OK the whole drag story time thing

[Qcng]

I've seen posts on this board before basically completely denouncing drag story time, but I've never really gone along with the perspective that it's such an oh so terrible thing. So I don't join in on those threads. As GC as anyone I actually think, dressing up is fine for girls and boys, these people aren't trying to send a message to children that it's big hair and fake lashes that actually make you a woman, (unlike say, someone like Caitlyn Jenner would send that message). They're sending a message that boys can do dress up too, that being gay is ok, and being a man in makeup is ok.

Anyway, I came across an article (posted by a GC feminist who was rather sarcastic and not at all sympathetic) where the drag queen received online abuse after attending a school for drag story time. So that's what got me thinking really, I don't think anyone should be on the receiving end of a torrent of abuse over something like drag.

I know drag itself is for adults, sexually charged, drugs involved etc and I am completely against "Desmond" and "Lactasia" (sp?) I would never in a million years want children to be encouraged to do drag or be in that scene at all under the age of 18.
Drag story time isn't encouraging that though surely? Like having a clown do tricks in a school, they aren't there saying "you should all start learning to juggle and paint your face now".

In the school setting the drag queens are literally just reading a story, usually with a positive LGB message. They aren't making crude jokes and won't use their same stage name (EG "Flow Job" is just "Flow" and "Popping Cherry" is just "Cherry" etc etc)

Am I being unreasonable in thinking that DQ story time isn't actually that bad, and in fact does send children a positive message particularly to the gender non confirming/LGB/those with LGB family members?

I assume it was the mum (or whoever booked the act) that was bopping on the side?

I’m just a bit confused by it, when did this become a thing? What is the aim?

I’m not especially anti-drag (don’t really have an opinion about drag or any interest in it) but it is an adult entertainment where men dress as a parody of a sexualised woman

I’m just not seeing the link between that and reading stories to 5 year olds.

So they shout that they are teaching their children about diversity. What do they exactly mean by this? Why men dressing like women? Why not someone with no legs or blind reading Braille? Why someone who is dyslexic or has a stutter?

Why teach kids to be kind and understanding when you can teach them to be sassy and bitchy

We got shouted at by a ‘diverse’ woman who said DQ didn’t need training they taught themselves how to teach children about diversity and gender fluidity because there are DIVERSE!

Gosh, think of how much money we could save on teacher training courses.

It is a widely held view that teaching A Levels is very difficult but anyone can do early years.

Because they look all glittery and colourful and have an extravagant personality. Children like that sort of thing.

Children are not all the same. I would have hated it and felt very uncomfortable.

It would have scared me. You could say the same thing about clowns.

I am anti DQST for many reason, most of them listed here, but what drew my attention to all this was the 3 (or was it 4?) sex offenders in Houston Library doing it.

No, they weren't alone with the children and no, not a single child was sexually assaulted or physically harmed, (bet they each went home and got off on it and relived the experience though) it's the blindness that descends when it's lgbT where everyone stops asking basic safeguarding questions and invites the Fox into the hen house that gets me.

Then I started reading and seeing more and more. It's not the same as one panto dame amongst a whole cast (where Peter Pan is a woman) and you can shorten Diamond Goodrim to Diamond and Flow Job to Flo and 'desexualise' it all you like but it's still misogynistic and based in adult entertainment and frankly confusing and not all that great if the adult reading is making it about themselves.

When it was the anniversary of the moon landings and someone thinks, oh I know we will get a man in a dress, make up and heels to read a story and twerk to kids I just don't see the train of thought being all that sensible. How about someone in a tin foil and cardboard box space suit comes in as an astronaut to send the message that you can reach for the moon and be anything you like?

Call it diversity if you like but that is a stretch as it's just completely unrelated.

Looking at videos like the one with the kid in the chair and the drag queen in the booty shorts all I can think is that this has nothing to do with the children at all, this is about the (really quite boring, probably didn't even know drag existed until RuPaul put it on telly) parents celebrating how proud they feel of themselves for being so cool and open minded.

It’s a bit of a dumb down. They don’t teach the children a little dinosaurs, plants or the planets. They teach that a strange man all dressed up can be fun and your best mate!

I can only imagine when that kid grows up and the lawsuits are a rolling in, mum and dad will accidentally delete the footage and say it didn’t happen.

‘Mom - remember when you got that man to do a lap dance for my 5th birthday and I’d asked for Barbie?‘
‘No honey, it was barbie! A girl Barbie! She was barbie! In a long dress. Barbie. Don’t you remember she did a little Ballet dance for you? Not a man in hotpants.’

That would be classes as non contact child abuse wouldnt it?

In ye olden days, a man prancing around and wiggling his bum at little girls would have had the parents after him with pitchforks.

So they shout that they are teaching their children about diversity. What do they exactly mean by this? Why men dressing like women? Why not someone with no legs or blind reading Braille? Why someone who is dyslexic or has a stutter?

Our school has a specialist centre and 62% of our children have an SEND of some description. I wish the drive for diversity extended to people like them.

So actual real women aren't capable of having big personalities or wearing extravagant clothes? They are too dowdy and boring to be able to read a story engagingly to children? A grotesque parody if a woman is better? Ffs.

Yep, apparently so. I mean having just Mhairi Black on her own, a lesbian who became an Member of Parliament at the age of just 20, would just be, like, soooooooo duuuuuullllll. We need to throw in a male adult entertainer who appears to have a drug habit to spice things up a bit! Cos... Glitter, innit?!

In what other context would it be okay for men who make their living as adult entertainers to go into schools and have time with small children? Do we not question the motives of men if they're wearing glitter?

That's how BA ended up hiring a paedophile to represent them at Pride and Houston library had one reading to children. Because they were wearing glitter, no one thought to ask if actually they had a predilection for raping children.

If I had an unhealthy interest in small children, DQSH would seem like a pretty quick and easy way to get close to them. Much easier than becoming a scout leader or priest though we know those are popular choices.

There's a MN thread about one of the videos mentioned above:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3836323-Disturbing-film-of-child-being-involved-in-drag-queen-performance

Our school has a specialist centre and 62% of our children have an SEND of some description. I wish the drive for diversity extended to people like them.

It feels like some diversities are more equal than others doesn't it - and some are just so much more attractive with which to align yourself and invite along to libraries etc.

Might I suggest searching drag kids and find the video of young Desmond dancing for money.

I can imagine that there is really only one reason that a child is encouraged to emulate a hypersexual culture in the name of dressing up.

Oh don't be daft. You know promoting a set of highly sexualised and sexist stereotypes about women to children is a terrible idea.

If you're still feigning ignorance just substitute 'women' for 'disabled people' or 'black people'. Still think it's about empowering boys to be different?! Thought not.

There are two comments on the first page, one in the OP, which amount to 'I know Drag is adult entertainment but surely they wouldn't go that far in front of kids, would they''?

I think you need a wake up call.

Grooming makes it socially acceptable for adults to participate in risky and sexually charged behaviours involving children, or to turn a blind eye to them;
Grooming also makes it socially unacceptable to challenge participants or to uphold safeguarding.

Non-contact abuse involves activities where there is no physical contact. Non-contact abuse includes exposing children to sexual activity.
learning.nspcc.org.uk/child-abuse-and-neglect/child-sexual-abuse/

My mum and I were talking about this and she asked me what 'woke' actually meant; and the only way that I could describe it, was like being 'right-on - but on steroids'.

To be honest, I'm still smarting that the British Library accused me of being 'offensive' for even raising the question.

It's that pesky 'Sacred Caste' again. LangCleg ™️

Indeed, Inedbrati - i raised the issue of 'grooming' to the BL and that was out of order, apparently.

I know my 3 year old would find drag terrifying. I hardly ever wear makeup, and the few times I have put it on to go out (so eyeshadow etc, but no where near drag levels of slap) she finds me scary and brings it up in the days after. I don't think she'd find a drag queen in full regalia fun, I think she'd see him as a monster or dragon and be quite frightened. And if I stood there clapping along I'd be teaching her to not trust her own inner voice.

What's in it for the kids?

I have never, ever seen an answer to that question.

Young kids cannot be LGB or TQ+ because they are young kids. They need to know that families have male or female parent figures in various combinations. Beyond that they don't care. Nor should they.

Many kids are scared by OTT panto dame type performances

All kids are harmed by misogyny

If the aim is to promote literacy it's not then OTT DQ distract from the book

It took decades to shake off the homophobic accusation that gay men take an unhealthy interest in kids. Bringing a sexualised part of gay culture into schools seems unwise. Kids and sexuality do not mix. Ever.

OP this is a good watch in terms of explaining it

I felt uncomfortable about it but couldn’t articulate why