Can someone please explain to me why a "drag show" is suddenly the epitome of evil?

[SkepticThinker]

They see this (and other things) as going after their children.

And what do they think the goal is in "going after their children?"

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If people do not approve of men preforming that way, they don't want these men influencing their children. Part of the reason drag queens read to children is to normalize their craft to children, and parents who don't approve of their craft will see this as going after their children

Why should haters be cattered to? It's not like drag queens are the first group RW Conservatives have wrongly been afraid of.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But what about a woman wearing pants???

Don't make me sic Sister Cindy on you!!!

 

[PureX]

If people do not approve of men preforming that way, they don't want these men influencing their children. Part of the reason drag queens read to children is to normalize their craft to children, and parents who don't approve of their craft will see this as going after their children

I agree. But that doesn't excuse the bigotry.

For example. Let's say these same people believe that having dark skin means that God has marked those dark-skinned people as being "aligned with the beast". And so they are to be loathed and avoided.

Then, to try and mitigate this absurd bigotry, people with dark skin begin visiting children's centers to interact with them in a way that shows the children that they're not "aligned with the beast" and need not be loathed or feared.

The adult bigots will remain bigots, and will fight this attempt at opening their kid's minds to the "evil of the beast" because they will not see themselves as bigots (because bigots cannot recognize their own bigotry for what it is). They will not see that they are wrong. Or that they are poisoning their own kid's minds. But the rest of us will.

So what do we do? We really don't want to usurp any parent's right to raise their own children as they believe is best. And yet some parents are so screwed up in the head and so blind to their own negative nonsense that they will in effect abuse their own children in their attempt at raising them "right". At some point society is going to be obliged to step in and protect the children from their own parent's destructive insanity.

But when? What is the line that we can't allow the parents to cross? Who is going to decide when it has been? What do we do about it?

These are difficult questions to answer.

 

[Father Heathen]

They see this (and other things) as going after their children.

That's just a deceptive and manipulate pretext to make their attacks upon other people's rights and freedoms appear defensive; to create the illusion that they're the victims rather than the victimizers.

 

[fantome profane]

They see this (and other things) as going after their children.

"They" said exactly the same thing about blacks.
"They" said exactly the same thing about immigrants.
"They" said exactly the same thing about communists.
"They" said exactly the same thing about gays.

I don't put much credence in what "they" say anymore.

 

[SomeRandom]

If people do not approve of men preforming that way, they don't want these men influencing their children. Part of the reason drag queens read to children is to normalize their craft to children, and parents who don't approve of their craft will see this as going after their children

Influencing their children?
I mean, I think parents overestimate the so called influence of entertainment on kids. Not saying it’s zero. Obviously kids learn through mimicry
But the overall influence might be more prevalent in the teen angst years. And even then that’s more to do with the psychology of teenagehood in general than actual entertainment. Since it’s a natural progression for an adolescent to seek out influences outside of their parents and/or close family/friends. That’s just part of growing up. It’s supposed to happen, iow
Also what actual “evil” detriment is there to crossdressing? Like honestly? What’s the horrible thing?
It’s just clothing and indeed the masculine and feminine identity of said clothing differs culture to culture, even today. Hell it differs between the two that I grew up in (I’m mixed race. So I grew up in two entirely different cultures.)
I dare you to tell a Scotsman that they’re a woman for wearing a skirt (kilt.) Go on.
Hell I know blokes who mock the Catholic Priesthood (among other clergy) for “dressing like girls.”
Should we expel the Church from our list of child influences as well, while we’re at it?

I mean for example the Genie from the movie and tv show of Disney’s Aladdin didn’t really influence me or my friends at all growing up. Despite us all being a massive fans of the franchise (and indeed in both instances drag actually was quite common for the character.)
I mean I guess it helped me to not care one iota about drag in general and react to it with utter indifference.
Is that what parents are afraid of? Kids not sharing their same fears?
That’s what we all used to condemn the folks crying about the X “coming for their kids” crowd over. Admittedly it was kind of jokingly. But still. Guess we were right to condemn their bigotry.

Now Lord of the Rings? Teen heartthrobs of the day? DC and Marvel? (Yes I’m a massive nerd, shoot me.)
Those were big influences in my life. Mostly if not all directly only throughout my puberty years of teenage hood though.
But eh?


(My apologies for the late reply. Blame my lack of caffeine.)

 

[Kfox]

And what do they think the goal is in "going after their children?"

The goal is to convince their children that this is normal.

 

[Kfox]

Why should haters be cattered to? It's not like drag queens are the first group RW Conservatives have wrongly been afraid of.

What constitutes "hatred" is completely subjective. Obviously they don't see themselves as haters, they see themselves as right.

 

[Kfox]

But what about a woman wearing pants???

A woman wearing pants =/= a man

 

[fantome profane]

A woman wearing pants =/= a man

But the question is this. Is it ok for a woman wearing pants to read a story to children?

 

[Kfox]

I agree. But that doesn't excuse the bigotry.

For example. Let's say these same people believe that having dark skin means that God has marked those dark-skinned people as being "aligned with the beast". And so they are to be loathed and avoided.

Then, to try and mitigate this absurd bigotry, people with dark skin begin visiting children's centers to interact with them in a way that shows the children that they're not "aligned with the beast" and need not be loathed or feared.

The adult bigots will remain bigots, and will fight this attempt at opening their kid's minds to the "evil of the beast" because they will not see themselves as bigots (because bigots cannot recognize their own bigotry for what it is). They will not see that they are wrong. Or that they are poisoning their own kid's minds. But the rest of us will.

So what do we do? We really don't want to usurp any parent's right to raise their own children as they believe is best. And yet some parents are so screwed up in the head and so blind to their own negative nonsense that they will in effect abuse their own children in their attempt at raising them "right". At some point society is going to be obliged to step in and protect the children from their own parent's destructive insanity.

But when? What is the line that we can't allow the parents to cross? Who is going to decide when it has been? What do we do about it?

These are difficult questions to answer.

So basically you are asking, if the parents disagree with the state concerning raising their children, should the state be allowed to take away their children and raise them according to the standards of the state. This was some of the logic behind the “Hitler youth” if I recall correctly.
How about if we allow parents to raise their children as they see fit, then when the children get older, they can decide for themselves which part of their parents training they hold on to, and which parts they reject.

 

[Kfox]

That's just a deceptive and manipulate pretext to make their attacks upon other people's rights and freedoms appear defensive; to create the illusion that they're the victims rather than the victimizers.

Consider the following scenarios:

*A white man putting one black makeup and an afro wig, and preforming according to his interpretation of how black people act
*A white man putting on Native American garb and preforming according to his interpretation of how Native Americans act
*A white man putting on female makeup and a female wig, and preforming according to his interpretation of how women act.

Why are 2 of these scenario’s wrong, but the third is okay?

 

[Kfox]

"They" said exactly the same thing about blacks.
"They" said exactly the same thing about immigrants.
"They" said exactly the same thing about communists.
"They" said exactly the same thing about gays.

I don't put much credence in what "they" say anymore.

What did the blacks, immigrants, communists, and gays do that can be interpreted as "attempting to influence children"?

 

[Kfox]

Influencing their children?
I mean, I think parents overestimate the so called influence of entertainment on kids. Not saying it’s zero. Obviously kids learn through mimicry
But the overall influence might be more prevalent in the teen angst years. And even then that’s more to do with the psychology of teenagehood in general than actual entertainment. Since it’s a natural progression for an adolescent to seek out influences outside of their parents and/or close family/friends. That’s just part of growing up. It’s supposed to happen, iow
Also what actual “evil” detriment is there to crossdressing? Like honestly? What’s the horrible thing?
It’s just clothing and indeed the masculine and feminine identity of said clothing differs culture to culture, even today. Hell it differs between the two that I grew up in (I’m mixed race. So I grew up in two entirely different cultures.)
I dare you to tell a Scotsman that they’re a woman for wearing a skirt (kilt.) Go on.
Hell I know blokes who mock the Catholic Priesthood (among other clergy) for “dressing like girls.”
Should we expel the Church from our list of child influences as well, while we’re at it?

I mean for example the Genie from the movie and tv show of Disney’s Aladdin didn’t really influence me or my friends at all growing up. Despite us all being a massive fans of the franchise (and indeed in both instances drag actually was quite common for the character.)
I mean I guess it helped me to not care one iota about drag in general and react to it with utter indifference.
Is that what parents are afraid of? Kids not sharing their same fears?
That’s what we all used to condemn the folks crying about the X “coming for their kids” crowd over. Admittedly it was kind of jokingly. But still. Guess we were right to condemn their bigotry.

Now Lord of the Rings? Teen heartthrobs of the day? DC and Marvel? (Yes I’m a massive nerd, shoot me.)
Those were big influences in my life. Mostly if not all directly only throughout my puberty years of teenage hood though.
But eh?


(My apologies for the late reply. Blame my lack of caffeine.)

It’s about the politics of the matter. Crossdressers are being lumped into the LGBT+ category, Disney characters, Priests, Disney Characters, and all the other characters you mentioned are not. So their push back is against the LBGT political war.

 

[Father Heathen]

Consider the following scenarios:

*A white man putting one black makeup and an afro wig, and preforming according to his interpretation of how black people act
*A white man putting on Native American garb and preforming according to his interpretation of how Native Americans act
*A white man putting on female makeup and a female wig, and preforming according to his interpretation of how women act.

Why are 2 of these scenario’s wrong, but the third is okay?

So you're comparing drag shows to the minstrel shows of yesteryear? Admittedly an interesting comparison. However, that still wouldn't warrant the "coming for your children" fearmongering. Also, considering how misogynist conservatives tend to be, I highly doubt that's their concern with drag shows.

 

[Kfox]

But the question is this. Is it ok for a woman wearing pants to read a story to children?

When he brought this up on post #211, nowhere did he mention reading to children. His point seemed to only make the point that a man wearing a dress =/= a woman

 

[Kfox]

So you're comparing drag shows to the minstrel shows of yesteryear? Admittedly an interesting comparison. However, that still wouldn't warrant the "coming for your children" fearmongering.

You seemed to make the point that it was an attack upon the rights of people to preform as they please. I was just pointing out progressives have their share of attacks upon the rights of people preforming as they please as well.

 

[fantome profane]

When he brought this up on post #211, nowhere did he mention reading to children. His point seemed to only make the point that a man wearing a dress =/= a woman

Avoiding the question.

I don't care who did or did not bring it up, I am bringing it up.

Is it ok for a woman wearing pants to read a story to children?

 

[Sand Dancer]

Avoiding the question.

I don't care who did or did not bring it up, I am bringing it up.

Is it ok for a woman wearing pants to read a story to children?

Or a woman wearing a fake mustache, a man's hat, having short hair and using a deep voice.