CDOT using talking urinal cakes in drunk driving campaign

Submitted by mens_issues on Mon, 2013-08-26 23:18

Your tax dollars at work - targeting men only.

'DENVER - The Colorado Department of Transportation is targeting men in its latest drunk driving campaign.

The Heat Is On campaign is launching radio, bus and billboard advertising, as well as in-bar advertising such as coasters, posters and a new tool for CDOT, the Interactive Urinal Communicator.

The IUCs feature a 15-second audio message encouraging male bar patrons to not drive and instead look to other alternatives, such as public transit, 1800taxicab.com or Uber.

Males, ages 21-34, have a higher propensity for dying in alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes, according to CDOT.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

I don't see the problem. Males have a higher risk of dying in a drink-driving crash, we are targeted by reminders. Some times making a distinction between the sexes is legit.

After all - are we turning into feminists? Is it the case that if the genders were reversed, we would be equally butthurt about how only the wimminz get support and men are left to kill themselves in car accidents for want of a friendly reminder? For shame!

If the urinal cakes could light up and display your BAC, that … that would be awesome.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by MrWombat on Tue, 2013-08-27 01:31

The only thing I don't like about this is that it feels like an invasion of men's privacy. As it is, men have significantly less privacy in public rest rooms, making things very uncomfortable. Having a talking urinal cake inhibiting your ability to urinate even more would be pretty annoying. Thankfully, I don't go to the bar anyway.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by xtrnl on Tue, 2013-08-27 04:05

The only issue I have with this is I never see ads targeting females. Remember that such ads have two effects. First, they try to change behavior. Second, and perhaps unintentionally, they inform all viewers of who the offenders are.

At least in my area, the campaigns all show men driving drunk, as if they are the only problem. If they do so more often than women, then it's fine if more ads target them. However, it isn't fine to give the impression that they are the only offenders.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by StayingFit on Tue, 2013-08-27 07:57

I was under the impression we didn't want gender specific anything, regardless of who benefits most from it. Are we to ignore disparities that benefit us? Like feminists have been doing? Perhaps that's not how this story was presented, and for that, I would agree with your argument, but I do see a problem with a campaign targeting only one sex, when the issue is common to both.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Kratch on Tue, 2013-08-27 08:59

I have no problem with using statistical data that men are more risky drivers. I have no problem with using statistical data that makes men pay more for auto insurance. In short: I agree with the policy that statistical data should be used to raise our auto insurance rates.

HOWEVER... if that is the case, men should pay LESS for health insurance. We use the health care system less and we die seven years sooner than women. And statistical data should be used to lower our health insurance rates. However, they do not do this.

Why are men screwed on both sides?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by bronxman on Tue, 2013-08-27 11:45