Dragphobia on the rise...

[Starlight]

Here are some good points.... maybe there's not as much public opposition to this nonsense because it's considered homophobic to tell the truth...

The Real Story Behind Drag Queen Story Hour

I tried to start reading this but it got too long and too boring so I gave up. So there's some person named Gayle Rubin with some crazy ideas. So what? Why should anyone care for even one second? There are lots of people in the world with lots of crazy ideas. She can in her wild imagination make up all sorts of theories, but that's not any reason for anyone to care about them or think she's even remotely correct about any of them.

At the end of the day, kids like getting books read to them, kids are amused and entertained by people being dressed up. As long as it's in a public setting or with other adults (e.g. teachers or parents) present, neither anything untoward can happen nor can false rumors of untoward things happening start up.

Gayle Rubin or anybody else can come up with all the crazy theories they like about why this is good or bad or whatnot, and I am not in any way obliged to believe them or believe their theories have any iota of truth or relevance to the real world.

[Cow Poke]

I tried to start reading this but it got too long and too boring so I gave up. So there's some person named Gayle Rubin with some crazy ideas. So what? Why should anyone care for even one second? There are lots of people in the world with lots of crazy ideas. She can in her wild imagination make up all sorts of theories, but that's not any reason for anyone to care about them or think she's even remotely correct about any of them.

At the end of the day, kids like getting books read to them, kids are amused and entertained by people being dressed up. As long as it's in a public setting or with other adults (e.g. teachers or parents) present, neither anything untoward can happen nor can false rumors of untoward things happening start up.

Gayle Rubin or anybody else can come up with all the crazy theories they like about why this is good or bad or whatnot, and I am not in any way obliged to believe them or believe their theories have any iota of truth or relevance to the real world.

Gosh, I should have checked with you before I posted this. Cause you read stuff.

[Diogenes]

I tried to start reading this but it got too long and too boring so I gave up. So there's some person named Gayle Rubin with some crazy ideas. So what? Why should anyone care for even one second? There are lots of people in the world with lots of crazy ideas. She can in her wild imagination make up all sorts of theories, but that's not any reason for anyone to care about them or think she's even remotely correct about any of them.

At the end of the day, kids like getting books read to them, kids are amused and entertained by people being dressed up. As long as it's in a public setting or with other adults (e.g. teachers or parents) present, neither anything untoward can happen nor can false rumors of untoward things happening start up.

Gayle Rubin or anybody else can come up with all the crazy theories they like about why this is good or bad or whatnot, and I am not in any way obliged to believe them or believe their theories have any iota of truth or relevance to the real world.

Gayle Rubin is a significant influencer on the topic. It's hilarious that you just hand wave her. It's not just about reading books to kids.

[Starlight]

Gayle Rubin is a significant influencer on the topic. It's hilarious that you just hand wave her. It's not just about reading books to kids.

So what is it about then? What is the real actual thing the public is supposed to be scared of about this? What is the bad outcome for the kids that should concern the parents?

I'm not interested in hearing theories about Gayle Rubin personally having ideas someone else doesn't like. If all you've got is "I hate Gayle Rubin", then take it to someone who gives two figs. I'm interested in hearing the actual statements as to why having dressed up people reading a books is a bad thing and why anyone should be concerned about it, nevermind almost hysterical about it, the way the US conservatives seem to be.

[Diogenes]

So what is it about then? What is the real actual thing the public is supposed to be scared of about this? What is the bad outcome for the kids that should concern the parents?

I'm not interested in hearing theories about Gayle Rubin personally having ideas someone else doesn't like. If all you've got is "I hate Gayle Rubin", then take it to someone who gives two figs. I'm interested in hearing the actual statements as to why having dressed up people reading a books is a bad thing and why anyone should be concerned about it, nevermind almost hysterical about it, the way the US conservatives seem to be.

To quote the founders of DQSH:

relationality with children that breaks from the reproductive futurity of the normative classroom and nuclear family.

Elsewhere:

Instead, drag is firmly rooted in play as a site of queer pleasure, resistance, and self-fashioning.

To quote Pat Califa:

True, not all younger dykes are interested in older women. But if a woman is interested in having a cross-generational lover, I cannot think of one good reason—apart from the threat of persecution—why she should deny herself such a relationship.

To quote Foucault, page 7:

It could be that the child, with his own sexuality, may have desired that adult, he may even have consented, he may even have made the first moves. We may even agree that it was he who seduced the adult; but we specialists with our psychological knowledge know perfectly well that even the seducing child runs a risk, in every case, of being damaged and traumatized by the fact that he or she has had sexual dealings with an adult.

And this doesn't get to Rubin's lamenting of child pornography laws. Tell us Starlight, can a child make sexual advances towards an adult? Foucault seems to think 12-13 year olds can legitimately make the first moves towards an adult, do you? Why am I suspected of being a Christian merely for finding this repulsive? Why is non-theism in such a state that the expectation for a non-theist to accept this or sex toys in schools? Do you condone so called "cross-generational" relationships?

Given the ages, I'm sure Hypatia will have something to say that completely ignores this is about pleasure and not in response to infant mortality rates or the labour intensity of agriculture of the ancient world.

[Starlight]

So you seem to not have actually answered the question... instead of replying with what you think we should actually be concerned about happening in reality... you've once again fallen back to pointing to crazy people who've written things you don't like.

Let me reiterate. I don't care what crazy people have written. They can have theorized that if a drag queen read to children that 6 elephants would miraculously appear and that this happening would cause world peace, and still I would not care one iota about their crazy theories.

What I am concerned about is solely reality not with their writings. You can dislike their theories, you can dislike their views and ideas. I have never read their works and I don't care about their ideas. I think anyone who wastes time taking their ideas seriously is silly for wasting their time with them.

If you are going to try to convince me that having drag queens reading books to children is 'bad', you have to be able to make an argument as to why it is bad. Arguing essentially "A dead guy [Foucault] once thought that a child could make sexual advances towards an adult", isn't an interesting argument because I have no reason to believe that guy was right in his personal views, and his personal views have little relevance to the situation.

Trying to piece your argument together by running your quotes in reverse, you seem concerned that the children might make sexual advances toward the adult, and that the adult might consent to them. Yet that is a statement that could be made about any children and any adults in any situation. It could happen with their teacher, with their parents, with other family members, with a club leader, with a neighbor etc.

In order to be uniquely concerned about drag queens seems to require adding in something else. And I am suspicious that that something else is generalized homophobia. Only if LGBT people are viewed as in some way uniquely dangerous or uniquely threatening or uniquely harmful to kids, does people dressed up reading books go from being something amusing to something sinister. In other words, isn't this just absolute run of the mill unjustified homophobia? Is that why you guys are so reticent about actually explaining what your argument is? Because if you actually had to explain it rather than try to dress it up and talk around it, then you'd admit that you just hate gay people unreasonably?

And yes, hating gay people unreasonably does seem quite common in US conservative Christianity because a lot of them interpret the bible as telling them they should. And yes that is one among the many reasons I suspect you of being a Christian.

To answer your question directly: I am happy with the age of consent and would not push for it to be lowered, and I do not condone 'cross-generational' relationships between adults and children.

[Diogenes]

Let me reiterate. I don't care what crazy people have written.

I have never read their works and I don't care about their ideas. I think anyone who wastes time taking their ideas seriously is silly for wasting their time with them.

Then you are a waste of time.

And yes, hating gay people unreasonably does seem quite common in US conservative Christianity because a lot of them interpret the bible as telling them they should. And yes that is one among the many reasons I suspect you of being a Christian.

No where have I expressed hatred for gay people. Being concerned about an ideology that open expresses concern for child pornography laws and advocates for adults-minor sex (gay or straight) is not "unreasonably". If It's in the open only pushed by one side, that's not "homophobia".


The only reason you suspect me of being a Christian is because I have similar mores. There's no reason for me to deny being a Christian on a conservative Christian forum. There are gay conservatives. There are trans individuals against giving kids puberty blockers. I find it hilarious you refuse to accept my self-identifier. You would easily condemn someone if they denied a trans individual's self-identity.

Am I merely confused about my agnosticism? Am I a Christian who is lying to be a provocateur? What reason would I have to identify as an agnostic without being one? Must all non-theists conform to your values and beliefs? As a non-theist, what should be my values and morals? Enlighten me so that I may know true agnosticism.

To answer your question directly: I am happy with the age of consent and would not push for it to be lowered, and I do not condone 'cross-generational' relationships between adults and children.

You certainly don't care about people who do.

[Starlight]

No where have I expressed hatred for gay people.

Not directly. But you keep dodging whenever I push you for what your underlying concern is on this issue.

Being concerned about an ideology that open expresses concern for child pornography laws and advocates for adults-minor sex (gay or straight) is not "unreasonably".

Selectively quoting and weaving together passages from a number of different writers doesn't make something an "ideology". It makes it something you've constructed.

Insofar as any group does exist that advocates against child pornography laws and advocates for adult-minor sex, sure, oppose them on that. But that's not the topic of this thread.

We are in a thread about people in costumes reading books to kids. And I am getting fed up with the fact that whenever I ask "why does anyone object to that?" the answer shoots off sideways into theories about what some people once wrote about other topics like child pornography laws, which is not an answer to the actual question of why people are objecting to drag queens reading books.

Am I a Christian who is lying to be a provocateur?

You're certainly a question dodger and very slippery whenever I try and pin you down on anything, which would be consistent with someone who was being a provocateur.

You certainly don't care about people who do.

I haven't got the energy to get angry about every crazy person in the world who wants crazy things that are never going to happen. No politician is proposing legalizing pedophilia. There are plenty of serious political issues that are actually real problems in the world to focus my attention on. Corruption, housing, healthcare, wages, workers rights, inequality, gun homicides, etc are huge problems in the US.

[Diogenes]

Not directly. But you keep dodging whenever I push you for what your underlying concern is on this issue.

I have been careful as to what I link on a forum. Since CP has the City Journal page, that allows for some room. The end goal is normalising "cross generational" relationships. No where have I indirectly expressed hatred for gay people. That's just your imagination, perhaps to help you support the fanciful notion that I am Christian.

Selectively quoting and weaving together passages from a number of different writers doesn't make something an "ideology". It makes it something you've constructed.

Gayle Rubin is considered the founder of queer theory. Foucault is a primary influence of Rubin. I cited the people who started DSQH. These are not inconsequential individuals, but again, you don't care.

Insofar as any group does exist that advocates against child pornography laws and advocates for adult-minor sex, sure, oppose them on that. But that's not the topic of this thread.

We are in a thread about people in costumes reading books to kids. .

The creators of DQSH wrote the article regarding drag pedagogy. It's not just men in costumes read books to kids. Perhaps you're a drag queen and you want to read books to kids. That would similarly explain your defence of DQSH. Do you think James Lindsay is a Christian? He similarly objects to DQSH and self-identifies as an atheist.

You're certainly a question dodger and very slippery whenever I try and pin you down on anything, which would be consistent with someone who was being a provocateur.

Out of respect of the forum, I've tried to limit what I've linked. I previously linked the information regarding drag pedagogy, but again, you don't care. Citing various individuals of an ideological movement is not dodging, you're just dismissive.

I haven't got the energy to get angry about every crazy person in the world who wants crazy things that are never going to happen. No politician is proposing legalizing pedophilia. There are plenty of serious political issues that are actually real problems in the world to focus my attention on. Corruption, housing, healthcare, wages, workers rights, inequality, gun homicides, etc are huge problems in the US.

No one said anything about politicians. Politics are downstream from culture, hence why the culture war is warranted. There are individuals trying to normalise "minor attracted persons" in the US. There was a big row over the comments of one Allyn Walker. Since you're so versed in the happenings of America, I assumed you would have heard about that.

There are serious political problems in the US on top of the problems posed by critical theory, its derivatives, and the proponents of such.

[seer]

I imagine some of them feel they are being of service to these children by helping them understand the diversity of people in the world. If any of these children happen to be LGBT, they will grow up not feeling so isolated because they have seen people like themselves in their lives.

Or they are so narcissistic and sexually demented that they need kids and then society at large to confirm/accept their particular peccadillos... I wonder when we are going to get into zoophilia? After all we wouldn't want kids who are sexually attracted to animals to feel isolated.

[rogue06]

I imagine some of them feel they are being of service to these children by helping them understand the diversity of people in the world. If any of these children happen to be LGBT, they will grow up not feeling so isolated because they have seen people like themselves in their lives.

"Service"

All of those LGBTQ+++ 8 year olds.

01GMTZ3P1E6PR2RV7NQ7G59ZFY.jpeg

Why not answer the question concerning why some of them feel compelled to twerk in the faces of young children waiting for them to stuff money in their underwear? How is doing so a right that if not permitted endangers the drag queen's life (yes, that's what some are now claiming).

[Diogenes]

"Service"

All of those LGBTQ+++ 8 year olds.

01GMTZ3P1E6PR2RV7NQ7G59ZFY.jpeg

Why not answer the question concerning why some of them feel compelled to twerk in the faces of young children waiting for them to stuff money in their underwear? How is doing so a right that if not permitted endangers the drag queen's life (yes, that's what some are now claiming).

Given that I'm allegedly a Christian for defending Christian talking points, logically that would make Starlight a drag queen for defending DQSH.

[rogue06]

Given that I'm allegedly a Christian for defending Christian talking points, logically that would make Starlight a drag queen for defending DQSH.

can'tdisagree.gif

[Starlight]

I cited the people who started DQSH.

The Wikipedia page for Drag Queen Story Hour lists a few founders and their reasons, you don't seem to have cited a single one of them.

The creators of DQSH wrote the article regarding drag pedagogy.

No. The article you cited not authored by creators of it. The closest it gets is that one of the coauthors is a participant.

Perhaps you're a drag queen and you want to read books to kids.

I've never met a drag queen and I dislike reading books to kids.

Do you think James Lindsay is a Christian?

Never heard of him. He must have done nothing newsworthy or interesting in the last 10 years or else one of the many US commentators I watch would have mentioned him. Wiki says he's one of the main proponents of the 'groomer' rhetoric, so it is slightly surprising I haven't heard of such a mentally sick person in the public sphere. Tucker Carlson, Jordan Peterson, Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder etc, seem to be the ones that dominate the public right-wing extremist landscape on this issue.

Politics are downstream from culture, hence why the culture war is warranted.

Sigh, you seem to get upset at me pointing out the provocateur nature of your posting. Yet here you are quoting Andrew Breitbart of all people. And your avatar, Diogenes, is an infamous ancient Greek provocateur.

There are serious political problems in the US on top of the problems posed by critical theory, its derivatives, and the proponents of such.

Indeed, but you seem to be very far down the rabbit hole on this topic, to the point where I have to wonder why. If you want to say you have personal experiences that have led you to focus on this topic, that would explain it I guess. It doesn't seem very normal / rational though to be focused so deeply on this topic to the point where you're trying to dig through the writings of dead people to connect the dots to try and construct an 'ideology' in order to fearmonger about different people reading books to kids.

[Diogenes]

The Wikipedia page for Drag Queen Story Hour lists a few founders and their reasons, you don't seem to have cited a single one of them.

I will concede the article was not written with the a founder. Scholarly article > Wikipedia.

I've never met a drag queen and I dislike reading books to kids.

Yet you keep defending DQSH.

Never heard of him. He must have done nothing newsworthy or interesting in the last 10 years or else one of the many US commentators I watch would have mentioned him. Wiki says he's one of the main proponents of the 'groomer' rhetoric, so it is slightly surprising I haven't heard of such a mentally sick person in the public sphere. Tucker Carlson, Jordan Peterson, Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder etc, seem to be the ones that dominate the public right-wing extremist landscape on this issue.

Twitter being known as not being the public sphere.

Sigh, you seem to get upset at me pointing out the provocateur nature of your posting. Yet here you are quoting Andrew Breitbart of all people. And your avatar, Diogenes, is an infamous ancient Greek provocateur.

I don't know where I quoted Andrew Breitbart. Are suggesting Sparko is a pirate due to his avatar? I specifically like Diogenes regarding the painting that I chose as the avatar itself. Since you know of Diogenes, you would know the context of the painting.

Indeed, but you seem to be very far down the rabbit hole on this topic, to the point where I have to wonder why. If you want to say you have personal experiences that have led you to focus on this topic, that would explain it I guess. It doesn't seem very normal / rational though to be focused so deeply on this topic to the point where you're trying to dig through the writings of dead people to connect the dots to try and construct an 'ideology' in order to fearmonger about different people reading books to kids.

More pyschologising.

Again, it's not just about reading books.