[LMB] a question of identity OT:

Rowena morgaine at zonnet.nl
Mon Dec 12 09:33:30 GMT 2005

Michael Bauminger wrote:

> On Sunday, December 11, 2005 10:54 PM, yadler at thejnet.com 
> <yadler at thejnet.com> wrote:
>> I just heard a commercial on the radio, that people who
>> are addicted to over-the-counter medicine should tell
>> their doctors, and get help.
> I have heard this advertisement, too. I am pretty sure that the drug 
> in question is heroin, not over the counter medicines.
I can imagine someone become aware of having a problem by an ad if they 
are addicted to painkillers or tranquelisers (are they over the counter 
for you folks?). But heroin? The scenario that an heroin addict watches 
TV, sees this add and comes to the conclusion 'gee I have a problem 
here, lets tackle it' seems a little far fetched. But than again, I 
don't have TV either, and I live in the Netherlands, perhaps do our 
heroin junkies react differently to yours? (or the ad-makers are more 
optimistic? here they stick to over the counter painkiller adiction, 
drunk driving, save sex, get excersize and don't practice domestic 
violence - these are hard enough)

>> the last 2 lines of this advert rather shocked me.
>> woman: my daughter got her mother back.
>> man:      i finally got my life back.
>> what?  doesn't the woman get her life back too?
> In the first part of the ad, the woman is saying how she is no longer 
> able to be a proper mother to her daughter. That is why at the end, 
> she says her daughter got her mother back. I heard it in the context 
> that they were using two people to illustrate two different classes of 
> people hurt by one person's drug use -- that person, and his or her 
> family. In other words, if your own life is not so important to you 
> that you would clean up for yourself, maybe your family is important 
> enough to you that you will clean up for them.

I agree with Ziviya. Ofcourse, you want to show two different good 
outcomes so as to appeal to as many people as possible (some people 
would not be touched by the daughter argument, but some might well be,. 
likewise the life back). But I don't think it is a coincidence at all 
that they had the woman saying the line about the daughter and the man 
the more general line. It is after all (still) in line with perception 
about what the priorities of men and women ought to be. An ad like this 
can't afford to differ to much from perceptions of those it wants to 
reach, because then reaching them would be harder. If the man had said 
"now I finally have my daughter back" I wouldn't be surprised if this 
would not 'work' as intended, people might start to think in what way he 
has his daughter back (in stead of the natural way of being able to be a 
parent for her).  But maybe instead of swapping the sentences they might 
have come up with more neutral ones like "now I have my family back" 
"now I can be myself again" (or is that to hippy/new age?) "now I can 
enjoy life" stuff like that.


More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list