• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Drag Shows!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
No concern?

What about post #2349?

(Dodge about Brand widely noted.)

It is not vehement disagreement when all you have been tasked with is providing is your evidence and reasoning.
I am heartened that Esses' case and views are being read here. Stella O'Malley is a typical heavy hitter, atheist and gravely concerned by repression of organ development in youth by pharmaceutical companies who gain life long patients.
She seems to have conflated drag shows with an anecdote that nitpicking members here have pounced on like greyhounds after the race.
Esses is new blood. Go at him.
 
I am heartened that Esses' case and views are being read here. Stella O'Malley is a typical heavy hitter, atheist and gravely concerned by repression of organ development in youth by pharmaceutical companies who gain life long patients.
She seems to have conflated drag shows with an anecdote that nitpicking members here have pounced on like greyhounds after the race.
Esses is new blood. Go at him.
That's what happens when you reflexively parrot every goofy thing you read without fact checking. You get "nitpicked".

Do you care to address your lie about a drag show at the white house? Or your lie about Spark canceling customers due to controversial opinions? (I'm relatively new to the thread. I suspect there are more.)

There's a broader pattern here. You're consuming garbage data sources uncritically, and parroting their lies, and letting those lies stand even when clearly debunked (by nitpickers).

Sincerely,
varwoche
Nitpicker
 
Last edited:
Ah I see we've reached the "It's your fault for showing me I'm wrong" stage of civil debates that keep us from being in a bubble or free speech will collapse where we can't personalize the argument because that's a dirty sin but being this level of wrong isn't.
 
I am heartened that Esses' case and views are being read here. Stella O'Malley is a typical heavy hitter, atheist and gravely concerned by repression of organ development in youth by pharmaceutical companies who gain life long patients.
She seems to have conflated drag shows with an anecdote that nitpicking members here have pounced on like greyhounds after the race.
Esses is new blood. Go at him.

Nitpicking? You can't be serious? You keep presenting evidence for your arguments that isn't evidence. And when this is pointed out to you, do you acknowledge your false claim, lie or misunderstanding? No. Do you reevaluate your position? No.

I like having discussions with people of differing opinions. Sometimes I discover that my position needs refinement or even total abandonment. Sometimes it strengthens my position. Either way I learn.

But what doesn’t work is being dishonest. Dishonest not just with others, but being dishonest with oneself. Sound epistemology is how we learn. It's ok to be wrong or mistaken. It's also ok to want to defend a position.

Many here have asked you to present evidence that drag leads to gender dysphoria. And the only evidence you've presented is either another person's opinion or total falsehoods. When this is pointed out to you, you dodge and never acknowledge your misunderstanding.

So lets try again. What evidence do you have?
 
I am heartened that Esses' case and views are being read here. Stella O'Malley is a typical heavy hitter, atheist and gravely concerned by repression of organ development in youth by pharmaceutical companies who gain life long patients.
She seems to have conflated drag shows with an anecdote that nitpicking members here have pounced on like greyhounds after the race.Esses is new blood. Go at him.

Not interested in her or in Esses they are not posting their claims here. What I am interested in is you supporting your assertions and you providing the evidence that links drag entertainment to whatever medical procedures have you up-in-arms.

Let us have your evidence, your reasoning.

Stop trying to hide behind other people's skirts.
 
I agree with Darat. We're done, or at least should be, in engaging with people who only have the courage of OTHER people's convictions.

Own your own wrongness and your own hatred.
 
Exactly!

I may be strawmanning Emily, but I'm convinced that to her if the performance is clearly gay, it counts. Female impersonation in a gay way is being a drag queen. If one is just impersonating someone of the opposite sex, that's not drag.

:confused: FFS, I would really appreciate it if people would just stop making assumptions about what I think. You have convinced yourself of something that has zero relevance to my actual views. Just stop.
 
:confused: FFS, I would really appreciate it if people would just stop making assumptions about what I think. You have convinced yourself of something that has zero relevance to my actual views. Just stop.

Fair enough.

Please if you can, explain how one impersonation of someone of the opposite sex is drag and how another is not. Tell me why Wesley Snipes in Wong Foo is drag and Robin Williams in Mrs Doubtfire isn't.
 
Fair enough.

Please if you can, explain how one impersonation of someone of the opposite sex is drag and how another is not. Tell me why Wesley Snipes in Wong Foo is drag and Robin Williams in Mrs Doubtfire isn't.

I'll take a whirl at it.

Snipes was supposed to be a man living his life as a drag queen, easily recognized as a man in a dress. Even the other movie characters knew it. Williams was trying to breifly actually pass as a woman for other benefits (I forget exactly why).
 
I'll take a whirl at it.

Snipes was supposed to be a man living his life as a drag queen, easily recognized as a man in a dress. Even the other movie characters knew it. Williams was trying to breifly actually pass as a woman for other benefits (I forget exactly why).

He wanted to see his children.

This is how the National Center for Transgender Equality describe drag.
Drag is a type of entertainment where people dress up and perform, often in highly stylized ways. The term originated as British theater slang in the 19th century and was used to describe women’s clothing worn by men.

Today, many prominent drag artists are still people who identify as men and present themselves in exaggeratedly feminine ways as part of their performance, and are known as drag queens. While some drag queens live their lives as men outside of their drag personae, people of any gender can be drag queens. Drag kings, who wear men’s clothing and perform stylized forms of masculinity, are less common, but do exist. Many drag kings are women, but people of any gender can be drag kings as well.

As part of their performance, many drag queens and kings have a separate drag persona in addition to the self they live as every day. This persona will of course look different, but may also have a different name and ask to be referred to by different gender pronouns.

This does not mean they are transgender. Just as actors do not keep being referred to by their characters’ names after stepping offstage, drag performers do not necessarily keep the names or pronouns they use while performing. Drag performers are artists and entertainers, so being in drag is not an integral part of their identity in the same way that gender is.
https://transequality.org/issues/resources/understanding-drag
it should be noted that drag is a performance. And while it is usually thought of as highly stylized it really isn't limited to that.
 
Do you think it's fine for a DeSantis publicity minion to claim that the half-naked adult was a drag queen when she was really a cisgender stripper, just so their campaign could keep beating on their 'Drag queens are evil' drum?

:confused: No. But that also doesn't make it okay for kids to be stuffing dollars into the undergarments of a half-naked adult.

Why do you think that someone else lying about the person being a drag queen would alter my opinion on whether or not it's okay for kids to be stuffing cash into an adults skivvies?
 
:confused: No. But that also doesn't make it okay for kids to be stuffing dollars into the undergarments of a half-naked adult.

Why do you think that someone else lying about the person being a drag queen would alter my opinion on whether or not it's okay for kids to be stuffing cash into an adults skivvies?

It might convince you that this is so vanishingly uncommon for drag performances that the only example turned up was a lie.
 
:confused: No. But that also doesn't make it okay for kids to be stuffing dollars into the undergarments of a half-naked adult.

Why do you think that someone else lying about the person being a drag queen would alter my opinion on whether or not it's okay for kids to be stuffing cash into an adults skivvies?

And yet you posted this image in a thread about drag queens. As if that was what it was portraying. Why would you do that?
 
I've said it before, but I'd much rather children learn about sex and sexuality when they are young than such topics be actively concealed from them.

How young do you think kids should be when they're learning about anal sex and how to safely choke your partner? How young should they be when they learn about sexual role-playing, spanking, and pony play?
 
why would someone lying about what drag queens are doing alter your opinion about what drag queens are doing? it's a mystery
 
Please if you can, explain how one impersonation of someone of the opposite sex is drag and how another is not. Tell me why Wesley Snipes in Wong Foo is drag and Robin Williams in Mrs Doubtfire isn't.

Neither Wesley Snipes nor Robin Williams engaged in drag - they both engaged in acting. They both played characters that cross-dressed. That said, Snipes' character was a drag queen - the role that Snipes played was of a male impersonating a female in an exaggerated fashion as entertainment for an audience. William's character was NOT a drag queen, the role was that of a male engaging in subterfuge in order to gain access to their children.

It really doesn't seem all that confusing to me. Perhaps because I don't actually think of clothing as a fixed barrier. I dunno.

There are cases where a male actor is performing a role where the character is female, and the sex of the actor is intended to be hidden from the audience - for all intents, the audience perceives a female character. This is the case for the "2000 years ago" claims, where ALL roles on stage were played by males. The characters were intended to be females, and were essentially accepted as female characters by the audience. It's also the case for kabuki shows.

There are cases where a male actor is performing a role where the character is a male pretending to be a female. This is the case for Mrs. Doubtfire and Tootsie. The sex of the actor being male is part of the gag, it's an inherent part of the story itself. The audience doesn't infer them to actually be females in any way. The audience infers them as a male getting away with something they're not supposed to be doing, by pretending to be a female, and the audience is in on the subterfuge.

There are cases where a male performer makes a living putting on a completely invented and exaggerated female persona - and that is the core of the entire act itself. It's not playing a limited role within the context of an overriding story arc - the persona is the role itself. Without the persona, there is no act at all. The persona itself is a caricature.

These are all cases where a male dresses in female-typical clothing while performing... but they're very different performances, with different implications. And the audience infers something different from them.

Consider a parallel: Lawrence Olivier playing Othello; Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder, and Thomas Rice performing as Jim Crow.

Olivier playing a black character.
Downey was playing a white character pretending to be a black person.
Thomas Rice was performing a persona of a caricatured black person.

All three involve a white person darkening their skin for a role, but they have very different intents, and are perceived very differently by the audience.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom