you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ClassroomPast6178 20 insightful - 7 fun20 insightful - 6 fun21 insightful - 7 fun -  (9 children)

Wait, are they saying that a drag act, a man performing in a dress, is the same as a transwoman telling a joke or singing karaoke?

Are they admitting that transwomen are just men performing in dresses? Are they sure they want to make that argument?

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I think there's a subtle difference between a "drag show" and someone just performing in a dress.

Shakespeare used to have men play the women's parts. That's not drag though.

[–]ClassroomPast6178 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I know that. There’s a difference between pantomime dames and drag queens too. I was trying to work out how they could equate a drag act to a transwoman singing karaoke, which is what they were saying.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's not much point in trying to ask how they work out their bad takes. They are either incredibly stupid and easily riled up by bad faith arguments or they themselves are making the bad faith arguments to rile up the stupid people. There really isn't any coherent argument to be made for why a child should attend what is essentially a strip tease show. Drag or strip club or pole dancing I don't really care about it. If we had stripper story hour I'd be against it same as the drag.

Mainly there are a bunch of people, not all the gays or drag queens or whatever but a bunch of them, that are wholely into the mindset of "anyone who doesn't accept me outright is my enemy" and that extremist viewpoint leads them to imagine oppression everywhere. It's not much different than the dynamic you see in extremely conservative religious circles where they are desperately trying to equate everything with biblical prophecy and persecution. Once you get that kind of, I don't want to say Marxist lense because the term is trite and overused without much thought, but an essentialist mindset of all things, then you do begin to interpret every interaction through that lense of oppressor vs oppressed, persecutor vs persecuted, and whether the criteria for your essentialist mindset is religion, race, sexuality, or class, the outcome is you view everyone who opposes you as your ideological enemy outright and that lends itself to a constant struggle of reinventing your positions to be against your enemy and prove you are ideologically pure, which of course leads to various rediculous positions getting accepted. Us vs them. Pretty simple tribal dynamics.

It's why they can't see the difference between criticising the suitability of a performance for children with genocide, because in their minds they are the persecuted and all persecution must inevitably progress to genocide.

This is not a good position for society to be in because it will inevitably create a kind of self fulfilling prophecy and escalation. If I believe my opponents or critics literally want me dead then that justifies any manner of response, including ironically enough, genocide, because it's either us or them. That's why this kind of discourse is extremely dangerous to normalize and it should be countered at the earliest possibility. Censorship doesn't work except to fuel the persecution complex. The only way to deal with it is to rationally counter it with well reasoned arguments, so that they look like fools.

[–]LyingSpirit472 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Well, one thing to keep in mind with a lot of these laws is that they go extremely hardline to give as little leeway as possible. No different than with the anti-abortion laws, where if you read the laws the states tried to pass, they were so hardline against abortion that under the definition of the law in the books, technically they could go into a hospital where a sobbing woman who had a natural miscarriage by no fault except fate giving them a nat 1 and arrest the mother for murder.

Same with this- the law says "no drag shows", but by their definition they ride so extreme it becomes "pantomime dames are illegal, Mrs. Doubtfire, Tootsie, and Some Like It Hot instantly become pornography, a trans performer in any context is illegal...hell, if they want to get extreme with it they could arrest a woman for wearing pants."

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It's so they don't have to make a law that can hold up in court, both sides can play their end of the culture war with it and use it for fundraising.

If you wanted to make an actually effective law you'd zero in on the problem behavior itself , which isn't "drag" so much as doing lewd performances in front of minors.

[–]LyingSpirit472 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

But that's still one of the problems as well with the culture war: Lewdness is in the eye of the beholder. To someone on the TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTQlgb+ side of the coin, the drag queen could be dressed as Jesus Christ and proceed to bend over a child in the crowd and peg them with a 20 inch horse dildo and that would merely be "an act of sex education, completely instructional", while to someone on the alt-right side "a person dressed as their birth gender, but has a little button saying their preferred pronouns on it, existing in a public place" is abject lewdness.

Both sides of the political spectrum are so extreme to their side, and will NOT grant the other side even the smallest point, that it becomes impossible to make an effective law.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's in the eye of the beholder sure but you can make the law detailed in an effort to remove that eye as much as possible. Define the various lewd acts. Simulating oral sex with fruit. Making pumping pelvic motions while moaning. Etc. You can define the problematic behaviors. Classify them as adult performances and then be done with it until someone finds a loophole. Then you fill it, with the rock hard cement of justice.

[–]LyingSpirit472 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly. But that ties to the same ultimate point. Neither side is truly able to bell the cat in that aspect. The pro-drag show side will believe nothing is lewd that's done, the anti-drag side will say literally everything involving a gay or trans person drawing breath is lewd, and neither side will budge from their demands enough to grant the other side even the smallest compromise (because if you compromise, you give the other side one point and if you give either side an inch, they'll take a mile from you.)

[–]LordoftheFliesAmeri-kin 2.0. Pronouns: MegaWhite/SuperStraight/UltraPatriarchy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, just old-fashioned misogyny /s.