a defense of drag show/drag queens..

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by iambiguous »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:03 pm
iambiguous wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 5:40 pm I watched to the part where she comes off [to me] as another Satyr: biologically there are men and women who are programmed by nature to fuck and reproduce the species. Anything other than that is "fake"/"unnatural" and must be opposed. Transgender folks are encouraged by the medical industrial complex because tons and tons of money can be made operating on them. Certain billionaires are behind it all. Billionaire Jews for example.

As though there are not in fact men and women who really do feel more comfortable/fulfilled imagining themselves as the other gender. As though homosexuality and such really was an unnatural perversion. As though everything relating to human sexuality must pertain exclusively to reproduction of the species.

Now, give us your own take on her point in the video. And note the hard evidence she provides to back it up and sustain it.
What I can say -- I hope this helps you - is that she is, or was, a longtime advocate for LGB rights. It is important that you understand this.

The rest of what you have written is outrageous misconstruing -- I assume deliberate but it may also be possible that you have difficulties reading and reasoning about what you have read.

So instead of paraphrasing what she has said, I would focus on your problems in reading (listening) and understanding.

Certainly as a feminist, and pro-woman, she is uncomfortable with men who artificially adopt women's 'parts' and then assume they can be referred to, and should be referred to, as legitimate women. That is definitely a position she takes.
On the other hand...
I watched to the part where she comes off [to me] as another Satyr: biologically there are men and women who are programmed by nature to fuck and reproduce the species. Anything other than that is "fake"/"unnatural" and must be opposed. Transgender folks are encouraged by the medical industrial complex because tons and tons of money can be made operating on them. Certain billionaires are behind it all. Billionaire Jews for example.

As though there are not in fact men and women who really do feel more comfortable/fulfilled imagining themselves as the other gender. As though homosexuality and such really was an unnatural perversion. As though everything relating to human sexuality must pertain exclusively to reproduction of the species.

Now, give us your own take on her point in the video. And note the hard evidence she provides to back it up and sustain it.
Actually, what is important to me [as it pertains to you and the Northern European white stock champions] is what happens to transgender folks if she and her ilk actually acquire the political power to enforce [legally and otherwise] her ideological agenda regarding human sexuality.

And just out of curiosity, what is your own position regarding LGB rights? How close to or far away from those like Satyr are you?

Me? I'm no less fractured and fragmented regarding human sexuality. And I recognize that my current frame of mind is still just a set of political prejudices that I acquired existentially re dasein.

Just like you. Well, if you are ever actually able to recognize how we acquire moral and political value judgments given the arguments I make in the OPs here:

https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=194382

And how, given what I construe to be the "psychology of objectivism", you are understood by me above.
Flannel Jesus
Posts: 2573
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by Flannel Jesus »

Can someone acquire political prejudices outside of dasein? 🤔
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by iambiguous »

Flannel Jesus wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:21 pm Can someone acquire political prejudices outside of dasein? 🤔
My point is that each of us have our own individual reaction to drag queens and drag shows and homosexuality and S & M and other aspects of human sexuality that is not "the norm".

But in not being "the norm", does that [necessarily] make them unnatural, immoral, perverted behaviors?

How do we as individuals acquire our own personal perspectives on them? Might this be rooted in the particular historical and cultural and experiential contexts in which we are "thrown" adventitiously at birth?

Might it revolve around our indoctrination as children? Might it pertain to our own unique trajectory of personal experiences as adults? Might it be embedded in the uniquely personal relationships we accumulate and the uniquely personal things that we read or hear of see over the years?

Had [for any number of reasons] our lives been different, might we have come to think and to feel very different things about sex? Might, down the road, we have new experiences, new relationships and access to new information and knowledge that change our minds about human sexuality?

Or, instead, are there philosophers and scientists among us able to pin down precisely which sexual behaviors are in fact rational and moral? Or irrational and immoral?
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5142
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

iambiguous wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:18 pm And just out of curiosity, what is your own position regarding LGB rights? How close to or far away from those like Satyr are you?
Have you read anything I’ve written in this thread? Go back and look.
Flannel Jesus
Posts: 2573
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by Flannel Jesus »

iambiguous wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:39 pm
Flannel Jesus wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:21 pm Can someone acquire political prejudices outside of dasein? 🤔
My point is that each of us have our own individual reaction to drag queens and drag shows and homosexuality and S & M and other aspects of human sexuality that is not "the norm".
Yeah, I just think that the term "dasein" didn't contribute any extra meaning to what you were saying, and I've had the feeling for a while now that if you excluded that word every time you used it, it wouldn't change the meaning of anything you say.

"And I recognize that my current frame of mind is still just a set of political prejudices that I acquired existentially re dasein."

Vs

"And I recognize that my current frame of mind is still just a set of political prejudices that I acquired."

Do those two things have any difference in meaning? If so, what difference? I just don't see it
User avatar
phyllo
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 5:58 pm
Location: Слава Україні!

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by phyllo »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 3:59 pm
phyllo wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 2:52 pmAre they intentionally moving people in a particular direction? Moving them all to trans? To transhuman?

Some believe so.
It is hard not to believe it when the notion of 'unseen influence' is at the core of both propaganda and PR:
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

― Edward Bernays, Propaganda
Edward Bernays is the authority on propaganda and PR since he wrote the seminal texts. May I ask you to critique what he himself wrote? That is, was he right (about what he said that he and about the "unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government") or was he exaggerating?
I can understand the manipulation behind advertising, PR and propaganda.

For example, cigarette companies work to make smoking look cool, adventurous and enjoyable.

But there is a direct connection in that sort of manipulation which is missing in the proposed trans/transhuman manipulation.

The manipulation has to make some sort of sense which it does not.

One can think of many things that these corporations could be doing which would be faster, easier and just as profitable.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5142
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

phyllo wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 7:43 pm The manipulation has to make some sort of sense which it does not.

One can think of many things that these corporations could be doing which would be faster, easier and just as profitable.
Perhaps ‘the sense’ of some of what is going on remains beyond your purview?

This article presents affirmative information.

But we have veered off the main topic which is, as I understand it, a cultural wave of sexual dysphoria.

What interests me is your-plural general negation of a major social issue with all sorts of problematic layers. I submit this too as Lindsay has influenced my perspectives.

I would suspect though that those involved in and invested in the dominant ideological theories will roundly dismiss these viewpoints. (My reference is to Sculptor, Kropotkin, Flash and those who seem to me to locate themselves there. Not completely sure about others not mentioned).
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6654
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by Iwannaplato »

I would like suits and corporate dress culture to be considered a kind of drag.
Down with the economic punishment of workers for following the corporate line.
Down with the economic punishment of workers for NOT following the corporate line.

No one should be forced to dress in drag, not even women, whether it is drag as in drag queens or drag as in corporate choking necktie overdressing.

If libraries want to invite people in corporate drag to read to children, I think this sends a normalizing message to children.

However if individuals who wear corporate drag are invited to give readings, that's a different story. Likewise drag queens.

Individual diversity, no punishment.

Not categorical diversity and shoving new and old stereotypes down the throats of children.
User avatar
phyllo
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 5:58 pm
Location: Слава Україні!

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by phyllo »

What interests me is your-plural general negation of a major social issue with all sorts of problematic layers. I submit this too as Lindsay has influenced my perspectives.
Depends on what you mean by "general negation" and by "major social issue".

The video talks about a destruction of "normalcy".

Is that the issue?

Is the issue that some small minority are going to be homosexual and trans and that's also "normal"?

Is the issue that an experiment on sexual identity is being conducted with children as the subjects? I wouldn't dismiss or negate that issue.

Some other issue?

There's undoubtedly more than one issue here. Which produce a range of reactions.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5142
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

phyllo wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 2:46 pmThe video talks about a destruction of "normalcy".

Is that the issue?
If you are asking me I think Our Present requires a special, a highly discriminating, a trenchant and analytical lens in order even to *look* at it. Then a sober description of what is seen.

Lindsay makes sound headway in such an analytical project. Though he also paints with a broad brush.

Queerness, as defined by those he quotes, definitely takes aim at normalcy. The root? Marxian acids.

Now, I suggest too that our own Iambiguous with his reductionist, loopy ‘philosophy’ can also be seen as grounded in similar reductionism.

As Lindsay proposes these influences are highly pervasive.

How many here will genuinely struggle to accept ‘normalcy’ as a justifiable term?
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5142
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

phyllo wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 2:46 pm Is the issue that some small minority are going to be homosexual and trans and that's also "normal"?
That can’t be it. Since such behaviors have been around since “man first crawled out of the slime”.

The issue is insane fluorescence of really really strange behaviors which looks like social and psychological pathology. However, it is becoming illegal to say that.
User avatar
phyllo
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 5:58 pm
Location: Слава Україні!

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by phyllo »

Alexis Jacobi wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 3:30 pm
phyllo wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 2:46 pmThe video talks about a destruction of "normalcy".

Is that the issue?
If you are asking me I think Our Present requires a special, a highly discriminating, a trenchant and analytical lens in order even to *look* at it. Then a sober description of what is seen.

Lindsay makes sound headway in such an analytical project. Though he also paints with a broad brush.

Queerness, as defined by those he quotes, definitely takes aim at normalcy. The root? Marxian acids.

Now, I suggest too that our own Iambiguous with his reductionist, loopy ‘philosophy’ can also be seen as grounded in similar reductionism.

As Lindsay proposes these influences are highly pervasive.

How many here will genuinely struggle to accept ‘normalcy’ as a justifiable term?
Yeah, Iambiguous popped into my head as I was watching the video. Same tactics.

I think that there is a lot of it in the universities and has been spread by the graduates.

Are we attributing too much influence to them? Are we overreacting? Is it at a dangerous level?

We can steer clear of this storm. Sanity and reason will prevail.
User avatar
Alexis Jacobi
Posts: 5142
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by Alexis Jacobi »

phyllo wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 4:16 pm Yeah, Iambiguous popped into my head as I was watching the video. Same tactics.
My view is that though we locate exemplars of the queering that Lindsay refers to, we get much more mileage when our main focus is on our own selves. We have all been indoctrinated, to one degree or another, by the same thinking-errors.

So much so (which is what I have been trying to argue) that not only do we support and applaud deviancy, always with a strange screeching emotionalism (like that girl at Yale) but we no longer recognize normalcy and the normal as valid categories.

And those who insist on holding to such definitions of the normal are now seen as agents of pathology.

Transvaluation of values ….

You may not wish to go as far as I have in making such harsh pronouncements but this is what I’ve come to.

To recover ourselves — I assert — is a metaphysical task. Meaning it involves the recovery of principles. Dubious argues that these are ‘invented’. But that amounts to saying that we invent the physic as well as the meta-physic. Yet both are obviously and demonstrably part of the structure of things.

I admit: it is a contentious issue.

Things will get far worse before they get better. What has been put in motion has tremendous momentum. The ‘emotional will’ is far too enticing. Sobriety a difficult, demanding attainment.

For this reason I say that decadence is a topic all to itself.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by iambiguous »

And around and around we go...

ME:
iambiguous wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:18 pm
Alexis Jacobi aka Mr. Snippet aka Mr. Wiggle wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:03 pm
iambiguous wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 5:40 pm I watched to the part where she comes off [to me] as another Satyr: biologically there are men and women who are programmed by nature to fuck and reproduce the species. Anything other than that is "fake"/"unnatural" and must be opposed. Transgender folks are encouraged by the medical industrial complex because tons and tons of money can be made operating on them. Certain billionaires are behind it all. Billionaire Jews for example.

As though there are not in fact men and women who really do feel more comfortable/fulfilled imagining themselves as the other gender. As though homosexuality and such really was an unnatural perversion. As though everything relating to human sexuality must pertain exclusively to reproduction of the species.

Now, give us your own take on her point in the video. And note the hard evidence she provides to back it up and sustain it.
What I can say -- I hope this helps you - is that she is, or was, a longtime advocate for LGB rights. It is important that you understand this.

The rest of what you have written is outrageous misconstruing -- I assume deliberate but it may also be possible that you have difficulties reading and reasoning about what you have read.

So instead of paraphrasing what she has said, I would focus on your problems in reading (listening) and understanding.

Certainly as a feminist, and pro-woman, she is uncomfortable with men who artificially adopt women's 'parts' and then assume they can be referred to, and should be referred to, as legitimate women. That is definitely a position she takes.
On the other hand...
I watched to the part where she comes off [to me] as another Satyr: biologically there are men and women who are programmed by nature to fuck and reproduce the species. Anything other than that is "fake"/"unnatural" and must be opposed. Transgender folks are encouraged by the medical industrial complex because tons and tons of money can be made operating on them. Certain billionaires are behind it all. Billionaire Jews for example.

As though there are not in fact men and women who really do feel more comfortable/fulfilled imagining themselves as the other gender. As though homosexuality and such really was an unnatural perversion. As though everything relating to human sexuality must pertain exclusively to reproduction of the species.

Now, give us your own take on her point in the video. And note the hard evidence she provides to back it up and sustain it.
Actually, what is important to me [as it pertains to you and the Northern European white stock champions] is what happens to transgender folks if she and her ilk actually acquire the political power to enforce [legally and otherwise] her ideological agenda regarding human sexuality.

And just out of curiosity, what is your own position regarding LGB rights? How close to or far away from those like Satyr are you?

Me? I'm no less fractured and fragmented regarding human sexuality. And I recognize that my current frame of mind is still just a set of political prejudices that I acquired existentially re dasein.

Just like you. Well, if you are ever actually able to recognize how we acquire moral and political value judgments given the arguments I make in the OPs here:

https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=194382

And how, given what I construe to be the "psychology of objectivism", you are understood by me above.
HIM:
Alexis Jacobi aka Mr. Snippet aka Mr. Wiggle wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:03 pm
iambiguous wrote: Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:18 pm And just out of curiosity, what is your own position regarding LGB rights? How close to or far away from those like Satyr are you?
Have you read anything I’ve written in this thread? Go back and look.
Jennifer Bilek is "a longtime advocate for LGB rights". How about you?


Note to Satyr:

Just out of curiosity, would AJ be construed by you as "one of us" or "one of them"? Is he shrill and nasty enough for you in going after those like me here?
Flannel Jesus
Posts: 2573
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2022 7:09 pm

Re: a defense of drag show/drag queens..

Post by Flannel Jesus »

iambiguous wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 8:30 pm Note to Satyr:

Just out of curiosity, would AJ be construed by you as "one of us" or "one of them"? Is he shrill and nasty enough for you in going after those like me here?
I really hope one day you can move past your obsession with him and his community. He's not as obsessed with your as you are with him, he's living rent free in your head. What happened that led to this? Apart from him being generally unkind to you and then banning you.
Post Reply