Drag Story time

[Melissa Louise]

1 minute ago, Wheres Toto said:

Why?    Can part of her life not be helping bring literacy to children?  As long as she does it dressed with the relevant bits covered, why would it be odd?  

Do we need to have anyone who does storytime fill out a questionnaire about how they spend every minute of their lives?

Should a teacher be fired if they do adult entertainment at night, even if there is no evidence of it in their daytime life?    

Interesting question - would someone who works as a drag queen, a perfectly legal job (at least for now), "fail" a background check?  

No, but they, like all people who work with children, should be 'working with children' checked before performing. 

 

[Wheres Toto]

Just now, Melissa Louise said:

No, but they, like all people who work with children, should be 'working with children' checked before performing. 

 

Of course, the drag performer should be background checked for certain positions, just like the mom next door, the church Sunday School teacher, and the newly licensed teacher.    

But being a drag performer shouldn't automatically exclude them from working with children, just like any other legally held job.  

[Melissa Louise]

I think people are coming to the discussion with a very shallow idea of what drag is. 

If I was going to play that game, I'd say there's some gay culture erasure going on in the discussion. 

Drag isn't Mrs Doubtfire. It's not Bowie pushing gender norms of the time. It's not a trans person wearing clothes more traditionally associated with the opposite sex. It's not representative of all LBGT people. 

[Melissa Louise]

Just now, Wheres Toto said:

Of course, the drag performer should be background checked for certain positions, just like the mom next door, the church Sunday School teacher, and the newly licensed teacher.    

But being a drag performer shouldn't automatically exclude them from working with children, just like any other legally held job.  

I certainly haven't suggested that. 

In the end, I think that DSQ - pro and anti - swallows up a lot of time and focus culturally  that would be better spent on other things. 

[Dmmetler]

5 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I think people are coming to the discussion with a very shallow idea of what drag is. 

If I was going to play that game, I'd say there's some gay culture erasure going on in the discussion. 

Drag isn't Mrs Doubtfire. It's not Bowie pushing gender norms of the time. It's not a trans person wearing clothes more traditionally associated with the opposite sex. It's not representative of all LBGT people. 

Uh, that's because the laws that were passed in the last 6 months in multiple US states doesn't draw that distinction and much of the rhetoric used against "drag" absolutely can apply to anyone who is gender non-conforming. That could include gender bending performers like Boy George, Shakespearian performances of the Merchant of Venice, which includes cross-dressing as a plot point, and things like a local community showing "Mrs. Doubtfire" in the park.  Whether it is enforced or not...depends on who is doing the enforcing in that community. It is seriously not an exaggeration. It is life for those of us who live in those states.  

 

And since those are the ones that ALSO have the most book bans,and often have preemptive laws that require pre-approval of materials, the representation is not going to happen through library books, either. 

 

Edited June 16, 2023 by Dmmetler

[Wheres Toto]

7 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I think people are coming to the discussion with a very shallow idea of what drag is. 

If I was going to play that game, I'd say there's some gay culture erasure going on in the discussion. 

Drag isn't Mrs Doubtfire. It's not Bowie pushing gender norms of the time. It's not a trans person wearing clothes more traditionally associated with the opposite sex. It's not representative of all LBGT people. 

I actually feel like some of this discussion is offering a much broader view of drag, instead of it being limited to only a highly sexualized, mocking caricature of women.  

This isn't the first place I've seen drag used more to describe people who dress in non-gender conforming ways, especially in a somewhat over-the-top performative way.  I've definitely seen it used IRL for a gay man dressing in a flamboyant, feminine way.  

Could this be one of those terms that is undergoing a slight change in meaning and getting more nuanced?    Especially in the way it's used to title something like "Drag" Storytime?

ETA:  I'm definitely NOT in one of those places that are seeing all non-gender conformity being labeled drag but I definitely see reference to it happening other places.    It seems much more benign and inclusive to a larger group the way I see it around here.  

Edited June 16, 2023 by Wheres Toto

[Melissa Louise]

1 minute ago, Dmmetler said:

Uh, that's because the laws that were passed in the last 6 months in multiple US states doesn't draw that distinction and much of the rhetoric used against "drag" absolutely can apply to anyone who is gender non-conforming. That could include gender bending performers like Boy George, Shakespearian performances of the Merchant of Venice, which includes cross-dressing as a plot point, and things like a local community showing "Mrs. Doubtfire" in the park.  It is seriously not an exaggeration. It is life for those of us who live in those states. 

 

And since those are the ones that ALSO have the most book bans,and often have preemptive laws that require pre-approval of materials, the representation is not going to happen through library books, either. 

 

Yes, I'm aware. 

Are we having a discussion of drag, or are we discussing why we can't and shouldn't raise any critique of drag? 

[HomeAgain]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

Because women weren’t allowed to perform on stage.  People like to use Shakespeare as if it’s a positive example of a long history of drag, but I don’t actually find that a strong argument due to the reasons behind it.

 

Please understand, that even with the knowledge that no women would be performing in their plays, Shakespeare and his peers wrote quite interesting love stories knowing they would be performed by men.

You can argue that women were not allowed, but you cannot disregard the intent of the playwrights in their stories -rather than creating works that would feature all male casts and keep women's roles as minor characters they wrote to explicitly provide scenarios in which women were equal in the story.  Nor can you disregard that the audience loved seeing the show, knowing the cast was all men.

[Dmmetler]

Just now, HomeAgain said:

Please understand, that even with the knowledge that no women would be performing in their plays, Shakespeare and his peers wrote quite interesting love stories knowing they would be performed by men.

You can argue that women were not allowed, but you cannot disregard the intent of the playwrights in their stories -rather than creating works that would feature all male casts and keep women's roles as minor characters they wrote to explicitly provide scenarios in which women were equal in the story.  Nor can you disregard that the audience loved seeing the show, knowing the cast was all men.

Not to mention cross dressing as a plot point. 

[Melissa Louise]

Just now, Wheres Toto said:

I actually feel like some of this discussion is offering a much broader view of drag, instead of it being limited to only a highly sexualized, mocking caricature of women.  

This isn't the first place I've seen drag used more to describe people who dress in non-gender conforming ways, especially in a somewhat over-the-top performative way.  I've definitely seen it used IRL for a gay man dressing in a flamboyant, feminine way.  

Could this be one of those terms that is undergoing a slight change in meaning and getting more nuanced?    Especially in the way it's used to title something like "Drag" Storytime?

Yeah, using drag to describe a feminine gay man - that's homophobic, imo.

I'd say it's getting less nuanced. Drag is not all the things. 

[prairiewindmomma]

1 minute ago, Dmmetler said:

Uh, that's because the laws that were passed in the last 6 months in multiple US states doesn't draw that distinction and much of the rhetoric used against "drag" absolutely can apply to anyone who is gender non-conforming. That could include gender bending performers like Boy George, Shakespearian performances of the Merchant of Venice, which includes cross-dressing as a plot point, and things like a local community showing "Mrs. Doubtfire" in the park.  It is seriously not an exaggeration. It is life for those of us who live in those states. 

 

And since those are the ones that ALSO have the most book bans,and often have preemptive laws that require pre-approval of materials, the representation is not going to happen through library books, either. 

 

This.

I think there are some cultural aspects at play here. I actually have nuanced personal views about drag, and agree that people can feel differently about how drag affects them, I think drag is a tiny niche of inclusive culture and takes a disproportionate amount of time and energy but will absolutely support the inclusion of drag story time because the legal discourse and distinction here very much matters. 

[Melissa Louise]

1 minute ago, HomeAgain said:

Please understand, that even with the knowledge that no women would be performing in their plays, Shakespeare and his peers wrote quite interesting love stories knowing they would be performed by men.

You can argue that women were not allowed, but you cannot disregard the intent of the playwrights in their stories -rather than creating works that would feature all male casts and keep women's roles as minor characters they wrote to explicitly provide scenarios in which women were equal in the story.  Nor can you disregard that the audience loved seeing the show, knowing the cast was all men.

No, you're wrong here. 

 

[prairiewindmomma]

In my blue part of a traditionally blue state (which is actually more purple than one would think), in my kids’ school district this year, there was an entire slate of candidates who ran on banning inclusiveness and came close to winning, who regularly storm school board meetings pushing to ban books, and who have generally just repeated stuff heard on tv.

If you don’t think this isn’t part of a larger National movement to ban ideas, books, and people….I think you are a bit naive. They are pushing as hard as they can and seeing how people react…testing the waters. If we sit back and think, “This won’t affect my community” then it’s going to be just like how the abortion ban went down all over again.

 

[Melissa Louise]

I feel like yelling. 

Guys, drag isn't any instance of a man putting on clothes women wear. 

Lol, I actually don't care about DQS in libraries - like, I think it's a lot of straight mommies showing their allyship in a really shallow way, but ban it ? Nope - so that's me done now. 

Let gay males defend their own culture. 

Edited June 16, 2023 by Melissa Louise

[Wheres Toto]

6 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Yeah, using drag to describe a feminine gay man - that's homophobic, imo.

I'd say it's getting less nuanced. Drag is not all the things. 

Well, he used it to describe himself and was excited about participating in some "drag" events during Pride Month.

Some places drag seems to be becoming a wider description/term used to scare people into protesting and pearl clutching over Pride events.   

Other places I see it being used by the LGBTQ+ community as a general term for being out and blatant in their non-conformity.  They are doing the opposite of trying to pass.   

[Melissa Louise]

4 minutes ago, Wheres Toto said:

Well, he used it to describe himself and was excited about participating in some "drag" events during Pride Month.

Some places drag seems to be becoming a wider description/term used to scare people into protesting and pearl clutching over Pride events.   

Other places I see it being used by the LGBTQ+ community as a general term for being out and blatant in their non-conformity.  They are doing the opposite of trying to pass.   

Internalised stuff is a thing. Dominant gay male culture generally devalues the feminine in other men. Gay writers write about this. 

[Granny_Weatherwax]

38 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Not drag. 

 

No, but flamboyant, goes against cultural norms, all are/were part of LGBTQIA? community

[Melissa Louise]

5 minutes ago, Granny_Weatherwax said:

No, but flamboyant, goes against cultural norms, all are/were part of LGBTQIA? community

But this isn't a thread about being flamboyant, it's a thread about drag! I know straight women who are flamboyant!

Look, my favourite Bowie video is actually one of the few times he actually performed drag - it's sexy, imo. But he wasn't a drag artist specifically!

To get myself in a better mood, I'm posting this (I grew up on this, and on Prince etc - I'm not coming from a perspective of enforcing gender norms).

 

Edited June 16, 2023 by Melissa Louise

[pitterpatter]

These things ARE news in my state. Along with gender-affirming care.

I wonder how many years drag queen story time has been going on. I have no clue. I didn't know about it until recently. Or, if I did, I didn't spend any time thinking about it.

I think the point of reading Pride books during Pride month is to promote awareness. I'm surprised that the school district instructed teachers to read them, though. That wouldn't fly in my state. I have no idea of the content of the selected books, so I don't know how to feel about them specifically.

We tended to steer clear of things that specifically talked about race or sexuality when DD was small. DH and I also didn't talk about race and sexuality in front of DD. We wanted to raise her in as non-biased of an environment as possible. I have no idea whether we would have taken her to drag story time, as that was never an option. For several years, when we asked her which American Girl doll looked the most like her (her twin doll, so to speak), she identified with an African American doll. My DD is vampire white. As a teenager today, she is the most tolerate person I know. A person's gender, race, and sexuality matters zero percent to her. She's made friends with people who are straight, gay, trans, and nonbinary. I don't really know where I'm going with this paragraph other than to say that we are really proud of her. She sees people for people and teaches us a lot of things that challenges our preconceptions. She has made us more understanding and tolerate over time.

I really feel as though this is a why this, why now kind of thing? Why is the LGBT community being picked on so much right now after enjoying several years of legislative and social progress? I think it's because there's a presidential election coming up. Our last election cycle hated on immigrants. I predict that this cycle's hate mongering will be focused on the LGBT community. I'm not looking forward to it. And, I always wonder, who's next.
 

21 hours ago, Ginevra said:

Can we discuss this? I want to understand what the purpose of this is. I view myself as moderately open-minded and for sure, do not think any group or culture of people should be shunned by society. 

However. Why have a Drag Queen presenting story time to young children at a public event? What is the goal? 

Along the same vein, an elementary school teacher friend said they have been instructed to read from a selection of “Pride books” before school ends for summer. What is the purpose of reading “Pride books” specifically? 

I am asking this in good faith and hope to discuss it in a rational manner. 

PS: these are things in my community within my direct experience; they are not news headlines or internet hear-say. 

 

[ktgrok]

15 hours ago, TravelingChris said:

That is what  I would do and have done.  In my view, t he only people you would be coming out to would be your family, not your coworkers. 

So what does that even mean? Does it mean my queer kid should remove the pride pins on a backpack, or not wear rainbow shoe laces, in case people consider it "coming out"? Never mention to anyone a crush or relationship? It's crazy. 

[Melissa Louise]

Just now, ktgrok said:

So what does that even mean? Does it mean my queer kid should remove the pride pins on a backpack, or not wear rainbow shoe laces, in case people consider it "coming out"? Never mention to anyone a crush or relationship? It's crazy. 

Yeah, I agree with this.

Don't ask, don't tell - not a great thing.

 

[livetoread]

1 hour ago, maize said:

Don't argue though that those of us who DO find drag offensive and demeaning should be just fine with a tamed-down version for kids.

I'm okay with someone finding it offensive to women. I wouldn't try and argue with someone who sees it that way. I think that's a narrow sliver of those who are against drag though, and I would think that those who see it as offensive to women aren't the ones trying to make it illegal for minors to be exposed to it.  They wouldn't take their kids (perfectly valid option) but also don't see it as pedophiles grooming their kids and needing the power of the state to punish those who do it. That level of outrage comes from a different place, IMO.

 

 

[ktgrok]

43 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

Uh, that's because the laws that were passed in the last 6 months in multiple US states doesn't draw that distinction and much of the rhetoric used against "drag" absolutely can apply to anyone who is gender non-conforming. That could include gender bending performers like Boy George, Shakespearian performances of the Merchant of Venice, which includes cross-dressing as a plot point, and things like a local community showing "Mrs. Doubtfire" in the park.  Whether it is enforced or not...depends on who is doing the enforcing in that community. It is seriously not an exaggeration. It is life for those of us who live in those states.  

 

And since those are the ones that ALSO have the most book bans,and often have preemptive laws that require pre-approval of materials, the representation is not going to happen through library books, either. 

 

As a Floridian, yes. 

42 minutes ago, Wheres Toto said:

I actually feel like some of this discussion is offering a much broader view of drag, instead of it being limited to only a highly sexualized, mocking caricature of women.  

This isn't the first place I've seen drag used more to describe people who dress in non-gender conforming ways, especially in a somewhat over-the-top performative way.  I've definitely seen it used IRL for a gay man dressing in a flamboyant, feminine way.  

Could this be one of those terms that is undergoing a slight change in meaning and getting more nuanced?    Especially in the way it's used to title something like "Drag" Storytime?

ETA:  I'm definitely NOT in one of those places that are seeing all non-gender conformity being labeled drag but I definitely see reference to it happening other places.    It seems much more benign and inclusive to a larger group the way I see it around here.  

You know, I think that is part of the issue. If we mean Drag to equal what is basically a varity of burlesque, then no, I wouldn't want a story hour like that. I wouldn't want women burlesque dancers showing up in costume for story hour either. But if we are defining it as including non sexual cross dressing in fancy clothing or costumes and make up, like a mother goose outfit, then fine, sure. 

[ktgrok]

2 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Yeah, I agree with this.

Don't ask, don't tell - not a great thing.

 

Yeah, we already walk that line in some homeschool groups. It's not fun. Nor healthy. 

[Pawz4me]

5 minutes ago, pitterpatter said:

And, I always wonder, who's next.
 

Ditto

[marbel]

10 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

So what does that even mean? Does it mean my queer kid should remove the pride pins on a backpack, or not wear rainbow shoe laces, in case people consider it "coming out"? Never mention to anyone a crush or relationship? It's crazy. 

This is not what she said. Read what she is responding to/agreeing with. 

Here it is:

I do not love Black History Month because I live for the day when we just say, “This was an amazing human in history,” and not having to fit them into February because of BHM. 
 

In Pete Buttegiege’s book, “The Long Way Home”, he said something about longing for the day when there is no need to “come out” as gay. When you just show up at the office picnic with your partner or spouse and everyone goes, “Well hello, Mr Whoever; it’s nice to meet you.” And then they have some more pasta salad.
 

I think that way. 

Edited June 16, 2023 by marbel

[livetoread]

1 minute ago, ktgrok said:

If we mean Drag to equal what is basically a varity of burlesque, then no, I wouldn't want a story hour like that. I wouldn't want women burlesque dancers showing up in costume for story hour either. But if we are defining it as including non sexual cross dressing in fancy clothing or costumes and make up, like a mother goose outfit, then fine, sure. 

Agreed

[Wheres Toto]

6 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

So what does that even mean? Does it mean my queer kid should remove the pride pins on a backpack, or not wear rainbow shoe laces, in case people consider it "coming out"? Never mention to anyone a crush or relationship? It's crazy. 

Her statement was actually made in response to another post.  At the time, I think she was saying that she hoped being gay would be such a non-issue that people wouldn't automatically assume everyone was straight and there would be no need to "come out", it would be something that just comes up in normal conversation where you would talk about your husband or wife or when you got married or who you are dating, etc.   Not something needing an announcement.  

[Melissa Louise]

4 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

Yeah, we already walk that line in some homeschool groups. It's not fun. Nor healthy. 

We did too, because our homeschool community was evangelical Christian, and it sucked.

[ktgrok]

6 minutes ago, marbel said:

This is not what she said. Read what she is responding to/agreeing with. 

Here it is:

I do not love Black History Month because I live for the day when we just say, “This was an amazing human in history,” and not having to fit them into February because of BHM. 
 

In Pete Buttegiege’s book, “The Long Way Home”, he said something about longing for the day when there is no need to “come out” as gay. When you just show up at the office picnic with your partner or spouse and everyone goes, “Well hello, Mr Whoever; it’s nice to meet you.” And then they have some more pasta salad.
 

I think that way. 

Yes, but Pete is talking about something aspirational, for the future and she indicated it should be that way now. 

[pitterpatter]

Yes, that's where we need to get as a society. "Coming out" should not be a thing. There shouldn't be a need for it. I thought we were getting there, but the tide seems to be shifting again.

5 minutes ago, Wheres Toto said:

Her statement was actually made in response to another post.  At the time, I think she was saying that she hoped being gay would be such a non-issue that people wouldn't automatically assume everyone was straight and there would be no need to "come out", it would be something that just comes up in normal conversation where you would talk about your husband or wife or when you got married or who you are dating, etc.   Not something needing an announcement.  

[Melissa Louise]

20 minutes ago, livetoread said:

I'm okay with someone finding it offensive to women. I wouldn't try and argue with someone who sees it that way. I think that's a narrow sliver of those who are against drag though, and I would think that those who see it as offensive to women aren't the ones trying to make it illegal for minors to be exposed to it.  They wouldn't take their kids (perfectly valid option) but also don't see it as pedophiles grooming their kids and needing the power of the state to punish those who do it. That level of outrage comes from a different place, IMO.

 

 

What peeves me is that this position is squeezed out by the pro and antis on both sides. I want room for that perspective. I know feminism is currently unfashionable, but I personally think it's valuable to keep some room for a classically feminist lens on cultural issues.

[QueenCat]

2 hours ago, pitterpatter said:

That's why I put "powderpuff" in quotes. Our high school had "powderpuff" exhibition games during assemblies, etc. where the boys basketball team dressed up as girls (in dresses and make up and boobs and sneakers) and played against the girls team.

Did no one else have these? Lol. Regardless, teenage boys dressed up several times as girls in high school for skits and other things too that I don't quite remember.

ETA: I also remember adult men dressing up to play basketball for a charity event. These things were always labeled "powderpuff." Then again, I think we also had a donkey playing basketball too. Lol. I don't know. I remember a donkey on the court. For what, I'm not sure. 😄

We had these types of events. In the 1970s and 80s.

[HomeAgain]

1 minute ago, QueenCat said:

We had these types of events. In the 1970s and 80s.

Same.  The football team dressed up as cheerleaders and the cheerleaders played football.

I just realized my youngest has already seen a drag show.  He loves watching The Nutcracker and especially Mother Ginger.  The role is traditionally played by a ballerino on stage and is wickedly funny.

 

I don't recall any objections to the annual performance, though.  Not a one, ever, with everyone appreciating the art and dance.  I'm so sorry that those of you in Florida now have the Nutcracker illegal in your state.

[MercyA]

1 hour ago, Wheres Toto said:

Why?    Can part of her life not be helping bring literacy to children?  As long as she does it dressed with the relevant bits covered, why would it be odd?  

Do we need to have anyone who does storytime fill out a questionnaire about how they spend every minute of their lives?

Yes, of course. If Dita volunteered at the library, that would be awesome, and I'm sure there would be many opportunities for her to serve. But if she did read to kids, I would hope the library wouldn't bill it as Burlesque Story Hour and have Dita reading from a giant champagne glass and waving feathers around. 

It's the theme and the emphasis that I find inappropriate. By all means, if people who dress in drag want to work with little kids at the library, great! But why does the story hour need to be themed to the adult entertainment they do in their free time? 

[Melissa Louise]

This is a crazy conversation.

There are complex power dynamics when considering why it's transgressive for males to adopt a feminine position, and why that is or isn't 'funny' or 'entertaining'.

Flattening a complex topic into 'good people approve of DQS' or 'good people disapprove of DQS' is just...idk...crazy and frustrating.

[MercyA]

33 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

You know, I think that is part of the issue. If we mean Drag to equal what is basically a varity of burlesque, then no, I wouldn't want a story hour like that. I wouldn't want women burlesque dancers showing up in costume for story hour either. But if we are defining it as including non sexual cross dressing in fancy clothing or costumes and make up, like a mother goose outfit, then fine, sure. 

Maybe then it should be billed as "Lila Mermaid [or whoever] Story Hour" rather than "Drag Queen Story Hour," perhaps with a photo so parents know what to expect. 

I don't see the point of the garish / scary makeup, enormous fake breasts, etc.

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Melissa Louise said:

Drag isn't Mrs Doubtfire.

Thank you for saying this, lol. It keeps being brought up in this conversation as if the movie was somehow a model of positive queer role models or something. That wasn't it.

1 hour ago, prairiewindmomma said:

If you don’t think this isn’t part of a larger National movement to ban ideas, books, and people….I think you are a bit naive. They are pushing as hard as they can and seeing how people react…testing the waters. If we sit back and think, “This won’t affect my community” then it’s going to be just like how the abortion ban went down all over again.

This absolutely is part of that. It struck me while reading your post how well the current dynamic is working as a strategy for the side that wants to do the banning. They pick an extreme version of something, then generalize it to mean all kinds of things only distantly related to that thing, and then use that to villify and ban the entire thing that's only tangentially related to the more extreme version of that thing. CRT is an example where they stated this explicitly as a strategy. They've done the same with transgender care and this issue as well. What I think actually helps their strategy work so well is that people who are defending the general idea of whatever it is the group wants to ban tend to double down and defend even the most extreme versions and any and all versions, such that it makes it easier for the group who likes to ban things to point to them as being the extreme ones. They probably secretly high five when they see a storytime drag costume in very poor taste being defended  because it makes their goal easier.

56 minutes ago, Wheres Toto said:

Well, he used it to describe himself and was excited about participating in some "drag" events during Pride Month.  

Other places I see it being used by the LGBTQ+ community as a general term for being out and blatant in their non-conformity.  They are doing the opposite of trying to pass.   

I continue to find this a rough one for transgender people who don't want to be seen as being in "drag" just because they are dressed as their preferred gender, but don't pass. I don't think generalizing the term is a positive thing for people in that category.

25 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

You know, I think that is part of the issue. If we mean Drag to equal what is basically a varity of burlesque, then no, I wouldn't want a story hour like that. I wouldn't want women burlesque dancers showing up in costume for story hour either. But if we are defining it as including non sexual cross dressing in fancy clothing or costumes and make up, like a mother goose outfit, then fine, sure. 

Agree, and again put forward that having "dress up story hour" or something similar would fit this goal, give the same kind of experience for the kids, without giving the people who are looking for things to ban such a target.

[DawnM]

22 hours ago, Amethyst said:

Does anyone remember Bosom Buddies? It’s the first show I ever saw Tom Hanks in. Premise was two guys couldn’t find cheap apartment so they dressed up as women to get into an all-women living situation. It was drag. It was funny. Anyone remember Radar O’Reilly from MASH. It was drag. It was funny. That’s all drag is. It’s outrageously funny. 
 

VERY conservative parents.   I was never allowed to Watch BB because they were in "drag" of sorts.   But I wasn't allowed to watch much TV anyway.   Thankfully we weren't in the US for most of my years and we didn't have a TV overseas as we had no channels where we were.   

But I have a long list of shows I wasn't allowed to watch due to my parents religious "convictions."

[KSera]

9 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Maybe then it should be billed as "Lila Mermaid [or whoever] Story Hour" rather than "Drag Queen Story Hour," perhaps with a photo so parents know what to expect.

I like this idea. Because some of the pictures I see look like they might be fun to attend and some would have scared my kids (they didn't like people wearing mascot costumes either).

[Ginevra]

1 hour ago, ktgrok said:

So what does that even mean? Does it mean my queer kid should remove the pride pins on a backpack, or not wear rainbow shoe laces, in case people consider it "coming out"? Never mention to anyone a crush or relationship? It's crazy. 

This is not what I was suggesting, though I do not know if @TravelingChris meant this or not. 
 

I just wish we were at a place where nobody needs to make an announcement about their orientation. If your partner is a man and so are you - so what? That was my thinking. It would be nice if people could just show up at the office picnic with their partner and didn’t have to previously had made it known he was not straight. 

[Terabith]

I've been staying out of this conversation because I've been busy with my non-binary kid having top surgery yesterday.  

I am fine with Drag Queen story hours, but I don't really care about them one way or another really.  I've never been to a Drag Queen story hour, because I live in a town where all rainbows were recently banned from public school classrooms.  I got chastised at work for wearing in a preschool classroom a dress with packs of crayons on them, because they looked too much like rainbows.  It's freaking ridiculous.  We certainly don't have Drag Queen story hours.  

I have been to, over Zoom, Drag Queen led worship services at House for All Sinners and Saints, where a regular attender and seminarian who is a drag queen preached sermons.  She was absolutely amazing.  A gay friend of mine from grad school is married to a Drag Queen, and his husband loves it and finds great personal satisfaction in that persona.  

I also am a part of a world where pretty much all my friends and family members take cosplay VERY seriously and do it a ton.  Personas that people play with bring a ton of joy to lots of people.  I have no issue with Drag Queens putting on appropriate story hours at the library, and I suspect that the ones I have encountered would do a fantastic job, because they are great performers.  

I have a lot more issue with children being sexualized by things like dance recital costumes and sexually suggestive moves and child beauty pageants than I do with watching a performance by someone else, but I do think there are merits that can be raised about whether or not drag is, in and of itself, bad for women.  I don't think it really is, because I think it's kind of a third thing that is its own thing, not really having to do with women, but I think it is a discussion that can be had with merit.  

My real issue is with laws that ban representation of LGBTQ people in lives, whether through banning Drag Queen story hours, book bans, or banning colors in school classrooms because they might signal support to a group of kids that desperately needs support.  

The whole thing just is pissing me off, and I'm very short on patience today for it.

[Melissa Louise]

You can raise the eyebrow at child pageants, skimpy dance recital dresses AND drag.

[Ting Tang]

I'm pretty sure Mother Ginger in the Nutcracker we saw was played by a straight white male.  He was a guest performer from a university.  But they never said he was going to be in "drag."  Totally family friendly, of course!  The things people don't think about...  He wasn't grooming anyone.  I really think it is just as simple as drag is equated with adult entertainment, but now we are seeing it doesn't always have to be.  Would people be upset if they just dropped the word drag?  I honestly do not know? This excludes someone pretending to be the opposite sex like in Mrs. Doubtfire.  He was trying to pass as a woman in that movie for his kids.

Edited June 16, 2023 by Ting Tang

[Ginevra]

1 minute ago, Ting Tang said:

I'm pretty sure Mother Ginger in the Nutcracker we saw was played by a straight white male.  He was a guest performer from a university.  But they never said he was going to be in "drag."  Totally family friendly, of course!  The things people don't think about...  He wasn't grooming anyone.  I really think it is just as simple as drag is equated with adult entertainment, but now we are seeing it doesn't always have to be.  This excludes someone pretending to be the opposite sex like in Mrs. Doubtfire.  He was trying to pass as a woman in that movie for his kids.

The story times, though, *do* say “Drag Queen Storytime”. So…I do wonder what purpose that serves. They aren’t saying, “Mother Goose Story Hour” and Mother Goose is a man dressed up like a feminine goose. 

[Melissa Louise]

OMG again for those in the back - not all cross dressing is drag!

Drag is a style of performance with its own history and norms!

This thread has had the ironic effect of having zero impact on my feelings about DQS one way or another, but making me feel protective of gay men's culture being so misunderstood by so many, even though I'm pretty sure a DQ wouldn't return the solidarity favor.

[MercyA]

7 minutes ago, Terabith said:

I live in a town where all rainbows were recently banned from public school classrooms.  I got chastised at work for wearing in a preschool classroom a dress with packs of crayons on them, because they looked too much like rainbows.  It's freaking ridiculous. 

This is not just ridiculous, but very scary. Everyone should be concerned.

[MEmama]

9 minutes ago, Terabith said:

I've been staying out of this conversation because I've been busy with my non-binary kid having top surgery yesterday.  

I am fine with Drag Queen story hours, but I don't really care about them one way or another really.  I've never been to a Drag Queen story hour, because I live in a town where all rainbows were recently banned from public school classrooms.  I got chastised at work for wearing in a preschool classroom a dress with packs of crayons on them, because they looked too much like rainbows.  It's freaking ridiculous.  We certainly don't have Drag Queen story hours.  

I have been to, over Zoom, Drag Queen led worship services at House for All Sinners and Saints, where a regular attender and seminarian who is a drag queen preached sermons.  She was absolutely amazing.  A gay friend of mine from grad school is married to a Drag Queen, and his husband loves it and finds great personal satisfaction in that persona.  

I also am a part of a world where pretty much all my friends and family members take cosplay VERY seriously and do it a ton.  Personas that people play with bring a ton of joy to lots of people.  I have no issue with Drag Queens putting on appropriate story hours at the library, and I suspect that the ones I have encountered would do a fantastic job, because they are great performers.  

I have a lot more issue with children being sexualized by things like dance recital costumes and sexually suggestive moves and child beauty pageants than I do with watching a performance by someone else, but I do think there are merits that can be raised about whether or not drag is, in and of itself, bad for women.  I don't think it really is, because I think it's kind of a third thing that is its own thing, not really having to do with women, but I think it is a discussion that can be had with merit.  

My real issue is with laws that ban representation of LGBTQ people in lives, whether through banning Drag Queen story hours, book bans, or banning colors in school classrooms because they might signal support to a group of kids that desperately needs support.  

The whole thing just is pissing me off, and I'm very short on patience today for it.

@Terabith

((Hugs))

 

[KSera]

12 minutes ago, Terabith said:

I live in a town where all rainbows were recently banned from public school classrooms.  I got chastised at work for wearing in a preschool classroom a dress with packs of crayons on them, because they looked too much like rainbows.

I'm sorry, that's insanity. Sorry you have to deal with that (and wondering if they're not going to allow Noah's Ark stories and pictures to include a rainbow because gay?)

Hope your kiddo has a smooth, problem free recovery. First couple days can be rough.

[Terabith]

Just now, KSera said:

I'm sorry, that's insanity. Sorry you have to deal with that (and wondering if they're not going to allow Noah's Ark stories and pictures to include a rainbow because gay?)

Hope your kiddo has a smooth, problem free recovery. First couple days can be rough.

After going to school to get my teaching certification, I realized I could not teach in the public schools because there is no way I could deal with this kind of stupidity.  It's not just all rainbows; it's any book that could be remotely problematic as defined by ANY parent anywhere.  So no kids can have books.  It's absolutely terrifying and chilling.  A lot of the staff members, who were called out BY NAME in a school board meeting and referred to as pedophiles and groomers, and got absolutely no protection from the school system, were not even displaying/ wearing rainbows as a form of support.  They were things like a first grade teacher who displayed a drawing from a student that included a rainbow.  

The goal is flat out genocide, either physical or cultural.