(05-23-2023, 08:26 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-23-2023, 07:09 AM)KingIngram052787 Wrote: [ -> ]To shape the world to how they want it and have complete and utter control over every single aspect of everyone's life, more than they already do. Blackrock, State Street, Vanguard, etc., none of those companies can ever lose money because they own the competition too. They literally own everything and are the biggest investors in every brand and every competitor of those brands. They rule the world, they rule the politicians, and they rule us. Now they just say jump and watch as we all say "how high?"
Hold on a minute, you listed companies. Companies aren't people and they do not have motivations. Who are these people you're talking about? This doesn't sound much different than the eternal accusations against "the bankers", "the diamond merchants", or "the Jews."
Rich, powerful people run these companies and push the direction they want to go. These same people also answer to other rich and powerful investors and board members. Larry Fink (Blackrock's CEO), for example, is the most powerful person on Wall Street, which might make him the most powerful person in the world. They own over $9 trillion in assets, it would be the 3rd largest economy in the world if it were its own country. You don't think these people can just do whatever they want and shape the direction the world decides to go on huge decisions and not have influence over our everyday lives? Surprise, he's also a democrat.
(05-23-2023, 09:42 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (05-23-2023, 09:26 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]They claim sales dropped 20% - but that can be attributed to not just attendance from minors but the "bad press" brought on by the state law and the campaign to pass it. If the governor of your state is on TV everyday telling people your business is bad... I mean... not hard to connect these dots.
I also imagine their suit is partly an emblematic component of the local LGBT push-back on all of DeSantis' posturing and attempts to minimize the "queer community." Not just about dollars and cents.
I don’t think he said their business is bad, just not appropriate for children.
Oh, right, that certainly casts a positive light.
Personally - I don't think drag shows in general are appropriate for young children, but I'm sure there are plenty of PG-13 versions out there that responsible parents could make their own decisions about.
But I'm not naive enough to think this isn't going to hurt the reputation of these venues amongst whatever moderate customer base they may have been able to attract previously.
Some things aren't appropriate for kids, man. It's not our job to tiptoe around that idea. Should we get them watching pg-13 porn at 8 years old, just because the parents want it? What about letting 8-year-olds getting to second base with adults? It's just kissing, right? If those arguments seem absurd to you, it's because they are.
10 years ago, we wouldn't be having this conversation about drag shows. Any isolated incident of this would not be met with a fierce defense by most people, and those who would have defended it would be slapped with the label of sick or perverted. Yet, you slap on an "oppressed" label on dudes with autogynephilia and all of the sudden, people start defending this [BLEEP].
The only reason to justify this is to normalize drag acceptance, which could be done in literally any other venue... not that we need to normalize drag behavior. We can't even have that discussion. Our society is stupid.
(05-23-2023, 09:43 AM)KingIngram052787 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-23-2023, 08:26 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Hold on a minute, you listed companies. Companies aren't people and they do not have motivations. Who are these people you're talking about? This doesn't sound much different than the eternal accusations against "the bankers", "the diamond merchants", or "the Jews."
Rich, powerful people run these companies and push the direction they want to go. These same people also answer to other rich and powerful investors and board members. Larry Fink (Blackrock's CEO), for example, is the most powerful person on Wall Street, which might make him the most powerful person in the world. They own over $9 trillion in assets, it would be the 3rd largest economy in the world if it were its own country. You don't think these people can just do whatever they want and shape the direction the world decides to go on huge decisions and not have influence over our everyday lives? Surprise, he's also a democrat.
Blackrock has many investors who vote for a board who vote for a CEO. If the investors don't agree with the things you are seeing, they can vote their shares against it.
(05-23-2023, 09:55 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (05-23-2023, 09:42 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]I don’t think he said their business is bad, just not appropriate for children.
Oh, right, that certainly casts a positive light.
Personally - I don't think drag shows in general are appropriate for young children, but I'm sure there are plenty of PG-13 versions out there that responsible parents could make their own decisions about.
But I'm not naive enough to think this isn't going to hurt the reputation of these venues amongst whatever moderate customer base they may have been able to attract previously.
Whether the light cast is positive or negative is up to the individual. Personally, I fail to see how allowing children to watch men act out their fetish is, in any way, intellectually or socially stimulating.
Uh oh, he's trying to have that discussion.... quick, let's shut that down.
(05-23-2023, 10:29 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-23-2023, 09:43 AM)KingIngram052787 Wrote: [ -> ]Rich, powerful people run these companies and push the direction they want to go. These same people also answer to other rich and powerful investors and board members. Larry Fink (Blackrock's CEO), for example, is the most powerful person on Wall Street, which might make him the most powerful person in the world. They own over $9 trillion in assets, it would be the 3rd largest economy in the world if it were its own country. You don't think these people can just do whatever they want and shape the direction the world decides to go on huge decisions and not have influence over our everyday lives? Surprise, he's also a democrat.
Blackrock has many investors who vote for a board who vote for a CEO. If the investors don't agree with the things you are seeing, they can vote their shares against it.
He is their majority shareholder, but you're right he could be ousted by the board. But, I think the point you make only further proves my point. He's answering to similar like minded individuals, or at least he is taking Blackrock and influencing their holdings how they want him to.
(05-23-2023, 10:23 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Some things aren't appropriate for kids, man. It's not our job to tiptoe around that idea. Should we get them watching pg-13 porn at 8 years old, just because the parents want it? What about letting 8-year-olds getting to second base with adults? It's just kissing, right? If those arguments seem absurd to you, it's because they are.
10 years ago, we wouldn't be having this conversation about drag shows. Any isolated incident of this would not be met with a fierce defense by most people, and those who would have defended it would be slapped with the label of sick or perverted. Yet, you slap on an "oppressed" label on dudes with autogynephilia and all of the sudden, people start defending this [BLEEP].
The only reason to justify this is to normalize drag acceptance, which could be done in literally any other venue... not that we need to normalize drag behavior. We can't even have that discussion. Our society is stupid.
Should have just led with the last sentence. Clearly, there are some really stupid parents out there or this conversation would not be happening. I don't sympathize with folks taking kids to drag shows. It's inane.
I didn't tiptoe around anything.
Yes, I am sure there are some innocuous versions of this stuff out there, but I still think it's ill-advised to involve children.
I thought it was pretty clear that I'm on the side of parents making these common sense decisions about their children's welfare. There isn't some sudden and urgent need to try and legislate every little tributary of the vast river of child welfare.
The law is nothing more than political posturing anyway.
Do you actually believe it is going to positively alter the course of some kid who may have otherwise seen a chubby dude prance around in a bathing suit a few years before they could get their head around that? I don't.
Young children these days are internet savvy at a very early age and will be exposed to all brands of hideousness. That's real life.
It's up to parents to parent them. Not the governor or state legislature.
We could spend the entire calendar of legislative sessions passing laws to "protect children" if we made a new law for every little common sense decision parents in our state crap the bed on.
I only entered the convo to point out that this local venue's lawsuit was likely more symbolic than monetarily driven, but there's my ten cents since we're here.
I think it’s important to make the distinction that Florida did not target drag queens until the drag queens targeted children.
I'm not alarmed about kids seeing cross dressing. I'm more concerned about performances that may explain and demonstrate things that kids are too young to hear, regardless of if the performers are in drag or not. And I'm most concerned about kids being invited to join in such performances. It happens, it's gross, and those kids are basically being groomed into being someone's twink.
(05-23-2023, 11:40 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]I think it’s important to make the distinction that Florida did not target drag queens until the drag queens targeted children.
Do you really believe there is an actual movement among drag queens to involve children in their wacky little art form?
Or is it more likely that a very small group of questionable parents are unable to draw a line between their involvement and/or enjoyment of drag and making responsible decisions about their kids' sexual education timeline?
I believe it is firmly the latter - and as with
so many other instances, we are simply seeing parents making stupid decisions about how they care for their children.
Here's the definition in the statute being challenged:
Quote:(a) “Adult live performance” means any show, exhibition, or
99 other presentation in front of a live audience which, in whole
100 or in part, depicts or simulates nudity, sexual conduct, sexual
101 excitement, or specific sexual activities as those terms are
102 defined in s. 847.001, lewd conduct, or the lewd exposure of
103 prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts when it:
104 1. Predominantly appeals to a prurient, shameful, or morbid
105 interest;
106 2. Is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the
107 adult community of this state as a whole with respect to what is
108 suitable material or conduct for the age of the child present;
109 and
110 3. Taken as a whole, is without serious literary, artistic,
111 political, or scientific value for the age of the child present.
I added the italics. The definition is pretty objective and easy to understand until you get to the italicized part, then it's totally subjective.
(05-23-2023, 12:02 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (05-23-2023, 11:40 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]I think it’s important to make the distinction that Florida did not target drag queens until the drag queens targeted children.
Do you really believe there is an actual movement among drag queens to involve children in their wacky little art form?
Or is it more likely that a very small group of questionable parents are unable to draw a line between their involvement and/or enjoyment of drag and making responsible decisions about their kids' sexual education timeline?
I believe it is firmly the latter - and as with so many other instances, we are simply seeing parents making stupid decisions about how they care for their children.
I believe there are organizations and movements using drag queens and willing parents to normalize that behavior. And of course, when they received the fully expected pushback, they cry discrimination. It’s simply a step in the process.
(05-23-2023, 12:32 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (05-23-2023, 12:02 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Do you really believe there is an actual movement among drag queens to involve children in their wacky little art form?
Or is it more likely that a very small group of questionable parents are unable to draw a line between their involvement and/or enjoyment of drag and making responsible decisions about their kids' sexual education timeline?
I believe it is firmly the latter - and as with so many other instances, we are simply seeing parents making stupid decisions about how they care for their children.
I believe there are organizations and movements using drag queens and willing parents to normalize that behavior. And of course, when they received the fully expected pushback, they cry discrimination. It’s simply a step in the process.
OK.
Fair enough. I guess that's possible.
I personally don't believe there is any widespread organizing to involve kids in this stuff, but rather isolated incidents of poor parenting, and likely a few performance groups failing to understand (or unwilling to understand) why it isn't appropriate for them to "branch out" to young children.
(05-23-2023, 10:47 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (05-23-2023, 10:23 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Some things aren't appropriate for kids, man. It's not our job to tiptoe around that idea. Should we get them watching pg-13 porn at 8 years old, just because the parents want it? What about letting 8-year-olds getting to second base with adults? It's just kissing, right? If those arguments seem absurd to you, it's because they are.
10 years ago, we wouldn't be having this conversation about drag shows. Any isolated incident of this would not be met with a fierce defense by most people, and those who would have defended it would be slapped with the label of sick or perverted. Yet, you slap on an "oppressed" label on dudes with autogynephilia and all of the sudden, people start defending this [BLEEP].
The only reason to justify this is to normalize drag acceptance, which could be done in literally any other venue... not that we need to normalize drag behavior. We can't even have that discussion. Our society is stupid.
Should have just led with the last sentence. Clearly, there are some really stupid parents out there or this conversation would not be happening. I don't sympathize with folks taking kids to drag shows. It's inane.
I didn't tiptoe around anything.
Yes, I am sure there are some innocuous versions of this stuff out there, but I still think it's ill-advised to involve children.
I thought it was pretty clear that I'm on the side of parents making these common sense decisions about their children's welfare. There isn't some sudden and urgent need to try and legislate every little tributary of the vast river of child welfare.
The law is nothing more than political posturing anyway.
Do you actually believe it is going to positively alter the course of some kid who may have otherwise seen a chubby dude prance around in a bathing suit a few years before they could get their head around that? I don't.
Young children these days are internet savvy at a very early age and will be exposed to all brands of hideousness. That's real life.
It's up to parents to parent them. Not the governor or state legislature.
We could spend the entire calendar of legislative sessions passing laws to "protect children" if we made a new law for every little common sense decision parents in our state crap the bed on.
I only entered the convo to point out that this local venue's lawsuit was likely more symbolic than monetarily driven, but there's my ten cents since we're here.
So if that's the case why have age limits on other vices or rights? Kids get denied the right to drive, to purchase guns, cigarettes, beer, porn, entrance to bars and clubs, the right to vote...we've got a society full of prohibitions based on age. Why is this thing different when the dangers associated with it for children are so very clear? And why are these gigantic corporations so vested in the acceptance of
this particular vice? I don't agree with the explanation above that it's about control...no CEO is sitting in his office thinking, "I can wait to make Main Street accept drag queens so I'm going to have Target advertise 'tuckable swimwear' to really stick it to them" (except maybe the media guys who get tv ratings from it). So why is drag suddenly this huge issue in our society when it's a rather insignificant minority and why have MCWW's taken up this mantle of obsession?
(05-23-2023, 12:56 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-23-2023, 10:47 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Should have just led with the last sentence. Clearly, there are some really stupid parents out there or this conversation would not be happening. I don't sympathize with folks taking kids to drag shows. It's inane.
I didn't tiptoe around anything.
Yes, I am sure there are some innocuous versions of this stuff out there, but I still think it's ill-advised to involve children.
I thought it was pretty clear that I'm on the side of parents making these common sense decisions about their children's welfare. There isn't some sudden and urgent need to try and legislate every little tributary of the vast river of child welfare.
The law is nothing more than political posturing anyway.
Do you actually believe it is going to positively alter the course of some kid who may have otherwise seen a chubby dude prance around in a bathing suit a few years before they could get their head around that? I don't.
Young children these days are internet savvy at a very early age and will be exposed to all brands of hideousness. That's real life.
It's up to parents to parent them. Not the governor or state legislature.
We could spend the entire calendar of legislative sessions passing laws to "protect children" if we made a new law for every little common sense decision parents in our state crap the bed on.
I only entered the convo to point out that this local venue's lawsuit was likely more symbolic than monetarily driven, but there's my ten cents since we're here.
So if that's the case why have age limits on other vices or rights? Kids get denied the right to drive, to purchase guns, cigarettes, beer, porn, entrance to bars and clubs, the right to vote...we've got a society full of prohibitions based on age. Why is this thing different when the dangers associated with it for children are so very clear? And why are these gigantic corporations so vested in the acceptance of this particular vice? I don't agree with the explanation above that it's about control...no CEO is sitting in his office thinking, "I can wait to make Main Street accept drag queens so I'm going to have Target advertise 'tuckable swimwear' to really stick it to them" (except maybe the media guys who get tv ratings from it). So why is drag suddenly this huge issue in our society when it's a rather insignificant minority and why have MCWW's taken up this mantle of obsession?
You're kind-of all over the place here. I'll just deal with what seems directed my way.
I already answered your question in bold, but I'll summarize and amend the points already made on it.
It's not widespread.
Certainly not widespread enough for me to seriously compare it to driving a car or buying cigarettes.
It is relatively a new kid on the block in terms of an issue that may or may not require some governance.
It should be a relatively easy thing for responsible parents to handle without government guidelines. Exceptions would be infinitesimal in number to the list of things you've compared it to.
Lastly, the notion that drag is a "huge issue" is inaccurate IMO.
I don't think it IS a huge issue. It's simply a fringe issue being magnified because it's divisive. And divisive sells like [BLEEP] hot cakes right now.
On the children and cross dressing:
My wife watched this "reality" show called I am Jazz.
It was a show over many seasons where a real set of parents raised their real son as a daughter throughout his childhood. They even put this poor child through a sex change well before their 18th birthday. Years later that same child now Person regrets the decision and lives in a world of depression.
(05-23-2023, 02:26 PM)OG-JAGFAN Wrote: [ -> ]On the children and cross dressing:
My wife watched this "reality" show called I am Jazz.
It was a show over many seasons where a real set of parents raised their real son as a daughter throughout his childhood. They even put this poor child through a sex change well before their 18th birthday. Years later that same child now Person regrets the decision and lives in a world of depression.
I wonder what the parents think now?
.gif "Laughing")
#
hammock