MCN Blogs
Kim Voynar

By Kim Voynar Voynar@moviecitynews.com

Who Would Make Fun of a Little Kid in a Halloween Costume?

Apparently some people would.

I just read this post from this mom whose five-year-old son loves Scooby-Doo and wanted to dress like Daphne for Halloween. And he looks adorable and rocks the hell out of that orange wig, am I right? Go check it out and read her story, I’ll wait for you ….

Back?

Okay, so. According to her blog, this family lives somewhere in the Midwest, so quite likely her liberal options are somewhat limited. You could argue that part of the problem here is that this mom chooses to put her son in a Christian preschool where she is likely to have to deal with women like this regularly, and then put him in a position of being bullied and having his feelings hurt by “allowing” him to dress as he wanted for Halloween anyhow.

And you could argue that this is a private Christian preschool and that as such, the people who send their kids there have a right to advocate for their faith beliefs, and that the Christian women in question here were genuinely acting out of “concern” for the eternal souls of the kid (who they apparently felt was being recruited by the homosexuals, who I guess they think targeted this five-year-old and sent him the Daphne costume in order to force him to grow up to be a cross-dresser or transgendered person) and his mom (who they apparently think is implicit in allowing her son to be recruited by the gays). I have no doubt, there were some private conversations among the concerned Christian moms about what to do about this trouble-making liberal mother and her Daphne-dressing young son. Why? Because I grew up around people exactly like them.

And honestly, if it was me I probably wouldn’t, as a liberal, bisexual mama myself, have enrolled my kid in a Christian preschool to begin with, Midwest or not. I moved back to Oklahoma with my kids a few years ago and moved back a year later when I realized that I didn’t want to raise my kids in a conservative culture so dominated by fundamentalist Christianity. BUT. These women who confronted this mom about her son’s Halloween costume aren’t just part of the problem when it comes to gay kids getting bullied — THEY ARE THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM.

I am not anti-Christian — I consider myself to be a Christian-leaning Unitarian — but I feel more at home in liberal Seattle than Oklahoma now. Although we had a wonderful Unitarian church in Oklahoma City that was our stronghold of liberalism in a sea of conservative Christian fundamentalism, and had a lot of great friends there, the environment in general in Oklahoma City is not what you would call gay-friendly.

My kids are getting their religious upbringing at the Unitarian Universalist church on the Eastside of Seattle. At our church my teen daughter, who came out openly as a lesbian earlier this year, can be herself without fear. And I am thankful every day that I made the decision to move back to Seattle, because if we still lived in Oklahoma her teen years would be much, much harder for her. And I would fear for her being hurt by people like the women at this little boy’s preschool, and by other kids her age who have been raised by parents like this.

And yet, there are times when I feel like I moved back to Seattle in part because I do not like conflict and it’s easier to live here. In a sense, I gave up my hometown to the fundamentalists and abandoned it and my liberal friends there for greener Seattle pastures, rather than stay and fight the good fight alongside them. So in a sense, I feel that this mom, by staying in the Midwest and raising her kids there with liberal ideals and standing up to the fundamentalist Christians and challenging their deeply held beliefs, is a far braver person than I. And I applaud her for standing beside her son and showing him that he is okay, that his choices are okay, even if a few narrow-minded women got their panties in a twist about his costume.

After all, these are parents who are teaching their kids from a tender age to judge others by how they dress or how they look, teaching their kids that they have a right to stick their fundamentalist Christian noses into other peoples lives, people who are so convinced they are the only ones right, they are obliged to tell this woman — confront this woman! — about her five year old kid’s Halloween costume. I think that Jesus would have looked at this kid’s beautiful, shining face in his awesome costume and loved him as he is, whatever that turns out to be.

The funny thing (funny stupid, not funny ha-ha) is that if this kid had dressed up like Fred instead, complete with that orange ascot, he would have REALLY looked gay and none of those women would have raised an eyebrow because it was a “boy” costume.

Be Sociable, Share!

5 Responses to “Who Would Make Fun of a Little Kid in a Halloween Costume?”

  1. Km713 says:

    Here’ s the elephant no one is talking about: While those women were out of line, and kids should be able to dress however they want at Halloween- he ultimately DID NOT WANT TO. He had been expressing reservations for days! And did she have an honest conversation with him when he said he was worried kids would laugh? NO, she said the only reason they would laugh is because his costume was “clever.” Manipulation in the first degree. Does she live under a rock? I say she knew darn well he was going to face trouble (who is so clueless about the world we live in to not know that), and instead of acknowledging that and asking if ti was worth it to him, she said everything would be fine. Why? Because she WANTED him to have a hard time, so she could post about it on her blog. I think people are so eager to have a champion for fairness, that they are missing the fact that she was completely unfair to the one person she owes it to, her son. She threw him to the wolves so she could play “enlightened mom” on her blog. I’m not buying it, and I hope people see her actions for what they are soon. (FWIW- my 3 yr old boy is allowed to wear his sisters’ dress ups in public. I think it’s fine. But if he ever expresses a moment’s misgivings, there’ no way I’m going to force him to wear a dress.)

  2. Bad Hair Days says:

    Km, your concern is misplaced. The boy feared of being ridiculed by his peers. He wasn’t. Instead he was ridiculed by grown up women who should have known better. Not his mother wanted to make a statement on the shoulders of her boy. The other women did.

  3. kilroy says:

    Bingo. km713 said it perfectly. It requires self restraint to nurture growing minds without pushing or pulling.

  4. Km713 says:

    Bad Hair, you are correct that the other women should have minded their own business, but look at the timeline. She herself says that he was having misgivings for days leading up to Halloween. What did she do when he expressed his concerns? She LIED to him. The other women did something wrong, no doubt, but she did something wrong first. And she’s the one who owes him the best.

  5. Matt Zuke says:

    “Fred instead, complete with that orange ascot, ”

    Well, yeah, the orange ascot does represent 9-10 Kinsey scale, but it also represents keeping it in the closet, which is really what the complaint is all about. Fred maintained a “relationship” with Daphene just to keep up appearances and to enhance social networking options. You can easily imagine them going to parties, and her having to leave on her own because he was “out with the boys” so to speak.

    This explains Shaggie, who had this total Bull in the Heather vibe going for him. Likely someone who drove her home after being ditched by Fred following his own “interests”, somewhat longing for someone that would at least muster up some enthusiasm.

    Had the kid dressed like Thelma, that would be even worse. Having no sexual identity what so ever suggests abuse.

Politics

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon