Drag show drama leads to proposed law to ban parental choice
June is Pride Month, and for those on the center-right, it’s the season to spear hateful rhetoric into the universe and pray for an end to homosexuality. Maybe it’s a bit of a dramatic performance? It’s not fair to say that everything Republicans are hurling hateful rhetoric out into the universe, but a good number of voices are sitting behind microphones detailing new plans to criminalize parents who dare to face their curiosity and invite their children into exploration.
Let me share an example of what I mean. Texas GOP Representative Bryan Slayton tweeted that he would introduce a law banning drag shows attended by minors in Texas. The statement he released says this:
“The events of the past weekend were horrific and show a disturbing trend in which evil adults are obsessed with the sexualization of young children. As a father of two young children, I would never take my kids to a drag show and I know President Dade Phelan and the rest of my fellow Republicans wouldn’t either. Protecting our own children is not enough, and our responsibility as lawmakers extends to the sexualization that is occurring across Texas.
He further added:
“I promised my constituents that I would stand up for their values and fight to protect the children of Texas. I was re-elected on that promise and I intend to keep it by drafting legislation to prevent children from being subjected to drag shows and other inappropriate events. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this important law.
Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert responded to reports from the Texas drag show by Tweeter out: “Take your kids to CHURCH, not drag bars.”
Whether this is simply a game by the right to maintain their anti-gay stance or their way of patronizing Pride Month with ridiculous propaganda, we can’t be sure. But what is obvious is that those repeating this rhetoric may not have seen the 3,000-page report on the SBC and its 20-year history of covering up sexual abuse and sexual assault within of their institution. I recently wrote about it here.
Let’s go back to Slayton’s claim to introduce legislation to prosecute parents found guilty of making decisions for their own children. This mirrors a similar proposal put forward by Florida Rep. Anthony Sabatini (R), which he announced on Monday.
“I will propose legislation to charge with Felony and end the parental rights of any adult who brings a child to these perverted FL child sex shows. When will sexualization stop?
Not only are Republican lawmakers chanting the same rhetoric as Biden, “This is for our kids,” but they’re also failing to acknowledge the growing sexual abuse happening in churches. Is it really about protecting children, or is it just another spectacle that ignites the internal fervor of hatred of the sexually confused and prudish? Or worse, is it a deviation or projection from what haunts the evangelical churches, which many conservatives align themselves with?
The premise that a parent could be charged with a crime for simply allowing their children to be curious and participate in something different and entertaining is a far-fetched proposal for legislation. Consider the consequence of this law if the views or values of legislators change? And shouldn’t we at least recognize that while some Texans (or Floridians) may not agree with the event, several state citizens actually supported the event and took their children to the event? Haven’t the citizens of the state already determined that it is consistent with the values of the people? Isn’t the forum owner a Texan? Aren’t the customers present Texans? Why do the values of all Texans have to be adjusted to match those of a single ignorant representative of the state?
And isn’t it strange that Rep Boebert has such a problem with drag shows, but forgot to mention how dangerous a bowling alley could be? In 2004, the representative’s husband, Jayson Steven Boebert, then 24, was charged with “lewd exposure” after revealing his genitals to 2 young women at a Colorado bowling alley. Representative Boebert was 17 at the time. Regardless of that 7-year age gap (because clearly, we’re not talking about men caring for young women in the Republican Party), our own kids aren’t even safe in a bowling alley.
Do I support taking my kids to drag shows? Not really. It’s not my thing. But I appreciate that in this country we have the freedom to make choices for our children. As a parent, I decide what is or is not appropriate for my children to observe or participate in. And I think I would prefer to keep that right to decide. So if you ask me if I would support a law to criminalize parents who can take their children to an event where a drag performer can be seen, the answer is no.
I’m curious, though, why is it OK, but going to a drag show isn’t?
And can we be honest about drag shows? They really aren’t that sexual. Drag performers wear pounds of makeup, heavy wigs, 6-inch heels and slip-on clothes, and fabrics that flow with the music. Drag performers don’t expose their genitals to young girls in bowling alleys. Drag artists don’t moleste kids in Sunday school classes or tell kids to keep it a secret lest they want their parents to burn in hell. Drag performers are artists. They are paid to be a show, not to have sex with children. Pastors and priests, on the other hand, are literally paid to preach the Good News and molest our children. Shouldn’t we be demanding more legislation for churches and holding abusers accountable instead of chasing men in 6 inch heels who just want to dance and wear makeup?
More so, let’s discuss the idea that the government should have more of a say in what I do as a parent. As long as I do not physically harm my child, no elected official or official has the right to intervene with my parental choices to tell me how to operate. It’s smart to sell such legislation under the guise of “child protection”, but if you don’t act to accuse priests and pastors of sex crimes, if you are unwilling to pursue allegations of the Epstein case, I don’t think you really care about the kids.
I think the proponents of this bill are more concerned with controlling the opinions of others, including children. And I will never trust the government enough to give them more access to my children or have control over what my children do. It’s one of the reasons I’m homeschooling. More government legislation is always an indication of more control, which means less exercise of natural rights and free will. No thanks. I would vote “no”.
Another slice of truth to pickle. This idea of others sexualizing children by being around them is ridiculous. Do you know who are the people who are really sexualize children? Those who announce that others are sexualizing them. Think about that for a moment. If you perceive something to be sexual, say, for example, a drag show, that is your projection of the situation. It means that your disturbs applies the prism of the “sexual” to the scene. Suppose you were just a viewer of one of the viral videos from the event that took place last Saturday. If you see a child in the space of a drag performer, as an audience member and the performer is just dancing, is that sex? No. It’s not sex. And while I know “sex” has a wide range of representations, dancing in full costume in front of other adults and children is not sex.
The objective you apply to the situation is often what creates outrage. My question for all the chosen ones is, does your jaded goal really reflect the reality of what was going on? Should your emotional reactivity to your ignorant interpretation really be the motivation for new legislation? Is that even a logical proposition, or does your legislator need a sex coach?
I encourage you to think more deeply about the ramifications of such reactive legislation and how it might affect you personally. Of course, you might think it doesn’t affect you because you would never take your child to a drag show. But what if you don’t want to vaccinate your child with an experimental new drug? Do you want a politician to take that choice away from you? What if you want to take your child to Disneyworld? Do you want a politician to take that choice away from you because he or she believes Disney is marketing pedophiles? What if you wanted to homeschool? Do you want your representatives to charge you with a crime for choosing to teach your own child because you fear the “sex agenda” in the public institution? What if your child wants to play soccer, but your state senator thinks soccer is dangerous and therefore any child who signs up to play soccer will be removed from their home?
The legislation is ambiguous, as I was recently informed. This means the laws can bend for whichever party has control. Carefully consider how much energy you are willing to give lawmakers to accuse parents who make choices different from yours. The road to hell is paved with good intentions to protect children. Damn, even Hitler used that piece of rhetoric to push his agenda, and look how good it turned out. Millions of Jewish children died. It’s never about the kids, it’s always about more power and more control.