a defense of drag show/drag queens..

[Flannel Jesus]

What are you arguing against?

That people should vote for this. That it would be good, sensible, etc. There's part of democracy. Arguing for any against policies

But you don't have an argument other than "government ought not to do ..."

Ok, I don't understand why that isn't a valid argument about a policy. That's what policies are about. What the government ought to do.

If a bunch of people decided they didn't like jazz music, we would all think it's absurd that they attempt to make jazz music illegal. The government ought not to make music illegal if it's not causing harm. I don't see the issue you have with this genre of argument. It feels entirely pertinent to me.

A policy is the government doing something. An argument for a policy is "the government ought to do this". An argument against it is "the government ought not". That's what arguments about policies look like as far as I can tell.

[Gary Childress]

That people should vote for this. That it would be good, sensible, etc. There's part of democracy. Arguing for any against policies

But you don't have an argument other than "government ought not to do ..."

Ok, I don't understand why that isn't a valid argument about a policy. That's what policies are about. What the government ought to do.

If a bunch of people decided they didn't like jazz music, we would all think it's absurd that they attempt to make jazz music illegal. The government ought not to make music illegal if it's not causing harm. I don't see the issue you have with this genre of argument. It feels entirely pertinent to me.

A policy would need to be shown by its proponents to be justified or else the detractors need to show its proponents are wrong. "Government ought not to do X" doesn't say much about X other than it's something that no government should do or whatever. You could say, "government ought not to outlaw Y" But that's not a sufficient argument if it gives no other reason.

[Flannel Jesus]

But you don't have an argument other than "government ought not to do ..."

Ok, I don't understand why that isn't a valid argument about a policy. That's what policies are about. What the government ought to do.

If a bunch of people decided they didn't like jazz music, we would all think it's absurd that they attempt to make jazz music illegal. The government ought not to make music illegal if it's not causing harm. I don't see the issue you have with this genre of argument. It feels entirely pertinent to me.

A policy would need to be shown by its proponents to be justified or else the detractors need to show its proponents are wrong. "Government ought not to do X" doesn't say much about X other than it's something that no government should do or whatever. You could say, "government ought not to outlaw Y" But that's not a sufficient argument if it gives no other reason.

I have given reasons

[Gary Childress]

Ok, I don't understand why that isn't a valid argument about a policy. That's what policies are about. What the government ought to do.

If a bunch of people decided they didn't like jazz music, we would all think it's absurd that they attempt to make jazz music illegal. The government ought not to make music illegal if it's not causing harm. I don't see the issue you have with this genre of argument. It feels entirely pertinent to me.

A policy would need to be shown by its proponents to be justified or else the detractors need to show its proponents are wrong. "Government ought not to do X" doesn't say much about X other than it's something that no government should do or whatever. You could say, "government ought not to outlaw Y" But that's not a sufficient argument if it gives no other reason.

I have given reasons

I suppose it may have been an overreaction on my part. I took your original comment:

To make drag illegal is to decide what clothes women can wear and what clothes men can wear. Why in the world would we want the government to dictate what style of clothes we can wear?

As a predilection for allowing drag, something along the lines of a rhetorical statement. Perhaps I was wrong. In any case, I can relate to the tendency to be incredulous about something at first glance. I mean, if you are simply asking, "what would be a reason for not allowing drag". Then perhaps it might be a little like asking "what would be the reason for all Stop signs to be red".

Personally, to me, there is a certain yuk factor about men dressing in ways that are clearly socially stereotypical ways for women to dress. Something is not right. If all men looked like women now do and all women were to look like men once did, then that's fine. I just question the value of men and women appearing identical. Most societies that I'm aware of have a sense of what men should look like and a different sense of what women should look like. My guess is there is a good reason for that. As I say, it seems to me that there is clearly deception, dishonesty, or delusion involved. There doesn't seem to be much practical reason that a man should prefer a cocktail dress over a tuxedo or high heels over loafers. Why would a guy want to fool others into thinking he is a female? What's the point? I can think of a negative being that it might confuse children. I mean, puberty is a pretty rough experience and if one of the kids in the class thinks a drag queen is attractive, then perhaps he might start to question why he is attracted to a man in a woman's dress. Does it mean he's homosexual, pansexual, or bisexual? Does it mean he's heterosexual but got fooled into thinking the guy was a female?

[ThinkOfOne]

Why do we have to be mindless zombies who approve of everything?

Why do we have to be labeled as fearful if we don't want something to be happening?

Why can't we decide that something is inappropriate for one or more reasons and that's the way it is? And we can act on that.

For example, Dean Martin was often shown with a glass of whiskey in his hand and "supposedly drunk". I don't think that should be shown to children because it's a bad example for them.

Do I need to shut up and pretend that I don't feel that way? Why? Why not?

Undoubtedly you feel the way you feel. So what? Many feelings are largely if not wholly void of reason.

By all means make a well-reasoned case as to why men - is it also always "bad" for women? - cross dressing is "bad" under all circumstances.

I gave a reason. It's a bad example for children.

Actually you were asked to make a well-reasoned case as to why men cross dressing is 'bad' under all circumstances.

Let's say someone made the following claim:

Wearing red clothing is bad. What's the reason? Wearing red clothing sets a bad example for children. That's the reason

Do you believe that a well-reasoned case had been made?

Do you still believe that you made a well-reasoned case?

[Flannel Jesus]

As a predilection for allowing drag, something along the lines of a rhetorical statement. Perhaps I was wrong. In any case, I can relate to the tendency to be incredulous about something at first glance. I mean, if you are simply asking, "what would be a reason for not allowing drag". Then perhaps it might be a little like asking "what would be the reason for all Stop signs to be red".

Personally, to me, there is a certain yuk factor about men dressing in ways that are clearly socially stereotypical ways for women to dress. Something is not right. If all men looked like women now do and all women were to look like men once did, then that's fine. I just question the value of men and women appearing identical. Most societies that I'm aware of have a sense of what men should look like and a different sense of what women should look like. My guess is there is a good reason for that. As I say, it seems to me that there is clearly deception, dishonesty, or delusion involved. There doesn't seem to be much practical reason that a man should prefer a cocktail dress over a tuxedo or high heels over loafers. Why would a guy want to fool others into thinking he is a female? What's the point? I can think of a negative being that it might confuse children. I mean, puberty is a pretty rough experience and if one of the kids in the class thinks a drag queen is attractive, then perhaps he might start to question why he is attracted to a man in a woman's dress. Does it mean he's homosexual, pansexual, or bisexual? Does it mean he's heterosexual but got fooled into thinking the guy was a female?

Yuk factor isn't really sufficient. Mushrooms gross me out. I'm sure there are people on here who like to eat mushrooms. I have no desire to get in their way.

Men in drag are not trying to fool people about their sex. That's a myth that can only be borne of ignorance, of a lack of awareness of the culture of drag.

You don't have to have a practical reason to do things. That's not enough reason to make something illegal. None of the things you said are enough reason to make something illegal. So what if it's yukky? So what if it confuses children? So what if you can't think of a practical reason for it? There are things that are yukky, things that confused children, things that you can't find a practical reason for, that you have never even dreamed of suggesting should be illegal.

Confusing children isn't harming children. Algebra confuses children. Walking around in public confuses children. I don't actually think a child is going to be drastically more confused by a man in drag than by any number of slightly unusual things a child is likely to see walking around any city .

In fact, children SHOULD be confused. If children aren't feeling confused regularly, you aren't exposing them to enough real experiences.

Show me real harm, and I may agree that it should be illegal. Without real harm, I don't see the argument that it should be illegal as anything other than fear of something you're not used to. "I'm not used to seeing this, so nobody should do it." That is not a good metric for making something illegal.

[seeds]

To make drag illegal is to decide what clothes women can wear and what clothes men can wear. Why in the world would we want the government to dictate what style of clothes we can wear?

I wouldn't make it illegal, but I think a discussion of it is a good idea. Why the sudden urge to have drag queens read to children? How about homeless people? People with a mental illness? Excentrics? Disabled people? Suddenly there is this urge to move something that was aimed at adults in bars and night clubs into libraries and schools. Why is this the kind of diversity we are focusing on?

Right you are, Iwannaplato.

Is there absolutely no commonsense left?

If it wasn't for the recent appearance of these sorts of images and situations involving children,...









...then most people wouldn't have given drag queens a second thought.

I'd imagine that the same sort of uproar would take place if unclothed nudists were doing reading hours for children in order to acclimate the kids to the nudist lifestyle.

Yet, there would no doubt be some logic-challenged folks around here (Kropotkin?/FDP?) that would defend the rights of the nudists to have access to the children.
_______

[Gary Childress]

As a predilection for allowing drag, something along the lines of a rhetorical statement. Perhaps I was wrong. In any case, I can relate to the tendency to be incredulous about something at first glance. I mean, if you are simply asking, "what would be a reason for not allowing drag". Then perhaps it might be a little like asking "what would be the reason for all Stop signs to be red".

Personally, to me, there is a certain yuk factor about men dressing in ways that are clearly socially stereotypical ways for women to dress. Something is not right. If all men looked like women now do and all women were to look like men once did, then that's fine. I just question the value of men and women appearing identical. Most societies that I'm aware of have a sense of what men should look like and a different sense of what women should look like. My guess is there is a good reason for that. As I say, it seems to me that there is clearly deception, dishonesty, or delusion involved. There doesn't seem to be much practical reason that a man should prefer a cocktail dress over a tuxedo or high heels over loafers. Why would a guy want to fool others into thinking he is a female? What's the point? I can think of a negative being that it might confuse children. I mean, puberty is a pretty rough experience and if one of the kids in the class thinks a drag queen is attractive, then perhaps he might start to question why he is attracted to a man in a woman's dress. Does it mean he's homosexual, pansexual, or bisexual? Does it mean he's heterosexual but got fooled into thinking the guy was a female?

Yuk factor isn't really sufficient. Mushrooms gross me out. I'm sure there are people on here who like to eat mushrooms. I have no desire to get in their way.

Men in drag are not trying to fool people about their sex. That's a myth that can only be borne of ignorance, of a lack of awareness of the culture of drag.

You don't have to have a practical reason to do things. That's not enough reason to make something illegal. None of the things you said are enough reason to make something illegal. So what if it's yukky? So what if it confuses children? So what if you can't think of a practical reason for it? There are things that are yukky, things that confused children, things that you can't find a practical reason for, that you have never even dreamed of suggesting should be illegal.

Confusing children isn't harming children. Algebra confuses children. Walking around in public confuses children. I don't actually think a child is going to be drastically more confused by a man in drag than by any number of slightly unusual things a child is likely to see walking around any city .

Show me real harm, and I may agree that it should be illegal. Without real harm, I don't see the argument that it should be illegal as anything other than fear of something you're not used to. "I'm not used to seeing this, so nobody should do it." That is not a good metric for making something illegal.

As I said earlier if a drag queen won't mind some parents telling their children, "don't end up like that guy" then they can be at "show and tell" or read a story or something. I don't know if I would go so far as to allow teachers to regularly dress in drag. But, who knows? Maybe a hundred years from now, men will run around wearing dresses and women will wear mustaches. Then a man in jeans having sex with a woman in a dress will be considered "perverted'" and "kinky".

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Sculptor]

Why do we have to be mindless zombies who approve of everything?

Why do we have to be labeled as fearful if we don't want something to be happening?

Why can't we decide that something is inappropriate for one or more reasons and that's the way it is? And we can act on that.

For example, Dean Martin was often shown with a glass of whiskey in his hand and "supposedly drunk". I don't think that should be shown to children because it's a bad example for them.

Do I need to shut up and pretend that I don't feel that way? Why? Why not?

What gives you the right to deny people their freedom when you expect such freedoms yourself?

Drag is a wonderful example to give to children about self expression.
Drag Queens are not the ones abusing children; leave that up to the leaders of churches who form weekly queues in court for abuse.

[Sculptor]

_______

Wonderful pictures.
The kids are loving it.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I suppose you would know what 'the kids' are thinking then. I think they are confused and overwhelmed by that terrifying creature.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Why do we have to be mindless zombies who approve of everything?

Why do we have to be labeled as fearful if we don't want something to be happening?

Why can't we decide that something is inappropriate for one or more reasons and that's the way it is? And we can act on that.

For example, Dean Martin was often shown with a glass of whiskey in his hand and "supposedly drunk". I don't think that should be shown to children because it's a bad example for them.

Do I need to shut up and pretend that I don't feel that way? Why? Why not?

What gives you the right to deny people their freedom when you expect such freedoms yourself?

Drag is a wonderful example to give to children about self expression.
Drag Queens are not the ones abusing children; leave that up to the leaders of churches who form weekly queues in court for abuse.

''Blackface is a wonderful way to teach children about self expression''--Sculptor.

[Skepdick]

Speaking of...

dressup.jpg (81.06 KiB) Viewed 307 times

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Speaking of...

dressup.jpg

You know all those people personally?

[Iwannaplato]

Speaking of...

dressup.jpg

If libraries where I am started inviting in Catholic priests to do reading for children, that would definitely be controversial. And if no other groups of storytellers were being invited, you'd have to wonder what the goal is bringing in Catholic priests and not other groups. Why is that THE diversity?