Drag Queen Storytime at my local library (photo attached)

[Carla786]

I had a lovely trip to my local library yesterday. Spent a long time there choosing books, basically the whole time there was a very noisy toddler event going on in the next room. I didn't mind, they host a lot of stuff for various people & that's good.

As I left, I looked at the posters of various things they were advertising. I saw one for 'Mama G', clearly a drag queen, which I photographed for identification purposes. I thought this nonsense of drag story hours might be quietening down, but clearly not at my library. I'd never seen them advertise anything like that before 🤦‍♀️

Checking the photo when I got home, I saw the event had taken place that day, while I was choosing my books. I wasn't listening particularly hard, but from what I heard it sounded more like a 'panto dame' style event than anything sexualised. It still seems odd and inadvisable though. If a drag Queen wants to do panto style entertainment for kids too, he should have a separate line in that, rather than mixing it up. 'Drag queen shows ' are by nature sexual and adult, so 'drag queen' shows blur boundaries whatever the content/intention.

I agree : only point would be that parents choose to attend the session, as with panto, but I get the point that the council funding a drag event is questionable.

Why is council funding drag events questionable exactly? Are councils not meant to serve gay men, or do gay men not pay taxes? Do we go back to section 28 and pretend they don't exist?

Aha, now, checking the details, it seems Mama G does call himself a pantomime dame, not a drag queen.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/pantomime-dame-mama-g-responds-25440383&ved=2ahUKEwit_7Gu376SAxXAiP0HHaf_F-8QFnoECEAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0ncd40jcYV2Fg2qd8B4HIw

Otoh the event was billed as part of LGBT History Month, which sounds more like they saw it as a drag queen thing.

Of course not! There's plenty of ways councils can serve gay men aside from drag events. Gay men = drag is lazy imo. Plenty of gay men don't like drag even, and most are not drag queens.

The thread is too long for me to catch up with but I'll just add this, which I think sums it up, they are targeting kids for a reason - grooming. In Plain Sight:

I understand that, but why does that mean councils shouldn't fund it? What's the issue with public money being used for this, compared to supporting any other performance or art form?

@ThatBlackCat you're another poster who's mentioned grooming. What do you think they're grooming them for exactly?
Also you seem to be be under the misapprehension that older adults or homeless people can't read. That's very judgemental of you.

Incidentally, re LGBT History Month, I think it's fine for toddlers to know gay people are a thing or hear basic detail about say, people who campaigned for equal partnership etc rights. I think some attempts to be more detailed backfire though. Eg. I've seen explanations like 'It used to be illegal to be gay in the UK' - whereas the more specific truth, that it was illegal for men to have sex with men in the UK is obviously not appropriate for young kids as sexual, but simplified explanations can arguably give the wrong impression. This is true for a lot of subjects imo : from education I got in primary school, I for a long time thought that Britain fought WW2 to save Jews from persecution, when in fact this was of course not the case..
I'm not really sure how, if Mama G is a panto dame, that relates to LGBT History Month then. Arguably that could give toddlers the impression that men who like men all wear crazy makeup & dresses etc. Arguably centres men too, which a lot of LGBT History resources seem to.

Tbf, pps have given quite a few examples of drag queens who have performed at care homes.

Did you know at least one of his sessions is reported to have featured twerking?

If you could have been bothered to read the thread you'd have seen several examples of people posting where drag artists have visited vulnerable adults to perform for them. They don't do storytime, because older people and adults are not children, and are generally capable of reading books for themselves.

And no, I genuinely don't know what you believe they're grooming them for. What is it?

There really should be no reason for males to dress up as 'dames' in pantomime. The practice started during the Shakespeare era when females were not allowed to act. That there are still males in the position of dames I find is offensive. I mean, why? What's the point? Why do we have males as dames in this day and age, when women are now allowed to act. This is all misogyny caked into misogyny plastered on top of misogyny. And only those who are not brainwashed can see this.

LOL. Drag acts have been popular and mainstream since the days of music hall. They were a key element of Entertainment Corps performances during the war. Drag acts like Danny La Rue, Hinge & Bracket etc were constantly on TV back in the day, not to mention Dame Edna Everage in the 70s and 80s.

’OAPS’ have been watching drag as mainstream entertainment all their lives. They’re not shocked by it.

This is about storytime. There is literally no reason a male cannot go into a library and read to children without dressing up as an over-sexualised vile and disgusting form of a woman. There is no reason at all it's needed.

Funny how none of the posters who claim drag storytime is a means to groom children will explain what they mean by 'grooming'. Grooming for what? Being kind to others? Being fabulous? Filth indeed!

'Dame Edna Everage' was a character, not drag. He was dressed as an older woman, not a sexualised type of 'bimbo'. I'm sure (if it hasn't already) someone will also bring up Mrs Doubtfire. Thinking they have a point. Men dressed up as elderly and (in Mrs Doubtfire's case) dowdy women is not even remotely in the same stratosphere as drag that is a vulgar hyper-sexualised caricature of women with massive breasts 3 quarters out of the dress.

I'm not certain most of these were drag as such. Drag is done specifically by gay men and that's a big element of it. Les Patterson was not gay, most of the WW2 entertainers probably weren't, Hinge & Brackett no.

Danny LaRue would be an in-between case, as he was, but he wasn't able to be out until later.

Tbf, Mama G does not appear to have been wearing a sexual costume. The twerking video, though...

So you can't justify or explain your accusation, shows how credible it is then.

They're probably thinking it's meant to encourage stuff like Desmond is Amazing, a preteen boy whose sexualised drag performances are very disturbing. I don't think this is always the intention but it does definitely seem creepy when the drag queens behave inappropriately.

Just saw this. It's rather homophobic to think obscene caricatures of women = gay. Councils can fund LGB things WITHOUT having males dressing up as disgusting obscene caricatures of women. Saying gay = drag and = obscene caricatures of women is deeply homophobic.

This is Desmond, for context.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_is_Amazing