Children being read stories by Drag Queens on World Book Day

😂😂😂

Certainly no surprise to me.

Common sense and experience seems thin on the ground right now.

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5485931/amp/Drag-queen-taught-kids-tolerance-posted-abusive-tweets.html

She goes into schools to teach children as young as two to be open-minded about transgender issues.

She called former Tory Minister Ann Widdecombe a ‘fing venomous, hypocritical bint’ in one tweet, and TV host Kim Woodburn a ‘vile c’ in another.

Apart from anything else, there's this insane complacency that people cant read. That your behaviour shouldn't be beyond reproach even if you are giving guidance to kids.

On hate crimes of all things. Ffs.

Sex is a protected characteristic in the Equality Act.

Harrassment is a type of discriminatory behaviour that is unlawful under the EA:

(1)A person (A) harasses another (B) if—

(a)A engages in unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected characteristic, and

(b)the conduct has the purpose or effect of—

(i)violating B's dignity, or

(ii)creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for B.

I think a decent case could be made by parents of girls that this head teacher is harrassing female pupils on the grounds of their sex by bringing in drag queens for compulsory lessons.

Unless it's a private school they'll also be required to comply with the public sector equality duty which means they not only have to not discriminate, they have to actively consider how the decisions they make affect different disadvantaged groups and how they can actively advance equality.

Everything Datun has said about grooming is spot on.

Beauty and Misogyny is an excellent book and you can download it for free here.

While looking for that, I noticed Unpacking Queer Politics is also available here. Everybody should read this book!

I used to think that drag was just a bit of fun until I watched Ru Paul's Drag Race and was appalled at the way they talked about women, calling women "fish" and laughing at the idea that they were better at being women than women were. It really drove home how rooted in misogyny the whole concept is - could you be a successful drag queen if you didn't find women inherently absurd?

Although in this country drag has different roots, in America drag started as part of the Minstrel acts. It was a deliberate poke at the perceived “masculinity” of black women. Blackface + Women-face is massively racist and misogynistic and it doesn’t become acceptable just because the blackface has been lost.

I don't like the drag act. I find them insulting. I wouldn't go about black face as a parody of black people. They are also incredibly crude, and the whole overacting drama queen attitude..? It really isn't my cup of tea and I'm far from prudish. I wouldn't want them in a school. They are reading children's books but I wouldn't want a bunch of porn stars in a school reading children's stories either. They are adult entertainers. How do you explain to your child what their day job is? No thanks.

I didn't mention blackface.

I said that the trappings of femininity are the misogynistic version of the antisemitic yellow star. That is, they are a badge girls and women wear to mark out our inferior status and our membership of the sex caste.

Think about how unacceptable it is for women to have hairy legs for example. Why is that? It's because it is non compliance with the badge.

So when men wear our misogynistic badge and they and an audience find it amusing and entertaining it is a profound insult.

If drag were really challenging this it would make women angry about our oppressive sex role and men ashamed about their position of dominance, selfawarded superiority and unearned privilege.

Bringing this into schools is hideous. But unfortunately not terribly surprising considering the current neo-liberal misogynistic climate.

Skin color is innate but biological sex is not? Black and white grease paint is as accurate a representation of Black people as Drag performers are of the female half of the population, which is who they are parodying.

I don’t take their point about blackface - skin colour is innate, biological. Performed gender stereotypes are not. To accept the blackface argument is to accept the idea that make-up defines women. Drag proves that it does not.

Some drag can be misogynist, certainly, but I disagree that it is inherently so.

I don’t believe drag is just about extreme sex-based stereotypes, but you might find the film Paris is Burning illuminating. The New York drag scene in the 80s did indeed involve parodies of e.g. Wall Street traders and other paragons of masculinity, performed by gay men.

(though, Beachcomber and thebewilderness - I do take your point about blackface.)

@RealityHasALiberalBias the question was why don't male performers do hyper masculine drag, if it's just about extreme sex-based stereotypes. Do any men do that?

I'm fine with this too. I don't object to men wearing dresses - actually, I'd rather it was more accepted for men to wear dresses - or people adopting an alter ego. None of that requires me to believe for real that you can be a woman with a knob.

I don't like drag, but I wasn't able to really put my finger on why it felt so wrong to me until I read "Beauty and Misogyny" by Sheila Jeffreys.

She doesn't talk much about drag in the book. What she does talk about is beauty practices and her analysis of them as "harmful cultural practices". She describes beauty practices as being a marker for women's status in male supremacist society; a marker for our inferior status, as us as being defined by men. The trappings of femininity often literally hobble women, they restrict our movement, they tell us that in our natural state we are ugly, smelly and unfuckable. The trappings of femininity mark us out as the sex caste, as lesser, as objects, as body parts rather than whole human beings like men.

We are socialized to accept beauty practices as normal even as fun, glamorous and for ourselves. But beauty practices throughout time and place consistently "other" girls and women.

And now to the bit about drag. I had a light bulb moment when Sheila Jeffreys described beauty practices as being the misogynistic equivalent to the antisemitic yellow star. Beauty practices are our yellow star.

And that's why drag offends and upsets me. Because it is deeply offensive for my oppressor class to find entertainment or pleasure in putting on my yellow star.

Not only would my children not be attending school if drag were to be present there but I would also be sending a copy of Beauty and Misogyny to the headmaster with a letter quoting the section about the yellow star of femininity.

Under male supremacy there is nothing progressive about the trappings of femininity. And men putting them on is not satire, it is profound fundamental misogyny (even when not intended as such).

Where are the white men in blackface teaching children diversity by reading them Tintin in the Congo.

I'm not sure whether this specific act is appropriate for schools, as I haven't seen it, but I would agree that drag acts are usually an adult entertainment.

I disagree that drag per se is sexist or misogynist though. The act only works if the audience knows it's a man - drag highlights how absurd gender stereotypes are, and how heels, make-up, dresses etc do not add up to Woman. It's the very opposite of the TRA's argument.

If a man can do make up and heels better than a woman (and drag queens can certainly do all that stuff far, far better than most women), then that stuff cannot be what makes a woman.

And to the pp who asked why don't they do hyper-masculine drag if it's all about parodying gender stereotypes - that's exactly what drag kings do.

on the simplest level - so long as not remotely sexual - it has to be a good thing that kids see men enjoying dressing up in "women's gear "- and still being clear they are men..... this is extending the definition of man, and not pushing the envelope of being woman....

though I hope it is balanced by other initiatives in the rest of the year around girls/women being able to do anything....

Ds would definitely have a day of unauthorised absence because of this.

I think that drag is sexist. Don't like panto dames either. I would want to know a lot more about this group and their books allowing my DC to participate.

Surely the best way for this headmaster -a man in authority- to break down sexist stereotypes would be for him to do it himself. Occasionally wear something pink and sparkly, high heels, make up and go about his business as normal with no further comment. It's likely to be way more effective than metaphorically screaming 'Look at these unusual GNC men, children!!' by bringing in a special group.

I wonder why this hasn't occurred to him.

AssignedPuuurfectAtBirth

I'm watching this thread unfold with a kind of horrid fascination.

Your fear, anger and frustration are instantly recognisable to me.

And I can see other posters' reaction, and recognise their viewpoint immediately, too.

And I know the difference. It's how exposed you are to, and how much experience you have had of, the creeping and insidious remarketing of the word progressive.

It's all tied up with things like the push to lower the age of puberty blockers for children. Making assumptions about their competence and say over their own bodies at 8, 9, 10. Their say. Not their parents.

The scandalously one-sided dogma that is being disseminated into primary and secondary schools. Telling school-age lesbians that sometimes lesbians like blowjobs.

And if your child comes out as trans and they don't want you to know, you won't be told. And if you disagree, the local authority can be called.

Teen Vogue writing articles promoting anal sex. Calling girls non-prostate owners and writing the clitoris (and therefore their pleasure) out of the entire narrative.

Telling young girls that a man's right to their intimate spaces trumps theirs to privacy.

And now middle-aged men with names like beaver and slag being considered an authority on how to instruct our daughters (and sons) in 'inclusivity'.

And any dissent, both on here, at the school and, increasingly society at large, is viewed as negative and actively discouraged.

I don't understand how anyone can repeatedly read the words that women/children need to be 're-educated', without a chill running down their spine.

This in-depth analysis of whether or not drag is misogynistic is very interesting.

It's been talked about several times on here, before.

I guess it would depend on what specific act you have watched.

Because there's no doubt that some drag acts are misogynistic.

But I can see the high end glamour, being quite appealing.

And I can also totally see how it's a stereotype.

And that's always the problem with stereotypes. Intrinsically, they're not bad. Taken on an individual level.

It's when you apply them, wholesale, and have an expectation based on them, that the problems start.

However. Drag acts are an adult niche entertainment.

People don't take their children to drag queen bars.

So you are already relying on a sanitised version. And a message, that is not the same message you get in a drag queen bar/act. And with names like beaver and slag and popping cherry, I personally would not be happy to place my faith in the marvellous, friendly altruism that people are being expected to buy into.

Especially as you are being given no choice.

But that's not the whole of it.

This group have specifically said they are teaching about hate crime. It's directly linked to transgenderism. Drag acts are not a protected characteristic.

They are not representative of any groups that are.

The people who are saying it's just fun, it's a bit of sparkles, how do you think grooming works? Or indoctrination?

But if you are finding that a bit of a leap, which you might well, let me introduce you to Lactavia. An eight-year-old boy drag act. His name is a play on lactation.

The sinister part to this is that, when he says if your parents disagree, get new parents, it's meant to be cute and funny and progressive.

The whole marketing of this child as a drag queen is meant to be progressive. You are meant to feel that if you disagree you are behind the times, a bit of a prude.

And you may well feel, as the parent, you will ultimately have the influence over your child that you want. That you can temper anything dodgy they learn, with sound commonsense.

Well good luck with that. When we are on the brink of deciding that biological sex doesn't exist and that you're a weird, old-fashioned prig if you don't agree.

This programme about 'the fabulous Lactavia' is aimed children, by the way.

dd and I watched a lot of the iceskating program at the olympics. There were lots of men in sparkly beautiful outfits moving in elegant and incredibly skillful ways. To me that is the sort of performance that shows boys and girls that men can present in different ways and be lauded and not laughed at

Great point. I agree.

Oh and just to say that I acknowledge that other people like drag in it's varied forms and that's fine. Some may take a lot of time and effort and some performers may be respectful toward women. If there are important messages about how society treats women hidden in drag I'd just much rather women were the ones making the point than men pretending to be women or even men pretending they are not pretending to be women.

"Drag Queens are adult entertainers"

Not if they're in panto.

Entertainers come in to schools for a variety of events for pupils. Not all have to be earnest - fun is also important. What's being missed here is how there entertainers were doing in a classroom performance. What were the teachers who wanted them there seeking to achieve by a session of that style? Were those aims met?