Drag queens pose in bond age gear for calendar in aid of Mermaids

No, sueanddumplings. It is not frivolous.

It is about the protection of children against potential predators.

I'm curious about this 'bond age gear'. Is it a smart suit, with a concealed Walther PPK, a watch that fires a mini rocket and a shoe that conceals half a pound of plastic explosive?

A calendar of pictures of men in sexual and kink costumes and posing? On behalf of a children's charity?

There's your red flag, right there.

By everyone commenting on this praising it or hating against it they have done exactly what they wanted to achieve which is to start a discussion and make people think. Out of everyone that read the articles there was probably a larger amount of people that actually liked it and looking into it and maybe had there mind changed on the matter rather than the people who have nothing better do other than complain

I don’t think it’s a case of gay men only putting their hands in their pockets for sexualised material rather than kittens but it’s more of a case of the drag queens wanting to do something fun and in aid of charity. Most of the people that the calendar was sold to would kno the queens and migjt even be friends with them.
To be honest a lot of people may have just bought the calendar because they knew the people in it.
I don’t think the calendar is really that sexualised, yes it has the bondage aspect but fetishism is widely used in photography and artistic ways to make a nice image.

I understand a lot of people views on this however I think this whole thread has mostly been a case of tryping before they think. It’s a calendar of people in makeup (some of which are trans and do drag, which for the record is comepltly different things) to raise money for a charity which has been successful as it has not only sold, it’s been in number newspapers and has had an impact on people both positive and negative to think

Has nobody taken a second to think that maybe the Calendar was produced and targeted towards adults to buy which made money to give to children?

Yes, I have thought that... and it doesn't make it any better. If those adults are so concerned about the welfare of children then I would assume they could put their hands in their pockets for a calender of fluffy kittens or whatever. The idea that gay men would only support a children's charity if their cocks are being appealed in one way or another is frankly, repellent (and homophobic).

Ditto the Greggs calendar. It is wholly inappropriate to use sexualised content to raise money for children, regardless of whom the content is targeted at, the fact that we have lost sight of that as a society is extremely worrying.

Daily Mail is celebrating drag queens & transgender beauties again today in Australia

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6662399/Transgender-beauties-drag-queens-bare-souls-international-pageant.html

Has nobody taken a second to think that maybe the Calendar was produced and targeted towards adults to buy which made money to give to children? As it Is a Newcastle calendar it was probably directed towards the Newcastle Gay bars and the people in those bars would know the queens and the locations. yes it is sexualised and may have taboo ideas behind it but if it was designed for the people who are likely to see the humour in that I don't see anything wrong with it.

the only reason there is an issue with it is because its drag queens and a topic that a lot of parents are scared of, Greggs done a charity calendar where they were all naked holding iced buns infant of their breasts, all proceeds went to children in need! that calendar wasn't aimed at children just like this one isn't

The world has gone mad
I'm glad mine are all to old or free thinking enough not to follow this new fad of changing gender.
A few of dd past friends from old schools are into this, she's blocked them from her social media now.
It will settle in a few years and we'll be left with the ones who really do want to trans.

twitter.com/lilylilymaynard/status/1045326441553031168

Lily took a screenshot which is good because last time I looked, the instagram post she linked to was there and now it's gone!

Take a screenshot. Archive if possible

Would you be able to link to it Orchid?

I think they deleted that photo but I saw it at the time. There is still one standing at the bottom of the ladder wearing a Stonewall Acceptance without Exception T-shirt

I remember ACs ‘bottom of the loft ladder holding a girl guide badge’ picture

That's truly shocking, I didn't know about that. Where was that published?

Does that mean Aimee not only knew, Aimee thinks it's something to joke about?

Inappropriate, but not surprising. this story peaked 2 of my mates though who have been 'you terf' type commenting me for months and months when I criticize Mermaids. They now suddenly see the problem with this 'charity' and its aims and wants and so on. Amazing how such a positive story can do such a thing to people who previously purposely stuck their heads in the sand

Agree, Zeugma.

The 'person' 2nd from left is tied to the beam;

I remember ACs ‘bottom of the loft ladder holding a girl guide badge’ picture.

The subtext is ‘we are untouchable.’ Where does such confidence come from i wonder ?

Just catching up with this.

Here's the thing: when I was a child, 'drag' meant Danny la Rue on The Good Old Days, dressed in full Edwardian fig with perfect hair and make-up, feather boa, picture hat and parasol, singing 'On Mother Kelly's Doorstep'. And if you asked, your mum would say 'yes, that man is dressed like a lady'. End of story. Think no more about it.

Now it's men looking like something from an extreme horror movie, in ripped fishnets, fright wigs and leather (or actually tacky pleather ) bondage gear, chaining each other up in a torture dungeon. On a calendar. Sold to benefit a charity. That purports to 'help' children and young people, who are presumably supposed to embrace all of this sado-masochistic stuff with joyful open arms in the name of 'inclusion'.

I make no bones about it, I'm not a fan of drag no matter what its supposed benign intentions but this? This is repellent, grubby and deeply sinister.

You cannot complain to the Charity Commission without also complaining to the charity. I have complained to Mermaids and will also follow this up with the Charity Commission.

Good point about Lily and Aimee, Joan.

Acceptance is not a virtue. It's simply a description of someone capitulating to someone else. In some contexts, this is a good thing. In others it's abuse. To elevate it to a virtue that must be practiced at all times is a religious idea, which is very evident when you look at the broad remit Stonewall have set themselves now.

This.

Plus the fact you could put almost anything in place of X and still snarl at people to get over it

"Some people don't believe in your made up gender identity", for instance.

Joan Summers

"the Web and feminists have been almost alone in standing up to it for a long time. The backlash will be on women's rights too. I don't know how to escape it because they have colonised our movements all so thoroughly."

You put this so well. This is what I see, they infiltrate where they see an angle that suits their purposes. They are somewhat baffling, the income of Mermaids was only £317,000.00 to March 2018 so they have to piggyback onto others to raise their profile and operate.