Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   New Yorker cover suggests Bert and Ernie are gay. In other news, the Washington Post thinks this is news   (washingtonpost.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, New York, New Yorker cover, independent artists  
•       •       •

7160 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jun 2013 at 11:58 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-06-28 12:02:03 PM  
7 votes:
Why do they have to drag Sesame street into all this?  Can't they just be puppets?

Classless Asshats.
2013-06-28 12:12:48 PM  
6 votes:

2 grams: Why do they have to drag Sesame street into all this?  Can't they just be puppets?

Classless Asshats.


^This.

None of my kids ever asked me if Bert & Ernie were gay; they never asked why Donald Duck didn't wear trousers.  Or why Tinkie Winkie carried a handbag or why Little Bear's entire family wore clothes but Little Bear ran around stark naked the whole time....

Little children - and the ones who watch Sesame St are very young kids - do not bother, nor are they particularly aware of sexual orientation; they're brains too busy figuring out a bunch of other stuff.  It's only the adults on all sides who obsess about who's "farking" whom on a children's t.v. show, and I don't know whether that's sad or ridiculous.
2013-06-28 11:12:21 AM  
6 votes:
They are not gay. How do I know?

encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com

Look at their shirts. No gay couple would leave the house together dressed like that.
Also, Bert's unibrow? Hell no. Any self respecting gay man has his eyebrows threaded
2013-06-28 12:46:28 PM  
4 votes:
bert and ernie's sexuality:

api.ning.com
2013-06-28 12:19:17 PM  
4 votes:
This movie came out in 1968, and was extremely popular.
ecx.images-amazon.com

Sesame Street (with a muppet cast led at that time by Bert & Ernie) premiered in 1969.
Are there seriously any more questions as to the inspiration and intention of Bert & Ernie???
2013-06-28 12:09:48 PM  
4 votes:
I always assumed they were brothers.
2013-06-28 12:07:23 PM  
4 votes:
Didn't even Jim Henson himself say they weren't gay, they're puppets years ago? Good god, N'yakker, go find some other lake to troll today.
2013-06-28 11:41:02 AM  
4 votes:
I remember thinking as a kid that they were Siskel and Ebert.

i.imgur.com
2013-06-28 01:27:18 PM  
3 votes:

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Does anyone else find it creepy that some adults are trying to push a sexual agenda on kids that are still learning how to count?


I don't really think this is pushing a sexual agenda on kids.

For one thing, marriage does not equal sex. You can explain to a kid in a basic way what marriage is without even mentioning sex. But for some reason, any time GAY marriage is brought up all anyone can think about is what they may be doing in the bedroom, it seems.

My son is almost 4. He knows mommy and daddy are married because we love each other. He doesn't know a thing about sex and how that is also part of marriage because it's not appropriate for a child of his age to know about these things.

He also knows (because we know several gay and lesbian couples with kids he plays with) that some kids have 2 mommies or 2 daddies because all families are different. Again, sex - be it gay or straight - is not a topic of conversation for a child of his age.

Kids who watch Sesame Street are generally too young to know about sex and therefore are not likely to make any sort of assumption about Bert and Ernie's sexuality or lack thereof. Kids just don't look at it that way.

Is the magazine cover from TFA inappropriate? I'm sure some people will think so, but I'm ok with it. Only an adult would know what it represented, a child wouldn't think anything beyond "hey, that's Bert and Ernie!", and it's just showing them with a loving arm around each other FFS, it's not in ANY way sexual unless you choose to see it that way.

Personally, I think it's a sweet image (that is on the cover of a magazine for adults that is not actually affiliated with Sesame Street) and will ultimately harm nobody.
2013-06-28 12:23:15 PM  
3 votes:
2013-06-28 12:01:05 PM  
3 votes:
They a puppets on a kids show.
2013-06-28 02:02:34 PM  
2 votes:
imageshack.us
2013-06-28 01:05:35 PM  
2 votes:
Its not like New Yorker covers are blatant trolls...

blog.syracuse.com
2013-06-28 12:54:42 PM  
2 votes:
Does anyone else find it creepy that some adults are trying to push a sexual agenda on kids that are still learning how to count?
2013-06-28 12:31:00 PM  
2 votes:
You know, being roommates and that's all is perfectly normal.
2013-06-28 12:26:51 PM  
2 votes:

MrBallou: Gunny Highway: They a puppets on a kids show.

I used to argue a lot with the wife about this. They are fictional characters. They don't do ANYTHING when the cameras aren't rolling, so they can't have hidden lives.

Similar discussion was had for Holmes and Watson.


No. Many fictional characters are described as having a life outside the narrative, a life that occurred before, and goes on inbetween stories (as with Holmes, etc). There's often a lot of vaguery so that people can project onto the character and better identify with them/enjoy them/understand them.

If Sherlock were gay, for example, it wouldn't really matter. His love life is only really of interest to the speculation of Watson (and sometimes others) but it's made very clear in the stories that's all secondary to his pursuits of the mind blah blah blah. So if he were boning someone outside of the narrative we see, it has no impact on the stories themselves. Non issue not important...to the story, and to the reader's understanding of the story. If someone wants to imagine him as gay, or bisexual, or hetero, or asexual... I suppose one could make arguments for it, but again...doesn't matter what he is. It may matter to a reader, but doesnt change the stories.

Bert and Ernie are puppets. They are puppets in their world too. They do not have sexuality any more than little kids do. That's the entire point. They have said that from the beginning. Bert and Ernie aren't really adults. They're not really children. They are puppets. Elmo is childlike, and treated as a child puppet...even though we never see Elmo's parents. Even though Elmo appears to live alone (except for his goldfish, who I think is named Dorothy). Some of the puppets have gender (Bert and Ernie are males) but some aren't defined. I don't think Elmo is ever defined. Big Bird wasn't I don't think when I was a kid. And that's also cool.

I'm bisexual myself, and I really get the problem of invisibility in culture. Most movies feature hetero characters (and white characters). People want to identify with positive things, and Sesame Street is a huge part of our culture, and our childhoods. But one's sexual orientation isn't a deal for the age of kids watching the show. It can be for the adults they know and have in their lives, which is why the show has addressed that and other issues with their ADULT characters.

So no they're not gay they're not anything. That being said, I still enjoy the adult humor of implying they are. But it's an unintended adult subtext, nothing more.
2013-06-28 12:25:46 PM  
2 votes:

studebaker hoch: Walker

Gunny Highway: They a puppets on a kids show.

They're gay puppets.

Spoiler: Peppermint Patty and Marcie are lesbians.

Those two were never in question.


"Charles M. Schulz denied that there was any truth in the rumor, saying that the characters are supposed to be very young children and they both have crushes on Charlie Brown."
2013-06-28 11:46:06 AM  
2 votes:
Meh. And I'm sure PBS and Sesame Street are gonna be thrilled that they're going to get dragged into this. I can only imagine all the BS they're going to be subjected to by the rubes for this


www.newyorker.com
2013-06-28 11:03:15 AM  
2 votes:
I even figured out they were gay when I was 5.
2013-06-28 10:56:19 AM  
2 votes:
And I'm sure Sesame Street would love to be dragged into this.

If they had suggested that Bert & Ernie were gay, then this could work, but they've vehemently denied it since day one.
2013-06-28 07:41:43 PM  
1 vote:
Whether Bert and Ernie were designed to secretly be gay or not, I don't accept Sesame Workshop's bullshiat that they are "puppets" with "nothing below the waist" and that they "have no sexuality".

If that were true, there would be no heterosexual puppets.  But unfortunately for Sesame Workshop there are plenty of blatantly heterosexual puppets, including couples with children.

And the whole "it's an innocent kids show" thing is rubbish too.  It's not like sex is happening on screen.  Gay couples are no more un-innocent than straight couples, of which there are plenty on Sesame Street.  Saying stuff like that implies there is something vulgar or dirty about the mere presence of gay couples that should be kept out of kids programming.

Unthinking homophobia, it's for the kids!


Jim_Callahan: While a valid point, this is a bad example. Holmes' social life outside of the stories is explained and is an important part of the overall storyline. He essentially only interacts with Watson in a social capacity, partly from introversion and hubris and partly due to his drug issues. Watson trying to get him to quit and trying to get him to interact with people is a big part of the context for some of the later stories, the whole bit where he throws a fit because Watson is getting married is a fairly big deal in-story.


There's a very interesting article about the coded homosexual references in the Sherlock Holmes stories which I now can't find, darn it.  These things might have been obvious to the underground homosexuals at the time but the cultural references are now quite lost on us.  Particularly interesting is that Holmes and Watson fled London for reasons the author declines to explain, in 1895 when Oscar Wilde's trial threatened a lot of London's gays and many real-life gays did flee the city.

I do find it interesting people are more comfortable with the idea he might have been gay than with the idea he might have been asexual.  Being gay might be "yucky" to some, but not being interested in sex makes you basically non-human to most people.
2013-06-28 04:14:24 PM  
1 vote:

Brittabot: Voiceofreason01: eeyore102:
Personally, I think Holmes being gay for Watson isn't that much of a stretch.

It makes all sorts of sense if you've never read any Sherlock Holmes

It also makes sense if you've watched any of BBC Sherlock... ;-)

[24.media.tumblr.com image 850x690]


They also totally lampshade that in the Hound of Baskerville episode
2013-06-28 03:18:03 PM  
1 vote:
You know where this is all headed....

a4.ec-images.myspacecdn.com
2013-06-28 03:14:31 PM  
1 vote:

Researcher: Brittabot: Voiceofreason01: eeyore102:
Personally, I think Holmes being gay for Watson isn't that much of a stretch.

It makes all sorts of sense if you've never read any Sherlock Holmes

It also makes sense if you've watched any of BBC Sherlock... ;-)

[24.media.tumblr.com image 850x690]

While it's a clever poke at the show and the characters they go out of their way to establish that Sherlock is a deeply flawed individual with major blindspots; Especially regarding his interaction with other people. Remember how apologetic he had to be to Molly... constantly.

TL;DR Sherlock's blind spot is himself. He doesn't get when people are into him or not.


Oh I agree. I adore the relationship between Sherlock and Watson on the BBC series. Though really, John is straight and I think Sherlock is probably asexual or very close to it (not to mention a total aspie who has no clue/desire to behave appropriately towards others).

/It's all Benedict Cumberbatch's fault - he's just so goddamned hot I can't help but envision him in sexy scenarios ;-)
//I love this thread.
2013-06-28 02:45:33 PM  
1 vote:

Brittabot: Voiceofreason01: eeyore102:
Personally, I think Holmes being gay for Watson isn't that much of a stretch.

It makes all sorts of sense if you've never read any Sherlock Holmes

It also makes sense if you've watched any of BBC Sherlock... ;-)

[24.media.tumblr.com image 850x690]


While it's a clever poke at the show and the characters they go out of their way to establish that Sherlock is a deeply flawed individual with major blindspots; Especially regarding his interaction with other people. Remember how apologetic he had to be to Molly... constantly.

TL;DR Sherlock's blind spot is himself. He doesn't get when people are into him or not.
2013-06-28 02:19:38 PM  
1 vote:
Jeez, next thing you know they'll be saying Ren and Stimpy had some kind of gay interspecies thing going on.
2013-06-28 01:58:59 PM  
1 vote:
What about Biff and Sully?

images1.wikia.nocookie.net
2013-06-28 01:32:42 PM  
1 vote:

WippitGuud: Gunny Highway: stonicus: Marcie is a lesbian... I don't think Patty is though, she's always had a crush on Charlie Brown...

So did Marcie

So did Linus.


He was so hung up on the Little Red Haired Girl that he didn't noticed that he could have had an all-niter that would have made Caligula blush!
2013-06-28 01:31:53 PM  
1 vote:
I have no problem with the depiction of the cover, but couldn't they have gotten a professional to do it? It looks like some yaoi fanart from some dipshiat's deviantart page.
2013-06-28 01:31:16 PM  
1 vote:

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Does anyone else find it creepy that some adults are trying to push a sexual agenda on kids that are still learning how to count?


Male babies wear baby jeans and little baseball caps...
Female babies wear little pink dresses...
Pushing a sexual agenda on children has been happening since like forever...
2013-06-28 01:27:55 PM  
1 vote:

Lady Indica: So no they're not gay they're not anything. That being said, I still enjoy the adult humor of implying they are. But it's an unintended adult subtext, nothing more.


Well said.
And for the record, I think the New Yorker cover is sweet.
2013-06-28 01:18:22 PM  
1 vote:

Zulu_as_Kono: Peter von Nostrand: I can only imagine all the BS they're going to be subjected to by the rubes for this

Rubes? Look at all the idiots in this thread all mad at the New Yorker!  Jesus, people - relax.


I hope I dont come off as mad about it.  I just think it is dumb.
2013-06-28 01:11:48 PM  
1 vote:
Yes, of course, they are just puppets, and more importantly, children characters with no sexuality intended. However, they are pretty much saturated in culture as being a gay couple. Whether jokingly or not, this will not change, and getting worked up over it will only make it worse. If it bothers you, ignore it. If your kids ask if they're gay, say "Of course not. They are just friends."

I admit that I find it amusing to joke around that they are gay, but I understand that there is zero intent to project that by Sesame Street.
2013-06-28 01:06:10 PM  
1 vote:

brap: My favorite Ernie bit is that he is always perturbed at being interrupted from reading some ridiculously esoteric book about pigeons or how to cook oatmeal.


sure someone has already pointed this out by now, but dude, it's Bert that reads the lame stuff.  Ernie's the fun one..
2013-06-28 01:02:12 PM  
1 vote:
I always thought they were brothers.

/shrug
2013-06-28 01:01:58 PM  
1 vote:
Wow, who knew so many people could be riled up by a cartoon featuring one of the oldest jokes about Bert and Ernie.  Well done, New Yorker.
2013-06-28 12:49:13 PM  
1 vote:
they're not gay. They're not straight. They're farking puppets who live together. That's all. Just farking stop with this stupid shiat.
2013-06-28 12:48:48 PM  
1 vote:
CSB...

When I was a kid, my mom introduced me to a couple gay guys she knew.  She tried to explain it (without saying "they're gay"), something along the lines of "they like men, not women."  I thought she meant misogyny, and was really confused as to why we were going to hang out with them - and they treated Mom like an equal, and seemed pretty cool, so that made no sense.

I did know what gay was, though, and once I figured out that's what she meant I just wondered why she even bothered because who cares - they're like any other couple really, although a bit more sophisticated and intelligent than a lot of the people we knew.

/Never really thought about whether Bert and Ernie were.  Didn't matter either - they're just funny.
2013-06-28 12:46:27 PM  
1 vote:
I don't care about Bert and Ernie's "relationship", but I think the cover is pretty well done. If it had been some anonymous person on the internet, everyone who is a fan of gay rights would be changing their profile pic and sharing the fark out of it, but instead the magazine makes an easy target.
2013-06-28 12:44:53 PM  
1 vote:

Lollipop165: Wizard of Oz has no homosexuality in it, but everyone understands what one means by saying someone is a "friend of Dorothy" as it is a cult classic in the LGBT community.


Jesus, you're just making this shiat up as you go along, aren't you?

Judy Garland is a huge favorite of the gay community.

Judy Garland's most famous movie was Wizard of OZ.

Calling them a "Friend of Dorothy" has nothing to do with the actual movie, they watch it because she's in it, but it's not the movie that makes you a "friend of Dorothy". It's the fan worship of Judy Garland herself. At least get it right.
2013-06-28 12:41:57 PM  
1 vote:
Gay? No.
But Bert is Evil.
2013-06-28 12:41:43 PM  
1 vote:
www.snopes.com
2013-06-28 12:38:37 PM  
1 vote:
THEY'RE PUPPETS FOR CHRISSAKE!!! THEY'RE NOT REAL!!!

www.inpapasbasement.com
2013-06-28 12:36:14 PM  
1 vote:
Appropriating pop culture has been a gay privilege ever since Joan Crawford started wearing Groucho Marx eyebrows. If they like it, they take it.
2013-06-28 12:33:04 PM  
1 vote:
Maybe they're just best friends.

NTTAWWT.
2013-06-28 12:30:03 PM  
1 vote:
They're g'damn puppets!
Their bodies end at the waist therefore they lack f**kable bits!
STOP SEXUALIZING BITS OF FELT, YOU PERVERTED FREAKS!
2013-06-28 12:29:29 PM  
1 vote:

Triumph: I remember thinking as a kid that they were Siskel and Ebert.

[i.imgur.com image 219x175]


That dynamic is older than mud, but it's usually called "the odd couple" after the 1965 play and the movie/TV series that followed it.  Two friends that like each other as much because of as in spite of being opposites in several major ways is a big running theme in modern (1960s+) literature, for obvious reasons.  If the civil rights movements  hadn't spawned some major tropes about getting along with different people it would have been pretty surreal.

The way Bert and Ernie are set up, if one of them was gay the other would have to be a fundie, because of how the dynamic is supposed to play out.

//Word of god is that they aren't gay, but this is the  reason they aren't written as gay.  That and if they were in a lovers' relationship all the hitting would stop being funny puppetry silliness and start being "making light of domestic abuse".
2013-06-28 12:22:27 PM  
1 vote:
www.monkeyclump.com
2013-06-28 12:21:35 PM  
1 vote:

Lollipop165: scottydoesntknow: And I'm sure Sesame Street would love to be dragged into this.

If they had suggested that Bert & Ernie were gay, then this could work, but they've vehemently denied it since day one.

Dude, they are gay icons. It's not Sesame Street that "made" them gay, its the public (particularly homosexuals) who are watching it and "decided" that. Wizard of Oz has no homosexuality in it, but everyone understands what one means by saying someone is a "friend of Dorothy" as it is a cult classic in the LGBT community.


It doesn't matter if they're gay icons or not. The show has said they are not gay and that should be reason enough to NOT drag them into this debate.
2013-06-28 12:17:19 PM  
1 vote:
 I don't remember the last time I bought a magazine, but they're 7 bucks now? Wow.
2013-06-28 12:17:18 PM  
1 vote:
ACunningPlan:None of my kids ever asked me if Bert & Ernie were gay; they never asked why Donald Duck didn't wear trousers.  Or why Tinkie Winkie carried a handbag or why Little Bear's entire family wore clothes but Little Bear ran around stark naked the whole time....

I asked my niece why Donald Duck doesn't wear pants to which she replied that "he's a duck, of course he doesn't wear pants." I decided that was the perfect answer.
2013-06-28 12:11:10 PM  
1 vote:
Damn... why does everything have to be gay lol
2013-06-28 12:10:33 PM  
1 vote:
Aah, an afternoon alone with my favorite book, "Broadway Musicals of the 1940s."
2013-06-28 12:08:08 PM  
1 vote:
They're puppets. On a show for children. They don't have a sexual relationship, so gay or straight really doesn't enter into it. Seriously, people, can't they just be friends?

In any case, why don't people focus on Big Bird and Snuffleupagus for a change? Sheesh.
2013-06-28 12:06:59 PM  
1 vote:

Il Douchey: They are not gay.  Puppets don't have genitals

/Grover, however, is a scatophage


Oscar has some serious issues too, but seriously FFS leave innocent children's educational programming out of it.
2013-06-28 12:05:59 PM  
1 vote:

2 grams: Why do they have to drag Sesame street into all this?  Can't they just be puppets?

Classless Asshats.


No because all the reporters want pulitzers to bring meaning to their waste of a career; so everything becomes 'news'
2013-06-28 11:28:41 AM  
1 vote:
Oh, FFS
 
Displayed 57 of 57 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report