bruto
Penultimate Amazing
Agreed. If you give an opinion, I think it reasonable for anyone to ask why, as I also think it permissible, if not very admirable, to refuse or evade an answer.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Drag Shows!!
- Thread starter crescent
- Start date
-
- Tags
- drag drag shows
- Status
Agreed. If you give an opinion, I think it reasonable for anyone to ask why, as I also think it permissible, if not very admirable, to refuse or evade an answer.
Nobody ever said that an opinion wasn't allowed, this has been pointed out to you.
If you're willing to lie about that small matter why should I believe you when you insist that you weren't going to get stuck into the person you were interrogating if you got the answer you were looking for.
How I arrived at my conclusion has already been fully explained to you.
Parsman
Muse
No, I'm happy with my statement. I have never been comfortable with the "some of my best friends are black" narrative. Your position seems to be about something that is not a serious problem, maybe just because it makes you feel icky?
What are you talking about? When have I ever used any variation of, "some of my best friends are black"? Are you confusing me with someone else?
You talk about my "position" and insist that I'm unhappy about the Gender Reform Bill yet you have absolutely nothing to base that on. I'm almost certain that I've never espoused an opinion on gender issues. I am certain that I've never debated the GRB. This is because I wasn't aware of it until you brought it to my attention.
Can you expand on why you think my position is that it (whatever "it" is) makes me feel "icky"?
Just to help you, here is my stated position, posted in this very thread.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13972705&postcount=395
Last edited:
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Last edited:
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 36,952
By nobody I was referring to myself during my exchange with Robin. Try harder.
Last edited:
That's it? That's all you've got?
Not really making much of a case are we.
What is it I'm uncomfortable with? It should be easy for you.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Robin wasn’t specifically talking to you. There is no context where “nobody” means just you. We can’t read your mind. You need to write what you mean.
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2008
- Messages
- 18,095
Reel your own in. I didn't 'insist' you insisted. In fact one of my core criticisms of your posts is that you've been attempting to obfuscate your points to shield them from criticism. 'Creeping towards a new fallacy' phrased as a question isn't as solid a shield as you seem to think it is. Claiming you insisted would undercut my own objection.
You've told people they're being unreasonably hostile several times now and each time it's to get out of making your arguments more substantial. Being critical of your points isn't some sign of silly anger and even being angry doesn't make someone's points wrong.
It doesn't matter what you're interested in; it still illustrates the point. The argument supported by your citation, the only argument it makes any sense to use that as evidence for, is refuted whether or not you stand by or endorse the argument personally. You agree to it here, which is great.
That you're 'just asking/answering questions'.
That children would be exposed to people like the one from your citation.
Yeah, there we are, having seen that you're not going to own the arguments you want to advance by pretending you're not even exploring them as a devil's advocate.
You're trying to find a reason these events shouldn't be and failing. That wouldn't be bad as an honest examination, but you're just claiming everyone else is angry and assigning arguments to you that you've touched on but claimed not to advance. In an honest examination, such points being refuted would be of good use, not bristled at. It's just showing how little there is to demands that drag be restricted to only adult venues.
Last edited:
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2004
- Messages
- 14,971
I was talking to Robin. Let it go.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
And It is not all about you in a public forum.
As they say,
and maybe admit when you are wrong from time to time.
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 36,952
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Oh, okay then. Let's have it your way.
No children were explicity and directly harmed while explicitly attending a DQSH event. We exclude any and all drag events that are aimed at or marketed to include children, if they are not explicitly named as DQSH or DQST events. We also exclude the pedophilic behaviors of any drag performers if those pedophilic behaviors occurred outside of specifically time-limited DQSH/DQST events. We will also exclude any drag events aimed at children that are positioned as "family friendly" provided that either 1) they include disclaimers that "family friendly" doesn't actually mean "family friendly" and may not be suitable for all ages or 2) whoever complained about the inappropriate content or behavior can be cast as ***Right Wing*** by someone on the internet, and thus summarily dismissed.
We'll just gloss right over the repeated overlap between DQSH and child porn and CSA. That's all just coincidence. We'll close our eyes and just pretend that efforts to introduce content that 'bends traditional norms of sexuality' to very young children, from a collection of individuals with a high proportion of 'MAP' behaviors is all just a figment of our imagination.
If you look really really hard, and squint a bit, you might be able to convince yourself that there really are five lights.
plague311
Great minds think...
I'd also be pissed if I found a few examples of something happening but couldn't use it to tar and feather an entire group of people. I say generalizations for all!
Props for at least admitting that none of the claims you made actually happened at a drag event, and that the people who run the events put disclaimers out that children shouldn't attend when, in fact, children shouldn't attend.
Lots of growth in this post. Good stuff. Food for thought *num num num*
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
FYI, it might be worth doing some research on the reason for the gay panic, and perhaps considering the dynamic here.
Consider that a significant amount of the push-back to gay rights was explicitly because NAMBLA attached itself to the movement. A lot of the objection was not to gay rights, it was to the normalization of pedophilia under the guise of gay rights. Consider that lesbians were strongly opposed to the inclusion of various pedophile rights activists in the gay rights movement, but were ignored by their male peers who didn't think it was a big deal. Are you surprised that the response to opposition to pedophilia was framed as if it were people correlating gay with pedo? The actual complaint - that pedos were using gay rights as a smokescreen - was drowned out by people claiming they were brainwashed by the evil christian right.
Go look at your history. As soon as the gay rights movement actually dumped NAMBLA out of its support network, surprise surprise! Gay rights, marriage equality, all of it came pretty fast, and with the only remaining opposition being exclusively religious in nature.
Now. Take that under consideration, and go look at the sheer number of "MAP" organizations, literature, and campaigning that has attached itself to the LGBTQIA+%@#%& umbrella, look at the "MAP" apologists and sympathizers who are so incredibly pro DQSH as well as various other alphabet related "civil rights" activities.
Go do some research into MAP, and how it has hooked itself into all of the activities that progressives are so gung-ho for. And then step back and look at the volume of both females and lesbians who oppose this forced-teaming.
Literally zero people who weren't already homophobic ever associated NAMBLA with gay rights.
Real talk.
"Drag" as a concept is kinda... I dunno weird (weird. I said weird. I did not say bad. I did not say evil. I did not say predatory. I said weird) AS A CONCEPT in a world with gender fluidity and all that.
Putting on clothes and acting like the other gender as an act, without any pretense of a change in identity is, again just a little weird when viewed through modern gender politics.
"Drag" as a concept is kinda... I dunno weird (weird. I said weird. I did not say bad. I did not say evil. I did not say predatory. I said weird) AS A CONCEPT in a world with gender fluidity and all that.
Putting on clothes and acting like the other gender as an act, without any pretense of a change in identity is, again just a little weird when viewed through modern gender politics.
- Status