Drag Shows!!

[lionking]

Most children's books don't go into the details you fear, and simply seeing a man in a dress isn't going to 'instruct about LGBTQ issues', it will only show the child that such exists. So that those children who feel similar know that they're not alone. That they're not freaks that shouldn't be alive. Better chance of them living to grow up that way.

You are talking about children as young as 3. With much older children you may have an argument, but not very young kids.

 

[The Don]

Most children's books don't go into the details you fear, and simply seeing a man in a dress isn't going to 'instruct about LGBTQ issues', it will only show the child that such exists. So that those children who feel similar know that they're not alone. That they're not freaks that shouldn't be alive. Better chance of them living to grow up that way.

You've managed to cut to the heart of the problem. There are a lot of people, not all of them right-wing nutjobs who are uncomfortable with today's acceptance of LBGTQ+ and non-binary people and lifestyles.

Those on the hard right are quite happy to come out and call LBGTQ+ and non-binary people freaks and monsters, are happy to shun them and wish them harm and/or that they would just go away and disappear from view.

Those who are less hard right know that it's not nice to say these things so instead hide their prejudice by saying that it's too early for LBGTQ+ and non-binary people to hear that they're not freaks, that there are plenty of people out there like them and that they should not be frightened or ashamed. They're not happy to "own" their prejudice and instead pretend to be accepting whilst at the same time talking about pushing agendas.

 

[Stacyhs]

Thank you for your single person evidence based post. Interesting, but of no relevance to this thread.

It's more relevant than anything you've presented.

 

[catsmate]

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

I'm far from alone in my view.

Right......
It perhaps you are a very, very, unrepresentative outlier?

Drag isn't my thing, but I went to a show last year, plenty of women present enjoying themselves.

 

[catsmate]

Thank you for your single person evidence based post. Interesting, but of no relevance to this thread.

Except as a refutation of Emily's Cat's whole 'women feel belittled by drag' nonsense.

 

[catsmate]

Given the strident criticism of people opposing your position, how about you providing evidence that only a minority of women do not like drag? You are making this claim after all.

But you won’t. Telling.

Anyone see a set of goalposts passing?

 

[lionking]

Except as a refutation of Emily's Cat's whole 'women feel belittled by drag' nonsense.

Well, of course you will accept one man’s personal opinion while declaring EC hysterical. Telling.

 

[pgwenthold]

Most children's books don't go into the details you fear, and simply seeing a man in a dress isn't going to 'instruct about LGBTQ issues', it will only show the child that such exists. So that those children who feel similar know that they're not alone. That they're not freaks that shouldn't be alive. Better chance of them living to grow up that way.

Yeah, I mean, what books do people think are being read at DQST? Do they think they are books about gender identity and sexual orientation? Not as far as I know. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's not what I've heard.

I am even thinkings, what would drag have to do with LGBT issues? Drag does not imply L nor G nor B nor T.

It seems like a major strawman to me.

And to the claim that kids are too young to teach LGBT stuff....

Remember the whining about teaching kids "gender identity" when they are too young to understand it? Oh, but Billy, you have to go to the BOYS bathroom. And line up in the hallway with boys on one side and girls on the other.

But don't you dare teach them about gender identity.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Well, of course you will accept one man’s personal opinion while declaring EC hysterical. Telling.

This may amaze two posters here but EC is not the official spokesperson for all women.

 

[Upchurch]

You are talking about children as young as 3. With much older children you may have an argument, but not very young kids.

What you're missing is that those topics are already introduced to children as young as 3, only from a cis, hetero perspective.

 

[catsmate]

Well, of course you will accept one man’s personal opinion while declaring EC hysterical. Telling.

We're all waiting for EC, and yourself, to support the assertion that most women consider drag performances to be a "highly sexualized portrayals of our bodies for the titillation and entertainment of males", specifically that she is "far from alone" in her views.

Let's see the evidence.....

 

[plague311]

Indeed. And, while I would have no problem with people in drag reading stories, it is the mission that I have problems with. I do not think that anyone, let alone hetro males, should be instructing young child about LGBTQ issues. They are far too young, and if it were my tax dollars in play, I would object.

Why? Why can't anyone instruct young children about LGBTQ issues? Do they have to be gay to be compassionate or show empathy? Can only PoC teach others about racial issues? I don't care who provides the instruction and direction to the children as long as it's informative and accurate. I can't imagine what difference the sexual orientation of the person giving the lesson would make.

I've taught my son's not to hit women and I'm not a woman.

 

[Thermal]

Yeah, I mean, what books do people think are being read at DQST? Do they think they are books about gender identity and sexual orientation? Not as far as I know. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's not what I've heard.

In the posted video clips, the works being read are specifically gender identification themed, and one was called Heather Has Two Mommies or something like that.

I am even thinkings, what would drag have to do with LGBT issues? Drag does not imply L nor G nor B nor T.

It seems like a major strawman to me.

Take it up with the DSH founder, who says their declared purpose is to provide positive "queer role models". So her intent is one thing, and her guise another.

And to the claim that kids are too young to teach LGBT stuff....

Remember the whining about teaching kids "gender identity" when they are too young to understand it? Oh, but Billy, you have to go to the BOYS bathroom. And line up in the hallway with boys on one side and girls on the other.

But don't you dare teach them about gender identity.

Gender identity instruction is fine, if being taught by someone who knows what they are doing. The qualifications for DHS seem to be that you have to have a penis and wear fabulous female attire. Way to normalize atypical presentation. I mean, if the kids introduction is by someone in a neon wig and Barnum and Bailey level makeup (look at the website), they are presenting atypical gender presentation at the level of a clown. Off-message, that.

Oh, and I believe schools separate bathrooms and locker rooms by sex, not gender. Considering the immature potential for abuse, that's probably a prudent decision.

 

[Thermal]

Just noticed that this is in USA Pol. Isn't this more a social issue?

 

[Checkmite]

What you're missing is that those topics are already introduced to children as young as 3, only from a cis, hetero perspective.

Very definitely. From pretty much the beginning of their life children face continuous messaging that a heterosexual interest and eventual relationship is their natural fated future and the presumptive expectation of their adult family. It's in the jokes and remarks their parents casually make, and in the media they consume. It's far more direct, voluminous, and explicit messaging than they would ever get from seeing a man wearing women's clothing while reading a book.

 

[lionking]

This may amaze two posters here but EC is not the official spokesperson for all women.

I didn't say she was. I did say she was called hysterical though.

 

[Stacyhs]

Very definitely. From pretty much the beginning of their life children face continuous messaging that a heterosexual interest and eventual relationship is their natural fated future and the presumptive expectation of their adult family. It's in the jokes and remarks their parents casually make, and in the media they consume. It's far more direct, voluminous, and explicit messaging than they would ever get from seeing a man wearing women's clothing while reading a book.

That is true. Children are, from birth, subtly and variously taught that boys and girls have different roles and expectations and that heterosexuality is 'normal'. We see it in how toys are marketed, the colors blue and pink (girls can wear both, but try and find pink clothing for boys). My daughter was into dinosaurs from about age 3-4. I searched in vain for girls' clothing featuring dinosaurs. I eventually found ONE dress that had dinosaurs on it. I had to buy boys' pajamas in order to get a dino pattern. Barbie has a boyfriend, not a wife/girlfriend. Three and four year olds may be young, but they do absorb these 'lessons' even if subconsciously.

 

[pgwenthold]

That is true. Children are, from birth, subtly and variously taught that boys and girls have different roles and expectations and that heterosexuality is 'normal'. We see it in how toys are marketed, the colors blue and pink (girls can wear both, but try and find pink clothing for boys). My daughter was into dinosaurs from about age 3-4. I searched in vain for girls' clothing featuring dinosaurs. I eventually found ONE dress that had dinosaurs on it. I had to buy boys' pajamas in order to get a dino pattern. Barbie has a boyfriend, not a wife/girlfriend. Three and four year olds may be young, but they do absorb these 'lessons' even if subconsciously.

And no one ever clutches their pearls over whether the people sending these "lessons" are qualified to do it.

As I said, kids in kindergarten or before are funnelled into Boys and Girls bathrooms, and lineup in the hallway as boys and girls. But hey, at least in Florida, no one is allowed to teach them gender identity....

 

[mgidm86]

Well, of course you will accept one man’s personal opinion while declaring EC hysterical. Telling.

You mean the opinion that also provided evidence that a large number of drag show attendees are women and that number is growing?

If you (whoever) don't like it don't go. If you want it to be illegal start a petition maybe.

Yes, I am sick of and offended by conservatives sticking their noses up everyones' asses year after year, decade after decade, with their feigned (or real) hysterics over the same type of ********. You are more offensive than any drag queen could ever be and more annoying than a broken record.

 

[tyr_13]

Most children's books don't go into the details you fear, and simply seeing a man in a dress isn't going to 'instruct about LGBTQ issues', it will only show the child that such exists. So that those children who feel similar know that they're not alone. That they're not freaks that shouldn't be alive. Better chance of them living to grow up that way.

I think a lot of people are completely misconstruing the term 'instruct' but you hit the nail on the head. They aren't reading books about that stuff, nor are they instructing by giving lectures. They are instructing by existing, openly. By participating in public life the way they are, like everyone else. The instruction is 'this kind of flamboyant person exists and that's fine'.

There is always the similar 'respectability' argument about pride parades and the presence of the 'kink' people. People marching mostly naked. People marching in gimp outfits. But these people openly marching is what it took to get the level of acceptance of non-cishet existence there is today. Even some of the gay community will be critical of the 'flaming' gays, as if it's holding the movement back.

But people opposed to things like that, and things like drag, on the grounds that it makes the lgbtq community less respectable are fundamentally wrong in that the number of people who say they'd support non-straight people more if not for the flamboyant elements and would actually follow through is vanishingly small. It's even smaller than the people who say that think. There will always, forever, be another excuse, another rationalization, to keep them from supporting public participation by anyone not cisgender and heterosexual. They tell themselves the nice story that it's 'just because they're in you face about it' or 'it isn't appropriate for children', but those excuses shouldn't fool anyone including themselves. They might wish they actually supported non-straight people, cognitively they might known that they should, but they don't.

You are talking about children as young as 3. With much older children you may have an argument, but not very young kids.

And as old as ten. This makes you incorrect on two levels.