One Million Moms Want Same-Sex Archie Comic Out of Toys 'R' Us

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT
 

One Million Moms Want Same-Sex Archie Comic Out of Toys 'R' Us

image

One Million Moms is calling on Toys R Us to pull an Archie comic about same-sex marriage from its shelves.

Remember the One Million Moms? It's the division of the American Family Association that wanted JC Penney to drop Ellen Degeneres as its spokesperson because she's openly gay. That demand went nowhere, so now the group is trying its luck with another target: Archie Andrews, specifically issue 16 of Life With Archie, which tells the tale of Kevin Keller, an openly gay soldier who returns from the war to marry his boyfriend.

"Select Toys 'R' Us stores are now selling Archie comic books with a same-sex wedding displayed on the front cover. The front cover reads 'Just Married' with two men marrying and one is wearing a service uniform," the Moms say on their website. "These comic books are sold at the front checkout counters so they are highly visible to employees, managers, customers and children. Unfortunately, children are now being exposed to same-sex marriage in a toy store. This is the last place a parent would expect to be confronted with questions from their children on topics that are too complicated for them to understand. Issues of this nature are being introduced too early and too soon, which is becoming extremely common and unnecessary."

The group says Toys 'R' Us should be "more responsible in the products they carry" and want consumers to drive that message home with an email campaign requesting that it remove all "same-sex 'Just Married'" Archie comics immediately.

It's probably worth pointing out that in spite of its name, One Million Moms actually has about 1200 followers on Twitter; it also apparently boasts about 44,000 followers on Facebook, although the link to its Facebook group now seems to go nowhere, perhaps a consequence of the growing number of anti-One Million Mom groups popping up all over the place.

Toys 'R' Us hasn't yet commented on the complaint but Archie Comics co-CEO Jon Goldwater has, and in a pretty snappy fashion, too. "We stand by Life with Archie #16. As I've said before, Riverdale is a safe, welcoming place that does not judge anyone. It's an idealized version of America that will hopefully become reality someday," he said in a statement. "We're sorry the American Family Association/OneMillionMoms.com feels so negatively about our product, but they have every right to their opinion, just like we have the right to stand by ours. Kevin Keller will forever be a part of Riverdale, and he will live a happy, long life free of prejudice, hate and narrow-minded people."

Nicely put, sir.

Source: The Mary Sue

Permalink

This is the last place a parent would expect to be confronted with questions from their children on topics that are too complicated for them to understand.

*ahem*
They love each other. So they married.
This isn't rocket science, lady. What did you tell your kids when they saw your wedding pictures? Same story.
The only reason this would be a complicated topic would be if you specifically raised your kid to see same-sex marriage as something entirely different from a straight marriage, at which point the fault lies with you for being a narrow-minded bigot.
Also props to Goldwater for standing by his product.

Unfortunately, children are now being exposed to same-sex marriage in a toy store.

Oh no, how awful!

...no wait, I mean shut up.

God forbid a parent, you know, be a parent and explain things to their kids.

Someone mail these "ladies" a box full of these comics.

"We're sorry the American Family Association/OneMillionMoms.com feels so negatively about our product, but they have every right to their opinion, just like we have the right to stand by ours. Kevin Keller will forever be a part of Riverdale, and he will live a happy, long life free of prejudice, hate and narrow-minded people."

Damn, Goldwater just burned those moms, good job.

Not much else to say here really. The Moms have voiced their opinion, but the company obviously doesn't see it as a threat to their consumer base and thus are rightly ignoring the complaints. To be honest, I feel this is more of a 'lazy parenting' thing then a bigotry thing. Specifically because these children are probably going to be raised to treat homosexual marriage as different then heterosexual marriage anyway, so the bigotry is already present. The moms are just trying to control their children's environment to avoid external influences on their personal beliefs, and then resultant explanations they'll have to use to justify their position.

On a side note I'd love to see a 1950s Archie crossover with the modern day Archie group. Based on the old comics at my grandparent's from when I was a kid the culture clash would be hilarious.

When did the Escapist become the head of internet politics?

One petition makes you bigger
and the other makes you small
and the one your mother sent you
don't do anything at all

jurnag12:

This is the last place a parent would expect to be confronted with questions from their children on topics that are too complicated for them to understand.

*ahem*
They love each other. So they married.
This isn't rocket science, lady. What did you tell your kids when they saw your wedding pictures? Same story.
The only reason this would be a complicated topic would be if you specifically raised your kid to see same-sex marriage as something entirely different from a straight marriage, at which point the fault lies with you for being a narrow-minded bigot.
Also props to Goldwater for standing by his product.

I'm not sure she was talking about the children.
If the news is to be believed, "Acceptance" is a topic that seems too complicated for a lot of parents to understand.

We in the "tried fencing for a few weeks at uni club" call that a well exceuted parry and riposte, a tip of the hat to him for not backing down.

Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

Andy Chalk:
Unfortunately, children are now being exposed to same-sex marriage in a toy store.

I would have said "Fortunately", but hey.

This is the last place a parent would expect to be confronted with questions from their children on topics that are too complicated for them to understand. Issues of this nature are being introduced too early and too soon, which is becoming extremely common and unnecessary."

Oh, how true...

image

I think this sums it up nicely

Seriously are we still unable to understand that people of all orientations just want to be able to marry?

Volf:
Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

Then don't take them to the goddamn Toys 'R Us. Just as the parents have the right to limit what their child sees, the store has the right to stock whatever product it feels is relevant to its sales. Comic books generally being for kids, particularly the Archie series

Your kids can't understand something? Why should I care, they're your fucking idiot kids.

Tell them that adults sometimes fall in love, and it's not their choice who they fall in love with. Someone can love women, and someone can love men. Some love both indiscriminately. And it's wonderful that they can find happiness without being oppressed by dickheads.

Lost In The Void:
I think this sums it up nicely

That man is right on so many levels.

Wow, this is news. There's places that still sell comic books on a news stand rack.

As for the group, well, I guess I can say be grateful it's on the cover so if you want to be narrow minded bigots, you can be so ahead of time, instead of being at home suddenly have to explain the relationship between two of the Young Avengers.

When I first read the title, my heart sank, as I thought it meant that One Million Moms meant how many people had complained about this. I'm glad this isn't the case.
The way the co-CEO of the comics company handled this was brilliant.
But this piece of news begs the question; does this group have anything more important to do?

Volf:
Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

Well, then kids shouldn't be let outside, because whenever I walk down the street, I see promotions for violent movies/games/tv-shows/music or promotions for fashion/tv-shows/movies/music that appeal to sex, not to mention the commersials/shows that are on TV.
Or the news. Damn, the NEWS! Children shouldn't be allowed to watch the news.
Or read the news.
Or actually, go to school. Then you have to interact with other people, and they might you know, share information.

Edit: And more OT..What do these moms mean when they say "children shouldn't be bothered with what is hard to understand."? How hard IS it?
How about "Hey, some men love men, and some women love women, and they can get married too. It's about love."? Seems pretty simple to me.

Huh, I wasn't aware Archie was still going after all these decades.

I don't think Toys 'R' Us has to worry. This is little more than a publicity stunt, a desperate and pathetic plea for attention by a group of people too stubborn and out of touch with reality to realize that they've already lost. They've realized that their intolerance no longer conforms with modern, progressive society. Instead of re-evaluating their stance, they lash out bitterly like a cornered animal.

12 Angry Men had the right approach for dealing with such people: ignore them. You deny them a captive audience and they have nobody to talk to but themselves.

This is the last place a parent would expect to be confronted with questions from their children on topics that are too complicated for them to understand

My question is: Is it really so complicated that the children can't understand, or that the parents are too closed-minded to understand?

Realitycrash:

Volf:
Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

Well, then kids shouldn't be let outside, because whenever I walk down the street, I see promotions for violent movies/games/tv-shows/music or promotions for fashion/tv-shows/movies/music that appeal to sex, not to mention the commersials/shows that are on TV.
Or the news. Damn, the NEWS! Children shouldn't be allowed to watch the news.
Or read the news.
Or actually, go to school. Then you have to interact with other people, and they might you know, share information.

Edit: And more OT..What do these moms mean when they say "children shouldn't be bothered with what is hard to understand."? How hard IS it?
How about "Hey, some men love men, and some women love women, and they can get married too. It's about love."? Seems pretty simple to me.

I didn't say sheltered, just that parents should be able to control what subjects toy stores expose children to.

Volf:
Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

And they can, buy not taking them to Toys R Us, not taking them in the check out lines with the comic in it, or any number of other simple fixes, but they do not have the right to deprive my kids of something that they find offensive.

And before you or anyone else tries to bring in an argument relating this to porn, or other over the top subjects, they are completely different situations. Seeing two people in sexual acts is something that the kid has not been exposed to, and exposing them to it in the wrong way can alter their perception of the act, whereas two men getting married is the same exact thing as a male and a female getting married, and can be explained the same way that you explained your own marriage. And if you have never talked to your kid about marriage, or they don't know what marriage is then the cover won't bring up any questions because there would be nothing strange about it.

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Volf:
Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

Well, then kids shouldn't be let outside, because whenever I walk down the street, I see promotions for violent movies/games/tv-shows/music or promotions for fashion/tv-shows/movies/music that appeal to sex, not to mention the commersials/shows that are on TV.
Or the news. Damn, the NEWS! Children shouldn't be allowed to watch the news.
Or read the news.
Or actually, go to school. Then you have to interact with other people, and they might you know, share information.

Edit: And more OT..What do these moms mean when they say "children shouldn't be bothered with what is hard to understand."? How hard IS it?
How about "Hey, some men love men, and some women love women, and they can get married too. It's about love."? Seems pretty simple to me.

I didn't say sheltered, just that parents should be able to control what subjects toy stores expose children to.

Then parents can vote with their wallets and go somewhere else?
If Toys R Us released a new GI-Joe action-figure, why should we allow that? Should parents have a say too? How about an easy-bake oven? Should parents have a say there?

No? Because these things aren't "offensive"? Well, neither is homosexuality.

Well, for that matter, why is Toys R Us selling Archie comics in the first place?

Volf:
I didn't say sheltered, just that parents should be able to control what subjects toy stores expose children to.

Then it's simple. Launch a complaint like these moms did, and the company will respond if there is enough of the consumer market that supports it. If not, and you still have a problem with it, don't go to their stores. Companies are private property that can enforce whatever 'decency' standards they wish, parents are only allowed to enforce their own 'decency' measures within their private property as well.

Andy Chalk:
As I've said before, Riverdale is a safe, welcoming place that does not judge anyone. It's an idealized version of America that will hopefully become reality someday,"

This is our home. But make no mistake - America is not a country of peace and love. They say it's a wasteland, that it's dangerous, that only a fool would search for something of value here.

Skullkid4187:
When did the Escapist become the head of internet politics?

It isn't. But there are people here, and we have OPINIONS.

Aw man.. disappointing.
I can't be the only one who read "same-sex Archie comic" and thought we were getting treated to some Betty and Veronica action...

OH MY GOD! His spouse is black!

My mistake. Wrong form of bigotry.

The funny thing is, I saw this in my TRU a few days ago and thought to myself, "Huh, that's interesting. I'm surprised some moron hasn't complained about this, yet". Then I read this and sure enough.....

artanis_neravar:

Volf:
Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

And they can, buy not taking them to Toys R Us, not taking them in the check out lines with the comic in it, or any number of other simple fixes, but they do not have the right to deprive my kids of something that they find offensive.

Nobody is "depriving" you of anything, but why does your opinion have more value to it then mine? I don't like something, but I just have to deal with it, but if the tables are turned, now I'm "depriving" you of something? Hypocritical much?

artanis_neravar:
And before you or anyone else tries to bring in an argument relating this to porn, or other over the top subjects, they are completely different situations.

I didn't bring up the subject, but now that you have, why is this different? I realize its not the same thing as them seeing porn, but what if I don't agree that this is a subject I want young children to be exposed to? How is this different from that? While porn and homosexual marriage are not the same thing, they are two subjects that I don't think young children should be exposed to.

artanis_neravar:
Seeing two people in sexual acts is something that the kid has not been exposed to, and exposing them to it in the wrong way can alter their perception of the act, whereas two men getting married is the same exact thing as a male and a female getting married, and can be explained the same way that you explained your own marriage. And if you have never talked to your kid about marriage, or they don't know what marriage is then the cover won't bring up any questions because there would be nothing strange about it.

Again, what about those of us that don't think homosexual marriage is the same thing as heterosexual marriage? Why should we have children's material deal with this subject if we don't want to have them exposed to it?

Jharry5:
When I first read the title, my heart sank, as I thought it meant that One Million Moms meant how many people had complained about this. I'm glad this isn't the case.
The way the co-CEO of the comics company handled this was brilliant.
But this piece of news begs the question; does this group have anything more important to do?

This is what happens when soccer mums stop playing farmville for 5 minutes shows we should really be showering zynga with money just to keep them occupied

Hell, I'm surprised some religious nuts haven't complained about KISS meets Archie (which actually sounds just as awesome as the Punisher meets Archie)....and those issues are sold at TRU, too!

OH LAWDY NO! LAWDY LAWDY NOOOO! Lemme get my bible so i can hit you across the face with it ya intolerant bitches. No one cares what you want if you want to stay rooted in the negativity of the past. Goldwater just made my list of awesome mother fuckers.

Realitycrash:

Volf:

Realitycrash:

Well, then kids shouldn't be let outside, because whenever I walk down the street, I see promotions for violent movies/games/tv-shows/music or promotions for fashion/tv-shows/movies/music that appeal to sex, not to mention the commersials/shows that are on TV.
Or the news. Damn, the NEWS! Children shouldn't be allowed to watch the news.
Or read the news.
Or actually, go to school. Then you have to interact with other people, and they might you know, share information.

Edit: And more OT..What do these moms mean when they say "children shouldn't be bothered with what is hard to understand."? How hard IS it?
How about "Hey, some men love men, and some women love women, and they can get married too. It's about love."? Seems pretty simple to me.

I didn't say sheltered, just that parents should be able to control what subjects toy stores expose children to.

Then parents can vote with their wallets and go somewhere else?
If Toys R Us released a new GI-Joe action-figure, why should we allow that? Should parents have a say too? How about an easy-bake oven? Should parents have a say there?

No? Because these things aren't "offensive"? Well, neither is homosexuality.

wrong, some people find homosexual marriage "offensive" when comparing it to heterosexual marriage, they have a right to voice their opinion just as much as anybody else.

Volf:

artanis_neravar:

Volf:
Don't see the problem, parents should be able to limit what their kids see.

And they can, buy not taking them to Toys R Us, not taking them in the check out lines with the comic in it, or any number of other simple fixes, but they do not have the right to deprive my kids of something that they find offensive.

Nobody is "depriving" you of anything, but why does your opinion have more value to it then mine? I don't like something, but I just have to deal with it, but if the tables are turned, now I'm "depriving" you of something? Hypocritical much?

artanis_neravar:
And before you or anyone else tries to bring in an argument relating this to porn, or other over the top subjects, they are completely different situations.

I didn't bring up the subject, but now that you have, why is this different? I realize its not the same thing as them seeing porn, but what if I don't agree that this is a subject I want young children to be exposed to? How is this different from that? While porn and homosexual marriage are not the same thing, they are two subjects that I don't think young children should be exposed to.

artanis_neravar:
Seeing two people in sexual acts is something that the kid has not been exposed to, and exposing them to it in the wrong way can alter their perception of the act, whereas two men getting married is the same exact thing as a male and a female getting married, and can be explained the same way that you explained your own marriage. And if you have never talked to your kid about marriage, or they don't know what marriage is then the cover won't bring up any questions because there would be nothing strange about it.

Again, what about those of us that don't think homosexual marriage is the same thing as heterosexual marriage? Why should we have children's material deal with this subject if we don't want to have them exposed to it?

To put it very simple: Your opinion is of exactly equal worth as another persons. But since there aren't a lot of you (or enough of you), it matters LESS. That's how our democracy works.

Volf:
I didn't say sheltered, just that parents should be able to control what subjects toy stores expose children to.

Take a trip round your local toy store and see what children get exposed to anyway.

imageimageimageimage

Especially as the shelves are designated as toys for BOYS and toys for GIRLS; with appropriate colours so you can remember which toys are yours and why you must never play with the other toys.

It's not like there's anything there that will hurt them...

image

So I guess we are now at the point where the tables have turned. The people who don't accept homosexuality are now the outcasts. Interesting.

Realitycrash:

Volf:

artanis_neravar:
And they can, buy not taking them to Toys R Us, not taking them in the check out lines with the comic in it, or any number of other simple fixes, but they do not have the right to deprive my kids of something that they find offensive.

Nobody is "depriving" you of anything, but why does your opinion have more value to it then mine? I don't like something, but I just have to deal with it, but if the tables are turned, now I'm "depriving" you of something? Hypocritical much?

artanis_neravar:
And before you or anyone else tries to bring in an argument relating this to porn, or other over the top subjects, they are completely different situations.

I didn't bring up the subject, but now that you have, why is this different? I realize its not the same thing as them seeing porn, but what if I don't agree that this is a subject I want young children to be exposed to? How is this different from that? While porn and homosexual marriage are not the same thing, they are two subjects that I don't think young children should be exposed to.

artanis_neravar:
Seeing two people in sexual acts is something that the kid has not been exposed to, and exposing them to it in the wrong way can alter their perception of the act, whereas two men getting married is the same exact thing as a male and a female getting married, and can be explained the same way that you explained your own marriage. And if you have never talked to your kid about marriage, or they don't know what marriage is then the cover won't bring up any questions because there would be nothing strange about it.

Again, what about those of us that don't think homosexual marriage is the same thing as heterosexual marriage? Why should we have children's material deal with this subject if we don't want to have them exposed to it?

To put it very simple: Your opinion is of exactly equal worth as another persons. But since there aren't a lot of you (or enough of you), it matters LESS. That's how our democracy works.

My point still stands about the "depriving" comment.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here