UK Drag Queen Charged for CSA materials

I gave a specific recent example of Mermaids being called out (in the international press) for their (at best) slapdash attitude to safeguarding.

However a quick glance at the first two suggest they are around sex education rather than 'queer theory' and in my opinion the more education people receive the better.

That's a very naive opinion. You really believe that children are better off being "educated" in a harmful way, than not receiving said education?

No, I'm really not interested any more in 'prove this to me to the nth degree while I niggle away' because the upshot is that male people continue to use children in highly inappropriate ways, connected to a highly dodgy agenda (do read the paedophile manifesto; we've all been had as to the intentional planning of how to soften up boundaries to enable offending, it's there in black and white) which women could see plainly, but have been told 'well there's not enough evidence. NAMALT. Be careful people don't think you're silly for saying x and y....'

And the evidence is getting higher daily. As in the mess of Mermaids.

You're either for this, or against it. And yes, those arguing with women shouting the house is on fire at this point are going to need to own what they are helping enable.

But interestingly enough despite saying why aren't we focusing on the actual paedophile in the OP, and that most abuses are by men the children or women know, 100% of the responses are focused on drag queens story time or Mermaids, neither of which have anything to do with the paedophile in question. Why do you insist on focusing on the smallest risk? Why aren't you shouting about the men abusing children?

Please dive deeper into these boards before you come out with stuff about 'not shouting about the men abusing children' - that's what we ARE doing!

Mermaids have enabled a specific 'acceptable' pathway for men to do this. They have HUGE safeguarding issues, but because safeguarding is for boring square normies they ignore it. Therefore where is the best place for an abuser to hide in plain sight? Obviously somewhere where going against safeguarding norms is applauded.

I don't massively have an opinion on drag queens in general - when harmless and appropriate, they are harmless and appropriate. But sex stuff around kids clearly needs appropriate safeguarding. I can't actually believe this needs explaining, but that's because of the success of queer theory.

I would suggest that while taking responsibility we should ensure what we are saying is accurate otherwise why do you expect people will listen? There's enough genuine worries to point out without making stuff up, it starts to sound a bit boy who cried wolf and I'm sure that's not your intention.

And what's wrong with being queer or is that not what you meant?

No, that's very much not what they meant.
Queer Theory is nothing to do with 'being gay'. It's about language and concepts and that boundaries are there to be broken.

I do recommend Kathleen Stock's book 'Material Girls' if you want an overview.

Thanks it will take me to time to read all of those, and I appreciate the links. However a quick glance at the first two suggest they are around sex education rather than 'queer theory' and in my opinion the more education people receive the better. And what's wrong with being queer or is that not what you meant?
Going by this inaccurate thread and the one I read the day before yesterday, where the OP had a doctored screen shot denigrating Mermaids. As well as reading I'll also research myself what was actually said. Honestly thanks though, this is a good start.

"I don't...... I'm just...... I'm GC as they come but......'

All the faux innocence and thought experimenting and deconstructing and NAMALTing and waffling is all directly enabling things like the now five separate safeguarding disasters at Mermaids. (I think. They're coming so thick and fast it's hard to keep track.)

The time's past for all this wide eyed 'but...'. People are going to have to take ownership and responsibility now.

Yelena

There are plenty of Mumsnet threads about the creep of queer theory (zero boundaries) into education, child safeguarding and children's entertainment.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3915879-the-proud-trust

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3701564-Anal-sex-for-13-year-olds-Warwickshire-again?flipped=1

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3795892--All-about-me-Sex-Relationships-primary-education

amp.lbc.co.uk/news/graphic-and-extreme-material-sex-education-school/

And about a zillion threads about the inappropriateness of Mermaids on a number of levels, most recently being appointing a paedophilia advocate to their board of trustees.

Interesting. I haven't defended having drag queens reading in libraries, I've merely pointed out inaccuracies. I've specially said I don't even like drag queens so not sure where you get defending from. Google drag queen story time and you get that company, or American articles. Link to these others you've mentioned and I'll read. Butt monkey wasn't a drag queen according to the article I read.

But interestingly enough despite saying why aren't we focusing on the actual paedophile in the OP, and that most abuses are by men the children or women know, 100% of the responses are focused on drag queens story time or Mermaids, neither of which have anything to do with the paedophile in question. Why do you insist on focusing on the smallest risk? Why aren't you shouting about the men abusing children?

DQST is deeply inappropriate. It's linked heavily and openly to agendas around breaking safeguarding boundaries and normalising sexual behaviour and misogyny around kids - with women who will rush to defend the normalisation and scold people with boundaries and go on and on about NAMALT. Either you are doing this intentionally knowing this and wishing to help get those boundaries down - which enables males some of whom includes the one in the OP, it is in no way in children's interests - or you are being used as a useful idiot in their cause. Either way, it's a bit grim.

Charming chaps not.
< not envy.

There isn't only one Drag Queen doing drag queen story time.

There's the guy who taught the DC to twerk as part of his story- literally stood twerking.

The guy who lay on the floor as the DC crawled all over him.

The guy who wants to teach kids to 'open their legs'.

In the defence of one 'nice guy in a rainbow suit' you are supporting a whole outlook that promotes openness over safeguarding.

We are prioritising safeguarding over the feelings of the nice guy in the rainbow suit. Why isn't he promoting himself as a kids entertainer? Like a Mork and Mindy character? That would be fabulous and no one would complain. It's not about him.

And it's disingenuous to say we aren't complaining about the pedophile. Of course we are.

Mermaids promoted the calendar on social media and their logo was on it. Enough of the wide eyed disingenuous posts.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3478720-Drag-queens-pose-in-bond-age-gear-for-calendar-in-aid-of-Mermaids

That was part of the DQSH scheme. That is why monkey man was booked. Because it’s seen as so progressive and edgy to have adult entertainers read to toddlers. There was another one who as part of his act at a family festival told the audience ‘we need to teach children to open their hearts, their minds and their legs’. This is not about promoting literacy, this is about blurring boundaries about what is acceptable around children. Now who would be invested in pushing adult entertainment at children and blurring boundaries….

I must admit I was nervous putting that search term into google, however o was brave. Having found several articles and images, that's not the same person or his company. It's actually an actor wearing an extremely inappropriate costume booked from an Arts Centre. Safeguarding failure but what's that got to do with drag queens?

Have a google of rainbow dildo butt monkey.
This is who is going into libraries to interact with young children.

Sigh. I answered you question on why drag queen story time. I've said I don't know and I'm not defending it either way. However I will defend lies: He's definitely not wearing a crop top. He's wearing normal make up, if a little heavy for day time use, not evening drag queen make-up. You've refused to denigrate the actual paedophile, just an innocent man running a company reading to children. Now I know you are being an absolute bullshitter and I won't be responding to you further.

Plus he is there in his work capacity. He is a drag queen. That’s his job. He’s going in as part of Drag Queen Story Hour. So if one type of adult entertainer can go in and read in their work capacity, why not another? Why could he not just go in as John, the bloke who’s going to read a story to some kids?

He’s literally got a face full of make up on?? Again, if all he wanted to do was read stories to children, why does he need the make up, crop top and wig? Why even mention he’s a drag queen? Why not just be a bloke who turns up to promote literacy to children?

Well maybe, it looks completely innocent to me, as I say I see articles with photos like that when teenagers are telling their story. Presumably they word it like that so they don't get people applying who WOULDN'T be happy for their bedroom to be in the article, some people are private like that. It stops people wasting their time.

Sigh. Okay, I'll humour you one last time. He has a day outfit he wears for the library. It's not the lingerie you accused him off, it's a perfectly normal rainbow trouser suit and wig, not even make-up. He has other outfits he wears for his club work in the evening. These are different and what you may refer to as women face. This is obvious. I don't agree with blackface and I don't even like drag queens, I'm pointing out lies and disinformation. 'stripper' story time isn't acceptable because it's a nasty old fashioned word for a dancer who works in the sex industry. It's not appropriate for a sex worker to work in a Library in their work capacity. Again, obvious. Will you go on the other misinformation and bullshit irrelevancies or do you actually have an opinion on the actual paedophile in the OP?

@Unseelie source for them being obsessed with showing their underwear? In a pair of trousers? And lots of companies speak at libraries. DBS checked and no red flags raised. So where is the evidence for any of this? This whole thread has been bullshit tarring if brushes and actual lies from start to finish, instead of talking about an ACTUAL paedophile.

So he walks round On a daily basis with fake boobs, big wig and exaggerated make up? Really? I don’t think that’s true do you? So why would stripper story hour not be appropriate? They’re both adult entertainers? Do you think blackface is acceptable? If not why not when you think womanface is acceptable?

As I said I have no idea why people are keen, and I wouldn't say a 'stripper' hour would be appropriate. And drag queens are not the same as sex workers, again. And he isn't in his work attire. More bullshit.