Drag Queen Story Hours

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty interesting that in this thread, posters have respectfully and (largely) without name-calling, discussed their thoughts on misogyny and sexism in drag, but the responses to those posts have (largely) just been people name-calling and unwilling to address the substance.

It isn’t very persuasive to sound like you are having a temper tantrum when a member of a historically deeply oppressed group says “hey, I perceive this as entertainment based in deep and historic oppression.”

There were blistering articles written about the right to blackface back in the day. There is nothing like the entitlement of the powerful to provoke rage when questioned.

Why do you think we're trying to "persuade" you of anything? You make disgusting comments then people will call you out for it.

Saying that drag is rooted in a history of misogyny and sexism is “disgusting”?

In fifty years, articles about the history of sexism will be written about people like you, and drag will have entered the history books for the sexist minstrelry that it is at heart. But keep having your temper tantrum in the mean time.

Manufacturing "history" to support your bigoted narrative is disgusting.

It’s too bad you are clearly incapable of rational discussion.

You are being left behind.

Who do you think I am?

A person who thinks sexism and misogyny is the pinnacle of entertainment.

Drag will be regarded years from now the way that blackface is rightly regarded now. It is sexist minstrelry based on harmful stereotypes.

I mean I think we can agree to disagree on this. To me it helps deconstruct those harmful stereotypes. I don’t think it’s the same as a blackface performance at all.

Curious, how and why are exagerating skin tone of different races different than appropriating the body parts of different sexes?

Because people of color are subjugated based on that skin tone and nothing else. I am not subjugated because of the way I dress, or my makeup, or because of having big exaggerated breasts. I am subjugated because I am a woman and none of those things actually make me a woman.

This is some pretty tortured reasoning, speaking as a former middle schooler who endured unending harassment and sexual assault based on my early-developed breasts. The idea that women don’t endure harassment because of large breasts seems deliberately ignorant.

I was just lurking on here and have BOTH dark skin and large breasts. Girls absolutely are made to feel uncomfortable b/c of their "curves" and girls in this area especially are specifically shamed if they enjoy make up, pink frilly clothes and jewelry, nail polish etc.. They are told that means they are a certain type of woman who is there for sexual enjoyment and that women who are serious present like Jen Psaki- barely any make up and no nonsense short hair and short nails. Women absolutely are harassed for dressing in the overtly feminine way that is represented in drag

Yeah, the drag proponents who say that women aren’t harassed for their physical appearance and so drag is okay are absolutely gaslighting us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty interesting that in this thread, posters have respectfully and (largely) without name-calling, discussed their thoughts on misogyny and sexism in drag, but the responses to those posts have (largely) just been people name-calling and unwilling to address the substance.

It isn’t very persuasive to sound like you are having a temper tantrum when a member of a historically deeply oppressed group says “hey, I perceive this as entertainment based in deep and historic oppression.”

There were blistering articles written about the right to blackface back in the day. There is nothing like the entitlement of the powerful to provoke rage when questioned.

Why do you think we're trying to "persuade" you of anything? You make disgusting comments then people will call you out for it.

Saying that drag is rooted in a history of misogyny and sexism is “disgusting”?

In fifty years, articles about the history of sexism will be written about people like you, and drag will have entered the history books for the sexist minstrelry that it is at heart. But keep having your temper tantrum in the mean time.

Manufacturing "history" to support your bigoted narrative is disgusting.

It’s too bad you are clearly incapable of rational discussion.

You are being left behind.

Who do you think I am?

A person who thinks sexism and misogyny is the pinnacle of entertainment.

Drag will be regarded years from now the way that blackface is rightly regarded now. It is sexist minstrelry based on harmful stereotypes.

I mean I think we can agree to disagree on this. To me it helps deconstruct those harmful stereotypes. I don’t think it’s the same as a blackface performance at all.

Curious, how and why are exagerating skin tone of different races different than appropriating the body parts of different sexes?

Because people of color are subjugated based on that skin tone and nothing else. I am not subjugated because of the way I dress, or my makeup, or because of having big exaggerated breasts. I am subjugated because I am a woman and none of those things actually make me a woman.

This is some pretty tortured reasoning, speaking as a former middle schooler who endured unending harassment and sexual assault based on my early-developed breasts. The idea that women don’t endure harassment because of large breasts seems deliberately ignorant.

I was just lurking on here and have BOTH dark skin and large breasts. Girls absolutely are made to feel uncomfortable b/c of their "curves" and girls in this area especially are specifically shamed if they enjoy make up, pink frilly clothes and jewelry, nail polish etc.. They are told that means they are a certain type of woman who is there for sexual enjoyment and that women who are serious present like Jen Psaki- barely any make up and no nonsense short hair and short nails. Women absolutely are harassed for dressing in the overtly feminine way that is represented in drag

Yeah, the drag proponents who say that women aren’t harassed for their physical appearance and so drag is okay are absolutely gaslighting us.

It’s a separate issue. I had c cups in fourth grade. My body has never not been commented on. I’ve never been able to wear a halter top without either being told I’m showing off or to put on a shirt. My family was no better, I had to wear a bra under my nightgown when outside of my room. People have always thought it was ok to comment or touch my breasts. It’s not.

Still no issue with drag. Or drag performances geared towards kids. Empathy is universal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty interesting that in this thread, posters have respectfully and (largely) without name-calling, discussed their thoughts on misogyny and sexism in drag, but the responses to those posts have (largely) just been people name-calling and unwilling to address the substance.

It isn’t very persuasive to sound like you are having a temper tantrum when a member of a historically deeply oppressed group says “hey, I perceive this as entertainment based in deep and historic oppression.”

There were blistering articles written about the right to blackface back in the day. There is nothing like the entitlement of the powerful to provoke rage when questioned.

Why do you think we're trying to "persuade" you of anything? You make disgusting comments then people will call you out for it.

Saying that drag is rooted in a history of misogyny and sexism is “disgusting”?

In fifty years, articles about the history of sexism will be written about people like you, and drag will have entered the history books for the sexist minstrelry that it is at heart. But keep having your temper tantrum in the mean time.

Manufacturing "history" to support your bigoted narrative is disgusting.

It’s too bad you are clearly incapable of rational discussion.

You are being left behind.

Who do you think I am?

A person who thinks sexism and misogyny is the pinnacle of entertainment.

Drag will be regarded years from now the way that blackface is rightly regarded now. It is sexist minstrelry based on harmful stereotypes.

I mean I think we can agree to disagree on this. To me it helps deconstruct those harmful stereotypes. I don’t think it’s the same as a blackface performance at all.

Curious, how and why are exagerating skin tone of different races different than appropriating the body parts of different sexes?

Because people of color are subjugated based on that skin tone and nothing else. I am not subjugated because of the way I dress, or my makeup, or because of having big exaggerated breasts. I am subjugated because I am a woman and none of those things actually make me a woman.

This is some pretty tortured reasoning, speaking as a former middle schooler who endured unending harassment and sexual assault based on my early-developed breasts. The idea that women don’t endure harassment because of large breasts seems deliberately ignorant.

I was just lurking on here and have BOTH dark skin and large breasts. Girls absolutely are made to feel uncomfortable b/c of their "curves" and girls in this area especially are specifically shamed if they enjoy make up, pink frilly clothes and jewelry, nail polish etc.. They are told that means they are a certain type of woman who is there for sexual enjoyment and that women who are serious present like Jen Psaki- barely any make up and no nonsense short hair and short nails. Women absolutely are harassed for dressing in the overtly feminine way that is represented in drag

Yeah, the drag proponents who say that women aren’t harassed for their physical appearance and so drag is okay are absolutely gaslighting us.

I dress like Jen Psaki now, Britney Spears when I was younger and have been harassed and criticized by men and women alike in both phases of my life.
Women performers like Dolly embrace the over top femininity and drag performers celebrate that.

The only you can square drag as being misogynist is if you believe that over the top femininity in women is offensive and harmful to women. I happen not to believe that, but I believe many here do.

This is a group who uses phrases like "she dresses like she belongs on a pole" AND criticizes women for going gray, so I don't take a lot of stock in the "drag offends my sense of woman" pablum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty interesting that in this thread, posters have respectfully and (largely) without name-calling, discussed their thoughts on misogyny and sexism in drag, but the responses to those posts have (largely) just been people name-calling and unwilling to address the substance.

It isn’t very persuasive to sound like you are having a temper tantrum when a member of a historically deeply oppressed group says “hey, I perceive this as entertainment based in deep and historic oppression.”

There were blistering articles written about the right to blackface back in the day. There is nothing like the entitlement of the powerful to provoke rage when questioned.

Why do you think we're trying to "persuade" you of anything? You make disgusting comments then people will call you out for it.

Saying that drag is rooted in a history of misogyny and sexism is “disgusting”?

In fifty years, articles about the history of sexism will be written about people like you, and drag will have entered the history books for the sexist minstrelry that it is at heart. But keep having your temper tantrum in the mean time.

Manufacturing "history" to support your bigoted narrative is disgusting.

It’s too bad you are clearly incapable of rational discussion.

You are being left behind.

Who do you think I am?

A person who thinks sexism and misogyny is the pinnacle of entertainment.

Drag will be regarded years from now the way that blackface is rightly regarded now. It is sexist minstrelry based on harmful stereotypes.

I mean I think we can agree to disagree on this. To me it helps deconstruct those harmful stereotypes. I don’t think it’s the same as a blackface performance at all.

Curious, how and why are exagerating skin tone of different races different than appropriating the body parts of different sexes?

Because people of color are subjugated based on that skin tone and nothing else. I am not subjugated because of the way I dress, or my makeup, or because of having big exaggerated breasts. I am subjugated because I am a woman and none of those things actually make me a woman.

This is some pretty tortured reasoning, speaking as a former middle schooler who endured unending harassment and sexual assault based on my early-developed breasts. The idea that women don’t endure harassment because of large breasts seems deliberately ignorant.

I was just lurking on here and have BOTH dark skin and large breasts. Girls absolutely are made to feel uncomfortable b/c of their "curves" and girls in this area especially are specifically shamed if they enjoy make up, pink frilly clothes and jewelry, nail polish etc.. They are told that means they are a certain type of woman who is there for sexual enjoyment and that women who are serious present like Jen Psaki- barely any make up and no nonsense short hair and short nails. Women absolutely are harassed for dressing in the overtly feminine way that is represented in drag

Yeah, the drag proponents who say that women aren’t harassed for their physical appearance and so drag is okay are absolutely gaslighting us.

But if you are gonna be plain (not a dig at her appearance just plain in the sense that you don't wear a lot o make up and do your hair), you'd better be really smart. There isn't a single news anchor except on PBS that is low maintenance.

[Anonymous]

Y’all are exhausting.

Just don’t go. Don’t take your kid. Done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty interesting that in this thread, posters have respectfully and (largely) without name-calling, discussed their thoughts on misogyny and sexism in drag, but the responses to those posts have (largely) just been people name-calling and unwilling to address the substance.

It isn’t very persuasive to sound like you are having a temper tantrum when a member of a historically deeply oppressed group says “hey, I perceive this as entertainment based in deep and historic oppression.”

There were blistering articles written about the right to blackface back in the day. There is nothing like the entitlement of the powerful to provoke rage when questioned.

Why do you think we're trying to "persuade" you of anything? You make disgusting comments then people will call you out for it.

Saying that drag is rooted in a history of misogyny and sexism is “disgusting”?

In fifty years, articles about the history of sexism will be written about people like you, and drag will have entered the history books for the sexist minstrelry that it is at heart. But keep having your temper tantrum in the mean time.

Manufacturing "history" to support your bigoted narrative is disgusting.

It’s too bad you are clearly incapable of rational discussion.

You are being left behind.

Who do you think I am?

A person who thinks sexism and misogyny is the pinnacle of entertainment.

Drag will be regarded years from now the way that blackface is rightly regarded now. It is sexist minstrelry based on harmful stereotypes.

I mean I think we can agree to disagree on this. To me it helps deconstruct those harmful stereotypes. I don’t think it’s the same as a blackface performance at all.

Curious, how and why are exagerating skin tone of different races different than appropriating the body parts of different sexes?

Because people of color are subjugated based on that skin tone and nothing else. I am not subjugated because of the way I dress, or my makeup, or because of having big exaggerated breasts. I am subjugated because I am a woman and none of those things actually make me a woman.

This is some pretty tortured reasoning, speaking as a former middle schooler who endured unending harassment and sexual assault based on my early-developed breasts. The idea that women don’t endure harassment because of large breasts seems deliberately ignorant.

I was just lurking on here and have BOTH dark skin and large breasts. Girls absolutely are made to feel uncomfortable b/c of their "curves" and girls in this area especially are specifically shamed if they enjoy make up, pink frilly clothes and jewelry, nail polish etc.. They are told that means they are a certain type of woman who is there for sexual enjoyment and that women who are serious present like Jen Psaki- barely any make up and no nonsense short hair and short nails. Women absolutely are harassed for dressing in the overtly feminine way that is represented in drag

Yeah, the drag proponents who say that women aren’t harassed for their physical appearance and so drag is okay are absolutely gaslighting us.

I dress like Jen Psaki now, Britney Spears when I was younger and have been harassed and criticized by men and women alike in both phases of my life.
Women performers like Dolly embrace the over top femininity and drag performers celebrate that.

The only you can square drag as being misogynist is if you believe that over the top femininity in women is offensive and harmful to women. I happen not to believe that, but I believe many here do.

This is a group who uses phrases like "she dresses like she belongs on a pole" AND criticizes women for going gray, so I don't take a lot of stock in the "drag offends my sense of woman" pablum.

YES

[Anonymous]

So if it is ok for men to dress up as exaggerated stereotypes of women then can white people (minus black face) dress in dreds, gold chains and slouchy clothes and mimic an AAVE dialect in an attempt to 'celebrate' black stereotypes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is pretty interesting that in this thread, posters have respectfully and (largely) without name-calling, discussed their thoughts on misogyny and sexism in drag, but the responses to those posts have (largely) just been people name-calling and unwilling to address the substance.

It isn’t very persuasive to sound like you are having a temper tantrum when a member of a historically deeply oppressed group says “hey, I perceive this as entertainment based in deep and historic oppression.”

There were blistering articles written about the right to blackface back in the day. There is nothing like the entitlement of the powerful to provoke rage when questioned.

Why do you think we're trying to "persuade" you of anything? You make disgusting comments then people will call you out for it.

Saying that drag is rooted in a history of misogyny and sexism is “disgusting”?

In fifty years, articles about the history of sexism will be written about people like you, and drag will have entered the history books for the sexist minstrelry that it is at heart. But keep having your temper tantrum in the mean time.

Manufacturing "history" to support your bigoted narrative is disgusting.

It’s too bad you are clearly incapable of rational discussion.

You are being left behind.

Who do you think I am?

A person who thinks sexism and misogyny is the pinnacle of entertainment.

Drag will be regarded years from now the way that blackface is rightly regarded now. It is sexist minstrelry based on harmful stereotypes.

I mean I think we can agree to disagree on this. To me it helps deconstruct those harmful stereotypes. I don’t think it’s the same as a blackface performance at all.

Curious, how and why are exagerating skin tone of different races different than appropriating the body parts of different sexes?

Because people of color are subjugated based on that skin tone and nothing else. I am not subjugated because of the way I dress, or my makeup, or because of having big exaggerated breasts. I am subjugated because I am a woman and none of those things actually make me a woman.

This is some pretty tortured reasoning, speaking as a former middle schooler who endured unending harassment and sexual assault based on my early-developed breasts. The idea that women don’t endure harassment because of large breasts seems deliberately ignorant.

I was just lurking on here and have BOTH dark skin and large breasts. Girls absolutely are made to feel uncomfortable b/c of their "curves" and girls in this area especially are specifically shamed if they enjoy make up, pink frilly clothes and jewelry, nail polish etc.. They are told that means they are a certain type of woman who is there for sexual enjoyment and that women who are serious present like Jen Psaki- barely any make up and no nonsense short hair and short nails. Women absolutely are harassed for dressing in the overtly feminine way that is represented in drag

Yeah, the drag proponents who say that women aren’t harassed for their physical appearance and so drag is okay are absolutely gaslighting us.

Okay, so women are harassed for their appearance. That's true, of course. Big boobs, small boobs, lots of makeup, no makeup, tight clothes, baggy clothes, dresses, pants, and everything in between. Women will always be harassed. I'm failing to see the connection between that and drag queen performances always being misogynistic. I just don't get it, nothing about drag offends me as a woman because nothing that they do has anything to do with what makes me a woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So if it is ok for men to dress up as exaggerated stereotypes of women then can white people (minus black face) dress in dreds, gold chains and slouchy clothes and mimic an AAVE dialect in an attempt to 'celebrate' black stereotypes?

Try it and let us know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as it is all voluntary and appropriately advertised, then I don’t see the problem.

If people want to take their kids to this, that’s okay. If people don’t want to take their kids, that’s okay too. What is not okay is if people are not provided options to decide for themselves.

So I would not be a fan of the public library just advertising a “story hour” and you would not be able to know if it was or was not a “drag queen story hour”.

It is important to distinguish this from just a trans person reading stories, which is different because a “drag queen” is a specific persona and in effect a costume.

That's an interesting point. But the library wouldn't need to disclose in advance that Elsa or Alice in Wonderland might show up at story time. Why is that, do you think? What is it about the persona of a Drag Queen that differentiates it from just any fictional female character? Could it be that they are males who are pantomiming female sexuality, and those personas exist to entertain adult patrons in adult spaces regarding sexual themes?

A drag performer is traditionally a cisgender gay man. Some trans people as well as cisgender women do drag now as well. The thing that some people that aren't familiar with drag don't seem to understand is that a drag queen is a character putting on a performance.

A trans woman normally takes hormones which changes the shape of her body/face and make her grow breasts as well as a host of other things that happen on estrogen. There are a lot of possible surgeries that trans women can get. Some get all, some get none. Trans women live their entire lives as women. Sometimes you'll see a really cringy looking trans woman but that's usually early in transition. After a few years, most have the goal of just blending in as best as they can because they just want to live a normal life like they did before. But now as a woman because that matches how they felt inside.

When a drag queen takes off the costume, he's a man under it. A trans woman looks like (or does her best to look like) and lives as a woman all the time.

If you are a cisgender man portraying a caricature of women to children, this is helpful exactly…how? These story times are being branded as a way to promote acceptance. The proponents of drag queen story time can’t seem to agree on who exactly the drag queens are and what are their purpose at a story time is. You all might want to tighten up your story.

I'm not a cisgender man that does drag. I'm a trans woman. I've never once done a drag performance nor do I have any desire to do so. I have no problem watching drag or taking my children to a DQ Story Hour though. It's literally just a man in a dress reading a kid's book.

It's more than that though. You can't just divorce drag from its history and context as a sexualized performative caricature of females by and for adult males, and claim it's for kids now. Just like you can't host a minstrel story hour and claim it's just a guy in a costume reading a book.

I think if I want to take my kids to a book reading, I should be able to. If you don't want me to, that's not your prerogative.

Sure. And we can point out how you are taking your kids to a book reading that relies on the vast systemic and historic oppression of women for “entertainment.”

I am going to keep asking this until someone answers with more than just saying "I feel this way.":


No one has explained how drag shows where performers dance to Cher, Beyonce, and Dolly is misogyny. Saying it is isn't evidence or an argument.

Keep in mine drag queens love these performers because they are naturally over the top feminine. Does that mean Dolly, Cher, and Bey are also misogynists and unworthy of feminist consideration? ETA; and they are propagating systemic and historic oppression of women?
Or--is it maybe just people using feminism in the most venal way possible as a cloak for their bigotry?

Appropriating and performing "female" is different than being a female who is a performer. In the case of the female performers, female is their identity. But drag queen isn't actually an identity, it is a performance. Can you not see the difference?

So when gay actors perform straight stereotypical, but exaggerated straight roles, like say, Neil Patrick Harris playing womanizing Barney Stinson, is that appropriation? After all, being straight isn't NPH's identity?

How about Dustin Hoffman playing Tootsie, or Robin Williams playing Mrs. Doubtfire, both of them playing men playing to stereotypes of uptight, straight-laced women?

Or how about black actors playing roles in Hamilton, or white-as Mel Gibson playing Christ, or etc etc?

If it is okay for Dolly and Bey and Cher to be Dolly and Bey and Cher, why can't men perform as them as performers have been doing for forever--by playing NOT their identities.

What about straight actors playing over-the-top gay characters? Is that okay? What about white actors pretending to be black people with exaggerated, stereotypical tropes? Isn't everything okay because acting?

False analogies. Take a logic class. But I'll try to spell it out for you.

If BEING Bey, Cher, and Dolly, or overtly feminine isn't offensive, as a couple of anti-drag posters said, playing those characters isn't offensive.
If you are playing an offensive gay or black characters in a club, that would be uncool. Playing them in a movie as a thoughtful role--not offensive.
But don't deflect--answer the questions above and the PP's examples of harry styles et al.

So you believe that blackface is okay, as long as it's not "offensive"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as it is all voluntary and appropriately advertised, then I don’t see the problem.

If people want to take their kids to this, that’s okay. If people don’t want to take their kids, that’s okay too. What is not okay is if people are not provided options to decide for themselves.

So I would not be a fan of the public library just advertising a “story hour” and you would not be able to know if it was or was not a “drag queen story hour”.

It is important to distinguish this from just a trans person reading stories, which is different because a “drag queen” is a specific persona and in effect a costume.

That's an interesting point. But the library wouldn't need to disclose in advance that Elsa or Alice in Wonderland might show up at story time. Why is that, do you think? What is it about the persona of a Drag Queen that differentiates it from just any fictional female character? Could it be that they are males who are pantomiming female sexuality, and those personas exist to entertain adult patrons in adult spaces regarding sexual themes?

A drag performer is traditionally a cisgender gay man. Some trans people as well as cisgender women do drag now as well. The thing that some people that aren't familiar with drag don't seem to understand is that a drag queen is a character putting on a performance.

A trans woman normally takes hormones which changes the shape of her body/face and make her grow breasts as well as a host of other things that happen on estrogen. There are a lot of possible surgeries that trans women can get. Some get all, some get none. Trans women live their entire lives as women. Sometimes you'll see a really cringy looking trans woman but that's usually early in transition. After a few years, most have the goal of just blending in as best as they can because they just want to live a normal life like they did before. But now as a woman because that matches how they felt inside.

When a drag queen takes off the costume, he's a man under it. A trans woman looks like (or does her best to look like) and lives as a woman all the time.

If you are a cisgender man portraying a caricature of women to children, this is helpful exactly…how? These story times are being branded as a way to promote acceptance. The proponents of drag queen story time can’t seem to agree on who exactly the drag queens are and what are their purpose at a story time is. You all might want to tighten up your story.

I'm not a cisgender man that does drag. I'm a trans woman. I've never once done a drag performance nor do I have any desire to do so. I have no problem watching drag or taking my children to a DQ Story Hour though. It's literally just a man in a dress reading a kid's book.

It's more than that though. You can't just divorce drag from its history and context as a sexualized performative caricature of females by and for adult males, and claim it's for kids now. Just like you can't host a minstrel story hour and claim it's just a guy in a costume reading a book.

I think if I want to take my kids to a book reading, I should be able to. If you don't want me to, that's not your prerogative.

Sure. And we can point out how you are taking your kids to a book reading that relies on the vast systemic and historic oppression of women for “entertainment.”

I am going to keep asking this until someone answers with more than just saying "I feel this way.":


No one has explained how drag shows where performers dance to Cher, Beyonce, and Dolly is misogyny. Saying it is isn't evidence or an argument.

Keep in mine drag queens love these performers because they are naturally over the top feminine. Does that mean Dolly, Cher, and Bey are also misogynists and unworthy of feminist consideration? ETA; and they are propagating systemic and historic oppression of women?
Or--is it maybe just people using feminism in the most venal way possible as a cloak for their bigotry?

Appropriating and performing "female" is different than being a female who is a performer. In the case of the female performers, female is their identity. But drag queen isn't actually an identity, it is a performance. Can you not see the difference?

So when gay actors perform straight stereotypical, but exaggerated straight roles, like say, Neil Patrick Harris playing womanizing Barney Stinson, is that appropriation? After all, being straight isn't NPH's identity?

How about Dustin Hoffman playing Tootsie, or Robin Williams playing Mrs. Doubtfire, both of them playing men playing to stereotypes of uptight, straight-laced women?

Or how about black actors playing roles in Hamilton, or white-as Mel Gibson playing Christ, or etc etc?

If it is okay for Dolly and Bey and Cher to be Dolly and Bey and Cher, why can't men perform as them as performers have been doing for forever--by playing NOT their identities.

What about straight actors playing over-the-top gay characters? Is that okay? What about white actors pretending to be black people with exaggerated, stereotypical tropes? Isn't everything okay because acting?

False analogies. Take a logic class. But I'll try to spell it out for you.

If BEING Bey, Cher, and Dolly, or overtly feminine isn't offensive, as a couple of anti-drag posters said, playing those characters isn't offensive.
If you are playing an offensive gay or black characters in a club, that would be uncool. Playing them in a movie as a thoughtful role--not offensive.
But don't deflect--answer the questions above and the PP's examples of harry styles et al.

So you believe that blackface is okay, as long as it's not "offensive"?

It can be. Ben Stiller in Tropic Thunder, for example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as it is all voluntary and appropriately advertised, then I don’t see the problem.

If people want to take their kids to this, that’s okay. If people don’t want to take their kids, that’s okay too. What is not okay is if people are not provided options to decide for themselves.

So I would not be a fan of the public library just advertising a “story hour” and you would not be able to know if it was or was not a “drag queen story hour”.

It is important to distinguish this from just a trans person reading stories, which is different because a “drag queen” is a specific persona and in effect a costume.

That's an interesting point. But the library wouldn't need to disclose in advance that Elsa or Alice in Wonderland might show up at story time. Why is that, do you think? What is it about the persona of a Drag Queen that differentiates it from just any fictional female character? Could it be that they are males who are pantomiming female sexuality, and those personas exist to entertain adult patrons in adult spaces regarding sexual themes?

A drag performer is traditionally a cisgender gay man. Some trans people as well as cisgender women do drag now as well. The thing that some people that aren't familiar with drag don't seem to understand is that a drag queen is a character putting on a performance.

A trans woman normally takes hormones which changes the shape of her body/face and make her grow breasts as well as a host of other things that happen on estrogen. There are a lot of possible surgeries that trans women can get. Some get all, some get none. Trans women live their entire lives as women. Sometimes you'll see a really cringy looking trans woman but that's usually early in transition. After a few years, most have the goal of just blending in as best as they can because they just want to live a normal life like they did before. But now as a woman because that matches how they felt inside.

When a drag queen takes off the costume, he's a man under it. A trans woman looks like (or does her best to look like) and lives as a woman all the time.

If you are a cisgender man portraying a caricature of women to children, this is helpful exactly…how? These story times are being branded as a way to promote acceptance. The proponents of drag queen story time can’t seem to agree on who exactly the drag queens are and what are their purpose at a story time is. You all might want to tighten up your story.

I'm not a cisgender man that does drag. I'm a trans woman. I've never once done a drag performance nor do I have any desire to do so. I have no problem watching drag or taking my children to a DQ Story Hour though. It's literally just a man in a dress reading a kid's book.

It's more than that though. You can't just divorce drag from its history and context as a sexualized performative caricature of females by and for adult males, and claim it's for kids now. Just like you can't host a minstrel story hour and claim it's just a guy in a costume reading a book.

I think if I want to take my kids to a book reading, I should be able to. If you don't want me to, that's not your prerogative.

Sure. And we can point out how you are taking your kids to a book reading that relies on the vast systemic and historic oppression of women for “entertainment.”

I am going to keep asking this until someone answers with more than just saying "I feel this way.":


No one has explained how drag shows where performers dance to Cher, Beyonce, and Dolly is misogyny. Saying it is isn't evidence or an argument.

Keep in mine drag queens love these performers because they are naturally over the top feminine. Does that mean Dolly, Cher, and Bey are also misogynists and unworthy of feminist consideration? ETA; and they are propagating systemic and historic oppression of women?
Or--is it maybe just people using feminism in the most venal way possible as a cloak for their bigotry?

Appropriating and performing "female" is different than being a female who is a performer. In the case of the female performers, female is their identity. But drag queen isn't actually an identity, it is a performance. Can you not see the difference?

So when gay actors perform straight stereotypical, but exaggerated straight roles, like say, Neil Patrick Harris playing womanizing Barney Stinson, is that appropriation? After all, being straight isn't NPH's identity?

How about Dustin Hoffman playing Tootsie, or Robin Williams playing Mrs. Doubtfire, both of them playing men playing to stereotypes of uptight, straight-laced women?

Or how about black actors playing roles in Hamilton, or white-as Mel Gibson playing Christ, or etc etc?

If it is okay for Dolly and Bey and Cher to be Dolly and Bey and Cher, why can't men perform as them as performers have been doing for forever--by playing NOT their identities.

What about straight actors playing over-the-top gay characters? Is that okay? What about white actors pretending to be black people with exaggerated, stereotypical tropes? Isn't everything okay because acting?

False analogies. Take a logic class. But I'll try to spell it out for you.

If BEING Bey, Cher, and Dolly, or overtly feminine isn't offensive, as a couple of anti-drag posters said, playing those characters isn't offensive.
If you are playing an offensive gay or black characters in a club, that would be uncool. Playing them in a movie as a thoughtful role--not offensive.
But don't deflect--answer the questions above and the PP's examples of harry styles et al.

So you believe that blackface is okay, as long as it's not "offensive"?

It can be. Ben Stiller in Tropic Thunder, for example.

Ringer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as it is all voluntary and appropriately advertised, then I don’t see the problem.

If people want to take their kids to this, that’s okay. If people don’t want to take their kids, that’s okay too. What is not okay is if people are not provided options to decide for themselves.

So I would not be a fan of the public library just advertising a “story hour” and you would not be able to know if it was or was not a “drag queen story hour”.

It is important to distinguish this from just a trans person reading stories, which is different because a “drag queen” is a specific persona and in effect a costume.

That's an interesting point. But the library wouldn't need to disclose in advance that Elsa or Alice in Wonderland might show up at story time. Why is that, do you think? What is it about the persona of a Drag Queen that differentiates it from just any fictional female character? Could it be that they are males who are pantomiming female sexuality, and those personas exist to entertain adult patrons in adult spaces regarding sexual themes?

A drag performer is traditionally a cisgender gay man. Some trans people as well as cisgender women do drag now as well. The thing that some people that aren't familiar with drag don't seem to understand is that a drag queen is a character putting on a performance.

A trans woman normally takes hormones which changes the shape of her body/face and make her grow breasts as well as a host of other things that happen on estrogen. There are a lot of possible surgeries that trans women can get. Some get all, some get none. Trans women live their entire lives as women. Sometimes you'll see a really cringy looking trans woman but that's usually early in transition. After a few years, most have the goal of just blending in as best as they can because they just want to live a normal life like they did before. But now as a woman because that matches how they felt inside.

When a drag queen takes off the costume, he's a man under it. A trans woman looks like (or does her best to look like) and lives as a woman all the time.

If you are a cisgender man portraying a caricature of women to children, this is helpful exactly…how? These story times are being branded as a way to promote acceptance. The proponents of drag queen story time can’t seem to agree on who exactly the drag queens are and what are their purpose at a story time is. You all might want to tighten up your story.

I'm not a cisgender man that does drag. I'm a trans woman. I've never once done a drag performance nor do I have any desire to do so. I have no problem watching drag or taking my children to a DQ Story Hour though. It's literally just a man in a dress reading a kid's book.

It's more than that though. You can't just divorce drag from its history and context as a sexualized performative caricature of females by and for adult males, and claim it's for kids now. Just like you can't host a minstrel story hour and claim it's just a guy in a costume reading a book.

I think if I want to take my kids to a book reading, I should be able to. If you don't want me to, that's not your prerogative.

Sure. And we can point out how you are taking your kids to a book reading that relies on the vast systemic and historic oppression of women for “entertainment.”

I am going to keep asking this until someone answers with more than just saying "I feel this way.":


No one has explained how drag shows where performers dance to Cher, Beyonce, and Dolly is misogyny. Saying it is isn't evidence or an argument.

Keep in mine drag queens love these performers because they are naturally over the top feminine. Does that mean Dolly, Cher, and Bey are also misogynists and unworthy of feminist consideration? ETA; and they are propagating systemic and historic oppression of women?
Or--is it maybe just people using feminism in the most venal way possible as a cloak for their bigotry?

Appropriating and performing "female" is different than being a female who is a performer. In the case of the female performers, female is their identity. But drag queen isn't actually an identity, it is a performance. Can you not see the difference?

So when gay actors perform straight stereotypical, but exaggerated straight roles, like say, Neil Patrick Harris playing womanizing Barney Stinson, is that appropriation? After all, being straight isn't NPH's identity?

How about Dustin Hoffman playing Tootsie, or Robin Williams playing Mrs. Doubtfire, both of them playing men playing to stereotypes of uptight, straight-laced women?

Or how about black actors playing roles in Hamilton, or white-as Mel Gibson playing Christ, or etc etc?

If it is okay for Dolly and Bey and Cher to be Dolly and Bey and Cher, why can't men perform as them as performers have been doing for forever--by playing NOT their identities.

What about straight actors playing over-the-top gay characters? Is that okay? What about white actors pretending to be black people with exaggerated, stereotypical tropes? Isn't everything okay because acting?

False analogies. Take a logic class. But I'll try to spell it out for you.

If BEING Bey, Cher, and Dolly, or overtly feminine isn't offensive, as a couple of anti-drag posters said, playing those characters isn't offensive.
If you are playing an offensive gay or black characters in a club, that would be uncool. Playing them in a movie as a thoughtful role--not offensive.
But don't deflect--answer the questions above and the PP's examples of harry styles et al.

So you believe that blackface is okay, as long as it's not "offensive"?

I'm not Black so I don't get to have an opinion on blackface; it doesn't injure me. My Black friends uniformly find it offensive so I take their word for it.

I'm also a cis woman who doesn't find drag offensive or harmful. So I guess the problem here is that the group that is in theory being injured have mixed opinions on the subject. Some of us think it's benign and enjoyable entertainment (me); others find it sexist and misogynist (you).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as it is all voluntary and appropriately advertised, then I don’t see the problem.

If people want to take their kids to this, that’s okay. If people don’t want to take their kids, that’s okay too. What is not okay is if people are not provided options to decide for themselves.

So I would not be a fan of the public library just advertising a “story hour” and you would not be able to know if it was or was not a “drag queen story hour”.

It is important to distinguish this from just a trans person reading stories, which is different because a “drag queen” is a specific persona and in effect a costume.

That's an interesting point. But the library wouldn't need to disclose in advance that Elsa or Alice in Wonderland might show up at story time. Why is that, do you think? What is it about the persona of a Drag Queen that differentiates it from just any fictional female character? Could it be that they are males who are pantomiming female sexuality, and those personas exist to entertain adult patrons in adult spaces regarding sexual themes?

A drag performer is traditionally a cisgender gay man. Some trans people as well as cisgender women do drag now as well. The thing that some people that aren't familiar with drag don't seem to understand is that a drag queen is a character putting on a performance.

A trans woman normally takes hormones which changes the shape of her body/face and make her grow breasts as well as a host of other things that happen on estrogen. There are a lot of possible surgeries that trans women can get. Some get all, some get none. Trans women live their entire lives as women. Sometimes you'll see a really cringy looking trans woman but that's usually early in transition. After a few years, most have the goal of just blending in as best as they can because they just want to live a normal life like they did before. But now as a woman because that matches how they felt inside.

When a drag queen takes off the costume, he's a man under it. A trans woman looks like (or does her best to look like) and lives as a woman all the time.

If you are a cisgender man portraying a caricature of women to children, this is helpful exactly…how? These story times are being branded as a way to promote acceptance. The proponents of drag queen story time can’t seem to agree on who exactly the drag queens are and what are their purpose at a story time is. You all might want to tighten up your story.

I'm not a cisgender man that does drag. I'm a trans woman. I've never once done a drag performance nor do I have any desire to do so. I have no problem watching drag or taking my children to a DQ Story Hour though. It's literally just a man in a dress reading a kid's book.

It's more than that though. You can't just divorce drag from its history and context as a sexualized performative caricature of females by and for adult males, and claim it's for kids now. Just like you can't host a minstrel story hour and claim it's just a guy in a costume reading a book.

Pervert. This is not sexualized.

This wig is amazing. I love it so much.

omg she is fabulous, that's amazing

And what would you say to an actual older woman who showed up to kids story hour dressed like that, with that hair and makeup? Still just fine? You’d happily hand your kids to her?

I mean. My choir teacher dressed and wore makeup kind of like that as a kid. Everyone thought she was wonderful and as far as I know she was a cis woman.

+1

Our school used to bring in a special storyteller for school events and she was dressed similarly. It was her character.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as it is all voluntary and appropriately advertised, then I don’t see the problem.

If people want to take their kids to this, that’s okay. If people don’t want to take their kids, that’s okay too. What is not okay is if people are not provided options to decide for themselves.

So I would not be a fan of the public library just advertising a “story hour” and you would not be able to know if it was or was not a “drag queen story hour”.

It is important to distinguish this from just a trans person reading stories, which is different because a “drag queen” is a specific persona and in effect a costume.

That's an interesting point. But the library wouldn't need to disclose in advance that Elsa or Alice in Wonderland might show up at story time. Why is that, do you think? What is it about the persona of a Drag Queen that differentiates it from just any fictional female character? Could it be that they are males who are pantomiming female sexuality, and those personas exist to entertain adult patrons in adult spaces regarding sexual themes?

A drag performer is traditionally a cisgender gay man. Some trans people as well as cisgender women do drag now as well. The thing that some people that aren't familiar with drag don't seem to understand is that a drag queen is a character putting on a performance.

A trans woman normally takes hormones which changes the shape of her body/face and make her grow breasts as well as a host of other things that happen on estrogen. There are a lot of possible surgeries that trans women can get. Some get all, some get none. Trans women live their entire lives as women. Sometimes you'll see a really cringy looking trans woman but that's usually early in transition. After a few years, most have the goal of just blending in as best as they can because they just want to live a normal life like they did before. But now as a woman because that matches how they felt inside.

When a drag queen takes off the costume, he's a man under it. A trans woman looks like (or does her best to look like) and lives as a woman all the time.

If you are a cisgender man portraying a caricature of women to children, this is helpful exactly…how? These story times are being branded as a way to promote acceptance. The proponents of drag queen story time can’t seem to agree on who exactly the drag queens are and what are their purpose at a story time is. You all might want to tighten up your story.

I'm not a cisgender man that does drag. I'm a trans woman. I've never once done a drag performance nor do I have any desire to do so. I have no problem watching drag or taking my children to a DQ Story Hour though. It's literally just a man in a dress reading a kid's book.

It's more than that though. You can't just divorce drag from its history and context as a sexualized performative caricature of females by and for adult males, and claim it's for kids now. Just like you can't host a minstrel story hour and claim it's just a guy in a costume reading a book.

Pervert. This is not sexualized.

This wig is amazing. I love it so much.

omg she is fabulous, that's amazing

And what would you say to an actual older woman who showed up to kids story hour dressed like that, with that hair and makeup? Still just fine? You’d happily hand your kids to her?

I mean. My choir teacher dressed and wore makeup kind of like that as a kid. Everyone thought she was wonderful and as far as I know she was a cis woman.

+1

Our school used to bring in a special storyteller for school events and she was dressed similarly. It was her character.

Hell yes. I'd think she was fully devoted to her job, tbh. Sounds awesome.