(03-16-2023, 08:46 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: (Do you think the kiddies would be freaked out if I read to them while dressed as a WWII German Soldier?  Or in my striped Concentration Camp PJ's?  I've got his Nazi uniform and I . . . )

Are little kids aware of German soldiers, concentration camps and Hitler?

Drag shows have been a part of culture for hundreds of years. Monty Python did drag and sexual misdirection as a staple. Bugs Bunny frequently did crossdressing gags and kissed Elmer in sexually suggestive fashion while doing so (for you morons making the "but the KIIIIIIIIIDS" argument) So did Shakespeare. Literally every female character in his plays was played by a man, and most of his comedies had some version of gender bending/romantic misdirection as a comedic trick. The indignant response is basically just from the hyper-repressed knuckleheads who are experiencing some odd sensations looking at drag queens and are conflicted because their republican Jesus said it was bad.

(03-17-2023, 04:47 AM)Duchess Wrote:

(03-16-2023, 08:46 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: (Do you think the kiddies would be freaked out if I read to them while dressed as a WWII German Soldier?  Or in my striped Concentration Camp PJ's?  I've got his Nazi uniform and I . . . )

Are little kids aware of German soldiers, concentration camps and Hitler?

Who cares?  It's a costume.  It's all make believe.  It's pretend time with grown-ups in costumes.

Besides . . . it's not my job . . . or yours . . . to tell the kids or make them aware of anything.  That's the parent's job and responsibility . . . and that's none of your business. 

It is not a real soldier, or a real person targeted for genocide . . . these are just people in costume reading to kids.

Besides, WWII is over, the holocaust is debated and Hitler suffered from severe untreated depression and thus, used a high-capacity firearm to commit suicide, as his health insurance didn't cover mental health issues.  What is left to tell?  (But NOT by you . . . not your kids.)
 
It's just a person, in a costume, reading to children.

Nothing more.

 

(03-17-2023, 12:00 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: Besides . . . it's not my job . . . or yours . . . to tell the kids or make them aware of anything.  That's the parent's job and responsibility . . . and that's none of your business. 

I couldn't agree more.

(03-17-2023, 10:11 AM)Donovan Wrote: Drag shows have been a part of culture for hundreds of years. Monty Python did drag and sexual misdirection as a staple. Bugs Bunny frequently did crossdressing gags and kissed Elmer in sexually suggestive fashion while doing so (for you morons making the "but the KIIIIIIIIIDS" argument) So did Shakespeare. Literally every female character in his plays was played by a man, and most of his comedies had some version of gender bending/romantic misdirection as a comedic trick. The indignant response is basically just from the hyper-repressed knuckleheads who are experiencing some odd sensations looking at drag queens and are conflicted because their republican Jesus said it was bad.

You don't think there's a difference between a Shakespeare and the American Library Association, National School Boards Association, or state education departments?

you seem to see everything relating to socio-economics through a dichotomous prism. I'd love to see the look on your face if it was removed, and the whole world was there for you to see.

I've walked with my kids through the red light district, I'm not worried about them seeing all walks of life including drag queens. That's not the point. The point is that there is an agenda when you have a drag queen story time at the library. There is no fucking reason for calling it that anymore than an exotic dancer storytime like I already said.

(03-17-2023, 03:29 PM)rothschild Wrote:

(03-17-2023, 10:11 AM)Donovan Wrote: Drag shows have been a part of culture for hundreds of years. Monty Python did drag and sexual misdirection as a staple. Bugs Bunny frequently did crossdressing gags and kissed Elmer in sexually suggestive fashion  while doing so (for you morons making the "but the KIIIIIIIIIDS" argument) So did Shakespeare. Literally every female character in his plays was played by a man, and most of his comedies had some version of gender bending/romantic misdirection as a comedic trick. The indignant response is basically just from the hyper-repressed knuckleheads who are experiencing some odd sensations looking at drag queens and are conflicted because their republican Jesus said it was bad.

You don't think there's a difference between a Shakespeare and the American Library Association, National School Boards Association, or state education departments?

you seem to see everything relating to socio-economics through a dichotomous prism. I'd love to see the look on your face if it was removed, and the whole world was there for you to see.

What a bunch of shit.  Two men . . . MANSPLANING and justifying . . . men dressing and pretending to be women . . .  as merely a comic misdirection or an insidious and calculated temptress to deceive and corrupt . . . as only women can and do so well.  The fille or femme fatale.

Yeah . . . assholes.  Thanks for perpetrating the female stereotype as the ultimate deceivers and and comedic relief.  

Fuck-off . . . both of you.  

It's obvious neither of you have any literate grasp of  the historical (mis)costuming of genders.  You both offer nothing but misogynistic and sophomoric opinions . . . absolute ridiculous drivel  . . . a distorted and myopic male view . . .  ruled by both your own personal political leanings and hatred.

And yet, here you are . . . lecturing on shit you know absolutely nothing about.  Fucking pompous male gasbags!

Fuck-off!

(03-17-2023, 03:29 PM)rothschild Wrote:

(03-17-2023, 10:11 AM)Donovan Wrote: Drag shows have been a part of culture for hundreds of years. Monty Python did drag and sexual misdirection as a staple. Bugs Bunny frequently did crossdressing gags and kissed Elmer in sexually suggestive fashion  while doing so (for you morons making the "but the KIIIIIIIIIDS" argument) So did Shakespeare. Literally every female character in his plays was played by a man, and most of his comedies had some version of gender bending/romantic misdirection as a comedic trick. The indignant response is basically just from the hyper-repressed knuckleheads who are experiencing some odd sensations looking at drag queens and are conflicted because their republican Jesus said it was bad.

You don't think there's a difference between a Shakespeare and the American Library Association, National School Boards Association, or state education departments?

you seem to see everything relating to socio-economics through a dichotomous prism. I'd love to see the look on your face if it was removed, and the whole world was there for you to see.

I think if your lot can be okay with active fucking shooter drills while our little ones are trying to learn how to read, then getting read to by a fella in a dress is probably the least of their potential dangers.

(03-17-2023, 06:12 PM)BlueTiki Wrote:

(03-17-2023, 03:29 PM)rothschild Wrote:

(03-17-2023, 10:11 AM)Donovan Wrote: Drag shows have been a part of culture for hundreds of years. Monty Python did drag and sexual misdirection as a staple. Bugs Bunny frequently did crossdressing gags and kissed Elmer in sexually suggestive fashion  while doing so (for you morons making the "but the KIIIIIIIIIDS" argument) So did Shakespeare. Literally every female character in his plays was played by a man, and most of his comedies had some version of gender bending/romantic misdirection as a comedic trick. The indignant response is basically just from the hyper-repressed knuckleheads who are experiencing some odd sensations looking at drag queens and are conflicted because their republican Jesus said it was bad.

You don't think there's a difference between a Shakespeare and the American Library Association, National School Boards Association, or state education departments?

you seem to see everything relating to socio-economics through a dichotomous prism. I'd love to see the look on your face if it was removed, and the whole world was there for you to see.

What a bunch of shit.  Two men . . . MANSPLANING and justifying . . . men dressing and pretending to be women . . .  as merely a comic misdirection or an insidious and calculated temptress to deceive and corrupt . . . as only women can and do so well.  The fille or femme fatale.

Yeah . . . assholes.  Thanks for perpetrating the female stereotype as the ultimate deceivers and and comedic relief.  

Fuck-off . . . both of you.  

It's obvious neither of you have any literate grasp of  the historical (mis)costuming of genders.  You both offer nothing but misogynistic and sophomoric opinions . . . absolute ridiculous drivel  . . . a distorted and myopic male view . . .  ruled by both your own personal political leanings and hatred.

And yet, here you are . . . lecturing on shit you know absolutely nothing about.  Fucking pompous male gasbags!

Fuck-off!

While I do appreciate you illustrating for us that men do NOT corner the market on myopic stupidity and missing the point, I have to disagree with your assessment of my original post. I'm not making any sort of statement on the rightness or wrongness of historic exclusionary practices. I'm simply stating that the concept of playing with gender/cross dressing has been ingrained in multiple cultures FAR longer than any ofnus has been alive, and the notion that it's suddenly somehow corrupting our civilization is (as you say) ridiculous drivel. Perpetrated  by your heroes on the extreme right.

Jeez, Tiki. Take a Midol.

(03-17-2023, 06:19 PM)Donovan Wrote:

(03-17-2023, 03:29 PM)rothschild Wrote:

(03-17-2023, 10:11 AM)Donovan Wrote: Drag shows have been a part of culture for hundreds of years. Monty Python did drag and sexual misdirection as a staple. Bugs Bunny frequently did crossdressing gags and kissed Elmer in sexually suggestive fashion  while doing so (for you morons making the "but the KIIIIIIIIIDS" argument) So did Shakespeare. Literally every female character in his plays was played by a man, and most of his comedies had some version of gender bending/romantic misdirection as a comedic trick. The indignant response is basically just from the hyper-repressed knuckleheads who are experiencing some odd sensations looking at drag queens and are conflicted because their republican Jesus said it was bad.

You don't think there's a difference between a Shakespeare and the American Library Association, National School Boards Association, or state education departments?

you seem to see everything relating to socio-economics through a dichotomous prism. I'd love to see the look on your face if it was removed, and the whole world was there for you to see.

I think if your lot can be okay with active fucking shooter drills while our little ones are trying to learn how to read, then getting read to by a fella in a dress is probably the least of their potential dangers.

What does gun violence have to do with politicized institutions taking it upon themselves to engage in social programming? How is that consistent with democracy, or can we lay that pathetic facade to rest?

It's interesting that you referenced Bugs Bunny because that's an extraordinarily violent cartoon, given that it's classified as children's programming, and especially disturbing because it suggests that deadly force isn't deadly, as the recipients always bounce back as if nothing had happened.

Today's programming makes the action movies from 20 years ago look like Davey and Goliath. Are the corporations producing this content exclusively Republican?

Do guns make people ultraviolent? Are liberals more concerned about ultraviolence than Republicans? Could it be that both parties are equally incapable of acknowledging that our culture is depraved to a degree far beyond what is talked about in mass media?

None of the answers to these questions can be perceived through the lens of a dichotomous prism, because such questions never arise.

(03-17-2023, 06:12 PM)BlueTiki Wrote:

(03-17-2023, 03:29 PM)rothschild Wrote:

(03-17-2023, 10:11 AM)Donovan Wrote: Drag shows have been a part of culture for hundreds of years. Monty Python did drag and sexual misdirection as a staple. Bugs Bunny frequently did crossdressing gags and kissed Elmer in sexually suggestive fashion  while doing so (for you morons making the "but the KIIIIIIIIIDS" argument) So did Shakespeare. Literally every female character in his plays was played by a man, and most of his comedies had some version of gender bending/romantic misdirection as a comedic trick. The indignant response is basically just from the hyper-repressed knuckleheads who are experiencing some odd sensations looking at drag queens and are conflicted because their republican Jesus said it was bad.

You don't think there's a difference between a Shakespeare and the American Library Association, National School Boards Association, or state education departments?

you seem to see everything relating to socio-economics through a dichotomous prism. I'd love to see the look on your face if it was removed, and the whole world was there for you to see.

What a bunch of shit.  Two men . . . MANSPLANING and justifying . . . men dressing and pretending to be women . . .  as merely a comic misdirection or an insidious and calculated temptress to deceive and corrupt . . . as only women can and do so well.  The fille or femme fatale.

Yeah . . . assholes.  Thanks for perpetrating the female stereotype as the ultimate deceivers and and comedic relief.  

Fuck-off . . . both of you.  

It's obvious neither of you have any literate grasp of  the historical (mis)costuming of genders.  You both offer nothing but misogynistic and sophomoric opinions . . . absolute ridiculous drivel  . . . a distorted and myopic male view . . .  ruled by both your own personal political leanings and hatred.

And yet, here you are . . . lecturing on shit you know absolutely nothing about.  Fucking pompous male gasbags!

Fuck-off!

I would never presume to lecture you on the intricasies of gasbaggery, Tiki. Never ever!

Nice try.  I didn't miss both you and RC's misogynistic rationalizations.  

The "concept" of playing gender/cross-dressing . . . or did you mean THE historical, social, caste, religious, philosophical and political necessity?  

Your flowery description of the Bard and Elizabethan England, reads as if, one day, Will created radical gender-bending roles, using female tropes as a revolutionary new way to entertain the masses.  

And then, through the centuries, this playful concept of impersonating women, deliberately exaggerating and presenting stereotypical essences (as determined by a man) is truly just a harmless lampoon with no hint or allusion to anything negative, regarding women.  Fuck you.

You know, kinda like white folks putting on black face and "den duz sums singins' an dancins' ".  Yeah . . . it is the same.  But, once celebrated and enjoyed, black face has now been declared offensive.  I don't give a fuck how long and how universal the practice is.  It is disrespectful.  What a fucking stupid justification!

"Uh . . . you don't understand Mr. Negro.  We do minstrel shows because we want to celebrate your fantastic way of singing and dancing.  Such talent you darkies have!  But unfortunately, niggers ain't allowed everywhere we go.  So . . . we dress up in black face ONLY AS A TRIBUTE TO YOUR TALENT AND CULTURE.  Hell, boy . . . you don't see us putting on the black shine and then go out to commit crimes . . . or do field work . . . do ya?  It's an homage, you stupid and sensitive nigger.  Know your place, boy . . . accept it and shut up.  It ain't no disrespect . . . it's a long and proud tradition!"

Women have suffered far longer and on a global level, at the hands of men, than any of our unfortunate offspring of slaves.  Women were prohibited, from being actors long, before the first humans in bondage arrived in the New World.  Yeah . . . little tidbit on why men (usually boys) played female roles . . . it wasn't sketch comedy, dumbshit.  Fuck you.

I pointed out that neither of you offered anything more than force-feeding your male hyper-sensitive and extreme political manifestations about a subject you knew nothing about.

And you both keep on yammering . . . while saying nothing.

And fuck-you, with the Midol quip.  Just because you wore a mask and listened to Fauci, during Covid, doesn't make you a doctor or capable of a medical diagnosis.

Who the fuck do you think you are prescribing to me . . . Trump?

A real man would have asked if I needed something . . . instead of assuming they knew what is best for me.

Irish . . . neat . . . rocks glass.  Thank-you, for asking . . . assholes.

There is truth in this.

I get it, what Tiki says, she means the opposite. That's how to make sense of it.

There is nothing more hilarious than a drag show. It is much funnier in person. These people are artists, talented, and trying their best to entertain and make others laugh.

There really is no need to get your knickers in a knot about the show, just sit back, laugh hard and enjoy.

I never understand how other people get upset about someone else living and enjoying their life. What business is it of someone else?

There is a big ANTI-TRANS rally here in Tasmania tomorrow. It is hate speech a pre-cursor to violence. The NAZIS showed up in solidarity to protect these monsters that don't have anything better to do. I think they are desperate for attention and lack the talent to attract that attention based on their own merits. So it really is quite lazy to attack and stir up hatred. Not hard to do. Arsewipes.

(03-20-2023, 05:34 AM)Duchess Wrote: There is truth in this...

Silly memes are what passes for "truth" these days. Sign of the times.

Exactly what part do you disagree with?

(03-20-2023, 11:28 AM)Duchess Wrote: Exactly what part do you disagree with?

That memes express "truth". They're nothing more than visual sound bites devoid of context.

(03-20-2023, 11:46 AM)rothschild Wrote: That memes express "truth". They're nothing more than visual sound bites devoid of context.

Saying "the biggest danger of taking your child to a drag show is that a Christian could show up with a gun" is not without context. No one reading that could fail to understand exactly what is meant and there is truth in the statement given it happens time and again.

(03-20-2023, 11:51 AM)Duchess Wrote:

(03-20-2023, 11:46 AM)rothschild Wrote: That memes express "truth". They're nothing more than visual sound bites devoid of context.

Saying "the biggest danger of taking your child to a drag show is that a Christian could show up with a gun" is not without context. No one reading that could fail to understand exactly what is meant and there is truth in the statement given it happens time and again.

It reminds me of a Bush campaign ad that showed menacing wolves circling around a defenseless person, characterizing Democratic defense policy. Nothing more than an appeal to fear.


If Christians show up at an event with guns, does that, in and of itself, mean that the event was in the public interest?

If Antifa members show up at an event and engage in violence, does that, in and of itself, mean that the event was in the public interest?

Is the answer the same in both instances?