11 yr/old drag kid worshiped within LGBTQ community (Mod warning op)

Zorya

Zorya wrote:

Don't care if it makes me a square - I think these kind of acts are suited to an adult audience and are NOT child-friendly.

Ah stop. That's EXACTLY like Alan from Morning AM as widow twanky in the Cheerios panto. Exactly the same.

Wibbs

Zorya wrote: »

Free show London last summer, The Glory lgbt bar sends performers to entertain the crowds.

Nope.

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I take it that you think that a panto dame is trying to normalise transgenderism/transvestitism?

If not then why conflate the two?

I'm not. The poster I was replying to has a huge problem with men in dresses, no matter how they conduct themselves around the kids.

Zorya

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope.

Ya oul square, Wibbser.

Wibbs

It's a bit disingenuous to equate panto dames with some drag artists better suited to older audiences. Drag Queen story hour started a few years ago in SF and from the reports I read, the acts were very much on the panto dame side of things, which would be fun and colorful for kids to be read to by a larger than life persona. No problem for me there.

I do have a problem with acts like the one in the photo being promoted as family friendly, because it's a bit confusing for kids and the act would likely contain more risque elements (just judging from the outfits) that kids would at best not understand, and at worst would misunderstand and be confused by.

I think panto dame story hour would be a far more appropriate way of promoting the events, and it's okay to let kids see other ways of being in the world in a non-sexualized way. Personally my parents were kind of old hippies and I was made aware of all kinds of partnerships without it being about sexuality. I was told there was lots of different kinds of being in love for people, and I don't think anyone should worry about a message like that for kids.

So for me as far as kids are concerned, it's colorful drag dames over fishnets and falsies, and love being good over if it feels good, do it regardless.

I absolutely accept the existence of trans people and wish their lives were easier. I also think that people who might have struggles with identity or gender conformity may feel that being trans is their answer, and be defensive of that answer in a way that isn't healthy. Medical supervision is a very necessary thing to make sure that all people get the right help for the right problem, whether it's transitioning or other help, as whats happening now may leave vulnerable people lost in the rush to identify as something they simply may not be.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Dressing as the opposite gender isn't a disability nor does it need to be normalised.

Drag is not trying to be normal. It is purposely being abnormal for comedic and theatrical effect. Why does that need to be normalised?

My 6 year old daughter met a guy I know who's gay and asked me why he had a boyfriend. I said that he likes boys. She looked a little confused. She asked did that happen to everyone. I said no, the majority of boys like girls and girls like boys but it's perfectly fine to love whoever you want.

Did I do wrong by telling her that being gay wasn't wrong but it wasn't usual?

You did absolutely right by your daughter here.

Kids often think/ask about these things. When I was 4 I invented in my own head a third gender, which I termed a “who-er”; this was after seeing the silhouette of a person in the Lansdowne railway signal box, and wondering if it was a man or woman inside, and then deciding the signal operator looked neither like a man nor woman, so there might be a third gender. My dancing teacher lived with her partner as a lesbian couple, and I asked my mother “are they married?” to which Mum replied “well they are almost a married couple”. Of course I went on to ask about all sorts of people like aunts who lived together were they married. To assuage I think she explained that married people went asleep in the same double bed, but I had the poor woman vexed at times with questions. Kids just need simple, age appropriate answers, which have to be perpetually thought up by long suffering parents!

sbsquarepants

Zorya wrote: »

Free show London last summer, The Glory lgbt bar sends performers to entertain the crowds.



I can make out 4 children clearly, 2 are tots. The young girl closest is looking down, smiling in an embarrassed way, the blond girl standing up looks bewildered, the two toddlers looking are not smiling. There are other kids further away and they are not looking. The adults are laughing which makes a noticeable difference between them and the children.

Don't care if it makes me a square - I think these kind of acts are suited to an adult audience and are NOT child-friendly.

FFS

Why exactly do we need to "normalise" this?

What exactly is normal about it?

Call me whatever name's you like, but I just don't want that shít around my kids.

Naydy

I wouldn't be happy taking my daughter to see Glitterhole for the same reason I would refuse to take her if Katie Price was doing the reading. They have branded themselves as adult entertainers. And even if the act itself is perfectly child friendly (which seems likely in my mind, I'm not disputing that) I just don't think a child should be familiar with the names of these performers. Kids get obsessed with things very easily. I remember my mother taking us to see a Eugene Lambert show when I was about 8 and the first thing I did when I got a chance was look him up on the internet (and this was back in the dial up days when very few people we knew had internet and we certainly didn't). Much as I like to think my daughter wouldn't have access to the internet without monitoring, I am not stupid. There will be opportunities for her to access it at school etc every day of her life. You only have to google Katie Price to be inundated with pictures and articles which are not child appropriate. Same with Glitterhole. She could easily look it up, or talk about it to her friends who then go and look it up etc etc.

I sound like a helicopter parent and I'm really not, I'm very laidback about most things. But I do think that kids should be allowed to be kids for as long as possible and I admit internet etc is a sticking point for me.

Fwiw, if David Walliams for example was there dressed up and reading one of his books, I would take her in a heartbeat. Or a pantomine dame actor. Because that would be child appropriate.

suicide_circus

here's a bit of a thought crime experiment but could the inappropriate drag performances for the chislers (in the name of pride advocacy) be an attempt to bring back a bit of moral outrage against "the gays" which has been lost now that lgbt is utterly mainstream. Of course everyone is happy with the increased acceptance and rights but it is at the cost of that covert counter cultural forbidden aspect of the scene which i'm sure many got a kick out of? I know for a fact that there are age appropriate lbgt groups so i dont know why these apparent gaffes are happening.

donaghs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I dont understand your point at all. The performance planned in this case was designed to be age appropriate.

So if they are putting the constant sex jokes, sexual innuendo thing on hold, (http://fringefest.com/festival/whats-on/the-fianna-fellatio-party-launch, which is fine for adults) what exactly is the point of a “glitter hole” event for kids??

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1021452167381700608/KlhoLRWJ_400x400.jpg

donaghs

donaghs wrote:

, which is fine for adults) what exactly is the point of a “glitter hole†event for kids??

To show 3-7 year olds how progressive it is to be accepting that adults sometimes like to dress as the opposite sex. Totally innocent

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

To show 3-7 year olds how progressive it is to be accepting that adults sometimes like to dress as the opposite sex. Totally innocent

You know people have been doing this on main stream tv for decades right?

kildare lad

I've no problems with adults doing what they want, if you wanna dress as a man/woman or be gay , I couldn't care less . I've a family member that's gay and don't treat him any different than anyone else. But I've a problem when they're trying to indoctrinate young children into their way of life. Let kids be kids and keep your lgbt/tranny stuff to adults .

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

You know people have been doing this on main stream tv for decades right?

Yes. So?

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes. So?

And it hasn't had any adverse effect! Why all of a sudden is it "wrong"?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes. So?

And it hasn't had any adverse effect! Why all of a sudden is it "wrong"?

It's not.

People aren't complaining that it's wrong, they're complaining that it's not normal. It's as if bring normal is an attribute to be strived for.

(Glitter Hole asside: while I don't nessecarily agree with the criticisms years the specific troop, I can certainly understand them)

Timberrrrrrrr

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

It's not.

People aren't complaining that it's wrong, they're complaining that it's not normal. It's as if bring normal is an attribute to be strived for.

(Glitter Hole asside: while I don't nessecarily agree with the criticisms years the specific troop, I can certainly understand them)

People have complained about whats not normal for years though.

In the 50's it was rock and roll and Elvis shaking his hips would be turning kids into immoral sexually promiscuous lunatics.

In the 60's it was the mini skirt, women who wore them were harlots and sleeping around.

In then70's it was punks, men wearing kilts and having blue spikey hair, it was anarchy and the end of society as we know it.

In
The 90's it was house music, half the people complaining here about HRT were probably off their head on ecstasy for most of the 90's

The 00's bought us Goths and their strange dress yet no one batted an eyelid walking past them outside the central bank.

But LGBT people? Jaysus they're trying to indoctrinate our kids with their rainbows and unicorn agenda!!!!

donaghs

Deleted User wrote: »

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

You know people have been doing this on main stream tv for decades right?

Yes. So?

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes. So?

And it hasn't had any adverse effect! Why all of a sudden is it "wrong"?

“Glitter Hole” for starters. The name, the logo, their track record for non-stop sex and sexual innuendo. Which has as has been stated is fine for adults. It’ s understandable that parents would want more clarity on this, and ask why “glitter hole” rather than some other group have to be involved.

Timberrrrrrrr

donaghs wrote: »

“Glitter Hole” for starters. The name, the logo, their track record for non-stop sex and sexual innuendo. Which has as has been stated is fine for adults. It’ s understandable that parents would want more clarity on this, and ask why “glitter hole” rather than some other group have to be involved.

I'll tell you now, it's a good job all you snowflakes didn't grow up in the 70's so!

https://youtu.be/ej7yHgNktmE

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xbgbc1

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

In then70's it was punks, men wearing kilts and having blue spikey hair, it was anarchy and the end of society as we know it.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

In The 90's it was house music, half the people complaining here about HRT were probably off their head on ecstasy for most of the 90's

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

The 00's bought us Goths and their strange dress yet no one batted an eyelid walking past them outside the central bank.

I don't remember goths/punks/djs going to libraries teaching kids that its normal to be a goth/punk/DJ.

In fact, drag acts whole schtick is that they are extraordinary. Why would you want to normalise it?

What a bizarre comparison.

Nobody is saying drag acts are evil, just that are inappropriate for children.

Incredible victim complex

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't remember goths/punks/djs going to libraries teaching kids that its normal to be a goth/punk/DJ.

In fact, drag acts whole schtick is that they are extraordinary. Why would you want to normalise it?

What a bizarre comparison.

Nobody is saying drag acts are evil, just that are inappropriate for children.

Incredible victim complex

Why?

Because the purpose of drag is to subvert gender norms and children shouldn't have to be exposed to that from such a young age.

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because the purpose of drag is to subvert gender norms and children shouldn't have to be exposed to that from such a young age.

Why Are gender norms so important to you?

I couldn't giving a feck about them.

eviltwin

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because the purpose of drag is to subvert gender norms and children shouldn't have to be exposed to that from such a young age.

It's dress up, cos play. Have you seen a drag queen? There is no way they look like biological women, they are exaggerated versions of women.

I've a 9 year old son and Rupaul's Drag Race is his favourite show. I bring him to age appropriate drag shows and he's met queens both in and out of drag. He's a cis gendered, straight kid who loves computer games and ninjas. He isn't going to grow up confused because of a few men in dresses.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because the purpose of drag is to subvert gender norms and children shouldn't have to be exposed to that from such a young age.

Again, chikdren have been seeing drag on mainstream tv for decades now without it having any diverse affect why the sudden outrage?

Also do you have evidence for the bolded claim above?

Brian?

Brian? wrote:

Why Are gender norms so important to you?

Because children shouldn't have to worry about the minutiae of gender politics.

Gender norms to me are not an issue. Couldn't care less what grown people do. I just don't want my children to be worried about queer feminists and their opinions.

eviltwin

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because children shouldn't have to worry about the minutiae of gender politics.

Gender norms to me are not an issue. Couldn't care less what grown people do. I just don't want my children to be worried about queer feminists and their opinions.

Kids don't look at it as political, it's fun to them. Ever taken them to a panto? There's usually a few drag acts in them. Does that damage the kids in the audience do you think?

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because children shouldn't have to worry about the minutiae of gender politics.

They will only worry about it if you make an issue of it.

Gender norms to me are not an issue. Couldn't care less what grown people do. I just don't want my children to be worried about queer feminists and their opinions.

Hopefully your children won't grow up.as homophobic as you are.

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

Again, chikdren have been seeing drag on mainstream tv for decades now without it having any diverse affect why the sudden outrage?

It's usually played for a laugh back in the day of Enda Everage and Danny la Rue. Probably not suitable for the modern age. the people in drag were laughed at for being absurd.

Not sure what the Ru Paul phenomenon is or how it's different. Never watched it.

This particular group are queer feminists who were going to read to children in drag. I doubt their purpose was to make the kids think that it was ridiculous.