Drag Queen Story Hour - postponed

People who want to mix sex/sexy/sexuality and children... there is a name for them.

Are librarians so very innocent of the ways of the world?

We've got enough straight white authors without needing to fill slots with authors from diverse cultures and backgrounds thanks.

And who said anything about straight white people? There's a lot more to diversity than drag queens. Did you really need that pointed out?

wE mUst pRotEct oUr cHildRen frOM tHe nIce mAn iN tHe frOck

What about the nice man in the monkey costume with the bare arse and massive swinging cock, diggity. Any comment to make on that?

"We've got enough straight white authors without needing to fill slots with authors from diverse cultures and backgrounds thanks."

wE mUst pRotEct oUr cHildRen frOM tHe nIce mAn iN tHe frOck

I don't even understand why libraries are entertaining this. Are there not enough takers for story time without wading straight into this kind of controversy?

@WinterTrees @OldCrone Thank you for providing the links, I couldn't believe what I was seeing and reading ...

The links you provided a few posts up from mine on this page show just how far these people are prepared to push at boundaries and decency for children. Who would've thought that someone who is dressed up in a monkey costume would be an inappropriate sight for children to see at their library's story time reading?

I didn't click on the video link but did read that the monkey went on to shake its hips from side to side, which consequently bounced his penis all over the place, then he simulated having sex.

Shame on the staff at Goodmayes library for not sending this character straight out of their doors upon first glance.

'Pantomime Dame' is not the same as 'Drag Queen'.

Honestly, if Sab Samuel went into schools and libraries to read with children I'd have no objection at all. Assuming he'd done all the same checks volunteers undertake, obviously.

As for the 'published author' bit- he's set up his own company which has published two of his books which he promotes all over the shop. There are no reviews or sales anywhere except on his own website. It's really not like he's passed any kind of publishing criteria.
I have a friend who has done similar, goes into schools and does literacy days. He's qualified. He doesn't get paid at Aida's rates though! And sadly, his books haven't taken off.

In this case 'published' means printed by the organisation this man works for.

It's his own company. So in this case, 'published' means he's printed his own material and sells it on his own website.

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/13975901/officers

Though I love panto, I wouldn't take my child to see one with an actual drag queen in it.

Someone posted an example of a pantomine featuring a drag queen just a few posts above yours 😒

Ah, a Game of Thrones themed preschool story time.

Why the hell not?

Yeah, this is a good point.

No one would invite those actors, in costume, to read stories to kids at the library, because the content of the tv show isn't really kid friendly.

They wouldn't get Natalie Dormer dressed up as Margery Tyrell, or Brian Cox as Logan Roy, either. Quite possibly both might get asked to read as themselves, mainly because they would likely be good at story reading, but those aren't the kinds of roles they would be mentioning to promote it on the website. I suspect they would not be mentioning their sexuality, though.

Has a children's book published equals published children's author

The thing is about facts, is that they are quite hard to argue with

What nonsense. Many 'facts' have a wide interpretation. In this case 'published' means printed by the organisation this man works for. I'd say it's not at all hard to argue that this 'book' - which isn't available on amazon, waterstones or bookshop.org - is flimsy marketing material to get drag queens through library doors.

None of which has any bearing on the second part of my post, about adults presenting in a hyper-sexualised way having no place hosting children's library events, regardless of their literary status. (I guess you could say the dildo monkey was just a 'person in a costume' too. www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/london-library-redbridge-monkey-costume-children-event-b945272.html)

Les Dawson dresses up as a woman. He wasn’t flashing his cock or wearing skin tight leggings so we could see the outline of his meat and two veg, whilst doing it however.

Mrs Browns Boys uses Fuck a lot so I’m not sure that’s suitable for Story Time.

Why anyone can compare this kind of “drag” with the ones charging £150 an hour to read to children, is beyond me.

Are all people in costumes suitable for children? What about the rainbow dildo monkey which made an appearance at a library last year?

www.womenarehuman.com/furry-rainbow-monkey-with-huge-dildo-performs-for-children-at-library/

A pantomime dame is not a drag queen, it's a totally different entertainment form.

It's completely disingenuous of libaries to pretend otherwise.

They are inviting drag queens because they see it as serving their purposes in terms of identity representation with regards to queerness, trans identities, and gay men. The reason they think that is because drag queens are an entertainment form that is associated mainly with gay men and which revolves around the relationship between sexuality and gender expression. It's not something typically considered suitable for kids, it takes place in nightclubs.

Panto dames are actually actors, of any sexuality, it has nothing to do with identity, and they do not represent any kind of marginalized group. They are just guys playing a role on a stage like any other actor. The entertainment form of the panto has different origins, it's interested in reversals but not revolving around sexuality and identity in the same way. It's traditionally a form of theater especially suitable for children.

But why?

Why do we need lesbian grandmothers, black uncles, Asian Aunts, or small kids being asked to relate to people mainly based on their identity characteristics?

It's pertinent for organizations to reflect on whether their employees and programming are reflecting the population overall. To some extent it's within their mandate and responsibility to do those things. But I am not sure where it became the job of the library to make sure kids were exposed to different identity groups or promote any kind of political ideology in their programming.

I can't bear pantomime or drag, especially Mrs Browns Boys. Well done Rochdale for finally protecting children, took long enough.

Has a children's book published equals published children's author

The thing is about facts, is that they are quite hard to argue with.

Honestly the intolerance here is outstanding. It's a person in a costume ffs! God forbid what's going to happen if any of you lot make it to Disneyland

Pantomimes absolutely do

Pantomime and Mrs Brown's Boys don't involve Drag Queens, which is a very specific entertainment form.

Aida H Dee has a title published by Drag Queen Story Hour UK Publishing, dated December 2020, currently unavailable on Amazon and with no customer reviews. I think calling them a 'published children's author' might be quite a stretch, especially given the quality of writing in the 3 line synopsis.

However, they could be at the top of the Sunday Times bestseller list and it still wouldn't make their overtly sexualised - and sexist - presentation any less inappropriate for children's library events.

To be honest I think the whole thing was set up as some money making grift wrapped up in a diversity banner. Probably quite a saturated marked of drag acts all trying to compete with each other. I think most things boil down to £/$ at the end of the day.

Self published, by the look of it.