Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I do wonder how all these virtue signaling tolerance totalitarians would feel about a person going to a library in a big blue city and reading stories to kids while wearing a MAGA hat.
You're going with 'totalitarians', huh? You appear confused by certain things. And by 'things', I mean words. Totalitarianism is about control. Not limiting readers based on their attire is the antithesis of control. It's allowing people to dress as they see fit. But, hey, baby steps - fifty years ago, your types were pitching fits over women wearing pants and men with long hair.
To answer your question, I doubt they'd be so hysterically over-wrought enough as to slap the nonsensical label 'totalitarians' on it.
You're going with 'totalitarians', huh? You appear confused by certain things. And by 'things', I mean words. Totalitarianism is about control. Not limiting readers based on their attire is the antithesis of control. It's allowing people to dress as they see fit. But, hey, baby steps - fifty years ago, your types were pitching fits over women wearing pants and men with long hair.
To answer your question, I doubt they'd be so hysterically over-wrought enough as to slap the nonsensical label 'totalitarians' on it.
I had long hair when I was a teenager. I also think women in tight pants is the best invention since the mini skirt. And I bet the person wearing the MAGA hat would get punched and people like you would say it was only to be expected. What if a drag queen wore a MAGA hat? Would people know how to react? Would they still want that drag queen reading books to their kids?
...Some of the locals thought it was an attempt to get children to be accepting of transgenders at an early age.
...
Cross-dressers are not the same as transgender. If adults don't understand that, I hardly think children would.
That said, I think if it in fact was drag queen story time, I think it's ridiculous. I'm not a parent and have always had gay friends and been very liberal, but I do find cross-dressing story time a bizarre idea.
Because the difference here is that blackface was traditionally performed by whites in a position of power.
Sure, drag is not always flattering to women, but it's performed by a traditionally disenfranchised group that is still subject to suppression. Dressing in drag isn't an act of privilege.
This topic hijacks the thread, but it has to be addressed. Drag is not even close to comparable to blackface.
Agreed. If the goal of drag were simply to turn men (temporarily) into women, then I could see how some people interpret drag as a mockery of women. But drag seems more complex than that. It's my understanding that drag is generally meant to be playful and campy, and sometimes a vehicle for social commentary. Much of the purpose for drag is for a relatively marginalized yet unassuming person (usually a male) to poke fun, simultaneously, at male and female images and stereotypes, the cult of celebrity, popular culture, and other aspects of society. It can be entertaining, even at a raw and simple level, but it seems that it traditionally tries to question expectations that we have of men, women, and people in power. Blackface, on the other hand, isn't so complex: its traditional purpose is to exaggerate features of a racial group for laughs. That seems like a big difference to me.
Having said that, a lot of kids (and obviously, many adults) don't see all of that--they just see a man sort-of dressed as a woman, and they take it too seriously. But some kids do pick up on the playfulness and social commentary. When I was a kid, I loved and appreciated Flip Wilson's drag on tv, and Carol Burnett did some fun routines like that, too. Their characters were more subtle than over-the-top drag, but it was the same idea. It didn't confuse me and it didn't offend me--I "got" the point behind it all, and I thought it was fun and clever.
Cross-dressers are not the same as transgender. If adults don't understand that, I hardly think children would.
That said, I think if it in fact was drag queen story time, I think it's ridiculous. I'm not a parent and have always had gay friends and been very liberal, but I do find cross-dressing story time a bizarre idea.
I do wonder how all these virtue signaling tolerance totalitarians would feel about a person going to a library in a big blue city and reading stories to kids while wearing a MAGA hat.
Wearing a MAGA hat would be overly political, just like wearing a Bernie shirt or Che Guevara shirt at story-time.
Drag is not explicitly political, though the political left has generally become the province of diversity, acceptance, and inclusion. Some conservatives talk about the "big tent" in their party, but I guess that tent isn't quite so accommodating.
In any case, very few library storytellers are in drag, and when they are, publicity and announcements are made well in advance. OTOH, take a closer look at the library storytellers who are regulars at the task. Some wear crosses and other religious symbolism. I remember some such folks I interacted with as a kid wore such things, but somehow I managed to turn out alright.
I have often wondered if women wearing pants, etc., was the equivalent of drag. But the practicality of pants (whether in a pantsuit or suit jacket/skirt for a job) is not aping men, it is wearing what work in a practical sense. I think pants and their equivalents are the default program, and dress/skirt/makeup is the extraneous project.
Having traveled in Third World areas, I see that women's skirts allow for public urination with the protective cover of a skirt for modesty. Pants are more figure-revealing, unless loose and tunic-covering, like in India. Men wear robes and skirt-like flowing material in hot climates, and they are not aping women.
To me, drag is more than a dress, it's the makeup, the exaggeration of what is perceived to be what makes a woman look like a woman. A man in a dress doesn't look like a woman, he's a man in a dress. Drag, to me, is the whole phony package of perceived womanhood, painful shoes and all.
I never wear skirts/dresses unless someone dies or someone is getting married or I'm applying for a job. Personal preference. I don't think I'm dressing like a man in my constant jeans.
Thanks to the poster for asking. I have thought of that question.
I have often wondered if women wearing pants, etc., was the equivalent of drag. But the practicality of pants (whether in a pantsuit or suit jacket/skirt for a job) is not aping men, it is wearing what work in a practical sense. I think pants and their equivalents are the default program, and dress/skirt/makeup is the extraneous project.
Having traveled in Third World areas, I see that women's skirts allow for public urination with the protective cover of a skirt for modesty. Pants are more figure-revealing, unless loose and tunic-covering, like in India. Men wear robes and skirt-like flowing material in hot climates, and they are not aping women.
To me, drag is more than a dress, it's the makeup, the exaggeration of what is perceived to be what makes a woman look like a woman. A man in a dress doesn't look like a woman, he's a man in a dress. Drag, to me, is the whole phony package of perceived womanhood, painful shoes and all.
I never wear skirts/dresses unless someone dies or someone is getting married or I'm applying for a job. Personal preference. I don't think I'm dressing like a man in my constant jeans.
Thanks to the poster for asking. I have thought of that question.
However, the fight in Western countries to allow women to wear pants was a fight about women wearing *men's* clothing (despite the fact that pants were not always considered men's garments)
There are examples of women in Europe and the US wearing pants long before it was socially acceptable, as writer Kathleen Cooper detailed in The Toast, even though in countries such as the US, England, and France they could actually be jailed for it in the 18th and 19th centuries. Some would dress as men to do things such as join the military. The most famous example was probably 18th-century Englishwoman Hannah Snell, who served for years in the British navy and later become a minor celebrity after revealing that she was a woman. During the US Civil War, Mary Walker, an assistant surgeon with the Union Army, chose pants over skirts (and was once arrested for impersonating a man).
Houston had a drag queen story hour, but apparently, the performers were threatened after it was revealed that one of the performers had been convicted of sexual assault of a minor (they have since required background checks, but that did not help)
Houston Public Library has not wavered in their support of Drag Queen Story Time, which we are extremely grateful for. But ourselves and our library team believe it is time to step away and not continue with the program in March or for the foreseeable future. What started as a fun community event shared between us, a couple of drag queens and kings, and a few families has become a national controversy. People are being threatened. People are being hurt. We believe in what we’re doing, but we don’t believe in putting our friends, our families, or our children in danger. If another person or persons wants to continue our effort or host their own event at some point down the line, they have every right to do so, and it’s likely somebody will. Drag Queen Story Time belongs to everyone, not just the two of us.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.