The trans children’s TV character nobody noticed

It’s one thing for television to be inclusive of all types of characters – people feel accepted when they see themselves in art – but there will only be true equality when their difference is no big deal.

One long-running animated series has done just that, and done it so well that nobody even noticed.

The Penguins of Madagascar is a spin-off of the film Madagascar, and made by Nickelodeon. It features characters from the film, anthropomorphised animals, living in New York’s Central Park Zoo.

One refreshing aspect of the show is many of the animals go against the stereotype often ascribed to them in fiction. The elephant is a bit dim. The squirrel is basically a stoner. The kangaroo is an arsehole. And it’s the kangaroo I’d like to talk about.

The kangaroo character is named Joey after the word for a juvenile marsupial, proving the creators did a bit of research. He has a masculine name, a masculine voice, and is referred to as “he” by all the characters, including himself as he regularly refers to himself in the third person. He is selfish, aggressive, and generally a bit of a dick.

He also has a pouch.

We all know that only marsupials born female have a pouch. Clearly, Joey is the first openly pre-op transgender character in a mainstream television program.

And while the other characters have plenty or reasons to dislike him, this is never one of them. In fact, it’s never even mentioned. The characters don’t mention it, the producers never called attention to it, the fans didn’t seem to even notice. It is universally accepted that Joey is a male who happened to be born with a pouch.

Bravo Nickelodeon for this inclusivity. And it didn’t even trigger a massive right-wing cancellation campaign. Well played!

  

 

Reading between the lines

You tell us, mate! Most of the dishonest debate has come from people on your payroll
- which I'm sure is a complete coincidence.

In translation:

Would someone with some intellectual authority, however dubious, please validate my pre-existing assumptions? Pretty please? I’m scared.

   

Reading between the lines, Part 3 – It’s not you, it’s us

In the world of ‘odd spot’ news (which is all some outlets do these day), nothing last week could top the story of three men deported from Saudi Arabia, allegedly for “too handsome.”

While it seems unlike the Saudis to let someone down gently, something about this just screams “cover story.”  Whether it is or it isn’t, this is something Australia could learn from, and perhaps utilise.

For example…
“It’s not that we have anything against your refreshingly novel ideas on Islam and multiculturalism Mr Wilders, or your right to present those views to the most humble of our countrymen.  It’s just that with your glowing locks and beaming, boyish face, we have real concerns that you may cause our women to lose interest in our local men and possibly even turn some of those men gay for you.  I’m sure none of us want that.  I’m sure you understand.”

How easy would that be?
 

Reading between the lines, Part 2

The latest line from the Liberal party and their leader is that, should they win the election, Tony Abbott expects to “grow into the job,” of prime minister.  They back this up by reminding us that John Howard grew into the job.

Translation:
1:  After nearly four years as opposition leader, Tony Abbott is still not ready to be prime minister and he knows it.
2:  John Howard was a naïve git before he became a cynical arse.
 

Reading between the lines

In a week when Fitch reaffirmed Australia’s AAA credit rating, making Australia one of only 9 countries in the world with a AAA rating from all three major ratings agencies, the news (and I use the term in its loosest possible meaning) from the Liberal party is that Tony Abbott’s daughters like him in this curiously un-paywalled story on news.com.au.

This is a follow up to the media blitz we had in October where Margie Abbott said Tony was a nice bloke too.

Abbott has faced a lot of charges of misogyny, all of which he has brought upon himself.  Personally, I don’t know if he is an actual misogynist or if he’s just stuck 50 years in the past, but if his main response is that his wife is a woman and so are his daughters, then that’s not much of a defence.

I have no comment on the Abbott family.  They’re not relevant to the issues.  Of course Tony Abbott’s wife and daughters love him and want him to succeed just as much as Julia Gillard’s partner and family love and support her.  Bridget and Frances Abbott are no more credible witnesses for Tony Abbott than the late John Gillard would have been for Julia Gillard.  That is no disrespect to any of them, it’s simply not news.  If this were the Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy, then this report would have been published by MISPWOSO – The Maximegalon Institute of Slowly and Painfully Working Out the Surprisingly Obvious.

The only way this can possibly be news, even at a human interest level, is if it’s based on the premise that Tony Abbott is so completely out of touch with women and with youth that it’s actually remarkable that his daughters like him.

There’s one other consideration:
We are constantly being told that despite Australia’s glowing economic performance mentioned above, the Labor government is headed for a wipeout and it’s a foregone conclusion that an Abbott-led Liberal party will win in a landslide.  All Abbott has to do, so goes the narrative, is remain standing and make sure he doesn’t punch anyone in the mouth, and he’ll be prime minister six months from now.

Something doesn’t add up though.

A leader of the opposition who is in a commanding position against a government in crisis doesn’t have to pull the “but my children like me,” trick.  Yes, I’ve seen the polling too, but this can only make one wonder why the Abbott family, the Liberal party and News Ltd (oh, but I repeat myself) felt the need to do this if their position is so strong already.

First rule of media management: change the story.