Argh, I thought I mentioned that Woody should be an easier find than any of the other toys, and certainly should be more common than a standee. Those things inevitably wear out and go into the trash in under a month. My bad.
Scott Plaid, you’ve still not explained how love is keeping Stinky Pete going. He never got bought, let alone played with. He’s not feeding off Al, who’s only interested in the money. Nobody else seems to have a collection of Woody stuff for Japan to buy. How’s this work?
Case Sensitive, please Over-analyze your favorite children’s story in that thread. Thank you!
Case Sensitive,
Once again, let me express my admiration for your penetrating insight into the subtext of the Toy Story movies. I would also, however, like to call a few additional matters that you overlooked to your attention:
Although you have quite correctly identified the homoerotic tension that exists between Woody and Buzz, and in a bravura display of erudition enumerated the sybolic references to it in the text, you confined your analysis primarily to the Toy Story I which did, indeed, end with Woody and Buzz apparently comfortable and fulfilled in their newfound sexuality.
In Toy Story 2, we find that Woody and Buzz are not as comfortable in a same-sex relationship as the ending of 1 might have implied and that the sexual permutations aren’t as simple as you might have wished. At the opening of the movie, Woody is symbolically (and literally) disarmed by Andy, whom you previously and correctly identified as a paternal figure in 1. It is, perhaps, also significant that this echoes the castration-as-rite-of-passage that Buzz endured in 1. We must look deeply at this particular instance, however. Why does Andy symbolically castrate Woody? Is it simply a reitteration of the Oedipal archetype? Though it may initially appear as such, Andy is no longer a symbolic father figure. Indeed the situation is quite reversed. Andy is growing up and will shortly no longer need Woody. In essence, the Oedipal trope has been reversed. Andy, as the physically and sexually maturing male child, castrates Woody who is now the father figure. This interpretation of the sexual subtext is supported by the fact that Woody has been “with” Andy’s mother longer than Andy himself. Clearly, Andy does not consider Woody either metaphorically or literally impotent, leading to his, perhaps, subconsciously deliberate castration attempt.
During this same act, we see Buzz engaged in various exuberantly physical pursuits. He does not, however, engage in the more-or-less overtly homoerotic interaction with Woody seen at the end of 1. Is Buzz putting on a “mating display” in an attempt to entice Woody back into their previous, more sexual, relationship? Is Buzz’s disregard for his own safety an overt manisfestation of a guilt-induced deathwish engendered by self-disgust at having engaged in homosexual activity with Woody? Both interpretations, at this stage, are possible.
Later, after he has been stolen, Woody is physically dominated by the cowgirl doll. This further confuses him sexually, for his iconsof femininity to this point have been the demure Bo Peep and the domestic Mrs. Potato Head. He is utterly unprepared to be “manhandled” by a female. Note, though, that he quickly adjusts to the new relationship. Much more quickly than he did to his experimental homosexuality with Buzz. Clearly, Woody still self-identifies as a heterosexual.
Meanwhile, Buzz, Potato Head, the slinky dog, and Hamm “mount” (so to speak0 their rescue mission. This entire subplot is so riddled with sexual metaphor, that it actually deserves seperate treatment. Suffice it to say, we see Potato Head sodomized with various foreign objects by his own wife…which is then expanded as an “out take” gag during the credits. The obvious message is that anal play is an activity that people of any sexual orientation may engage in. You have already covered much of what might be said about Hamm, save that during this rescue mission he loses his cork and symbolically defecates coins in full view of his companions. An unclean pig, indeed. The slinky dog is nothing short of the most exaggerated phallic symbol in either movie, and as such, I will deal with him in a dedicated treatise. Rex the Dinosaur begins the mission as yet another impotent male character. The repeated references to his arms being to short to allow him to effectively play his video game underline this interpretation. An older term for game controller is “joystick.” Rex is so demasculinized that he cannot even adroitly handle his joystick IOW masturbate. Yet note, that when he is picked up bodily by his male companions and used as a battering ram (surely one of the most phallic images in our collective conscious) he is effective. Rex, then, is truly homosexual and finds fullfillment in the arms of his male companions.
Just when it appears that all may be set right, Stinky Pete who has to this point presented as a kindly, paternalistic figure is revealed as treacherous and castrates Woody again! The message? Obviously that Woody, as a sexually mature heterosexual male, has no need of father figures. Other adult males can only be perceived as rivals. It is interesting to note that as the movie reaches its conclusion, it is considered as poetic justice that Stinky Pete is now in the possession of a girl who will apply make-up to him and otherwise feminize him. He is subject now to the same castration he inflicted on Woody. This echoes both classical Greek drama and the “surprise ending” dramas once typified by such shows as “The Twilight Zone.” Woody now grasps that he neither needs a father-figure of his own, nor is he required to continue to serve as one for Andy. Instead, as a virile male (note that when he repairs the arm that has served as a symbolic penis he increases its girth) he finds true self-actualization in pursuing a sexual relationship with Bo Peep. Likewise, Buzz and the cowgirl doll have bonded, their extreme physicality implying a mutual enjoyment of rough sex. With this in mind, I think you will see that Buzz and Woody’s earlier foray into homosexuality was, at most, situational; with Buzz forcing the issue. I stand by my earlier assessment that Buzz, on some level, could be said to have raped Woody.
Sorry for all the typos and badly phrased thoughts in that last post. One should never deconstruct drunk.
[QUOTE=don Jaime]
He’s not feeding off Al, who’s only interested in the money. QUOTE]
What the hell was that!?
Oh, I need to turn off the Official Strong Bad Voice Modulation Box*.
Ok, let’s try this again.
Fine Strong Bad merchandise can be found where ever fine Cheapasfree Products are sold.
Of course, he is feeding off of Al. He is slightly overweight. Al is slightly overweight. When Al sees him, he is filled with a kind of misdirected admiration, almost romantic in nature. He sees Pete as the prime of perfection.
There, perfectly alliterated.
I mean, explaun-urated.
Case Sensitive,
Upon further reflection, I believe it necessary to address your interpretation of the meaning of Buzz’s laser. Although Buzz believes it to be a real laser, woody correctly identifies it immediately as just a mere light. That is to say he recognizes Buzz’s heterosexual potency as a sham, even though Buzz himself does not. The true key to Buzz’s role in the sexual dynamic vis a vis Woody lies not in the laser itself but in the posture Buzz adopts when “firing” it. He lunges forcefully toward the target with his laser arm/phallic symbol aggressively out thrust. His clear message is an intent to forcefully violate the target. But wait, the hand on his laser arm is clenched into a fist, a universal icon of anger and violence. That fist, however, is flexed in a limp-wrist posture. Buzz is obviously signalling to the world at large with each discharge of his laser that he is an angry homosexual; though that homosexuality as I have already stated is situational. Who is the first target of Buzz’s laser display? Woody. I think you will agree that this is an obvious foreshadowing of Buzz’s symbolic rape of Woody later in the film.
Oh *that * Case Sensitive. :dubious:
I feel like I should scold you, but your contributions to this thread have made you priceless, so Kythereia, if you see this, for my sake let it slide! 
This is great, dudes!! I love it!
Any chance of someone calling or emailing Pixar and finding out “their” version? 
If you ever get a chance to share these theories with John lasseter, please snap a photo of his jaw-dropping doubletake for posterity.
We were just rehearsing for the school play.
I am folded at the waist in laughter, Mr. Sensitive. Please do with my bent-over self whatever you will.
Ewwwwww.
I didn’t think he, or she would do that!
I see. Scott, I think I’ll pass on having any babies with you.
I am now seriously curious about what you guys can do with Monsters Inc.
Case Sensitive and Scumpup: I enjoyed your attempt to explore the symbolism inherent in Woody’s empty holster. I wish to respectfully disagree with your conclusions, however. I will draw your attention to one glaringly obvious data point evident in both the primary and secondary apologues: Woody’s holster is empty and crucially always has been empty. It is not so much a representation or motif of emasculation as it is of muliebrity. Woody is self evidently chromosonically determined, and specifically is displaying her genitals on his hip. Yet he/she dresses as a male. It is here that the movie is asking a profound question of the viewer: is a person’s sex determined by genitalia or through lifestyle choices? It is an inherently complex question and the movie expects much of the audience. For a start it leaves open the question of whether Woody is a tranvestite or a transexual. There are numerous clues that lead to the latter answer, however. One of the more obvious can be seen in his nickname “Woody”. As has been noted, this term is a euphenism for the erect phallus. So whilst Woody is choosing to thrust her birth given pudenda into the viewers face through the symbolism of the empty holster, in juxtaposition he is waving his erect phallic member through the allusion of his sobriquet. It is within this ambiguity that the sexual tension of the movie, and one might extrapolate genre, is manifested.
Hey guys- we made Threadspotting!!! Whoot- whoot!! 
Hi! For the most part I love your subtextual analysis. (Heh. "anal"ysis.) However, I cannot let this section slide. Please read the appropriate snippet from your previous post:
Please revise before publication. Thank you.
Woody wants to bone Buzz.
Thank you for pointing out this apparent {but only apparent} discrepancy, Rufus Xavier. I inadvertantly {although tellingly} substituted “slit” for “slot”: however, I contend that the similarity of the two words both phonetically and semantically only serves to further reinforce my point about Hamm’s yonic nature.
Now, if we agree that “slot” may thus be read as “slit”, the same phonemic substitution which gives us “slut”, if applied to “Sid” would, of course, give us “sud”: French for south, and thus an obvious reference to “down there”, a sqeamish euphemism for the genitals or anus.
This squeamishness mirrors both Woody and Buzz’s reluctance to confront their true natures: indeed, it is not until they are physically free of the metaphorical constraints of Sid’s yard that they are, on another level, physically free to accept their true sexualities, beyond the social constraints that previously bound them.
Or A Bug’s Life. I’m sure pages could be said about the relationship between Slim (the stick bug) and his friend Francis (the ladybug). In fact, when the theatre bugs are in the city bar, the flies that had been harassing Francis in an earlier scene arrive. Slim says, “Francis, your boyfriends are back.” Add to that the part where Francis picks Slim up and uses him as a sword.