New Study proves Pundit was right

[SHARK]

A simplistic mind wrote this law.

What passed law is even being referenced in these comments? Legit question. I have heard of stuff like a Tennessee law banning adult cabaret, or adult-oriented (presumably sexualized) performances. But I have not heard of any law that bans crossdressing or men wearing makeup. (Cuz like a ton of people in theatre and the movie industry do the latter all the time, if I remember right.)

I'm all for free speech, and I'd be against a law that bans one's right to wear what they want to wear so long as they aren't walking around nude or whatnot. But in such instances as it is specifically adult oriented (heavily sexualized) content being banned from consumption by minors... that's a good thing to my mind whether it's lgbtq or whatever content or straight heteronormative content or whatnot. Because minors cannot give informed consent to sexual activity. So why should they be able to give informed consent to pornographic or erotic content consumption? Especially with live actors in-person?

Greetings!

Exactly, KindaMeh.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Just listen to the Liberals REEEing!!! REEE! REEE! REEE!

Nobody REEing here, dumbass.

You think Ren Fairs and Shakespeare performances should be adults-only, you're a fucking idiot.

You think it doesn't apply to those things, you're a fucking idiot.

REEE away Sharky. REE away about how you didn't think about the ramifications.  This was a dumb law written by people without a sense of humor, or who lack the ability to think beyond a single stage of thinking, or both. A simplistic mind wrote this law.

Greetings!

As far as I have heard, such laws that have been passed in various states have specifically been targeted at Drag shows provided to an audience primarily of CHILDREN No one has said anything about prohibiting Shakespeare or Renaissance Faires.

The only DUMBASSES and FUCKING IDIOTS I see are the degenerate scum trying to tap dance and white knight in their efforts to defend and protect fucking groomers continuing to have access to our community's children.

I would encourage you, Mistwell, to seriously reconsider your philosophy concerning this topic.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Just listen to the Liberals REEEing!!! REEE! REEE! REEE!

Nobody REEing here, dumbass.

You think Ren Fairs and Shakespeare performances should be adults-only, you're a fucking idiot.

You think it doesn't apply to those things, you're a fucking idiot.

REEE away Sharky. REE away about how you didn't think about the ramifications.  This was a dumb law written by people without a sense of humor, or who lack the ability to think beyond a single stage of thinking, or both. A simplistic mind wrote this law.

Greetings!

Oh, yes. Another observation, Mistwell. I am not "REEEING" about anything. The only people I see REEEING are Rainbow Hippos crying that they can't continue to do DRAG SHOWS AIMED AT CHILDREN--and well, Liberals, like you.

Most normal parents and upstanding people that I talk to, have generally thought it is a good thing to protect children from fucking degenerate groomers.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[jhkim]

Usually it's the progressive left who has no sense of humor and doesn't think through the logical ramifications of their advocacy. This time, it's the right. Where the F is your sense of humor and how have you not thought through all the things in our society which involve drag but not sex shows? You're literally banning all-mens-cast Shakespeare performances, despite that being the traditional form of Shakespeare going back to the 1600s! How have you found yourself as someone who thinks all drag is sex shows, when you know you've seen men in drag in your life and not found it offensive or about sex?

The laws are banning drag shows FOR CHILDREN.  You are a liar and a poltroon...

As far as I have heard, such laws that have been passed in various states have specifically been targeted at Drag shows provided to an audience primarily of CHILDREN No one has said anything about prohibiting Shakespeare or Renaissance Faires.

This is incorrect. The anti-drag laws don't just ban performances for young children. For example, the Nebraska bill introduced would make it a crime for anyone younger than 19 to attend a drag performance.

https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/108/PDF/Intro/LB371.pdf

Someone who is 18 can vote and fight in war, but it is a criminal act to let them attend a drag performance? R-rated movies means those under 17 require an accompanying parent or guardian. This is much more restrictive than that with criminal penalties.

The Arizona bill would ban any drag performance within a quarter mile of a school, church, or park.

https://legiscan.com/AZ/bill/SB1030/2023

The Tennessee law (that was signed in March) bans drag shows on any public property. So, for example, they would be banned at public universities - even if it is for adults and no minors are present. It also bans such performances anywhere a non-adult *might* be present, even if it is intended for adults and no one under 18 is present.

https://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/113/Bill/SB0003.pdf

[SHARK]

Usually it's the progressive left who has no sense of humor and doesn't think through the logical ramifications of their advocacy. This time, it's the right. Where the F is your sense of humor and how have you not thought through all the things in our society which involve drag but not sex shows? You're literally banning all-mens-cast Shakespeare performances, despite that being the traditional form of Shakespeare going back to the 1600s! How have you found yourself as someone who thinks all drag is sex shows, when you know you've seen men in drag in your life and not found it offensive or about sex?

The laws are banning drag shows FOR CHILDREN.  You are a liar and a poltroon...

As far as I have heard, such laws that have been passed in various states have specifically been targeted at Drag shows provided to an audience primarily of CHILDREN No one has said anything about prohibiting Shakespeare or Renaissance Faires.

This is incorrect. The anti-drag laws don't just ban performances for young children. For example, the Nebraska bill introduced would make it a crime for anyone younger than 19 to attend a drag performance.

https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/108/PDF/Intro/LB371.pdf

Someone who is 18 can vote and fight in war, but it is a criminal act to let them attend a drag performance? R-rated movies means those under 17 require an accompanying parent or guardian. This is much more restrictive than that with criminal penalties.

The Arizona bill would ban any drag performance within a quarter mile of a school, church, or park.

https://legiscan.com/AZ/bill/SB1030/2023

The Tennessee law (that was signed in March) bans drag shows on any public property. So, for example, they would be banned at public universities - even if it is for adults and no minors are present. It also bans such performances anywhere a non-adult *might* be present, even if it is intended for adults and no one under 18 is present.

https://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/113/Bill/SB0003.pdf

Greetings!

Good, Jhkim. That all sounds great! You do know, that most states require people to be *21* years of age to drink alcohol, right? So, yeah. 21 sounds good. Restrict fucking DRAG SHOWS to bars and other such clubs intended for adults, period. That way, there cn still be opportunities for the fucking degenerates to get their freak on. No need for anyone under the age of 21 to need to be exposed to such BS though. Drag shows should be treated just like fucking porn. Restrict them to the fucking seedy clubs and warehouse dumpster fires out in the sticks, far away from chrches, schools, houses, and as much of anything else, too. That reminds me, too. Here in good Red States, we often TAX THE FUCK out of anything remotely deemed sinful. Alcohol, sexshops, fucking porn, and fuck, add Drag shows! TAX THE FUCK OUT OF THEM. And, add HUGE fucking license fees for them, too. So many opportunities to tax them down! *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[jhkim]

I'm all for free speech, and I'd be against a law that bans one's right to wear what they want to wear so long as they aren't walking around nude or whatnot. But in such instances as it is specifically adult oriented (heavily sexualized) content being banned from consumption by minors... that's a good thing to my mind whether it's lgbtq or whatever content or straight heteronormative content or whatnot. Because minors cannot give informed consent to sexual activity. So why should they be able to give informed consent to pornographic or erotic content consumption? Especially with live actors in-person?

To KindaMeh, drag performances are not necessarily pornographic or erotic, though. For example, the movie "Kinky Boots" (2005) is rated PG-13 for "thematic material involving sexuality, and for language". Characters talk about sex - but that's about it. My extended family (parents, sisters, kids) all went to see the Kinky Boots musical - including my son was 14 at the time. The material was completely PG-13.

And there are drag performances that are tamer than that. The new laws could also apply to, say, the Mulan Jr musical, which is centered on cross-dressing as its central theme.

If parents want to prevent their children from seeing or performing in Mulan Jr, then that should be their choice - but I don't think it should be decided by the government rather than parents.

Restrict fucking DRAG SHOWS to bars and other such clubs intended for adults, period. That way, there cn still be opportunities for the fucking degenerates to get their freak on. No need for anyone under the age of 21 to need to be exposed to such BS though. Drag shows should be treated just like fucking porn. Restrict them to the fucking seedy clubs and warehouse dumpster fires out in the sticks, far away from chrches, schools, houses, and as much of anything else, too. That reminds me, too. Here in good Red States, we often TAX THE FUCK out of anything remotely deemed sinful. Alcohol, sexshops, fucking porn, and fuck, add Drag shows! TAX THE FUCK OUT OF THEM.

I'm fine with taxing alcohol or taxing drag performance. I would not be fine with deeming alcohol sinful to the point that one has to go into a seedy club out in the sticks to drink it.

Personally, I'm happy to have a glass of wine with my dinner at a restaurant with my family. If you think alcohol is sinful, that's your choice. Don't drink it - don't let your kids drink it. Calling on the government to ban alcohol in all restaurants is going too far, in my opinion.

[SHARK]

I'm all for free speech, and I'd be against a law that bans one's right to wear what they want to wear so long as they aren't walking around nude or whatnot. But in such instances as it is specifically adult oriented (heavily sexualized) content being banned from consumption by minors... that's a good thing to my mind whether it's lgbtq or whatever content or straight heteronormative content or whatnot. Because minors cannot give informed consent to sexual activity. So why should they be able to give informed consent to pornographic or erotic content consumption? Especially with live actors in-person?

To KindaMeh, drag performances are not necessarily pornographic or erotic, though. For example, the movie "Kinky Boots" (2005) is rated PG-13 for "thematic material involving sexuality, and for language". Characters talk about sex - but that's about it. My extended family (parents, sisters, kids) all went to see the Kinky Boots musical - including my son was 14 at the time. The material was completely PG-13.

And there are drag performances that are tamer than that. The new laws could also apply to, say, the Mulan Jr musical, which is centered on cross-dressing as its central theme.

If parents want to prevent their children from seeing or performing in Mulan Jr, then that should be their choice - but I don't think it should be decided by the government rather than parents.

Restrict fucking DRAG SHOWS to bars and other such clubs intended for adults, period. That way, there cn still be opportunities for the fucking degenerates to get their freak on. No need for anyone under the age of 21 to need to be exposed to such BS though. Drag shows should be treated just like fucking porn. Restrict them to the fucking seedy clubs and warehouse dumpster fires out in the sticks, far away from chrches, schools, houses, and as much of anything else, too. That reminds me, too. Here in good Red States, we often TAX THE FUCK out of anything remotely deemed sinful. Alcohol, sexshops, fucking porn, and fuck, add Drag shows! TAX THE FUCK OUT OF THEM.

I'm fine with taxing alcohol or taxing drag performance. I would not be fine with deeming alcohol sinful to the point that one has to go into a seedy club out in the sticks to drink it.

Personally, I'm happy to have a glass of wine with my dinner at a restaurant with my family. If you think alcohol is sinful, that's your choice. Don't drink it - don't let your kids drink it. Calling on the government to ban alcohol in all restaurants is going too far, in my opinion.

Greetings!

Jhkim, I didn't say anything about *banning* alcohol, or being forced to go out somewhere in the sticks, just to drink. That is why I *LAUGHED* concerning sinful and sin taxes. That's just what such extra taxes and regulations do though. By the way--"Sin Taxes"--are popular not just in Red States, but BLUE states as well, like California. California has HUGE taxes tacked onto any alcohol purchases, as well as other things that the government wants to make money from, or doesn't generally like or approve of--like guns.

As far as what some people view as "sinful"--well, that varies, too. Some Mormons believe that drinking coffee is sinful. Alcohol isn't sold here on Sundays. Well, anything 3.2 or less is available, but not hard liquor. Whatever. I don't really care. I like some alcohol, and drink it occasionally, socially.

I was also referencing ZONING. Governments ZONE different stuff all the time. Like how porn shops, sex shops, stripper bars--they all have to be isolated, and not near schools, hospitals, churches, and so on.

I pointed those things out as precedents. Stop trying to get me to argue about stupid shit in the weeds, man.

My main point was to treat fucking Drag shows like porn shops. That's an idea. Whatever. If you like fucking Drag shows, great! That degenerate bullshit won't fly here though. And I was referencing that yeah, different states can choose and they should--how to zone, tax, and deal with stuff, including the fucking Drag shows. If some states want to ban them, well, GOOD! Let them ban the fucking degenerates! Groomers have NO BUSINESS being anywhere near children.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[Eirikrautha]

I pointed those things out as precedents. Stop trying to get me to argue about stupid shit in the weeds, man.

That's all he has.  Neither he nor Mistwell are willing to come out and say that they want children to be exposed to lewd drag shows, despite the fact that this is what is being banned.  Well, this and the potential loopholes (like there are underaged college freshmen and venues will sell tickets to adults but let them bring minors, so we need to ban it from anyplace a minor might be).  We all know leftists are liars and will look for those loopholes to groom kids.  And that's what this is about, grooming kids to think that sexual kinks are ok (and hoping kids will explore them).

[KindaMeh]

Usually it's the progressive left who has no sense of humor and doesn't think through the logical ramifications of their advocacy. This time, it's the right. Where the F is your sense of humor and how have you not thought through all the things in our society which involve drag but not sex shows? You're literally banning all-mens-cast Shakespeare performances, despite that being the traditional form of Shakespeare going back to the 1600s! How have you found yourself as someone who thinks all drag is sex shows, when you know you've seen men in drag in your life and not found it offensive or about sex?

The laws are banning drag shows FOR CHILDREN.  You are a liar and a poltroon...

As far as I have heard, such laws that have been passed in various states have specifically been targeted at Drag shows provided to an audience primarily of CHILDREN No one has said anything about prohibiting Shakespeare or Renaissance Faires.

This is incorrect. The anti-drag laws don't just ban performances for young children. For example, the Nebraska bill introduced would make it a crime for anyone younger than 19 to attend a drag performance.

https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/108/PDF/Intro/LB371.pdf

Someone who is 18 can vote and fight in war, but it is a criminal act to let them attend a drag performance? R-rated movies means those under 17 require an accompanying parent or guardian. This is much more restrictive than that with criminal penalties.

The Arizona bill would ban any drag performance within a quarter mile of a school, church, or park.

https://legiscan.com/AZ/bill/SB1030/2023

The Tennessee law (that was signed in March) bans drag shows on any public property. So, for example, they would be banned at public universities - even if it is for adults and no minors are present. It also bans such performances anywhere a non-adult *might* be present, even if it is intended for adults and no one under 18 is present.

https://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/113/Bill/SB0003.pdf

The first two bills don't seem likely to pass despite a firm Republican presence in those states. Which to me says that the right is not really trending authoritarian on this sort of thing in practice. Also, I'd imagine that as time goes on the more extreme  and weird bill proposals that aren't passing (and remember that even if these were somehow passed they'd have to get past the courts and a Supreme Court run mostly by republicans that considers gender a protected class, whereas I myself would've considered "gender expression" more along the lines of discriminating on the basis of sex, since gender is kinda BS) will be less likely to come into play. Gotta remember that things have been trending more and more left wing on lgbtq stuff for years, and not just on the left. I see no evidence therefore of current genuine oppression or threat of rising authoritarianism in the long run from the right. Though the left has done and been pushing for some pretty sketchy stuff on lgbtq lately. Ignoring first amendment rights, parents' rights, and more.

For the last one cited, seems like it was an amendment to the Tennessee law I referenced earlier. I'm a little grey on this one, but it's worth noting that if this is literally the best you can find that would seem to imply America is doing well enough on this issue. I do feel like if a state controls public land and funds and runs public institutions it is up to them whether they want markedly adult content like stripping or the like on that land. If this overreaches into lands and institutions not run or held by the state but by local authority then yes I might be somewhat displeased. Though honestly local authority flows from the state level to begin with under the Constitution, so I can't exactly claim the state doesn't have the authority to do it.

Remember though that the original bill, which this only modifies, specifically calls out markedly adult-oriented performances. On which note, I think it reasonable that such performances should make an active effort not to allow kids in. So yeah, you shouldn't allow a non-adult to potentially be present. Do your due diligence.

[KindaMeh]

I'm all for free speech, and I'd be against a law that bans one's right to wear what they want to wear so long as they aren't walking around nude or whatnot. But in such instances as it is specifically adult oriented (heavily sexualized) content being banned from consumption by minors... that's a good thing to my mind whether it's lgbtq or whatever content or straight heteronormative content or whatnot. Because minors cannot give informed consent to sexual activity. So why should they be able to give informed consent to pornographic or erotic content consumption? Especially with live actors in-person?

To KindaMeh, drag performances are not necessarily pornographic or erotic, though. For example, the movie "Kinky Boots" (2005) is rated PG-13 for "thematic material involving sexuality, and for language". Characters talk about sex - but that's about it. My extended family (parents, sisters, kids) all went to see the Kinky Boots musical - including my son was 14 at the time. The material was completely PG-13.

And there are drag performances that are tamer than that. The new laws could also apply to, say, the Mulan Jr musical, which is centered on cross-dressing as its central theme.

If parents want to prevent their children from seeing or performing in Mulan Jr, then that should be their choice - but I don't think it should be decided by the government rather than parents.

Restrict fucking DRAG SHOWS to bars and other such clubs intended for adults, period. That way, there cn still be opportunities for the fucking degenerates to get their freak on. No need for anyone under the age of 21 to need to be exposed to such BS though. Drag shows should be treated just like fucking porn. Restrict them to the fucking seedy clubs and warehouse dumpster fires out in the sticks, far away from chrches, schools, houses, and as much of anything else, too. That reminds me, too. Here in good Red States, we often TAX THE FUCK out of anything remotely deemed sinful. Alcohol, sexshops, fucking porn, and fuck, add Drag shows! TAX THE FUCK OUT OF THEM.

I'm fine with taxing alcohol or taxing drag performance. I would not be fine with deeming alcohol sinful to the point that one has to go into a seedy club out in the sticks to drink it.

Personally, I'm happy to have a glass of wine with my dinner at a restaurant with my family. If you think alcohol is sinful, that's your choice. Don't drink it - don't let your kids drink it. Calling on the government to ban alcohol in all restaurants is going too far, in my opinion.

I specifically stated that I am pro-free speech and dressing however (apart from literal nudity and the like). I then went on record that SPECIFICALLY for adult-cabaret or adult oriented performances kids shouldn't be allowed to consent to such things. No strip clubs should allow kids in either. It's not an lgbtq thing, it's a societal recognition of the importance of informed consent, which children cannot give.


Also, not that I'm for banning alcohol, but why shouldn't personal moral beliefs have a place at the polls? If you really think something is morally wrong or sinful, maybe you should be honest with yourself and with society about that fact. If a large group of people gets disutility out of alcohol being available to everyone, say also to minors, in unlimited quantities, then isn't there a market failure if that isn't reflected in pricing? The left is all in favor of talking about market externalities for the environment or whatever their latest forced health crusade is... but the moment morals derived from religion come into play as a motivating factor for individuals with respect to what they value and what might cause them distress, then suddenly it's gone too far. One should be able to vote one's conscience, and at times that means voting in accordance with religious beliefs. I'm not going to begrudge the people who do that simply because their motivations may include religion or even beliefs I don't agree with. I'll debate them on the specifics of their proposed policy and on the validity of those beliefs, but that doesn't make their vote invalid in the public sphere simply because they believe in sin.

[SHARK]

I pointed those things out as precedents. Stop trying to get me to argue about stupid shit in the weeds, man.

That's all he has.  Neither he nor Mistwell are willing to come out and say that they want children to be exposed to lewd drag shows, despite the fact that this is what is being banned.  Well, this and the potential loopholes (like there are underaged college freshmen and venues will sell tickets to adults but let them bring minors, so we need to ban it from anyplace a minor might be).  We all know leftists are liars and will look for those loopholes to groom kids.  And that's what this is about, grooming kids to think that sexual kinks are ok (and hoping kids will explore them).

Greetings!

SO TRUE! Damn right, my friend!

All this BS, "Well, what about Shakespeare? What about Renaissance Faires? What about alcohol? OH MY GOD! REEE!"

We aren't talking about any of that. We are talking about targeting the fucking degenerate groomers that want to corrupt and plunder children, through various avenues of seeming "innocent" and otherwise "Innocuous" methods. Good lawmakers and laws are aimed at shutting all that BS down. That means locking these fucking scum out of doing their fucking perverted dancing, rubbing their shit on kids, teasing kids, and all that you mentioned about. It's exactly that. A sly, choked goggling effort to get close so these grooming fuckers can mentally, emotionally, and sexually confuse and corrupt children.

That BS makes me grind my teeth. I see parents all over the country going crazy, too. I don't blame them. Then, we of course have the fucking atrocity that happened in Tennessee. Yeah, a fucking TRANS MONSTER slaughtered innocent adults and children. Fuck these animals. The goddamn lawyers and police just better smarten the fuck up real fast, or people are gonna get down to brass tacks and start taking care of this BS right and proper. These governors and politicians know this is for fucking REAL, so they better step up and get shit done. They better get shit done as to what PARENTS WANT. Not the fucking degenerates. The politicians don't want to read in the news that 10,000 parents marched down somewhere and strung two dozen fucking groomers up by the tallest fucking trees, while the police stood by and applauded.

That isn't a scenario the politicians want to see flashed on national news, so yeah, they definitely have a fire lit under their asses to step up and get this BS checked. 

Whatever, you know? Good states are gonna do what they need to do. Fuck what the groomers cry about, and their cucked fucking Liberal white knights that want to defend them, and protect their degeneracy.

This country's leaders need to pay far more attention to what NORMAL PEOPLE DEMAND. TO WHAT NORMAL PARENTS DEMAND. Instead of always worrying about the fucking freaks, the degenerates, and the groomers. The politicians either wake the fuck up to that reality, or they can continue to fuck around and find out.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[GeekyBugle]

It should be possible to have a society where liberals and conservatives can both their lives, and LGBT people are free to do the same things as straight people. Conservatives shouldn't be legally required to express support or use proper pronouns, but equally, LGBT people should be able to live and work and play without being condemned as a danger to children just for existing in public. New anti-drag laws are defining things like simply wearing a dress as indecent behavior that children shouldn't see, which is ridiculous. Banning nudity or strip shows is one thing, but banning wearing a dress or makeup is completely different.

Drag is fundamentally sexual, you know it as well as we do.

NOT doing your sexual show in front of children doesn't violate your rights, but you go on speaking in favor of pedos.

I have seen Drag shows before. They are entirely very sexual. They are gross, lewd, and absolutely degenerate. Anyone attempting to convince you otherwise is GASLIGHTING you.

Like fashion shows or music videos or many other entertainment forms, drag shows vary widely, from tame to explicit. There are very sexually explicit music videos, from Madonna to Peaches. But music videos and music performances aren't all the extreme, so it would be ridiculous to ban all music videos from being seen in public.

Drag shows have a long history from popular military drag shows in WWII.

From the same period, Bugs Bunny frequently appeared in drag as part of children's entertainment. Drag characters appeared in popular primetime sitcoms like M.A.S.H. and All in the Family.

Like any other show, drag shows should be classified by how sexually explicit they are, not banned simply because they are drag.

--

I've been to a bunch of rock concerts, and they've been sexual and full of drinking, drugs, lewdness. But I'm not saying that all concerts should all be banned from anywhere children might see them, because it is going to vary. Our culture is full of sexuality - from girls wearing string bikinis on the beach to sex scenes on television and especially the Internet. I'd prefer there to be less overt sexuality in general. But having the government run in to ban anything sexually suggestive from public isn't the solution.

It's up to the parents whether they want to allow kids to watch Bugs Bunny or M.A.S.H. -- and at what age. Likewise for any other drag.

Again lying...

Not everytime someone dresses as the opposite sex is Drag, because Drag is explicitly sexual, but you carry on with the pedo-apologetics my dude.

This is the same playbook you lefties use every time, conflate two things: One clear degeneracy and the other not and then argue that banning the degenerate one is banning the other. FUCK OFF.

[Garry G]

I pointed those things out as precedents. Stop trying to get me to argue about stupid shit in the weeds, man.

That's all he has.  Neither he nor Mistwell are willing to come out and say that they want children to be exposed to lewd drag shows, despite the fact that this is what is being banned.  Well, this and the potential loopholes (like there are underaged college freshmen and venues will sell tickets to adults but let them bring minors, so we need to ban it from anyplace a minor might be).  We all know leftists are liars and will look for those loopholes to groom kids.  And that's what this is about, grooming kids to think that sexual kinks are ok (and hoping kids will explore them).

Greetings!

SO TRUE! Damn right, my friend!

All this BS, "Well, what about Shakespeare? What about Renaissance Faires? What about alcohol? OH MY GOD! REEE!"

We aren't talking about any of that. We are talking about targeting the fucking degenerate groomers that want to corrupt and plunder children, through various avenues of seeming "innocent" and otherwise "Innocuous" methods. Good lawmakers and laws are aimed at shutting all that BS down. That means locking these fucking scum out of doing their fucking perverted dancing, rubbing their shit on kids, teasing kids, and all that you mentioned about. It's exactly that. A sly, choked goggling effort to get close so these grooming fuckers can mentally, emotionally, and sexually confuse and corrupt children.

That BS makes me grind my teeth. I see parents all over the country going crazy, too. I don't blame them. Then, we of course have the fucking atrocity that happened in Tennessee. Yeah, a fucking TRANS MONSTER slaughtered innocent adults and children. Fuck these animals. The goddamn lawyers and police just better smarten the fuck up real fast, or people are gonna get down to brass tacks and start taking care of this BS right and proper. These governors and politicians know this is for fucking REAL, so they better step up and get shit done. They better get shit done as to what PARENTS WANT. Not the fucking degenerates. The politicians don't want to read in the news that 10,000 parents marched down somewhere and strung two dozen fucking groomers up by the tallest fucking trees, while the police stood by and applauded.

That isn't a scenario the politicians want to see flashed on national news, so yeah, they definitely have a fire lit under their asses to step up and get this BS checked. 

Whatever, you know? Good states are gonna do what they need to do. Fuck what the groomers cry about, and their cucked fucking Liberal white knights that want to defend them, and protect their degeneracy.

This country's leaders need to pay far more attention to what NORMAL PEOPLE DEMAND. TO WHAT NORMAL PARENTS DEMAND. Instead of always worrying about the fucking freaks, the degenerates, and the groomers. The politicians either wake the fuck up to that reality, or they can continue to fuck around and find out.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Greetings!

Too true.

I am so glad you brought up the fucking TRAN MONSTER slaughtering people. Like you I was sickened by it.

It also reminds me of a girl I knew at University who was from Dunblane, a delightful little town near Stirling, Scotland and home to the celebrated tennis player Andy Murray.

Great guy Andy but I digress.

She was what you would expect in a girl, a pale red haired beauty who nevertheless lacked the morality and intelligence of us men and had chosen a social science. She was concerned about an incident in the town not many years before. She turned to me and said "Mister G", I always encourage formality with girls, "I can't help but feel hatred for all people with the same background as the person who committed such an atrocity! Can this be a reasonable thing?"

I have of course lifted the signs of her distinctive country brogue which gave even more sign of her naivete. I talk about her naivete but what of mine? Putting a comforting hand on her shoulder I told her she should not expect the same treatment from others of the perpetrators background as most people may not be completely morally pure but they try and few are so heinous.

Now as an older man reading your words and looking back I realise how mistaken I was. I should have told her to live in perpetual fear and perhaps she has shared the fate of her hometown friends. I haven't gazed into her green eyes in more than 20 years.

I am with you Sharkboy, we must guard against these MONSTERS and oppress the mercilessly despite the REEING of their pathetic enablers.

Mind the cundie,

GarryG

[Garry G]

It should be possible to have a society where liberals and conservatives can both their lives, and LGBT people are free to do the same things as straight people. Conservatives shouldn't be legally required to express support or use proper pronouns, but equally, LGBT people should be able to live and work and play without being condemned as a danger to children just for existing in public. New anti-drag laws are defining things like simply wearing a dress as indecent behavior that children shouldn't see, which is ridiculous. Banning nudity or strip shows is one thing, but banning wearing a dress or makeup is completely different.

Drag is fundamentally sexual, you know it as well as we do.

NOT doing your sexual show in front of children doesn't violate your rights, but you go on speaking in favor of pedos.

I have seen Drag shows before. They are entirely very sexual. They are gross, lewd, and absolutely degenerate. Anyone attempting to convince you otherwise is GASLIGHTING you.

Like fashion shows or music videos or many other entertainment forms, drag shows vary widely, from tame to explicit. There are very sexually explicit music videos, from Madonna to Peaches. But music videos and music performances aren't all the extreme, so it would be ridiculous to ban all music videos from being seen in public.

Drag shows have a long history from popular military drag shows in WWII.

From the same period, Bugs Bunny frequently appeared in drag as part of children's entertainment. Drag characters appeared in popular primetime sitcoms like M.A.S.H. and All in the Family.

Like any other show, drag shows should be classified by how sexually explicit they are, not banned simply because they are drag.

--

I've been to a bunch of rock concerts, and they've been sexual and full of drinking, drugs, lewdness. But I'm not saying that all concerts should all be banned from anywhere children might see them, because it is going to vary. Our culture is full of sexuality - from girls wearing string bikinis on the beach to sex scenes on television and especially the Internet. I'd prefer there to be less overt sexuality in general. But having the government run in to ban anything sexually suggestive from public isn't the solution.

It's up to the parents whether they want to allow kids to watch Bugs Bunny or M.A.S.H. -- and at what age. Likewise for any other drag.

Again lying...

Not everytime someone dresses as the opposite sex is Drag, because Drag is explicitly sexual, but you carry on with the pedo-apologetics my dude.

This is the same playbook you lefties use every time, conflate two things: One clear degeneracy and the other not and then argue that banning the degenerate one is banning the other. FUCK OFF.

This is weird because you're just wrong. Literally every time somebody dresses as the opposite sex it's drag. It may be that English isn't your first language but drag is the word that is used for dressing up as the opposite sex for whatever reason. It's not a particularly new word either, anybody dressing as the opposite sex is doing drag. Look it up likesay, give it a go if you fancy.

[GeekyBugle]

Which of these images isn't sexual?

https://www.google.com/search?q=drag+show&client=firefox-b-lm&sxsrf=APwXEdcf1F1zAuYFe_w55mtaB8rfxguyeQ:1685744245631&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiDn8XXzqX_AhVJJkQIHaNiB3gQ_AUoAXoECAIQAw&biw=1173&bih=824&dpr=1.09

You leftists know damn well what we're talking but want to deflect and conflate in order to protect the degenerates and pedos.