Drag Queens

VS
pedophiles genuinely are disturbing and upsetting to me
Again I agree with you VS!
Pædophiles are very upsetting to everybody, except perhaps the pædophiles.

We know that Not all people, whatever name or initial they use or don’t use to classify themselves, are pædophiles.

But . . .

Anyone, pædophile or not who entices children to believe that it’s OK to pretend things about sex, whether it’s parodying women, or letting it all hang out like the rainbow monkey, or in the case of pædophiles, talking about our special secret, should not be talked of as being inclusive or celebrating diversity.

Wouldn’t you agree?

Mooted up thread by a couple of posters introducing new concepts of diversity to the small child is in the interests of inclusion, but surely some concepts would be beyond the confines of the hopefully, happy but limited world they inhabit. Drag queens are no more relevant to a small child than a high court judge in all their regalia, why would they need to be inclusive about a persona that is to all intents and purposes could be considered risque, certainly as depicted in the link up thread. On that basis should they be open to any nightclub act, say lap dancers or male strippers?? In the words of Pink Floyd "leave them kids alone" stop trying to steal their innocence and early childhood years which are all too brief.

Good post Terribull I agree with you. Also with the comment Lathyrus made about the book being the important thing for the child not the person reading it to them.

Good points raised TerriBull. Some of the drag queens do actually look like lap dancers and strippers so we're not a million miles away from it happening.

Mollygo, I agree with you too. Come to think of it, I also can't think of anyone who doesn't find paedophiles offensive and upsetting. But they have nothing to do with drag queens to my knowledge.

Beetlejuice they were dragged in somewhere, and I was trying to reassure VS that she was not alone in being upset by pædophiles. Fortunately, as I said, Not all people are pædophiles, whatever name or initial they use or don’t use to classify themselves.

I don't think for a minute that drag=paedophilia, but I do think that anyone who is deliberately dressed in a sexually suggestive manner around children should be asked to justify the need for it.

I'm pleased to see that, in 2022, a North West Borough Council cancelled all planned drag queen story hours. The irony of Aida H Dee complaining that he was "being bullied and that the decision will cause lasting damage to an ‘already marginalised community" wasn't lost on me. Clearly the parents who were concerned enough to complain that their children could be caused lasting damage were just bullies. Or sensible.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202306/medium-980626-images.jpeg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202306/medium-778006-fqjwl7gxoaa-swh.jpeg

Just found these photos of the CabaBabaRave show which brands itself as a 'little slice of afternoon delight' that intersperses cabaret with 'captivating baby sensory moments' before 'ending in a rave'.

Footage showed one dancer, known as Benloader Circus, dressed in bondage gear while performing acrobatic sequences from straps dangling from the ceiling as babies and their parents watched.

The video also shows another act performing a handstand on a chair while wearing nothing but stilettos and a thong at The Flair Ground, near Waterloo in south-east London.

The organisers defended it, insisting it was carefully curated and suggesting the babies would not understand what was being performed - as they argued it provides a 'fun and welcoming space for parents with young babies'.

Well if the babies wouldn't understand what was being performed, why do that in front of them? I can only think of one reason why.

Beetlejuice

Just found these photos of the CabaBabaRave show which brands itself as a 'little slice of afternoon delight' that intersperses cabaret with 'captivating baby sensory moments' before 'ending in a rave'.

Footage showed one dancer, known as Benloader Circus, dressed in bondage gear while performing acrobatic sequences from straps dangling from the ceiling as babies and their parents watched.

The video also shows another act performing a handstand on a chair while wearing nothing but stilettos and a thong at The Flair Ground, near Waterloo in south-east London.

The organisers defended it, insisting it was carefully curated and suggesting the babies would not understand what was being performed - as they argued it provides a 'fun and welcoming space for parents with young babies'.

Well if the babies wouldn't understand what was being performed, why do that in front of them? I can only think of one reason why.

This is adult entertainment for, well... adults.

I've always felt uncomfortable with the notion that it's OK for children to attend performances where the content - the 'double-entendre', etc, will "go over their heads" and they won't understand what's being said or portrayed.

There's something rather unpleasant and cynical about exposing children to the adult world of sexual innuendo etc... it really just smacks of 'grooming' - so that as early as legally allowable, they can then be part of the 'scene', without them really understanding or grasping the concepts or complexities of adult behaviour.

And I feel the same about beauty pageants for very young girls... three and four year olds in full make up, wearing bra-tops on their flat chests, posing - as they've been taught to do - provocatively with hands on hips.

To me, it is the corruption of children's innocence.

Funny you should mention "legally allowable" Dickens because that's precisely CabaBabaRave's stance against their critics. Just because it's legal doesn't make it right and I would judge any adult who thought it was appropriate to expose a child to attending any performance where semi naked men grate in front of children.

I would like to see an interview with the drag queens where they are asked what the point is of performing to children. If the children aren't going to understand the jokes, aren't going to pick up on the sexual connotations and there is no intention to gaslight them, then why are the drag queens doing it?

Also, what is the motive for the librarians and teaching staff who employ them, and who approached whom in the employment process?

Beetlejuice

Funny you should mention "legally allowable" Dickens because that's precisely CabaBabaRave's stance against their critics. Just because it's legal doesn't make it right and I would judge any adult who thought it was appropriate to expose a child to attending any performance where semi naked men grate in front of children.

Quite.

It's pushing the boundaries.

Children don't mature overnight. It really does seem like a form of grooming.

It is a form of grooming-‘normalising’ abnormal behaviour.

Beetlejuice omfg.

Those pictures show perverts.

Not drag; not trans; not ‘adult entertainment’; not ‘afternoon delight’ (innuendo which means daytime sexual intercourse)

Pure evil perversion.

Beetlejuice

Just found these photos of the CabaBabaRave show which brands itself as a 'little slice of afternoon delight' that intersperses cabaret with 'captivating baby sensory moments' before 'ending in a rave'.

Footage showed one dancer, known as Benloader Circus, dressed in bondage gear while performing acrobatic sequences from straps dangling from the ceiling as babies and their parents watched.

The video also shows another act performing a handstand on a chair while wearing nothing but stilettos and a thong at The Flair Ground, near Waterloo in south-east London.

The organisers defended it, insisting it was carefully curated and suggesting the babies would not understand what was being performed - as they argued it provides a 'fun and welcoming space for parents with young babies'.

Well if the babies wouldn't understand what was being performed, why do that in front of them? I can only think of one reason why.

Anyone who would feel comfortable seeing their Grandchild, infant or not, exposed to performances like this is most certainly not an inhabitant of the world in which I choose to live. Appalling.

How can any parent justify exposing their child to such yuck

Anniebach

How can any parent justify exposing their child to such yuck

Anniebach haven’t you heard?
For those who would support it, or take part in it, it’s inclusive and promotes diversity, an opportunity to be kind.

Words which, like the word woman, have had their meanings adapted to suit what some males and even some females want.

Actually it’s just sick, insidious grooming, and another chance for some males to demonstrate their power and disrespect.

But you may well see some defence of their actions.

Mollygo I agree 100% with you.

If the parents did not attend the shows they would not happen.

Anniebach

Mollygo I agree 100% with you.

So do I. It's an obscene, gratuitous pollution of precious childhood innocence.

Theexwife

If the parents did not attend the shows they would not happen.

Being a parent doesn't always equate to sound judgement, or acting in the best interests of a child. I believe someone mentioned up thread, there are beauty contests, where small girls are made up to the nines to look like mini adults, do these little girls put themselves forward to take part? Small children don't have a voice neither can they make an informed choice, they are reliant on adults to make safe and sensible decisions that will be in their best interests. Just because certain things exist, that doesn't make them right and there are always those who will be up for anything because often because it's what they want! I rather think the question that should be posed is not "if the parents did attend, these shows wouldn't be happening" but rather "why are they happening around very young children?" that's the basis of the OP.

I meant that the parents are responsible for what those babies are attending, they should be blamed for any wrongdoing .

I don't understand how it is inclusive at all. How many children have lives that include women dressed or made up like this? Or which normalise sexualised gyrating and so on?

I think that it would be one thing if the shows involved clown-like female impersonators (like Mother Goose/pantomime dames), in the guise of matronly older women in bloomers and a pinny who are obviously unthreatening. But this does not appear to be anything like that. It is sexualised and isn't inclusive of anything with which children are likely to be familiar - in fact if there were any suggestion that a child were familiar with this sort of thing it should be a huge and luminous red flag.

I meant that the parents are responsible for what those babies are attending, they should be blamed for any wrongdoing.

Quite so Theexwife, they are 100% responsible. But, as we all know, some parents are just inadequate and make poor decisions generally. Some parents just don't understand what impact stuff like this will have on the children. And some parents are so fixated on being inclusive to anyone and everyone, no matter how obviously dodgy they are, that they genuinely can't see that their children are being groomed. My main bone of contention is with the organisers of these events, who either haven't done due diligence to establish the exact content of the show or,,alternatively, they have checked and have decided that the "marginalised drag act's" needs trump those of the vulnerable children.

If you look at the monkey man act at Redbridge Library, just remember that that character was actually photographed with members of the library staff. And they apparently thought it was fine.

“A huge and luminous red flag”

When I worked with young children one of the signs that alerted us to possible abuse was sexualised postures and movements, which do not come naturally to young children. And language that was inappropriate to the normal range of experience.

Now adults can say Oh she’s just copying a show I took her to.

A very clever masking strategy?