It has long been a topic fascinating to some fans of the long running classic children’s television program Sesame Street; Are roommates Bert and Ernie actually a couple? Now a group , Change.org is petitioning to have PBS let the male puppets get married and people from all over the political spectrum are weighing in for and against it. What do you think? Should the puppet pals get hitched?
Link
Through Change.org, the group is petitioning to have popular Sesame Street roommates Bert and Ernie get married. While the creators of Sesame Street have never confirmed the long-standing rumor that the puppet pals are actually gay, the petition (signed by more than 700 people) argues that the move would teach tolerance and acceptance to the young viewers of the children's program. Is it time for Bert and Ernie to say "I do"?
Link
I would suggest they lobby to introduce new characters instead of sacrificing the (in my opinion) long-standing friendship with its ups and downs.
That is that needs to be said.
The fact alone that this creates so much controversy is very indicative of how in-tolerant we still are.
@ Dallas: You create more problems by overprotecting children. You think kids can't handle a gay couple? Please.
Like the rest of us have, they can just use their imaginations on that relationship when they get older. ;)
Done and done.
That said, I think it's high time a gay human couple moved to Sesame Street. The show has explored adult family relationships through the human characters many times. If they could pair up Maria and David in the 70s, then they can give Laundromat Leela a girlfriend in the 10s.
Teach kids that having friends is good and that they do not need to have sex with a person in order to be their best friend.
But Bert and Ernie have never given any indication of romantic love. There's nothing wrong with being friends and roommates and NOT gay. A child should also be taught that it's okay to love someone as a friend without it being a question of sexuality.
I don't agree with Bert and Ernie getting married any more than I agree with Statler and Waldorf getting married, or Dumbledore supposedly being gay (funny, no mention of THAT in the recent movie).
The world of Sesame Street is a world of kids, and not of pre-teens, teens, or adults. As such, it should not have adult issues or adult scenarios between its muppet characters.
However, the human characters on the show could have a gay couple, and I doubt it would traumatize the audience. They needn't be Butch and Lance, who run the leather bar up the street, just two people on the show. It doesn't sexualize the relationship just because they exist on the street.
I don't think they need any sort of more complex relationships than just friends on the show, between humans or muppets. That's like Kermit and Miss Piggy finally getting married, or Gilligan and the gang getting off the island.
And finally, they're MUPPETS, NOT PUPPETS!
Bert is not gay. Ernie, idk.
Anyway, I watched *Plaza Sesame*, and as I understood it, Bert and Ernie were really, really looking forward to going to bed together. But I haven't really got my Spanish back up to speed yet. :)
This is the problem with gays and lesbians and such. It's not that they want to be left alone to live in peace...I wholly support that.
It's that they are not satisfied to be left alone to live in peace. They want to force everyone else to place their stamps of approval on their lifestyle.
Being left alone to live as you please with other adults that like your lifestyle choices should be everyone's right (I'll fight for that). But, forcing everyone to place their stamp of approval on your lifestyle choice is NOBODY'S right.
Need an example, do ya? Gay pride parades. Since when did being left alone to live your life as you please dictate a parade?
Not that I don't love a good ol' gay parade, but when breeders talk about having a Heterosexual Pride parade they are called homophobic (http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/Latin-America-Monitor/2011/0804/Heterosexual-Pride-Day-in-Sao-Paulo).
You can't expect tolerance if you are unwillling to give it.
And you should know when to draw the line at introducing adult subject matter to children (whether that subject matter be gay, straight or some weird sh!t I have yet to hear about).
So much more refreshing than the polite "I'm all for it, but not in front of the children" hater comments. These people have a genuine bigotry, and they don't mind showing it off.
As for Heterosexual Pride Day, that's every day. To suggest a parade for it is not sincere, and is a demonstration of hatred. Since when can a gay couple show the same level of affection in public that a straight couple can without fear of being physically threatened? Not in a lot of places.
Children of Sesame Street age are inundated with heterosexual couples all the time. It's Cinderella's goal to get married to Prince Charming. I don't hear you complaining about the sexual element in that story, or the sexual element in any children's story where a boy and a girl meet and fall in love.
But if a boy and a boy meet and fall in love, it's all about how degenerate and perverted they are.
Like I said, Sesame Street isn't the place for complex relationships, but screening your kids from the realities of life just turns them into arrogant bullies and haters like some of the previous commenters.
Do you think the Olympic committee will ever allow same sex pairs figure skating?
BEEN INSTEAD OF THEM GETTING MARRIED. iN GOD i BELIEVE AND BELIEVE IN AND ALWAYS WILL, IN THE SAYING OF THE MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE , "IN GOD WE TRUST"
It's like the old racist comment, "I have nothing against the blacks, but I wouldn't let my daughter marry one."
And who in this day and age cares if it's "Biblically incorrect"? I'd rather "kneel" before my Maker and show that I taught my children patience and tolerance, and to treat other human beings with decency and respect, than "kneel" before my Maker as a self-righteous, blind bigot, who refused to see people for the decent, loving human beings that they were, and who tried to bully companies who didn't agree with my narrow mind set.
In Scientific American Mind (July/August 2011), page 36, the section titled "A Critical Link" explores the relationship of offspring Degu rats to their parents.
It reads in part "At a stage of development when most of the brain should be burgeoning with new connections, the pups raised without a father had deficits in the orbitofrontal cortex and the somatosensory cortex. The orbitofrontal cortex is part of the prefrontal cortex, which regulates decision making, reward and emotion. And although it is difficult to extrapolate from rodent studies to effects in humans, it is worth noting that faulty synapses and processing problems in this locale might well explain why we see some kids who grow up without a dad wrestle with occasionally serious behavioral problems."
I know that I have seen more developmental and behavioral problems in children and adults who grew up without a caring father (whether the father was absent or present but uncaring) than in those that grew up with a caring father.
This would seem to indicate that children who grow up without a caring father (whether that be in a lesbian home, an orphanage, a broken heterosexual home or a home where the father has died and the mother did not remarry or some other situation) would be at greater risk of future emotional and behavioral problems.
It seems that the presence of a father figure is vital to proper brain development.
I would assume (as I have not looked for any scientific studies to back this up) that the same goes for rats (and children) raised without caring mothers.
Having watched children raised in an environment where their mother cared more about her own needs and wants than theirs (even telling the children that they were not going to get in the way of her living her life the way she wanted) I can state from my observations that (at least in this instance) children raised without a caring mother are just as negatively affected as those raised without a caring father.
As a matter of full disclosure...the article goes on to contradict itself by saying ""Having two parents is one thing," Wiess points out, "but having effective relationships between parents and offspring is yet something else. It's actually the effectiveness of the relationships [that matters]"."
This statement was not backed up by the previously mentioned Degu rat study, and is contradictory to the information gained from the Degu study.
It would seem, from the evidence that we have, that for children to develop properly, and to their fullest potential, there exists a need for both a caring mother and a caring father.
So, while I do not begrudge anyone their right to marry a same sex partner, all indications are that children raised in such homes are at a distinct disadvantage.
You're quoting scientific studies at length, to discuss a point that's not even germane to the topic.
The topic is not about homosexuals raising kids, but teaching all kids to be tolerant of all types of people, considering that Bert and Ernie have long been considered by some groups as very similar to a homosexual couple.
to top it off, your conclusions are backed up not by the article you quote, but by your own biased (i.e., non-scientific) observations.
Well done. I'm glad you were able to resolve that issue for us. All children should be raised by heterosexual, caring parents. Any widows or divorcees should remarry immediately. Single mothers should immediately marry. And make sure that your hubby is caring. We don't want to mess with that brain development.
Bert, Ernie, put down that turkey baster - no children for you!
This is most certainly germane to the topic at hand. The topic is whether Bert and Ernie should get married.
Along with teaching tolerance of others (which I wholeheartedly support), for those of Seasame Street age and mental/emotional development, this also teaches acceptance of the lifestyle - a lifestyle which is not the ideal for raising children (something a lot of non-traditional families are trying to do).
As it is not possible at this young age for children to differentiate between tolerance for alternative lifestyles and acceptance of that lifestyle as an equal alternative to traditional families - and as children are not really ready to discuss things like this scientific study at the Seasame Street age - I believe it best if the alternative lifestyle indoctrination is left to things like Glee, where children are more able to differentiate between tolerance and lifestyle acceptance and are more able to understand things like this study and others (like the CDCC study that recently showed ALL sexually active groups declining in HIV/AIDS transmission EXCEPT homosexual males).
It is irresponsible to expose children this young to subjects that they cannot fully discuss or understand.
Its just a very serious bromance.