Drag Shows!!

[Darat]

Would you mind setting down those goalposts for a moment?

I asked you where this "in his own words, that I was given, and decided to ignore" post was. That would be at (or before) the time you claimed it. Really not clean pool to play ******* Time Lord and grasp at posts made days later.

The issue is that you thought RuPaul wasn't just playing a drag character - you assumed aspects of his "female" drag character reflected himself apparently from one quote you had from him doing a performance. Stacyh has posted quotes that show absolutely that RuPaul considers himself a man, not "gender fluid" not "Martha" or at all female - unlike his drag character. Are you now happy to agree he considers himself a man?

 

[catsmate]

Snurched from somewhere else:

[imgw=400]https://i.imgur.com/ltSd68n.png[/imgw]

Accurate, if horrific.

 

[Darat]

I'm hesitant to bring this up because I know where it could lead, but why "drag" seems to only go in one direction does seem like someone that has to at least go on the table as part of the discussion at some point.

Although maybe it's just harder to "dress up" in male clothing, I dunno.

There have always been a small number of "male impersonators" indeed go back to our pantomime tradition and you'll find Prince Charming or the principle boy is traditionally played by a woman. So yep in our pantomimes we are quite happy to have men play female characters, a beautiful young lady play the love interest of the hero, the hero that is who is a female playing a male character. At the end the two ladies usually end up kissing. Go figure.

 

[catsmate]

Here is the one Thermal found from.s medical site:

"What is bisexuality?
Bisexual people are attracted to more than one gender and may have sexual and romantic relationships with other people regardless of gender identification or genitalia. "


Thats almost exactly what I said. We are not hung up on sex or gender.

Is it time to pass around the Genderbread Person?

 

[Thermal]

You're hung up on the "call me she" part of the entire quote so much that you're ignoring the entire thing and the meaning behind the entire thing.

RuPaul didn't mean he identifies as a "she" anymore than he identifies as a "Regis" or a "Kathy Lee". RuPaul was explicitly saying "I don't care what you call me, as long as you call me." It was an "I want your attention, and I don't care what form it comes in" statement.

No, I'm not. My basic impression of a drag queen is someone who would be pretty flexible about gender representation right out of the gate. RuPauls well-known comment lightly supports that, but it's hardly what I rely on. And yes, I totally get the totality of the context. But would you, for instance, tell people you are fine with being called a she? On this forum, it is actionable to deliberately misgender a member, IIRC. Not a super casual thing, especially from a guy who markets himself as a queen.

It doesn't matter, though. I was questioning a poster who was confident in the workings of RuPaul's inner mind (I asked "you pretty sure about that?"), then challenging a claim that appears to have been entirely made up for purposes of insult. Whatever. I'm bored now.

 

[catsmate]

I'm hesitant to bring this up because I know where it could lead, but why "drag" seems to only go in one direction does seem like someone that has to at least go on the table as part of the discussion at some point.

Although maybe it's just harder to "dress up" in male clothing, I dunno.

The stereotyped hypermasculity perhaps?

 

[Thermal]

The issue is that you thought RuPaul wasn't just playing a drag character - you assumed aspects of his "female" drag character reflected himself apparently from one quote you had from him doing a performance.

No, I've in fact said repeatedly that it's what I thought being a drag queen actually is. Like, Eric Idle in women's clothing or a pantomimer is a guy in drag, but a drag queen is showing a very real part of themselves. Which as I also said repeatedly, I respect a great deal. It's living honestly. The quote seemed incidentally supportive of that.

Stacyh has posted quotes that show absolutely that RuPaul considers himself a man, not "gender fluid" not "Martha" or at all female - unlike his drag character.

What's that you say? She....actually provided evidence for her claim? You don't say?

Are you now happy to agree he considers himself a man?

Well if I felt like being a prick, I could venture that someone who was fluid might report one way one day, and another another. But before you continue to change the subject and claim a win, there remains an outstanding matter you might have overlooked five or six times?

 

[JoeMorgue]

The distinction between "playing a character" and "living a lifestyle" in literally any objective 3rd person sense of the word doesn't exist.

 

[Pacal]

The distinction between "playing a character" and "living a lifestyle" in literally any objective 3rd person sense of the word doesn't exist.

I have been enjoying the sheer silliness of this whole thread. What with acres of semantic crap etc.

What with Politicians south of the border working so hard to push various hot buttons and making political hay over Trans people and Drag shows. The recent limitation of public drag by one state is bloody hilarious. Talk about trying very hard to virtue signal and be PC to a certain large group of hysterical people obssessing over trivia.

The above quoted comment is hilarious. So I ask when a actor plays a character, say a dockworker is he / she living the Dockworker lifestyle?

Is a female impersonator living a lifestyle or is he playing a character? Is the straight actor who plays Dame Edna living a lifestyle or playing a character?

I've met enough drag queens to know that usually when they arn't in drag they are quite different because they arn't acting / performing and outside of performing they don't do drag. The number of drag queens who do drag outside of performance is actually quite small in my experience. (Oh and the drag queens I have known have earned their living in pretty ordinary occupations like - janitor, lawyer, accountant etc. If you want to describe the lifestyle of these people - janitor, lawyer, accountant would be better choices.)

 

[wareyin]

No, I'm not. My basic impression of a drag queen is someone who would be pretty flexible about gender representation right out of the gate. RuPauls well-known comment lightly supports that, but it's hardly what I rely on. And yes, I totally get the totality of the context. But would you, for instance, tell people you are fine with being called a she? On this forum, it is actionable to deliberately misgender a member, IIRC. Not a super casual thing, especially from a guy who markets himself as a queen.

It doesn't matter, though. I was questioning a poster who was confident in the workings of RuPaul's inner mind (I asked "you pretty sure about that?"), then challenging a claim that appears to have been entirely made up for purposes of insult. Whatever. I'm bored now.

Whether or not I would be fine with being called a she has no bearing on how RuPaul thinks about it. And the guy who markets himself as a queen is more concerned with being called than what he is being called. As he said.

Being flexible about gender representation seems on point when talking about someone who dresses up in a representation of a different gender. So much so that, duh, that's exactly what it is. Being gender fluid means something different. It's not about how you present yourself to others, but about your identity, how you think about yourself. You've been being very persnickety about others saying exactly what they mean, so playing fast and loose with your own language is going against your own advice.

 

[Darat]

No, I've in fact said repeatedly that it's what I thought being a drag queen actually is. Like, Eric Idle in women's clothing or a pantomimer is a guy in drag, but a drag queen is showing a very real part of themselves. Which as I also said repeatedly, I respect a great deal. It's living honestly. The quote seemed incidentally supportive of that.



What's that you say? She....actually provided evidence for her claim? You don't say?



Well if I felt like being a prick, I could venture that someone who was fluid might report one way one day, and another another. But before you continue to change the subject and claim a win, there remains an outstanding matter you might have overlooked five or six times?

What outstanding matter?

 

[Stacyhs]

Since I am obviously the "poster" you are referring to, let's take a walk down memory lane:

Are you familiar at all with RuPaul? He has very famously said "call me a he, or call me a she", and for most of his Drag Race shows, he started by saying "Gentlemen, start your engines, and may the best woman win" (it was only changed when a woman claiming she was a transman drag queen entered the competition).

You pretty sure what he identifies as, are you?

Oh, dear. Some intellectual dishonesty going on here. This is his complete statement:

"You can call me he. You can call me she. You can call me Regis & Cathy Lee; I don't care! Just as long as you call me." That is not saying he identifies as a woman.

Oh, dear again. Do you not recognize performance schtick? He says "Gentlemen" and then changes to "woman" because they're dressed in DRAG! That is glaringly obvious to most people who are not hell-bent on dying on a hill.



Yes, as a gay man. If he identified as a woman, do you think he'd be married to a GAY man?

No, I'm not. My basic impression of a drag queen is someone who would be pretty flexible about gender representation right out of the gate. RuPauls well-known comment lightly supports that, but it's hardly what I rely on. And yes, I totally get the totality of the context. But would you, for instance, tell people you are fine with being called a she? On this forum, it is actionable to deliberately misgender a member, IIRC. Not a super casual thing, especially from a guy who markets himself as a queen.

It doesn't matter, though. I was questioning a poster who was confident in the workings of RuPaul's inner mind (I asked "you pretty sure about that?"), then challenging a claim that appears to have been entirely made up for purposes of insult. Whatever. I'm bored now.

You either did not get the "totality of the context" OR you did but deliberately chose to present only the part of the quote that you have relied on (despite your claim otherwise) to support your argument.

You asked me if I was sure what he 'identifies' as; I never said I knew the "workings of his inner mind". His gender identify is one specific thing.

What's that you say? She....actually provided evidence for her claim? You don't say?

Why, yes...yes, I did. Which is far more than you have done. Your "impressions" aren't evidence. Now, how about acknowledging that RuPaul identifies as a gay man so we can move on?

 

[Thermal]

Since I am obviously the "poster" you are referring to, let's take a walk down memory lane:

You either did not get the "totality of the context" OR you did but deliberately chose to present only the part of the quote that you have relied on (despite your claim otherwise) to support your argument.

You asked me if I was sure what he 'identifies' as; I never said I knew the "workings of his inner mind". His gender identify is one specific thing.

Yeah, how about that? If we take the Genderbread Person chart supplied above by catsmate seriously, your physical sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity are three separate and distinct things. Do you get what that means? It means you can say you are a gay man who identifies as a woman. There's no contradiction if RuPaul said he was a gay man, and didn't mention in that context what he gender IDed as.

Why, yes...yes, I did. Which is far more than you have done. Your "impressions" aren't evidence.

Jesus Christ, I give you full props and you still sit there bitching? Wtf?

Also, take the time to read more carefully. I never claimed evidence, or claimed anything at all. I questioned something I'm not at all clear on, very very clearly specifying that it was nothing more than my vague understanding. As I just pointed out with the Genderbread thing, this stuff makes my head spin a bit.

For instance, you were complaining that he is a gay man, and therefore could not identify as a woman. But Genderbread Person shows there's no problem with that. So you're talking out both sides of your mouth, and complaining via another orifice.

Now, how about acknowledging that RuPaul identifies as a gay man so we can move on?

As you know, the terminology is slippery and varies from person to person. I'll happily agree that the quotes you searched for long after you made the claim (with a sigh of relief when you finally found them) say he called himself a gay man at least twice. Great! But if he means "man" as "adult male" like many of us do, it actually doesn't clear up anything. Refer to ye olde Genderbread Person again.

 

[Thermal]

What outstanding matter?

You have got to be kidding me.

 

[Stacyhs]

Yeah, how about that? If we take the Genderbread Person chart supplied above by catsmate seriously, your physical sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity are three separate and distinct things. Do you get what that means? It means you can say you are a gay man who identifies as a woman. There's no contradiction if RuPaul said he was a gay man, and didn't mention in that context what he gender IDed as.



Jesus Christ, I give you full props and you still sit there bitching? Wtf?

Also, take the time to read more carefully. I never claimed evidence, or claimed anything at all. I questioned something I'm not at all clear on, very very clearly specifying that it was nothing more than my vague understanding. As I just pointed out with the Genderbread thing, this stuff makes my head spin a bit.

For instance, you were complaining that he is a gay man, and therefore could not identify as a woman. But Genderbread Person shows there's no problem with that. So you're talking out both sides of your mouth, and complaining via another orifice.



As you know, the terminology is slippery and varies from person to person. I'll happily agree that the quotes you searched for long after you made the claim (with a sigh of relief when you finally found them) say he called himself a gay man at least twice. Great! But if he means "man" as "adult male" like many of us do, it actually doesn't clear up anything. Refer to ye olde Genderbread Person again.

The above word salad rant can be reduced to one thing: No, you cannot admit that RuPaul identifies as a gay man.

Stay up on your hill, stamp your feet, shake your fist, and defend your position until death do you part. It still doesn't make you right. Buh-bye.

 

[catsmate]

The above word salad rant can be reduced to one thing: No, you cannot admit that RuPaul identifies as a gay man.

Stay up on your hill, stamp your feet, shake your fist, and defend your position until death do you part. It still doesn't make you right. Buh-bye.

Indeed.

 

[Thermal]

The above word salad rant can be reduced to one thing: No, you cannot admit that RuPaul identifies as a gay man.

Stay up on your hill, stamp your feet, shake your fist, and defend your position until death do you part. It still doesn't make you right. Buh-bye.

Rant? What are you talking about? That's as docile as it gets. Oh, I get it. You think you're doing the Jedi mind trick. Yeah that totally works.

Here's a shorter version that you won't have to make excuses for not understanding: yep, he said he was a gay man. Nope, that need not have anything to do with his gender ID.

Yet I still don't care. I thought this might be a thread I could get some clarity about this on, but no. It's the usual.

 

[arthwollipot]

Okay but there's a limit. "It's complicated" can't be the reflexive answer to everything, especially with the "And not only will I make no attempt to clarify I will get insulted and self righteous at the idea that maybe I should and I'm basically saying it will always be complicated and that's the only answer you'll ever get" subtext.

If it's complicated, explain it better. Or at the very least eventually have a plan for that being the goal.

Oh, I'm as uncomplicated as it gets. I'm heterosexual cisgender male, straight up in that pigeonhole. I'm not the one who's complicated. But I'm the only person I can rightfully explain.

The point I'm trying to make is, again, different people are different. You can't assume that a pigeonhole that suits one person will suit anybody else, especially when you're exploring around the fringes of the subject. Someone might quite readily fit into the heterosexual cisgender male pigeonhole with me, but someone else might not. RuPaul fits into the gay male drag queen pigeonhole, but someone else might not. The only way you can know what pigeonhole a particular person fits into, if any, is to ask them. Don't ask me, don't ask RuPaul, ask the person themself.

What people get offended and frustrated about is that when you assume that someone fits into a particular pigeonhole without asking.

I've met enough drag queens to know that usually when they arn't in drag they are quite different because they arn't acting / performing and outside of performing they don't do drag. The number of drag queens who do drag outside of performance is actually quite small in my experience. (Oh and the drag queens I have known have earned their living in pretty ordinary occupations like - janitor, lawyer, accountant etc. If you want to describe the lifestyle of these people - janitor, lawyer, accountant would be better choices.)

I have known one drag queen who also wore stereotypically womens' clothes while not performing, but still identified as male and used he/him pronouns (I checked to make sure), but in my experience he was an exception. When on stage, she was Sheneeda Beverage because that was the character.

 

[arthwollipot]

Yet I still don't care. I thought this might be a thread I could get some clarity about this on, but no. It's the usual.

What additional clarity are you seeking?

 

[Carlotta]

You'd think people were running down the streets trying to avoid drag shows, stepping around one only to run smack into another from this thread.

Half this board probably couldn't find a drag show in the next 24 hours if they actively tried to seek one out.

Yeah, yeah, I'm way behind in this very long thread. A quick Google came up with a dozen places nearby with drag brunches alone. I don't go out much anymore, so I'm only familiar with one place. It's a lesbian bar. No feminists in that audience.