Drag Queen Story Time

[LizzyStrata]

First time posting here, so not sure of the etiquette. My apologies if this is the wrong place to raise these concerns.

Reading Borough Council is planning to hold Drag Queen Story Hour events in our libraries during the summer holidays. I’ve written to my MP, my councillors, and the Head of the Library Service to raise concerns. I think drag is entirely inappropriate for children, as it is a form of adult entertainment, highly sexualised and misogynistic, that blurs boundaries and undermines safeguarding.

The response Ive had is simply that they have received very few complaints so no reason to cancel.

Has anyone had any experience of tackling their local library over this issue? Grateful for any tips.

Also, if you live in Berkshire ,would you be willing to write and share your concerns?

thanks!

Has anyone seen Drag Queen Story Hour content on the parenting app My Babbu? Apparently they have teamed up but I can't see anything on it as yet

I don't have access to that parenting app - what is the latest?

Have you seen the latest?

reduxx.info/rest-in-power-drag-queen-story-hour-uk-founder-fundraising-for-convicted-child-sex-offenders-funeral/

Oh gosh this came up on me newsfeed (the death) and it sounded like it was a suspicious death that the police were looking into - somehow that small fact omitted would have suggested a bit of a motive…

TRAs are saying it was statutory rape and the boy was his boyfriend and he was only a cpuple of years older. I can't see any evidence to back this up. Sounds like they're trying to downplay it anyway.

The Daily Mail reports it happened as a teenager.

Several other places report that he was convicted in 1999, which as he was 39 when he died would have made him ~15-16 at the time. I think it checks out.

I might’ve bought that if he didn’t then put himself in a position of working with kids/teens, knowing it was a breech of his post conviction conditions.

A person on the sex offenders register doesn’t accidentally end up working as childrens gymnastics coach!

Besides, can you really see a teenage boy getting a 3 year custodial sentence for a slightly age-imbalanced but otherwise consensual teen romance?

There is no way that would be considerate proportionate/appropriate or a good use of public funds.
We generally try to avoid incarcerating young offenders because it sets them up for long term repercussions/recidivism/introduces them to other offenders.

See transcrimeuk.com/2017/10/30/darren-sewell/

Convicted in 1999 and three years in a young offenders institute.

So, a young boy who was not able to consent then? Under 14. 'just a couple of years older'.....

Oh.... yes.... that makes all the difference.

For what it is worth, I have seen this rhetoric discussed in public before by gay men. A few of these men really don't seem to see the issue....

Must have been about 16 when convicted (born in approx 1983, as The Sun reports him being 39 )

Convicted in 1999, served 3 years (so released approx 2002) made to sign lifetime sexual harm prevention order but was convicted of breaching that order 9 years later (non custodial sentence given in 2011).

Obvs whatever Sewell/Moore was convicted of he’d completed both his sentences, it wasn’t a capital offence and we don’t have a death penalty so he certainly didn’t deserve to die prematurely (just making that clear for the inevitable screenshotters).

Not that we know anything about the circumstances of his death - news reports only say ‘unexplained’, with no mention of criminal acts.
For all we know he could’ve just tottered off drunkenly in his giant drag heels, fallen and hit his head on the curb. Weird/sad/unlucky shit happens to people all the time.

The boy was 14 and he got sent to a young offenders institution for three years because of it and a lifetime ban on contact with children, which he then breached and had a to attend a three year sex offender's treatment programme and had a curfew and electronic tag for six months

They would say that. "Statutory rape" is an American term, which we don't have. It cannot have been that. I'm sure they'll claim it though.

There has always been limited appetite on the part of public prosecutions or jurors to convict clear-cut rape cases, so we simply don't prosecute teenagers for relationships with each other where the younger partner would be a hostile witness.

The most similar legislation we have is legislation relating to children "under 13" which is phrased that way to make it clear that the victim isn't supposed to be on trial. The child witness isn't supposed to have to convince a jury that he or she didn't "consent" as adult women do, but simply to convince a jury that the acts happened.

I do not believe anyone in 1999 would have conducted a trial because a 14 year old had consensual sexual experimentation with a close in age peer. Not even if they were both male. We were under a Labour government that had made it clear that they intended to drop the age of consent for same-sex relationships to match the age of consent for heterosexual sexual activity. The other child was either very much younger, or it was plainly abusive.

Just a couple of years older and they can make a decision on their ID, that the Scots are trying to push forward? Doesn't sound right.