Phyllida Archer-Dowd on Teletubbies

Originally published March 5, 1999, in Comics Buyer’s Guide #1320

Hello. Phyllida Archer-Dowd here. As one of the founders of the Children’s Protectorate Council, I have once again been allotted space in But I Digress. This is, of course, a self-serving action on Mr. David’s part, since he has become so enmeshed in his stage activities that he has little enough time to attend to his proper writing duties. Indeed, it is not surprising to me that he was drawn to 1776, a musical “entertainment” that degrades our founding fathers, rife with profanity and jokes about such riotous subjects as urination, lust, and prostitution.

The last time I was involved with this column, I wrote of Mulan, a Disney animated feature whose supposed female role model in fact broke at least half a dozen holy commandments. The film is now out on videotape . I watched this tale of a Chinese legend on home video and, curiously, half an hour after I finished it, it was as if I had not watched it at all. Would that that had truly been the case, because there’s no improvement in the transition. Everything, from the Satanesque worshipping of deceased ancestors rather than the one true God, to Mulan’s becoming the first female in Disney history to murder not just one, but thousands of opponents, has made the transition to small screen and is no less repellant for the change in venue. An unsurpassed Disney body count, all blood shed at a female’s delicate hand.

At least we have some degree of proper presentation of appropriate subject matter in the film, Prince of Egypt. Whereas Mulan was simply a borrowed copy, Prince of Egypt will have a valued place in the Archer-Dowd household, I can assure you.

But I’m not here to discuss that today, having already gone over it at length in a previous column. No, I am here to praise the actions of Brother Falwell… and, I must admit, to take a bow and some credit for myself.

You see, it was my organization, the CPC, which ripped the cover off the Teletubbies and outed Tinky Winky. I rang up brother Falwell the other month and pointed out the sinister messages being sent by the supposedly harmless creature. Never has there been a less subtle advertisement for the gay mentality and life style.

I brought this to the Reverend’s attention, and the very next thing I knew, Brother Falwell had gone public with my private musings, and the Associated Press had picked up the story, which said in part:

Under a headline that reads “Parents Alert: Tinky Winky Comes Out of the Closet,” an article in the February edition of the National Liberty Journal notes that Tinky Winky has the voice of a boy yet carries a purse.

“He is purple—the gay-pride color; and his antenna is shaped like a triangle—the gay-pride symbol,” the story said. The paper is edited and published by Falwell.

Falwell contends the “subtle depictions” are intentional and in a statement issued Tuesday said, “As a Christian I feel that role modelling the gay lifestyle is damaging to the moral lives of children.”

To that, Brother Falwell, I can only add huzza, huzza. And when one considers the scandalous truth that one of the actors who plays the Teletubbies moonlighted as a male stripper, one cannot help but feel sorry over the moral decay prevalent in this supposedly harmless children’s show. Perhaps they should be honest and change the character’s name to Kinky-Winky.

The only problem is that, regretfully, Brother Falwell did not go nearly far enough. No, not nearly. The undercutting of our young people’s philosophical boundaries and morality has been a slow, steady erosion by the Hollywood elite (rife with homosexuality) for decades now. The only possible interpretation is that they are looking for recruits to their perverted cause, and are obtaining them through the most pernicious and vile means available: Going after young, impressionable children. The simple fact is that Tinky Winky is only the most obvious of these efforts, which is understandable. Teletubbies is a British-created television series and, as the sage Archie Bunker put it so well, “England is a fag country.” It’s actually appropriate that I opened this column mentioning 1776, because the fact is that if the stridently American heterosexual personality had not asserted itself some two hundred years ago, prompting us to break away, this would be a predominantly poofta nation by now.

There has been some discussion of the problem thus far. The flagrantly homosexual relationship between Bert and Ernie has been bandied about, and that Sainted Man, Dr. Wertham, turned the spotlight on the perverse relationship between Bruce Wayne and Dick Grayson. But this is such a pervasive problem and conspiracy that it is incumbent upon us to “out” further exploration of the topic in hopes of abolishing the danger to our youths’ moral underpinnings before it’s too late.

Let us be willing to accept the notion of talking animals as a staple of children’s television. One is inclined to consider such a phenomenon to be Satanist in nature, but I think it’s deeper than that. By cloaking rampant homosexuality in the guise of funny animals, the producers make such perverted activities seem harmless, even charming. For proof of that, one need look no further than the fact that there are virtually no happily married anthropomorphic characters (aside from the superb and wholesome Berenstain Bears, which doesn’t really count since it was adapted from a book series. I assure you that if the Bears were original-to-TV, there would be no mother figure and the brood would be raised by the Father Bear and his “good friend.”)

Instead, every major funny animal cartoon pairing is between two males who do nothing but spend all their time together. They never go on dates; indeed, females hardly seem to exist in their world. Furthermore, one is always tall while the other is short, thereby putting the latter’s eyeline squarely into the groin area of the former. Just a few examples:

Quick Draw McGraw and Babalooie. Imagine Quick Draw in his cheerful purple hat, and his occasional tendency to dress up in black with a mask as if he just came galloping in from the Christopher Street Halloween parade.

Secret Squirrel and Morocco Mole, rife with symbolism as Secret Squirrel–in a bizarre agglomeration of dominator and exhibitionist–goes about masked at all times and has an obsession with throwing open his trenchcoat at key moments in the “action.”

Tom and Jerry, a sicko sado-masochistic relationship that is so stripped down, they needn’t even bother to talk. What words, indeed, could possibly be required?

Yogi Bear and BooBoo. Taking a giant step forward for perversity, they’re actually depicted sleeping together on occasion (“hibernating,” naturally, is the cover story). BooBoo is probably the most pathetic of the homosexual pairings; his plaintive voice sounds so downtrodden, so utterly without hope, that one can only imagine a lengthy existence of submitting to Yogi’s appalling demands. A lifetime of flagrant lawbreaking combined with extensive forays into gluttony and sloth. Certainly Yogi feigns interest in Cindy now and again, but that’s likely just to torment the already tortured BooBoo further.

Rocky and Bullwinkle. Rocky, who is literally light in his non-existent loafers, speaking with a high-pitched female voice, and his “friend,” Bullwinkle, who is—in the best known running gag—constantly trying to out himself symbolically (“Watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat.”) At least Boris and Natasha are a male and female pairing and view each other with obvious affection (“Darlink”), but it’s undoubtedly no coincidence that they’re the villains.

And let us not even get into human hosts of TV shows. We must shudder if we dwell too long upon the overly neat, tidy, and obviously suspect persona created by Mister Rogers (who is, in real life, a minister yet! What was he thinking?) Or consider the grotesque relationship between Captain Kangaroo and Mister Moose, who is compelled to torment the Captain regularly by pelting him with his massive collection of balls.

The list could easily go on and on, and I suspect further examples are already occurring to you. This is children’s entertainment? These are the supposedly harmless individuals that we have turned the youth of America over to? What in God’s name have we been standing by and allowing to occur?

I can only applaud Brother Falwell’s bravery, particularly since the Hollywood establishment will no doubt orchestrate a massive disinformation campaign, designed to demean and undercut Brother Falwell’s stance and diminish him in the eyes of the public. I beg you, the perceptive readership of CBG, not to be fooled by the perverts’ attempts to cover their tracks and prevent their vast conspiracy from being revealed. Keep their recruitment campaigns out of decent households everywhere, and in the gutter where it belongs. People speak with concern of the graying of America? Of far greater moment is the gaying of America, and for that you need look no further than the Cartoon Network and this country’s long history of perverted entertainment.

I ask that such talented cartoon-involved individuals (and noted heterosexuals) as Paul Dini, or Mark Evanier take time from depressing superheroic dystopias or brainless Conan-esque barbarians and create instead series that focus on positive, uplifting, masculine and indisputably heterosexual characters. In that way, American youth can be salvaged from the morass of perversity into which the current Hollywood braintrust is plunging it.

(Phyllida Archer-Dowd can be written to at Second Age, Inc., PO Box 239, Bayport, NY 11705. And watch what you say.)