The jowly Christian Fundamentalist Jerry Falwell had many a moment when his fanatical McCarthy-style crusade to stem the great Gay Menace pushed the limits of logic.
His paranoia reached its comic apex in his 1999 much-reviled diatribe against the phenomenally-successful British children’s series The Teletubbies. His target was the purple member of the ensemble Tinky Winky (seriously) whom he hilariously vilified as some sort of subliminal gay message.
Of course, when one demented bigot dies another usually takes his place. Enter Polish conservative Ewa Sowinska, a government-appointed media watchdog/children’s advocate who’s ready to assume Falwell’s mantle and crack down on the dangerous homosexual propaganda the Teletubbies brazenly trade in.
“He is purple, the gay-pride color; and his antenna is shaped like a triangle, the gay-pride symbol” Big Daddy Falwell famously stated in his outing of Tinky Winky. The character’s trademark “magic bag” also was a bone of contention because it resembled a purse, such “subtle depictions” insidiously promoting the gay agenda to unwary tots. “As a Christian, I feel that role modeling the gay lifestyle is damaging to the moral lives of children.”
Hand-wringing Everymom Sowinska — purportedly a trained physician and admittedly only furthering the Polish government’s institutionalized policy of discrimination against gays — parrots Falwell’s rhetoric verbatim eight years after it drew mockery and bemusement stateside:
“I noticed (Tinky Winky) has a lady’s purse, but I didn’t realize he was a boy. At first I thought the purse would be a burden for this Teletubby … Later I learned this may have a homosexual undertone.” Her dread surrounding a “gender ambiguous” child icon and the “inappropriate attitudes” it may effect has caused her to assemble a crack team of child psychologists to investigate.
Way to take a stand.
Poland’s Far Right government isn’t exactly up-to-date with the concept of Gay Rights by any means. Still, even Sowinska’s witch hunt may have gone too far even for the predominantly Catholic and militantly anti-gay nation. Attempts to reign her in have commenced with Parliamentary Speaker Ludwig Dorn advising her to put a lid on it before her proposed investigation into the program’s supposed underlying messages turns into a complete farce.
Too late. As the U.S. experienced with Falwell’s rant, there are times when even the most grotesque zealot can veer off into unintended self-parody. When her claims were met with derision, Sowinksa promptly back pedaled to no avail. The line between righteous indignation and obsession is razor-thin.
When an entity like a Tinky Winky becomes fair game for homophobes, the “slippery slope” crutch that the Right always relies on has itself become too extreme. There’s always been parental concern over the life-affirming nature of children’s programming and toys in general are often the means by which kids acquaint themselves with their gender roles. Boys have toy soldiers and slingshots, girls get Barbie Easy-Bake Ovens.
Like Sea Monkeys, the Teletubbies are essentially sexless and that begs the question if its their gender-neutral quality that threatens the Falwells and Sowinskas of the world. Their fear is the same one that’s been applied to homosexuality ad nauseam for decades: if prescribed gender roles breakdown, chaos in the form of sexual confusion will ensue.
In the 80s, the popular Garbage Pail Kids (left) — a spoof of the already ubiquitous Cabbage Patch Kids — were the bane of many concerned moral watchdog groups because they depicted kids as gross, unruly, gleefully antisocial, and utterly repulsive, which, if you’ve ever had the joy of experiencing a youngster at their very worst isn’t exactly hyperbole.
The Teletubbies, all of whom could be said to sport some kind of vaguely phallic or vaginal head protrusion, are apparently the new junior subverts because they also mirror kids who ultimately don’t meet an arbitrary standard of identity.
A child’s self is free-form, willing to explore, to color outside the lines. Sowinska would have us believe that’s a dangerous state because it allows undue media influences to enter. Homosexuality must be a flaw in a child’s socialization, not a naturally-occurring internal development. For a hysterical hate monger like the Bride of Falwell, the world The Teletubbies conjure up — a pristine multi-colored landscape, secret language, denizens who eat a vegetarian diet, nature and technology coexisting peacefully, and non-existent gender distinctions — must be her own Queer Nation nightmare.
Great piece, Shawn!
You have to wonder if there’s anything other than self-disgust and prayer that a Christian Fundamentalist finds safe and proper enough to actually enjoy. Movies, music, books, and the latest clothing always come under fire. Now even children’s toys are part of some elaborate gay conspiracy. What’s left?
Haven’t they seen “Footloose”?
Oh, please…this is another pathetic attempt to make people pick up the cause and march headstrong with the government on the whole issue. Clearly, she thought that parents would be alarmed because it threatened their children.
Sadly for her, the world is not so intent on seeking the gay representation in every single program. I wonder if it’s ever occurred to her that children who watch that show are of no age to even understand all this crap. Much less would they acknowlegde Tinky Winky, or any other Teletubbie, to be either male or female, because there’s nothing about them that can be defined as such.
It’s about time politicians found a way to fight a *real* problem by thinking of some solutions themselves, rather than dragging out subjects that are neither important nor innovative by trying to appeal to a large group of people with things that have been said over and over again. It’s like a polish, political version of a child molester, trying to lure in the children only to screw them over in the end. (Sorry if I shock or offend anyone with that…but as I see it, it’s just true)
because it allows undo media influences to enter.
“undo”?
Not that it really matters…Great Article!
Very funny.
I’m sure I have been on this earth too long. It all reminds me of Jerry’s foray into the ‘homeless crisis’; he was going to save the homeless from themselves and make a ton of money in the bargain, but, alas, the right had already sufficiently vilified the homeless that the usually bounteous Christians were in no mood and after a much ballyhooed kickoff, he had to let it die a quiet death.
When the day comes, and, truly, I believe it will be sooner rather than later, that there is no money in gay baiting, gay baiting, too, will die a quiet death.
Even in righteous Poland, what’s her name’s efforts seem to come a, at least minor, cropper.
If you ask andrew davenport, the show’s co-creator, he’s a bit vague on the creation of the characters. He did say that he created a larger show for an older target audience - 7 year olds, which had two characters in space suits bumbling around like toddlers, which anne wood liked most of all. Those characters were pulled out and became actual toddlers for the teletubby show. Andrew does admit that “the whole thing develops out of your past experience.”
Did andrew have a purse experience and get chastized for it when he was young, due to strict gender expectations, and is the appearance of the purse a soothing re-enactment? Or did anne wood add the purse because she thought it deflected any possible perceived aggression on the part of the character who is male, taller than the others and a bold purple? Without the purse, would someone view the taller character as a sort of father figure to the others and did they want to eliminate that representation? Who knows. It’s all in the psyches of andrew and anne.
There does seem to be gender. There are two females, smaller, and with circles or spirals (female) on their heads. There are two males - with dipsy being the most masculine, and (no surprise) he has a shaft/rod on his head for his symbol. Dipsy was the only character to refuse to wear a tu-tu, and said “run away, run away.”
Do 2 year olds even get any of this subtext stuff? Probably not. One of the main messages the creators say they want to introduce is comfort with technology, such as the tv screen imbedded in their bodies, the vaccum cleaner, the toaster, etc. I’m not sure why this is, since kids seem to do great with technology already, it’s actual people they have problems with.
Overall, the show seems cute, and I like the colors and the hugs, and the absence of parents, and the little happy baby-world they’ve created, but some of it still seems a little strange to me.