Michael Rosen, queering children’s literature

[LiterallyProblematic]

I could cry.
twitter.com/wwwritingclub/status/1217210625153290240?s=20

In case first link doesn’t work
twitter.com/wwwritingclub/status/1217210625153290240?s=20

:(

I'm crying with you, Literally

Doesn't surprise me at all. He's always been so left-leaning as to be practically horizontal. I'm thinking in particular of his appalling defence of Corbyn et al in the anti-semitism scandal. This is right up his street.

not everything about queering children's literature is about TRA propaganda. it is right and appropriate for there to be more representation of non heteronormative relationships in kids books. there should be stories where the princess is rescued by another princess, or where some characters have two mums or two dads without that being the focus (or title) of the book.

I have no idea how woke bloke Rosen is, but it seems a bit of a leap to assume that this is all about filling books with sexist ideas about making sure bodies and pronouns match clothing style.

Kick ass princesses and kids with two mums are a dime a dozen in the kid lit world already.

Of course, I’ve never ever come across any diverse characters in children’s books. Never ever ever.
He loves to talk over female authors on that Radio 4 book programme.

He loves to talk over female authors

Oh surprise.

A disdain for women and girls does seem to be pre-requisite for 'queering'.

It's no surprise - he's a professor at Goldsmiths, where students would like women to be reeducated in Gulags.

Why is there this obsession with trying to ram LGBT into primary schools? Why are people wanting to introduce sexuality to pre-sexual children? It's an adult agenda that should have no place in children's lives.

That's the question we should always go back to Sun

'Why?'

there should be stories where the princess is rescued by another princess

Like Frozen, you mean?

Why are people wanting to introduce sexuality to pre-sexual children? It's an adult agenda that should have no place in children's lives.

This.

Because if children think a child with 2 dads is normal and something they see in other places, not just one child but in books and tv, then they are less likely to bully that child.

And as they grow into their sexuality they will not think themselves abnormal if they would rather be in. 2 dad situation

Like lots of things , nothing is simple black and white, in this case it's about having age appropriate information, which is where things often go wrong of course

Why are people wanting to introduce sexuality to pre-sexual children? It's an adult agenda that should have no place in children's lives.

This is so fair. So no more talking about mums and dads, no more stories with families, no more role-playing 'house' with a mum and/or dad and children, no more fairytales, no books with weddings in at all, nothing in history that talks about wives or children.

Or is it just gay and lesbian couples that are 'too adult' for children?

It is possible to explore sexuality without discussing sex acts. Heterosexuality is a sexuality, it's not just the default.

I think the problem with the term "queering the classroom" is that "queering" essentially talks about gender identity - and the less we encourage children to obsess on their gender identity, the better. It's encouraging a completely narcissistic and naval-gazing culture amongst our young people.

"Such and such has two dads" type books have been in our classrooms for years.

I hardly think the children’s books will be discussing the bedroom antics of the two mums or dads...this is nothing to do with sexualising children’s literature, it’s about representing a wider range of people to reflect the diversity that is present in modern society.

He's interviewing students who have written about LGBT issues. It seems to me he's interested in people's views and encouraging debate.
<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/radical-women-hold-feminist-jamboree-matchwomens-festival&ved=2ahUKEwiUiuupiYXnAhWPSxUIHWxTBKgQFjADegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw01_jNnPNtHOvTqWexr2lXq&cshid=1579073294210" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Morning Star link He attends feminist debates too.

What exactly is the aim here?

And for the record - we had this in the 70s! I remember a book in the school library about a kid with two dads.

The current trend seems to be more adult centred rather than child. Adult themes in a child’s world.

"Such and such has two dads" type books have been in our classrooms for years.

indeed. but how many ordinary story books which just happen to mention in passing dad Sam and dad Tom without it being the focus or title of the story? the existence of books like Heather Has Two Mummies is only a very basic starting point - we have only created a culture where kids can grow up and realise they are gay and not feel weird about it if there are numerous pervasive and positive examples in all kinds of media not just of token "look this is how to be inclusive" didactic stories which are still quite "othering" as they make a big deal of the difference.

how many children's authors sit down to write a story that isn't a story about LGBTQ inclusivity and just happen to make the central character kid have a non-het couple as their parents, not to make a point or be a major part of the storyline but just because it's a perfectly reasonable possibility?

Can someone explain the issue to me as I'm not sure I fully see it.

I think there's a grneral problem with language confusion (not particularly on this thread, just in general) between 'queer' as a catch-all term for LGBT and 'queering' as a shorthand for 'transgressing boundaries being axiomatically good'.

I have no problem with age-appropriate LGBT representation in children's books, so long as it's not gaslighty like the recent usborne book. I would have a problem with other bits of the alphabet soup (eg 'kink') appearing in children's books. I certainly have a problem with 'transgressing boundaries being axiomatically good' in kids' books.

The words 'queering' and 'children' never belong together, imo. I do not support a blurring of boundaries around children.

@Apache Yes, that would be the right way to do it. I think books like that would still be marketed a certain way though (and are unlikely to get published as the message is not deemed strong enough).

Yeah ilthere needs to be a much wider representation of gay relationships in kids books. More Tabby Mc Tat and less Heather has Two Mommies. Totally agree about the no kink though.

how many children's authors sit down to write a story that isn't a story about LGBTQ inclusivity and just happen to make the central character kid have a non-het couple as their parents, not to make a point or be a major part of the storyline but just because it's a perfectly reasonable possibility?

It wasn't literature, but this is basically what happened in Doctor Who under Russel T Davies.

I agree with @Sunkisses - Children aren't sexual and shouldn't be being encouraged to be either. It's abuse in my opinion.

"Queering the classroom" has nothing to do with "having more gay and lesbian characters in children's books". Having gay and lesbian characters in children's books is obviously fine.

Queer theory is about subverting mores, breaking boundaries and destroying the normative. None of which is appropriate in material directed at primary school children.

You'll notice the other panellist is the author of the Usborne book we are currently critiquing for valorising the emotional abuse of a child by making it the caretaker of the feelings of its parent. The kind of boundary queer theory breaks that shouldn't be broken.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3792431-Usbourne-publishing-calling-mums-transphobes