Down vote, for bad taste.

This is the first time I have ever down voted a Video, i hope it is the last.

featuring gays is bad taste? hmmm?

This is the first time I have ever down voted a Video, i hope it is the last.

Up or not at all.....sounds like a personal issue-

yeah - gays featured in a commercial as far back as 1994, that is something to be celebrated, non?

If it's bad taste...or to prevent others, that does sound like a personal issue.

This video has been discarded due to negative votes by members.

*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Saturday, June 7th, 2008 7:53pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter doogle.

other than some mild stereotyping what is in bad taste about this? the only thing (other than their predilection for furniture) that identifies these men as gay is their relationship to one another. no one is lisping, shrieking, drag-queen-style effeminate, rampantly bitchy, or any of the myriad other gay stereotypes out there. is showing gays on television in bad taste? is it that ikea is identifying them as a separate market? given when this ad is from, it was admirably forward-thinking of ikea to run an ad like this.

^Yep. And it's not like Ikea is saying the opposite...gays wouldn't shop at Ikea, cuz they're gay...But that Gays are people too. And people shop at Ikea.

This was in 19freaking94. Too bad they only played it once. The bad taste is from the people who sought for it to be censored. And maybe that is happening from those saying this is in bad taste...

Not seeing anything bad about this, except maybe the video quality. Sure there's some stereotyping but its positive, and seeing as all commercials stereotype (drink every time you see the soccer mom), its not like its out of the ordinary. I see a progressive moment in history.

This is a commercial about a couple and some furniture. Is normalizing the strange offensive? I don't get the downvoting.

Complete this thought, if you please, for shits'n'giggles (apologies to non-Americans):

In today's American culture, gays are being treated similarly to blacks of which time period?

1890's
1910's
1930's
1950's
1970's

The people who downvoted this sift did so because they are the segregationists of yesterday: separate drinking fountains, waiting areas, bus seats, etc. But here's the rub: the segregationists of yesterday were in the majority at the time (read: in the right). Just like today with gays. It's accepted that gay people should not have certain rights that straight people have.

There are those of you "heads of knuckle" who will try to claim that I'm saying you believe gays should be segregated. No. That's not what I'm saying. I'm talking about the likelihood that you would consider a gay person to be as much of a human being as a straight person.

You're free to dispute my premise but the fact is that public opinion changes very slowly. For instance, the American south is still wary of "northerners" because of the civil war and I'm not sure that'll ever go away.

During the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, it was decided, for enumeration purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives, that slaves would count as three-fifths of a person.

So, to the downvoters, what ratio would you assign to a homosexual?

I wouldn't have bothered upvoting this, cos I really don't care enough about it. I certainly don't see what the controversy is over (4 downvotes?!?) what year are we in now? But I felt like I had to upvote it to make the point that there is nothing "wrong" with this commerical.

^x2.

upvote because it's history and should be on the Sift.

Upvote to balance out Bill O'rly

>> ^NordlichReiter:
Down vote, for bad taste.
This is the first time I have ever down voted a Video, i hope it is the last.


What's in bad taste?

wow budzos you're late for the debate.