To the Editors of the Crimson:

I objected strongly to the male contraceptive ad on page six of Saturday's Crimson (October 18). Specifically, I oppose advertising this type of product in the Harvard daily paper. Those seeking this kind of information have many available sources in local as well as national publications.

I also oppose the content and style of the ad itself. The ad was in poor taste both in graphics and in text. The pseudo-scientific eroticism exploited sexuality and the mystical authority of science in a most exaggerated and deceptive manner.

My third point puts the question of poor advertising aside and addresses a related concern of mine. I oppose the type of sexual relations that the product supposedly facilitates. Here I am assuming that the ad was directed to the single male (implicitly involved in sexual relations).

I believe sex between married partners can be the highest expression of love. Such expression can honestly exist only when long range emotional commitments unite a couple. Where such profound, permanent relationships are not found, sex loses all but the dimension of physical gratification. Any person can and should develop the discipline and self-control to postpone such gratification until he chooses to accept all the responsibilities of marriage and family. I believe this to be ultimately the most satisfying approach to sex.

Despite heavily publicized (exaggerated?) attention to pre-marital sex, I am confident that many silently share the view expressed here.

May I ask The Crimson for greater discrimination in the subject and style of its advertisements? Matthew A. Thomas '77