How a beloved children's cartoon turns fathers into mothers and what the Bible says about it

Blaze Media, By Jeremy Pryor, on October 6, 2024

https://www.theblaze.com/align/bluey-turns-fathers-into-mothers

Bluey's dad adores his kids. A conservative writer says that's unbiblical.
 The Friendly Atheist by Hemant Mehta on October 8, 2024

https://www.friendlyatheist.com/p/blueys-dad-adores-his-kids-a-conservative

The conversation opens with a discussion about a conservative writer, Jeremy Pryor, and his critique of the children's cartoon Bluey, focusing on the portrayal of the father figure. Pryor argues that the show reflects how modern society has removed all "manly" aspects of fatherhood. Cindy introduces the topic by discussing the article's outcry against the show, noting that it was featured in conservative media outlets. The debate begins by highlighting the absurdity of Pryor's stance, with the panelists collectively agreeing that attacking a children's cartoon for such reasons is a stretch. Kelley and Cynthia point out the frequent conservative attacks on children’s media over the years, referencing shows like Barney and Teletubbies.

Cynthia discusses how Pryor's appeal to tradition is a flawed argument. His belief that traditional gender roles should be preserved without question is based on a false premise that these roles are biologically fixed and beneficial. She dismantles Pryor’s assumption that such roles are inherently superior, noting that rigid gender roles have historically caused harm within families. Jonathan picks up on this theme, arguing that this conservative backlash is a desperate attempt to cling to a sense of privilege and outdated personal mythology. He observes that as society evolves toward equality, those invested in traditional gender roles feel left behind, often clinging to an imagined idealized past where men were strong and women submissive.

Kelley points out the absurdity of Pryor's claim about an "objective" ideal for fatherhood and motherhood, noting that such ideals are subjective and influenced by cultural norms. The idea that there could be one "correct" version of parenthood is questioned, and the panelists collectively reject this notion.

Cindy continues by questioning the supposed biological basis of gendered behaviors, mocking the idea that boys should wear blue and girls pink as something rooted in biology.

Jonathan dives into the hypocrisy of conservatives like Pryor, who decry the influence of symbols in media on children's minds, all while the church itself has used symbols for centuries to shape behavior. He calls out this projection of guilt onto others, a tactic to distract from their own indoctrination efforts.

He emphasizes that conservatives often accuse others of what they themselves are guilty of, particularly when they cannot defend their outdated beliefs. Jonathan concludes that such people are too emotionally invested in their beliefs and social standing to change, even when confronted with facts.

Cindy points out that Pryor’s complaints about the show’s title character being blue as a subversive gender statement are entirely misplaced. Bluey is a blue heeler dog, not a comment on gender roles.

Cynthia shares an anecdote about her own upbringing, where her father played a central, loving role in her life, defying the stereotypical “manly” behaviors that conservatives like Pryor seem to promote.

The panel concludes by agreeing that conservatives’ fixation on rigid gender roles is not only outdated but harmful, and that individuals should not be defined by their beliefs.

The Non-Prophets, Episode 23.42.1 featuring Kelley Laughlin, Jonathan Roudabush, Cindy Plaza and Cynthia McDonald

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-non-prophets--3254964/support.