Have You Got A Minute?

 

By telling women that there is “always” (emphasised) a better option, and that abortion “tears” a woman’s life apart, this advertisement encourages and condones “dangerous behaviour or unsafe practices” as it discourages women from having an abortion in ANY circumstances, even when their lives are medically threatened as a result of the pregnancy.

 

Want to complain to JC Decaux?

Click here.

(Sam Boal/Photocall Ireland)

Thanks Tom Lowe


131 thoughts on “Have You Got A Minute?”

      • a) Did you even READ that link before you posted it?

        “The Constitution also states that it is an offence to publish or utter blasphemous, seditious or indecent matter”

        b) The article encourages you to complain to a PRIVATE entity. This is not a matter for constitutional free speech. Do you not understand the difference between a government and a business?

        c) Freedom of expression is about the freedom to express your opinions, NOT about freedom about HOW to express your opinions.

        You couldn’t post an ad promoting free speech (or hell, anything), and have loads of people showing their genetalia, and then run it on billboards outside of schools, and on the bus and luas that young children use to get to school. But apparently, THIS filth is perfectly acceptable.

    • Exactly i was about to send a copy of this one but then realised it seems to be a letter catered for women only? What? are men not allowed be disgusted by this garabge as well?
      Anyway ill fix it up like yourself, still a bit annoyed by this though

      • Apologies, in the original circulation I said to change name and gender. It was originally a personal letter. I do of course understand that men feel extremely strongly about this issue also. I recommend changing it from “Irish woman” to “Irish citizen”. Thank you for passing it on.

      • I don’t think she meant to eliminate men from the letter intentionally.
        Anyways we should vent our outrage towards Youth Defence’s deplorable, misleading and damaging advertising campaign which I like many have to walk past everyday in disgust.

  3. I’m offended by something I saw…. I demand someone do something about it….
    Grow a pair and get over it. Or better yet, if you feel that strongly about it, do something like start /join a pro-abortion campaign!

    • Ugh spot the youth defence troll in our midsts, “pro abortion”?
      LOL didn treally try very hard to hide yourself did you, must not have gone to enough of their stealth troll meetings and gotten your attendance badge

        • pro-abortion would mean that you think everyone should have an abortion. Ever met someone who thought that was a good idea? Pro-choice just means that you think everyone should have a choice… more accurate.

          • As i have said before the “pro-life” side have more in common with china’s pro-abortion stance, neither of them believe the individual woman should make the call.

    • Yeah! Grow a pair and do nothing! Or do something! Whatever! It’s your life! Stop asking me what to do! I can’t take the responsibility! Leave me alone!

  4. Can’t see how those with a genuine moral discomfort with the notion of an abortion wouldn’t also have a moral discomfort with the flat out dissembling, misinformation, and fear based rhetoric of this campaign.

    Apart from fundies of course – fundies are crazy and there’s no accounting for crazy.

    • No im pretty sure the whole idea of a democracy is people are allowed campaign over issues that they care about, which is why youth defence are unfortuntely allowed display garbage like this, but it is also why theres nothing wrong with people being vocal in their disagreeing with it.

    • Until the 90s, so was divorce and homosexuality.

      Then the law was changed. The law is mutable, that’s a corner stone of democracy.

      • I wish Youth Defence were mutable.

        Like with a mute button.

        (Because they’re shouty.)

        • Think a volume button would be the more democratic option.

          Say what you like, just don’t hurt my ears with your carrying on. ::shakes cane::

          (Oh god, I’m an old!)

    • Colm, I’ve seen (and made) some stupid comments on Broadsheet.ie, but that one was special. Congratulations.

    • That’s not the story at all. The Youth Defence are spreading misinformation which could drastically affect peoples lives. They don’t care about the law. They care about tricking people into accepting their viewpoint.

      Whether you’re for or against the right to abortion, there’s no reason to accept the Youth Defence’s contempt for the Irish people.

  6. I had an abortion – it worked for me, it allowed me to end an unwanted pregnancy. However, I respect other peoples right to their opinion. I don’t expect devout catholics or fanatical misogynists or those educated by either section to applaud my choice. I wish I’d had sex education while I was at school, I wish contraception had been available before I got pregnant but things were different back then, so I got pregnant. Abortion was the solution. Let those who choose to abort their pregnancies do so without harassment and those who choose to go through with it do so as well. Don’t then judge them as sponging single mothers or drains on the state. You can’t have it both ways.

    • Spot on. The anti-abortion issue is simply something for religious bigots to SHOUT ABOUT and organise a BAKE SALE. Most of them have probably never even given any thought to the other side of the argument; that someone like yourself Miss. 3rd Child (congrats on the nippers by the way) might have been in a scenario where having the baby wasn’t an option for one reason or another.

      If Ratzinger came out tomorrow and said: “The Catholic Church have had a strange u-turn and actually thought about the issue of abortion, and we’d now like to change our stance and stop calling people who think it’s a viable option ‘evil,’” the argument would probably cease overnight.

      But they’re just so gosh darn sure that they’re right about everything, because they’re led by someone who, according to their creed, is impossible of being wrong.

      It wouldn’t frustrate you or anything. Not at all.

      • Not to take away from either of the excellent comments above, but I truly enjoyed your BAKE SALE comment.

        Well done.

      • Happily, I am the 3rd child. Thanks for the good wishes though. No off-spring here.

      • “Most of them have probably never even given any thought to the other side of the argument; ”

        They usually do at one point, well documented in the US that a lot people protesting outside these clinics have no problem using them when they themselves specifically are pregnant because their abortion is ok.

        “The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion”
        http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html

        It is unpleasant to call people like that out on it but if they’re going to condemning other people for doing the same it should be said.

      • catholicism isn’t the thing here necessarily a pro choice catholic here the pope is just a polish bloke as far as millions of us r concerned youth defence are a shady bunch dont they have links to one of those langer zealous political groups that skulk around dublin in various guises of left and right?

  7. Here’s a growing photo album of Altered Youth Defense poster. Expect a good few more before the weeks end, so bookmark it and come back.

  8. Yes,Colm,so it shouldn’t be discussed except to fear monger and tell lies about it being the work of the devil.. Just like when contraception was illegal..

  9. Many thanks for link, my blood pressure has been rising excessively high upon passing these offensive things.

  10. Hi Broadsheet, thank you so much for putting this up. I’ve just heard word on Twitter than Bravo Outdoor are also hosting the advertising for Youth Defence. Could you please edit the original post to include their email too? It is nfo(at)bravooutdoor(dot)ie.

    Thank you to everyone who complains. Because the ASAI has told us that complaints about these billboards aren’t under our remit, our only choice was to go straight to the advertising companies facilitating them.

  11. what about advertising standards association? do they not regulate JC Decauex?

    • They’ve said they can only regulate commercial advertising and have totally washed their hands of it, unfortunately! :-(

    • Unfortunately the ASAI have stated that this is outside of their remit. You can read their disclaimer about it here: http://www.asai.ie/complain.asp

      Seemingly, because the campaign does not have a “commercial element” – ie they are not selling anything or fundraising – then the ASAI can do nothing about complaints. It seems strange and wrong to me that there is no official body to regulate advertisements that seek to influence and affect the general public on matters of religion and politics. This is a hurtful campaign that is spreading misleading information, and yet the ASAI can do nothing about it for the legions of us wishing to complain.

    • I wont waste the time. A bit of straight up cross country direct action and subvertising is what will shape the public debate, certainly for young women. A decent strategy of leveraging the money these right wings nuts use to do billboards to raise the opposing position. A kinda of Tai chi grassroots media strategy if you will :)

      • Yeah – this.

        YD have a right to put these things up. And people who disagree with them, of course, have a right to complain.

        However, the solution is not to get the posters taken down, but to make a better counter-argument. Explain why the posters are wrong and misleading, why there isn’t always a better option, why YD are against options in the first place.

        Counter-argument, not censorship.

        • Its very hard forming a counter argument for people to digest in billboard form that doesnt end up too long winded when dealing with sensationlist lies and missleading “facts”

          • True enough, but one must also be wary of acknowledging the claims of their argument, thus validating them. All well and good to disseminate and debate on appropriate forums, but when the content used in the original argument isn’t factual (and is intentionally misleading to favour one, judgemental, point of view), then it should be a legal matter.

        • Protesting an advertising campaign is not ‘censorship’ and it trivialises real censorship to say that is. Censorship is when the government denies your right to free speech and expression. I believe in Youth Defence’s right to free speech, but I think this *particular* campaign is misleading, manipulative, ill-informed and potentially very hurtful to people who may be vulnerable.

          I don’t think there’s any point debating zealots like Youth Defence; but consumer action can be an effective form of campaigning these days – like with people contacting the advertisers who used News of the World. I don’t think it will work by the way, apparently they spent anything between €100-250k on the campaign, but at the very least people should register their protest and let the companies know about it.

          • Woah there now!

            I’m not saying protesting the campaign is censorship at all. Protest is an absolute right.

            I’m saying that a campaign to get the ads taken down or discourage advertisers from taking ads from them in future would be censorship. Censorship is not just when the government does it.

            As well as being wrong, trying to gag YD would be a strategic mistake, since it puts you in the wrong and them in the right (on that issue).

            Better to call them out on their misinformation. Explain clearly why it’s misinformation. Make it very, very clear that they’re religious extremists who are not above using lies and misinformation to further their cause.

            If you get that label to stick, they can put up all the posters they want and, unless they’re 100% factual, every poster will hurt them more.

          • Hi woesinger – can’t seem to reply to you directly for some reason. You make a good point and I see where you’re coming from, but I personally don’t believe that they should *never* be allowed to run an advertising campaign, I just object to one as misleading as this. I passionately believe in free speech, but also that free speech does not mean immunity from criticism. And I think direct action to corporates is a very valid way to express such criticism. I don’t think the companies will pull the ads, personally, there’s probably too much money at stake. But I would like the ad companies to at least think about the messages that they are putting out and to take responsibility for them – Bravo for example have a Facebook page where they are posting loads of their campaigns, but not this one for some reason!

  15. In the words of Mr Obama

    “No you cant deny women their basic right and pretend its about your religious freedom, if you don’t like birth control don’t use it Religious freedom does not mean you can force others to live by your beliefs”

    Now you practice your life as you think your religion says you should and let others practice their life’s as they see fit.

  16. I do wonder where these right-wing religious fundamentalists get all their money from. So much money, they can waste it on rubbish like this.
    Youth defense and the life institute are an embarrassment to this country. I am thankful that we have so many people in this country that can see their campaigns for what they are, campaigns of hatred. Their downfall can not come soon enough.

  17. I think this campaign is great. I dont understand why you all are getting so angry by the fact that Youth Defence are trying to offer mothers and babies another option other then abortion. I mean why is that so distressing to you?? If you really care about this issue you would thank them and not trying to smear their campaign.

    • Youth Defence only care about Mothers and Babies while the foetus is in the Womb..

    • I have no problem whatsoever with Youth Defence exercising their right to freedom of speech, and their right to hold opinions that differ from mine. However, freedom of speech does not preclude consequences and no one – of any political or religious persuasion – can spread harmful misinformation to the general public. Unfortunately, Cormac, that is what Youth Defence are doing. This billboard’s message is a lie. Please read the full email complaint template for an extensive breakdown of why this is the case. Thank you.

    • It’s weird that you think that it’s within your power or provenance to offer women an option that’s already there, and well catered for, while campaigning to deny one that’s… already denied. Weird and creepy.

  18. They get a lot of support from overseas, especially the US. Take a look at their Facebook page – the majority of the comments are from non – Irish supporters. That’s the other thing that angers me – our country and women are being used to further political agendas elsewhere.

    • as a few people have said, I don’t think ripping down the posters is helpful (though would love to do it myself!) – the stickers with different messages are a great idea.

  20. If you are sending an email, it’s worth mentioning that over 150,000 women have travelled outside of Ireland since 1980 in order to avail of abortion. Taking into account partners, families and friends, this means there are probably well over half a million people who due to direct or indirect experience will be affected by this advertisement. It’s worth reminding large corporations that they aren’t dealing with a negligible fraction of the Irish poulation.

  21. Imagine if YD spent the money they spent on this campaign on say, combating child poverty. They are hypocritical arse hats who spend all their time “defending” foetuses (i.e. stopping women having autonomy over our bodies) and don’t give a toss about fully formed kids.

    • Absolutely. A person from Termination for Medical Reasons Ireland said to them that this money would be better spent donated to Crumlin Hospital (if they truly did care about the lives of vulnerable children) and their response was “Why don’t YOU donate your money to Crumlin?” They are emphatically not reasonable or logical people.

      • They’re eejits alright, but that argument is a very weak one. You don’t know how much of their income they give to children’s charities.

        People who oppose pro-lifers always assume that they neglect the non-unborn, but I’ve never seen any basis for it.

        • Well there is the small matter of the massive, systemic, brutal neglect and abuse of children given to the care of the ‘pro-life’ Catholic church. That’s at least one fairly sizeable basis…

      • You should have gone back to them and said that if they donated a percentage of their funds to the children’s hospital, you’d match that percentage. Make it a pissing match.

        If they refuse, donate a percentage anyway and beat YD over the head with it.

        If they go for it, everyone wins.

  22. Agree completely but just think it should be noted that JC Decaux and Bravo would have had to enter into this prior to seeing the creative, they would not have known anything other than that they would be hosting a Youth Defence advert. Despite my view that they should not be hosting Youth Defence adverts whatsoever, I do think that it’s worth noting that they would have signed into a contract to run this for a certain time period and that it is now technically out of their hands to stop it. This petition will undoubtedly prevent a campaign like this happening again so it’s definitely worthwhile but if the aim is to halt the campaign in progress, it’s the Advertising Standards Authority that have the ability to stop this activity and sanction punishments to the advertiser.

    • delighted – shows how stupid and uniformed ye all are.

      freedom of speech trumps stupid pinko liberals every time !!!!!!

      • Hi Joe. Just to inform you that the reason the ASAI can’t intervene is NOT because this is not a damaging, manipulative and ultimately false campaign – it is because Youth Defence are not marketing a product. If they were, then under many clauses of the ASAI code this advertisement would be impermissible. We are not uniformed. On the contrary, Youth Defence are being exempted from advertising standards due to a technicality. You can read full details here.

        http://www.twitlonger.com/show/hu367f

  24. This is brillant for so many reasons but mainly it show what self professed open minded, free thinking liberals are really like closed minded, group thinking idiots.

    Last time i looked its a free country where people/organisations are free to express their views. If folks want to gather together for a Pro abortion campaing go ahead no one is stopping ye

    I am a pro lifer (not a member of YD and never have been) but pro lifers believe in the sanctiy of human life and we will never be cowed or silenced as long as we have life. so this battle will rage as long as the world exists

    its yd time in the spotlight – fairl play to them

    • Please read my above comment to Cormac, as you are both thinking along similar lines:

      “I have no problem whatsoever with Youth Defence exercising their right to freedom of speech, and their right to hold opinions that differ from mine. However, freedom of speech does not preclude consequences and no one – of any political or religious persuasion – can spread harmful misinformation to the general public. Unfortunately, Cormac, that is what Youth Defence are doing. This billboard’s message is a lie. Please read the full email complaint template for an extensive breakdown of why this is the case. Thank you.”

      The problem is not that their views differ from a group of “open minded, free thinking liberals”. The problem is that they are spreading lies, judgement and graphic imagery in the public domain in order to further their political or religious agenda. Would you like your child to see these images on their way to school? It’s not just about protecting those who have undergone abortions. It’s that these tactics are wrong.

      • Fiona

        I do believe you are taking absolute rubbish – that siad i respect you right to talk complete and utter claptrap

        1. Do you have a monoply on the truth – you think its a lie doesn’t actually make it a lie

        2. People make judgement calls all the time – this is just another one

        3. the is no graphic imagery NONE – An ultrascan and a woman crying is not graphic

        4. Kids see far worse on day time telly than these images- get over yourself

        Again this is a free country and its there entitlement to profess their opinions in a free and open way – unless you want censorship

        • I’m sorry Joe but what upset alot of people was the image of a baby within the womb as well as an ultrasound image. I don’t mind if there are images posed by models, such as the woman crying etc

    • “Fair play to them” …?

      Please provide proof for the ‘Always’ claim in the banner then.

      Without proof, it is a false claim and must be stopped.

      • Abortion always snuffs out a little life that could change the world

        note “always”

        • Joe, I don’t believe that was the question posed. You are deflecting from one argument in favour of another and missing the point completely- but from what little you have posted so far I can see you are not a reasonable gentleman, not one who understands irony. (Arguing that Ireland, “is a free country and its [every person's] entitlement to profess their opinions in a free and open way – unless you want censorship,” in an attempt to stifle the other side of the argument? I think you need may need take a step back and think about that one for a few minutes.)

          However, of course, I am confusing matters. I apologise. I know this argument is a difficult one for you to follow, so I will attempt to break it down further. What is at stake here, something you don’t seem to be considering, is the rights of the woman in this issue. It’s a pretty important factor, if you think about it, seeing it is the use of her body we are arguing.

          No one is trying to say that abortion is something to be taken lightly or easily- but there are instances when personal circumstances (financial, emotional, medical, psychological etc.) where a woman is simply not capable of carrying a child. So sometimes- contrary to the advertisement- there really is no better answer to an unwanted pregnancy; and trying to maintain there is, is a harmful lie that attempt to shame those who are in a vulnerable position already.

          In a perfect world, abortion would not be necessary- but we do not live in one. It is nobel that you would stand up for the rights of all potential children- but not when it ignores the rights of those who might give birth to these children, the people who are here right now (some of who might even just be children themselves).

          That was the ‘always’ that was being referring to, but your blatant refusal to recognize that point, and your attempt to then twist it into an altogether different argument, was neither clever nor subtle.

          • Noble. Nobel made explosives, and various prizes. The most misguided prize, (posthumously, it must be said), was to Fischer Black (RIP) and Myron Scholes, who, with Robert Merton as an enthusiastic supporter, blew up the financial world. Those three, Seanie, Sean Quinn and Fred Goodwin, to name a few others,did their bit.

            Btw, I’m resolutely pro-choice.

  25. I’m a regular contributor and commenter… and not a troll. I’m 100% pro choice, and my views couldn’t have opposite than those in the ad.

    That said, do we want ever JC Decaux to censor ads? If they censor far right ads, surely they could censor liberal ads (like pro choice ones), if they think that is far left enough. It is not their place to determine what ads should go up.

    Instead of writing to them in disgust, we should maybe be signing up to pro-choice lobbies, voting for candidates with the balls to stand up for pro-choice issues etc.?

      • TBF, I think that’s more a reflection on their lack of funding rather than them getting censored.

        • Yeah, and I guess what I was trying to say was the call to arms here should’ve been “please contribute so we can buy a pro-choice ad” rather than “let’s demand they censor the ads”.

      • generally there are ads for crisis pregnancy agencies, which ‘should’ be impartial

  26. Anyone remember the giant “Sex Kills” posters that were around in the early 80′s?

    Now THAT was batshit crazy.

  29. Complain to the Advertising Standards authority or the client, not the ad agency.

    The client signs off on the content. It’s their responsibility. Most people in marketing aren’t that smart and don’t have the skills to know whether what they claim is true or not.

    • The ASAI only covers commercial ads. And people aren’t complaining to an ad agency about the creative, they’re complaining to the display company that are being paid to host the billboards and posters.

  30. although with these kind of campaigns they depend on high levels on controversy to promote the idea further so dont play into their hands to much.

  31. I’m not sure what the problem is. It’s a valid enough point of view. Obviously, if you disagree with that point of view you won’t particularly like the message but I don’t see how this particular campaign could be accused of being any more misleading than a campaign saying that abortion is the solution. The debate is far more complex than a headline on an ad campaign.

    • 1. Nobody claims that abortion is always the solution. I wish people would stop trying to make this point – it makes no sense.

      2. The misleading (as opposed to ‘depends on your point of view’) part is ‘always’ a better answer – there is such thing as medically necessary abortions, and for many people having an abortion is preferable to giving birth to a child who can’t survive outside of the womb.

  32. For me there is really only one question when it comes to abortion.

    Is the unborn child alive?

    If so then it’s murder and can’t be condoned. If not then it’s nothing and there is no problem. So, is the unborn child alive?

    • That’s not really an argument ‘for’ or ‘against’. Cells are alive- they have to be in order to grow. So yes, by your definition the the unborn child is alive, but it’s a very loose and inaccurate way of viewing the situation. Sperm is alive, unfertilised cells are alive. Does that made either of them an ‘unborn child’? Sadly, you need to take a harder look at the issue. It is not at all that simple.

          • I’m not a doctor but… a human fetus is a human being in a particular stage of development. Calling something a fetus does not prove that is neither living nor human.

        • It is, if we are talking the latter end of the timescale where abortion is generally allowed– a foetus.

          And as for your argument against that below, I’m not a doctor but… sperm is also a human being in a particular stage of development. Calling something sperm does not prove that is neither living nor human.

          Your argument doesn’t work.

          • I know it’s a fetus Caroline. Where in my reply to ‘I’ did I employ that it was anything else?

            I was just pointing out that simply stating that it is indeed a fetus does not explain the reasoning behind the answer given to the question.

            Any your right, your rephrased ‘augment’ doesn’t work :)

    • That’s great Nick, I am happy for you to live by that your personal moral code. Grand. Mine is different though. Please offer me the same respect.

      • It’s not a code. It’s just a question I think people could ask themselves before making such a decision. If they answer it honestly it might help them make the choice that’s right for them.

        • Considering you are calling a foetus an ‘unborn child’ then I would say it is your own personal moral code. You began your statement with ‘for me’, so you yourself acknowledged that it was a personal belief from the get-go.

          Only after the presence of critical brain activity would I begin to think that a foetus is approaching the definition of a ‘human being’. This is my personal belief.

          It is also my personal belief that I can’t force said belief onto another person, unlike those from Youth Defence who seem to think a woman’s personal life is their business.

          • TBH the though that using the words ‘unborn child’ might highlight a personal moral code to someone never crossed my mind? I think I didn’t use the word fetus because it excludes embryo – but I don’t know if we should even go there :)

            I never said it wasn’t a personal view and I did indeed use the words, ‘for me,’ to hi-light this.

            “Only after the presence of critical brain activity would I begin to think that a foetus is approaching the definition of a ‘human being’. This is my personal belief.” I’d agree.

            “It is also my personal belief that I can’t force said belief onto another person, unlike those from Youth Defence who seem to think a woman’s personal life is their business.” I’d agree. Although, Youth Defense would say they are representing the unborn which has the same rights as anyone else, including the mother?

            However, too much of their advertising relies on shock tactics and is inconsiderate of someone who may have already had an abortion. As you said, they should be more open and respectful to others. Anyone who is even contemplating an abortion deserves more consideration than a lot of the stuff they show.

  33. I sure wasn’t torn apart by my abortion. I’d do it again in a heartbeat. (get it? heartbeat!) No but seriously I would. The bottom line is that women are going to have abortions, whether they are legal or not. History has proven that. So let’s all live in reality and make it safe. DIY and off shore abortions are what truly tear women apart.

  34. Pro-choice is fine, I respect that, but I have to be honest and say that I find your flippant, “no-big-deal” attitude towards having an abortion to be a bit disturbing.

    • I don’t see it as a trivial thing either, but I’m sure there are some that wouldn’t consider it to be no big deal. It’s not my business to tell them what to think.

    • ASAI probably just don’t want to deal with it because it’s so contentious. I’m going to call them in the morning to ask for clarification, just because I’m curious.

  36. I hope, if something happens, that they take responsibility for their actions. As we all should.

  37. On Dublin buses now, hurray. Complaints to Dublin Bus so? Or are they JC Deceaux spots too?

  40. I had an abortion during the 1990s. I hated that I had to do it, I did it. I recovered from it. As do most women who have abortions.

    There is no melodramatic vail of ferverous tears hanging over my life. There is only relief that I had the option (the plane to England) and my life was no ruined by circumstances I could not control.

    I now have two happy healthy loved children and a life where no-one knows I have had an abortion. Small-minded people think because you have had one that you are marked or different. See that woman across the table, in the bus, walking down the road? She may have had an abortion and is now getting on with her life. That is what most of us do.

    BS like this poster are demented imaginings of bigots.

  41. Why are the Young Girls/Women targeted in this way – It is totally unwarranted in this day and age. With proper Sex Education in Place in Our Schools and the Girls Parents are of a generation that know all the Options their daughter faces in life

    Their Daughters choice is hers alone no matter what group says otherwise. One young woman choice in life should be free from conscientious interference in all forms. Freedom of choice is a right to choose ones path in life.