Drag Shows!!

[pgwenthold]

How is providing gay role models more of an "agenda" (sinister scare cord music sting) then straight role models?

Much like the mythology that everything non-traditional sexual people do is about sex, everything they do seems to have "an agenda."

"Hello. I exist. I deserve the right to exist without hiding what I am" is not an agenda.

You see this type of stuff in the "anti-gay marriage" and anti-trans crap that comes out all the time.

You will even hear explicit claims like, "The kids are too young, we can't teach them about gender" while at the same time still having Boys and Girls bathrooms in schools. And telling them which of these bathrooms they have to go to.

Apparently, they aren't too young to be taught about gender that way.

With anti-gay marriage, it's ok for a woman to have a picture of her husband on her desk, but not her wife.

Yep, it's about hiding it.

Remember in the gay marriage debate, the complaint was, if gay marriage is legal, then it will be taught in our schools!!!! What will be taught in our schools? That it is legal? Well, yeah. Because it is. The real complaint is that the schools won't teach that it is bad.

 

[pgwenthold]

2. "This is John. He wears a dress." End of discussion. It ain't that hard.
.

As I've said many times, this is only an issue if you start with the presumption that drag is bad. But if you don't hold that as a foundation, it all falls apart. Because if you don't hold that presumption, then nothing you see in DQSH is going to make you think it.

And that's the case with kids. They have to be taught that draq queens are bad. Because nothing they would see would actually make them think it on their own.

Now, you could say that for a lot of people. I mean, the Serial Killer Story Hour could be just as innocuous. And in that case, you can tell the kids honestly why they are bad. Then again, it's not clear that this would change the story hour.

As usual, kids need to be taught to hate. Don't teach hate, and things are much better.

 

[bruto]

If it helps any, I would suggest that the word "hysterical" would be equally applied to our late colleague Warp12. Despite the unfortunate etymology of the word, these days it describes an equal-opportunity characteristic.

Robin's discourse is pretty well summed up by "you can't win." The host is guilty of the parasite.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

Don’t forget the worst demographic of all for child molestation: family members and family friends.

DSH is a drop-in-the-bucket attempt to reduce non-cis-gendered bullying and bring down the self-harm rate of that group. It’s not mandatory. No one in this thread has shown that it hurts anyone beyond the anxiety from a conservative media driven moral panic.

EC has, once again, bought into the propaganda over the reality to the point she can’t even decide if she’s outraged about this situation because of pedophiles or drag queen caricatures of women.


ETA: derp. Ninja’d on the family thing.

Yeah, I've mentioned family, not to forget research linking the majority of known abuse to certain extended families in particular study areas, a couple of times in this thread alone and have done so in several other similar threads.

Amazing how frequently all such posts by whichever of us makes them never get any sort of response...Strange indeed.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Because there is no counter-argument. The facts have been presented and they are not in dispute.

Edited by jimbob: 

snip for rule 12

This isn't a discussion with two sides.

 

[catsmate]

<drivel snip>

What has this distorted drivel have to do with your hysterical prejudices against drag?

 

[JoeMorgue]

So you're fine with Drag Queens reading to children outside the US then?

Where's Jabba when you need a "roadmap" of a discussion to make sense of any of it...

 

[jimbob]

I've split 55 posts about the risk of child abuse and drag acts to

"Perceived risk of child abuse from transvestites"

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=363821

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jimbob

 

[catsmate]

BTW this thread has inspired me to pick up a new book for my pile:
Death in Heels by Kitty Murphy, the first in the Dublin Drag Mysteries series.

 

[jimbob]

I have put a load more posts into AAH

My understanding from the OP is that the topic is Drag Shows and the perceived risk that some people think they pose to children

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jimbob

 

[Robin]

Why oh why, it's such a mystery that females might object to highly sexualized portrayals of our bodies for the titillation and entertainment of males?

You are the first woman I have heard objecting to drag queens on the basis that they are sexist since the early eighties.

For context, the women in the early eighties who objected to drag queens are the same ones who wanted the song "Pretty Woman" changed to "Pretty Human" to stop it being sexist.

 

[lionking]

You are the first woman I have heard objecting to drag queens on the basis that they are sexist since the early eighties.

And how is this even remotely relevant? Firstly, it is a commentary of only one person, and for all anyone knows you could have been living in a cave since the 1980s. And secondly you dismiss Emily Cat’s opinions without making any attempt to refute them.

Edited by jimbob: 

off topic snipped

 

[Upchurch]

And how is this even remotely relevant? Firstly, it is a commentary of only one person, and for all anyone knows you could have been living in a cave since the 1980s. And secondly you dismiss Emily Cat’s opinions without making any attempt to refute them.

Edited by jimbob: 

off topic snipped

Wait, what? Unless they’ve been shunted off to one of the many split threads, Robin has done almost nothing in this thread but debunk EC’s claims.

 

[Robin]

And how is this even remotely relevant?

Pay attention and I'll explain. EC was asking why it was such a mystery why women might object to drag queens.

My answer was that, in my case it was because it is unusual in my experience for women to have negative reactions to drag queens.

It is not a question for which there can be a generic 'one size fits all' answer because different people will have different reasons so the only possible answer is a subjective one.

So the relevance is that it was a direct answer to a question she asked. I'm not sure why that puzzles you so much

Edited by jimbob: 

off topic snipped

.

Of course I refuted her. You came late in the discussion, but that's no reason for you to leap to the unsupported and erroneous conclusion that I hadn't tried to counter her.

She claimed that gay activism was infested by pedophile apologists through the 70s and 80s and they had only been ejeted in the 90s at which point acceptance of gays happened very quickly.

My counter claim, from being part of that movement in the 80s and close friends with people involved in the GLF all through the 70s, that pedos tried to infest the movement but that we resisted them and were largely Successful in avoiding infiltration.

Her evidence was that NAMBLA had been member of a Brussels based organisation for ten years (and active in the organisation for five years before that) and that this organisation had gained consultative status at a UN body.

I pointed out that this didn't support her claim because this organisation was just one organisation among many and that it was only a miniscule part of the movement generally. Them having consultative status with a I. body doesn't imply they are a significant part of our movement, only that they were good at playing the UN game

Her other evidence was that a CHE meeting had passed two resolutions favourable to PIE in the mid seventies.

I pointed out that alleged votes at one meeting of 80-100 people in Sheffield 45 years ago was hardly evidence of an infestation throughout the 70s.

I also pointed out that the journalist's source in the article she linked was a pedo, who are not the most honest and reliable people.

I also pointed out that in her link it said that a senior member had spoken at the end of the meeting and condemned PIE and pedos in general in no uncertain terms.

Her other evidence was the pedo infiltration of NCCL. I pointed out that NCCL was not a gay organisation.

I have also pointed out what should be obvious that pedos tried to infest organisations in all walks of life. The fact that the only evidence she could find was that the pedos managed to infiltrate a Brussels based gay organisation for 20 years shows that we repelled the pedos with a pretty high success rate compared to other organisations (the Catholic Church being the obvious example.

So, a direct counter to her claims from someone who was in the thick of it in the 80s repelling the pedo infiltrators.

(Although I am guessing you will continue to pretend I didn't counter her argument.)

 

[Stacyhs]

And how is this even remotely relevant? Firstly, it is a commentary of only one person, and for all anyone knows you could have been living in a cave since the 1980s. And secondly you dismiss Emily Cat’s opinions without making any attempt to refute them.

Edited by jimbob: 

off topic snipped

We must be reading a completely different thread.

 

[mgidm86]

I'm done with this thread because I can't figure out where my posts went and which new thread has what in it. I feel like I've said enough anyways.

To summarize my views: Most of the people I know who go to shows are women, and the stats back up the fact that women are a large part of the audience.

To me this is just another conservative attempt at attacking whoever they hate with whatever argument they can dream up. Standard operating procedure:

- Find something you hate.
- Attach some kind of phony moral argument to it.
- Convince others to hate it based on that phony reasoning.
- Attack!

It isn't about women or the children, it isn't about decency, it isn't even about Gawd....those are just the excuses they use to fire people up. It is about power, as always.

ETA:
I told my gay step-Sister and her wife years ago, "I used to be against gay marriage but I could never think of a good reason why"

 

[Emily's Cat]

You are the first woman I have heard objecting to drag queens on the basis that they are sexist since the early eighties.

This suggests you haven't been listening to females since sometime in the early eighties.

I'm far from alone in my view.

 

[tyr_13]

This suggests you haven't been listening to females since sometime in the early eighties.

I'm far from alone in my view.

Besides the ones who have said that you're wrong? You're far from the majority.

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm done with this thread because I can't figure out where my posts went and which new thread has what in it. I feel like I've said enough anyways.

To summarize my views: Most of the people I know who go to shows are women, and the stats back up the fact that women are a large part of the audience.

To me this is just another conservative attempt at attacking whoever they hate with whatever argument they can dream up. Standard operating procedure:

- Find something you hate.
- Attach some kind of phony moral argument to it.
- Convince others to hate it based on that phony reasoning.
- Attack!

It isn't about women or the children, it isn't about decency, it isn't even about Gawd....those are just the excuses they use to fire people up. It is about power, as always.

ETA:
I told my gay step-Sister and her wife years ago, "I used to be against gay marriage but I could never think of a good reason why"

 

[Stacyhs]

This suggests you haven't been listening to females since sometime in the early eighties.

I'm far from alone in my view.

Failed attempt at argumentum ad populum