TV Loves Babies (and wants you to do the same).

I’m a fan of the show Bones (yes, I happen to watch TV once in a while), and tonight I caught an episode that made me realize something about the media and babies. I realize that talking about TV shows I watch is venturing into blog territory, but I promise that I actually have a point behind this.

Ahem. Tonight, aside from their usual crime-solving antics, Booth and Bones wind up taking care of a murder victim’s baby. The episode actually had some good commentary from the other side of the fence, namely certain characters commenting that they’d rather keep their bodies under 400lbs by not having children. Good for you, childfree TV characters. Good for you.

The sad thing is, the childfree characters were presented as “different,” just as the same show portrayed an S&M club as being “different:" something to pique curiosity. The show’s creators expect their mainstream audience, i.e. a lower-middle class family of five, to see somebody claiming to not want babies and be shocked by it. It’s exactly the same response that Bubba-Joe would have after seeing a grisly chainsaw murder on TV: “There aren’t really people out there like that, are there, ma?”

However, what really piqued my interest was the treatment of the baby onscreen. The crying was minimal, the poopshots were nonexistent, and for some reason, sappy piano music started playing whenever the little alien was on screen. Put simply, they covered the “cute” aspects of babies far more than the ugly ones.

But this isn’t just in Bones. Turn on your TV, and find any show or commercial with a baby in it. Chances are, there will always be either upbeat or sympathetic music playing, and the kids will be smiling 99% of the time. You never see an “angry baby” on TV unless it’s for the supposed comedy factor.

This is marketing, pure and simple. Viewers don’t see little red poopzombies flailing their arms at two in the morning while making noises reminiscent of Linda Blair’s most famous role. It’s all smiles, burbles, and sappy piano music.

To the average viewer, this puts babies in the same category as puppies.

“Aww, it’s so cute! Did you see how it kicked when Booth scratched it‘s tummy?! I want one!”

As many of you know, I love puppies. It makes me extremely angry to learn how many animals are abandoned on the streets every day. Clearly, many people who think they can handle a little puppy realize it’s too much responsibility and dump the poor pooches off. Now multiply that level of responsibility by five thousand and imagine how many new parents wish they could just put their new pooping monkey right back where it came from.

Is this a direct result of the media marketing kids as being cooler than the boogieboard? Probably not. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the reality of raising children never comes into play. Not only is reproducing seen as the “normal” thing to do (I’m looking at you, Old Navy commercials that advertise “for your kids” and not “for those with kids.”), but it’s seen as something fun, hip, and trendy.

Obviously, our society is extremely pro-baby, and of course I expect nothing less from our media. However, when you really start looking for it, specifically the “baby-marketing” stuff, it smacks you in the face like a wet diaper. Go ahead, try it - next time you watch TV, keep track of all the preconceptions that state people are supposed to have kids, and all the assumptions that it’s more fun than a barrel of flan.

I’d prefer the flan, myself. And I happen to find flan awkwardly disturbing.

Antonio Troy wants your mail. Even hate mail. thebabyhater@gmail.com.

P.S. I realize it’s been a long time since the last update, and I truly, sincerely apologize. I’ve had to recode a significant portion of the website to make it more search-engine accessible, and I’m also toying with the idea of adding a forum (as suggested by a very helpful reader). Let me know what you think - forum, yes or no?