Drag.

[omikron]

I'm still struggling with whether Drag should be considered offensive to women.

On one hand I consider it to be in the same realm as Blackface.

On the other I see it as entertainment that was born out of the gay movement.

Can anyone persuade me to come down on one side or the other?

He didn't do drag though. He was - for the time - an outrageously camp effeminate gay man. I don't ever remember him adopting a 'female' persona. And, he's wickedly funny, which is why he's now something of a 'national treasure' - he's as funny on radio 4 playing Just a Minute.

Oops my mistake. Someone mentioned Dame Edna above.. that is a name I remember as the kind of thing I watched as a child and liked.

This is a very difficult topic. I think intention can be everything (cruel pisstake or genuinely affectionate portrayal), but either way, it's the resulting effect on the "community" being portrayed - whether that's people of colour, or women, that counts, not the intention of the person in drag/blackface. The problem is, there is no unified view on drag in the "community" of women, so for every woman who hates it, there is an equal number who don't see the problem.

There's a much more definitive view on blackface in the "community" of black people (that it's wrong, whatever the intention); however, in the wider community of human beings, many white people continue to not see a problem (e.g., Justin Trudeau, the wokest of woke political leaders, couldn't see the problem until it was spelled out to him).

I went to a party recently. There were 2 white women there portraying black women. One was there as Mel B (so called Scary Spice). She was dressed in a leopard skin outfit, the typical style of that singer. She did not wear black face, nor did she wear an afro. She didn't "act" in any way other than herself, apart from going into character for photos (typical Spice Girls type pose). So her portrayal was more or less just clothes. For the purposes of the event, however, she was saying: I am a black woman, Mel C.

The other was there as Sinitta. She wore jet black paint all over her body (nothing like Sinitta's skin colour) and an afro, as well as an 80s outfit, apparently relevant to that singer's style. She also seemed to be acting "in character" all evening, although that character didn't seem to be anything like the impression I have of Sinitta. Nevertheless, she was, for the night, saying, tonight, I am a black woman, Sinitta.

Both their intentions were good (so I understand). But were they both racist? In the Sinitta example, yes, undoubtedly, even if unintentionally. In the Mel B example, I am not so sure, to be honest.

So drawing an analogy with drag: In scenario 1, is donning particular clothes to be a particular black woman racist? Is a man donning particular clothes to be a particular woman misogyny? In the absence of any other cosmetic embellishments or character behaviour, just the clothes, is it wrong? Just to be clear, neither party is being themselves in this scenario (so not like Julian Clary, who is just being Julian Clary when he wears a skirt), they are being someone else. Or, is it the behaviour/character portrayal/physical embellishments that is the terrible part - the grotesque aspect (in the Sinitta example, the black make up and wig, in a drag scenario, the exaggerated "female" behaviour, e.g. Widow Twanky nagging/fainting/flirting)? If it's the grotesque aspects that are the problem, this seems to be a sliding scale|: at what point does someone tip the scales?

Here's another example of the sliding scale: Robert Webb doing the Flashdance skit for Comic Relief. He did the famous dance, but he also wore a leotard, which indicated female. Was he just being Robert Webb wearing a leotard, or was he saying, I am portraying a woman?. He wore a curly wig to have hair like Jennifer Beals, who is mixed race. So, was he not being Robert Webb? Was he saying, I am being the character from Flashdance, a mixed race woman? IIRC, nobody has condemned it as sexist or racist. Is it because the intention was kind (Comic Relief)? That the dance performance was unexpectedly good? That it's Robert Webb, whom everyone seems to like? It was a grotesque, talented dance aside, he was doing an exaggerated version of Jennifer Beals' acting/dancing performance. Is it that most people don't realise she is black? Is it that most people don't care about a woman, whatever the colour? Why didn't he tip the balance?

PP said History of drag in theatre goes back such a long way. Some are grotesques, yes, but they don’t say all women are like that, just the character they don with the dress and make up.

Does it matter whether it's a real life character that's being portrayed? If not, is that a free pass for blackface, as long as it's not a real person or "not all black people" ? There's a long history/tradition of black face too.

Great post @PJsatMidday

I think women will reasonably disagree on this. I usually don’t have a problem with drag in that I consider it to be making fun of feminine stereotypes (which deserve making fun of) rather than making fun of women or “celebrating” feminine stereotypes.

What I don’t like are some of the misogyny that comes along - terms like “fish” for example. But, misogyny is ripe in all male communities including gay male communities so it’s not surprising or particular to drag.

I think this will depend a lot on why you think it's a problem to impersonate someone, and what you think drag is really doing from a performance/social commentary POV.

I don't think it's inherently offensive to impersonate any group of people, even if its done in an exaggerated or political way. It can be done offensively (making fun of your grandmother at dinner is probably offensive), and historical context can come into it. But that is not the same as it being inherently offensive.

I know someone who thinks certain kinds of make up to impersonate are inherently offensive, so that would obviously lead to different conclusions about drag than the ones I might make.

FWIW, I don't think drag is necessarily really about women, I think it's more about masculinity, femininity, and social roles, and also sexuality and how it interacts with those things. My feelings about particular drag acts tends to reflect whether I agree with the performer's observations about those elements or not.

PJsatMidday

From your post, you seem to be moving in the direction of saying any depiction of anyone other than yourself is a problem. Or especially any real historical person.

I think drag is fundamentally men making fun of women, and that's why I'm uneasy about it.
I have no problem with men acting a female character. I have a problem with men dressing like the biggest tart stereotype going and acting like the bitchiest stereotype going. I was uncomfortable with men in drag DJing/performing in gay bars as a young adult and it's only fairly recently that I can understand why.

I think drag is fundamentally men making fun of women, and that's why I'm uneasy about it.

I agree.

A lot of gay men though have been seen as being feminine in some way, or effeminate if you want to put a not-nice spin on it. So around dress, mannerisms, speech patterns, social activities, and also of course sexuality.

So it seems logical to me that they might be interested in exploring the trappings of that, clothing, make up, etc. Are those things really about women, or a certain kind of gender stereotype? I think in a way they are about both but it's also tre that some people are drawn to the characterisations that typically are associated with the other sex. I think drag is often about that gap between femaleness and maleness when you try and make maleness feminine. That sounds convoluted, so maybe it won't be clear to anyone but me! To put it in another way, drag doesn't remind me much of a stereotype of women, it reminds me of a stereotype of gay men.

This board: we want to abolish gender

Men: Okay, I’m gonna dress in clothes traditionally worn by women

This board: No, not like that

Whether or not it is part of gay culture is irrelevant. Would blackface be any more acceptable if it were on the faces of gay men?

Parodying and mocking the "characteristics" of a group, especially one that is suppressed, is wrong, whether it be blacks or women. I can see no defense of drag on any basis; it is pure misogyny at its finest.

I don't think men inhibiting themselves in the trappings of femininity is what abolishing gender looks like.

What abolishing gender looks like is an interesting question. But it doesn't look like drag acts.

I can see the gay men embracing the "effeminate" argument. I can. I just think the whole thing is based on the feminine being lesser and over sexualized and for laughing at/ using for entertainment.

Its like culturally women are pressured to look a certain way and then someone comes along and take the pee out of the way women are pressured to look while still the pressure remains. And it's more than the dressing as well. It plays on stereotypes of women that are damaging to women. And I don't think men emphasising those stereotypes is a great thing.

I think there's nuance because you know dressing up as the opposite sex and being a really OTT character in the context of a comedy sketch show for example seems ok to me. But there's a line where it starts to feel uncomfortable and offensive. And when you start getting terminology like "fishy" bandied around you know you're well over that line.

Fundamentally, drag is lip synching in bad wigs

Would it be offensive if women staged acts where they dressed up in bare-assed chaps, sang songs about glory-holes, waved exaggerated limp wrists, shrieked in tenor voices about flower-arranging and the new bottom next door, and referred to gay men with a word that referenced the smell of smegma?

I’m guessing yes.

I think it is parodying women and is offensive.

It’s not just clothes either, as some posters have suggested. It’s also fake breasts etc. which to my mind is pretty similar to black-face.

AS I've got older I've increasingly seen it as a fairly unpleasant parody of women, based on an extreme gender stereotype. Therefore I suppose I find it somewhat 'offensive'.
However, just because I disagree with something, almost however strongly, I think there must be more evidence that it does actual harm before I would lobby for any action against it (eg banning). It speaks to my support of free speech and free will as far as it does no material harm.
So yes I disagree with it, but I couldn't support any action against it.

I'd be quite interested in MNHQ organising a Q&A session with a drag queen, like they do with public figures.

I have no issues with drag artists, both male and female because I think it's more social observation than a piss take of either gender.

On the subject of Rupaul's drag race, the US and UK editions are very different, the UK drag scene in my opinion is completely different to the American (this is limited to me seeing drag acts in the UK only, both in bars, usually UK artists and in a theatre set up, i.e. Bianca Del Rio who has done a few huge UK tours)

On the other hand my brother feels very uncomfortable around drag artists, he can't explain why, but from a very young age he would get very upset even at panto with the Dame on stage.

Ive gone off authoritarianism so I've gone off banning things but I would also like to be able to speak freely about why I find drag problematic without someone popping up and saying "homophobe" which seems to inevitably happen. I'm not homophobic and I do understand how it has arisen as part of gay culture. But it still uses the "feminine is lesser/degrading" premise which is why it feels offensive and why it needs to be challenged.

I am also uncomfortable with the promotion of drag into mainstream culture. I would like that not to happen. But that isn't the same as wanting it banned. Banning wouldn't work anyway. Consciousness raising might.

In most states here in the US, blackface is not illegal. That said, it is considered so culturally unacceptable that to engage in it will likely result in significant negative outcomes, such as being fired from a job, ostracism from friends and social circles, and losing any community or elected positions.

I agree that banning drag violates free speech and expression. But I'd love to raise my daughters in a world where it would be considered equally unacceptable to parody women as vapid, worthless, comical creatures, and where our anatomy and physiology aren't the subjects of ridicule and scorn. This isn't entertainment; this is a reminder that men, gay or straight, continue to call the shots. It's the balance of power, dressed up in lipstick and stripper heels.

Even more curious to find support for drag on a feminist forum...the effectiveness of socialization, I suppose. A little sad.

Would it be offensive if women staged acts where they dressed up in bare-assed chaps, sang songs about glory-holes, waved exaggerated limp wrists, shrieked in tenor voices about flower-arranging and the new bottom next door, and referred to gay men with a word that referenced the smell of smegma?

I think some of the comedy aspects of drag can be very problematic. A middle class man making jokes at the expense of working class women, women with substance abuse issues, or making jokes about rape/sexual assault /birth injury is definitely problematic.

I don't think a man wearing a dress and makeup is inherently offensive. I think when it's just about the look, it's interesting and can help break down gender stereotypes.

I think when men choose to wear fake breasts etc, and use them in a potentially erotic/sexualized way, again, that can be really problematic and the men involved should remember that while this is a costume they can take off, women don't have the same option.

I think as drag becomes more mainstream, and you have straight men doing it, that is even more problematic- although I can't explain exactly why I feel that way.

I don't 'get' drag, don't watch it, and don't understand the fascination that people have with it.

I wonder, though, @GeorgeFayne and @WomaninBoots, if holding drag in such contempt and considering it so culturally unacceptable is effectively the same thing as a ban, particularly if you're likely to lose your job/friends/status because of it.
An academic argument, rather than one I necessarily stand by.
What do you think?

Well if drag got to the same level of cultural unacceptability as blackface I would be very amazed but also I wouldn't be upset by that, I'd be pleased by that. But it getting there because society has progressed to the point where it's just not funny or entertaining for anyone is different than just banning it. Don't you think? Even if, in effect, the same thing has happened.

But personally I'm not going to be hounding anyone out of their jobs for performing drag or watching drag or even defending drag. I'm just going to keep saying what I think and how I feel about it.

I think the costume you can't take off element mentioned above is important to recognise.

I think I would be pleased too, in that I would have got what I wanted because I think I am in the right. But perhaps I am wrong, and then we would hugely stigmatise something that has/had a value for lots of people (men, mostly) and still not have had any effect on how women are perceived (eg catty, ornamental, sexual etc).
I wonder if, like the trans debate, the line is crossed when we call drag artists women, rather than acknowledging them for what they are; men playing a caricature of a certain type of woman.