Conor J Rogers, Editor
Ideology: Moderate Republican | Writing from: Arlington, VA
Pam Tebow made a choice to have her child instead of getting an abortion.
Her son, Tim, grew up to become one of the most famous college football quarterbacks in recent memory. She decided to share her story about motherhood through a TV ad sponsored by Focus on the Family, a conservative think tank and action group.
Feminists everywhere were outraged (some even, were deeply saddened).
So let’s get this straight: a mother shares her story about how her decision to carry her child allowed her to become a proud mother – and feminists got mad? The ad was about motherhood, and about a woman’s choice to have her child – yet supposedly “pro-mother,” and “pro-choice” groups were livid.
Put it this way: pro-choice groups are mad that a woman is talking about her personal choice.
Naturally, feminists groups expected something much more slanted than “I Love You, Mom” from Focus on the Family, but their initial outrage towards an advertisement they had yet to even see is telling about the current state of the feminist movement. Groups like the National Organization for Women (NOW) didn’t hold any fire against the Tebow family – they ran blog posts accusing Pam Tebow of lying, making up her story, and giving false context about her son’s birth. They slammed Tim Tebow, a student-athlete who has done mountains of charity work as anti-woman and ignorant – all because of a TV ad they had not yet seen.
NOW, is this what it means to be pro-woman – attacking and tearing down other women who disagree with you? (See also: NOW vs Sarah & Bristol Palin.)
When the ad actually aired, it was a soft-hearted spot about Pam and her son. We can all agree it was a bit out-of-place among the other catchy and humorous ads that have made Super Bowl commercials famous. And yes, the ad ends with an awkward moment of Tim Tebow tackling his mom in jest.
Somewhere between ‘I love you, Mom’ and the tackle, it was just too much for National Organization for Women President Terry O’Neill. She released a statement this morning that should make her want to hire a new spokesman:
“I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it. That’s what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don’t find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself.”
Hear that kids? Don’t play around with your Mom – it’s domestic assault and battery.
It is one thing to attack Tim Tebow for his actual anti-abortion political stance, but accusing a 20-something college student of encouraging domestic violence for joking around with his mother? Come on.
Where is the Outrage?
What’s most interesting about the feminist lobby’s reaction to the Super Bowl commercial is their lack of reaction to…every other ad.
Half naked women advertising for GoDaddy – that’s empowering! Car commercials portraying wives as needy and bothersome – that must be pro-women! But don’t put a mother and son up on screen to celebrate their family – according to the National Organization ‘for’ Women, that’s anti-woman, anti-mother and anti-family.
NOW may support a woman’s right to choose, but God help you if you choose to speak out against them.
Spot on Conor, they would never like to hear the other side. I agree with you for the most part about the entire commercial, especially how ridiculous this back-lash from the feminists looks.
Though I’m not actively involved in many feminist groups, the vast majority of my friends who self-identify as feminists were more offended by the fact that the ad was run despite its controversial nature (it quite clearly implicitly pro-life) while at the same time rejecting other ads for being “controversial”.
This article makes a good point. As someone who is pro-choice, I did not find anything offensive about this advertisement. The backlash against it seems somewhat disproportional.
Here’s what I don’t understand…
If you’re pro-choice, can’t you choose not to abort?
Yes. But it seems those (like Pam Tebow) who urge women to do just that are attacked and torn down by so called “pro-choice” groups.
Domestic abuse?! I thought his tackle was funny and cute (cheesy and bad, but cute). Statements like the one NOW made is the reason more than half of my friends don’t want to be associated with feminism – and these are my GIRLfriends. These ridiculous people should focus on women in trouble – not women in a cheesy love-ad with their son.
Where is the outrage? My outrage is aimed mostly at your article. Apparently you have yet to do your research.
Just because this ad happens to be the most publicly disputed, it is most certainly not the only ad to bother feminists (Article A: http://www.now.org/news/blogs/index.php/sayit/2010/02/09/super-bowl-ads-same-old-sexism-for-sale) Aside from that though:
The Focus on the Family website has a video of the charming Mrs. Tebow detailing her pregnancy…kind of. For the whole story as told by her, click here: http://www.focusonthefamily.com/default.aspx) Now, the ad itself says basically nothing, and it personally does not bother me much. It does, however, teach mothers-to-be it’s okay to completely go without any sort of medical care during a pregnancy, which is extremely dangerous and unhealthy. The side you don’t hear is that of the deceased mothers and their unborn children who did not get the medical attention they needed. Placental abruption can be an extremely hazardous condition without immediate medical treatment. With medical treatment it is a different ballgame (want to learn more?: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/placental-abruption/DS00623/DSECTION=complications). So, while Mrs. Tebow made a choice it does not appear to be quite the miraculous anti-abortion message that it is made out to be as she did not even know much about her condition at the time. Instead, it appears Mrs. Tebow just got lucky by not going to see a doctor who could have helped her.
I can also find it rational that a women’s group would want to prevent any sort of add from Focus on the Family to air during the Super Bowl. If you were unaware it is an extremely conservative Christian organization aimed at changing the political climate in order to overturn Roe v. Wade in addition to supporting other parts of the pro-family agenda (such as vehemently opposing homosexuality).
I am assuming you have actually watched the ad, Mr. Rogers, as I say that if that is supposed to be “joking around” please do not ever joke with me, it would probably be very painful.
ML,
-Not doing my research? You yourself apparently haven’t. You question if I’ve viewed the ad, when I stated that I had, and also described it piece-by-piece. I’m well aware of Focus on the Family’s agenda (hence why I said: “Focus on the Family, a conservative think tank and action group.” — did you miss that part in your peruse of my article?) I’m well aware of their agenda and disagree with the vast majority of it, hence why this article was a critique of the feminist reaction, rather than a defense of Focus on the Family.
-Moving on. I never said women’s groups were wrong to seek to prevent the ad, I said they were wrong for slandering the Tebow family like they did, and then subsequently to fall back behind a “domestic abuse” veil when their over-reaction was obviously unwarranted. If your qualms are with how Pam Tebow talks about pregnancy, then NOW et al should talk about that, not that Pam Tebow might be lying, that Tim Tebow is against women’s rights and supports domestic violence.
-Aside from that, I’m going to ignore the awkward joke about tackling me at the end there.