New Yorker magazine alert thread

happy to defer to anyone better represented by the cover than I am but yeah: what Bert & Ernie stand in for on the cover is a couple who are a couple at home & can't/haven't come out publicly, being affectionate privately. this seems like a pretty good & funny read on them & on a big thing one could hope is changing with the news. it isn't untrue thatrepresentation iof coupescouples is important or is frequently subject to patronising interpretations but this is neat & exists in its own world successfully enough to be seem too terrible imo

phone; should read representation of couples

would've had less trouble with Big Bird and Snuffleupagus tbh

freddie has this.... thing about "liberal representations of gay people"

it is like a lot of freddies things about 1/3 accurate and 2/3ds projection

"My father, a theater professor, introduced my siblings and me to queer people throughout our childhood, and the existence and acceptance of them was an assumed part of the landscape. And these people were queer, in the old sense, not the sanitized, sexless TV gays that are the dominant image of homosexuality today. "

should have been beavis & butthead

in all fairness, they have lived together for decades. they probably are pretty sexless by now. hahahaha! #rayromano4ever

it would have been more on point to show E&B working on a joint tax return

"Ernie! There are people here from The New Yorker magazine!"

i think freddie suffers from a problem endemic to the liberal community; he's more principled than he is coherent.

"Bert and Ernie clearly love each other. But does Ernie suck Bert’s cock? I don't think so."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/06/28/bert_and_ernie_on_new_yorker_cover_for_gay_marriage_a_terrible_way_to_commemorate.html

a lotta "thoughts" out there about this. #chooseyourbattles

#crazyforhashtagstoday

"Bert and Ernie clearly love each other. But does Ernie suck Bert’s cock? I don't think so."

well he does now, in my mind, and I am really not happy about that slate.com

http://www.authenticmanprogram.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/bert-ernie-banana.png

they aren't even the gayest muppets. you got kermit, grover, the count...

statler & waldorf

Dr. Honeydew and Beaker

ernie has never struck me as gay. bert, yes. maybe ernie was an old high school friend and he just ended up with bert and bert likes having help with the rent? seems more likely.

So Ernie's just a boy who helps with the rent. A "rentboy," if you will.

statler & waldorf

Yeah, if anybody in the Henson universe is a gay couple, it's these two.

Are there any openly gay couples on Sesame Street? Honest question. At this point there should be.

they aren't even the gayest muppets. you got kermit, grover, the count...

― scott seward, Friday, June 28, 2013 1:13 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I always though kermit was just afraid of sex

there is a character with a parent in prison, which is both awesome and crushingly depressing in what it represents

did you ever see the very special episode prequel where the muppet dad kills grover

tbh i'm just glad it wasn't peppermint patty and marcie

elmo was probably behind the whole thing

i can see both sides of the "should bert & ernie be appropriated like this" coin enough that what really annoys me about the new yorker cover is that a) they're admiring a shot of the ENTIRE supreme court and b) that the appropriating is being done by the new yorker

I realize it's not totally my place to say, but this ultimately comes off as another Thing To Be Vaguely Outraged About On The Internet

i.e. blog fodder

blfodder, as you say

imo the cartoon character (or puppet) that will retroactively be written as a "gay character" will probably be Bart Simpson, not Bert and Ernie

Like, a liberal, pro-gay rights publication celebrated a victory for gay rights with a humorous cover that may have been just like a hair off in tone and allegedly perpetuates a stereotype of gay people that almost no one, especially liberals, really has.

that people still get their news from network TV in 2013?

btw, you know who else codes as gay to me? that Neil Patrick Harris fella

what really annoys me about the new yorker cover is that a) they're admiring a shot of the ENTIRE supreme court

That aspect hadn't quite occurred to me, but I do find it weird that they're looking at a still photo superimposed on a TV screen.

what do you mean?

getting pretty deep into objections to an illustration of sesame street characters at this point, does anybody have issues with the decor, model of tv

just wait for my forthcoming gawker piece addressing exactly that

OK, I have no evidence that it's a still photo per se. But it seems like an image that would be unlikely to appear on a TV screen except as a small graphic in the corner of the screen in a news broadcast. (Obviously, it was chosen as a symbol to communicate in the easiest possible manner what the illustration is about.)

cancelling my subscription

Jesus Christ you guys

wait since this is the new yorker thread are people annoyed that people are annoyed with the cover just defensive readers?

my interpretation of the cover is that bert and ernie are anti-gay bigots. this is why they're holding onto each other in the dark, retreating from "the light" of the frightening new world that doesn't discriminate quite so much and which they don't understand. they are watching a dvd that contains a slide show of supreme court images because they no longer understand how to have fun.

lololol

Check out the comment section on the New Yorker page for a whole lot more of people taking this kinda funny, kinda sweet image way too seriously.

the inside cover is the same shot from the other side, and ernie and bert have the faces of roberts and scalia

sometimes the modern mainstream left feels like a sensitivity contest

Brave is the man who calls out this farce