Disease Prevention: Good, Baby Prevention: Bad

NYT profiles the reaction to a new Trojan condom ad that features a bar full of pigs where one guy turns into a classy dude after he grabs a condom.

Advertising agency :

We have to change the perception that carrying a condom for women or men is a sign they’re on the prowl and just want to have sex.

Fox and CBS :

Contraceptive advertising must stress health-related uses rather than the prevention of pregnancy... We do not find it appropriate for our network even with late-night-only restrictions.

2001 Report on condom advertising :

Some networks draw a strong line between messages about disease prevention — which may be allowed — and those about pregnancy prevention, which may be considered controversial for religious and moral reasons.

I guess the backlash from the ignorance of HIV during the 80s and now in Africa that the "moral and religious" reactors cannot touch disease prevention, but can still be pro-baby, anti-abortion, while being anti-contraception.

This hits me as a bizarre line to draw, that having sex with a condom with the intention of preventing disease and a side effect of prevention conception can be accepted, but having sex with a condom with the intention of preventing an unwanted birth and also preventing disease creates controversy.

Not to mention, it doesn't seem like the ad actually say its not for disease prevention, it just doesn't emphasize it like the network would like them to? I don't know if I even remember the ugly Trojan Men commercials addressing disease prevention (though I could be wrong... corrections?)

Possibilities?
- The part that effects men (disease) matters and the part that effects women (pregnancy) doesn't matter?
- The purpose of sex is to create babies, not to pass on disease, so its ok to try to prevent the 'unnatural' one?
- Ads that focus on preventing disease transmission end up focusing on a downside of sex and make the "moral and religious" ones think that it will spread word of reasons to avoid sex?

I don't know, I'm really pushing myself on those.

Additionally, this ad series, called 'Evolve', creates a shift from condoms = raunchy horny guy (Trojan Man!) to condom = responsible eligible guy. Yay! Let's encourage a positive mentality that leads towards healthy decisions!

Curiosity :: Does anyone know if Fox & CBS run ads for the pill and NuvaRing and everything? I don't watch them enough to know if they think its ok to advertise hormone methods (which, I guess if they do, they could say are for those suffering from severe cramps, etc) but not ok to advertise condoms for contraception.

Let's look again, though! Fox has problems with condoms for something other than disease prevention!? Home of "When Bears Attack IV" and "Cops"? I smell another example of "an overload of violence is fine, but sex is dirty!"

Anyway, I find it incredible that this distinction on condom matters that much to "certain groups".

Furthermore, I'm frustrated that it makes me stand up for Trojan for a minute, because they have 75% of the market share, yet do worse in quality tests, and wrote a ridiculously biased survey grading university in terms of sexual health.