Drag Shows

[Metaphor]

There are similar cases of children having/ wanting plastic surgery, which are real.

You will forgive any sane person for not taking your word for this, particularly in the light of the fact that the only evidence you've presented so far is an obviously nonsensical fake.

You're a bit late. I've acknowledged its fake. Sane, that you're suggesting you are, needs a little alertness oiling.
(I do too )

You acknowledged it's fake, and then didn't change your worldview one iota.

That's not how it works. "Sorry" isn't a complete response to an error; It's the starting point for a response. Unless you are just using it to silence your critics.

Change my view about Children being influenced into believing they can be like adults? That is the point.

So uh, there is no adult anywhere through history that ever became anything other than a "child" without something influencing them into believing they could be an adult.

Influencing children into believing they can be like adults is the entire point of childhood education and the express job of parents.

The issue here is that having surgeries to 'correct' minor 'problems' is not acting like an adult... It's acting like a spoiled fucking child.

Usually we all make fun of and recognize when people waste buckets of money and put on plastic faces.

The goal of trans rights activists is to see that this is not necessary, to make sure that people have access to body chemistry that gives people a chance to look like themselves without surgery at all.

People already look like themselves without surgery of any kind.

Preventing induction to surgery has always been the goal. Breast enlargement, adams apple modification, etc only happens when an errant puberty has already happened.

Nobody who is trans wants that.

Stop telling trans people what they want.

If someone is getting surgery because that is the only means available to them to get anything approaching the body they want, something has already gone wrong!

Oh, so you oppose adults getting surgery?

No, you don't. You simply believe that puberty blockers are reversible and you've concocted a special brand of metaphysical nonsense that people can go through the 'wrong' puberty.

 

[Learner]

[......]

Apologies for that, I wasn't clear here when I mentioned happiness. I used the word in context as to being the alternative to a mental state, that these young girls would suffer from, and that is a form of depression! An emotional and psychological state which simply is affected by what the young individual sees through their eyes etc..

I've chose the BBC's link (carefully this time, which I should have used this in my original post instead) just to illustrate my initial point.

Vagina surgery 'sought by girls as young as nine'

Your linked article indicates that even though girls under the age of 18 sought this surgery, no surgeries were performed for cosmetic reasons on those girls. The UK medical profession acted responsibly in those instances. So the fear about such surgeries appears to unfounded.

Its not the fear of surgeries per se ... as I see it, in regards to safe procedures (reason I mentioned, knowing of corrective surgeries that occurs in young children is normal). The fear is far more than this discussion has been narrowed down to, which is a tad stifling - surgeries is NOT the main concern, why limit the scope to a small aspect ?. Its the mental psychological state children can suffer from when exposed to things that are for adults! How about expanding this a little further rather than limiting the wider scope, where young children and teens can be harmed. You could include the young males in the equation too, adding to the bigger picture.

While it is disturbingly sad that children feel the need to have purely cosmetic surgery, that issue is not due to public policy ideas stemming from any ideology. Nor does it appear that the medical community at large is acting unethically. In my view, the issue of how people are dressed while reading to children (in drag or not) is a trivial issue compared to the issue of the content of what is read to children.

My initial post was with those posting about the sexualizing of children! That's where I'm at.

 

[Gun Nut]

I find it hysterical that ya'll are conflating a story-time setting for kids with a drag-show setting for adults.
Can you shoot a gun?
Can you talk to children?
If yes to both then, "How can you shoot guns at children!!?!?!?!!?pne"
I guess if a "drag queen" can't read a book without being sexual, then a gun owner can't own a gun without murdering thousands of children every day... of, um... course.
logical, huh?

More like... can you shoot a gun? Can you talk to children? Why don't you bring your guns to a library and read to children while fully and obviously armed?

What could go wrong with that, hey? Why would anyone object to an avid shooter showing up in full kit with several pistols and rifles to read stories to kids?

in this version of the analogy, what is the "gun"? A dress? really? and "shooting the gun" is <scary font> wearing </scary font> it?

 

[Gun Nut]

"facial deformities".. you mean like on a young boy that thinks they are supposed to be a young girl where their bone structure, lip thickness, and eye shape is just not quite feminine looking enough? That kind of "deformity"?
Eye of the beholder, and all that.. right?

WTF? From the context that any sober and literate adult could see, the reference to facial deformities refers to unnatural formations of the face not aesthetic yearnings.

I'm kind of wondering if Gun Nut is already on holiday vacation and has been hitting the eggnog hard...

did I express "eye of the beholder" wrong? or did you both just miss the actual point?

 

[southernhybrid]

Congratulations on going all over the place with this thread. Good job guys. Anyway.....since I haven't given my important opinion and since it's about 4:20 and since posting here will keep me from doing something constructive, here goes

My husband I once visited Provincetown, Ma. the gay capital of the East Coast. It was in the 1980s and being one of the few straight couples in P-town was a lot of fun. It was wonderful seeing so many gay people having fun and literally running the island. So.. we went to our first and only drag show while there. It was a lot of fun but since it was in a bar, only adults were permitted. There was nothing sexual about the drag show. It was more like the movie "The Birdcage" where Nathan Lane performs as a drag artist.

Although Emily finds drag an insult to women, I don't. We are both entitled to our opinions. I find drag to be a fun, light hearted form of entertainment. And, while there may be sexual drag shows, historically, that wasn't usually the case. The drag artist danced, sang and did a little flirting. There were no children in the audience. It was all in fun. For some reason, which I don't understand, there are some men who have a huge attraction to dressing in traditional female garments. I hate wearing such things. I only wear slacks, mostly jeans, but to each their own. There's plenty of things I don't understand, but that's no reason for me to make negative judgments about others.

When I first read about the drag artists reading to children in libraries, I thought it was a wonderful idea. Drag Artists are entertaining and funny. When they read to children, there is nothing sexual about it. They are just dressed up in exaggerated female costumes. And, perhaps they help children realize that dressing up that way isn't a bad thing. Maybe it helps them develop more interest in reading due to the dramatic ability of the person dressed in drag. Or, maybe it helps them understand that it's okay to be different from the mainstream.

Come to think of it, my closest little friend when I was 3 and 4, was a little boy who loved dressing up in his mom's clothing. Did I care? No, because that meant that both of us could dress up in our mother's clothing and pretend. His dad was worried, but that was in the 1950s, so what would one expect? One would thing we would have come a long way since then!

So, this obsession and lies about drag artists trying to sexualize children is nasty bullshit. It's about the hatred that comes from the right, regarding transvestites and transgender folks, along with other minorities related to the LBGTQ communities. It's mostly the extremist religious folks who think this way. When I heard that drag artists were visiting libraries to read books to children, I never even thought about it having anything to do with sex. It's a fucking library, but these days, the nuts on the right are even into banning books in libraries, so I guess it comes as no great surprise. It's just sad to see so much hate and bigotry directed toward a. harmless minority.

 

[Emily Lake]

Why is drag suddenly the hot issue for the right? Has there been a recent increase in drag queens shaking their tucked junk at kids? Is there really nothing better for them to find to make noise about to distract from there support for Trump and assholes like Stew Peters, Nick Fuentes, Joe Ladipo, Alex Jones, Marg, Boebert, etc… That is what this Qaren outrage is about isn’t it? Noise to piss off the plebes and distract from news about the Jan 6 findings.

Thing is... it's not an issue "for the right". It's an issue for parents, it's an issue for a lot of liberal women... and the right has latched on to it for their own reason.

 

[Oleg]

and the right has latched on to it for their own reason.

The "right" didn't care before this push to normalize the sexualization of children.

 

[Emily Lake]

The goal of trans rights activists is to see that this is not necessary, to make sure that people have access to body chemistry that gives people a chance to look like themselves without surgery at all.

The exogenous chemistry makes them look like not-themselves though. This is like claiming that access to hair dye let's a brunette look like the blonde he truly is! I

Preventing induction to surgery has always been the goal. Breast enlargement, adams apple modification, etc only happens when an errant puberty has already happened.

It's not an errant puberty, it's the puberty we as a species have evolved to experience. And your view is misinformed - no amount of cross-sex hormones at puberty will grow a penis and testicles on a female child, nor will it grow genuine breast tissue on a male child. Substituting the hormones of the opposite sex does NOT make it a "correct" puberty - a male cannot ever experience a female puberty, and a female cannot ever experience a male puberty.

Nobody who is trans wants that. If someone is getting surgery because that is the only means available to them to get anything approaching the body they want, something has already gone wrong!

Usually this means someone has filled their head with lies that happiness as a human means having a body or face that the shallow will lust over, its own special kind of abuse. This kind of abuse flows as a fountain from those who proclaim what the epitome of the masculine and feminine look like.

We instead deserve permission and acceptance to be exactly who we are so long as that does not involve theft or harm! Sometimes that involves a rejection of the hormonal path one finds themselves attached to, access to impact their own psychology in that way.

Rejecting the development of the body that one has is NOT being who one is. It's trying to be who one wishes to be, in a way that remains unattainable.

It shouldn't have to involve surgery and the clearest path to not having surgery is to embrace choice regarding the change, and to embrace only the most noncommittal choices at those ages: to defer and delay.

Those aren't noncommittal choices at a young age, Jarhyn. There are costs and there are damages. Delaying the natural course of hormones during puberty is not reversible.

 

[Emily Lake]

Yes well you can talk ' technically speaking' i.e., putting in a different way to the term i.e., influencing children - to mean being responsible as adults, when educating children

Which includes introducing them to the idea that people who dress in drag are just people.

Sure, sure, let's also introduce them to the idea that people who present in blackface are just people too.

 

[Oleg]

Those aren't noncommittal choices at a young age, Jarhyn. There are costs and there are damages. Delaying the natural course of hormones during puberty is not reversible.

 

[Emily Lake]

Drag is a bunch of male actors in womanface. I find it to be generally offensive and denigrating toward women

Maybe try thinking about it this way.

"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"

Tell that to the black people who are offended by white people performing in blackface. Go ahead, tell them "it's the sincerest form of flattery". I'm sure they'll buy that and come around to your way of thinking, and will stop being insulted by the inherent racism of a white person performing a derogatory and exaggerated stereotype of blackness.

 

[Emily Lake]

I find it hysterical that ya'll are conflating a story-time setting for kids with a drag-show setting for adults.
Can you shoot a gun?
Can you talk to children?
If yes to both then, "How can you shoot guns at children!!?!?!?!!?pne"
I guess if a "drag queen" can't read a book without being sexual, then a gun owner can't own a gun without murdering thousands of children every day... of, um... course.
logical, huh?

More like... can you shoot a gun? Can you talk to children? Why don't you bring your guns to a library and read to children while fully and obviously armed?

What could go wrong with that, hey? Why would anyone object to an avid shooter showing up in full kit with several pistols and rifles to read stories to kids?

in this version of the analogy, what is the "gun"? A dress? really? and "shooting the gun" is <scary font> wearing </scary font> it?

That would be the exaggerated performance of femininity with exaggerated sexual prosthetics and exaggerated clothing and exaggerated hair that all, taken together, make a mockery of women.

 

[Metaphor]

Yes well you can talk ' technically speaking' i.e., putting in a different way to the term i.e., influencing children - to mean being responsible as adults, when educating children

Which includes introducing them to the idea that people who dress in drag are just people.

Sure, sure, let's also introduce them to the idea that people who present in blackface are just people too.

When men dress as exaggerated stereotypes of women, that's healthy and normal. When white people dress up as non-white ethnic stereotypes, that's disgraceful and cancel-worthy.

When men claim they are women, they are telling the truth. They are telling you their identity. When white people claim they are a non-white ethnicity, they are disgraceful, cancel-worthy, delusional and evil liars, no matter that 'race' is a construct and surely every bit as fluid as 'gender'.

 

[TomC]

Drag is a bunch of male actors in womanface. I find it to be generally offensive and denigrating toward women

Maybe try thinking about it this way.

"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"

Tell that to the black people who are offended by white people performing in blackface. Go ahead, tell them "it's the sincerest form of flattery". I'm sure they'll buy that and come around to your way of thinking, and will stop being insulted by the inherent racism of a white person performing a derogatory and exaggerated stereotype of blackness.

You're barking up the wrong tree here sweet cheeks.
If Whoopi Goldberg's boyfriend goes to a costume party in black face I'll laugh about it. If Reverend Sharpton gets his panties in a twist over it I'll laugh at him too.

Note my IIDB gender. Just to give you a little hint about my attitude towards delicate snowflakes. I enjoy pissing them off, possibly a little too much.

But you are talking about something rather different here. Drag isn't the same as black face.
Tom

 

[Metaphor]

Drag is a bunch of male actors in womanface. I find it to be generally offensive and denigrating toward women

Maybe try thinking about it this way.

"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"

Tell that to the black people who are offended by white people performing in blackface. Go ahead, tell them "it's the sincerest form of flattery". I'm sure they'll buy that and come around to your way of thinking, and will stop being insulted by the inherent racism of a white person performing a derogatory and exaggerated stereotype of blackness.

You're barking up the wrong tree here sweet cheeks.
If Whoopi Goldberg's boyfriend goes to a costume party in black face I'll laugh about it. If Reverend Sharpton gets his panties in a twist over it I'll laugh at him too.

Note my IIDB gender. Just to give you a little hint about my attitude towards delicate snowflakes. I enjoy pissing them off, possibly a little too much.

But you are talking about something rather different here. Drag isn't the same as black face.
Tom

Oh? Why isn't it the same? Simply saying "the right people are offended by drag but not blackface" is not a sufficient answer.

 

[Emily Lake]

You're barking up the wrong tree here sweet cheeks.

Don't call me sweet cheeks, pal.

But you are talking about something rather different here. Drag isn't the same as black face.

Once again, I'll make an attempt to point out that a man telling a woman that drag isn't offensive to women is about as effective as a white person telling a black person that blackface isn't offensive to black people.

Maybe consider NOT mansplaining my own views to me? Or do you just want to go all the way over the edge and tell me it's no big deal, I should just calm down, and ask if it's my time of the months?

 

[Emily Lake]

Oh? Why isn't it the same? Simply saying "the right people are offended by drag but not blackface" is not a sufficient answer.

I've got to scratch my head here. Who are "the right people"? Because it reads as if it's a goal to offend women. And while I *am* offended by drag, I don't think it's the intent of drag to be offensive to women. It's just run of the mill misogyny, where most men simply never bother to think about the feelings of women, or what their portrayal of women, has as an effect. Women don't matter to them enough to even cross their poor little minds.

 

[Metaphor]

Oh? Why isn't it the same? Simply saying "the right people are offended by drag but not blackface" is not a sufficient answer.

I've got to scratch my head here. Who are "the right people"? Because it reads as if it's a goal to offend women. And while I *am* offended by drag, I don't think it's the intent of drag to be offensive to women. It's just run of the mill misogyny, where most men simply never bother to think about the feelings of women, or what their portrayal of women, has as an effect. Women don't matter to them enough to even cross their poor little minds.

I should have been clearer. "The right people" here means "conservatives or people on the right". The progressive attitude appears to me to be:

* Conservatives object to drag (p1)
* Conservatives don't object to blackface (p2)
* Conservatives are evil so whatever is the opposite of what we impute to them is correct (p3)
* Therefore, blackface is wrong but drag is right.

 

[Jarhyn]

The fact is that drag is not "blackface".

The fact is that drag is supported by a great many women.

Hell, I recall a lesbian bachelor party at a lesbian-heavy gay bar where the primary entertainment was drag shows.

They had a stage for it and everything.

HoW dArE ThEy!!111

 

[Metaphor]

The fact is that drag is not "blackface".

Explain the moral difference.

To get you started, let's look at the facts

* Drag is usually biological males, dressing and acting as caricatured females, primarily for the purposes of entertainment
* Blackface is usually Justin Trudeau white people, dressing and acting as caricatured black people, primarily for the purposes of entertainment
* Both women and black people are regarded as minorities with respect to the people performing the drag/blackface