I for one am fucking sick of hearing about this particular subject. Why is anyone talking about this?
You keep hearing about the GOP vilifying and persecuting LGBTQ+ people because it’s against the supposed ideals of the country and the GOP keep doing it. If you want news about LGBTQ+ issues to stop, you need to make the GOP stop.
You are being distracted. Focus. You CAN eat your local representative. One bite at a time.
People don’t need to know what is in the chilli at the cookout.
Innocent people being villified, persecuted, attacked and oppressed isn’t just a “distraction”, it’s a serious problem that’s heading towards genocide.
We can chew bubble gum and walk at the same time, by which I mean deal with this AND their other fuckery.
Because keeping us fighting over this keeps us from going after billionaires.
i am not an expert on the subject but i would imagine it’s because it has implications for the safety and legal rights of trans people. if they’re able to pass laws banning drag queens, they might then start (incorrectly) claiming that trans people are drag queens and thus those laws apply to them.
Exactly this.
Step 1) Declare that all drag performances are sexually explicit and therefore shouldn’t be allowed near kids. This is false, of course. There are plenty of PG or G rated drag shows where nothing even remotely explicit happens, but they need this lie to be enshrined into law.
Step 2) Declare that trans people, by existing, are “performing drag in public.” Again, false, but this would mean that trans people wouldn’t be allowed to be dressed in their preferred gender anywhere there might be kids. Even simply walking through the grocery store would be declared “sexually explicit behavior in the presence of children” and could result in criminal charges.
The right will stop at nothing to enforce their radical Christian views on the country and they don’t care whose lives they ruin to do this.
They’re not banning drag queens, they’re banning sexually explicit drag shows for children. Drag shows are still 100% legal.
They think all drag queens are sexually explicit and will enforce the law accordingly.
Nah, maybe just that it is fuckall business of government and they should concentrate on real issues instead of poking their nose into what clothes people wear?
Yes. That’s literally the issue being discussed here that you seem to think is “too boring”. You agree with the general sentiment here. Who are you mad at?
Because republicans keep violating the constitution and trying to marginalize anyone who isn’t white hetero Christian.
Ya, Drag shows for children, how would they grow up right without them… SERIOUSLY!
Seriously what do you guys even get out of wasting your life with low effort troll posts on lemmy. Like do you actually not have frejnds or family you would rather spend your time on? Or hobbies? Or even just video games or looking at memes? Is it an extention seeking thing?
I’ll never understand authoritarians who can’t separate “that’s not something I’m interested in” and “that should be illegal”
Funny, I’ll never understand the people that can’t differentiate the things that are appropriate for children and things that aren’t. Funny, not too long ago people were able to do that, regardless of political bullshit.
Do you find Hooters inappropriate for children too? Should we ban that or are boobies ok but men in costumes not?
not too long ago people were able to do that, regardless of political bullshit.
Parents’ moral panic (especially from conservatives) has been going on for as long as it has been. I certainly remember growing up in the 90s hearing news about parental indignation on Mortal Kombat and South Park, and especially The Simpsons believe it or not.
Political bullshit is all it is. Why is this an issue all of a sudden? Who cares? If you don’t want your children to see one, don’t go. Where are all these kids that are going to drag shows unsupervised or without parental permission?
Alcohol, R-rated movies, a driver’s license… Plenty of things aren’t suitable for children, so we don’t give them to children. Children shouldn’t be exposed to heterosexual erotica either. Do you want to ban that? Didn’t think so. How about, you know, take some personal responsibility as a parent for what your child should or should not see?
Exactly. Why haven’t we banned Hooters, Tilted Kilt, any strip club, any theatre that shows R rated movies. Gun clubs aren’t safe for children, and restaurants serve alcohol, which also isn’t appropriate for children. Attending church makes a child more likely to be assulted, but so does being near your own family, as well as strangers. Schools pose the risk of indoctrinating kids, but so does their unce Frank. Rainbows? Straight to jail. A Smiley Face? Jail. Any opinion not shared by their parents? Wouldn’t you know it, Jail.
Ban people from doing anything because anything has an effect on kids.
Key words: “In front of children”
How does it harm children to see someone in prosthetics dancing and lip synching?
I don’t think it’s good to expose children to grown men in revealing outfits twerking in front of them while kids are encouraged to tuck dollar bills into the dragqueens shirt like a stripper. Which happens and you don’t bat an eye. Just because you’re sexually desensitized doesn’t mean it’s okay to expose children to it.
You know what actually happens and none of you bat an eye? Grown men fondling altar boys. You know it happens, but you don’t dare address it, so instead you pretend there’s a much bigger child abuse problem out there that’s more worthy of your time.
But there isn’t. Clergy have demonstrably sexually abused children, and their church organizations have covered it up.
So go ahead, keep protecting pedophiles and protecting your disconcert with it onto everything else. When you’re ready to value protecting kids over protecting religion, let us know.
Why are you under the impression that every drag show is like that? Drag story time at a library does not involve any of that.
Key words: straw man. Guessing almost zero drag shows happen in front of children
If I were to present you evidence of sexually explicit actions happening at a drag show in front of children would you change your mind?
One time, no. Dozens of times, no I wouldn’t change my mind that it’s basically a non-issue, but I might believe that it’s something that actually happens amongst the hundreds of millions of people that exist in my country.
You can find one example of the most insanely uncommon shit ever and it won’t mean it’s worth talking about for more than 30 seconds per year
It would be immaterial, because that is already illegal and can be enforced using existing laws without resorting to a broad ban of a particular kind of performance art.
No. It wouldn’t. Because you’re a prude, and your definition of “sexually explicit actions” is almost certainly over-the-top pearl-clutching nonsense to me.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
U.S. District Judge David Hittner found Senate Bill 12 “impermissibly infringes on the First Amendment and chills free speech.” The struck-down law prohibited any performers from dancing suggestively or wearing certain prosthetics in front of children.
“It is not unreasonable to read SB 12 and conclude that activities such as cheerleading, dancing, live theater, and other common public occurrences could possibly become a civil or criminal violation.”
While SB 12 was originally billed as legislation that would prevent children from seeing drag shows, the final version did not directly reference people dressing as the opposite gender.
In Tuesday’s 56-page ruling, Hittner noted a survey of court decisions “reveals little divergence from the opinion that drag performances are expressive content that is afforded First Amendment protection.”
U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk said that West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler acted within his authority when he canceled a campus drag show.
“Today’s ruling is a celebration for the LGBTQ community and those who support free expression in the Lone Star State,” GLAAD President and Chief Executive Officer Sarah Kate Ellis.
The original article contains 796 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Bad bot. Summary references two federal trial level judges with different opinions, without explaining why there are two different trial level judges. I will read full article to see why there are two different judges on the same case. EDIT: not the same case. Summary omits context - different judges ruling differently in different cases concerning drag.
When you think about it, the cons sure are creepy weirdos - obsessed with things like this so very, very much. Wonder why?
Combination of things:
- Some are just assholes who hate anything they’re told to hate.
- Some are self-hating because they’re in the closet themselves.
- Some have bought into the “groomer” lies.
- And some are child molesters who’ve figured out that if they can get everyone in the first three groups to focus on drag queens, it takes the heat off.
