With children’s books doubling as cultural propaganda, many of us feel disheartened and increasingly protective of our children’s innocence.
The newly published “Worm Loves Worm” is a case in point. It’s a children’s picture book bluntly labelled by one major American book reviewer as “sly.”
“Worm Loves Worm” is for ages 3-8 (preschool to third grade). It tells the tale of one worm who meets another special worm. They fall in love. But there are problems in the forest that have all the animals a-twitter: Who will wear the gown? Who will wear the tux?
(There’s also a cricket that Kirkus Review calls “uptight.”)
Teaching all the woodland creatures a gigantic lesson in tolerance, the overarching lesson of this colorful picture book is, according to the Amazon title description, “It doesn’t matter. Because Worm Loves Worm.”
“This irresistible picture book is a celebration of love in all its splendid forms,” Amazon blares to potential readers.
Kirkus Reviews gushes of the author, illustrator and title, “Austrian and Curato turn the simple wedding of two worms into a three-ring circus that slyly turns the whole controversy over same-sex versus heterosexual marriage on its head. … As in life, love conquers all.”
Why are we using sly tactics on young, impressionable children? And how does love conquer all in this case?
Yet the praise just keeps coming. Publisher’s Weekly sees “Worm Loves Worm” as a sort of primer on shaping young minds. “How do you explain a revolution to a young audience?” it asks in their review of the title. “This book is a terrific start.”
In other words: Get ‘em young.
Kirkus claims it delivers to readers “critical recommendations they can trust.”
“Taken all together, the illustrations work wonderfully with the text to make its statement with no apologies whatsoever,” its review of the book reads.
But the unapologetic book may leave many of us parents scratching our heads.
“I am a Christian who is not against gay people in any form, but if I don’t profess not only tolerance but enthusiastic acceptance of this children’s book and others like it, I am both bigoted and intolerant,” one Boston-area mother of three told LifeZette about the book.
“The fact is, these reviews make it quite clear for us — this is a sly way to indoctrinate the very young into complete acceptance before traditional ideas take hold,” she said. “The ‘state’ is becoming more important than the home, with the help of a media — including these reviewers — that can only be called fawning.”
For years now those who don’t approve of gay marriage have been called fearmongers by the progressive Left, as pro-gay marriage groups offer the mantra that traditional families would not be hurt, and in fact would be enhanced, by this “civil rights” movement.
Kirkus also reports, “On the final, wordless page, the happy couple smooch, the actual meeting of lips chastely fig-leafed by a bright red heart.”
Is it possible conservative parents are supposed to be grateful for this “chasteness” — to accept a bone thrown to anyone made the slightest bit uncomfortable by the idea of introducing this material to young children’s minds? (And if not, why not just show the two princes kissing?)
Another gay fairy tale called “The Princes and the Treasure” tells a similar story.
“I wanted young and old alike to be able to read a fairy tale story that included a gay marriage,” the book’s author, Jeffrey A. Miles, told The Christian Post. “More and more public libraries are adding the book to their collections, such as the New York Public Library, the Sacramento Public Library and the Pacific Library.”
In the not-so-distant past, very young children were offered classics like “Make Way for Ducklings,” which offered a mother and father duck working together to care for their babies and find a safe home in the city of Boston. Today, worms with a message join similarly themed tales such as “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” “Heather Has Two Mommies,” and “King & King,” a fairy tale of two princes who wed.
“The assurances by advocates of redefining marriage that it would affect no one except the couples who would be allowed to marry continues to be proven wrong, as the relentless effort to indoctrinate children — as young as age four — continues,” Peter Spriggs, a senior policy fellow at the Family Research Council, told LifeZette.
“Human beings, of course, are not worms, and marriage is not just about affection,” added Spriggs. “I hope that parents will keep ‘Worm Loves Worm’ far away from their children, and will instead seek resources that communicate the true meaning of marriage as the union of a man and a woman.”
Ernest Hemingway once said “All things truly wicked start from innocence.” Perhaps he would have had similar thoughts about beginning a values indoctrination of small children with glossy, brightly colored pages filled with friendly cartoon princes, or uncomprehending, confused woodland creatures acting as stand-ins for everyone with traditional values.
“For years we have been warning people that homosexual marriage is NOT the end game — the sexual anarchist movement seeks to destroy marriage as an institution altogether, among other goals,” Sean Ryan, communications director of the conservative action group Mass Resistance, told LifeZette.
“This book is yet another disturbing indicator of that. Quite tellingly, of all the creatures they could have chosen, the authors demonstrate their notion of ‘progress’ by comparing humanity to primitive, nonsentient creatures.
“We think it’s safe to say that’s not progress.”
Last Modified: January 5, 2016, 8:43 am