Regarding sexualized drag shows for LITTLE CHILDREN:

Stable and orderly is the pinnacle of any human society - sought and valued by every iteration of humanity. Societies which have stability and order don't get there by encouraging everyone to go their own way (and damn the consequences). Scandinavian nations twenty years ago, for example. Japan. Such places are/were admired the world over.

 

No it hasn't. The late 20thC was brilliant. EVERYONE was winning.

That advantage was dismantled by Progressives, who did not like where things were heading.

 

Neither drag nor homosexuality has fallen into acceptance. Maybe in the media it's accepted but in everyday life it is not. Unless of course you live in a homosexual haven like san Fran or las Vegas or wherever else it is they've all gone.

 

That's true, but for the average First World Westerner, it's less of an issue than it is in the rest of the world.

 

First off, you completely glossed over my mention of Danny LaRue (That would be Danny LaRue holder of the Order of the British Empire medal by the way) who's about as mainstream a cultural icon as you can get.

You completely missed my qualifier:

"In some places and cultures drag or some variation of it can optionally be seen as sexual, such as ladyboys in Thailand and the Philippines but again, that's perfectly acceptable within that society. "

And in this case that was entirely optional because the picture I posted was of ladyboys appearing onstage in a UK show as cabaret/theater which is something they've done entertaining millions of people around the world:

"Created for the Edinburgh Festival 21 years ago, the Bangkok babes have entertained more than three million people over the past two decades with their glamorous party nights travelling all over the world.

For 2019, the variety show - which features comedy skits, flamboyant costumes, show stopping choreography, audience participation and singing - will be visiting 10 city centres and 50 theatres across the UK - and looking glam for all those shows is no small feat."

https://www.nottinghampost.com/what...yboys-bangkok-taking-over-nottinghams-2560445

And yes I do think anti-trans-drag is just a phase here in America. It all started around about the time of the Obergefell decision legalizing same-sex marriage. The conservative right had just lost a big target so they had to scramble around to find another one. That's when trans/drag came into the crosshairs.

I'll bet they don't give a hoot about it in Australia? Maybe Dame Edna Everage could chime in?

 

Idk about that. In the west it is generally only women that accept it, for obvious reasons. Pretty much most straight males don't.

 

I think it's illegal for ANYBODY to lapdance children. It's also illegal to show you a video. So you are requesting that we break the law. And if you claim the video you posted shows that, then you are publishing porn. I haven't opened it because downloading child porn would ALSO be illegal. Not to mention immoral.

What's wrong with you!

 

Yet they only instituted a law that only protects 5 year olds and younger from teachers discussing gay and trans sexuality issues.
Which just dismantled your entire theory
Next

 

The nation is a work in progress, not a perfect end result. And stable and orderly is somewhat like my way of the highway, because instability and chaos are the options that destroy everything people work for and want- but are sometimes so self-centered they think it's only important for themselves. Sometimes we make poor choices, but it's getting pretty bad when we keep doubling down instead of learning. And we're doing that by insulating people from the consequences of poor decisions. Pretending they aren't happening, or they are normal and OK. Chaos won't cut it for the future- or today.

It's a journey over generations, and each should understand that the objective is to leave the world better than they found it. That's doesn't mean more free things, it means stronger, more capable people who can thrive without destroying their own world. A place where truth is respected, honesty is respected, being trustworthy is respected.

Much of life and what we have is vastly better than what we had a say 150 years ago- but our people have not kept pace with that, morally or otherwise. Many of those alive today would have been unable to survive at that time. Things always change, but historically, societies perish from loss of values and motivations, not natural causes. WE are our own worst enemy, and right now we are at the critical point in the historical life cycle of a democracy - approaching a point of no return. If we don't get a handle on this soon, we never will.

 

The typical Republican voter who is routinely presented with propaganda on how schools are trying to turn young children gay or transgender might care about the kids. The politicians and the conservative activists don't. For them it's about promoting their own indoctrination onto the populace, easily observed by the complete lack of evidence that their claims actually happen in classrooms. Their social manipulation is designed to distort the conversion from their actual goals.

The most detestable of liars use children for their ends, claiming to be their guardian, while the laws they pass are primarily designed with the hubris of thinking you can censor a group out of existence. They seek to ban books and discussion that doesn't coincide with their own ideology, and it doesn't stop at preschool, this is extended out to all public schools. And it doesn't stop with curriculum, it's about access. Should we really be so surprised what those who ban Brave New World have planned?

Unfortunately I find this a topic where most aren't interested in having an actual discussion. While I have an interest in the actual law that is pushed from the narratives presented throughout this thread, the replies are a derivative sophistry with the only intention of building a wicker man for their next culture war burning.

The holidays are upon us, and I don't intend to spend them here. I've got a turkey to prepare and a pumpkin cheesecake that needs a topping. Despite the great differences many of us have, I hope everyone has a wonderful holiday and doesn't let bullshit politics get in the way of their family relationships.

Happy Thanksgiving!

 

So that cartoon perfectly describes YOUR IDEOLOGY.

 

Teachers still cannot be allowed the right to free speech in the classroom and public school that is a government agency and if the government exercises free speech over the people it is denying the people free speech.

I don't have a problem with them having ideas or even talking about it but you do it outside of the classroom. In the classroom you are the government.

My partner is a teacher and he is LGBT. He's the one that explained this to me.

In the classroom you have a responsibility it is not your bully pulpit you do not get free speech there.

And I wish you a very Happy Thanksgiving as well.

 

We don't discuss straight sexuality issues with 5 years olds. Much less gay or trans. So I think you're just over reacting a bit.
Happy Thanksgiving

 

So, what you're posting is you put forth theories (I'd prefer to call that an endorsement) but don't claim to endorse these theories?

 

If you read current headlines in the news (I'm surprised the mainstream anti-democratic press even covers this) or watched a few of the threads in DP, you'd know and wouldn't need clarification.

 

On the contrary-- you, I am sure have misunderstood the facts or, at the very least, are misrepresenting those facts. The thing you had said, had been nonsense, which is why I had wanted you to clarify what you were referring to. But, apparently you are refusing to clarify your own point-- because I should already know what you mean?

Here @ECA , is what I meant about competition for the most ridiculous post (I just didn't know that cabse5 would be competing with himself, for the title). I will just point out to you, Cabse, that if you expect those who read you, to already understand and agree with your interpretation, then there would be no reason for you to bother saying anything, at all. Also, when any poster gets asked to clarify a vague allegation, and they respond that they won't, it is patently obvious that it is because they can't, and that whatever claim they'd been making, had been total bullshit.

It had been you, who had supposedly wanted to make a point. I answered that your allusion was too obscure, for me to know what you'd meant by it, giving you the chance to more successfully put forth your point. And your response is, "no." That, FYI, does not mean that you have won the point; it means that you have abandoned your attempt to make it.

 

Read the news. Read a few threads on DP. That's all the clarification you should need.

 

Nope, what he's posting is that each parent makes their own choice for their own kid and no one else's.

 

Cybred's interpretation of what ECA is posting is wrong because the gov't intervenes in what choices are given a child. For example, (and this is the hypocrisy I was pointing out to ECA) a parent doesn't have the legal ability to tell their children to kill, for example, 'cause it's against the law to do so. The argument that kids can come to drag queen shows 'cause their parents want them to go to drag queen shows doesn't fly because not everything suggested to a child by their parent is legal.

BTW, I child can't vote or legally own a firearm either.

 

Yes it does.

 

So kids can kill, vote and own firearms if their parents tell them it's OK to kill, vote or own firearms???

 

You're being too kind. These 'progressives' in America are neo-communists.

 

When were we talking about killing, voting and owning firearms?

 

I already do keep up with the news-- and it's not clarifying because, as I've explained, your comment was obscure, and seemed utterly clueless--

cabse5 said: ↑
Well, school teachers and sex groomers don't agree that parents have a say in how their children are raised. The DOJ doesn't agree that parents have a say in how to raise their kids--

which is how I know that you've got no idea of what your talking about, and hence cannot even explain your own arcane reference. IOW, in lieu of some qualifications, your assertion that the DOJ does not believe that parents have any say in the raising of their own kids, is patently bullshit. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you might have only been speaking with a surfeit of hyperbolism. But if you are not going to redefine your claim, then-- to anyone with any sense whatsoever-- your charge is without the slightest merit.

 

You're talking about it being OK for kids to be a drag queen shows 'cause their parents want them at drag queen shows.