Friday
Editor in chief: Jack Clifford
Managing Editor: Jessica Blanchard
Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu
September 29,2000 VOLUME 102, ISSUE 23
EDITORIAL EDITOR: MICHAEL j. KLECKNER, opededitor@journalist.com
Planned Parenthood’s Joe Sperm:
Irresponsible messenger...
By Andrew Adams
Oregon Daily Emerald
The majority of public opinion re
garding Joe Sperm is favorable. Most
people in Eugene and on campus view
the mascot as nothing more than that
— a mascot to usher in a new advertis
ing campaign. He’s been in a parade
and several newspaper ads and even
graces our mass transit vehicles.
Planned Parenthood defends their
new campaign as an innovative way to
make people think about how to en
gage in sexual activity more responsi
bly. They believe that when young
people see Joe Sperm’s smiling mug on
the side of a bus, they’ll be more in
clined to make use of free medical ex
ams and contraceptives.
This is ridiculous. I see Joe Sperm as
a danger to young people and a bad
choice of a mascot.
How can young people understand
the seriousness of sex when something
like Joe Sperm is so
enthusiastically sup- m
ported? Studies by the I
University Health ig
Center show that
many University stu
dents had sex for the first time when
they were between the ages of 16- to
18-years-old. To me, this means they
were thinking about having sex when
they were likely between the ages of 14
and 15. At that age, children are look
ing for something to help them make
the decision about whether to have
sex. Going to an agency like Planned
CON
Parenthood — which should help
young people avoid sexual mistakes —
and finding some cartoon that both
trivializes and makes sex even more at
tractive will only induce young people
to make mistakes.
I The pro argument
claims the mascot
helps Planned Parent
hood relate to young
people. I agree, the
mascot does, but in a such way that
will defeat the mascot’s purported pur
pose. Is Joe Sperm funny? Yes, he is, to
college students who know the conse
quences of sex. But unfortunately, he
also is funny to young people who
don’t know how emotionally damag
ing and physically dangerous making a
wrong choice about sex can be.
Sex is not a joke. Would it be funny
to have a Barry Bong or Sammy Sy
ringe teach children about the dangers
of drug use? I can’t think of a better
mascot to teach kids about proper sex
ual choices, which makes me inclined
to argue that there should be no mascot
to raise sexual consciousness.
The best way to teach proper sexual
values is between parent and child,
and failing that, through a responsible
campaign that frankly lays down the
potential risks involved with sex.
Using a contraceptive is a mature de
cision. How can Planned Parenthood
expect young people to make that ma
ture decision when they attempt to re
late to them by using a joke of a mascot
such as Joe Sperm?
Or effective campaigner?
By Michael J. Kleckner
Oregon Daily Emerald
Planned Parenthood has introduced
its latest marketing tool and mascot,
Joe Sperm, and I couldn’t be happier.
Joe is an accessible, joyful way to reach
out to young people and educate them
about the consequences of sex.
Some people have expressed con
cern or outrage at the Joe Sperm cam
paign. I fin’d this just a bit silly, but it’s
a serious conversation, so I will engage
it seriously.
According to its mission statement,
Planned Parenthood’s main concern is
to provide health care services while
guaranteeing each individual’s right to
reproductive self-determination and
promoting understanding of the impli
cations of sexuality. They want to cut
down on unwanted pregnancies and
STDs. Good mission.
How does Joe Sperm help bring
these goals to fruition? By appealing to
younger people in a playful manner -
which is how many
younger people treat h
sex. Many teenagers I
have a casual attitude I
toward sex, many of “
them are uneducated about sexuality
and most of these people are at risk.
This is a huge public health concern.
Perhaps sex should never be treated
in a light, playful manner. Perhaps its a
very serious, sacred act of love that is
only to be expressed within the con
fines of a publicly committed relation
ship. And perhaps some of us just real
ly dig on sex.y’all.
Joe is reaching out, in an admittedly
PRO
frivolous manner, to those people who
treat sex frivolously. It’s likely to get
their attention, and then it’s likely to
get a few more people thinking serious
ly about playing safely. This is good. .
The con argument
claims that young peo
ple don’t know the con
sequences of sex and
that there should be no
mascot to raise sexual consciousness.
But this isn’t dealing with the real
world. In reality, teen-agers are inter
ested in and are having sex. Parents
can engage in this dialogue, but
Planned Parenthood isn’t a mother or a
father. This is a public health cam
paign, and it needs to appeal to the
masses.
Does Joe Sperm perpetuate trivial
ization of this most sacred of acts?
Probably. Is that bad? Depends on your
outlook. But I think it’s a worthwhile
trade-off if we end up with fewer teen
mothers who can’t support themselves,
and fewer people dying of AIDS. Be
cause people are still having sex. They
do it quite a lot.
I think treating sex with a serious at
titude is a worthwhile moral concern
for those who feel that way. And I
think it’s the job of parents, organized
religion and peer groups to preach and
teach all about it. That’s a good thing.
. But I don’t think it’s the job of non
profit, health-advocacy groups. They
are facing the reality of teens having
sex. And it’s their job to educate, in the
most effective manner possible, those
who may be at risk. Joe Sperm does
that wonderfully.
Yahoo! ads raise concerns
It is with great disappoint
ment that I write in regards to
the Yahoo! inserts advertised in
the Emerald. Familiar with poor
judgment in the media industry,
I performed the standard action
of voicing my objections to the
homophobic and sexually as
saulting nature of the campaign.
I called Becky Merchant, the ad
vertising manager for the Emer
ald, to determine how the adver
tising staff came to the
conclusion that these ads were
acceptable. Although Merchant
admitted that she herself knew
there was a problem with the
ads, she also stated that it is not
her role to influence advertising
decisions made by student staff.
Thus, the advertising depart
ment collectively agreed that al
though the ads were “stupid,”
they did not find it obviously of
fensive or stereotypically deni
grating.
This brings me to two critical
concerns. First, it is very dis
heartening to realize that our so
ciety has regressed to such a
base level; viewing women as
sexual objects is so common, it’s
not wrong any more.
Today we are appalled at a
school shooting. If it happens
more frequently in the future,
will we become equally desensi
tized and shrug it off in the same
manner? I think not. Or would
Guest Commentary
Erica
Fuller
.....■
we?
What about rape? Sexual ha
rassment? Gay bashing and hate
crimes? General violence?
What’s the difference? Where
and when do we draw the line
and demand that it is no longer
acceptable?
These questions lead me to
my second concern. I serve a
similar role as Merchant: I am a
hired professional responsible
for serving the educational
needs of students. When a po
tential conflict arises, it is ex
pected that I take advantage of
the “teachable moment” to facil
itate recognition and a clear un
derstanding of the issue. Further,
it would be more than reason
able to make a strong recommen
dation as to the most appropriate
course of action. If the students
in the advertising department
did not see a problem with these
ads, then it was the job of the
qualified “professional” to seize
the opportunity to educate them.
Not doing so is belligerently irre
sponsible. Merchant missed that
moment, and as a result, a large
population on this campus has
been subjected to vile debase
ment and objectification of their
womanhood and sexuality.
I was prepared to begin this
school year without the custom
ary cynicism towards student
journalism. After this affront,
however, my relationship with
the Emerald will proceed with
considerable caution and dis
trust of their ability to produce
responsible journalism.
Erica Fuller, M RS. is the director of the
Multicultural Center.
Letter to the editor
Build a culture of respect
The white flyers inserted
in the Oregon Daily Emerald
this week, paid for by Yahoo!
and published as advertising
by the ODE, brought many
calls of concern, outrage,
anxiety and anger to offices
in student affairs. Students,
student leaders and student
affairs staff who read the
Emerald reacted negatively
to the ads. The ads seemed to
these readers to be in poor
taste, offensive and an affront
to the culture of respect we
seek here that honors the
rights, safety, dignity and
worth of every individual. In
addition, most readers who
spoke to my office found the
ads crude, ineffective and
obscure in their advertising
message.
The University has a
strong tradition of freedom of
thought and expression. The
Oregon Daily Emerald has a
long history as an independ
ent newspaper on this cam
pus. The ODE editorial staff
and advertising staff func
tion independently. It is my
hope that these staff also
function collaboratively with
sensitivity and support for
the community we build to
gether here. Ads such as
these do not affirm our com
munity standards of respect
for the rights and well-being
of all members. Rather than
promoting diversity of opin
ions, ideas and backgrounds,
these ads promote feelings of
bigotry, intimidation and in
sult to much of the reader
ship. ODE — you can do bet
ter. Please join us in
building, not breaking, our
culture of respect.
Anne Leavitt
University of Oregon Associate
Vice President
& Dean of Students
CORRECTION
The story “Governor speaks
to revive student voting vital
ity,” (ODE, Sept. 26) should
have said that ballots for the
November election will be
mailed to voters on Oct. 20.
The Emerald regrets this er
ror.
Thumbs
To a BIG voter
registration ef
fort
TheASUO
broughta host
of local politi
cians to campus
on Wednesday
to boost student
voter registra
tion. In addi
tion, the student
executive office
is building the
world’s largest
ballot box to
draw attention
to the effort.
To sharing the
tunes, man
The Grateful
Dead has always
protected its
copyright inter
ests. But the
Dead’s only con
cern is ensuring
that no one else
profit from the
music. So they
didn’t sue Nap
ster. Groovy,
dude.
To saying one
thing and doing
another
At Monday’s City
Council meet
ing, Mayor Jim
Torrey prodded
councilors to
make a decision
on the ordi
nance banning
smoking in bars,
taverns and bin
go parlors-and
then cast the tie
breaking vote to
postpone voting
on it.
To teaching kids
with M&Ms
Millions of
books have
been sold to par
ents and teach
ers in recent
years that are
teaching chil
dren hand-eye
coordination,
reading and
math by im
printing their
brains with
brand names
and logos.