# Mila Kunis: bourbon and/or baby? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 30, 2014, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895 "2014-03-30T14:45:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/1 "2014-03-30T14:45:13Z")
Jim Beam has rolled out a new ad series for their bourbon that feature Mila Kunis. It now appears that Ms. Kunis is expecting a child with her fiancée. Should Jim Beam stop running the ads now? (I prefer Maker’s Mark, myself, when I get in a bourbon mood.) But I don’t see any reason that Jim Beam should pull the ads. I have read at least one article with a tone that suggests that they should, although the article is Just Asking Questions. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/2 "2014-03-30T14:56:22Z")
Why? Kunis is just an actress. She’s not actually drinking the bourbon just because she’s make a movie on it. And even is she did drink barrels of the stuff during the making, then the the ad series has already been shot. The baby won’t be harmed by a glass of bourbon now and then anyway. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/3 "2014-03-30T15:02:34Z")
Perhaps the OP can lay out the pros and cons as he sees it. I can’t see any reason why this is even an issue. It’s not like there is a “baby bump” in the commercials. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/4 "2014-03-30T15:37:29Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Perhaps the OP can lay out the pros and cons as he sees it. I can’t see any reason why this is even an issue. It’s not like there is a “baby bump” in the commercials. Sure: Pros for continuing the ads: Kunis is an attractive and effective advertiser for the product, and there’s absolutely no reason that her pregnancy is risked by the ads. Nor do the ads suggest that pregnant women should drink gallons of bourbon. Cons: see the linked article for an example of the tenor of the questions that suggest, without explicitly laying out a case, that the ads are A Bad Idea. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/5 "2014-03-30T15:43:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Cons: see the linked article for an example of the tenor of the questions that suggest, without explicitly laying out a case, that the ads are A Bad Idea. That article simply asked the question if it’s a good or bad idea. It doesn’t make an argument either way. You say in the OP that “the tone” indicates it’s a bad idea. Are we to debate against a “tone”? ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/6 "2014-03-30T16:34:04Z")
This does seem like one of those things where the arguments against it are only that other people might have arguments against it. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/7 "2014-03-30T16:41:02Z")
Since she’s engaged, they should probably stop airing all those TV shows and movies where she’s with some other guy. People might get the idea that marriage isn’t sacred. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/8 "2014-03-30T16:50:44Z")
So if I film a commercial for razors, do they have to stop showing it when I decide, in my private life, to grow a beard? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/9 "2014-03-30T16:53:17Z")
Wait, I see the argument. Mila Kunis is engaged to Ashton Kucher. Ashton Kucher was once married to Demi Moore. Demi Moore once posed, pregnant, for the cover of _Vanity Fair_. Other possible debates: Is it DE-mi or de-MI? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/10 "2014-03-30T20:22:54Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > That article simply asked the question if it’s a good or bad idea. It doesn’t make an argument either way. You say in the OP that “the tone” indicates it’s a bad idea. Are we to debate against a “tone”? Ok, John. I guess we can table this debate until some source comes along that offers an actual critique, or until Kunis’ pregnancy passes unremarked by TV ad viewers. I though the tone was obvious, but I am certainly willing to admit that I may have been wrong, and this did NOT presage more spirited attacks from other sources. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/11 "2014-03-30T20:44:09Z")
> [@](#): > > MILA Kunis is reportedly pregnant with her first child to Ashton Kutcher. > The two have been the subject of numerous rumours on whether she is expecting or not but multiple sources now confirm to E! News and US Magazine that the actress in indeed pregnant and over the moon about it. > But in what could be one of the worst cases of timing, Kunis has just signed on to be the global spokesperson for Jim Beam. > “Look who just joined the Beam family. #MakeHistory,” the company tweeted on January 29, along with the below photograph for the Make History campaign. From here. Is that sufficiently explicit, John, and sufficiently less reliant on “tone?” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/12 "2014-03-30T20:48:57Z")
> [@](#): > > Nobody wants to see a pregnant woman holding up a glass of the hard stuff because it sends the wrong message to people. While there hasn’t been any official word from the Jim Bourbon distillery, it’s very likely that the company and the actress are going to work some sort of schedule out to accommodate both parties’ interests. From [here.](http://news.softpedia.com/news/Mila-Kunis-Is-Pregnant-with-Ashton-Kutcher-s-Baby-433657.shtml) John? How’s that tone? Still too faint to debate? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/13 "2014-03-30T20:53:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Ok, John. I guess we can table this debate until some source comes along that offers an actual critique, or until Kunis’ pregnancy passes unremarked by TV ad viewers. > > I though the tone was obvious, but I am certainly willing to admit that I may have been wrong, and this did NOT presage more spirited attacks from other sources. Come on. I agree that the tone is negative, but like I said, are we supposed to debate a tone? And as I also said, since the ads don’t show any “baby bump”, what’s the problem? > [@Bricker](#): > > From here. > > Is that sufficiently explicit, John, and sufficiently less reliant on “tone?” No, that’s not explicit at all. It’s the equivalent of: OMG!!! To which I guess the rebuttal is: Uh-HUH!!! As a general principal, though, I would hope we were past this sort of thing. As long as she’s not explicitly promoting drinking while pregnant, I don’t see the problem. Does she need to stop driving cars while she is shilling for JB as well? If she gets pregnant again 2 years from now, can they show the commercials without any “controversy”? What do YOU think? ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/14 "2014-03-30T20:53:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Pros for continuing the ads: Kunis is an attractive and effective advertiser for the product, and there’s absolutely no reason that her pregnancy is risked by the ads. Nor do the ads suggest that pregnant women should drink gallons of bourbon. Counter-point: I find Kunis only medium-attractive, and her endorsement will not cause me to change my opinion on rye vs. traditional bourbons. (Though I do like Devil’s Cut.) They should discontinue the ads. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/15 "2014-03-30T20:53:44Z")
> [@](#): > > Some people now find themselves asking questions, as Kunis recently became the news campaign face for bourbon manufacturer Jim Beam. While some might consider it inappropriate and perhaps send a wrong message to pose pregnant with alcohol, others might find it okay as she sticks to a “prop” version of the drink, and not the real deal. According to reports, she will not be sampling the Jim Beam product line during her pregnancy. [Cite](http://guardianlv.com/2014/03/ashton-kutcher-and-mila-kunis-pregnant-at-the-clippers-game/). I must be imagining it. Certainly not enough tone there to debate, huh John? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/16 "2014-03-30T20:56:42Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Come on. I agree that the tone is negative, but like I said, are we supposed to debate a tone? And as I also said, since the ads don’t show any “baby bump”, what’s the problem? > > No, that’s not explicit at all. It’s the equivalent of: OMG!!! To which I guess the rebuttal is: Uh-HUH!!! > > As a general principal, though, I would hope we were past this sort of thing. As long as she’s not explicitly promoting drinking while pregnant, I don’t see the problem. Does she need to stop driving cars while she is shilling for JB as well? If she gets pregnant again 2 years from now, can they show the commercials without any “controversy”? > > What do YOU think? I thought I made my own reaction clear in the OP. > [@Bricker](#): > > Jim Beam has rolled out a new ad series for their bourbon that feature Mila Kunis. > > It now appears that Ms. Kunis is expecting a child with her fiancée. > > Should Jim Beam stop running the ads now? > > (I prefer Maker’s Mark, myself, when I get in a bourbon mood.) But I don’t see any reason that Jim Beam should pull the ads. I have read at least one article with a tone that suggests that they should, although the article is Just Asking Questions. (Color added to one sentence for attention and emphasis). ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/17 "2014-03-30T20:58:27Z")
It is a marketing question. In this case I doubt the people who think “OMG! A pregnant woman is in a liquor commercial!” are significantly represented in the target market, so that alone may not effect the company’s decision. However, their long term plans may change since the Mila’s future image might change now. The details matter, since they’ve already paid to have the ads produced they may want to use them before she is no longer a good representative, but if they started this in anticipation of continuing the campaign then they may want to move on to another representative sooner rather than later. I doubt it makes any real difference though. I believe Ali Larter was doing something similar for a liquor company just before having her first child. I don’t recall any uproar about it. ---
**Author:** ![nevadaexile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb8c5e/32.png) [@nevadaexile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nevadaexile)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/18 "2014-03-30T21:10:11Z")
The advertising series was created prior to Ms. Kunis getting pregnant (hopefully) and she has been presumably paid for her presence in the ads. They should run until Jim Beam and Ms. Kunis decide that they no longer wish to have a business relationship. If Ms. Kunis wants to indulge in bourbon while she is pregnant, then that’s not great, but it is _ **her** _ business. It’s not my place to tell an adult how they should maintain their pre-natal health,especially not an adult who I don’t know personally. She’ll have to deal with the consequences (if any) if she chooses to imbibe while carrying a child. **A side note** : I’ve never been a fan of Jim Beam. I’ve always preferred scotch,gin,rum or vodka in mixed drinks when I do imbibe. Mila Kunis’ presence or absence in Jim Beam ads will do nothing to make me buy the product. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/19 "2014-03-30T21:20:26Z")
I object to the tone of this thread. It’s not nearly mocking enough. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2014, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895/20 "2014-03-30T21:35:14Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I object to the tone of this thread. > > It’s not nearly mocking enough. My first draft was more disdainful of the “OMG A Pregnant Woman Plus Alcohol” theme. But I decided to…er…tone it down. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mila-kunis-bourbon-and-or-baby/684895.md?page=2)