Up, Up and Away

Today, I would like to discuss Erectile Dysfunction. Obviously, I do not suffer from the malady, and when I told my husband I was writing about this, he emitted a loud gasp and then insisted that I make it very clear that he does not suffer from the malady as well. You men are so protective over your "boys", and I think it's been this way since the dawn of time. Females are protective of their "womanhood" too, but until Georgia O'Keeffe and her paintings came along, many of us were not really sure what was down there.

A usual, I am getting off topic. What I truly want to discuss is the advertising for Erectile Dysfunction or E.D. The most annoying commercials to me are the ones that show a middle-aged-to-almost-senior couple doing work around the house when suddenly the "love bug" hits the man. I guess the point is that the "love bug" can still hit the man because he takes this drug. As I have said many times before, I am all for sex, so if this drug helps the guy have a great love life, then it's worth the pharmaceutical co-pay.

The commercials start off nice enough. The couple cuddles and hold hands, and they both have that "come hither" look in their eyes. Then they take a romantic stroll into the woods, get naked and sit in separate bath tubs. Can someone explain to me the point of separate bath tubs? Is it a censorship thing like when Lucy and Ricky couldn't sleep in the same bed because people might assume they were having sex?

I would think if you are advertising a drug that enhances one's sex life, you want people to assume the man and the woman do things besides take a bath in different tubs. Why aren't they sitting in a big Jacuzzi bathtub or a backyard spa? I think the separate bath tubs are a little misleading. No one can have sex while sitting in separate tubs. I don't care how strong that drug makes a guy!

Anyway, if you take the time as I did to go on You Tube and search out these commercials, you find some truly interesting ones from Viagra®. At least one of these has been banned. Are they funny? Absolutely. Are they off-color? For sure, that is why they are funny. But I don't think that is why the commercial was banned. I think the people who oversee ads (Is that the great and powerful FCC?) probably thought the drug promised much more than it could deliver. I will give you a hint. The man in the commercial is doing push ups with no arms.

I guess the problem with the Viagra commercial was that it was too up front ( no pun intended). There is a commercial for a natural enhancement product that addresses the whole impotence problem with visual symbolism. There are pointy objects and hoses and a plethora of other symbols just hidden from view. This commercial reminds me of the "Can you find?" puzzles that are in kids' books. You know, where you have to circle the objects that have to do with a certain theme? I guess the theme in this ad would be phallic symbols.

The point is I don't mind the commercials. I get scared when I hear the litany of side effects that can be caused by these drugs. It's nice that men can have sex again but at what cost? I know men are saying, "Hey, we have been subjected to feminine hygiene products for decades. It's our turn to have our needs met."

Men are right; fair is fair. The E.D. commercials are addressing a true medical disorder - a medical disorder that has been swept under the rug for years. Maybe these drugs are making relationships last longer. I have to say that I know a lot of people who walk around with smiles on their faces nowadays. Maybe they are high on life or high on something else.