Drag Queens are totally not for adults! (Next step: BDSM story hour?)

submitted by QueenBread from i.imgur.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]AlanOneWant some popcorn? 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (34 children)

My uncle is actively teaching his daughter to avoid these freaks at all costs and honestly? I'll be doing the same when I have my own children. There's a difference between just being different and being a lumberjack in a flamingo tutu who's getting a boner every time he sees a little boy. So stunning, so brave...!

[–]jet199 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (33 children)

My mum knew (as in said "hello" to in the street occasionally) a few trans women when I was a kid. She just used to find them funny and that worked out just as well in the long term.

[–]William_World 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

should have shunned, and not encouraged them

[–]Musky༼⁠ ⁠つ⁠ ⁠◕⁠‿⁠◕⁠ ⁠༽⁠つ 🐈 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

I feel compassion is warranted when deviant lifestyles aren't popular like they are now. I'm all for accepting freaks and weirdos, except when it becomes mainstream and leads people to ape the behavior. That's problematic.

[–]Entropick 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (24 children)

I'm having the issue of guilt from my aggressive support of homosexual lifestyles for decades because I felt they deserved at least a place to exist, I had NO IDEA it would turn into state-backed teaching the kids to be gay situation!

[–]Musky༼⁠ ⁠つ⁠ ⁠◕⁠‿⁠◕⁠ ⁠༽⁠つ 🐈 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

What the conservatives in the 90s said would happen if we embraced homosexuality happened. They totalled called it.

We just believed the propaganda we were fed. Just as kids do now.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

You just have to sit and think, why did societies take such a harsh stance against homosexuality in the past?

(Oh it's because they were a bunch of old-fashioned bigots)

Ok sure but why were they old fashioned bigots? If gay people never caused issues why was society so opposed to it?

Something made society that way.

I'm not saying we send out people to police people's bedrooms or raid the gay bars, I don't think we should do that. But I do think public expressions of sexuality shouldn't really be encouraged.

[–]Musky༼⁠ ⁠つ⁠ ⁠◕⁠‿⁠◕⁠ ⁠༽⁠つ 🐈 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

You can extend that logic to reasons why we did other things in the past, like not allowing women to vote, control money or property, work, etc. Perhaps it wasn't just sexism, and there were reasons for those as well.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Generally speaking, it's more complicated, and depends on the country.

Voting for everyone seems a rather modern sentiment. The concept of democracies themselves being quite old but they generally did operate on some degree of exclusivity in who got to vote. Course that ignores all the successful non-democratic societies as well.

Women's ability to work own property etc varied wildly from place to place. I think outside of places like the middle east where they go to the extreme of not allowing women to go outside, most societies have basically allowed women to control and own property.

[–]Musky༼⁠ ⁠つ⁠ ⁠◕⁠‿⁠◕⁠ ⁠༽⁠つ 🐈 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I don't know, two issues I think probably led to things being the way they once were: many women having a lesser capability for logical thought, and the need for one person to raise the offspring. I don't think women voting or working has generally improved the human condition, although it's not a one-size-fits all situation.

But particularly allowing institutions to raise our children because both parents have to work is an issue. It's a somewhat elegant solution to say we believe the woman cannot work. Then her efforts can be devoted to one's own family's needs rather than an employer's. Although not every woman is a natural caregiver or homemaker.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Since sexism was so normalized in those days I think the real reason was most people just aren't able to question what is. If that's how society is already set up and that's what everyone else believes, they go along with it, even if it makes absolutely zero sense.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Society has always hated those who are different, so it wouldn't be too surprising if they just hated gay people for no reason.

[–]William_World 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

which is why it's safe to assume that they will keep going and make pedoes accepted next

[–]Musky༼⁠ ⁠つ⁠ ⁠◕⁠‿⁠◕⁠ ⁠༽⁠つ 🐈 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

They've already been at it for decades. They kind of poke it in a little every now and then, test the waters, but it's generally met with revulsion. I'd like to think that we have a biological instinct to not harm children, but there have been societies like the Greeks who thought every child and slave should be a fucktoy. Sodom and Gomorrah come to mind as famous cautionary tales as well. If it happened before it could conceivably happen again.

[–]QueenBread[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

You've never studied much about ancient history, isn't it? The ancient Greeks never said "child and slaves should be fuck toys". Watch less movies and study real history.

What the Greeks did was to be sexist and claim man+man was better than man+woman simply because women are inferior. What they also said was that an adult man having a sexual relationship with a teenager was a good idea if that meant the teen could be groomed into being a fiercer, better soldier. Some ancient Greek author even wrote the equivalent of a modern day's internet article, claiming that "it would be good to have homosexual soldiers because they would protect each other in the battlefield and they would not need to go back to their women".

[–]Musky༼⁠ ⁠つ⁠ ⁠◕⁠‿⁠◕⁠ ⁠༽⁠つ 🐈 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You've never studied much about ancient history, isn't it? The ancient Greeks never said "child and slaves should be fuck toys". Watch less movies and study real history.

I don't claim to be an expert on ancient Greece, but that is my understanding of the factual history. The influence of pederasty on Greek culture of these periods was so prevalent that it has been called "the principal cultural model for free relationships between citizens." That article goes into detail on the slaves as well, at one point mentioning it was less socially acceptable.

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

Yeah not everyone would do it but without society and it's rules there'd be a lot of terrible rapists out there. And children are just an easy target. I mean it happens anyway unfortunately but supporting and accepting pedoes will just obviously make the problem a hundred times worse.

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

poke it in

Are we still doing phrasing?

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

They deserve a place to exist but the problem with the slippery slope is when people deny it's existence they can't set up a way to prevent society from sliding down it.

It's like the euthanasia arguments. Or abortion. Corner a conservative and most will admit that in certain circumstances either can be morally justifiable, but if you allow it in that one case what's to say you don't allow it in another? Where do you draw the line?

Activism pushes things far past the point where people want it because it's the nature of the beast.

Someone who has, let's say horrible terminal cancer and is going to die miserably after a long period of pain, I think it is perfectly justifiable morally for them to suicide if they wish. But once we set up a legal precedent for it, where do we stop it? Someone just wants to kill themselves because they feel sad? That's a slippery slope "fallacy" because it skips the interim steps. But it's not an outrageous situation if you believe the initial idea that "people have a right to kill themselves".

Legally how you handle this is you let the terminal cancer patient ride it out on heroin.

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

Thanks for the insights.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That's not your fault

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

I appreciate that.

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

slippery slope. the compassion encouraged more to get into it, for attention and for feeling like they belong to a cult

[–]Ehhhhhh 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

How does that feel to be called "funny" by yer mum?

[–]jet199 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

The thing is that in the past transexuals were expected to have a thick skin and a good sense of humour about themselves because the doctors knew they would need it to survive. My mum liked them because they could talk endlessly and so could she. Their were no out trannys who weren't confident and sociable back then.

[–]Ehhhhhh 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

While I was taunting you, that's actually a good point. I didn't think about the difference in past trannys attitudes vs today's.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Today's aren't even for real. Just like liberals always do they hijacked a vulnerable group of people so they could "advocate" for them and benefit themselves from it. When this visibility is doing far more harm than good. And of course the real ones are now demonized as transphobes for not wanting to scream TRANS PRIDE UWU everywhere they go. Even wanting to pass or take hormones is starting to be considered transphobic.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Socially they were way better off before everyone else even knew they existed, for obvious reasons. They don't want to be noticed. And there was no reason for the few who did know to not like them. Now everyone is thinking about them all the time, and it carries a very strong political connotation. And they're portrayed very badly by their own "advocates", so of course people think of them that way.