Saturday, June 22, 2013

Patheos Hosting Ads For Contraceptives

When I was over at Mark Shea's Patheos page updating that last link, I noticed that there was a link in the "Around the Web" section entitled Female Condoms: Will women wear them? near the bottom. It was right next to an ad for Mark Shea's book This is My Body about the Eucharist. I noticed that you can also get to it from the Elizabeth Scalia's blog posts, as in this example where she talks about going to meet the "inventors" of Patheos. I don't want to provide the link to the offending ad, but you can go to their pages and verify this and click on it their. Basically it goes to a site called "LifeScript" with a big infomercial disguised as a news article on so-called "female condoms". The page is also covered with ads for Essure, another contraceptive described as "permanent and non-surgical". Here's some text from the infomercial:

Prophylactics aren’t expected to be particularly pretty, but no one wants to have sex looking like they’re wearing their grandmother’s rain slicker. That may be why the female condom, available since the late 1990s, has never caught on in the U.S. The fact that it is visible may be a turn-off for some. But women may want to reconsider: after all, the rain-gear look trumps facing unwanted pregnancies or STDs...

The female condom — marketed as the FC — may not be alluring, but it puts protection directly into the hands of women. Produced by the Female Health Company, the FC is one of four barrier birth control methods, the other three being the cervical cap, the diaphragm and the sponge. Of these, only the FC can prevent both sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and pregnancy when properly used.

The page also contains links with text such as The Morning After Pill, Top 5 Birth Control Methods, etc. You get the idea. Here's what it looks like on Mark Shea's blog.



Here's what it looks like on the Anchoress's blog.



What do I make of all this? Well, one thing I did right away was to remove the Google AdSense ads from my blog. I realized that anything can be advertised there, and if I write the word "contraception" in a post, chances are pretty good that Adsense will throw in an ad for the morning after pill, rubbers, etc. I cut the one on the side and the one at the bottom. I'm working on the one at the top, but I forget how to access that one. I think I need to go into the template code, fun stuff — dusting off the HTML book....

I know that Mark and Ms. Scalia do not want to promote using contraceptives. And they never had to worry about accidentally doing so on their old blogs where they were their own masters. But this is what happens when you abandon you own little garden and start "working for the man" to make more money. You end up sacrificing control for a steady paycheck from the factory farm managers.

If Patheos ever extends an offer to me to blog there, I'll have to decline the offer based on this. Not that they'll ever ask me now.

There — got that pesky top ad out of there. Ad-free now. Maybe I'll advertise coffee made by monks now. Or something.

18 comments:

  1. Kinda Sorta Catholic and Enjoying it

    ReplyDelete
  2. This would be an excellent situational example for Ms. Scalia's new book, "Strange Gods: Unmasking the Idols in Everyday Life". Oh wait.

    ReplyDelete
  3. OK, I hate to be the dissenting poopy-pants...but I think we're being a little unfair here. Should a Catholic refuse to publish an op-ed in a secular newspaper (say the NYT) because said newspaper may support abortion or run raunchy personals in the classifieds? How can we avoid all association with The World?

    I don't begrudge Mark this opportunity to make a little more money. I agree that, at some point, you have to draw the line...but at what point? That is a thorny question for anyone who works for The Man. (And most of us do.)

    More later re this complicated topic. Gotta get ready for Mass now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Diane, what did I say that you are dissenting from?

      Delete
    2. I guess...well, taking Mark to task for the birth-control ads, over which he has no control...? I dunno. Not really dissenting, I guess. Didn't mean to come across as picking a fight or anything remotely like that.

      I guess what I'm trying to ay is: It's hard to be Completely Pure in one's work associations. Don't get me started on the apparel industry, LOL. But I know you agree, so I'll quit while I'm ahead.

      Delete
    3. Diane, my point is you are way more forgiving than Shea will ever be. He'd argue that's because he's a smarter catholic than you, but I'd argue the opposite.

      Mark has plenty of control, he doesn't have to write for that blogsite. Perfect control, in fact.

      Delete
    4. taking Mark to task for the birth-control ads....

      I'm pointing out that this dearly beloved Patheos site is just another "greedy corporation". Mark has spent a lot of time going after anyone who has a remote connection to "consumerism", and he readily admits it. But my guess is that he won't bite the hand that feeds him.

      Scalia is even more guilty of hypocrisy here with her habit of seeing household idols EVERYWHERE she looks. We definitely have a beam/mote situation going on where Patheos is concerned.

      And lest anyone doubt that Catholics are getting a little bit carried away about the absolute awesomeness of Patheos.

      Delete
    5. Ahhhh so. Capisco. Well, I rarely read Mark and never read Liz, so I guess I've missed most of this stuff. But I do seem to recall that Mark is always on a tear about consumerism and materialism. Point taken.

      Delete
    6. I'm glad I don't read either of them. One nemesis blogger/pundit has turned out to be enough for me.

      Speaking of whom, I was heartened to see that Dreher actually went fishing, and went with his old man, to boot. Good for him - he should go more often and maybe he'll get some perspective.

      (He could have manned-up and learned something about baseball from the guys, rather than returning to form by fawning over a book by an author-we-are-supposed-to-be-impressed-by, but baby steps will have to do for now.)

      Delete
  4. Diane, if "The Anchoress" and Mark Shea weren't quite so eager to pounce on whatever outrage du jour strikes their finely calibrated catholic-o-meters, you might have a point. But since The Anchoress stated to me directly that conservatives treat immigrants as "less than human" when we point out their illegality under immigration law, and used her handy dandy all-purpose Lizzie-Scalia-lite catholicism as buttress for this absurd position, she lost any opportunity for the leeway I would ordinarily grant ... And by the way, it's interesting that Ms. Scalia wrote her little book about "idolatry", because in my opinion she idolizes what is her extremely blinkered and bastardized version of catholic doctrine for answers on virtually every topic under the sun, issues about which she knows little or nothing. Not what it's there for, "Lizzie".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And of course the same criticism goes for Mark Shea x1000, but I'm figuring that argument is so obvious as to not need restatement.

      Delete
  5. "Squee!" who ARE these people? holy cow

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/theanchoress/2013/06/25/im-back-baby-im-back/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They replaced the contraceptive ad with a link to Olivia Munn pictures showcasing her new dresses and pumps.

      IDOLATRY! IDOLATRY

      Delete
  6. Is there anything worse than the intersection of Catholicism and aged wannabe yuppies? "ooooh, she's going to blog from RWANDA!"

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Deacon Greg was like a little superstar"! LOL

    ReplyDelete
  8. "The ever-busy Lisa Hendey managed to serve on not one but two discussion panels" !!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think we can count "blogging from Rwanda", "superstars" and "discussion panels" on a list of " Elizabeth Scalia's, ahem, Strange Idols.

    ReplyDelete