I grew up straddled among three cultures; each of them separated by their own language. I subsequently arrived in the States in the fifth grade. During my education in Puerto Rico and later in Florida, they introduced me to fairy tales like any other child. In Puerto Rico, we read these Disney storybooks with a mini record in a sleeve in the back. We played the records too; they were the size of 45’s but played back at 33. Initially, I wondered if had indeed first heard these in Spanish. However, I then remembered the name ‘Cenicienta’, which is the Spanish version of Cinderella.
The words ‘happily ever after’ mark the prototypical ending to fairy tales. That said, children naturally understand the implication of those words when referred to Snow White and Prince Charming when the story ends. It means that the young couple gets married and lives a life of horizontal bliss. Not having actual jobs, Snow White’s screams of ecstasy fill the towers of the castle on a nightly basis, sometimes during the day too. They got married; this is completely permissible. The only real question is whether the young couple prefers missionary or doggie style.
This is, of course, completely absurd. While the above may accurately describe a young couple under the same circumstances, it does not describe the ending to this story nor is it even implied. They wrote these stories to be appropriate for children. Even if Snow White does prefer doggie style, its mere mention is not age appropriate.
Fairy tales speak to a sanitized truth
Being an engineer, we willfully ignore entire collections of details. We sneer about point masses, perfectly frictionless surfaces, and perfectly elastic or inelastic collisions. None of these occur in nature, but it simplifies the problem. Of course, imperfect solutions to problems permeate other fields. We live in an off-the-rack world.
Fairy tales speak to magical and imaginary tales that defy the laws of physics. We intentionally gloss over other details of the story. The characters seldom deal with real world problems, like finances or health struggles. We understand why that happens; these stories inspire. Sometimes we tell these stories to enforce an ideal, much like we did with the Tortoise and the Hare. Often times though, these are just to occupy a child’s mind and maybe to allow them to imagine and dream. To that end, the writers sanitize these tales.
These fantastic stories span our childhood imagination. We learn about envy as portrayed by Snow White’s stepmother. Cinderella teaches us humility. While these are tales of love, they are told from a vantage that children can understand. Children understand fondness and companionship. Furthermore, they comprehend the idea of a lifetime partnership, not necessarily one that you’re born into but one which you will choose. They look at pictures and listen to words and empathize with the characters, as they should with a well-written story. All of this is appropriate for a child’s mind.
The fairy tale reimagined
In 1977, I was lucky enough to watch a little film in the theater by the name of Star Wars. It opened up the imagination in ways that didn’t think was possible. For those of you who are enthusiasts, you’ll understand precisely what I mean. For those of you are indifferent to Star Wars, I quietly weep for you. Many will classify this film as science fiction; however, IMDB lists it as fantasy. I only discovered this a few years ago. While I would personally classify it as both, there’s no denying that it’s definitely fantasy. You might even say a fairy tale of sorts. It has villains, magic, knights, and princesses. How could you possibly assert that it is not? The modern fairy tale has already been reimagined.
While all fairy tales are similar, each is subtly different. Let’s take for instance the story of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. How might we change it? First, let’s make sure that it remains a children’s story. We’ll keep most elements the same. The evil stepmother is instrumental to the story; we’ll keep her. We must keep Prince Charming; we like him, besides how else would we resolve the conflict? The seven dwarves are part of the title; we can’t get rid of them. Naturally, we simply can’t get rid of Snow White, who is the protagonist in this story. In fact, let’s keep everything about this classic fairy tale precisely the same, except for one tiny little inconsequential detail. Snow White is now a handsome young prince, and yes, Prince Charming is still a man.
Since all other elements of this fairy tale remain the same, it’s still appropriate for children. I’m so glad we agree; let’s move on.
“Whoa… No, it’s no longer appropriate for young children”
Let’s visit the recent legislation in Florida, the one that is commonly called the “Don’t Say Gay” bill. It targets limiting the mention of sexual orientation and gender identity to younger children; the law is written to sound reasonable. Specifically:
The bill bans classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity in kindergarten through third grade and states that any instruction on those topics cannot occur “in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards,” according to the legislation, HB 1557.
I completely agree that younger children should not bear witness to material that is not “age appropriate”, but that is subjective. They put a magic clause that reads ‘in accordance with state standards’. This could literally be anything. I’m sure this law would object to a gay, male Snow White.
Here’s the really interesting question. If we agree that Snow White was written in a responsible, non-sexualized manner that is compatible with children, why is changing the gender of the protagonist suddenly make it inappropriate for children? And no, you can’t answer, “It just does.”
If you still believe that it is an inappropriate topic of conversation, then please elaborate. Though you’ll need to do it without mentioning religion or sin (separation of church and state) and without mentioning what is ‘natural’.
However, if you continue to assert that there is simply no viable, sanitized way to express the idea that two people of the same gender may be a couple. And furthermore, you may maintain that there needs to be a law that outlines precisely this stipulation. There is a word for that: homophobia.
And similarly, transphobia towards transgender people.
“Parents have a right to manage what our kids see”
No, you don’t; at least not this way. Allow me to elaborate:
- Public education is much like public transit. The bus doesn’t take you to from your doorstep to the door of your destination; you’ll still need to walk. When it rains, you’ll get drenched. You pick the best fit, but you understand that there is no perfect fit. Public education is the same. You pick the best fit, but you don’t get to dictate “oh, I don’t want fractions with my math. Remove that.”
- You may in some instances filter what your particular children will see, but nothing gives you the right to dictate what everyone else’s child will see. If you have the right to manage what your children don’t see, then other parents similarly have the right to manage what their children do see. Very simple.
- In high school, my mom signed a consent form in order for me to take sex education. For those students who didn’t have consent, they spent that session in the library. This model is a reasonable compromise. For those whose parents are comfortable, they get that content. Those whose don’t, they sit out that session.
I can understand if you want to insulate your children from certain topics. Maybe you want to be the one who breaks the news that Santa Claus doesn’t exist.
Imagine that your 7-year-old child has no problems with playing with their new friend of the same age from the block and subsequently spending time with their family. However, if you find it unsettling that their parents are both men, at least entertain the idea that the problem is not their gender but is instead your prejudice.