Strollerderby : gay dads

Sesame Street Changes with the Times Again

Shannon LC Cate — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:00:00 GMT

The Children's Television Workshop, producers of Sesame Street and other public television hits for shorties, has announced that it will develop its longtime favorite Bert and Ernie characters into a more openly gay couple in a committed relationship. Long suspected by homosexuals to be "family," Bert and Ernie have remained in an ambiguous roommate relationship throughout Sesame Streets' nearly 40-year history. But CTW spokeswoman Irene Hutchins was quoted as explaining that

"Sesame Street has always evolved with the times in which real children are living. More and more children today are living in proximity to happy, healthy, gay people who have no interest in hiding. We think portraying Bert and Ernie in more traditional romantic "couple" ways will be affirming for children with gay uncles or family friends in their lives."

The relationship will have no sexual overtones, Hutchins hastened to add, ensuring that Bert and Ernie will still sleep in their separate, single beds. but now instead of "old buddy Bert," Ernie will call his longtime companion, "my boyfriend, Bert." And instead of just getting frustrated with Ernie's trademark antics, Bert will end his tirades with "you drive me crazy, but I could never love anyone else the way I love you!"

When asked if the newly outed couple might become fathers, Hutchins was enthusiastic. "Not in the first season," she said, "but we do think Prairie Dawn could be persuaded to be their gestational surrogate."

Gay Man and Straight Woman Choose to Parent Together

Miriam Axel-Lute — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:24:00 GMT

Terry Finnegan and Selina Evans seemed to everyone in their childbirth classes to be a normal couple. But there were a few things their fellow expectant parents didn't know: like, Terry is gay and the two met online because they each wanted kids and weren't sure how it was going to happen (Selina was divorced and didn't want to be a single mom). They became close friends, drew up a "baby contract," Selina used a "donation" from Terry to inseminate, and now they are ecstatic new parents, talking about moving in together, but needing to get a place large enough to have their own rooms.

It was fun to read about, but honestly, I'm not even sure why an arrangement like this is news any more. Quads made up of two gay men and two lesbians have been doing versions of this for years. I knew a straight man who was not only the donor but also the active father for his queer best friends' kids. Parents who have fallen out of love/lust but are still friends raise kids together all the time.

After all, why do you need to be sleeping with someone to parent with them?

Most of the worries that are raised are so weak as to be laughable: "Some day Isabella will ask why mummy and daddy sleep in different bedrooms." Oh my. Please let all children never have to ask anything more troubling than that.

Even the idea that some day they would each find romantic partners and she might have three dads is a bit ho-hum. Like, um, umptyskillion children of divorce everywhere? Except without the breaking apart of the family first? And with a written contract that stipulates responsibilities and priorities? It would be a change, true, but its effects would all be in the handling. (It should be noted also that they are both very clear on putting the kid and their role as parents first and not intending to introduce step-parents to the mix even if they date.)

Yes, of course there will be oddities and challenges. There are in every family. Such an arrangement wouldn't be for everybody. But as far as I can tell the most abnormal thing about these two is they have a five-month-old and didn't mention sleep deprivation once.

(Hat-tip Proud Parenting.)

More by this author:

Gay Babies: The New Man-Purse?

Shannon LC Cate — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:30:00 GMT

Here's s new twist on two old themes: One, the theme of "children-as-status-symbol" and two, the theme of "gays-with-babies-are-conservative."

To give you a fair warning, both drive me nuts.

Anyone who thinks a child is a status symbol (for anyone besides a multiple-nanny-employing movie star, that is) does not have children. Much as I'd love to dress my kids in designer clothes and parade them down Michigan Avenue on a boutique shopping spree, this just doesn't work in real life, where kids spit up, diapers blow out, potty training takes the better part of a year and I don't have time to separate my darks from my whites from my pastels when I try to tackle the monster laundry pile in the corner of my room.

I think this kids-as-status-symbol thing is a misunderstanding of the shopping habits of new parents. Yes, sometimes, if we are so privileged to afford it, we spend more than we should on fancy strollers, nursery furnishings, baby shoes and high chairs. A friend of mine bought beautiful rosewood baby spoons for her only child, looking to eschew plastic. How my heart longed for those spoons when she emailed me a link to their online supplier! But by then, I was on my second kid and had realized that I could just use my regular teaspoons to feed the baby without buying anything new or using plastic.

New babies are exciting. We adore them, however much they spit up and their diapers blow out and we want to lavish signs of love upon them. In our late-capitalist society, signs of love are often materialistic. How many engaged or married women do you know who don't sport a diamond engagement ring? This doesn't make a husband a status-symbol (well, most of the time).

Now here's Kevin Sessums, at the Daily Beast claiming that a biologically related child is the new status symbol for gay men.

Sessums go into a brief explanation of how gay men arrive at biologically related children, exploring the details of sperm-washing (for men who are HIV+) and surrogacy contracts. And yes, all that really is expensive. But given the opening scene of Sessums's essay--a "drive back to Manhattan from our summer places in Provincetown" what of spending $150,000 to have a baby? It's still a bargain compared to either a summer place in P'Town or a Manhattan apartment.

Mind you, I am an adoptive, lesbian mother who never gave a moment's thought to getting pregnant. (Okay, I confess, my partner and I whimsically created a fantasy sperm-donor dream team, but we were only kidding around while googling gay-friendly adoption agencies.) I have a strong personal prejudice in favor of adoption of existing children over laborious creation of new ones. But even so, to each her (or his, as the case may be) own. Everyone has a long and complicated list of reasons for parenting and how to go about it. I'm glad the technology is available to help people go the biological route when that turns out to be the best option for them. And given the difficulty and long waits prospective gay dads--especially single ones--often face when trying to adopt, biology might be a good option for those who can afford it.

But I am more bothered than anything else by Sessums's simplistic (and frequently heard) claim that seeking "the right to marry, the right to serve in the military, the right to be ordained as ministers, the right to have or adopt children, the right to be in the Boy Scouts" automatically makes queers conservative. He posits his history "as a 52-year-old homosexual man who marched against Anita Bryant and survived the AIDS epidemic" in imagined opposition to these queer conservatives.

I don't know when this old chestnut is going to die. I sometimes think it's just generational bitterness about "kids these days"--a new possibility in a new queer world in which our elders have been out long enough to geeze about the good old days when no one wanted to marry or have kids, because they were too busy dancing the night away at 54.

And that's a blessing. In spite of it all, I'm grateful that Sessums survived the AIDS epidemic, and I'm glad the generation to follow him has the kind of miraculous medical technology that allows them to live normal and even reproductive lives with HIV. I'm grateful we have the luxury of these internecine squabbles because it means that our existence--including our history--is being acknowledged.

But don't write me off as a non-radical just because I'm raising children. Maybe no one in Sessums's day wanted to marry or have children, or maybe no one could imagine ever having that option anyway. In another generation, my kids will be part of the insider queer conversation, as some adult children of GLBT parents are already. And the conversation will be richer and the movement for justice will be more powerful because of that.

Image: In the interest of full disclosure, that's my adopted daughter and her non-biologically-related but gay godfather!

Clay Aiken Comes Out

Brett Singer — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 01:18:00 GMT

It's official – Clay Aiken is a gay dad.

In news that surprises absolutely no one, the AP is reporting that yes, Virginia (or is that Mary?) Clay Aiken is a gay man. Claymates everywhere are in tears.

The story highlights from CNN?

· "American Idol" runner-up and infant son are on new People cover
· "I cannot raise a child to lie or hide things," Aiken says
· Aiken made his debut on Broadway in "Spamalot"

So. The first two, OK. On the cover of People, interesting (especially since it was previously reported that no one wanted that picture because it was too "creepy"). Can't lie while raising a child, yes, right, newsworthy quote. And…he was on Broadway. This is relevant because…?

UPDATE: Famecrawler has the People Mag cover which features the headline, "Yes, I'm Gay." Pulitzer material, methinks.

Source/image: CNN

Read more:

Naked Harry Potter pics hit the web

Ricky Martin's Twins Photos - Wanna See?

SHOCKER: Clay Aiken Is Gay! (Cute Pic Of His Baby Too)

Clay Aiken Welcomes Son!!!

First Picture of Clay Aiken's Son

Arkansas Evangelist's compound raided, six children removed

Enormous baby sculpture

Who needs a uterus? Or a partner?

Miriam Axel-Lute — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 23:40:00 GMT

Perhaps this will finally kill the use of the miserable phrase "female-headed household" to mean "single parent."

Reporting on a trend that says more to me about changing gender roles than anything Sarah Palin has done, the New York Times reports that like single women who feel their biological clocks ticking have done for decades, more and more single men—gay and straight—are choosing single fatherhood, through adoption or surrogacy.

The Times reports that they face discrimination in their quest: They tend to be on the bottom of the preference list for birth parents, egg donors, or surrogates (I wonder how single straight men compare to queer couples in those cases. My guess is it depends where you are). And apparently some face women trying to "help" or "correct" their parenting in public too. (This reminds me of my favorite GabbyBaby shirt: "Please don't ask my daddy if he's 'babysitting.' Thanks. xoxo")

I for one suspect that many single men do start off a little behind in the knowing what the hell to do with a baby department, just because of what we as a culture see fit to expect men and women to know, but this doesn't bother me. They'll catch up just fine, just like the rest of us catch up with all the things we didn't learn from growing up in massive extended families caring for tons of younger siblings and cousins.

What I want to know, though, is how many of these single fathers are going to try to breastfeed.

Photo by divine in the daily.

"30 Days" Not Long Enough to Change One Woman's Mind About Gay Parenting

Erin White — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:30:00 GMT

As an old writing teacher of mine used to say, just because something really happened doesn't mean it's a good story. This pretty much sums up my feelings about reality TV, and is at least half the reason that the "Same-Sex Parenting" installment of Morgan Spurlock's 30 Days show sat on my DVR for nearly a week before I could bring myself to watch it.

I was also afraid of how upset it would make me.

The show follows Kati, an Orange County Mormon and adoptive mother of two, as she travels across the U.S. to a farmhouse outside Ann Arbor, Michigan where she has agreed to spend 30 days living with Tom, Dennis, and their four adopted children.

Boy, is Kati ever nervous! How will the gays treat her? Will they take it personally when she tells them that she thinks their children would be better off living on the streets than with them? Will the lesbian mom she meets get defensive when Kati tells her she's truly sorry that she's been denied all contact with her child because she has no parental rights, but that she could have solved her own problem by not having a child in the first place?

Suffice it to say, Kati does not form lasting friendships with Tom and Dennis. She's angry and sad about this, and confused about why they can't just "agree to disagree." (Tom points out that actively working to dismantle his relationship and family isn't just disagreeing with him.)

While it would be easy to make Kati the villian in this story (and I think I will just go ahead and do that), I also hold Spurlock accountable for much of what is offensive about this show. While he gives airtime to Dawn Stefanowicz, author of Out From Under, and Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council, the only gay or lesbian individual he speaks with directly is the head of Pacific Reproductive Services, a sperm bank in San Fransciso. And it's less of an interview and more of a Mr. Rogers-esque field trip during which Spurlock gets to make the obligatory straight man jokes about how great it would be to get paid for doing something he does anyway. So original! There is a whole boatload of research showing that children raised by gay and lesbian parents are happy, healthy, and well-adjusted. But not one data point made its way into this show.

By the end of the show everyone is in tears and Kati is on her way back to California, relieved that her deeply stressful and lonely 30 days as the only homophobe in the land are over. If this 30 Days experiment proves anything, it's that people's bigotry and prejudice can't be changed simply by getting to know a few good gays. Real change of heart requires something a little closer to home. Which is why I'm praying that one of Kati's sons turns out to be gay.