adults do is think about their sexual function,” Parrish says.
Ads don’t indicate what adults think about; they are targeted toward the show’s audience.

If Parrish does not want her kids to see such ads, she should’nt let her kids watch shows intended for 50-year-old men.
Parents aren’t the only ones in hysterics over the issue.

Dr. Vic Strasburger, a professor of pediatrics at the University of New Mexico, says, “The underlying message in these ads is confusing to children and teenagers.”

How so? “It seems like everybody is having sex and there’s no risk to it. … But then what do you do? There’s no talk about birth control,” says Strasburger

The ads depict committed partners who do not fear STIs and might not actually mind pregnancy.

What’s confusing to children and teenagers is they have never been told unprotected sex is not always a bad thing.

The article’s author claims erectile dysfunction ads have a “skewed view of adult sexuality.”

But the ads show sex for what it actually is.

It is educators and parents who present a skewed view of sexuality: you always want your germ-ridden partner on the other side of some plastic and you never want to have a baby. This is not true.

These ads aren’t targeting kids because no 14-year-old needs an erectile dysfunction pill.

(If there were an anti-Viagra, then 14-year-olds would pay attention. “You mean I don’t have to have a dozen boners a day? I will see your ad in ‘Better Homes and Gardens’!”)

What do “concerned” parents think is the point of advertising.

Drug companies select the TV shows that reach their potential customers.

Then parents let their kids watch inappropriate TV shows and obviously the problem is evil drug companies with their “skewed” view of human sexuality.

The programs these children watch present a more skewed view of sexuality than drug ads.

I would rather my 8-year-old learn about sex from a Cialis ad than from “American Idol” or “Modern Family.”
At least I would have less wrong information to correct.

Everything Cialis has to tell her is true, even if it is slightly beyond her maturity.

I can always correct that by not allowing my 8-year-old to watch primetime TV.

Dr. Douglas Gentile, an associate professor of psychology at Iowa State University, says, “National sex surveys show that whether we’re married or single, we’re not having sex all the time.”

Yes, Dr. Gentile had to cite a national survey as evidence that you are not currently having intercourse.
“The whole point of most ads is to make us feel inadequate,” he notes. “Without that as a motivation why would we buy something?”

That’s the point of advertising. The point of parenting is to teach children to disregard this tactic.

You don’t have to obey every ad you see and that doesn’t make you inadequate.The worst part of kids seeing these ads isn’t that kids might learn the real reason to have sex; it’s that we’re seeing just how bad their parents are.

And unfortunately, there are no pills kids can take for that.