On the first anniversary of the legalization of marriage for same-sex couples in California—or at least for the 18,000 that managed to get hitched before November 5th of last year—Equality California has released a new ad featuring a pair of gay dads and their five kids. In November, I criticized the No On 8 campaign for failing to have included images of same-sex parents and their children in their ads before the election; it seems I was not the only one, and that someone has listened.
Still, one of the comments on the video’s YouTube page says the new ad below should have been more aggressive in showing how Prop 8 hurts families—or been more funny and memorable in the spirit of Stephen Colbert. What do you think?
I really think this is a step in the right direction. It shows a wonderful, photogenic family and a couple of guys who are obviously gay and who talk about the inequality brought on by being second class citizens.
However, I think we do need to show the painful effects of legal inequality as well. People need to see how legal discrimination hurts us and our families.
No, it’s not aggressive and it’s not memorable, unfortunately. The men in the video seem like very nice guys who are a little disappointed, not angry. The gay community’s anger is completely justifiable. Why not show it? I’m not saying that people need to scream into the camera, but what they’ve given us here is too weak.
What a great family. And kudos to them for letting their whole family (kids included) be shown to the world.
But it hope it will be just one of a series of spot ads. Some of the ads should be a little angrier or, dare I say it, dramatic with e.g. one of the kids not getting hospital care or visitation because her dads couldn’t marry. I think the ads need to show more impact.
Not even remotely aggressive enough. Clearly reaching out to the right (“anyone want to say grace?”) and seems to be trying to appeal to the “gays are just like us” crowd versus using the rational “marriage rights are equality rights” argument. Also, poor choice of soundbite: “I’m free to love who I love” – people will argue that in fact he is free to love who he loves – this is not the argument, the argument is about human rights. I get the impression that there is still reluctance to clearly state the issue and demand the rights, we’re still stuck in that “we’re just like you, we’re not threatening” rut which sounds to this married dyke like begging.