The Wonderful World of Wanzie: Penguins, same-sex couples and making babies

Do gay penguins provide the example same-sex human couples should emulate when it comes to their desire to raise a child?

It’s just a question to pose for which I have no clue as to the answer. I am not being critical or taking a particular stance on the subject, I am but musing. In this column I’m going to ask an indelicate question that is likely to raise the ire of same-sex couples who have enlisted the assistance of a surrogate to bring a child into the world or who have borrowed a little sperm to get the job done.

I have a question that I simply wish to put out into the ether to see what comes of it. But first, a little background on the real-life penguins and the play they inspired which got me to thinking about this question in the first place.

Apparently, as is sometimes the case with humans, heterosexual penguin pairs who mate and bring forth an egg sometimes abandon their offspring—or that is to say, their egg—and show no interest in incubating and caring for that which they have produced. And also apparently, as is very often the case with humans, a loving homosexual pairing of penguins can step in to care for and nurture the unwanted life and help it to realize its full potential as part of a loving family unit.

I barely recall the real-life incident that occurred at the Central Park Zoo in 1998 when keepers there began to document the mating rituals of two male penguins named Roy and Silo and their subsequent, shared, successful incubation of an abandoned egg resulting in the birth of baby chick Tango in 1999. I vaguely remember that this seemingly lovely occurrence sparked enormous controversy at the time as the religious right came out in their typical full nutty-mode force to demand that the zoo separate the male couple and restrain them from incubating the egg because they believed this unholy alliance, which would help preserve life, was not as their God intended it.

The incident inspired the book “And Tango Makes Three,” which went on to the become one of the 10 most banned books by public schools and libraries for five years, but also went on to became a national bestseller. Roy, Silo, baby Tango and the absurdly abhorrent protests by the Christian-right inspired a play for young audiences penned by Emily Freeman called “And Then Came Tango,” which premiered during the 2011 Cohen New Works Festival at The University of Texas in Austin.

But being Texas, the reception for the play was not exactly warm. The Austin Independent School District said the play—which they had not seen or read—dealt with a subject matter that should be discussed by parents with their children at a time they deem appropriate.

The play fared no better in California, where same-sex marriage was very much legal at the time, when the Mariposa County School Board voted overwhelmingly to cancel a planned run of “And Then Came Tango” by one of its charter schools.

Rob Watson—a writer for “The Next Family”—sent a letter to the school board in which he wrote, “The family depicted in ‘And Then Came Tango’ is mine. We are not penguins, and my sons were not hatched, but aside from those set-decorating changes, it is us … My sons, like other kids from differing family structures, fully grasp the concept of mutual respect between families. It is the principle where we listen to each other and find common ground, not a focus on our differences. It is a concept that you have just voted down. It is a lesson you have yet to learn.”

All over this country, planned performances of “And Then Came Tango” have been repeatedly thwarted by the influence wielded over school boards by the homophobic. Happily, for me and the many others who got to see a stellar production of the play at Orlando Fringe, this was not the case. Windermere High School Thespian Troupe 8483 not only was allowed to present the play, but it won honors in competition and was selected to be presented at Orlando Fringe as part of its “Fingers of the Future” initiative where it won multiple awards and was a Patron’s Pick.

I cried buckets of tears watching this production, partially due to the content of the play but more so because I was so very proud of these outstanding students and I was feeling fiercely proud and fortunate to reside in a community where these students can and did present “And Then Came Tango,” and were deservedly rewarded for doing so.

As a result of all of this, I am left with the aforementioned question of which I am admittedly sheepish to pose. That being, should gay persons really be bringing children into the world by whatever means possible rather than adopting?

It occurs to me that if we insist, and medical science substantiates, that homosexuality is a naturally occurring state of being then might it not be by design that we are not intended to sire children? Is there any possibility that homosexuality is nature’s population control?

Perhaps instead of manipulating science to achieve a desired end through surrogates and/or sperm donors for the purpose of manufacturing a biological offspring we should instead welcome into our families those children who already exist and need our love?

If nature intended us to be gay might it then actually be going against nature to utilize science to achieve the offspring we cannot naturally conceive with the person we love?

I’m just asking.

Write to me with your thoughts if you are inclined to. In the meantime, if you have the opportunity to see “And Then Came Tango” do yourself a favor and make it happen.

Michael Wanzie is a playwright and theatrical producer residing in Orlando. You may subscribe to his weekly WANZeGRAM performing arts & cultural e-newsletter by logging onto WANZIE.com.

More in Opinion

See More