Children's school books featuring gay characters

[jebus]

I don't have any links for this, but it's on the Last Word repeat this morning. Basically a debate between a school's Principal and a homophobe (David Quinn from the Indo) about whether or not children's school books should include homosexual characters. The principals multi-demonational school has school books that include homosexual characters and they touch on homosexual relationships. The homophobe is saying it's wrong, blah blah blah, we should cut out name calling in general :rolleyes:, what about the Muslims :rolleyes:. Sorry, it may not be a current affair but how are these people given a stage to spout their nonsense? He just said 98% of the population are hetrosexual so obviously homosexuality is wrong! :mad:

Anyway does anyone really having a problem with a schoolbook having a gay character among straight characters, Muslim characters, Catholic characters, etc.? It's meant to tackle homophobia at an early stage and teach children about intigration, but apparantly this guy wants the gay character cut out becuase it will lead children to the dark side apparantly.

[shantykelly]

its a democracy. everyone has a right to an opinion, and be given the opportunity to voice that opinion. they dont automatically have the right to be correct, or even intelligent.

[BohsPartisan]

its a democracy. everyone has a right to an opinion, and be given the opportunity to voice that opinion. they dont automatically have the right to be correct, or even intelligent.

Maybe but they should join the queue. I'm sure there was something more deserving of air time.

[shantykelly]

Maybe but they should join the queue. I'm sure there was something more deserving of air time.


just be thankful they're not actually running your government. we've got the delightful iris robinson. wannae swap?

[superfrank]

Anyway does anyone really having a problem with a schoolbook having a gay character among straight characters, Muslim characters, Catholic characters, etc.? It's meant to tackle homophobia at an early stage and teach children about intigration.
I think it's a brilliant idea.

[SkStu]

theres nothing wrong with the idea per se but creating a gay character solely for the sake of it seems a bit silly to me.

ach-ja or nicht-nicht?

[GavinZac]

its a democracy. everyone has a right to an opinion, and be given the opportunity to voice that opinion. they dont automatically have the right to be correct, or even intelligent.

Its a republic actually. Democracies went out with 20th century BC Greek city states.

[gilberto_eire]

What age group were they books been aimed at?, primary school children?

I would'nt agree with it been in Primary school books, i'd be more for making a go at secondary school kids in teaching them acceptance of somebody's life choice.

[Dodge]

For the fact that a homosexual can't go on the reproduce with is the backbone of the human society.

Sentance posted on foot.ie that made the least bit of sense ever. My read of it is; Society had a backbone, and it is "that a homosexual can't go on the reproduce with"?

Did you post in another language and the above is the best google translator came up with?

[Dodge]

Ah I see, you've edited it. Nice to see the couple of minutes stopped you looking like an idiot and a homophobe.

[passinginterest]

What age group were they books been aimed at?, primary school children?

I would'nt agree with it been in Primary school books, i'd be more for making a go at secondary school kids in teaching them acceptance of somebody's life choice.

It's too late by secondary school. It's at about ten or eleven (maybe earlier) that we start to become aware of sex, this is the age when things can become stigmatised. I think it's a good idea to introduce same sex relationships to younger children, it doesn't have to be anything extreme, just passing reference to the fact that not everyone is heterosexual and homosexuality is not something to be stigmatised or to be ashamed of.

[gilberto_eire]

Sentance posted on foot.ie that made the least bit of sense ever. My read of it is; Society had a backbone, and it is "that a homosexual can't go on the reproduce with"?

Did you post in another language and the above is the best google translator came up with?

I was tired when i wrote that and did'nt look back over my post before i sent it. I meant ''For the fact that a homosexual can't go on TO reproduce WHICH is the backbone of the human society.''

[seanfhear]

I was tired when i wrote that and did'nt look back over my post before i sent it. I meant ''For the fact that a homosexual can't go on TO reproduce WHICH is the backbone of the human society.''
to be honest most of our current world problems and future problems are related to too much reproducing.Could you have a word with the catholic church about contraception or helpfully suggest a conversion en masse to homosexuality.I advise that you be prepared to listen to a load of sanctimonious crap from that discredited cult.Good luck

[Magicme]

I was tired when i wrote that and did'nt look back over my post before i sent it. I meant ''For the fact that a homosexual can't go on TO reproduce WHICH is the backbone of the human society.''

So those who cant have children or choose not to are also part of this bad group who wont/cant be part of the "backbone of human society"??

Grow up. No one is suggesting everyone should be gay. Learn to live and let live and you might have a fuller more interesting life Mr eire.

[gilberto_eire]

So those who cant have children or choose not to are also part of this bad group who wont/cant be part of the "backbone of human society"??

Grow up. No one is suggesting everyone should be gay. Learn to live and let live and you might have a fuller more interesting life Mr eire.

I never mentioned anything about people who could'nt have children of the likes.

My point was as human beings are function in this world is purely to reproduce and survive, these are our prime functions and they are the same as all living creatures(but we have the added bonus off a complex brain).

Some people make life choices and been Gay is one of these, it in no way should be encouraged in people but accepted when it happens, that's where the problem lies in social acceptance and putting an end to prejudice.

I'd only be against these books if they in any way influenced it, if they can educate people to be more acceptive of homsexuals then it would be a great idea.

[Dodge]

If they can educate people to be more acceptive of homsexuals then it would be a great idea.

They might even help you.

Only here to reproduce :rolleyes::eek:

[Magicme]

I never mentioned anything about people who could'nt have children of the likes.

My point was as human beings are function in this world is purely to reproduce and survive, these are our prime functions and they are the same as all living creatures(but we have the added bonus off a complex brain).

Some people make life choices and been Gay is one of these, it in no way should be encouraged in people but accepted when it happens, that's where the problem lies in social acceptance and putting an end to prejudice.

I'd only be against these books if they in any way influenced it, if they can educate people to be more acceptive of homsexuals then it would be a great idea.

but by saying we are only here to reproduce you are saying that those who cant have kids have no function.

I dont think anyone chooses to be gay. One of my best mates is gay and he is an ex boyfriend of mine. He is an extremely religious guy who I know struggled fiercely with who he was, had several girlfriends and then finally was true to himself. He is much happier now and those of us who love him are delighted.

I have 2 sons and while I do hope they will grow up, marry and have kids, if either of them is gay I will love them all the more as they will need protection from the bigots of this world.

[pete]

Far too much seems to be made of this. From what I heard the school & parents decided to do this so no one is being forced into anything.

Sure haven't half the cartoon cartoon characters of the 70s and 80s proven to be gay?

[BohsPartisan]

Sure haven't half the cartoon cartoon characters of the 70s and 80s proven to be gay?

How do you prove a cartoon character is gay? :confused::D

[padjoe]

I thought this was a game of some sort didn't realise how serious of a discussion it was.

out of interest what gay characters are there so far.

Noddy shared a bed with an elderly man called Big Ears, who may or may not be a kiddy fiddler.

Peter Pan is surely a metaphor for homosexuality and admitting to oneself the truth about themselves, while Willy Wonka and the oompa loompas certainly had the dress sense and the eccentricities.

surely one if not all of the seven dwarfs. it says nothing about any of them having a crack off snow white.

According to the times of india, Batman and Robin, Incredible Hulk, X-Men and Superman "promote the gay agenda"

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1188273.cms


"The two are unmarried males living together, that they sometimes sit close together on a couch in their shirt-sleeves, and that Robin's hand is sometimes shown touching Batman's arm. They slide down poles and try on different outfits. Like girls in other stories, Robin is sometimes held captive by the villains... Robin is a handsome boy, usually showing his uniform with bare legs. He often stands with legs spread, the genital region discreetly evident. Besides, Batman's lack of commitment to women is a recurrent theme."


Georgina from the famous five was the first transvestite, she couldn't accept she was a girl, so she dressed and acted like a boy. This is her now....
images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/16842/original.jpg

[Macy]

David Quinn made the best argument there could be for getting religion out of our schools. He's nothing but a homophobic bigot. The way the Catholic Fundamentalist tried to hide behind the schools Muslim children was disgusting. Maybe we shouldn't have school books with black characters because most of the population are white?

btw Gay couple's can have children. Obviously Lesbian couple's can give birth, and Gay men can adopt. Primary school is 100% the right age to start introducing gay characters to children.

[Pauro 76]

Far too much seems to be made of this. From what I heard the school & parents decided to do this so no one is being forced into anything.

Sure haven't half the cartoon cartoon characters of the 70s and 80s proven to be gay?

Ernie and Bert from Sesame Street surely. :eek:

[anto1208]

How is the gay guy going to be represented in the books ? Are they just going to get in more trouble for stereotyping a gay man.


ive no problem with it it prob a good idea to get kids used to the idea but I don’t think it will do a lot of good I think a lot of kids prejudices is learnt at home

[Pauro 76]

How is the gay guy going to be represented in the books ? Are they just going to get in more trouble for stereotyping a gay man.


ive no problem with it it prob a good idea to get kids used to the idea but I don’t think it will do a lot of good I think a lot of kids prejudices is learnt at home

Anyone remember the Ann and Barry books?

Ann is in the park. Barry is in the shop buying some bread and some jam. "Hellooooo dahlings" says the man.

[Wolfie]

Doesn't that make Bosco a Swordsman of the highest order?

He practically lived in a box........................

......coats on the way.................. :o :o

[CameramanConka]

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y128/tonymcbride/Golliwogs.jpg

[pete]

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y128/tonymcbride/Golliwogs.jpg

Golliwogs have apparently been removed from kids books in recent years. I heard the whole sharing the same bed thing also removed from I think it was Postman Pat...

[micls]

I'm a teacher and would be delighted if we had something like this(highly unlikely as it, like most schools, is a Catholic school).

I teach 3rd and 4th class and this is the age they need to be taught that differences are there and how to deal with them.

I regularly hear the kids using terms like gay in a derogatory way. They dont mean harm and are only copying what they hear but with more explanation and understanding they could avoid it.

Of course the first time they see a homosexual character they will react strangely. Probably make 'jokes' about it, and will have a lot of questions. But once these are dealt with appropriately it can only be to the benefit of the child.

It's better that they deal with these inevitable questions about people who are different than them, early and through characters than being thrown into a situation where they meet someone who is gay and have to try to deal with it then.

Educate together schools are really doing a fantastic job in trying to educate children in tolerance and understanding. I only wish all the majority of schools were the same

[gilberto_eire]

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y128/tonymcbride/Golliwogs.jpg

Enid Blyton wrote a book like that? :eek:

[GavinZac]

Enid Blyton wrote a book like that? :eek:

She wrote several stories about Golliwogs, not Gay Wogs- that one's a cover that's been edited.

[gilberto_eire]

She wrote several stories about Golliwogs, not Gay Wogs- that one's a cover that's been edited.

Sorry i read it as ''Gay Golliwogs'' did'nt notice the edit at all, it just did'nt look out of place on the eye and i assumed Golli was there too!

[Pauro 76]

Golliwogs have apparently been removed from kids books in recent years. I heard the whole sharing the same bed thing also removed from I think it was Postman Pat...

Think that was Noddy and Big Ears. I vaguely remember the likes of dialogue in the old Enid Blyton books. Stuff like 'I feel jolly gay', and stuff. She was fond of throwing in the golliwog stuff too...

[John83]

Think that was Noddy and Big Ears. I vaguely remember the likes of dialogue in the old Enid Blyton books. Stuff like 'I feel jolly gay', and stuff. She was fond of throwing in the golliwog stuff too...
The golliwog stuff was genuine casual racism, I think, but gay really didn't have any connotations outside of happy when she was writing.

[passinginterest]

The golliwog stuff was genuine casual racism, I think, but gay really didn't have any connotations outside of happy when she was writing.

It was casual racism that was very much a product of the society she lived in, much like her portrayal of gypsies. It's often castigated, but on closer inspection her golliwog and gypsy characters weren't always the bad characters, as is often suggested by the anti-Blyton establishment. Her most famous character George from the Famous Five is very much an early portrayal of a strong feminist, and quite probably a lesbian, interestingly she's also probably the character most closely based on Blyton herself. I think suggestions of homosexuality in her characters was quite possibly deliberate, she was a very intelligent, if a touch crazy, person. Her biography makes for an interesting read. I'm a fan anyway. My dissertation may have been on the Famous Five. Yes I'm that sad. :(

[Pauro 76]

It was casual racism that was very much a product of the society she lived in, much like her portrayal of gypsies. It's often castigated, but on closer inspection her golliwog and gypsy characters weren't always the bad characters, as is often suggested by the anti-Blyton establishment. Her most famous character George from the Famous Five is very much an early portrayal of a strong feminist, and quite probably a lesbian, interestingly she's also probably the character most closely based on Blyton herself. I think suggestions of homosexuality in her characters was quite possibly deliberate, she was a very intelligent, if a touch crazy, person. Her biography makes for an interesting read. I'm a fan anyway. My dissertation may have been on the Famous Five. Yes I'm that sad. :(

It was a different world back then. When the Black and White Minstrel Show was huge and not many people were offended.

[John83]

It was casual racism that was very much a product of the society she lived in, much like her portrayal of gypsies. It's often castigated, but on closer inspection her golliwog and gypsy characters weren't always the bad characters, as is often suggested by the anti-Blyton establishment.
I think so too.


Her most famous character George from the Famous Five is very much an early portrayal of a strong feminist, and quite probably a lesbian, interestingly she's also probably the character most closely based on Blyton herself.
That's interesting. I haven't read much in the way of biography on Blyton herself.


I think suggestions of homosexuality in her characters was quite possibly deliberate, she was a very intelligent, if a touch crazy, person.
In the form of George, yes, I always assumed she was at least based on someone Blyton knew. I was referring only to the use of the word 'gay' in her books. Are there other Blyton characters whose sexuality is doubted? I don't recall the Secret Seven characters too well, or do you mean some other character? I haven't read any Blyton since I was a kid, and any connotations would have passed right over my head back then.


My dissertation may have been on the Famous Five. Yes I'm that sad. :(
She's one of the most widely read children's authors ever, and has remained popular for decades - I recall seeing somewhere that she's been translated as often as Shakespeare. I think that merits someone's attention. ;)

[passinginterest]

I was thinking along the lines of the Noddy and Big Ears sharing a bed thing. Intimate relationships between older gentlemen and younger boys is something that's quite a common theme in history. It may have been painted in an innocent light a lot of the time, and I'd imagine Blyton was looking at it this way, but it's something worth considering.

I'd definitely recommend having a look at her biography, Barbara Stoney is the author of the official one. Blyton had a very strange relationship with her own children, which Stoney only really touches on, she seemed to be jealous of them and spent very little time with them.

[John83]

Was just googling around the subject, and found this excerpt from The Three Golliwogs:

Once the three bold Golliwogs, Golly, Woggie, and ******, decided to go for a walk to Bumble-Bee Common. Golly wasn't quite ready so Woggie and ****** said they would start off without him, and Golly would catch them up as soon as he could. So off went Woggie and ******, arm-in-arm, singing merrily their favourite song - which, as you may guess, was Ten Little ****** Boys.Those asterisks are foot.ie's take on a word rhyming with 'digger'. That's spectacularly racist by modern standards.

EDIT: Oh, and Ten Little ******* is the name of a children's poem, sometimes set to music, which celebrates the deaths of ten Black children, one-by-one.

[passinginterest]

Veering wildly off topic at the moment, but anyway, it says an awful lot about the prevailing views at the time that a story like that ever got published.

It's probably not something we'd recommend as casual reading for our children today! It is, however, a useful social document that illustrates very well the fact that just because a belief is widely sociably acceptable today doesn't mean it's right, or that it will be OK in the future.

It just goes to show that society progresses and it'll probably seem bizarre in 50 years time that we were having a debate about something as normal as homosexual characters in children's books (by then it'll probably be sadomasochism or something!).

[Pauro 76]

Veering wildly off topic at the moment, but anyway, it says an awful lot about the prevailing views at the time that a story like that ever got published.

It's probably not something we'd recommend as casual reading for our children today! It is, however, a useful social document that illustrates very well the fact that just because a belief is widely sociably acceptable today doesn't mean it's right, or that it will be OK in the future.

It just goes to show that society progresses and it'll probably seem bizarre in 50 years time that we were having a debate about something as normal as homosexual characters in children's books (by then it'll probably be sadomasochism or something!).

Jaysis, that's a bit mad. Thankfully we've moved with the times, that's quite shocking! Even in the 70s, early 80s, stuff like 'Black and White Minstrels' was quite popular, Alf Garnett's views were acceptable and the like... Amazing how we've moved on and what passes for shocking now, will be relatively normal in a generation's time.

[passinginterest]

Oddly enough that's also one of her books where the Golliwogs are actually the main characters and the hero's of the story. There is a series of them in which they feature as the hero's.

[anto1208]

I regularly hear the kids using terms like gay in a derogatory way. They dont mean harm and are only copying what they hear but with more explanation and understanding they could avoid it.





The word has changed meaning it now means something stupid or retarded rather than having anything to do with sexuallity ( ie Everybody loves raymond is gay ). This is mainly due to south park.

Words evolve having a gay old time at xmas now means something very different :D

[jebus]

The word has changed meaning it now means something stupid or retarded rather than having anything to do with sexuallity ( ie Everybody loves raymond is gay ). This is mainly due to south park.

Words evolve having a gay old time at xmas now means something very different :D

It now means having a retarded time at Christmas?

[anto1208]

It now means having a retarded time at Christmas?

Depends on how retarded you get at xmas :D

[Cymro]

I'm surprised no-one has yet to mention that gay really means happy in this thread, particularly as it's one about kids' books. :D

I tend to think that primary school is too young to be teaching kids about sexual orientation, or sex in general, but I do agree with micls that maybe something should be done about kids using the word gay in a derogatory sense. Although I have to say I grew up using the word gay derogotarily and have no problem with the Dafydd Thomases of this world, so maybe that would overly PC.

[micls]

I tend to think that primary school is too young to be teaching kids about sexual orientation, or sex in general,
I agree tbh, but I dont think thats the idea. Id imagine its more like a gay couple in the storym, rather than discussing is as 'sexual orientation'.




but I do agree with micls that maybe something should be done about kids using the word gay in a derogatory sense. Although I have to say I grew up using the word gay derogotarily and have no problem with the Dafydd Thomases of this world, so maybe that would overly PC.

And many many others would be the same. But the problem is the percentage of children who dont have minds as 'open' as ours, and carry on believing what they heard/learned as a child without thinking it through.

The majority will grow out of it, but if we can stop children from seeing 'gay' as derogatory in the first place, maybe we can stop some people turning into homophobes.

As well that Id imagine, a young lad/girl, who has grown up using 'gay' as a derogatory term, and then realises he may be or is gay will have more difficulty coming to terms with it given teh context the term had been used in during his upbringing

Id imagine similarly years ago there are plenty of children who would have used derogatory names for black people, who now would not in any way be racist. It still isn't acceptable though for children to do the same now. Id like to see the same happen as much as possible with 'gay'.

[Macy]

I agree tbh, but I dont think thats the idea. Id imagine its more like a gay couple in the storym, rather than discussing is as 'sexual orientation'.
That would be my understanding too, it's introducing gay couples as normal. Only right as there could be children with gay parents.

[anto1208]

The majority will grow out of it, but if we can stop children from seeing 'gay' as derogatory in the first place, maybe we can stop some people turning into homophobes.

As well that Id imagine, a young lad/girl, who has grown up using 'gay' as a derogatory term, and then realises he may be or is gay will have more difficulty coming to terms with it given teh context the term had been used in during his upbringing

.

I think racisim/ homophobic etc is something kids grow into rather than grow out of. Normally kids dont care they have to be thought how to hate.


Still i like using the word gay in the new context i think all the gay gays need to stop being so gay and just get over it :D

[jebus]

On another homophobic topic Heinz yesterday withdrew one of their TV adverts that showed two men kissing after it drew 200 complaints. Wow, 200 people still support Mary Whitehouse and we're all supposed to follow suit. Gutless knee jerk reaction from Heinz who shouldn't have included the image if they hadn't the bottle to back it up

[Schumi]

The ad was a bit too saucy then?