> "This family has two mommies. They love each other so proudly and they all go marching in... the... big parade," sing the lyrics. Other terms featured include "trans," "non-binary" and "queer."
> “Love is love is love you see, and everyone should love proudly,”
Acknowledging LGBTQ people are capable of love is somehow an example of “culture war”. It’s incredible people can be so bothered by a simple, sweet message.
yes, acceptance of others is an overly political message to those of a certain political persuasion. can’t have kids running around thinking whatever they grow into might be ok if it doesn’t comport with mommy and daddy’s worldview.
Whatever kids grow up into is not okay with most parents. I’d imagine almost everyone would agree with that statement. There are probably traits you wouldn’t want your children to have. You probably wouldn’t be okay with them being gambling or drug addicts, racist, murderers, uneducated, etc.
If parents were truly okay with their children growing up into whatever they happen to grow into, there would be no reason for the parents to impart morals, life lessons, education, proper nutrition, etc., to children. The fact that, for the entire existence of humankind (so far as I can tell), we seem to have done those things, it seems to me that all parents strongly care about what their children grow up to be like.
Why does the idea of a parent wanting to impart their vision of how the world ought to be offend you? If the shoe were on the other foot, and you wanted your children to be raised a particular way, would you appreciate being ridiculed for that?
>You probably wouldn’t be okay with them being gambling or drug addicts, racist, murderers, uneducated, etc.
Some are objective. Not much interpretation to whaty a gambler or drug addict is. But the sad thing is that "racism" and especially "educated" are highly subjective.
>Why does the idea of a parent wanting to impart their vision of how the world ought to be offend you?
Depends on the vision. Obviously as a black man I'd have an issue with people who's "vision" is that black people are dangerous, dumb, and dirty. I imagine it's the exact same for a lesbian, or a trans person, or even a not rich person.
And of course not all disagreements are equal. I may not prefer a helicopter approach but that is ultimately a choice that does not impact me nor my family. The former, not so much. Your freedom ends where mine begins.
It goes both ways. Maybe you'll teach your kids to be open and tolerant to everything but they'll grow up, convert to Catholicism, and -- gasp -- vote conservative.
Yes, i fully recognize that at least one of my children is likely to enjoy baseball and vote for a Republican at least once in their life, despite my best efforts to show them the light. I will love them anyway.
well, everything is political, but i wasn’t making it so. i just really hate baseball and have never encouraged my kids to play the sport because of that.
Perhaps you mean 'vote reactionary', as the religious tend to do? Voting conservative means the Democratic party these days - general support of institutions, the United States's standing in the world, law and order, individual freedoms, fiscal responsibility. The contemporary Republican party has rejected these things, instead focusing on some imagined idyllic past and pushing for radical change towards it. The Democratic party certainly has its things it wants to change, but they're much more incremental and not the sweeping sea change of the current Republican agenda.
Bluey is targeted towards pre-school children. I'm not really bothered if my 4-year-old daughter sees stuff like this, it's just that she won't really understand things like "non-binary". It seems like a topic more appropriate for older children - maybe from age 8 or later?
At my kids’ childcare, by far the most popular educator is non-binary. They do a great job of listening to the kids, and talking to them without talking down to them. Come to think of it, the way they interact with the kids actually reminds me a fair bit of the parents in Bluey.
Both my kids (3 and 5 but now at school) have said stuff like “Today we did x with Greg. He’s not exactly a boy and not exactly a girl.” Then they get on with their day. To them, it’s just another person that’s a bit different to them.
I live in a pretty liberal European city, yet I haven't met any non-binary person. I know exactly one trans person, and only remotely (she lives in US). I guess to me, this topic seems "advanced", perhaps "irrelevant" in a way for such a small kid. There are many other things she needs to learn about, which she will commonly experience in the real world.
80s in California... there was a sizable but not exactly large group. No one cared. We all knew "old people" were supposed to care, but it was more likely just a thing everyone had to pretend to care about on TV. None of the old people I knew cared either.
Depends on the circle. Tech industry in California, know 2 NBs, and 2 trans people (and then 2 more I knew transitioned after I left work and contact with them). I guess that does fit all the liberal stereotypes that people like to throw at my State.
I'm in London, and I've met a few non-binary people (enbys), and had at least two trans people in my school (one student, one teaching assistant; this was in the mid-2000s).
> Some people believe that whether you're a woman or a man is a thought in your head, and they also believe that these thoughts mean you can be neither, which they call 'non-binary'. It's helpful to respect these people's beliefs and act as if they are true, because they can get very angry and vindictive if you don't agree with them.
And then we ask why some kids wind up entrenched away from economic opportunity…
Like, if your only coping mechanisms for beliefs you disagree with—particularly about someone else’s private affairs—rise out of fear of retribution, you shouldn’t be in a decision-making role of any kind. It’s somewhat sad to see that baked into a kid from the get go, but maybe they’ll get over it without winding up resentful for the handicap.
The point is it's not a private affair. Retribution from people who react harmfully when others do not share their beliefs is a real thing, ask anyone who was brought up in a strict religious environment who became a non-believer. Sometimes the easiest path is minimal appeasement to avoid conflict where you'll end up worse off.
Someone's sexuality or gender identity sure is. Given languages' pronouns evolve (e.g. a universal "you" in place of the informal "thou", or the aborted deprecation of "y'all"), that's not a reasonable hang-up.
> the easiest path is minimal appeasement to avoid conflict where you'll end up worse off
Sure, and instinctive conflict avoidance is a valid life strategy. It's just bad build for a decision maker. Someone conditioned in that behaviour is going into life with opportunities cordoned off.
Perhaps you should teach children that it's good to respect people's beliefs because being nice to people is good?
I think it's ironically tragic that in an attempt to get people to respect your beliefs more, you argue that the main reason to do so it out of fear of retribution.
The one thing that could be noted on this point of seeing a toddler-focussed TV show with an LGBTQ acceptance theme, is that there are a lot of other acceptance-worthy themes out there that never make it into toddlers' TV shows. I will not make a list because obviously that would be whataboutism, virtue signalling, I don't know.
That too - the pantomime dame character is basically just men ridiculing middle-age women, while sending a message to any children watching that it's acceptable to do so. It's as offensively sexist as the drag queens.
If I'd written a comment about the racism inherent in 'blackface' performance regarding its mockery of black people, would you claim I was redefining racism?
Yes, you did. Both blackface and drag performance have particular histories you're intentionally and erroneously conflating. The former is racist in its origin. The latter is not misogynistic in either its origin or contemporaneous performance.
Drag is men dressing up as caricatures of women. They wear costumes intended to represent women and mimic female bodies, adopt a 'woman' persona under a feminised and often heavily sexualised name, and act out every demeaning, offensive stereotype of women for laughs, often leaning heavily on mocking women's bodies and the physical experiences exclusive to women: pregnancy, birth, breastfeeding, menstruation, and sometimes even abortion. Then they take off those costumes and get to go about their lives as men when they aren't doing this, without having to live under those same stereotypes they helped perpetuate for fun or money. Meanwhile, women are expected to laugh, clap along and celebrate this insult. This mockery of women isn't exactly subtle.
So, please explain the reasoning behind your belief that drag is not misogynistic.
I guess you think that bodybuilders, models, and actors (film and especially Theatre) are all misandric/misogynistic as well? They fit all the items above as well.
I guess I see why the comment upstream was flagged.
Please explain your logic more clearly, I don't see the connection you're making between the occupations you mentioned and men dressing up to make an offensive mockery of women in the way they do for drag.
>They wear costumes intended to represent [Person]
>adopt a persona under Fake name
>act out every demeaning, offensive stereotype for s/laughs/entertainment, boften leaning heavily on the physical experiences.
>Then they take off those costumes and get to go about their lives, without having to live under those same stereotypes they helped perpetuate for fun or money
How is RuPaul doing anything different that America's next top model, Hollywood, or any other competition based on looks doing? It's just personal interpretations if you view it as empowering, demeaning, or even bigoted. They all get the same accusations levied at them after all.
How is this different to when Mr. Rogers shared a wading pool with his Black mailman? Or Captain Kirk kissed Uhura? Both evoked the same conservative outrage we hear about today over things like this. Introducing and celebrating people different from ourselves is how we become more comfortable with them. It eliminates the other-ness of them. As these kids grow up they're going to become aware of a vocal minority of adults who are trying to convince people to marginalize these minority groups and in some cases even call for their extermination. Yes it's a culture war, but it's not being waged by LGBT people, it's being waged against them.
To be fair, there are subtler ways of communicating acceptance. The Bluey way would seem to be having a couple at the playground that the kids maybe ask about. Or maybe they don’t! They just coëxist peacefully because it’s no more remarkable than them having a different skin tone. Different framing from a drag show, which I can see someone preferring without being homophobic.
Out of curiosity, as a non-parent, do any galling examples come to mind?