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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

+1 It’s crazy we are at this point where we can’t all agree how this is inappropriate for children.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

I haven’t seen any pictures that aren’t blurred/censored, which is dishonest and implying his genitalia was showing. It’s obvious the person was wearing tights so it’s not clear what was visible if anything.

[Anonymous]

I think it is unfortunate that both sides are putting children in the middle of a culture war. Though I teach my kids to be tolerate of everyone including LGBTQ people, I would not take them to one of these events because I think both sides are exploiting children.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

I haven’t seen any pictures that aren’t blurred/censored, which is dishonest and implying his genitalia was showing. It’s obvious the person was wearing tights so it’s not clear what was visible if anything.

OMG. I can’t believe you are actually defending this. It doesn’t matter that the photo was blurred — you can see the view the child got even with the blurring. The man is sitting there, in an extremely short skirt, with legs open such that the children sitting in front of him had a direct view straight up his crotch. There is no world in which that is appropriate. If you can’t even admit the very basics of good parenting—that no child should be forced into a live upskirt view just to listen to a story—your judgment is highly suspect. You are defending the indefensible here and it’s appalling, even for people who might otherwise be okay with DQSH.

Let’s start with the basics: Kids should not be looking up the crotch of adults in order to listen to a story, regardless of whether appropriate underwear is worn or not. Do you agree or disagree?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

I haven’t seen any pictures that aren’t blurred/censored, which is dishonest and implying his genitalia was showing. It’s obvious the person was wearing tights so it’s not clear what was visible if anything.

OMG. I can’t believe you are actually defending this. It doesn’t matter that the photo was blurred — you can see the view the child got even with the blurring. The man is sitting there, in an extremely short skirt, with legs open such that the children sitting in front of him had a direct view straight up his crotch. There is no world in which that is appropriate. If you can’t even admit the very basics of good parenting—that no child should be forced into a live upskirt view just to listen to a story—your judgment is highly suspect. You are defending the indefensible here and it’s appalling, even for people who might otherwise be okay with DQSH.

Let’s start with the basics: Kids should not be looking up the crotch of adults in order to listen to a story, regardless of whether appropriate underwear is worn or not. Do you agree or disagree?

Assuming they were wearing undergarments, which it sounds like they were, how is that different from what one sees when a man wears a speedo?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

I haven’t seen any pictures that aren’t blurred/censored, which is dishonest and implying his genitalia was showing. It’s obvious the person was wearing tights so it’s not clear what was visible if anything.

OMG. I can’t believe you are actually defending this. It doesn’t matter that the photo was blurred — you can see the view the child got even with the blurring. The man is sitting there, in an extremely short skirt, with legs open such that the children sitting in front of him had a direct view straight up his crotch. There is no world in which that is appropriate. If you can’t even admit the very basics of good parenting—that no child should be forced into a live upskirt view just to listen to a story—your judgment is highly suspect. You are defending the indefensible here and it’s appalling, even for people who might otherwise be okay with DQSH.

Let’s start with the basics: Kids should not be looking up the crotch of adults in order to listen to a story, regardless of whether appropriate underwear is worn or not. Do you agree or disagree?

Assuming they were wearing undergarments, which it sounds like they were, how is that different from what one sees when a man wears a speedo?

It would be entirely inappropriate for children to be seated at knee height, staring up the crotch of a man in a Speedo while listening to a story as well. I hope you are not anywhere near kids, since that isn’t obvious to you.

And you didn’t answer my question. Do you agree or disagree with the basic statement?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

I haven’t seen any pictures that aren’t blurred/censored, which is dishonest and implying his genitalia was showing. It’s obvious the person was wearing tights so it’s not clear what was visible if anything.

OMG. I can’t believe you are actually defending this. It doesn’t matter that the photo was blurred — you can see the view the child got even with the blurring. The man is sitting there, in an extremely short skirt, with legs open such that the children sitting in front of him had a direct view straight up his crotch. There is no world in which that is appropriate. If you can’t even admit the very basics of good parenting—that no child should be forced into a live upskirt view just to listen to a story—your judgment is highly suspect. You are defending the indefensible here and it’s appalling, even for people who might otherwise be okay with DQSH.

Let’s start with the basics: Kids should not be looking up the crotch of adults in order to listen to a story, regardless of whether appropriate underwear is worn or not. Do you agree or disagree?

Assuming they were wearing undergarments, which it sounds like they were, how is that different from what one sees when a man wears a speedo?

It would be entirely inappropriate for children to be seated at knee height, staring up the crotch of a man in a Speedo while listening to a story as well. I hope you are not anywhere near kids, since that isn’t obvious to you.

And you didn’t answer my question. Do you agree or disagree with the basic statement?

I guess I just don't think seeing someone's covered crotch is something to get your panties in a bind about. Kids see lots of crotches every time they go to the pool.

[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:

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: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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

I haven’t seen any pictures that aren’t blurred/censored, which is dishonest and implying his genitalia was showing. It’s obvious the person was wearing tights so it’s not clear what was visible if anything.

OMG. I can’t believe you are actually defending this. It doesn’t matter that the photo was blurred — you can see the view the child got even with the blurring. The man is sitting there, in an extremely short skirt, with legs open such that the children sitting in front of him had a direct view straight up his crotch. There is no world in which that is appropriate. If you can’t even admit the very basics of good parenting—that no child should be forced into a live upskirt view just to listen to a story—your judgment is highly suspect. You are defending the indefensible here and it’s appalling, even for people who might otherwise be okay with DQSH.

Let’s start with the basics: Kids should not be looking up the crotch of adults in order to listen to a story, regardless of whether appropriate underwear is worn or not. Do you agree or disagree?

Assuming they were wearing undergarments, which it sounds like they were, how is that different from what one sees when a man wears a speedo?

It would be entirely inappropriate for children to be seated at knee height, staring up the crotch of a man in a Speedo while listening to a story as well. I hope you are not anywhere near kids, since that isn’t obvious to you.

And you didn’t answer my question. Do you agree or disagree with the basic statement?

I guess I just don't think seeing someone's covered crotch is something to get your panties in a bind about. Kids see lots of crotches every time they go to the pool.

+1

We see lots of covered crotches during the Olympics. I guess we shouldn’t watch those anymore?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it is unfortunate that both sides are putting children in the middle of a culture war. Though I teach my kids to be tolerate of everyone including LGBTQ people, I would not take them to one of these events because I think both sides are exploiting children.

People objecting to the further deterioration of standards are not exploiting children and creating a culture war. Continuing to move the Overton Window lets people like you continue to reframe those who want the status quo as "extreme" but it isn't true.

[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:

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: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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

I haven’t seen any pictures that aren’t blurred/censored, which is dishonest and implying his genitalia was showing. It’s obvious the person was wearing tights so it’s not clear what was visible if anything.

OMG. I can’t believe you are actually defending this. It doesn’t matter that the photo was blurred — you can see the view the child got even with the blurring. The man is sitting there, in an extremely short skirt, with legs open such that the children sitting in front of him had a direct view straight up his crotch. There is no world in which that is appropriate. If you can’t even admit the very basics of good parenting—that no child should be forced into a live upskirt view just to listen to a story—your judgment is highly suspect. You are defending the indefensible here and it’s appalling, even for people who might otherwise be okay with DQSH.

Let’s start with the basics: Kids should not be looking up the crotch of adults in order to listen to a story, regardless of whether appropriate underwear is worn or not. Do you agree or disagree?

Assuming they were wearing undergarments, which it sounds like they were, how is that different from what one sees when a man wears a speedo?

It would be entirely inappropriate for children to be seated at knee height, staring up the crotch of a man in a Speedo while listening to a story as well. I hope you are not anywhere near kids, since that isn’t obvious to you.

And you didn’t answer my question. Do you agree or disagree with the basic statement?

I guess I just don't think seeing someone's covered crotch is something to get your panties in a bind about. Kids see lots of crotches every time they go to the pool.

+1

We see lots of covered crotches during the Olympics. I guess we shouldn’t watch those anymore?

Do you have your children sit a foot away from them in person for extended periods of time?

[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:

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: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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

I haven’t seen any pictures that aren’t blurred/censored, which is dishonest and implying his genitalia was showing. It’s obvious the person was wearing tights so it’s not clear what was visible if anything.

OMG. I can’t believe you are actually defending this. It doesn’t matter that the photo was blurred — you can see the view the child got even with the blurring. The man is sitting there, in an extremely short skirt, with legs open such that the children sitting in front of him had a direct view straight up his crotch. There is no world in which that is appropriate. If you can’t even admit the very basics of good parenting—that no child should be forced into a live upskirt view just to listen to a story—your judgment is highly suspect. You are defending the indefensible here and it’s appalling, even for people who might otherwise be okay with DQSH.

Let’s start with the basics: Kids should not be looking up the crotch of adults in order to listen to a story, regardless of whether appropriate underwear is worn or not. Do you agree or disagree?

Assuming they were wearing undergarments, which it sounds like they were, how is that different from what one sees when a man wears a speedo?

It would be entirely inappropriate for children to be seated at knee height, staring up the crotch of a man in a Speedo while listening to a story as well. I hope you are not anywhere near kids, since that isn’t obvious to you.

And you didn’t answer my question. Do you agree or disagree with the basic statement?

I guess I just don't think seeing someone's covered crotch is something to get your panties in a bind about. Kids see lots of crotches every time they go to the pool.

So, just so I understand, you believe that it is perfectly acceptable for a child to be seated close by, with eyes such that they are looking directly upskirt at someone’s crotch and extreme mini skirt, for the duration of story time.

Yeah, we have different views of what it means to respect children’s boundaries.

[Anonymous]

The controversy was just on NBC Nightly news.

[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:

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: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?

Now hold up. First off, drag isn't naturally a an exaggerated stereotype, since there are plenty of real women who dress similarly. Further, tt's more akin to burlesque and it's a performance. As for the second part, tell me how that would play in a performance in a bar, club, or cabaret? What kind of show would that be?

Sasha Baren Cohen did something similar as Ali G, a British rap style dude, and it was okay, because it was a performance with a purpose and was fun.

Trying to equate minstrel shows with drag continuously is not a good argument, because your first premise would have to be that real women who dress like drag queens are offensive to all women.
See:

Women who dress over the top are offensive
Drag queens dress as over the top women.
Therefore, drag queens are offensive.

That's the only way to square that. Is this what you are arguing, or are you trying to pretend that there aren't woman who act and dress just like drag queens, which are whom they are performing as?

Thanks for that ridiculous straw man. The offensiveness is not because women don't like women who dress sexy. Drag is a performance that appropriates female sexuality. The offensiveness of drag is in its appropriation and performative reinterpretation (by males) of what it is to be female.

By this standard, all performance and acting is offensive.

How so?

All acting is a performative reinterpretation

Not all acting is appropriation that creates a caricature of a traditionally marginalized and oppressed group, representing that group via stereotypes that have been used to perpetuate their oppression.

+1

The “I guess NOBODY CAN ACT NOW” temper tantrum is just so tiresome.

Again then, women who dress this way, say Dolly Parton or Madonna or hell, Carmen Miranda--are you arguing that they are (were) helping to continue the oppression of women? They should just disappear then?

NP. "women who dress this way" is a dog whistle. You're actually categorizing women by their outfits instead of viewing them as real people.

The drag queen reading the book a few pages back was wearing a dress and a sweater. I'm not sure I would describe her costume as overly sexual.

Any male who wears fake breasts is by definition appropriating female physical secondary sexual characteristics. You may not describe her costume as overtly sexual but it is.

You mean gendered? Sure.

Sexual as in sexy? No.

This exactly. They're conflating sex, gender, and sexuality. The attacks on drag are about sexualizing everything. That drag queen has clearly not sexualized anything. She has appropriated the female form with prosthetics which is the female sex as well as the gender woman. But she isn't sexualizing her costume which seems to be what people are concerned about. Or so they say at least. I'm pretty sure that picture was taken in Maryland the Olney library. In which case, people are trying to decide what Maryland law should be based on their morals as well as what parents should be allowed to do with their kids (take them to DQSH). At the end of the day, I honestly think a lot of these people would be happier in Florida or Texas or some Kansas where the rest of the population largely agrees with their values. That's not the case in Maryland.

Except there are examples of DQSH that have been overtly sexualized. Obviously not the majority of DQSH, but the bad incidents get lots of coverage. Some people are reacting to clips they've seen of a DQ twerking in front of kids at a library, or the more highly publicized incident of a DQ flashing his genitals under his skirt while reading to the kids. There are other examples, but there seems to be no litmus test for what is and isn't age appropriate.

I am firmly against taking kids to DQSH and consider drag to be sexist minstrelry, but please do not spread incorrect information. The incident regarding the “flasher” did not involve showing genitals. It did involve a man wearing a very short skirt with tights on, sitting on a chair, reading to kids who were eye level to his knees. The tights fully covered his genitals, though. It is important to note that the drag queen was not arrested or charged with anything, which he would have been if there had been an exposure.

I think the choice of outfit was highly inappropriate but would have been for both men and women.

What’s wrong with them dressing like that?

You actually have to ask why it is inappropriate to have children sitting a few feet away from where they look directly into someone’s crotch? You have to ask why it is inappropriate for anyone—man or woman—to sit such that their underwear is in the face of young kids?

You can see the photos of the event in question. Search for Hennepin County drag queen story hour. If you think that is appropriate, we definitely have different views of children’s boundaries.

It sounds like an unfortunate faux pas that could happen to anyone wearing a skirt, male or female, drag queen or not. The problem was with the positioning of the reader and the kids, not the outfit, of course.

Man. You will say anything to defend clearly inappropriate behavior. Crazy.

Sadly it’s not surprising. Some of these super leftists will literally do anything to defend inappropriate behavior, as long as it makes them look tolerant and accepting. It’s like a cult.

I hadn't heard about this so I looked it up. Nothing happened. It wasn't inappropriate. Stop being so gullible.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2022/06/drag-queen-did-not-flash-kids-during-storytime-social-media-users-spread-bogus-tale.html

You can see the pictures yourself. Just look. That article leaves them off. And it was already stated above that he was not flashing genitals. That doesn’t mean that kids weren’t looking up the extremely short skirt.

It’s indefensible.

I haven’t seen any pictures that aren’t blurred/censored, which is dishonest and implying his genitalia was showing. It’s obvious the person was wearing tights so it’s not clear what was visible if anything.

OMG. I can’t believe you are actually defending this. It doesn’t matter that the photo was blurred — you can see the view the child got even with the blurring. The man is sitting there, in an extremely short skirt, with legs open such that the children sitting in front of him had a direct view straight up his crotch. There is no world in which that is appropriate. If you can’t even admit the very basics of good parenting—that no child should be forced into a live upskirt view just to listen to a story—your judgment is highly suspect. You are defending the indefensible here and it’s appalling, even for people who might otherwise be okay with DQSH.

Let’s start with the basics: Kids should not be looking up the crotch of adults in order to listen to a story, regardless of whether appropriate underwear is worn or not. Do you agree or disagree?

Assuming they were wearing undergarments, which it sounds like they were, how is that different from what one sees when a man wears a speedo?

It would be entirely inappropriate for children to be seated at knee height, staring up the crotch of a man in a Speedo while listening to a story as well. I hope you are not anywhere near kids, since that isn’t obvious to you.

And you didn’t answer my question. Do you agree or disagree with the basic statement?

I guess I just don't think seeing someone's covered crotch is something to get your panties in a bind about. Kids see lots of crotches every time they go to the pool.

+1

We see lots of covered crotches during the Olympics. I guess we shouldn’t watch those anymore?

Do you have your children sit a foot away from them in person for extended periods of time?

How is anyone sitting one foot away?

[Anonymous]

This is the stupidest thread I’ve read in awhile.