Why Do Republicans Hate Gay People?

[PupLucca]

22 hours ago, TotalTop said:

...Giving cross sex hormones to children, teens, and young adults and manipulating them into irreversible sex change surgeries is harmful. Many of these children, teens, and young adults are not even trans and are mentally ill with borderline personality disorder and many other severe mental illnesess. 

... neoleftists are exactly like the fascists they delusionally claim to be so radically different from.

 

 You obviously have no clue about LGBTQ+ history going back in time, in the 1920's and early 30's when the Nazis seized power there was a thriving LGBTQ community the first to die and be imprisoned in concentration camps where were the trans and gays! Where do you think modern evangelical s and republicans got the idea from to exterminate us.

 I'm not drinking anything or smoking anything either, you most certainly are though.

 No one on the left or progressive is a fascist we are diametrically opposed to fascism unlike republicans and MAGAts who are suckling the teets of white nationalists and neonazis all while wrapped in the flag claiming to be "patriots" more like faketriots.  SIT DOWN Bubba, no one wants to sleep with you bi sexual or not because your attitude sucks.

 Giving puberty blockers to trans kids is not harming them. they can't get hormones until they are teens or older and they certainly can't have sex reassignment surgery until the age of 18 and have two psychiatrists  sign off on it. 

 The trans communities fight for equality and acceptance is slightly different than gays and leasbians but aat the same time it is no more different. Just as the GAY AND LESBIAN fight for equality is slightly different than that of black Americans but yet no more different. If YOU can't see WE are all equal then YOU are the problem and see yourself out as you are not welcome at OUR table.

 Also the trans community does not hate the gays or bi's or lesbians, maybe they just hate YOU

[topblkmale]

21 hours ago, PupLucca said:

 You obviously have no clue about LGBTQ+ history going back in time, in the 1920's and early 30's when the Nazis seized power there was a thriving LGBTQ community the first to die and be imprisoned in concentration camps where were the trans and gays! Where do you think modern evangelical s and republicans got the idea from to exterminate us.

 I'm not drinking anything or smoking anything either, you most certainly are though.

 No one on the left or progressive is a fascist we are diametrically opposed to fascism unlike republicans and MAGAts who are suckling the teets of white nationalists and neonazis all while wrapped in the flag claiming to be "patriots" more like faketriots.  SIT DOWN Bubba, no one wants to sleep with you bi sexual or not because your attitude sucks.

 Giving puberty blockers to trans kids is not harming them. they can't get hormones until they are teens or older and they certainly can't have sex reassignment surgery until the age of 18 and have two psychiatrists  sign off on it. 

 The trans communities fight for equality and acceptance is slightly different than gays and leasbians but aat the same time it is no more different. Just as the GAY AND LESBIAN fight for equality is slightly different than that of black Americans but yet no more different. If YOU can't see WE are all equal then YOU are the problem and see yourself out as you are not welcome at OUR table.

 Also the trans community does not hate the gays or bi's or lesbians, maybe they just hate YOU

 

I would love to read sources on the bolded statements.

 

Moderator's Note:

The discussion on gender-affirming care and trans youth is way off topic and I'm creating a new topic for it. Please continue it there:

https://breeding.zone/topic/80264-gender-affirming-care-for-trans-youth/

 

[Guest]

Republican and people in general hate gay community and its not because of the gay community! but becaue of the LGBT! I am presently living in Portugal and here the LGBT is  constantly on the medica with advertisements trying to teach society on the terms of gay and Lesbian community and different sex terms, not to mention trying to influence our culture. I am not American nor Republican, but I have to admit Gay culture have been around for thousands of years, the Romans practiced gay life style so did the Greeks so did Sodom and Gamora in early human culture in the  bible, What I find most annoying and when someone tries to have me change my life style, my beliefs and impose their belief system on me! I have had gay sex since i was 14 yrs old, I dont have sex in public nor would i ever do it. Sex is something that the world practices but it is done in private and not public, i have never had anyone tell me what I could do or not do. but then sex like it as been since the bigging of time a private matter. But the hatred of the LGBT is becoming a serious matter because it is not only trying to change my belief system but also influence our children! Children should not be menupulated to accept something that they will not want or force to accept something that they dont to be part of their life.

I say this because I had a friend who forcably broke me into the gay life style and sex was forced until i would willingly submit to his sexual desires and pleasures of fucking me. Now i like it, but originally I was 14 yrs old made to believe that it was something all did and I should too! and it started with my top raping me, and forcing me to submit and do what I did not want and forced regulary till i accepted, as i was drilled daily sex and verbal abuse being told how sexy and that i was born to be a mens bitch. and having sex daily sometimes several times a day.

 believe everyone as the right to accept what they want and deisre and i see here in Portugal gay and bisexual men and trans males who wear woman clothing on the street, and no one says anything to them they are free to do as they please. its a choice of their own, However dotranating children to become gay or lesbian is not something that the LGBT should be doing!

we hear children are not mature enough to make decisions on their own but when it comes to sex change and major decision of sexual orientation a child is allowed to do his or her decision and even if its a child. I see contradictions to appease a new sexual orientation system.

I have spoken and worked with a trans male who was named Amenda and he had a sex change and then changed back to a male again. He said to me that it was the worste mistake of his life! One that almost killed him as sex change influences every organ of ones body and alters the body and its not an easy process.

I have no issue with sex change but one should be mature enough to know and accept and not a child like i have heard of five year old children who want to be of different sex or parents who manupulate their child to have a sex change to appease their desire.

Religion is not the main concern as i have said gay and lesbian culture as been around for thousands of years. The Spartans practiced it in Greece. but when we try to influce others to change themselves is the issue!

 

[ErosWired]

One of the facets of my life has put me in the position where I have many times been asked to read children’s books to groups of children, of various ages, in schools and public venues. Up to a certain age, children will be oblivious to the fact that the person reading to them is a man dressed as a woman unless it is flagrantly obvious or made a point of.

Which begs the question, to my mind. What, indeed, is the point of a drag queen story hour for children, other than to make a point to adults about a lifestyle? The arguments that children are being groomed or indoctrinated are absurd, of course, and are sewn out of whole cloth by culture war mongers who have no qualms about crying “think of the children!” to twist hearts and minds over any issue. But the fact that a drag queen story hour for children has no lewd or sexualized content at all does not mean that it lacks all sex-related context for the adults involved.

The very act of saying “See? People who dress in drag can do regular things like read stories to children” is an intentional statement made to those who dislike, judge, and oppress the LGBT community. Dressing in drag is a choice. If a man, even a Transperson, wishes to perform the public service of reading to children, there is no reason that service needs to be performed in drag - unless you happen to be reading about the Magic Schoolbus and want to portray Ms. Frizzle. Otherwise, the drag is performance art intended for a purpose of its own, even if that purpose is only making the point that the wearer is not a man who conforms to conventional gender roles.

But if that’s the point, then there actually is an agenda beyond simply reading to children, and the children are being used, essentially, to stage a scene. I do not object to drag at all, but I object to that. By all means fight the fight against bigotry, but leave the children out of it.

Full disclosure: My nephew is a drag performer. I support him absolutely. I have helped create his outfits and have attended his performances. He has a kind, generous heart, and I would trust him around any child on the planet.

[hntnhole]

On 6/26/2023 at 4:42 AM, NEDenver said:

Other places also I’m sure, but just listing places where the hateful right is flexing or dominant is depressing.

I've noticed this too.  It seems that every few decades, the instinct to destroy "the other" surfaces in the general populations everywhere.  While centuries ago, the actual damage to humanity was limited to small areas, these days there are weapons that can wipe out entire continents in an eyeblink, rendering huge swaths of the globe a smoldering, infertile cinder for a thousand years.  It's unsettling.  

[PupLucca]

5 hours ago, mikeboi1 said:

Republican and people in general hate gay community and its not because of the gay community! but becaue of the LGBT! I am presently living in Portugal and here the LGBT is  constantly on the medica with advertisements trying to teach society on the terms of gay and Lesbian community and different sex terms, not to mention trying to influence our culture. I am not American nor Republican, but I have to admit Gay culture have been around for thousands of years, the Romans practiced gay life style so did the Greeks so did Sodom and Gamora in early human culture in the  bible, What I find most annoying and when someone tries to have me change my life style, my beliefs and impose their belief system on me! I have had gay sex since i was 14 yrs old, I dont have sex in public nor would i ever do it. Sex is something that the world practices but it is done in private and not public, i have never had anyone tell me what I could do or not do. but then sex like it as been since the bigging of time a private matter. But the hatred of the LGBT is becoming a serious matter because it is not only trying to change my belief system but also influence our children! Children should not be menupulated to accept something that they will not want or force to accept something that they dont to be part of their life.

I say this because I had a friend who forcably broke me into the gay life style and sex was forced until i would willingly submit to his sexual desires and pleasures of fucking me. Now i like it, but originally I was 14 yrs old made to believe that it was something all did and I should too! and it started with my top raping me, and forcing me to submit and do what I did not want and forced regulary till i accepted, as i was drilled daily sex and verbal abuse being told how sexy and that i was born to be a mens bitch. and having sex daily sometimes several times a day.

 believe everyone as the right to accept what they want and deisre and i see here in Portugal gay and bisexual men and trans males who wear woman clothing on the street, and no one says anything to them they are free to do as they please. its a choice of their own, However dotranating children to become gay or lesbian is not something that the LGBT should be doing!

we hear children are not mature enough to make decisions on their own but when it comes to sex change and major decision of sexual orientation a child is allowed to do his or her decision and even if its a child. I see contradictions to appease a new sexual orientation system.

I have spoken and worked with a trans male who was named Amenda and he had a sex change and then changed back to a male again. He said to me that it was the worste mistake of his life! One that almost killed him as sex change influences every organ of ones body and alters the body and its not an easy process.

I have no issue with sex change but one should be mature enough to know and accept and not a child like i have heard of five year old children who want to be of different sex or parents who manupulate their child to have a sex change to appease their desire.

Religion is not the main concern as i have said gay and lesbian culture as been around for thousands of years. The Spartans practiced it in Greece. but when we try to influce others to change themselves is the issue!

 

Your words paint you as a liar. you don't know anyone trans or you'd use their proper pronouns. 

 And once again NO ONE IS FORCING ANYTHING ON ANYONE

[BootmanLA]

11 hours ago, ErosWired said:

Which begs the question, to my mind. What, indeed, is the point of a drag queen story hour for children, other than to make a point to adults about a lifestyle? 

One could make the same argument about any costume, including clowns. Yet we not only tolerate people in clown costumes interacting with children; we (or, at least, some parents) pay good money for them to entertain children at events like birthday parties.

We take and send kids to Disney parks by the millions, where they see adults dressed up like: talking mice, fairy godmothers, princesses, talking dogs, talking dogs that belong to the other talking dogs, talking ducks.... the list goes on and on. Yet nobody says a word about kids getting confused by these characters.

Children are naturally drawn to the bold and colorful. You don't see drag queen story hour being produced by drag queens who look like the Church Lady from SNL; they're deliberately bold, colorful, with extravagant makeup and hair, because that grabs' kids attention and they listen to the fabulous person telling them a story.

11 hours ago, ErosWired said:

But the fact that a drag queen story hour for children has no lewd or sexualized content at all does not mean that it lacks all sex-related context for the adults involved.

I keep trying to understand this but I can't even figure out what you mean - are you saying that at some level, drag is *always* sexual? Why is drag - the cross-dressing kind, at any rate - "sexual" but dressing up like a talking dog who owns another talking dog is just clean fun? If what one wears conveys "sexuality" then cis-dressing people are also conveying sexuality - just of the "approved variety." See that woman in that skirt? That's SEXUAL!

11 hours ago, ErosWired said:

Otherwise, the drag is performance art intended for a purpose of its own, even if that purpose is only making the point that the wearer is not a man who conforms to conventional gender roles.

But if that’s the point, then there actually is an agenda beyond simply reading to children, and the children are being used, essentially, to stage a scene.

But as I say - that purpose may simply be (like the makeup on a clown) to grab the kids' attention and focus it on the speaker. They can listen to a cis-dressing person drone on and on reading a story to them, but their attention is likely to flag, just as it may in school. Having a hook to draw the kids' attention makes a difference. There may be an agenda, but I think it's mostly just to enhance the experience.

But: even if the purpose WAS to point out to the adults that see, we're safe around kids - what's wrong with that? As I said above, I don't buy for one second the notion that drag is inherently sexual. I think that says a lot more about the people who think that, than it does about the people wearing drag. And that's just the same argument that was used for decades about us - that as gay people, we were *inherently* sexual, that our very existence was *sexual* and moreover, a sexual *threat* - and that was used to justify all sorts of horrible treatment. It's appalling that we would treat drag the same way.

11 hours ago, ErosWired said:

I do not object to drag at all, but I object to that. By all means fight the fight against bigotry, but leave the children out of it.

Again: this is the same argument used about us for much of the 20th century. We can't be around children because we might "influence" them. It was bullshit then and it's bullshit now. 

[ErosWired]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

One could make the same argument about any costume, including clowns. Yet we not only tolerate people in clown costumes interacting with children; we (or, at least, some parents) pay good money for them to entertain children at events like birthday parties.

We take and send kids to Disney parks by the millions, where they see adults dressed up like: talking mice, fairy godmothers, princesses, talking dogs, talking dogs that belong to the other talking dogs, talking ducks.... the list goes on and on. Yet nobody says a word about kids getting confused by these characters.

Children are naturally drawn to the bold and colorful. You don't see drag queen story hour being produced by drag queens who look like the Church Lady from SNL; they're deliberately bold, colorful, with extravagant makeup and hair, because that grabs' kids attention and they listen to the fabulous person telling them a story.

I keep trying to understand this but I can't even figure out what you mean - are you saying that at some level, drag is *always* sexual? Why is drag - the cross-dressing kind, at any rate - "sexual" but dressing up like a talking dog who owns another talking dog is just clean fun? If what one wears conveys "sexuality" then cis-dressing people are also conveying sexuality - just of the "approved variety." See that woman in that skirt? That's SEXUAL!

But as I say - that purpose may simply be (like the makeup on a clown) to grab the kids' attention and focus it on the speaker. They can listen to a cis-dressing person drone on and on reading a story to them, but their attention is likely to flag, just as it may in school. Having a hook to draw the kids' attention makes a difference. There may be an agenda, but I think it's mostly just to enhance the experience.

But: even if the purpose WAS to point out to the adults that see, we're safe around kids - what's wrong with that? As I said above, I don't buy for one second the notion that drag is inherently sexual. I think that says a lot more about the people who think that, than it does about the people wearing drag. And that's just the same argument that was used for decades about us - that as gay people, we were *inherently* sexual, that our very existence was *sexual* and moreover, a sexual *threat* - and that was used to justify all sorts of horrible treatment. It's appalling that we would treat drag the same way.

Again: this is the same argument used about us for much of the 20th century. We can't be around children because we might "influence" them. It was bullshit then and it's bullshit now. 

The false equivalency between a Disney cast member in a Minnie Mouse costume and a man in drag is a long-armed reach, and a feat of rhetorical acrobatics, even by your standards.

No, I am not saying that all drag is inherently ‘sexual’ in the sense of prurience. I am saying that its inherent nature is absolutely, unavoidably rooted in gender difference - that juxtaposition is the entire point of it as a form of expression. There is no equivalence with the person in the Minnie Mouse suit - who may, by the way, be a person of either gender, and that person’s gender is immaterial. The mouse is the entire point. The same cannot be said of the performer in drag. If the person in the “woman suit” is a female, she’s just a woman. If the person is a man, a statement is being made because what’s inside the “woman suit” makes all the difference. Of course it does, or it wouldn’t be drag, and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

The comparison with circus clowns might be closer to the mark, but I would point out that the social function of clowns throughout history has not been idle entertainment, but the ability to make radical social statements and speak truth to power without getting their heads chopped off. Clowns have always been on the spearhead of social agendas. But that’s as far as the comparison goes. How many drag performers do you know personally? How many of them do you think consider themselves clowns, objects of ridicule? My nephew sure as hell doesn’t consider himself a fucking clown, and would take umbrage at your comparison.

I take it you don’t read to children very often. If you’re going to successfully share a story time with a group of children, the very, very last thing you want to do is make a spectacle of yourself to the point that they are paying more attention to what you’re wearing than what you’re reading. But in the case of a drag story hour, that seems to be precisely what we get. The focus isn’t on the books or on the kids, and do you know how we can tell? It’s in the name - a “Drag Queen Story Hour”. It’s all about the drag.

Children, we’re going to have a drag queen story hour.

[boy raises his hand] What’s a drag queen?

You’ll see in just a moment, Brad. Everyone look at the drag queen, now. Make sure you pay attention. That’s a drag queen.

[Brad, to himself] I don’t get it.

  -or-

[Brad, to himself] That’s a guy in a dress. I don’t get it.

Either way, what’s the point of it for the children? Where’s the added value, except to make a point of exposing children to a person with this alternative lifestyle in an overt pitch to make that person appear more socially acceptable? I don’t happen to disagree in general with helping demonstrate that a person in drag is not a danger to society, but this is a cynical ploy trying to act like it isn’t.

Let’s take a step back. If drag is inherently about drawing attention to gender difference - that is, a difference between sexes - and it is inherently about that - then if the hour is focused on the fact that the reader is in drag, then the hour is focused on the fact that the reader is exhibiting a juxtaposition of gender roles. And the children involved are being used to force everyone to look at it.

Your argument that it’s nothing but big, colorful costumery is arch, to say the least. If the guy was dressed up as Mary Poppins to read Mary Poppins, that would be one thing - it would be an actual costume. He’s not. He’s dressed as his femme alter ego Trayla Trasch and he doesn’t look like any character in any children’s book, ever.

But read my post again - nowhere did you hear me make any sort of argument that a drag performer shouldn’t be around a child because the child might be influenced. I said nothing of the kind. What I objected to was that children are being used as pawns in a culture war battle between adults over matters inherently concerning adult gender roles. 

[hntnhole]

15 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

drag is inherently sexual

It occurs that there are a couple of "types" of drag:  the so-called "skag-drag" with clown-like makeup, enormous balloon-tits, loud clashing colors, silly wigs, all of that.  There is nothing inherently "sexual" at all about this type of drag (excluding, perhaps, the potty-mouthed jokes).

There is also a type of drag wherein the performer actually emulates a real woman, which takes an enormous amount of dedication and hard work.  I recall sitting in The Baton drag bar down on Clark St* in Chicago, which featured both types.  When the second type of performer - impersonating a real woman - was onstage, surprisingly often it was simply impossible to see anything but a real woman.  I knew it was a boy physiologically, but the male presence onstage was completely gone, and only the "female" present.  Graceful, elegant, beautifully dressed, all the feminine mannerisms were perfect.  In the case of these professional female impersonators, I might understand how "dangerous" straights might find these people.

In that sense, the second type - often billed not as "drag performers", but as "female impersonators" - can easily be an affront to the straights, in that a talented f.i. might be able to fool a straight man.  Imagine a straight man's rage if his Cock got hard for a female impersonator !!  The clown-like first type of drag can't possibly threaten anyone, but the second "female impersonator" type might.  

* interestingly, directly across the street from the famous Leatherbar ... The Gold Coast.  I know that there are some who consider wearing the hides merely another type of drag, however mistaken that may be.  

Edited June 29, 2023 by hntnhole

[NWUSHorny]

I can't quite comprehend either the appeal or the outrage over drag queen story hours. I know our local suburban library apparently hosted 2 of them that were reported to be well attended, which resulted in protests that shut down the library board meetings since the 1st of the year. On balance the drag queens at the very least, are not ay worse from a sexual perspective than other dress up for lack of a better word fetishes that local children are likely to encounter on the street, in the parks or at a local Walmart (I can't remember the last time I went to Walmart without seeing something that made my jaw drop).

At least so far we have managed to keep the "cultural warriors" completely off the local school boards, quite possibly because several radical right organizations have endorsed full slates of candidates, that conveniently give me a list of who not to vote for.

I'm a little curious about @ErosWired comment that drag performers not considering themselves similar to a clown, anytime I have seen them perform or even dressed up ready to perform, they are for the most part every bit as flamboyant with their costumes and quite often with their makeup. This isn't necessarily true of those that you encounter in more mundane situations like at Walmart, but it isn't unusual even there. The same holds true of the other dress up fetishes, they tend to be flamboyant enough to draw attention and exist openly in large numbers,  but as to the sexual implications, while they may be overtly trying to look sexual, this is beyond a shadow of a doubt the most sexually repressed and inhibited place I've ever lived when it comes to actually consummating a sexual act, which applies to drag queens and all of the other dress up fetishes.

Edited June 29, 2023 by NWUSHorny

[ErosWired]

3 hours ago, NWUSHorny said:

I'm a little curious about @ErosWired comment that drag performers not considering themselves similar to a clown

Let me say first of all that I can’t speak for all drag performers, only from a knowledge of my nephew’s performance ethos, and that if certain other drag queens of my acquaintance (I have been fucked multiple times by a man who enjoys performing in drag as a nun. He’s a hoot). I am certainly not such a performer myself. But if we look at the nature and function of the clown in society, there is a difference between what a clown does, how he does it, why, and in what context, that sets it apart from drag.

Across cultures, the societal role of the clown is as a person sanctioned to draw attention to deficiencies or flaws in the society and the power structure, and the sanction is permitted because the clown takes it on himself to be an object of humor and ridicule, thus deflecting the weight of the blow the criticism might have on its target in authority. That is, the clown is allowed to criticize the king, but he’s required to be funny about it to defuse the social unrest. Essentially, the people can say, “He said something bad about the King, but it’s okay because he’s a dumb goof.”

Across cultures, there is usually a specific type of costume associated with clowns - a clown uniform if you will - worn so that there is no question that the person saying the socially edgy things he’s saying has the sanction to do so. If you picture “clown” in your mind, you’ll likely see some aspect of this ritual dress. The ‘uniform’ has varied from culture to culture, from primitive societies to the present, but in all cases there would be no doubt that a person in that culture was looking at one of their clowns. In some cultures, clowns were members of exclusive ‘societies’ requiring ritual admission, almost in the sense of a guild, because hilarity in the context of rubbing the chief’s nose in it is a serious business, and the thing they had to make sure they did very, very well was make fools of themselves so that they would be ridiculous to people.

I have known other drag performers in addition to my nephew, and while they are generally good-natured and able to laugh at their own and each other’s foibles, I have found that on the whole they want to be respected as performers and as persons, and not considered ridiculous. This is partly because their decision to do drag stems from a self-acceptance of some queer aspect of their nature. That aspect of themselves is not ridiculous to them; on the contrary, it is an important part of their identity, self-respect and self-esteem. While the clown actively courts ridicule, the drag performer generally does not. Many drag queens put great effort into perfecting their look and delivery, and uphold high standards upon which they stake personal pride and dignity. A man who takes a stage in smoking drag and makes grown men start to pant with a take on “Stormy Weather” is not going for laughs, and would be offended if treated like a clown.

Their drag persona is just that - a persona, an expression of a facet of a genuine inner self. The clown’s outfit is intended to put a wrapper of faceless, humorous anonymity around a potentially unpalatable social statement, but the drag performer’s persona is neither a mask nor a costume meant to conceal - it’s intended to reveal an alternate facet of the queer individual. Drag is, therefore, not at all the same as clowning, because it does not function the same way to buffer social unease around controversial speech, and it has no social sanction to do so.

Drag performers have a steep hill to climb from the get-go because most of the heterosexual world thinks a man in a dress is ridiculous. The last thing many of them would want is to be considered on a par with men who wear honky red noses and size 30 shoes. Queer people don’t want society to get to a point where it says, “The queer said something upsetting but that’s okay because he’s a dumb goof.” Or “just a fag.” Because they already do that, and it hasn’t gone well. People who express their true selves in drag cannot afford to be seen as clowns today. They can be skilled entertainers and performers. They can look outrageous, extravagant and utterly fabulous in making their statements. They can be funny as hell. They can, and do, very often speak truth to power, and sometimes pay a price…because they are not clowns.

[BootmanLA]

On 6/28/2023 at 10:53 PM, ErosWired said:

If the person in the “woman suit” is a female, she’s just a woman. If the person is a man, a statement is being made because what’s inside the “woman suit” makes all the difference. Of course it does, or it wouldn’t be drag, and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

True. But the children who are present for Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) don't grasp "drag" in that way, and so we can't decide that because WE as ADULTS see things that way, children do too.

On 6/28/2023 at 10:53 PM, ErosWired said:

The comparison with circus clowns might be closer to the mark, but I would point out that the social function of clowns throughout history has not been idle entertainment, but the ability to make radical social statements and speak truth to power without getting their heads chopped off. Clowns have always been on the spearhead of social agendas.

True speaking historically - the role of the fool in history (both in literature and in political dynamics. But again, not necessarily true in the last, oh, 100+ years. Circus clowns seldom have any "message" to impart, other than deflating pompous egos (belonging to performers who themselves are clowns without the makeup), and nobody invites a birthday clown to serve as a social justice emblem.

I don't mean to insult your nephew's drag performances or talent in the slightest, no matter which form they take. But as someone who's closely watched account after account of DQSH flare-ups, the drag queens in question were, invariably, the "skag drag" type that Hntnhole mentions - wild hair, vastly exaggerated makeup, flamboyant clothes. 

On 6/28/2023 at 10:53 PM, ErosWired said:

I take it you don’t read to children very often. If you’re going to successfully share a story time with a group of children, the very, very last thing you want to do is make a spectacle of yourself to the point that they are paying more attention to what you’re wearing than what you’re reading. But in the case of a drag story hour, that seems to be precisely what we get. The focus isn’t on the books or on the kids, and do you know how we can tell? It’s in the name - a “Drag Queen Story Hour”. It’s all about the drag.

As a matter of fact, I haven't read to children much in a while, but when I did, I did my absolute best to grab the kids' attention with sound effects, broad gestures, and all sorts of other things designed to have them focus on me - because then, they were also focused on what I SAID. Nothing, in my experiences, causes kids to tune out faster than a person in normal, everyday clothes reading something to them in normal, boring tones just like they could hear in any classroom. The same reason kids will gather round a clown at a birthday party and pay close attention when he does tricks, or pranks, or tells jokes - because he focuses their attention - is the reason kids go to DQSH. They aren't going to develop an appreciation of linguistics or fine literature; they're going because their parents want their minds stimulated by stories, and the way to stimulate their minds is to grab and focus their attention.

Because bear in mind: any damned fool can read a book to a child. Parents come to these things because they know the kids enjoy it, and they WORK. And not a single kid is ever coerced to attend one of these events without his parent or guardian's assent - which suggests the parents find some value in it, too.

On 6/28/2023 at 10:53 PM, ErosWired said:

Children, we’re going to have a drag queen story hour.

[boy raises his hand] What’s a drag queen?

You’ll see in just a moment, Brad. Everyone look at the drag queen, now. Make sure you pay attention. That’s a drag queen.

[Brad, to himself] I don’t get it.

  -or-

[Brad, to himself] That’s a guy in a dress. I don’t get it.

As I've said: sometimes the kids don't even know it's a man in a dress. For those that do, you're making a HUGE assumption that they "don't get it" - or even that they're TRYING to get it. Kids accept an awful lot that just "is" - if it's entertaining. Projecting your own concerns about men in dresses back onto little kids says a lot, but not about the kids.

On 6/28/2023 at 10:53 PM, ErosWired said:

Either way, what’s the point of it for the children? Where’s the added value, except to make a point of exposing children to a person with this alternative lifestyle in an overt pitch to make that person appear more socially acceptable? I don’t happen to disagree in general with helping demonstrate that a person in drag is not a danger to society, but this is a cynical ploy trying to act like it isn’t.

1. You assume that this is an "overt pitch" for anything, because you can't imagine that it could just be harmless fun. Like a clown at a birthday party. Again, that says more about you than it says about them.

2. You say it's a cynical ploy, but again, I think this shows your own cynicism. 

The "added value", as I've said, is like the costumes at Disney. They grab attention. They focus attention. Kids are oblivious to the notion that this gender-bending or whatever - to them, it's just funny. And no, that doesn't mean I think your nephew's drag performances are "just funny" - they are, presumably, a different kind of performance marketed to a different kind of person for a different reason.

On 6/28/2023 at 10:53 PM, ErosWired said:

Your argument that it’s nothing but big, colorful costumery is arch, to say the least. If the guy was dressed up as Mary Poppins to read Mary Poppins, that would be one thing - it would be an actual costume. He’s not. He’s dressed as his femme alter ego Trayla Trasch and he doesn’t look like any character in any children’s book, ever.

But read my post again - nowhere did you hear me make any sort of argument that a drag performer shouldn’t be around a child because the child might be influenced. I said nothing of the kind. What I objected to was that children are being used as pawns in a culture war battle between adults over matters inherently concerning adult gender roles. 

I simply reject the notion that the only drag outfit suitable for reading Mary Poppins is a Mary Poppins costume. The performer/reader/artist isn't merely there to illustrate the text and bring it to life.

And as for children being used as pawns: again, no parent is forced to bring their kids to a DQSH. The fact that DQSH's exist, and are popular enough for venues to book them, suggests there's a place for them. I would presume any parent who's comfortable enough around drag to bring their child to a DQSH is probably going to be bringing up that kid in an enlightened manner, culturally speaking.

The people waging the "culture war" are those who want to control what those parents - the open-minded ones - can allow their children to see, when there's literally nothing age-inappropriate about the events (and in saying that, I'm assuming that the performances are age-appropriate insofar as exposed flesh and language and so forth - if not, by all means, ban those not because it's DQSH, but because it's inappropriate for children like an R-rated movie).

I see zero reason to cede that ground to those "culture warriors" - because it's unnecessary, and because this is just one more way they're trying to get to their real goal (which involves suppression/criminalization of the entire LGBTQ spectrum). They've ALWAYS been the ones to use children as pawns - "We can't have THOSE people teaching our kids! It's not safe!".

[BootmanLA]

And without quoting/replying to piece-by-piece of subsequent post about drag personas and stage performances - again, those aren't the same thing as DQSH.

Try this experiment: google "Drag Queen Story Hour" and then click on the "Images" tab to see associated images, and tell me if that's the kind of drag your nephew does. I'm willing to bet it's not even in the same universe of drag.

And yes, I realize that news media like to use shocking pictures to grab attention for a story. But I couldn't find a single image - not even among the promotional material for DQSH events - that showed what I would call the "true female impersonation" type of drag. And I don't think that sort of drag would work for what DQSH sets out to do - and I suspect that's why you don't see it illustrated.

[Guest]

On 6/26/2023 at 6:50 PM, topblkmale said:

 

🤯

wow!

It is not PC, but it is true. There is poverty, disease, and famine there like you cannot imagine.

[PupLucca]

The real problem is republicans don't want to do anything that would actually benefit the people of this country. So to distract from that they have to create villains and the homosexuals  are always a popular group among their followers to hate on