The kids have thwarted all of my attempts to write coherently on this topic for the last few days but here are my thoughts in a nutshell:
1. Don’t critique it without watching it first. I have not seen it, nor do I expect to.
2. Sexuality has no place on a show for 5-9 year olds.
3. How bout a “don’t ask, don’t tell sort of thing”? Not a “Sally Has Two Mommies” sort of thing? I know my Big Gay Friends won’t much like it, but I’m trying to be tactful. Compromise. They might very well have done that, I didn’t see it. (see #1)
Oh I’m talking about the Postcards From Buster that featured a lesbian couple and child. Just in case you haven’t heard the scuttlebutt. Yahoo! news search for Buster.
Editing to add that Faith and I both really enjoy this show and talk about it every time we see it.
i’m with you. i’d like to see it, but it doesn’t look like i’ll get to. i doubt they will choose to air it her in the south. anna likes the show, too.
1. No. If you know the substance of the content, there’s no need to experience it personally to disagree on principle.
See also: porn, “The Last Temptation of Christ”.
2. Agreed.
3. No compromise. Big Gaydom already has Bravo and a portion of Lifetime. PBS Kids should stick to the normal common denominator. Keep the foisting of lesbian role modeling out of children’s programming, period.
Are you talking about Buster on Arthur?
IRT T.J.: Yeah, they have an Arthur spinoff where Buster flies all over the country with his airplane pilot dad, and they make it seem as though Buster is filming video of the people and places he visits, then sends the video back to Arthur or his mom. It’s a little lame in terms of the response the people have to ‘Buster’ filming them (presumably because they are real people, not actors and are having a hard time pretending a four-foot white rabbit in a v-neck is behind the camera) but it’s a good show nonetheless. Faith really likes it.
IRT Kevin:
1. No, I don’t know the substance of the content. I disagree in principle with a show focusing on the sexual relation of any two or more adults in the context of a children’s program. However, I don’t disagree in principle with a show focusing on a girl, her mother and another woman who all live together in Vermont and make maple sugar.
3. The compromise I intend is one like #1, where no mention is made of anyone’s relation to each other in terms of sexuality. I have no objections to my children seeing a show about two women who live together and care for a child. Like I said, many of my more militant friends *cough*birthwarrior!*cough*Jaime!*cough* might take exception to those restrictions but I spect we’d find common ground eventually.
The kids are tuning up, I will try to revisit this later.
Revisiting now: I talked to Sean and decided I have a Gleeson Acid Test for Children’s Programming. If I, as a Generation X semi-hipster, come away from the show saying “Eh. They were probably gay,” then it is A-OK. If I come away from it saying “Dude! They were so totally gay!” then, not.
HTH!
IRT Phoebe,
I’m not sure what aspect of the lesbians’ sexual relationship you and Sean are going to be acid testing for, but I know enough to reject it without seeing it. The controversial point of this broadcast is that we ALREADY know they’re lesbians. I’m not A-OK with any favorable portrayal of a homosexual family unit on a show my kids watch. (Ergo, we’re not going to be watching Buster anymore. Thanks for the heads up.)
We shouldn’t have to prescreen anything on PBS Kids for appropriateness.
LOL. Phoebe, I think we found someone who makes you look like a flaming liberal. Ok, maybe just a non-practicing Democrat.
I agree with you. I don’t think the you should come away from any childrens show thinking about the sexuality of the “players”. I don’t want to see 2 hetrosexual mice giving eachother tongue. Not appropriate.
There’s are common ground. You should be able to come away from a childrens show having no thoughts about sex. If:
* the show has lesbians,
* and never makes mention of it
* and never makes you think about it.
Then: I am A-OK. I think the same about hetrosexuals, too. I don’t want to hear “These two hetrosexual people, who like to only have sex with each other, which are of opposite sex, are making Maple Syrup.” Not on my childrens show. lol
She didn’t have to look far, Zach. We’re family, and happy for it!
;)
I’ll lay any odds there will be no portrayal or mention of sexual activity on that program. I don’t think that’s anyone’s contention.
Zach, my BIL Kevin.
Kevin, my friend Zach.
Oh and Kev, Sean’s not testing for nuffin, he’s just listening to me ramble.
it doesnt sound like they discussed lesbianism on the show? i mean, they simply introduced her two mommies. it could just as easily have been mom and dad or dad and dad or single mom or single dad or young mom, or aging mom, or adoptive dad etc etc etc…
i saw an episode of this where they visit a trailer park and discuss life there.
i think its a great show,exploring a lot of fact-of-lifestyles in an environment where you can be there and help your child integrate it all.
the way i see it,
1) there are people all over doing things i disagree with
2) i would be a fool to think ignoring these things will make them less real
3) children are born unpredjudiced
4) i want to keep it that way if at all possible
ykwim?
tabitha
Well said Tab. I especially like 2.
I’ve now seen the show, and can knowledgably comment thus:
The show features a lesbian couple with 3 kids, two of whom are sent on errands to buy maple syrup and cheese. On their errands, they show people making the syrup and cheese.
The parents’ lesbianism isn’t conveniently ignored, but rather spotlighted. The camera pans the family photos while Buster comments on how they sure have a lot of mommies. The girl corrects him, that she has a mommy and the other one is her “partner”. Savvy viewers will understand this to mean her “[live-in lesbian sex] partner”, though our kids viewed cluelessly (not on my watch, my wife’s). The show culminates in a social event at a bonfire hosted by another lesbian headed “two mommy” household with kids.
To quote a commenter above, I would much rather that this kids’ show ignored these things to make them less real. The show’s emphasis on children raised in two gay families, ending with a joint family photo at the bonfire with 4 moms and no dads are meant to provoke questions and discussion of homosexual family units, forcing the issue at an earlier age that most of us normals don’t want discussed until the kids reach a greater level of maturity.
The show should ignore these things to make them less real? They are real.
Reality: lesbians and gay men have children. Whether the kids came from a former heterosexual relationship or were adopted or conceived through donor sperm - they have two mommies or two daddies.
These families exist. They are real families.
Yes - this discussion should be had at a young age, you can say whatever you want about the lesbians in the show, but you should talk about it so that when YOUR kids meet kids in real life who have two moms or two dads or interracial parents or who are raised by their auntie or in a foster home or are adopted internationally and look physically different from their mom and dad then YOUR kids will know what is going on and know your opinion on the subject.
Yeah, Kevin! Obviously, you must be opposed to interracial families, since you criticized a cartoon that had nothing to do with interracial families!
So, when were you planning on exposing your sons to interracial families, huh? Huh?
Dear anotherjenny,
Let’s just stick to the two moms or two dads please, since that’s all that’s portrayed in this show, and that’s the only moral abberation you’ve listed in your alternative family structures. That and the donor sperm, which is for another forum. My boys are black and white, adopted and not, and brothers all, which is nothing like being raised gay or by gays.
You have said “yes, this discussion [about homosexually parented families] should be had at a young age.” No. Not with my kids. In my children’s world, homosexuality does not exist, because I’m their responsible parent exercising my duty to keep things out that they’re not ready to be aware of yet. For that same reason, I’m holding back a lot of good things as well, like the full Gospel message of Jesus Christ, the gift of the seven sacraments, right to life issues, and the fine job our troops are doing in Iraq.
The role of PBS Kids and other children’s programming has been to present entertainment whose contained values should be completely trustworthy by worry free parents: Share. Tell the truth. Go the library. Do your homework. Be nice to your sister. Animals have families too. Don’t litter.
By blindsiding many sensible families with the lesbian family episode of Postcards from Buster, PBS Kids betrayed this trust. To my children (ages 3, 2 and baby), homosexuality still is not yet real (or rather, is not yet
part of their reality), and Jenny, you wouldn’t like the family discussion this little consciousness foisting production would have unfolded.
Q: Daddy, is it OK if a family has 2 mommies or daddies instead of 1 mommy and 1 daddy?
My Options:
The dilemma: You’d have to pry these words from my cold, dead lips.
Let’s watch nothing but DVDs from now on.
Kevin, I am sorry that your children will grow up with so much hate in their lives. Obviously, talking about explicit sexual acts with a young child is wrong and will confuse that child, no matter what that explicit sexual act is.
I will pray that you realize that being gay is not about sex anymore than being straight is about sex. It is about who you love, who you are compatible with. I hope none of your children are gay because you will have hurt them their entire childhood by preaching hate and lies. I hope they dare to question the religious beliefs you teach them.
I won’t debate your opinion with you, because it isn’t worth one second of my energy, but I will pray for your children because hate hurts from the inside out.
God bless.
Jenny, rejoice! Your prayers have been answered before you said them.
Actually, you’re just mistaken in your rush to judgement you made about my harboring hatred toward homosexuals. Having said that however, when it comes to the gay activists forcing the gay agenda on my kids in children’s programming or in the schools, you’ve got combat.
I DO:
1. Subscribe to that portion of a religious tradition or other moral belief system that condemns homosexual sex acts as immoral.
2. Exercise no or little effort to suppress one’s natural sense of revulsion, if present, to homosexual sex acts (e.g., rectal intercourse, same sex kissing, etc.).
I do NOT:
3. Support, participate in or take pleasure from acts of violence, hatred, or infliction of emotional damage to homosexual persons.
You decided correctly that changing my beliefs and attitudes on #1 and #2 are a waste of energy.
My children will not hate, but will probably share my religious beliefs as well as a hearty sense of humor and strong sense of inclusion. I doubt they’ll be gay, but they’ll always be loved unconditionally. We’ll take prayers too!
You’ve tried and failed to stick me with charges of racism and hatred, but if you wish to label me a “homophobe”, go ahead, but given my abridged list of characteristics, I would insist on “Homophobe, Third Class”.