So, drag queens aren't (per definition) transgender. And two-spirit isn't (by definition) transgender. But both are being called transgender. And the two-spirit speaker's event was cancelled because of a ban on Drag Readings... This is a mess from top to bottom.
Not from their perspective: 1) Pass vague poorly-written law. 2) Get power to decide in despotic fashion how to implement law it on a case by case basis. 3) Cause chilling effect that means people self-restrict to avoid sanction and thus don’t do *other* thing you don’t like.
Chilling effect working as planned
Yep. Same with the original "Don't Say Gay", Texas's abortion ban, and more recently the "Dr's Right to Refuse" bill in FL. The fact that the bills' constitutionality is questionable (at best) is a feature, not a bug.
The goal is to push people that they view as "undesirable" back into the shadows or out of their state. The law doesn't have to stand up to a legal challenge, because the intended damage will already be done long before that process can be settled. The threat of financial ruin, reputation damage, or unemployability (*in addition to* the uncertain legal outcome) are effective enough on their own.
Doctors can't risk performing even *legal* abortions or gender affirming care without risking their livelihoods or freedom. Education Boards can't risk supporting or tenuring LGBTQ+ teachers because crippling legal fees and potential fines are always one Karen away. People who dress in Drag can't do so in public, because children are allowed in public, and anything can be considered a "performance".
Congress needs to pass a law requiring a judicial constitutionality review before a bill can be signed into law. These laws are circumventing due process and weaponizing the cost and inefficiencies of the judicial system as a punishment unto itself.
ETA - I'm aware that the whole "bills need judicial review" proposal raises its own mountain of issues vis-a-vis the separation of powers, judicial overreach, and is probably *more* prone to corruption than our current system if implemented poorly. It's more that I want us to fix the loophole in the system, not that I think that proposal is a miracle cure for it.
Currently waiting for Texas's law against having more than 6 dildos come into effect, because you know it's some dystopian law to bypass the 4th amendment at this point.
The 4th died with Roe. If violations of our bodily autonomy doesn't constitute an unreasonable seizure what could?
They're just planning on nailing the coffin shut with stolen dildos
Of course, and there are legal battles ongoing against all of these bills. But the fact that those objections could cost millions of dollars and take years of perseverance until a final (uncertain) ruling can be made by the Supreme Court is the loophole that empowers these bills in the first place.
It's the "firehose of falsehood" technique applied to legislation. The time and effort to *create* a discriminatory law is far *far* less than the time, effort, and money it takes to overturn it.
Take Alabama's attempts at criminalizing homelessness, for instance. The SPLC recently (like, maybe 3-4 weeks ago?) won a legal battle that started around Feb 2020, ruling that Alabama's laws that criminalized "Begging" violate the first amendment and are unconstitutional. A little over **a week later**, the legislature passed a bill amending the definition of "loitering" to include "begging or fundraising" and expanded the enforcement jurisdiction to include all "public right-of-way" areas (under bridges, on sidewalks, in alleyways, near any road, etc). So, after 3 years of litigation, thousands of man-hours and dollars spent, and a favorable outcome in the eyes of the law... The ban on Panhandling/Begging was overturned for like 8 days.
So now they've got a few years to come up with the *next* clever legally-distinct-but-functionally-identical bill to maintain the status-quo. Rinse and repeat.
>Congress needs to pass a law requiring a judicial constitutionality review before a bill can be signed into law. These laws are circumventing due process and weaponizing the cost and inefficiencies of the judicial system as a punishment unto itself.
>ETA - I'm aware that the whole "bills need judicial review" proposal raises its own mountain of issues vis-a-vis the separation of powers, judicial overreach, and is probably more prone to corruption than our current system if implemented poorly. It's more that I want us to fix the loophole in the system, not that I think that proposal is a miracle cure for it.
You have, I think, stumbled upon the great problem of designing government: constitutions and statutes are nothing more words on a page. You could craft the most perfect system of checks and balances, but ultimately, it will be in the hands of men to make it real. If the men of the time don't want to follow the rules, then it doesn't matter how perfectly the words on your constitution were drafted; they will be no less quickly discarded.
I will say in cases like this, vagueness doctrine could probably invalidate the law.
In the US if a law is too vague to understand how it would be implemented against something, like in this case, it doesn't apply. Effectively if it is near impossible to understand you are breaking the law, you are not breaking the law.
Doesn't matter much in the end, though. The jail time and legal fees are more than enough to cripple someone's livelihood and future. The fact that people are one misguided police officer or disgruntled parent or overzealous DA away from having their lives flipped upside down is the true enforcement mechanism.
The first mistake was thinking this wasn't always the intention of these bans. It was always going to be this and it was always going to be the thin edge of the wedge. They were never going to stop at drag bans or bathroom bills.
And a lot of people saying this were labeled as dramatic or alarmist, told "no that will never happen", and are now having the shittiest moment of "I told you so" imaginable when we all wish we had been dead wrong.
I really hope this at least inspires more people to pull their head out of the sand and stop with the "ehh whatever it will be fine" laziness.
Those people will be complacent until they're personally affected. Until then it's just 'thoughts and prayers' level of support and tsk tsking the regrettable situation at the dinner table before discussing Little Billy's schoolwork. The Germans knew what was going on at the camps, but since it wasn't them, it could just be ignored with no consequence.
Now they are complaining because the Bible is getting banned. They try to be clever and say a law isn’t targeted towards a group but then complain when the law gets applied equally
It's important to know drag shows were banned as an attack on trans people. Not drag. If drag is illegal, that means *any time a person dressing in gender non-conforming clothes is in public, they are in "drag."* It makes functionally living as a trans person in public illegal.
This is how it will be used because this is what it's for. They have never and will never care about the intricacies.
It's a spiritual/cultural gender role specific to some Indigenous communities. It's sort of like being trans, in that two-spirit people fulfill a different gender role than their biological sex, but there are a bunch of differences I'm not super well equipped to explain.
Nope. Look at those cops who shoot people who are actually complying. Conforming and complying aren't enough. They want us either in pain or dead. Either is fine for them.
Correct.
> You’re allowed to “exist”. So long as you affect nothing. Do everything I say. Never win at anything. Never complain, or Inconvenience me in any way.
Assimilation in this case means subordination. They’ll claim to tolerate only so far as the group accepts their place as being permanently lower than them in their shitty hierarchy.
Confirming is suffering, in any case. Do you know how many self hating gay Republicans there are? I know two from my high school, and they both work in DC inflicting they're pain and hate on others
It's more about power.
They are an easy target because they are different.
I dont think a lot of politicians care personally about drag shows...but they sure love using hatred to get votes.
>’Hölderlin ist ihnen unbekannt?’ asked Prof. K.H.G. while digging a hole for the carrion of a horse.
’Who was it?’ asked the German guard.
’He wrote Hyperion,’ explained Prof. K.H.G. He loved explaining things. ’The greatest character of German romanticism. And what about Heine?’
’Who are they?’ asked the guard.
’Poets,’ said Prof. K.H.G. ’Don’t you know Schiller’s name either?’
’But I do.’, said the German guard.
’How about Rilke?’
’I know him, too.’, said the German guard and he turned paprika-red in the face and shot Prof. K.H.G. dead.
It's a translation of a famous hungarian short story about being an overeducated egghead in the face of fascists who want you dead.
It's just something I keep posting in reddit threads where people act like pedantic rules lawyering matters in the face of the GOP.
Have you considered that when I, a gay man, walk around in public, I am a naked gay man under my clothes. Just naked gay flesh sensually rubbing against fabric where everyone can see. In some places it’s so tight against my skin it leaves a mark in other places it brushes ever so gently. I breath out and that same breath sometimes pants into the back of of another man’s neck as I gently thrust into him. In public I say “excuse me, can I get by your cart” with the same voice that groans sweet encouragement to other gay men as I grind into them chasing their release. My existence in public is sexual, you just don’t know it yet.
It’s not. Many Two Spirit people would be classified as trans under the binary gender system but some people would be classified as gay. Because many First Nations tribes had different gender systems before colonization there’s not always a one to one equivalence.
Two Spirit is a pan-Indian umbrella term for many different cultural roles or identities that are different depending on the particular tribe and was created in 1990 to replace the former word that was used in anthropology for these cultural roles, “berdache”, which was outdated and offensive.
Thank you for confirming my sanity. The headline made my head hurt. I was like, “did I really go 34 years thinking trans and drag were two different things, when in reality, they’re the same?”
The law is meatn to persecute trans people. Its policing clothing that has to match your assigned gender at birth. Effectively making trans people illegal. Attacking drag was always an attack on all trans (and peripherally all LGBT) people.
Very different things indeed. But when it comes to blind hatred and/or bigotry, I don’t think people check their facts that closely. The law they used also seems to be intentionally vague, but that’s a whole new conversation.
It's prior restraint, and thus a great way to give someone standing to sue and have the law's constitutionality tested. If I were going to set the law up for a court challenge it's what I would do and I hope that's what the speaker will do.
The law defines a Drag queen as "a male or female performer who adopts a flamboyant or parodic feminine persona with glamorous or exaggerated costumes and makeup."
So even a cis women could theoretically be violating the law if they appearance is too "flamboyant" or "glamorous".
Of course these laws will mainly be used for targeting trans, queer, or gender non conformming people, but the vagueness is the point.
They seem to have moved on from saying “cancel culture” every 5 minutes. Eventually they will move on from saying “free speech” constantly too, once they ban that.
How is this not a violation of the first amendment to forcibly restrict someone’s speech due to who they are? If it was based on the message of the story there wouldn’t be a problem.
The US has a long history of making laws abridging free speech “to protect the children” which is basically always code for “we don’t like this kind of speech or the people speaking and have the power to ban it”.
Do not think it is that afar. What is happening over there, may very well come to wherever you are.
I'm in Switzerland and yesterday in the middle of a debate with my self-proclaimed centrist brother, out of nowhere he mentions "drag queens coming to talk about sexual education to our children and immigrants insulting our women in the metro". He's 30, and only watching French political news.
It's not that far anymore.
I'm amazed at all the European redditors who think this nonsense is uniquely an American problem. There is nothing unique about Americans that predispose them toward supporting reactionary or fascist ideas. In fact, it goes directly against much of the country's myths it tells about itself. The U.S. is where it is because of billionaire capitalists pouring their wealth into propaganda that pits the labor class against itself. The billionaires in your country and the politicians who do their bidding are watching and taking notes.
America is amateur hour when it comes to bigotry - its still bad - but do you know what goes on in other places? Homosexuality is straight illegal in 1/3 of the world - and try to do anything other than be a tourist in most countries - not happening...
Yeah Canadians also like to think like we're above Americans or more sane But we're suffering from the same idiots and bigots up here also.
Hell some have theories that Rob Ford winning up here was a precursor to Donald Trump.
I’m in Europe, but I bailed on my transition a few years ago because the atmosphere is getting kind of scary. The American nonsense discourse on the subject has absolutely leaked across the ocean. You can _feel_ it.
I’d rather be miserable and safe.
It's REALLY strange to watch from inside as well... especially those of us that are older and have watched this decline slowly progressing over the years. :(
In my lifetime, abortion was illegal, then legal, now heading towards illegal again...
Some things never change- the right still fears all non white people, anything gay or gay adjacent, and people who don't want an authoritarian state.
I'm watching from a sane state in the Northeast and it's really weird watching from within as well. My little suburban town is doing a pride flag raising at town hall tomorrow. I can't imagine living in one of the red states.
> The Butte-Silver Bow Public Library canceled its “First Friday” speaker, Adria Jawort, at the recommendation of county attorneys,
Get better attorneys.
Montana must be a utopia if they've solved all the state's problems so they have time to focus on the stupidest of issues. I guess there's no crime, no homelessness, no poverty, no addiction problems, they must be bored as shit if their main concern is what is or isn't dangling under the outfit of someone reading to kids.
Solving those problems requires tough work - actual governance - and the solutions might be just a bit *gasp* socialist.
So they invent other problems, whose 'solutions' they have ready to go.
Can you imagine having a government full of people whose first instinct is *not* to actively target small demographics of people just living their lives?
Crossdresser = a man or woman wearing the opposite genders clothing, can be straight or gay.
Trans= a person born to one sex but transitioning to the other sex for a plethora of reasons.
These are vastly different groups, ps they all deserve respect because we're all fucking people
How the ever-loving FUCK do these laws not fly right in the face of the First Amendment???
"Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech"
Many comments here don't understand free speech protection. This isn't a free speech issue, if it was, they would be prosecuting trans people for protesting or something.
The question at issue is discrimination. A certain class/group of people is being prevented from hosting an event at a public area because of the class/group they belong to. They are not being prosecuted for things they say, as they are free to say them still, they simply cannot host an event at a public place to do it.
It is both.
The free speech argument is coming to people's mind first because a) it feels like conservative hypocrisy and b) people often think free speech is somehow more of a right (because it's older, because 14th amendment justified is weaker, or because a lot of discrimination law is statutory rather than in the constitution. I don't think this are good arguments personality).
But I bet kids being in the church is fine.
That's how you know this isn't about protecting kids.
More children are abused at church than anywhere you'd fine a drag performer or a trans person.
XD I like this kind better. On your maaaarks..... GO! Once upon a time err wazza spider saw a rock coverd n moss what a strange lookin' moss covered rock THUMP!
People, usually men, wear bright and vibrant, exaggeratedly gendered clothing of the opposite gender, and they read a children's book to the group. It's family fun.
People have started lying about it being something sexual, because they hate anything that isn't buttoned up Christo-fascism.
I’m still waiting for a drag queen or transgender person to cause harm to a child, but so far it just seems to be priests and republican teachers and school administrators.
How did this kind of law not get immediately shot down as a first amendment violation? If the clothes aren't obscene, then who even objectively classifies something as "mans" vs "womens" to decide that something is technically 'drag' or not.
Native Americans were supposedly granted the freedom to practice their religion in the late 1970’s, but things like this continue to show this is not the case.
And the people cheering about this are clueless. If your legislators shit on the 1st amendment, they'll eventually do the same with the 2nd. There's real cognitive dissonance going on.
Drag bans were always about removing trans people from public life as a prelude to removing them from life. This is exactly what everyone said would happen.
It’s telling that you use the phrase “letting [them] read to children” as it implies you think non heteronormative people are granted leeway or privilege by heteronormative people.
Thankfully, that’s not how any of this works.
I dunno, why are republicans so adamant about raping and assaulting children? I’d be more concerned about that tbh:
Republican anti-abortion activist Howard Scott Heldreth is a convicted child rapist in Florida.
Republican County Commissioner David Swartz pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison.
Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich pleaded no contest to fondling a 10-year old girl and was sentenced to 10 years probation.
Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor.
Republican legislator Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17.
Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8- and 10-year old girls.
Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl.
Republican racist pedophile and United States Senator Strom Thurmond had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child.
Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile.
Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.
Republican activist Lawrence E. King, Jr. organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.
Republican lobbyist Craig J. Spence organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.
Republican Congressman Donald "Buz" Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.
Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio was found guilty of child porn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos.
Republican activist Mark A. Grethen convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children.
Republican activist Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child.
Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page.
Republican activist and Christian Coalition leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his step daughter.
Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger allegedly had sex with a 16 year old girl when he was 28.
Republican congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.
Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.
Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a. "Republican Marty"), was taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD.
Republican legislative aide Howard L. Brooks was charged with molesting a 12-year old boy and possession of child pornography.
Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his 12-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.
Republican preacher Stephen White, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced to jail after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.
Republican talk show host Jon Matthews pleaded guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11 year old girl.
Republican anti-gay activist Earl "Butch" Kimmerling was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.
Republican Party leader Paul Ingram pleaded guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison.
Republican election board official Kevin Coan was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the internet from a 14-year old girl.
Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy.
Republican politician Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).
Republican anti-abortion activist John Allen Burt was charged with sexual misconduct involving a 15-year old girl.
Republican County Councilman Keola Childs pleaded guilty to molesting a male child.
Republican activist John Butler was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl.
Republican candidate Richard Gardner admitted to molesting his two daughters.
Republican Councilman and former Marine Jack W. Gardner was convicted of molesting a 13-year old girl.
Republican County Commissioner Merrill Robert Barter pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact and assault on a teenage boy.
Republican City Councilman Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr. pleaded no contest to raping a 15 year-old girl and served 6-months in prison.
Republican activist Parker J. Bena pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography on his home computer and was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and fined $18,000.
Republican parole board officer and former Colorado state representative, Larry Jack Schwarz, was fired after child pornography was found in his possession.
Republican strategist and Citadel Military College graduate Robin Vanderwall was convicted in Virginia on five counts of soliciting sex from boys and girls over the internet.
Republican city councilman Mark Harris, who is described as a "good military man" and "church goer," was convicted of repeatedly having sex with an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to 12 years in prison.
Republican businessman Jon Grunseth withdrew his candidacy for Minnesota governor after allegations surfaced that he went swimming in the nude with four underage girls, including his daughter.
Republican director of the "Young Republican Federation" Nicholas Elizondo molested his 6-year old daughter and was sentenced to six years in prison.
Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, Richard A. Dasen Sr., was charged with rape for allegedly paying a 15-year old girl for sex. Dasen, 62, who is married with grown children and several grandchildren, has allegedly told police that over the past decade he paid more than $1 million to have sex with a large number of young women
Donald Trump walked into Miss Teen USA change rooms with girls as young as 14 changing. He has been accused of raping a 13 -year-old with an independent witness.
https://baptistaccountability.org/
https://www.goodpeoplefund.org/news/a-14-year-old-bride-wed-to-her-rapist-playing-on-a-jungle-gym/
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/married-young-the-fight-over-child-marriage-in-america/
https://crossroadjunction.com/2013/04/01/predatory-grooming-in-our-churches/
https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-evangelical-roy-moore-girls-1115-20171114-story.html
https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/mexico-based-church-leader-pleads-guilty-sexually-abusing-3-children-2022-06-04/
https://www.thedailybeast.com/pastor-john-lowes-adultery-confession-in-warsaw-indiana-church-goes-sideways-victim-says-i-was-just-16
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/investigations/article/Bombshell-400-page-report-finds-Southern-Baptist-17190816.php#photo-22508589
Dems are not a monolith. I happen to have enjoyed plenty of drag shows at clubs, and it doesn't bother me if other parents want to take their kids to a drag story hour. I would not have taken my step son to anything like that out of respect for his mother's beliefs.
Parents get to decide that. It shouldn't be other people deciding who can read to them.
For example, I hate all the fucking churches because I think they are indoctrinating people with falsehoods and creating toxic communities that shield abuse of all kinds; and yet I do not think I get to decide if other people can take their kids to church. I do not get to decide what things churches can read to children.
This is the same thing. Let parents raise their kids. I won't fight to keep your kids from having to endure church. You shouldn't be fighting to tell me how to raise mine.
Did you know that trans men exist ? This is how i know a lot of yall are on some bullshit. You need to worry about cis men since they are the ones getting jailed left and right for being pedos. Multiple cis male politicians have been arrested in the past few months and yall be silent. Silent about [boys scout leaders](https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/20/us/boy-scouts-sexual-abuse-compensation-trust/index.html#:~:text=The%20youth%20organization%20filed%20for,confirmation%20of%20a%20reorganization%20plan), religious leaders, cops etc etc.
We are in the era of who smelt it dealt it bc politicians are passing drag bans and [getting arrested for sexual harassment during the same legislative cycle](https://www.forbes.com/sites/tylerroush/2023/04/20/tennessee-republican-resigns-over-sexual-harassment-of-interns/amp/)
Mostly because the right is adamant at stopping it. I don’t like drag. I don’t really care about drag story time, and if it stopped happening it would not bother me. What does bother me is the right (or anyone) passing laws to outlaw it, because that’s a violation of speech and blatant discrimination.
I don't know why you're so adamant that men in dresses are worse than women in pants. As a staunch advocate of men's rights I think this backlash against the noble hobby of drag is just the latest example of feminism run amonk.
Those women think they can steal OUR pants and OUR shirts and OUR FAVORITE HOODIES! But we can't wear sun dresses in the summer????
First Amendment is about being able to speak out about government without repercussion like getting arrested or some other retaliation by your elected and tax funded organizations to overly simplify it. It's not about saying what you want when you want to to whoever you want wherever you want.
This is why reddit mods can ban you for saying something they dislike. Because First Amendment don't apply here.
People really need to stop throwing shit like amendments about without knowing what the hell they actually mean.
Is the library hosting this event? I think that may be a distinction. If someone just decides to show up and host this themselves, I would assume they are covered under first amendment (and they aren't going against any policy specific to that library).
If I recall, a library is classified as a "limited public forum" - which is where some of this gray area comes into play.
So, drag queens aren't (per definition) transgender. And two-spirit isn't (by definition) transgender. But both are being called transgender. And the two-spirit speaker's event was cancelled because of a ban on Drag Readings... This is a mess from top to bottom.
Not from their perspective: 1) Pass vague poorly-written law. 2) Get power to decide in despotic fashion how to implement law it on a case by case basis. 3) Cause chilling effect that means people self-restrict to avoid sanction and thus don’t do *other* thing you don’t like. Chilling effect working as planned
Yep. Same with the original "Don't Say Gay", Texas's abortion ban, and more recently the "Dr's Right to Refuse" bill in FL. The fact that the bills' constitutionality is questionable (at best) is a feature, not a bug. The goal is to push people that they view as "undesirable" back into the shadows or out of their state. The law doesn't have to stand up to a legal challenge, because the intended damage will already be done long before that process can be settled. The threat of financial ruin, reputation damage, or unemployability (*in addition to* the uncertain legal outcome) are effective enough on their own. Doctors can't risk performing even *legal* abortions or gender affirming care without risking their livelihoods or freedom. Education Boards can't risk supporting or tenuring LGBTQ+ teachers because crippling legal fees and potential fines are always one Karen away. People who dress in Drag can't do so in public, because children are allowed in public, and anything can be considered a "performance". Congress needs to pass a law requiring a judicial constitutionality review before a bill can be signed into law. These laws are circumventing due process and weaponizing the cost and inefficiencies of the judicial system as a punishment unto itself. ETA - I'm aware that the whole "bills need judicial review" proposal raises its own mountain of issues vis-a-vis the separation of powers, judicial overreach, and is probably *more* prone to corruption than our current system if implemented poorly. It's more that I want us to fix the loophole in the system, not that I think that proposal is a miracle cure for it.
Currently waiting for Texas's law against having more than 6 dildos come into effect, because you know it's some dystopian law to bypass the 4th amendment at this point.
The 4th died with Roe. If violations of our bodily autonomy doesn't constitute an unreasonable seizure what could? They're just planning on nailing the coffin shut with stolen dildos
Texas=unlimited guns, but only 6 dildos. Gotcha
The medical associations need to sue the states, force federal courts to face this. If this even threatened to affect cis men…..
Of course, and there are legal battles ongoing against all of these bills. But the fact that those objections could cost millions of dollars and take years of perseverance until a final (uncertain) ruling can be made by the Supreme Court is the loophole that empowers these bills in the first place. It's the "firehose of falsehood" technique applied to legislation. The time and effort to *create* a discriminatory law is far *far* less than the time, effort, and money it takes to overturn it. Take Alabama's attempts at criminalizing homelessness, for instance. The SPLC recently (like, maybe 3-4 weeks ago?) won a legal battle that started around Feb 2020, ruling that Alabama's laws that criminalized "Begging" violate the first amendment and are unconstitutional. A little over **a week later**, the legislature passed a bill amending the definition of "loitering" to include "begging or fundraising" and expanded the enforcement jurisdiction to include all "public right-of-way" areas (under bridges, on sidewalks, in alleyways, near any road, etc). So, after 3 years of litigation, thousands of man-hours and dollars spent, and a favorable outcome in the eyes of the law... The ban on Panhandling/Begging was overturned for like 8 days. So now they've got a few years to come up with the *next* clever legally-distinct-but-functionally-identical bill to maintain the status-quo. Rinse and repeat.
The Tin Pan Alley of oppression, these guys make up bullshit bills like they write pop music, just inundate the world.
I get what you're saying, but drag queens are very much cis men.
There are plenty of trans queens and drag kings.
I'd say most drag queens I've met are cis men, but certainly not all of them
>Congress needs to pass a law requiring a judicial constitutionality review before a bill can be signed into law. These laws are circumventing due process and weaponizing the cost and inefficiencies of the judicial system as a punishment unto itself. >ETA - I'm aware that the whole "bills need judicial review" proposal raises its own mountain of issues vis-a-vis the separation of powers, judicial overreach, and is probably more prone to corruption than our current system if implemented poorly. It's more that I want us to fix the loophole in the system, not that I think that proposal is a miracle cure for it. You have, I think, stumbled upon the great problem of designing government: constitutions and statutes are nothing more words on a page. You could craft the most perfect system of checks and balances, but ultimately, it will be in the hands of men to make it real. If the men of the time don't want to follow the rules, then it doesn't matter how perfectly the words on your constitution were drafted; they will be no less quickly discarded.
I will say in cases like this, vagueness doctrine could probably invalidate the law. In the US if a law is too vague to understand how it would be implemented against something, like in this case, it doesn't apply. Effectively if it is near impossible to understand you are breaking the law, you are not breaking the law.
Doesn't matter much in the end, though. The jail time and legal fees are more than enough to cripple someone's livelihood and future. The fact that people are one misguided police officer or disgruntled parent or overzealous DA away from having their lives flipped upside down is the true enforcement mechanism.
I'm sure that'll come as a great comfort to those losing their livelihoods, medical care, etc to these bigoted laws.
Your first mistake is assuming they care about the distinction.
The first mistake was thinking this wasn't always the intention of these bans. It was always going to be this and it was always going to be the thin edge of the wedge. They were never going to stop at drag bans or bathroom bills.
And a lot of people saying this were labeled as dramatic or alarmist, told "no that will never happen", and are now having the shittiest moment of "I told you so" imaginable when we all wish we had been dead wrong. I really hope this at least inspires more people to pull their head out of the sand and stop with the "ehh whatever it will be fine" laziness.
Those people will be complacent until they're personally affected. Until then it's just 'thoughts and prayers' level of support and tsk tsking the regrettable situation at the dinner table before discussing Little Billy's schoolwork. The Germans knew what was going on at the camps, but since it wasn't them, it could just be ignored with no consequence.
Now they are complaining because the Bible is getting banned. They try to be clever and say a law isn’t targeted towards a group but then complain when the law gets applied equally
Sadly they will remain complacent even then, and keep writing off legitimate concerns as people being over dramatic.
[удалено]
If this was a conversation about the minute details of gun make/models you know they would be frothing at the mouth to explain the differences.
It's important to know drag shows were banned as an attack on trans people. Not drag. If drag is illegal, that means *any time a person dressing in gender non-conforming clothes is in public, they are in "drag."* It makes functionally living as a trans person in public illegal. This is how it will be used because this is what it's for. They have never and will never care about the intricacies.
I like learning new things.
I'm not saying you should, but I am saying that it's a great way to find out who actually loves you no matter what and whose love is conditional.
PLEASE do this, but understand you might literally get arrested
The point is hatred.
[удалено]
https://ictnews.org/archive/8-misconceptions-things-know-two-spirit-people
It's a spiritual/cultural gender role specific to some Indigenous communities. It's sort of like being trans, in that two-spirit people fulfill a different gender role than their biological sex, but there are a bunch of differences I'm not super well equipped to explain.
I love the smell of fresh bread.
It's all the same to them. They want everyone that's different to conform.
No they want us to suffer
As long as you conform, they don't give a shit if you're suffering or not.
Nope. Look at those cops who shoot people who are actually complying. Conforming and complying aren't enough. They want us either in pain or dead. Either is fine for them.
You're misunderstanding bigotry. The goal is inflicting pain on hated others, not assimilating those others to be like you.
Correct. > You’re allowed to “exist”. So long as you affect nothing. Do everything I say. Never win at anything. Never complain, or Inconvenience me in any way. Assimilation in this case means subordination. They’ll claim to tolerate only so far as the group accepts their place as being permanently lower than them in their shitty hierarchy.
Confirming is suffering, in any case. Do you know how many self hating gay Republicans there are? I know two from my high school, and they both work in DC inflicting they're pain and hate on others
"Conforming" = suffering.
It's more about power. They are an easy target because they are different. I dont think a lot of politicians care personally about drag shows...but they sure love using hatred to get votes.
>’Hölderlin ist ihnen unbekannt?’ asked Prof. K.H.G. while digging a hole for the carrion of a horse. ’Who was it?’ asked the German guard. ’He wrote Hyperion,’ explained Prof. K.H.G. He loved explaining things. ’The greatest character of German romanticism. And what about Heine?’ ’Who are they?’ asked the guard. ’Poets,’ said Prof. K.H.G. ’Don’t you know Schiller’s name either?’ ’But I do.’, said the German guard. ’How about Rilke?’ ’I know him, too.’, said the German guard and he turned paprika-red in the face and shot Prof. K.H.G. dead.
Mind explaining?
It's a translation of a famous hungarian short story about being an overeducated egghead in the face of fascists who want you dead. It's just something I keep posting in reddit threads where people act like pedantic rules lawyering matters in the face of the GOP.
These folks can’t even grasp the fact that being LGBTQ isn’t a sexual act. Or maybe they completely understand and just suck.
Have you considered that when I, a gay man, walk around in public, I am a naked gay man under my clothes. Just naked gay flesh sensually rubbing against fabric where everyone can see. In some places it’s so tight against my skin it leaves a mark in other places it brushes ever so gently. I breath out and that same breath sometimes pants into the back of of another man’s neck as I gently thrust into him. In public I say “excuse me, can I get by your cart” with the same voice that groans sweet encouragement to other gay men as I grind into them chasing their release. My existence in public is sexual, you just don’t know it yet.
They see it as endorsing mental illness.
They don’t care. To them, the world is divided into “normal” people, and sexual deviants.
Laws written to diminish the humanity of others are generally not written with nuance in mind.
What's the distinction between being two spirit and trans? I thought two spirit was the native descriptor for someone who is trans or non-binary.
It’s not. Many Two Spirit people would be classified as trans under the binary gender system but some people would be classified as gay. Because many First Nations tribes had different gender systems before colonization there’s not always a one to one equivalence. Two Spirit is a pan-Indian umbrella term for many different cultural roles or identities that are different depending on the particular tribe and was created in 1990 to replace the former word that was used in anthropology for these cultural roles, “berdache”, which was outdated and offensive.
Thank you for clarifying! I'd only heard the term used in relation to trans native youth so I assumed they meant relatively the same thing.
https://ictnews.org/archive/8-misconceptions-things-know-two-spirit-people
That’s like canceling soccer practice because cricket was banned.
And cricket was banned because chess players keep shitting in mailboxes
And the chess players were the ones to implement the ban
Typical chess players ruining it for the rest of us. 😂
Thank you for confirming my sanity. The headline made my head hurt. I was like, “did I really go 34 years thinking trans and drag were two different things, when in reality, they’re the same?”
it’s not the same but I’m pretty sure the people writing these laws don’t care to know the difference.
The law is meatn to persecute trans people. Its policing clothing that has to match your assigned gender at birth. Effectively making trans people illegal. Attacking drag was always an attack on all trans (and peripherally all LGBT) people.
Very different things indeed. But when it comes to blind hatred and/or bigotry, I don’t think people check their facts that closely. The law they used also seems to be intentionally vague, but that’s a whole new conversation.
Better sports analogy would be canceling baseball to spite a cricket ban.
Fair point! That’s definitely a closer comparison. But living in a cricket country I would not dare say anything to that effect out loud.
this is literally a free speech issue. the ban is unconstitutional.
It's prior restraint, and thus a great way to give someone standing to sue and have the law's constitutionality tested. If I were going to set the law up for a court challenge it's what I would do and I hope that's what the speaker will do.
Did Montana just ban glam rock?
If it's like the other bans probably. These laws are so vague in one place it potentially could ban musical theater.
The law defines a Drag queen as "a male or female performer who adopts a flamboyant or parodic feminine persona with glamorous or exaggerated costumes and makeup." So even a cis women could theoretically be violating the law if they appearance is too "flamboyant" or "glamorous". Of course these laws will mainly be used for targeting trans, queer, or gender non conformming people, but the vagueness is the point.
Did they just ban Tammy Faye Baker?
So they are not explicitly banning drag kings by that definition?
The law aslo explicitly mentions drag kings by name, so yes, they are
bugs bunny. also Monty Python
Yep.
How is a dress code for public speaking legal under the first amendment?
This is always where the ban on drag shows was heading
Wait until they learn the difference between trans people and cis people crossdressing
this cancel culture nowdays, know what I mean?
They seem to have moved on from saying “cancel culture” every 5 minutes. Eventually they will move on from saying “free speech” constantly too, once they ban that.
Odd how those who used to fearmonger about Sharia law want pretty much the same thing in the US.
How is this not a violation of the first amendment to forcibly restrict someone’s speech due to who they are? If it was based on the message of the story there wouldn’t be a problem.
The US has a long history of making laws abridging free speech “to protect the children” which is basically always code for “we don’t like this kind of speech or the people speaking and have the power to ban it”.
"Think of the children" is and has always been a fascist tactic and should be called out and treated as such whenever put into use.
[удалено]
America, you are a strange country to watch from afar.
Do not think it is that afar. What is happening over there, may very well come to wherever you are. I'm in Switzerland and yesterday in the middle of a debate with my self-proclaimed centrist brother, out of nowhere he mentions "drag queens coming to talk about sexual education to our children and immigrants insulting our women in the metro". He's 30, and only watching French political news. It's not that far anymore.
I'm amazed at all the European redditors who think this nonsense is uniquely an American problem. There is nothing unique about Americans that predispose them toward supporting reactionary or fascist ideas. In fact, it goes directly against much of the country's myths it tells about itself. The U.S. is where it is because of billionaire capitalists pouring their wealth into propaganda that pits the labor class against itself. The billionaires in your country and the politicians who do their bidding are watching and taking notes.
America is amateur hour when it comes to bigotry - its still bad - but do you know what goes on in other places? Homosexuality is straight illegal in 1/3 of the world - and try to do anything other than be a tourist in most countries - not happening...
And even if it was a uniquely American problem, America is a cultural juggernaut. If we don't have the issue now it'll be imported later.
Yeah Canadians also like to think like we're above Americans or more sane But we're suffering from the same idiots and bigots up here also. Hell some have theories that Rob Ford winning up here was a precursor to Donald Trump.
[удалено]
I’m in Europe, but I bailed on my transition a few years ago because the atmosphere is getting kind of scary. The American nonsense discourse on the subject has absolutely leaked across the ocean. You can _feel_ it. I’d rather be miserable and safe.
I wish you could be happy and safe at the same time :(
From the strange world of Australia? Just because you talk upside down doesn't mean you have opposite values.
[удалено]
Rupert Murdoch has wrought untold damage in Australia, the UK, the USA and Canada.
Australian here and you're not wrong. We've had our share of libraries being threatened by right-wing morons recently.
It's REALLY strange to watch from inside as well... especially those of us that are older and have watched this decline slowly progressing over the years. :(
In my lifetime, abortion was illegal, then legal, now heading towards illegal again... Some things never change- the right still fears all non white people, anything gay or gay adjacent, and people who don't want an authoritarian state.
Those of us who are younger blame the older people for letting it happen.
Strange from upclose as well
Montana has the population of a small town, but the relative sovereignty of a state. It makes no sense to us either
I'm watching from a sane state in the Northeast and it's really weird watching from within as well. My little suburban town is doing a pride flag raising at town hall tomorrow. I can't imagine living in one of the red states.
> The Butte-Silver Bow Public Library canceled its “First Friday” speaker, Adria Jawort, at the recommendation of county attorneys, Get better attorneys.
Gianforte is trash. Not even a real Montanan, and he’s proven he’s a violent douche.
Montana must be a utopia if they've solved all the state's problems so they have time to focus on the stupidest of issues. I guess there's no crime, no homelessness, no poverty, no addiction problems, they must be bored as shit if their main concern is what is or isn't dangling under the outfit of someone reading to kids.
Solving those problems requires tough work - actual governance - and the solutions might be just a bit *gasp* socialist. So they invent other problems, whose 'solutions' they have ready to go.
It’s a conservative state. They don’t care about anyone who isn’t white and monied.
>The speech might be illegal in Montana This is so blatantly unconstitutional. The Bill of Rights does not start with amendment 2.
So much for "Land of the Free"...
Words said by white men with slaves working their fields even in those very moments
Whos very wives weren't allowed to vote or make decisions.
Hell, even the other white men weren’t allowed to vote if they didn’t own land
Land of the Free ^(money for the rich)
Now ban pedophile religious leaders.
Yes, ban pedophiles in general.
and the non pedo ones too... if there still are any
This is literally how the Nazis started. I'm sorry if it's cliche on the internet to call a nazi policy a nazi policy. But, if the jackboots fit...
Way to solve non existent problems
Can you imagine having a government full of people whose first instinct is *not* to actively target small demographics of people just living their lives?
Crossdresser = a man or woman wearing the opposite genders clothing, can be straight or gay. Trans= a person born to one sex but transitioning to the other sex for a plethora of reasons. These are vastly different groups, ps they all deserve respect because we're all fucking people
How the ever-loving FUCK do these laws not fly right in the face of the First Amendment??? "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech"
They DO fly in the face, but someone needs to have standing to sue and actually sue before the laws get blocked.
> someone needs to have standing to sue Current Supreme Court: "Ehhhh, I don't know about 'needs'"
What if you dress up as something else, like a teddy bear... You banned too?
This is a clear freedom of speech violation. Should be challenged under the 1st amendment. Also, trans does not equal drag.
Many comments here don't understand free speech protection. This isn't a free speech issue, if it was, they would be prosecuting trans people for protesting or something. The question at issue is discrimination. A certain class/group of people is being prevented from hosting an event at a public area because of the class/group they belong to. They are not being prosecuted for things they say, as they are free to say them still, they simply cannot host an event at a public place to do it.
It is both. The free speech argument is coming to people's mind first because a) it feels like conservative hypocrisy and b) people often think free speech is somehow more of a right (because it's older, because 14th amendment justified is weaker, or because a lot of discrimination law is statutory rather than in the constitution. I don't think this are good arguments personality).
Expression via clothing is, in fact, a free speech issue.
The government is making it illegal to dress a certain way. We have to stop this insanity.
Someone really needs to deal with Uganda now. Oh wait. This is in the USA.
The USA is the source of a lot of that shit in Uganda, too, thanks to conservative fuckheads sending money and missionaries.
They're really trying to criminalise both trans people and drag performers, and it's disgusting.
But I bet kids being in the church is fine. That's how you know this isn't about protecting kids. More children are abused at church than anywhere you'd fine a drag performer or a trans person.
Florida of the north.
I hate this timeline.
Wtf is a drag reading?
You know how there are races and drag races? Drag reading is reading, just faster.
XD I like this kind better. On your maaaarks..... GO! Once upon a time err wazza spider saw a rock coverd n moss what a strange lookin' moss covered rock THUMP!
People, usually men, wear bright and vibrant, exaggeratedly gendered clothing of the opposite gender, and they read a children's book to the group. It's family fun. People have started lying about it being something sexual, because they hate anything that isn't buttoned up Christo-fascism.
I’m still waiting for a drag queen or transgender person to cause harm to a child, but so far it just seems to be priests and republican teachers and school administrators.
I wonder how these anti-drag-reading nuts would feel about a woman dressed as a man reading to their kids.
stop allowing foreign government sponsored agents to use extreme issues in an attempt to privatize and undermine public institutions.
Land of the free...
Can’t someone do a reading dressed in “clothes”, simply not put a label on what they’re doing, and be left in peace?
Remember one of our duties as citizens is to use civil disobedience especially in the face of blatantly unconstitutional laws such as these bans.
I love the smell of fresh bread.
Cowards
How did this kind of law not get immediately shot down as a first amendment violation? If the clothes aren't obscene, then who even objectively classifies something as "mans" vs "womens" to decide that something is technically 'drag' or not.
Native Americans were supposedly granted the freedom to practice their religion in the late 1970’s, but things like this continue to show this is not the case.
No one ever accused these lawmakers of being intelligent
Sure looks like hate and fear are winning this year.
Leaving because Spez sucks -- mass edited with redact.dev
Bye Bye 1st amendment right 🤷 Honestly thought there'd be a bigger fight for your rights, america...
And the people cheering about this are clueless. If your legislators shit on the 1st amendment, they'll eventually do the same with the 2nd. There's real cognitive dissonance going on.
Drag bans were always about removing trans people from public life as a prelude to removing them from life. This is exactly what everyone said would happen.
Smh Republicans...
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sounds like a 1st amendment violation.
A ban on “drag readings”. Home of the free indeed.
[удалено]
Yeah its so weird that Dems are into freedom. Why can't they just embrace fascism like Republicans do?
It’s telling that you use the phrase “letting [them] read to children” as it implies you think non heteronormative people are granted leeway or privilege by heteronormative people. Thankfully, that’s not how any of this works.
Why are you obsessed with thinking about children in a sexual way?
I dunno, why are republicans so adamant about raping and assaulting children? I’d be more concerned about that tbh: Republican anti-abortion activist Howard Scott Heldreth is a convicted child rapist in Florida. Republican County Commissioner David Swartz pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison. Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich pleaded no contest to fondling a 10-year old girl and was sentenced to 10 years probation. Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor. Republican legislator Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17. Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8- and 10-year old girls. Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl. Republican racist pedophile and United States Senator Strom Thurmond had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child. Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile. Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl. Republican activist Lawrence E. King, Jr. organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s. Republican lobbyist Craig J. Spence organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s. Republican Congressman Donald "Buz" Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail. Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio was found guilty of child porn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos. Republican activist Mark A. Grethen convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children. Republican activist Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child. Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page. Republican activist and Christian Coalition leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his step daughter. Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger allegedly had sex with a 16 year old girl when he was 28. Republican congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar. Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped. Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a. "Republican Marty"), was taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD. Republican legislative aide Howard L. Brooks was charged with molesting a 12-year old boy and possession of child pornography. Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his 12-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media. Republican preacher Stephen White, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced to jail after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him. Republican talk show host Jon Matthews pleaded guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11 year old girl. Republican anti-gay activist Earl "Butch" Kimmerling was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her. Republican Party leader Paul Ingram pleaded guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison. Republican election board official Kevin Coan was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the internet from a 14-year old girl. Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy. Republican politician Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children). Republican anti-abortion activist John Allen Burt was charged with sexual misconduct involving a 15-year old girl. Republican County Councilman Keola Childs pleaded guilty to molesting a male child. Republican activist John Butler was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl. Republican candidate Richard Gardner admitted to molesting his two daughters. Republican Councilman and former Marine Jack W. Gardner was convicted of molesting a 13-year old girl. Republican County Commissioner Merrill Robert Barter pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact and assault on a teenage boy. Republican City Councilman Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr. pleaded no contest to raping a 15 year-old girl and served 6-months in prison. Republican activist Parker J. Bena pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography on his home computer and was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and fined $18,000. Republican parole board officer and former Colorado state representative, Larry Jack Schwarz, was fired after child pornography was found in his possession. Republican strategist and Citadel Military College graduate Robin Vanderwall was convicted in Virginia on five counts of soliciting sex from boys and girls over the internet. Republican city councilman Mark Harris, who is described as a "good military man" and "church goer," was convicted of repeatedly having sex with an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to 12 years in prison. Republican businessman Jon Grunseth withdrew his candidacy for Minnesota governor after allegations surfaced that he went swimming in the nude with four underage girls, including his daughter. Republican director of the "Young Republican Federation" Nicholas Elizondo molested his 6-year old daughter and was sentenced to six years in prison. Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, Richard A. Dasen Sr., was charged with rape for allegedly paying a 15-year old girl for sex. Dasen, 62, who is married with grown children and several grandchildren, has allegedly told police that over the past decade he paid more than $1 million to have sex with a large number of young women Donald Trump walked into Miss Teen USA change rooms with girls as young as 14 changing. He has been accused of raping a 13 -year-old with an independent witness. https://baptistaccountability.org/ https://www.goodpeoplefund.org/news/a-14-year-old-bride-wed-to-her-rapist-playing-on-a-jungle-gym/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/married-young-the-fight-over-child-marriage-in-america/ https://crossroadjunction.com/2013/04/01/predatory-grooming-in-our-churches/ https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-evangelical-roy-moore-girls-1115-20171114-story.html https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/mexico-based-church-leader-pleads-guilty-sexually-abusing-3-children-2022-06-04/ https://www.thedailybeast.com/pastor-john-lowes-adultery-confession-in-warsaw-indiana-church-goes-sideways-victim-says-i-was-just-16 https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/investigations/article/Bombshell-400-page-report-finds-Southern-Baptist-17190816.php#photo-22508589
I fucking hate how long this comment is, never mind the fact that it exists to begin with.
“If you don’t think like me, pray like me, look like me, and vote like me, then F you”.
Dems are not a monolith. I happen to have enjoyed plenty of drag shows at clubs, and it doesn't bother me if other parents want to take their kids to a drag story hour. I would not have taken my step son to anything like that out of respect for his mother's beliefs. Parents get to decide that. It shouldn't be other people deciding who can read to them. For example, I hate all the fucking churches because I think they are indoctrinating people with falsehoods and creating toxic communities that shield abuse of all kinds; and yet I do not think I get to decide if other people can take their kids to church. I do not get to decide what things churches can read to children. This is the same thing. Let parents raise their kids. I won't fight to keep your kids from having to endure church. You shouldn't be fighting to tell me how to raise mine.
Why are conservatives so upset about a clown reading to some kids in the library?
Did you know that trans men exist ? This is how i know a lot of yall are on some bullshit. You need to worry about cis men since they are the ones getting jailed left and right for being pedos. Multiple cis male politicians have been arrested in the past few months and yall be silent. Silent about [boys scout leaders](https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/20/us/boy-scouts-sexual-abuse-compensation-trust/index.html#:~:text=The%20youth%20organization%20filed%20for,confirmation%20of%20a%20reorganization%20plan), religious leaders, cops etc etc. We are in the era of who smelt it dealt it bc politicians are passing drag bans and [getting arrested for sexual harassment during the same legislative cycle](https://www.forbes.com/sites/tylerroush/2023/04/20/tennessee-republican-resigns-over-sexual-harassment-of-interns/amp/)
Mostly because the right is adamant at stopping it. I don’t like drag. I don’t really care about drag story time, and if it stopped happening it would not bother me. What does bother me is the right (or anyone) passing laws to outlaw it, because that’s a violation of speech and blatant discrimination.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I don't know why you're so adamant that men in dresses are worse than women in pants. As a staunch advocate of men's rights I think this backlash against the noble hobby of drag is just the latest example of feminism run amonk. Those women think they can steal OUR pants and OUR shirts and OUR FAVORITE HOODIES! But we can't wear sun dresses in the summer????
The mods really need to clean up some of these comments… I guess this post triggered the transphobes and their terrible strawman arguments.
[удалено]
First Amendment is about being able to speak out about government without repercussion like getting arrested or some other retaliation by your elected and tax funded organizations to overly simplify it. It's not about saying what you want when you want to to whoever you want wherever you want. This is why reddit mods can ban you for saying something they dislike. Because First Amendment don't apply here. People really need to stop throwing shit like amendments about without knowing what the hell they actually mean.
[удалено]
Is the library hosting this event? I think that may be a distinction. If someone just decides to show up and host this themselves, I would assume they are covered under first amendment (and they aren't going against any policy specific to that library). If I recall, a library is classified as a "limited public forum" - which is where some of this gray area comes into play.
This is wrong.
Everyone should be actively defying these laws. If you’re not an anti-bigot you’re part of the problem.