I'm straddling the fence

If you're a Social Media follower, you'll likely have seen the emotional reactions to a variety of situations surrounding the #cancelculture decisions of late. I will stand up and be counted that I am completely straddling the fence on this, aghast that the entertainment of my youth is being ripped apart using today's politically correct standards, while also acknowledging that the proponents of some change have a good point. 

What is the right way to feel? I guess it's case by case.

According to dictionary.com (CLICK), "Cancel culture refers to the popular practice of withdrawing support for (canceling) public figures and companies after they have done or said something considered objectionable or offensive. Cancel culture is generally discussed as being performed on social media in the form of group shaming."

In case you missed them, some of my generation's childhood heroes have borne the brunt of emotional attacks from those who feel strongly that the messages conveyed are culturally offside. From Dr Seuss' depictions of racial stereotypes, to rape-culture messages construed by Pepe Le Pew, to the degendering of Mr + Mrs Potato Head, to the inclusivity of new Barbie bodies and physical features, to condemnation of Miss Piggy's spousal abuse laden Karate chops of her beloved Kermit the frog, the pop culture icons of our adolescence are squarely under the microscope.

I'm not sure what started it all, but some Internet research reveals that while some are the result of a cyber-swell of finger pointing, others are self-imposed, likely a result of a "we'll do it to us before they do it to us" ideal. The six books that Dr. Seuss Enterprises discontinued are “And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street,” “If I Ran the Zoo,” “McElligot’s Pool,” “On Beyond Zebra!,” “Scrambled Eggs Super!,” and “The Cat’s Quizzer.” None of them are currently available for sale from many retailers online or the official Dr. Seuss website. None of them made the USA TODAY Best-Selling Books list. CLICK

I'll be perfectly honest, my own children were raised on a steady diet of Dr Seuss, with my son in particular loving the zany, wacky world the books created. Now that the issue is flapping in the breeze, I can recall a twinge of discomfort when we read "If I ran the zoo" but I don't recall reading the others. When the announcement was mainstream, the cadre of keyboard warriors condemning "The Cat in the hat" and "Horton hears a Who" for perceived transgressions ... that I DON'T agree with TBH ... that are damaging young minds of today, created passionate support on both sides of the argument.

Lost in all of this is the notion that if you don't like what a book teaches your children, then choose to not purchase it or read it with your child. If Dr Seuss Enterprises wishes to voluntarily withdraw titles because they feel they now see parts of the book are counter to the company's ideals, then who am I to argue. What was tolerated in past times is no excuse for continuing to allow outright prejudice or racism to continue. I draw the line at literature censorship though, and do not in any way, shape, or form support a vocal minority making choices for the masses.

In my venture into the wormhole of the Internet, I found out that Hasbro Toys, one of the world's largest toy producers, announced the removal of binary gender labels on their iconic Mr Potato Head and his family. "Hasbro is making sure all feel welcome in the Potato Head world by officially dropping the Mr. from the Mr. Potato Head brand name and logo to promote gender equality and inclusion," the company said. The rebranding for the modern (??) family will invite kids to create their own Potato Head family with two large (gender non-specific) potato bodies, a small potato body, and 42 accessories. Not to mess the a good thing, Hasbro will continue to produce the Mr and Mrs versions, in the event that your family is less sensitive to this particular issue. CLICK This one is a complete "Meh" for me. I support the need for toys to represent a wide variety of familial situations and applaud Hasbro for allowing the consumer to vote with their wallets be continuing the "old" line.

Barbie Dolls have generated controversy since her introduction in 1959. The creator, Ruth Handler, based Barbie’s body on a German doll called Lilli, a prostitute gag gift handed out at bachelor parties ... How's that for a mind-blower!  Her proportions were designed accordingly. The misogynistic boardroom of 1959 laughed Handler out of the room insisting that nobody would want to play with a doll with breasts. Would you like a steaming heap o' crow fellas? Mattel Toys hopes that new dolls with diverse body types, new skin tones and hair textures introduced recently, will more closely reflect the changes in Barbie demands around the world. Adding three new body types is sure to irritate some, and picking out the terms petite, tall and curvy, while translating them into dozens of languages without causing offense took months. Some young owner will strip curvy Barbie and try to put original Barbie’s clothes on her and find not everything will Velcro shut, possibly prompting child-powered fits. Exasperated parents calling Mattel to lodge a complaint will find they have set up a separate help line just to deal with Project Dawn complaints. CLICK

Did I miss something? My own daughter had a host of Barbies plus numerous outfits, so I feel qualified to offer an opinion, but she was absorbed in the Barbie world well before she recognized that post-puberty females come in a variety of shapes. While applaud Mattel for "modernizing" Barbie, it would seem to me that the effort was Herculean, leading to a host of new costs that will be happily passed onto the consumer ... like a grandpa version of this guy ... God willing.

Now Social Media's keyboard warriors are bleating that if the love-struck Le Pew is cancelled for inappropriate behaviour, then Miss Piggy should be too. To be fair Miss Piggy’s behaviour has been known to be rather problematic, but it’s all part of her shtick. Her persistent sexual harassment of Kermit the Frog, karate chopping of various characters, and quick-trigger temper means that this diva is certainly no picture of innocence. Disney+, who bought the rights to The Muppets, now has a disclaimer, “This program includes negative depictions and/or mistreatment of people or cultures. These stereotypes were wrong then and are wrong now. Rather than remove this content, we want to acknowledge its harmful impact, learn from it and spark conversation to create a more inclusive future together.” CLICK

IMHO, the purpose of the Muppets, and entertainment like it, is to make light of ridiculous situations by forcing a hyperbole of society in order to promote giggling or outright guffaws. If Miss Piggy's narcissistic demands for attention are deemed censor worthy, how long will it be before the Swedish Chef's stereotypical mumblings fall prey to the chopping block? What about Oscar the Grouch's potential for damaging young psyches with his lack of empathy and self-control? How many still view Cookie Monster's gluttony as grin-growing antics and can't get their head wrapped around his conversion to Veggie Monster? 

How much is too much? Of that, I'm not sure, but I do feel strongly that all of these characters were born out of the intention to make people laugh ... young people, in particular. While I support some of the changes that were simply a reflection of society's biases and transgressions of the past, casting the blanket of criticism across all "modern" sources of humour is unnerving in the least, and downright dangerous in it's boiled down form.

Yep, firmly straddling the fence.