Yeah, I know, Im saying instead you could reply to what he specifically said. It’s your example after all, spare us a few words to explain why you cited it, so far all youve done is share the link and then ignore the substance of his reply by saying “I guess we’ll never see eye to eye”
Yea I got it was for me but you’re just ignoring the points I raised. Your issue is that if happened at all. Can you at least acknowledge it’s not as bad as you thought or that steps were taking to minimise any “damage” that could be done?
No issue if you personally wanted to keep your kids at home if this was taking place but that doesn’t make it inherently dangerous does it?
1 Like
If he were to say that, he’d be wrong because he’s not a very nice man!
Wonder what Greta would have to say? ‘It’s good for the environment’ most likely and there would be synchronised wanking and finger blasting over what an amazing show of humanitarianism she has shown.
3 Likes
It’s not as dangerous as it could be true.
As to the body of your reply I did read it
Now fair enough if you think those points minimise it but even with those qualifiers I still feel uneasy about the whole thing.
Nevermind that kids can easily get round the information they’ve not been told by the schools e.g. older siblings and internet social media but as you say parents should monitor that but then how realistic can we expect that to be.
Why?
I’ll be back later to split this topic, so it can get back to the topic of thoroughly likeable chap Andrew Tate.
But I’ve spent enough time arguing about drag for now, I’ve got a 2 week old child I’m trying to force to watch Ru Paul’s Drag Race against her will.
3 Likes
He had a wank over the drag Queen.
Sorry Electrifying - completely uncalled for.
Definitely no sarcasm or bias in this post!
I just wonder what happens if he is found not guilty. Do people retract their statements?
I was worried I might have made it too subtle!
1 Like
The reason this matters is because it’s an example of someone who in one area of their life publicly engages in sexually explicit activities. That tells you something about their attitude towards sex. No school should take chances with that. Likewise you fire a teacher if they are a stripper or on onlyfans or something similar.
It’s not minor. You have an adult man boasting about butt plugs etc. around children and he’s invited a drag queen in - a friend? a fellow groomer? We don’t know. Hence, we remove any possible risk.
7 Likes
This shit is so current year, just a few years ago people would not even support this nonsense, even drag queens don’t support shows/stories in front of kids
4 Likes
Will you also expand this to jokes which are discriminatory in nature?
I just don’t think primary school kids being exposed to drag like that is ideal.
And fine my example may be relatively benign compared to the wild stuff @Dr_Strangepass posted which @JakeyBoy agreed many of it was inappropriate but this was a local story I remembered. I posted because you guys were looking for examples.
Now I don’t really want to spend my Sunday evening talking about the validity of drag in schools with people on the internet.
1 Like
Right, but we’re talking about kids being exposed to inappropriate material and content. In this case, they weren’t? The article doesnt allege that the show had any sexual content, and the act went by “Flo”, and seemingly at no point by the extended version of the name. So Im still missing the harm done.
The sex education bit and the drag queen coming to school during Pride Week seemed to be disconnected events to me, from my reading? Did I misread part of the article?
From my reading, the sex ed part was one thing, very inappropriate in my eyes, no arguments there, and then seperately the school had a drag queen come in during Pride week, which even if I concede is inappropriate, is a totally different kettle of fish to butt plugs and dildos. The bit I described as fairly minor was a drag queen comin in during Pride week, not the sex ed bit, for absolute clarity.
Goddamn it I said I was done for now.
None of this stuff should be in schools this shouldn’t even be a discussion
3 Likes
Exposed how? Is it an issue to have them learn that people are different?
I’m just gonna go all primary school kid myself here and just keep asking why?
Would you have the same concerns about say, a war vertran talking to kids about Iraq or Afghanistan? Not ideal for me either but I get why it might happen.
Where is your personal line? And once more, why?
I would like to ask what the benefit is?
3 Likes
Presumably this person was personally affected by the legislation and has a story to tell. Same as a war pilot might.
If you’re going to invite someone to speak on section 28, why do they have to be in drag?
It was an admirable topic. Why cause controversy when many people may take issue, which they did ( for whatever reason).
And for me as others have said it is sexualised when you look at the context of Flowjobs name, tweets and costume.
If a veteran came with their guns as props etc and talked in detail of how they blew off people’s heads then yes I’d have a problem as well.
Also if they were tweeting wild stuff.
Anyways this is my last post on the topic