Search this blog

John McCormack writes:

The LA Times reports that the president of the National Organization for Women is still outrageously outraged over the incredibly tame Focus on the Family/Tebow ad last night:

NOW president Terry O’Neill said [the Tebow ad] glorified violence against women. “I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it,” she said. “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.

The “violence against women” O’Neill refers to occurs when Tim Tebow tackles his mom Pam in an attempt at slapstick.

The offending ad is below. No word yet on whether or not NOW is equally outraged by the hyper-sexualized objectification of women in many of the other Super Bowl ads. Or whether or not they are bothered by the actual violence that is done to women who are just being born.

View Comments


29 thoughts on “Not a Parody: N.O.W. Says Tebow Ad Glorifies Violence Against Women!”

  1. Chad says:

    This post is a chiasm :)

  2. That’s a good point–is there any word from NOW about the sophomoric commercials by GoDaddy? Doubtful.

  3. bigjoe says:

    great video and testimony from his parents. Does anyone know why his father’s voice in the first part of the interview is different when talking about weeping for the babies who haven’t had a chance. It almost sounds like it was dubbed into the video.

  4. emmzee says:

    I’d never heard of NOW before this whole “controversy” started. They sure are using this ad as a way to make a name for themselves …

  5. Justin Ennis says:

    I don’t think NOW actually believes what they are saying about the ad. It is a pure political chess game and in this case I think they’ve made a miscalculation, most especially since the ad itself is so subtle (as the linked article mentions). To use a football metaphor, NOW was drawn offsides. They went on the attack and they look foolish for it.

  6. Chuck Beem says:

    Damage control, plain and simple.

    And does anyone else think Pam Tebow looks kind of like Mary Steenburgen?

  7. Rather than eat crow, they spewed more venom. Classy.

  8. jigawatt says:

    Are they saying the same thing about the Betty White ad?

    1. Isabella says:

      GREAT POINT! What about the Betty White ad?

  9. bigjoe says:

    Chuck: I’d say she is STRIKING resemblence to Mary Steenburgen. No pun intended:)

  10. joey says:

    Sally Jenkins of the Washington Post wrote an outstanding article on all this. She is “pro choice” but completely destroyed NOW. “The National Organization of Less and Less Women” was one of the many times she played around with the name hilariously.

    Clearly the ad was very laid back and playful even…not confrontational. It made the reaction to it beforehand seem exactly like what it was…the spewing of an increasingly irrelevant group of people trying to regain their political sway.

  11. Dave says:

    That’s the best they can come up with? “Violence against women?” *sigh* Lame. Great post.

  12. Paul C says:

    Pathetic. You almost feel sorry for this Ms. O’Neill. Almost.

  13. I didn’t like the tackle either. I think the blindside tackle is over-done. It was funny, once, with office linebacker.

    I don’t find anything humorous about hitting one’s momma.

    They had 30 seconds and $2.2 million dollars riding on that ad. I think it was a colossal letdown. NOW did it a great service by over-reacting.

    I still love Tim Tebow. :)

  14. Erin says:

    How sad for Ms. O’Neill. As a woman, I did not think this commercial glorified violence against women. But as the ad was not as “in your face” as they had anticipated, this seems to just be a reaction…because obviously one was needed. How about all those ads I had to skip through for inappropriateness so my teenage son wouldn’t be exposed.

  15. dc says:

    What about all of the violence against Betty White in the Snickers commercial? Where is N.O.W. on that?

  16. I *jokingly* suggested in a blog post that I wrote last night that NOW should re-direct their outrage to the ad’s alleged advocacy of violence against women.

    When my grossly over-exaggerated parody/caricature gets trumped by reality, it’s time to quit. Quit what, I’m not sure.

  17. emmzee says:

    “I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it” she says … I’m blown away at the celebration of violence against women AND men betrayed by NOW’s advocating abortion.

  18. Tim Bertolet says:

    This is what you call doubling down. It is, of course, damage control.

    If you can’t tell the difference between what is essentially a loving playful bear from a son who loves his mom, and violence against women, perhaps its time you got out of the business of advocating anything.

    Following the logic the Superbowl commercial with Betty White should be protested as a commercial that supports violence against women and the elderly–not to mention an insult to the transgendered.

    I guess the insanity knows no bounds.

    1. Tim Bertolet says:

      Meant to say “bear hug”.
      Why hasn’t NOW spoken out against the Megan Fox/Motorola commercial? Far more women have been taken advantage of and violated by uploading suggestive–even if non-explicit–pictures to the internet.

  19. Tim Bertolet raises a very good point (and, in the case of the “transgendered” comment, a funny one, too).

    I don’t know if different commercials air at different times in different markets, but here in Atlanta, the Snickers commercial (with Betty White and Abe “he’s still alive” Vigoda) aired immediately before the Tebow ad, multiplying the irony.

  20. Chris Price says:

    we have a saying where i come from down here in the south, “what are you smoking crack?” NoW is so off base with this one!!

  21. steve hays says:

    I also wonder when NOW is going to oppose violence against women in the case of lesbian domestic violence.

  22. Brian says:

    I like Tim Tebow too. But the ad left much to be desired. I think the ad with the Roe lady is much more powerful.

  23. The president of NOW is an idiot.

    No surprise there.

  24. I think the ad is lame as far as humor goes, but violent? Give me a break…

Comments are closed.

Search this blog


Justin Taylor photo

Justin Taylor, PhD

Justin Taylor is executive vice president of book publishing and book publisher for Crossway and blogs at Between Two Worlds. You can follow him on Twitter.

Justin Taylor's Books