I take aim with a couple things in this ad but not for the same reason many others are such as the violence...

First off, where are the parents? Why did the young child answer the door alone without any parents around? This is the first time your child is meeting the new babysitter without you present? That's a red flag. I immediately am judging the parents and not in the good way. That's strike 1. It's one thing if you're home and watch your child answer the door or tell them to while monitoring, okay but to leave them alone to play alone and wait for the babysitter? That's a no go for me.

Secondly, where the hell is the Twix? Where is the candy in the actual ad? This 2 second flash of a stock image of bite size Twix as a prelude to the ad is weak. Can you even call yourself an ad for your product if the ad you're showing has NOTHING to do with candy. Not even a little bit. I understand there are social causes and issues that companies take up and promote in their ads and direct their commercial towards like Twix here is doing with trans awareness and support, okay that's fine if you want to take a stand but I still want to see some sort of product tie in, not a little logo flash. I don't like ads that entirely stray away from their product or theme period so that's strike 2 for me.

Those two things are my biggest criticisms, not the violence. I honestly did not take aim with the witch blowing away the bully and I'll tell you why. First off I do not condone violence and if I believed this to actually be heinous violence I would not actually support it. I think this is a matter of perspective. I view this ad as fictitious. We're looking at a witch with magical powers. Obvious that's not realistic. Additionally my perspective on the witch is slapstick in nature. Since it's a witch, since it's already a supernatural perspective, I'm looking at this ad as almost cartoon like. This is nothing different than what our kids see in Looney Tunes, Tom and Jerry, or gosh even the Three Stooges. I understand what makes this different is that it's a kid, live action not a cartoon, and that it's an answer to bullying but still. By setting this ad up with a supernatural backdrop has the same effect as a slapstick cartoon or comedy to me. What happens in slapstick? The characters are not actually dead or severely injured to the point of concern. They bounce right up and back so I was not thinking this bully was just murdered. It felt like I was watching the witch as Jerry and the bully as Tom. Just being honest so that's why I'm not outraged by this. Now if this was a regular babysitter and she went over and slammed the bully's head against the pavement and there was gore that would be real outrage. That would be inappropriate. Children need to understand the difference between reality and altered fictitious reality and each of those roles in our perceived worlds in regards to how to act. It's your job to teach your kids the difference between reality and acceptable behavior and altered reality especially in a satirical nature. If you establish a good foundation with understanding, there is nothing to worry about. I don't think kids are as naïve as some of you make them out to be.

Think what you want about the political nature of the ad and trans issues, that doesn't bother me, but I think if you take aim with this ad and it's perceived violence, you also have to take aim with Tom and Jerry, Looney Tunes, the Three Stooges, and countless other slapstick examples. Should we ban The Stooges because it promotes violence when someone acts stupidly? If you think no, in my opinion you also should be okay with this Twix ad, at least in regards to the violence. What's the difference between laughing at the absurdity of Mo or Curly bopping each other over the head with a bat or a witch blowing away a bully? As far as I'm concerned they're both examples of absurdity typical in slapstick.

Sitemap