- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If Drag Queens intentions are pure, why don't they simply wear their everyday clothes
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:13 pm to AggieHank86
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:13 pm to AggieHank86
quote:You didn't really think that through, did you?
while group (a) feels a need to demonize group
This was never about demonizing a group. It was about demonizing an activity, in this case that activity is grooming.
E.g., I don't demonize heroin addicts, but I'd object strenuously to them shooting up during a Children's Story Hour. I don't demonize nudists, but I'd object strenuously to them displaying themselves during a Children's Story Hour.
1
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:13 pm to roadGator
quote:I am sure this is true. The question is whether those are individuals who would have done so anyway, and how many will "turn" who otherwise would not. I doubt anyone can answer those questions yet.
goal of the desensitization is to eventually turn all these kids into gays, or trannies, or queers, or furries, or drag queens.quote:
With the help of parents some will turn
quote:I suspect that more than one Ph.D. candidate is working on a thesis addressing these questions. I suspect that the answer is multi-faceted, but basically boils down to our society always looking for something new and different to provide it with entertainment. We went from (a) Billy Crystal in Soap to (b) Will and Grace. Gays have "played out" as something new and different, so the entertainment machine went looking for something newer and more-sensational.
How else to we explain the rise in trans kids and now even drag kids being highlighted. You mentioned something about kids and trendy. Where do these trends come from?
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:15 pm to roadGator
quote:Admittedly, I am having some fun by responding with a bit of hyperbole to an entire thread of histrionic hyperbole.
Did he say that or are you doing that which you loathe?
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:18 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:I look to the DoJ and the ABA, who basically define that term as a first-person activity, by which a SPECIFIC offender engages in activities targeted at a SPECIFIC target, as opposed to just chumming the waters in hopes that some gay somewhere will benefit from it some undefined time in the future.
What pray tell (or should we say prey tell) do you suppose grooming is?
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:20 pm to AggieHank86
From Soap to will and grace to drag story time to drag kids tv show to what’s next?
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:26 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
) feels a need to demonize group (b).
Cries about people using pop psychology, attempts a psychoanalysis on multiple people simultaneously.
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:26 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:I considered the language QUITE carefully. Group A (comprised of 90% of the posters in this thread) cannot accept that Group B (me and two or three others) genuinely believe that the goal of this organization is something less than a desire to frick small children. As such, Group A feels compelled to attack Group B in very personal ways.
while group (a) feels a need to demonize group (b)quote:
You didn't really think that through, did you?
quote:And my post did not SAY that you demonize addicts or nudists. It SAID that you have been demonizing (i) those who opine that addicts may have different origins than you believe or (ii) those who opine that many nudists do not engage in naturism solely in the hope of participating in vast outdoor orgies.
I don't demonize heroin addicts, but I'd object strenuously to them shooting up during a Children's Story Hour. I don't demonize nudists, but I'd object strenuously to them displaying themselves during a Children's Story Hour.
The response in this thread from Group A is that anyone willing to consider a non-orgy basis for nudism is automatically a supporter of mass orgies.
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:28 pm to roadGator
quote:Idiocracy?
From Soap to will and grace to drag story time to drag kids tv show to what’s next?
Seriously, I have no idea. But they will find something.
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:31 pm to AggieHank86
quote:Imitation and related psychopathy is a well understood concept in developmental psychology.
I doubt anyone can answer those questions yet.
So btw is denial.
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:33 pm to AggieHank86
quote:How does your posit play without the weasel word?
solely in the hope of participating in vast outdoor orgies
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:35 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:Yes. As Roadie and I were discussing, there is no question that this is occurring to some extent. The question is "to what extent?"
Imitation and related psychopathy is a well understood concept in developmental psychology.
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:38 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
So, we are in agreement that this sort of Story Hour is "desensitization" rather than first-person "grooming." I certainly agree that it has that aspect to it and that some level of desensitization is a goal of the organization.
Well desensitization is literally a component of grooming. It's the whole point of the idea that someone is "slowly" changing someone's opinion/morals to accept something they typically wouldn't.
quote:
By contrast, I think the goal of the desensitization is just to reduce stigma. And a handful of posters seem to think that even the idea of reducing stigma is anathema to Western Civilization.
As someone trying to argue above the fray, do you really not understand the philosophical implications of consistently eroding any and all barriers, and continuously pushing "everything is ok as long as it doesn't physically hurt someone?"
See the above about densensitization. If drag, as you state, is meant to "reduce stigma," then it's meant to normalize perversion - and drag queens themselves will say the whole point of drag is to twist gender norms, aka a perverse act ( definition - perversion: the changing of something so that it is not what it was or should be:
)- which in term is meant to make it seem more normal and acceptable, which in turn is meant to encourage kids to accept moral perversion and be more willing to partake, practice, and experiment.
It's literally grooming.
If the goal is to reduce stigma, then the goal is to "make it more acceptable so more people do it, and engage in communities of sexual perversion." The goal is to change kids sexual concepts and beliefs period. And that's grooming.
This post was edited on 6/16/22 at 12:40 pm
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:39 pm to AggieHank86
quote:Yet nudists can and do participate uncontroversially in children's schooling activities.
The response in this thread from Group A is that anyone willing to consider a non-orgy basis for nudism is automatically a supporter of mass orgies.
They simply do it WITH THEIR CLOTHES ON!
... Which again returns us to the OP:
"If Drag Queens intentions are pure, why don't they simply wear their everyday clothes?"
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:45 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Yet nudists can and do participate uncontroversially in children's schooling activities.
Ya know, when the first posters called him a "groomer", i laughed it off.
Seeing that he feverishly posted his idiotic defense well into the night, only to wake in the morning and continue, I'm just not so sure.
One thing I AM sure of is that he's legitimately sick.
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:48 pm to Freauxzen
I agree. Most of the drags aren’t grooming the kids for sex. They are grooming them to become part of the lifestyle.
That’s why we have generation drag. The tv show hyping children in drag.
That’s why we have generation drag. The tv show hyping children in drag.
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:55 pm to AggieHank86
quote:Negative!
there is no question that this is occurring to some extent. The question is "to what extent?"
The question is why, when children are involved, risk ANY extent at all?
It is the same question which arises with males "identifying" as female being legally allowed access to women's changing rooms, showering and restroom facilities.
Some such biological males have no nefarious intent at all. But "some" doesn't quite do it for the numerous victims of such intent, does it?
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:55 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
I am unsure what thread you have been reading. I have repeatedly acknowledged that the Story Hour DOES desensitize
and is a part of grooming
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:57 pm to Freauxzen
I THINK that your are saying that "All grooming includes an element of desensitization, even if not all desensitization is part of a pattern of grooming."
I can agree with that premise.
From there, you seem to indicate that certain "barriers" should NOT be desensitized. From your phrasing, I infer that you also acknowledge that other barriers SHOULD be desensitized. (e.g. the signing of Jackie Robinson was clearly part of a pattern of desensitization aimed to gaining acceptance for Black players in MLB).
Which takes us back, yet again, to the question of whether intolerance toward gays/trannies and/or drag performers falls into the first category or the second. Your use of the term "perversion" tends to indicated that you consider that particular barrier to belong in Category One.
In other words, you seem to believe that "Gay Acceptance" (shorthand) is "Bad For Society."
You are certainly entitled to that view. I just don't share it.
I can agree with that premise.
From there, you seem to indicate that certain "barriers" should NOT be desensitized. From your phrasing, I infer that you also acknowledge that other barriers SHOULD be desensitized. (e.g. the signing of Jackie Robinson was clearly part of a pattern of desensitization aimed to gaining acceptance for Black players in MLB).
Which takes us back, yet again, to the question of whether intolerance toward gays/trannies and/or drag performers falls into the first category or the second. Your use of the term "perversion" tends to indicated that you consider that particular barrier to belong in Category One.
In other words, you seem to believe that "Gay Acceptance" (shorthand) is "Bad For Society."
You are certainly entitled to that view. I just don't share it.
Posted on 6/16/22 at 12:57 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Because they are PERFORMERS. It is their NATURE.
Seriously, people, have you ever attended a Drag Show? It is basically burlesque, with folks wearing the "wrong" clothes." Is anyone actually SURPRISED that flamboyant burlesque performers engage in attention-seeking behavior?
Fine, but not for CHILDREN. Get it?
Page 21 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News