a defense of drag show/drag queens..

[Peter Kropotkin]

A technically-proficient medically trained scientist is preferable to an empathizer who's there to stroke egos. They've got nurses for that, amongst their other nurturing duties.

Keep in mind that the primary duty of the nurse is as advocate for the patient, and in this age of highly educated nurses the bold ones may even challenge doctors.

The primary duty for the doctor is to do no harm, through science.

K: and once again, how does this impact what you said about "trump loving"
slobs who dress in a dirty shirt, shorts and sandals and haven't showered in days....
what is the connection between doctors and how they dress?

Kropotkin

[Walker]

what if he were the pilot? does that any bearing on the quality of
his being a pilot? If a pilot can get me across the country without
crashing, I don't care what he/she looks like or how they dress..
all I care about is not crashing....

Obviously ...

A pilot who flouts routine procedures such as appropriate attire calls into question whether or not he will flout flight procedures and thus cause a firy crash that ends the terrified screams of those who have been facing death all the way down. Slobs do not inspire confidence in the passengers, and a slob appearance belies the pilot's casual, folksy pre-flight announcement that's purposed for reassurance that competence, precise control, and professional perspective as evidenced in all things including clothes and speech, is at the helm.

Is it called a helm on a plane?

Top gun individualism is fine under some conditions, such as combat, but even they wear uniforms on the job.

[Walker]

K: and once again, how does this impact what you said about "trump loving"
slobs who dress in a dirty shirt, shorts and sandals and haven't showered in days....
what is the connection between doctors and how they dress?

Kropotkin

Don't be a demanding little bitch. It's ... distasteful.

[henry quirk]

It's a correction to the illogicality of your question

Let's review...

The assertion: Yeah, I suppose if a man in drag claimed that being in drag makes him a woman, he would be off his rocker. And if in drag he walks into the ladies locker room and there are a bunch of naked women around, they'd be justified in having him arrested.

The question: Why should he be arrested?

The second assertion: Anyone who gets arrested, for anything, gets arrested for Inappropriateness.

The second question: Why is inappropriateness a crime?

There's no illogic in the questions.

[Peter Kropotkin]

K: and once again, how does this impact what you said about "trump loving"
slobs who dress in a dirty shirt, shorts and sandals and haven't showered in days....
what is the connection between doctors and how they dress?

Kropotkin

Don't be a demanding little bitch. It's ... distasteful.

K: AHHH, you mean it makes you uncomfortable because
it calls into question your answer...got it.... you don't like
it when people call into question an answer you gave...
that is what is "distasteful"....

Kropotkin

[iambiguous]

You may well come to champion their right to dress in drag.

Well, champion is a little strong. Anyway, I've already acknowledged the freakish nutjobs, as each has an inalienable and natural right to his, and no other's life, liberty, and property, can each do whatever he likes with himself, from wearin' a sports bra under his three-piece clear thru to havin' his tallywhacker lopped off.

Seems like a square deal to me.

Absolutely shameless.

Given that, among other things, it is you who have allowed yourself to be reduced down to this Corner crap. I only led you by the nose to it.

[Walker]

It's a correction to the illogicality of your question

Let's review...

The assertion: Yeah, I suppose if a man in drag claimed that being in drag makes him a woman, he would be off his rocker. And if in drag he walks into the ladies locker room and there are a bunch of naked women around, they'd be justified in having him arrested.

The question: Why should he be arrested?

The second assertion: Anyone who gets arrested, for anything, gets arrested for Inappropriateness.

The second question: Why is inappropriateness a crime?

There's no illogic in the questions.

Actual timeline review:

Walker: Inappropriate actions can be crimes and all crimes are inappropriate actions, however not all inappropriate actions are crimes.

HQ: Why is inappropriateness a crime?”

Your question, which directly follows that statement, is in response to that statement, and is the illogical question I was referencing. I explained why it's illogical. It doesn't reference the language of the statement.

*

- Any action can be inappropriate, depending on the situation and the culture.
- Any action can be appropriate, depending on the situation and the culture.

- For example, killing someone can either be appropriate, or inappropriate, depending on the culture and the situation.
- For example, heterosexual nudity can be appropriate, or inappropriate, depending on the culture and the situation.
- For example, a man dressing like a woman can be appropriate, inappropriate, depending on the culture and the situation.

- In the situation of the decadent Royal French court pre-FR, a man dressing like a woman was appropriate.

Extend it further ...
- For example, any inappropriate action can be a crime, or not a crime, depending on the culture and the situation.
- If someone gets arrested, it's because what that special someone did was inappropriate to the culture and the situation.

[Walker]

K: and once again, how does this impact what you said about "trump loving"
slobs who dress in a dirty shirt, shorts and sandals and haven't showered in days....
what is the connection between doctors and how they dress?

Kropotkin

Don't be a demanding little bitch. It's ... distasteful.

K: AHHH, you mean it makes you uncomfortable because
it calls into question your answer...got it.... you don't like
it when people call into question an answer you gave...
that is what is "distasteful"....

Kropotkin

If it simply means you're acting like a demanding little bitch, like it says, what do you get then?

*

To ape you I’ll be a petty, demanding little bitch. I asked you if it’s called a helm on a plane. Why don’t you answer that question? Are you avoiding it? That question must make you uncomfortable. Do you avoid what makes you uncomfortable?

I demand that you explain the relevance of why you ignore these questions and why you cannot understand for me EXACTLY* how they connect to what I perceive is the topic.

How’s the picture look in that mirror? What does your avoidance of this last question have to do with transvestites, or however they now self-identify, posing for their closeups, acting out for the laughing mothers, and dry humping the little children?

Hmmm?

*

[Peter Kropotkin]

Don't be a demanding little bitch. It's ... distasteful.

K: AHHH, you mean it makes you uncomfortable because
it calls into question your answer...got it.... you don't like
it when people call into question an answer you gave...
that is what is "distasteful"....

Kropotkin

If it simply means you're acting like a demanding little bitch, like it says, what do you get then?

*

To ape you I’ll be a petty, demanding little bitch. I asked you if it’s called a helm on a plane. Why don’t you answer that question? Are you avoiding it? That question must make you uncomfortable. Do you avoid what makes you uncomfortable?

I demand that you explain the relevance of why you ignore these questions and why you cannot understand for me EXACTLY* how they connect to what I perceive is the topic.

How’s the picture look in that mirror? What does your avoidance of this last question have to do with transvestites, or however they now self-identify, posing for their closeups, acting out for the laughing mothers, and dry humping the little children?

Hmmm?

*

K: clearly, you have mistaken me for another....
I didn't answer your question about the "helm' for
a simple reason, it is an irrelevant question for me
what does it have to do with the topic at hand..
and returning to that, you have made several assumptions in
your post among them is, the assumption that by reading
to children, trans people are "dry humping the children"
personally I have witness cross-dressing men reading
to children, and no one was dry humping anything...
but it fits into your narrative that somehow, never
exactly explained how, but somehow people who cross-dress
are in some way, shape or form, are wrong, misguided,
sexual perverts, immoral, or engage in dry humping
children... as ALWAYS, "what about the children" becomes
the ''de facto'' defense against people who behave differently
than what you think how they should act/behave..

and as I have suggested, the argument against gays, transgenders,
and other ''deviants" come from one's childhood indoctrinations,
education, and training.... what have you done to overcome
that childhood indoctrinations against those you oppose...

or said another way, why do you believe that some people engage
in ''immoral'' actions and what is your idea of ''immoral''
actually based upon... what is your reason for believing
that cross-dressing is ''immoral?"

''well, they are dry-humping children"

and once again, we hit the "what about the children"
defense against gays/transgender/ or otherwise ''deviant''
behavior..... remove that bogus defense and what is left?

Kropotkin