Gay Values

Remember when Jerry Falwell thought he discerned gay propaganda in the Teletubbies, and everyone thought he was crazy?  The counter kept getting buried and reburied, and re-re-buried that he had gotten the idea from repeated references in gay culture, who were saying exactly that. Yet that didn't stop the sneers. "But they haven't even reached puberty yet," laughed the Washington Post. It stuck with Falwell's reputation the rest of his life and was mentioned in every mass-media obituary.

Years later, even Slate magainse admitted that Falwell was, uh, right. The gay commenity had been claiming Tinky Winky as a camp idol for years.  One of those Murphy Brown; or most-of-the-mainstream-press-votes-and-contributes-Democratic; or yeah, Bill Clinton does lie a lot moments that liberals own up to once they think it can't damage current candidates. Some people can say a thing, others can't.

So here we are again.  The NYTimes is seeing gay messages in the children's books by gay authors. Male characters who are friends, such as Frog and Toad?  That's quietly applauding gay affection.  Because, what else could it be, really? The author was gay, so...well, you know. They must be too. I mean, why else would these boy/men argue and then get along?  Why else a tenderness and worry that they would be lonely? Men are never like that unless...

I'm thinking those soldiers with wounded or dying comrades, or teammates hugging at the championship, or lifelong friends clapping each other on the back might object that the view is a touch narrow. I don't call it completely untrue - half-truths have more strength than lies - but it all seems rather convenient.  Gay authors may gravitate more to depicting positive male affection. But taking credit for all warmth and love seems a bit much. Anything nice that men do?  Oh hey, that's completely us. That's our trademark

There are next all those books with tomboys, or even girls in the latency stage when they find boys icky, who are now revealed to have lesbian sympathies. The authors were writing in code, you see. That attitude was condemned in discussing girls who liked sports or climbing trees or fishing as far back as I can remember, but now, well, wink wink, nod nod...YOU know. I'm thinking some tomboys or hunters might weigh in on that unpleasantly.  Women who didn't really have much against lesbians or think about them much - until this minute when you are sorta pissing them off.

I give the authors much more credit than that.  If a woman felt a little ostracised for being too boyish she might well broaden that in a way that included many females.  Tomie dePaola may have had a personal reason for writing something encouraging about a boy considered a sissy and defending him, but the book is about that broader category of criticised boys. Not everyone is a cultural advocate every waking moment. Except at the Times, I suppose.

It's an extended series of heads-I-win/tails-you-lose arguments by the author. Additionally, the article wanders and is unfocused.  Jesse Green makes sure he works his best factoids about children's lit in there, even when they don't fit.