SCOTUS Decision: Ban on "Talk" Conversion Therapy is Unconstitutional

[BCSpace]

4 hours ago, Notatbm said:

At BYU, gay men were subjected to electroshock therapy

I'm going to call BS on this statement, including your reference (because Wikipedia is not dedicated to truth, but rather, to the views of those who have taken it over). They were not subjected to anything at all. They volunteered for the treatment and administered the shocks themselves when they decided they were ready.

Edited April 5 by BCSpace

[Notatbm]

10 minutes ago, BCSpace said:

I'm going to call BS on this statement, including your reference (because Wikipedia is not dedicated to truth, but rather, to the views of those who have taken it over). They were not subjected to anything at all. They volunteered for the treatment and administered the shocks themselves when they decided they were ready.

Ok show how the works cited at Wikipedia are lies. I’m not saying you are incorrect, but you need to prove it. 
 

the fact male homosexuals were provided an environment to place measurement devices on their own penises and look at porn at BYU is a sure sign to me the school and the church is wack. Perverted even. 

Edited April 5 by Notatbm

[The Nehor]

14 minutes ago, BCSpace said:

I'm going to call BS on this statement, including your reference (because Wikipedia is not dedicated to truth, but rather, to the views of those who have taken it over). They were not subjected to anything at all. They volunteered for the treatment and administered the shocks themselves when they decided they were ready.

[citation needed]

[Calm]

On 4/4/2026 at 11:57 AM, smac97 said:

My sense is that support of gay people has never been higher in the history of the world.

Considering where it started, that doesn’t have to be that high.

There can also be a big difference between the public appearance of support (think corporations and their PR moments which aren’t terribly meaningful in the long run) and private respect and acceptance.

[Calm]

6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

[citation needed]

See the links I posted

[Calm]

7 hours ago, BCSpace said:

and administered the shocks themselves when they decided they were ready

Not quite accurate….early on, if I understood correctly, the subjects set the pain level (see upper quote) and shocked themselves.  Later while they still set the intensity, they signaled readiness and then a couple of shocks would occur over the next few minutes.   Thorne suggests knowing the shock/pain was coming would mean they would be focusing on that rather than the picture/ideas the shock was supposed to create an aversion to and so a variable schedule was assumed to be more effective as it has been shown to be in other forms of conditioning.(see lower quote)

PS:. I believe Thorne on both accounts as 1) for shocks self administered…the setup was consistent with other studies I had read and 2) for non pornographic nudes, you only have to look at McBride’s thesis to know that using porn at BYU would have been way too uncomfortable for most professors and students since he was hoping to prove they could use clothed subjects just as effectively…my memory is his research did show that.

Quote

And the cuff

was like a blood pressure cuff. I mean, you know, it looks like that. And as far as the intensity

was concerned, they were instructed,

"alright, now, turn this knob, red knob, and you deliver it,

it will deliver to you a shock, that will increase as you increase the rheostat in movement, and

you stop where you find it uncomfortable or barely tolerable.

" So they had total control of the

intensity….

 And they had

little controller by their hand. And they had a switch to turn up the or down the intensity and to

turn off the shock altogether.

Quote

And I think it

would last probably about 10 or 15 seconds, and then the next one would come up. And the

shock would be given by the subject. You know, two or three times while they were watching

each male slide. While they were watching the female slides, they were to be thinking about

things that were pleasant and, and wouldn't it be nice to be accepted by everybody and you

know, things that were not ego dystonic.

Quote

And so the shocks, then, when you were performing your studies, were administered by the

subject himself….

Dr. Eugene Thorne 46:44

In most cases; in some cases, they came about two or three within the 10 second interval, they

never knew where. In the interval there's what's been called variable response. So it might be a

10th of a second, or maybe two seconds. So they never knew what was coming. But they were

instructed, now keep looking at the picture and trying to imagine yourself interacting sexually

with the subject of that picture, you won't know when the shot came. And that was more

towards the end of my involvement, where we use that on a variable schedule, because in

learning theory, that particular schedule is much more effective than a fixed schedule….

Yes. And let me say one more thing about the reason that we changed. If they have to think

about okay, now I got to shock myself, their mind is not on the sexual thought. If they if it's

coming, when-- by an automatic process, the machines that we had, they can still try to be

thinking while they're viewing their subject, the picture of what they're not supposed to be

thinking about, and trying to get themselves aroused. And ultimately, while those thoughts are

there, aversive things are happening to them in an unpredictable fashion within a, say, a given

interval. And so it just, I thought, made it even more effective. And they reported it was too,

because if they had to give themselves a shock, which is what they did at first, they had their

mind was on something else, turning it on and off.

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Eugene-Thorne-FAIR-Examination_otter_ai.pdf

Edited April 6 by Calm

[Calm]

13 hours ago, Notatbm said:

look at porn

So you do believe any nude picture is porn since you are repeating this after I posted Thorne’s description of how and what was used.

He used the statue of David in comparison.

Quote

 says, but they

cannot be prurient, they can't be salacious. They must be... if it's a nude, for example, It'd be

like something like the statue of David. I mean, you know, it's a piece of art or something like

that….

 If it was pornographic, it was never used.

Anything pornographic was rejected if anyone did bring such in.

Thorne would have been risking getting fired and McBride getting expelled if they had been caught using porn, I suspect.  And that would have gotten around quickly and someone would have reported it.

I bet someone reported the nudes given some of the crazy stuff that was going on at the time (a woman not allowed to take a test because her pants weren’t dressy enough, notes put in women’s coat pockets encouraging them to be more modest—so creepy, others being stopped and counseled by young men—creepier).  Can’t wear too much makeup, but too little is almost as bad.  Don’t be immodest, but better be ‘attractive’.  Damned if we did, damned if we didn’t.

Someone did a paper in my psych research during that time period on what characteristics a BYU male student wanted in a woman to see her as marriage material.  The only thing of significance was she had to shave her legs and pits. I died laughing (quietly) at the profound spirituality of my fellow BYU students of the male variety, not quite so different from other young men of their age.  😛 

added:  nowadays I would be asking about her sampling method and just who she asked to contribute. Maybe it was the guys she hung out with rather than BYU gentlemen in general. Getting a truly random selection was more effort than the paper was worth. 

Edited April 6 by Calm

[Notatbm]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

So you do believe any nude picture is porn since you are repeating this after I posted Thorne’s description of how and what was used.

He used the statue of David in comparison.

Anything pornographic was rejected if anyone did bring such in.

Thorne would have been risking getting fired and McBride getting expelled if they had been caught using porn, I suspect.  And that would have gotten around quickly and someone would have reported it.

I bet someone reported the nudes given some of the crazy stuff that was going on at the time (a woman not allowed to take a test because her pants weren’t dressy enough, notes put in women’s coat pockets encouraging them to be more modest—so creepy, others being stopped and counseled by young men—creepier).  Can’t wear too much makeup, but too little is almost as bad.  Don’t be immodest, but better be ‘attractive’.  Damned if we did, damned if we didn’t.

Someone did a paper in my psych research during that time period on what characteristics a BYU male student wanted in a woman to see her as marriage material.  The only thing of significance was she had to shave her legs and pits. I died laughing (quietly) at the profound spirituality of my fellow BYU students of the male variety.

Your buddy McBride used pornographic images of nude adolescents, men and women in his study... at least that is what he wrote and BYU gave him his degree so I guess it was BYU approved..... I swear people who get into studying this crap need to get locked up. I bet McBride had a temple recommend too.  I read the whole paper I posted below. What a freak show. This would be a good primer for the next sequel of SAW

 

"Pre-Post Rating of Male and Female Therapy

VCS Male therapy VCS were randomly selected by E. from a series of slides that had been prepared by several homosexuals who had been previously treated by Dr. D. Eugene Thome.

Female therapy VCS were chosen randomly from women's fashion magazines and Playboy-like magazines. Male and female therapy VCS were randomly arranged, they were not hierarchly scheduled (Thome, 1968). Therapy VCS was rated on a scale from 1 to 9. A rating of 1 signified sexual repulsion, 5 signified sexual neutrality, and 9 high sexual interest. Each slide was viewed until S was able to reliably rate it. Pleythvsmographic Measure of VCS Impact A phallometric test using a pleythysmographic mercury-inrubber-strain-gauge was used to assess physiological arousal to (visually projected) male and female slides before and after treatment. The apparatus used was patterned after Bancroft et al. (1966). Changes in penile volume were measured in mm increase in diameter of the penis. The measure used was the largest increase m penile circumference that occurred during the first 10 minute period following presentation of the first standard VCS . A reading of 25 mm represented a full erection (Bancroft, 1970). An arbitrary cut-off point between erotic and non-erotic was between 0.4 and 0.6 mm (Bancroft & Staples, 19 74).

Male and female nude VCS were chosen randomly by the E from a series of pictures taken from recent Playboy/Playgirl-like magazines. Clothed stimuli were chosen from several popular women's and men's fashion magazines. These pictures were then made up into 35 mm slides. The slides were simple poses; there were no overt sexual activities portrayed or implied in any of the slides"  pp53-55

"(male standard VCS were composed of nude, semi-nude and clothed adolescent and adult males in various poses). It appears because the compilation of the standard VCS slides was diverse, it was not difficult for S, to attend to or identify with some of the slide material and sustain an erection." pp73 

WHAT????

nude, semi-nude and clothed adolescent and adult males in various poses??

What the fetch??? lol this just gets better the deeper one digs. Holy crap!! BYU- the Lord's University ... they ought to be proud of this one

https://ia800400.us.archive.org/16/items/BYUaversionTherapy/McBride Effect of Visual Stimuli in Electric Aversion Therapy BYU Dissertation Aug 1976_text.pdf

Hmmm playgirl and playboy "like" magazines... sounds like something BYU honor code office would have regarded as porn.

 

Re the shaved armpits and legs. Well yea, no one wants to date a wookie. 

 

Edited April 6 by Notatbm

[Notatbm]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

So you do believe any nude picture is porn since you are repeating this after I posted Thorne’s description of how and what was used.

He used the statue of David in comparison.

and in practice he allowed a student to use nude pics from playgirl and playboy "like" magazines....doesnt sound much like the statue of david

EFFECT OF VISUAL STIMULI IN ELECTRIC AVERSION THERAPY

Max Ford McBride Department of Psychology Ph.D. Degree, August 1976

ABSTRACT

Two experimental groups of seven subjects each received Behavior therapy for male homosexuality which incorporated aversive conditioning and assertion training. The intent of the study was to determine whether use of nude male and female pictures are a necessary requisite for successful treatment. Indices of change included subjective rating of male and female slides used in treatment, pleythysmographic impact measured by penile volume change to a standard set of male and female slides not used in treatment, and a self-report questionnaire that measured sexual orientation. Results showed that treatment was effective in reducing homosexual responsiveness. It was found that nude male pictures used in treatment were more effective in ,d ’minishi ng sexual responsiveness to male stimuli. It was also found that the initial use oi nude female pictures may inhibit fantasy activity during treatment.

COMMITTEE APPROVAL:

D. Eugene Thorne, Committee Chairman

Reed Payne, Committee Member 

David G. Weight, Committee Member 

Darhl M. Pedersen, Department Chairman

2 hours ago, Calm said:

Anything pornographic was rejected if anyone did bring such in.

No one brought it in...McBride provided it or so it would seem

2 hours ago, Calm said:

Thorne would have been risking getting fired and McBride getting expelled if they had been caught using porn, I suspect.  And that would have gotten around quickly and someone would have reported it.

Thorne didnt care enough obviously,,, he blessed off this paper 

 

[california boy]

8 hours ago, Notatbm said:

and in practice he allowed a student to use nude pics from playgirl and playboy "like" magazines....doesnt sound much like the statue of david

EFFECT OF VISUAL STIMULI IN ELECTRIC AVERSION THERAPY

Max Ford McBride Department of Psychology Ph.D. Degree, August 1976

ABSTRACT

Two experimental groups of seven subjects each received Behavior therapy for male homosexuality which incorporated aversive conditioning and assertion training. The intent of the study was to determine whether use of nude male and female pictures are a necessary requisite for successful treatment. Indices of change included subjective rating of male and female slides used in treatment, pleythysmographic impact measured by penile volume change to a standard set of male and female slides not used in treatment, and a self-report questionnaire that measured sexual orientation. Results showed that treatment was effective in reducing homosexual responsiveness. It was found that nude male pictures used in treatment were more effective in ,d ’minishi ng sexual responsiveness to male stimuli. It was also found that the initial use oi nude female pictures may inhibit fantasy activity during treatment.

COMMITTEE APPROVAL:

D. Eugene Thorne, Committee Chairman

Reed Payne, Committee Member 

David G. Weight, Committee Member 

Darhl M. Pedersen, Department Chairman

No one brought it in...McBride provided it or so it would seem

Thorne didnt care enough obviously,,, he blessed off this paper 

 

So the experiment was to tease the gays to see what turns them on the most and they concluded that naked men were preferred over pictures of David???

This is like asking if rain is really water.  I've never been turned on sexually by the statue of David.  Naked men? duh. The whole thing sounds like those doing the electrical shock should have been the ones needing to  be experimented on. 

[Notatbm]

18 hours ago, BCSpace said:

I'm going to call BS on this statement, including your reference (because Wikipedia is not dedicated to truth, but rather, to the views of those who have taken it over). They were not subjected to anything at all. They volunteered for the treatment and administered the shocks themselves when they decided they were ready.

https://ia800400.us.archive.org/16/items/BYUaversionTherapy/McBride Effect of Visual Stimuli in Electric Aversion Therapy BYU Dissertation Aug 1976_text.pdf
 

pp46 of the actual pdf… described how study subjects could avoid being shocked or what would cause them to be shocked. No where in the pdf could I find evidence the test subject shocked themselves

[Notatbm]

10 minutes ago, california boy said:

So the experiment was to tease the gays to see what turns them on the most and they concluded that naked men were preferred over pictures of David???

This is like asking if rain is really water.  I've never been turned on sexually by the statue of David.  Naked men? duh. The whole thing sounds like those doing the electrical shock should have been the ones needing to  be experimented on. 

Yep… bunch of wack jobs. The whole lot of them 

[Notatbm]

29 minutes ago, california boy said:

So the experiment was to tease the gays to see what turns them on the most and they concluded that naked men were preferred over pictures of David???

This is like asking if rain is really water.  I've never been turned on sexually by the statue of David.  Naked men? duh. The whole thing sounds like those doing the electrical shock should have been the ones needing to  be experimented on. 

What did you think of the use of pictures of clothed and nude adolescents? I’m wondering how people read this doc and completely miss that? Sounds like some LE agency needs to do some digging to see if this involved child porn. Surely the researcher is still alive or many of the study participants are. 

[webbles]

48 minutes ago, california boy said:

So the experiment was to tease the gays to see what turns them on the most and they concluded that naked men were preferred over pictures of David???

This is like asking if rain is really water.  I've never been turned on sexually by the statue of David.  Naked men? duh. The whole thing sounds like those doing the electrical shock should have been the ones needing to  be experimented on. 

No, the experiment was trying to determine if the behavioral modification mechanisms (including electric aversion) can work with clothed pictures vs nude pictures.  The usage of nude pictures was the norm but it doesn't work for certain cultures (such as BYU).  If clothed pictures worked just as well as nude pictures, then for the cultures that have issues with nudity, they could use clothed pictures.

It wasn't trying to determine if they are turned on by clothed vs nude pictures, only if the behavioral change had the same response to clothed vs nude pictures.  It turns out that the response was not the same with regards to nude male pictures.  But interestingly, clothed female pictures did have a different response.  But the experiment also noted that the men who were randomly assigned to the clothed female pictures also had a stronger reaction to women vs the men in the nude female pictures so that probably was a factor.

[smac97]

16 hours ago, Calm said:

Quote

Quote

Healing from that trauma are the first steps in realizing that it is ok to be gay, even if it seems the whole world wants to shame you out of it.

It "seems" to you that "the whole world wants," in 2026, "to shame you"?

Really?  My sense is that support of gay people has never been higher in the history of the world.

Considering where it started, that doesn’t have to be that high.

And yet it is "that high."  Support for same-sex marriage has more than doubled in my adult lifetime.  See, e.g., here:

This is an remarkable level of support, even in a pluralistic society such as ours.

Human Rights Campaign in 2023: ICYMI: New Data Shows Support for LGBTQ+ Rights Reaches Highest Rates Ever Recorded

Quote

Key Points:

• 10% of Americans now identify as LGBTQ+
• Eight in ten Americans favor laws that would protect LGBTQ+ people against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations, and housing
• 66% of Republicans favor nondiscrimination provisions for LGBTQ+ people
• Seven in ten Americans support marriage equality, including nearly half of Republicans
• Nearly two-thirds of Americans (65%) oppose religiously based refusals to serve LGBTQ+ people
• Majorities of almost every major religious group oppose allowing religiously based service refusals

And yet CB, in 2026, is stating: "Healing from that trauma are the first steps in realizing that it is ok to be gay, even if it seems the whole world wants to shame you out of it."

16 hours ago, Calm said:

There can also be a big difference between the public appearance of support (think corporations and their PR moments which aren’t terribly meaningful in the long run) and private respect and acceptance.

I'm not sure what you are saying here.  To what do you attribute this "big difference"?  Are people just lying?  Mouthing what they think they need to say ("public appearance of support") even though it may not actually reflect what they genuinely thing ("private respect and acceptance")?

I found this article interesting: Have Young Americans Turned Against Gay Rights?

An excerpt:

Quote

By nearly every measure, the Biden administration was the most LGBTQ-inclusive ever, both in terms of personnel and political priorities. What’s more, the administration took pains to publicize these efforts, ensuring that people understood that the voices and interests of LGBTQ people were represented.

What happened next was probably predictable. If Americans came to believe that gay and lesbian people were well-represented in American cultural and political institutions, their support for aggressive measures promoting LGBTQ equality would necessarily fall. And that’s precisely what occurred. From 2020 to 2025, the percentage of Americans who believe the country needs to do more on gay rights plummeted. In 2020, half of Americans said more needed to be done to ensure gay and lesbian people have equal rights to other Americans. By 2025, that had dropped to 39 percent. This is exactly what one would expect if LGBTQ Americans were perceived as having considerable cultural clout and political representation. What’s more, an acknowledgment that gay and lesbian people have attained greater political influence does not negate their experiences with discrimination. In fact, most Americans can hold these views concurrently. Polls still find that most Americans believe gay and lesbian people experience “a lot” of discrimination.

And this (from The Advocate in March 2026) : Fewer young Americans support LGBTQ+ protections, survey finds

Quote

Just 7 in 10 Americans aged 18 to 29 support nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ residents, a new survey has found.

"Just."

Quote

That is down from 80 percent expressing support in 2015, just ten years prior, primarily driven by a decrease in support from young Republicans, according to the Public Religion Research Institute.

While support has decreased overall in recent years, protections for LGBTQ+ protections are still widely popular among Americans, according to the survey released Thursday by the institute, titled the “2025 American Values Atlas.”

The article goes on to speculate as to the decrease:

Quote

Despite this, some areas of LGBTQ+ rights have not found as much favor. The right to use the bathroom that aligns with an individual’s gender identity, for example, was only supported by 40 percent of respondents.

“There is a disconnect among many Americans with respect to upholding the broad principle of non-discrimination protections for transgender Americans and growing support for bathroom bills,” Deckman said.

Radical trans ideology seems to be dragging down the "LGBT Community."

And here (November 2025) : Support for Same-Sex Marriage Has Dropped, Amid Conservative Attacks

Quote

In a new poll, Americans’ public support for gay marriage dropped significantly for the first time in years.

The Economist/YouGov’s 2025 annual poll surveyed 1,623 adult U.S. citizens between October 24 and October 27, 2025. When asked if they think same-sex marriage should be legal, 54% said yes, 33% said no, and 13% were unsure. These numbers mark a considerable drop from just a few years ago, when Gallup’s 2021 poll found that a record-high 70% of Americans supported same-sex marriage.

 

The 2025 Gallup poll found a 47-point gap between political parties’ support for marriage equality — 41% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats agreed that same-sex marriages should be “recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages.” This marked the lowest that Republican support for marriage equality has been in a decade, and the largest gap between the parties since Gallup began asking the question in 1996. However, the poll found that, overall, 68% of all U.S. adults surveyed supported same-sex marriage rights for same-sex couples.

This year’s Economist/YouGov poll found that, on average, Americans are still markedly less supportive of trans rights. 41% of 2025 respondents agreed with the statement “our society has gone too far in accepting people who are transgender,” and 64% opposed allowing transgender students to play on sports teams that align with their gender identity.

I wonder if the explanation pertains to what could be called "Activism Fatigue."  I have previously commented on "March of Dimes Syndrome" here:

Apology for the Priesthood Ban / "March of Dimes Syndrome" / "Mission Creep" / "Spencer's Law"

The article itself is here: The March of Dimes Syndrome

A Grok summary of the article:

Quote

"The March of Dimes Syndrome" Author: John Tierney City Journal, June 16, 2024

Core thesis: Successful activist organizations and causes often suffer from “March of Dimes syndrome”—once they nearly solve their original problem, they pivot to new (often exaggerated) crises to keep their funding, relevance, and jobs alive.

Key examples:

• The original March of Dimes shifted from eradicating polio (achieved via vaccines) to fighting birth defects.
• Anti-Vietnam War activists became antinuclear protesters.
• LGBT groups declared new “emergencies” after winning same-sex marriage.
• Civil-rights organizations moved to affirmative action, reparations, and anti-fossil-fuel campaigns.
• The Southern Poverty Law Center evolved from suing the Klan to labeling broad “hate groups” for massive fundraising.
• BLM, #MeToo, antismoking campaigns, and climate activists similarly escalate rhetoric and broaden targets even as underlying problems decline.

Conclusion: Amplified by “Spencer’s Law” (people worry more about shrinking problems) and negativity bias, the syndrome leads activists to invent apocalyptic threats, sustaining their movement at the cost of accuracy and social peace.

As regarding LGBT groups (from the article) :

Quote

Consider the current cultural conflicts over gender and sex. As the gay rights movement achieved its initial goals from the 1970s, overturning antisodomy laws and destigmatizing homosexuality, the movement expanded to include so many new causes that it required an acronym, LGBTQIA+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning, Intersex, Asexual, and more). Its leaders declared a new cause, same-sex marriage, which vanished after the Supreme Court legalized it nationally in 2015. Five years later, the Court extended civil rights protections to people’s sexual preferences.

What were activists to do? Gays could marry in every state, and the whole LGBTQIA+ alphabet was a protected class—what more could groups like the Human Rights Campaign or the National LGBTQ Task Force possibly demand from the government? What would get the attention of crusading journalists? An antigay hate crime would generate a brief publicity and fund-raising burst, but even progressive journalists struggled to sustain the groups’ narrative that America was a homophobic society.

The laws against homosexuality had been toppled. The culture that produced those laws has been overthrown, too. Most Americans now support same-sex marriage. The Pride flag flies at corporate headquarters, churches, schools, city halls, and the White House. Uttering once-common antigay slurs is now career suicide. Gay characters, long taboo in television scripts, are now practically obligatory. Gays once felt overwhelming social pressure to stay in the closet, but now many young adults are reluctant to admit to being heterosexuals, as reflected in the surge of young women classifying themselves as bisexual despite never having had sex with a woman.

So activists have moved the goalposts once again. It is no longer enough for conservative Christians to tolerate same-sex marriage—now they must be legally required to bake cakes and design web pages for the weddings. It is no longer enough to protect gay students from harassment—now these students must have access in elementary school libraries to how-to manuals for **** sex. Public schools must encourage prepubescent students to explore the many possible gender identities without their parents’ knowledge. Biological males self-identifying as females must be allowed to compete against females in sports. These new causes have been wildly unpopular, arousing opposition from homosexuals as well as heterosexuals, and have led to a decline in public support for the gay rights movement. But however much the backlash has hurt the original cause, the controversies keep activists in business.

Mr. Tierney is, I think, not alone in perceiving a substantial drift away from what the Gay Rights Movement originally was intended to achieve.  See here (June 2025) : Gay journalist says LGBTQ movement has gone from civil rights success to 'madness'

Quote

Gay journalist Andrew Sullivan said Thursday that the LGBTQ movement is losing ground in America because it has become "radicalized."

In a New York Times guest essay, Sullivan marveled at how the gay rights movement traded a legacy of civil rights successes for radical ideas that are turning off modern-day Americans, like trying to rewrite the rules of biology and advocating for child transgender treatment — all the while demonizing Americans who aren’t on board with those ideas.

"{R}ewrite rules of biology" = Trans ideologies positing positing that a man can become a woman by "identifying" as one, "trans women are women," biological men in women's sports, bathrooms, prisons, re-defining "woman," etc.

"{A}dvocating for child transgender treatment" is self-explanatory.

Quote

"Far from celebrating victory, defending the gains, staying vigilant, but winding down as a movement that had achieved its core objectives — including the end of H.I.V. in the United States as an unstoppable plague — gay and lesbian rights groups did the opposite. Swayed by the broader liberal shift to the ‘social justice’ left, they radicalized," he wrote.

Sullivan detailed how the gay rights movement changed for the worse after winning most of the victories for gay, lesbian and transgender civil rights in the past few decades. It became "a new and radical gender revolution" that he said focused "on ending what activists saw as the oppression of the sex binary, which some critical gender and queer theorists associated with ‘White supremacy,’" dissolving the "natural distinctions between men and women in society," and replacing "biological sex with ‘gender identity’ in the law and culture."

I think he has a point.  This stuff has been a bridge too far.

Quote

He also said modern LGBTQ activists redefined homosexuality "not as a neutral fact of the human condition but as a liberating ideological ‘queerness’ meant to subvert and ‘queer’ language, culture and society in myriad different ways."

Sullivan added that because of this shift, the words "gay and lesbian" in LGBT "all but disappeared" as it became "L.G.B.T.Q., then L.G.B.T.Q.+, and more letters and characters kept being added: L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ or 2S.L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+ … The plus sign referred to a seemingly infinite number of new niche identities, and, by some counts, more than 70 new ‘genders.’"

I think that regular folks, regardless of where they originally stood and now stand on the core topics in "gay and lesbian rights" (particularly same-sex marriage), are getting wary of, and/or tired of, the endless emphasis and discussion and activism associated with this "seemingly infinite number of new niche identities."

Quote

Sullivan continued, saying that the word "’Queer’ was a way of summing up the new regime, a clear sign that this really was a different movement than the gay, lesbian and transgender civil rights movement of the past."

The author, though he said he welcomed some of the changes brought by this modern movement, said he "simply didn’t buy it."

"I didn’t and don’t believe that being a man or a woman has nothing to do with biology. My sexual orientation is based on a biological distinction between men and women: I’m attracted to the former and not to the latter. And now I was supposed to believe the difference didn’t exist?"

He called this development "madness," writing, "But abolishing the sex binary for the entire society? That’s a whole other thing entirely. And madness, I believe. What if I redefined what it is to be heterosexual and imposed it on straight people?"

Fair questions, these.

Quote

"They demanded the entire society change in a fundamental way so that the sex binary no longer counted," he said, noting how dissent with this principle was "equated with bigotry."

Hoo, boy.  Is he spot-on with this observation.

Quote

The other major problem with this new version of the gay rights movement, he said, was the preoccupation with children’s sexual orientations.

The other "bridge too far."

Quote

Sullivan continued, "But this illiberalism made a fateful, strategic mistake. In the gay rights movement, there had always been an unspoken golden rule: Leave children out of it. We knew very well that any overreach there could provoke the most ancient blood libel against us: that we groom and abuse kids… So what did the gender revolutionaries go and do? They focused almost entirely on children and minors."

I think he has a solid point here, as does Tierney above.  The "they," is the "gender revolutionaries," not all gay/lesbian folks.

Quote

He detailed how gender ideology proponents taught kids that "being a boy or a girl was something they could choose and change at will," allowed biological males to compete in female sports, and, in some places, allowed kids to socially transition at school "without their parents’ knowledge or permission."

I've previously stated in this thread: "Self-appointed State actors and strangers assigning to themselves the right to decide what "abuse" means, and to scare children, and to secretively alienate children from their parents, and to seek to actively subvert parental rights, are engaging in wrongful and deeply creepy behavior."

I agree with Mr. Sullivan on this point.

Quote

The author then mentioned the "most radical of all: gender-affirming care for minors, which can lead to irreversible sex changes for children."

"{T}he most radical of all."

Quote

After mentioning the advent of these radical positions, Sullivan pointed to current polling showing people’s support for the LGBTQ movement eroding. Citing a Gallup poll, he said, "In 2021, for example, 62 percent of Americans said that transgender athletes should be able to play only on teams that matched their gender at birth; by 2023, that figure had risen to 69 percent."

"When people who know a trans person personally were polled, only 40 percent in 2021 supported their competing in teams that matched their gender identity; by 2023, that dropped to 30 percent," he said, mentioning another set of Gallup polls. "On the medical question, 46 percent of Americans supported banning medical care related to gender transitions for minors in 2022. Today, as people have learned more, 56 percent do," he said, citing Pew Research data.

Sullivan went on to note that because of this radicalism, the footholds that the gay rights movement carved out among the political center and right "are being lost."

I suspect that he is correct about the adverse effects of this "radicalism," but I would like to see more discussion/data about it.  

Quote

"Gallup showed Republican support for gay marriage dropping from 55 to 46 percent between 2022 and 2025," he wrote. 

Sullivan concluded his piece by urging fellow liberals to protect the successes of the gay rights movement and not sacrifice them for radical ideology. 

"Let’s not throw it away," he said.

This is where Tierney's article comes back into focus.  I don't think activists are willing to close up shop, so they continue to push and push and push, even to the point of doubling and tripling down on what Sullivan aptly calls the "madness" associated with "abolishing the sex binary for the entire society" and "preoccupation with children’s sexual orientations."

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited April 6 by smac97

[smac97]

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

Quote

Again: Drag shows are not inherently “sexual” in the strict sense that every single one must involve explicit sex acts or pornography-level content.  However, the honest answer is, I think, more nuanced: Drag shows are very frequently and deliberately sexualized, and the art form itself is built on gender parody, exaggeration, and adult-oriented performance traditions that often incorporate sexual humor, innuendo, and provocative elements.

I don't quite understand this.  You admit that drag shows are not inherently "sexual"

"Drag shows are not inherently 'sexual' in the strict sense that every single one must involve explicit sex acts or pornography-level content."

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

but you object to them because Drag shows are frequently and deliberately sexualized???  

Yes.  "However, the honest answer is, I think, more nuanced: Drag shows are very frequently and deliberately sexualized, and the art form itself is built on gender parody, exaggeration, and adult-oriented performance traditions that often incorporate sexual humor, innuendo, and provocative elements."

What is it about this do you not understand?

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

Yet you seem to object to any child even seeing a drag queen.  

I don't think I said that.

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

Not because it is inherently sexual, but because the person in drag is a gay man dressed as a woman.  Would that be correct?  

No.  Again: "{Other than drag queens who are engaging in highly sexualized behavior in the presence of children,} I don't give much thought to drag queens.  While I think they would be better off abandoning such behaviors, they are adults and can do as they please, within the confines of the law."

Are all drag queens gay?

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

Do you also object when women wear male clothing like suits, tuxedos, mens shirts etc?

If they are doing so while engaging in highly sexualized behavior in the presence of children, yes.  Otherwise, I don't give much thought to women dressing up as men.  Adults can do as they please, within the confines of the law.

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

Every drag show that has adult humor I have ever seen that were all held in a bar or night club that served alcohol.  

Back in 2022 you and I were in a thread that discussed instances of events which, in my view, sexualize children:

Quote

The coverage of many "Pride" parades is not doing that movement any favors.  The participants come across as hedonistic, grossly oversexualized, and pervy.  And with increasing frequency, the debauchery parades, the "Drag Queen Story Hours," the supposed "Kid-Friendly" drag shows, etc., are coming across pretty clearly as "grooming" behaviors.  As sexualizing children.

Yes, kink belongs at Pride. And I want my kids to see it.

Quote

Our family often took the train into Philadelphia, but as we rode across the bridge to attend the city’s Pride parade five years ago, my wife’s leg bounced with a nervous jitter. 
...
When our children grew tired of marching, we plopped onto a nearby curb. Just as we got settled, our elementary-schooler pointed in the direction of oncoming floats, raising an eyebrow at a bare-chested man in dark sunglasses whose black suspenders clipped into a leather thong. The man paused to be spanked playfully by a partner with a flog. “What are they doing?” my curious kid asked as our toddler cheered them on. The pair was the first of a few dozen kinksters who danced down the street, laughing together as they twirled their whips and batons, some leading companions by leashes. At the time, my children were too young to understand the nuance of the situation, but I told them the truth: That these folks were members of our community celebrating who they are and what they like to do.

 

That one was about a Pride parade.  What is your perspective? 

Do you support an public event where children watch "a bare-chested man in dark sunglasses whose black suspenders clipped into a leather thong ... {being} spanked playfully by a partner with a flog"?

Don't Look Away: These Are the 'Family-Friendly' Pride Events the Left Is Pushing On Kids

Quote

Here are just a few of the most recent disgusting, "family-friendly" LGBTQ events billed for kids, and just how horrifically perverse they actually are.

This...er...performer? In spandex, standing next to men in thongs, shouting "We have bandanas and lube!" from a float parading in front of young kids.
...
Christina Aguilera sporting a green strap-on penis at a concert advertised as an "all-ages" pride event in Los Angeles.
...
This man in drag exposing his pantyhose-clad crotch at a "kid-friendly" brunch.
...
A toddler watches as men in thongs and bondage gear whip one another at a pride parade.
...
A group of half-naked people - including men and women - gyrate on stage and simulate sex acts at a "family-friendly" drag and pride event in Austin, Texas.
...
This drag queen wearing pop-up prosthetic genitalia that actually sprayed liquid on to a crowd that included kids.
...
Drag queens and men in women's lingerie danced provocatively in front of a crowd that included one very confused little girl.
...
This bare-breasted person twerking and gyrating near a cop, only feet from children marching in the same parade in Washington, D.C. 

I disapprove and am opposed to events such as those described above.

What is your perspective?  Do you support children attending events exhibiting the above behaviors?

Prepping Kids for a Pride Parade

Quote

Jenifer McGuire, Ph.D., an associate professor of family social science at the University of Minnesota, has been to Pride celebrations across the world with her family, from Tucson to Amsterdam. McGuire, a lesbian parent, always preps her kids for possible adult content beforehand. After a few events, the kids knew to expect nudity and other surprises. “They just had to learn to laugh and enjoy things. Like there were these Beanie Babies with giant penises on them,” McGuire says. “For a fourth- and fifth-grade kid, that's super funny.”

What is your perspective?  Do you support children attending events in which they will see nude adults engaging in sexualized behavior, including behaviors like "Beanie Babies with giant penises on them"?

Do you think children should "laugh and enjoy" these things?

Journalist Witnesses Naked Men Playing with Kids at Pride

Quote

It was horrifying. Naked adults were playing with children at Seattle’s Pride fest and the police couldn’t do anything about it, Post Millennial reporter Katie Daviscourt said on the Todd Starnes Show. The following is a rush transcript of the interview.

STARNES: [01:47:29] We told you earlier about this disgusting video that came out of Seattle, the pride parade. You got the Boy Scouts marching with the rainbow flags and then you have a bunch of men that are butt naked and they’re riding around on bicycles. 
...
DAVISCOURT: [01:48:12] You know what? It is so shocking, the events that occurred. You know, it’s evident that the nature of pride has taken a very dark turn in the sense of morality. Pride, you know, it went from being able to love who you want, to if you don’t accept me prancing around naked in front of a crowd of children and trying to groom them. Then, you know, you’re a homophobe. It was a shocking surprise that they were out in the open yesterday.
...
DAVISCOURT: [01:48:53] Right. So let’s just start from the top. So I’ve been to many pride events in the past, but this year’s special acts of deviancy reached new heights. I don’t know a single reporter who likes to post footage of children on the Internet, but sadly, the events that occurred need to be exposed. And an estimated 500,000 people took over the streets of Seattle Sunday to celebrate Pride for the first time in about three years because the event was shut down from the pandemic. And out of all of the participants that could have opened the parade, the organizers chose the Boy and Girl Scouts of America, who recently changed their name to The Scouts to be more inclusive. And now, given the history of the Boy Scouts and the sexual molestation and pedophilia that has come out of their group, sadly, having the young children open the parade was a rather bold move. And following shortly behind the Boy Scouts was the group of naked cyclists, both male and female, circling the parade route, exposing their genitalia to children who came to attend the event, which was advertised as a family friendly event. And some of these cyclists were covered in body paint while the majority were fully exposed, leaving nothing unseen to the eye.  But that video that you just talked about was nothing compared to what I witnessed at Pride Fest, which happened directly after the parade.
...
DAVISCOURT: [01:50:43] Yeah, they are fully nude. And so I was going around Pride Fest interviewing people and I went to the international fountain. It’s our big fountain at the Seattle Center. And there were dozens of fully naked men and women playing in the fountain with children.
...
DAVISCOURT: [01:51:03] Exactly! How is this legal? And so I sat there shocked. I have never in the field, you know, Seattle is so insane. I’ve been at a loss for words a couple of times but this has actually left me at a loss for words witnessing grown adults playing in the fountain, naked with children. And so I sat there shocked and I was trying to find Seattle PD. And there’s a back story to this that I’ll explain. But I went up and I did find two officers and I asked them, what is going on? How can people be naked with these children? And they said that due to the city’s indecent exposure laws, public nudity is permissible under them unless someone feels threatened or harmed. And only then they could take action if someone were to file a police report. But I also think that the parents who decided to bring their kids to this seemed to have no problem. And it just goes to show that Pride has become a grooming festival to these young kids.

Children watching a public event involving "a bunch of men that are butt naked and they’re riding around on bicycles ... exposing their genitalia to children who came to attend the event, which was advertised as a family friendly event."  

"{S}ome of these cyclists were covered in body paint while the majority were fully exposed, leaving nothing unseen to the eye."

"{D}ozens of fully naked men and women playing in the fountain with children."

I am opposed to events such as those described above being characterized as "family friendly" and having children as attendees (and, to an extent, participants ("fully naked men and women playing in the fountain with children")).

Are you?

DC Pride parade marked by depravity, grooming of children despite ‘family friendly’ billing

Quote

The Capital Pride Parade was hosted in Washington, D.C. Saturday and, as has become too common these days, the event that billed itself as “family friendly” was filled with nudity, fetishism and depravity that children were encouraged to watch.

Marching through the Logan Circle and Dupont Circle neighborhoods of D.C., the Marriott International sponsored event had anticipated as many as 500,000 attendees. Including marchers and floats from an array of organizations, the Capital Pride Alliance run event stated their purpose as serving “to celebrate, educate, support, and inspire our multi-faceted communities,” and, evidently, this was best accomplished by twerking half-naked in front of kids.

One video captured what was described as “a man with breasts” marching ahead of young children wearing little more than a bikini bottom walking straight up to a police officer, bending over, and shaking his rear at the cop.

Lest it be construed as an isolated incident, the event was said to have hundreds of children marking along the parade route. Among the participants were representatives from the District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS), including a banner for Ross DCPS which is an elementary school.
...
Other content that was promoted as appropriate for young children to observe included groups engaged in “Puppy Play” where participants wear canine masks and bondage gear and behave as though they are a dog.

"'{A} man with breasts' marching ahead of young children wearing little more than a bikini bottom walking straight up to a police officer, bending over, and shaking his rear at the cop."

I am opposed to events including stuff like this.

Are you?

Pride Parade Clips Show Shocking and Bizarre Moments — with Children in Attendance

Quote

Cities around the United States held parades and other events over the weekend to celebrate Pride Month. Bizarre displays and antics from attendees have since appeared on social media, with a few videos showing that children were present. Here are several disturbing moments from the latest round of Pride parades.
...
Other images from the weekend showed that children were in attendance at Pride-themed events.

Dan O'Donnell

 

I regret to inform you that yesterday’s drag show at the Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin farmer’s market wasn’t as family-friendly as advertised.

 

One video showed an adult encouraging a little girl to wave at men dressed in women’s clothing while other men walked by, clad in rainbow-colored speedos with tight bulges on display.
...
Another video shows a drag queen standing on an eggplant emoji float, proclaiming — with young children present — “We have genitals and lube.”
...
One video appears to show an adult forcing her reluctant child to watch the Pride parade.
...
Additional video clips show that children were present at a drag show featuring several men disrobing and suggestively dancing on stage.
...

The L.A. Pride music festival on Saturday was described as an “all-ages” event, according to a report by Los Angeles Daily News.

Pop star Christina Aguilera was seen wearing a green, bejeweled phallus, with which she repeatedly stroked during her performance at the all-ages event on Saturday night.

"{O}ther men walked by {children}, clad in rainbow-colored speedos with tight bulges on display."

"{A} drag queen standing on an eggplant emoji float, proclaiming — with young children present — 'We have genitals and lube.'"

"{C}hildren were present at a drag show featuring several men disrobing and suggestively dancing on stage."

"Christina Aguilera was seen wearing a green, bejeweled phallus, with which she repeatedly stroked during her performance at the all-ages event on Saturday night."

"{A}n adult forcing her reluctant child to watch the Pride parade."

What are your thoughts about children being exposed to these behaviors?

Pride Month Jumps the Shark

Quote

“Pride” events started a few decades ago as an activist effort to push back against the stigma attached to homosexuality. Now extended across the whole month of June, it looks more like an effort designed to do the opposite.

Last weekend, social media abounded with videos of a Pride event at a gay bar in Dallas called Drag the Kids to Pride. Young children can be seen handing money to twerking drag queens. A bright pink neon sign saying “It’s Not Going to Lick Itself!” added an extra layer of creepiness.

This week, the Twitter account Libs of Tiktok alerted followers to a drag show at a San Francisco middle school. In one video, a crowd of students cheers wildly as the performer—Twitter handle @NickiJizz—pulls off his wig in the finale.

...

For instance, as The Daily Signal reports, the Smithsonian American Art Museum has gotten in on the action. As part of its Pride Family Day, the taxpayer-supported museum sponsored “what it called an ‘age appropriate’ drag queen show and crafts inspired by the LGBTQ Pride flag for children ages 3 and up.”

You can find “age-appropriate drag queen” listed in the dictionary of oxymorons not far from “female penis.”

Second, Pride now seems less about gay and lesbian inclusion and more about abolishing the difference between males and females, and between adults and children.

...

This targeting of children gives the sea of rainbows a much more sinister hue. The pride-signaling on corporate logos, map and exercise apps, public school hallways, TV networks and streaming services, Google doodles, even on Major League Baseball fields and jerseys, feels ever more oppressive.

This rainbow-fest has irked social conservatives for years. And some feminists have objected to drag queens, which are little more than men dressing up as sexualized parodies of women. But now, even some who identify as gay and lesbian have had enough.

On Twitter, Storm Robinson observed: “As a gay man, I can’t understand why a parent would take their child to a drag queen story hour. Why does this even exist? … Drag is not for kids. The end.”
...

And consider British philosopher Kathleen Stock, author of the terrific book “Material Girls,” who was marching in Pride parades just a few years ago. She now has harsh words about the whole business:

This annual festival of naked men and naked political manoeuvring is incredibly dispiriting to any lesbian or gay man who doesn’t believe in the underpinning values—if you can call them values at all.  Some of my friends have become positively averse to the sight of the rainbow flag, and shudder whenever they see one. In Brighton, given the ubiquity of rainbows—from buses to shopfronts to lighting displays and beyond—this means you shudder on average about four times an hour. And not in a good way. Rather than feeling proud as robotically instructed, many feel ashamed of what’s being done in their name.

"Young children can be seen handing money to twerking drag queens. A bright pink neon sign saying 'It’s Not Going to Lick Itself!' added an extra layer of creepiness."

Do you approve or disapprove of events such as the one described above?

Yale Professor Wants Your Kids To See Sex At Pride Parades So They’re Not ‘Homophobes’

Quote

It has become increasingly apparent that LGBT activists want to sexualize children. Just when you think that such attempts couldn’t be any more bold, there’s always a left-wing academic, children’s TV show, or public figure eager to push for the needle towards the acceptance of pedophilia. 

The latest example comes from Yale University associate professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Joseph J. Fischel, who shamelessly came out in favor of exposing children to public sex acts in his gut-wrenching article titled “Keep Pride Nude” in the Boston Review. 

Fischel, who proclaims in his Twitter bio that he is “gay for pay,” attempts to justify his argument that children should be exposed to public displays of kink and gay sexuality by taking the laughable position that such exposure will help combat “racism and homophobia.”
...
According to Fischel, “Bodies of color, simply by existing, were tantamount to sex in public.” Adding that “Blacks were white folks’ sex public [sic],” capitalizing “Black” while leaving “white” lowercase throughout the article. 

Then suddenly, the heart of the matter resurfaces, with Fischel writing “My argument, all along really, has been for the children.” With surprising honesty, he notes that the legal jargon, citations of supposed intellectuals, and bizarre invocations of racism simply serve as pretexts, pseudo-intellectual backings for his underlying, wretched desire to expose children to sexual acts.

Here Fischel really takes off the mask, writing what are perhaps the most telling lines of the entire article when he inquires “What is the presumptive harm if a child …. sees an adult’s butt cheeks, or even an adult’s genitals or breasts?”  
...
But Fischel continues, asking if a child would feel violated after witnessing any of these things, or if they’d be “as likely to respond with curiosity?”
...

Fischel also writes that “leather chaps and nipple clamps” serve to “model modes of living and loving that many kids… have never seen,” adding that “the more models of queerness the better.”

He even bashes parents who seek to shield their children from public sex acts, writing “When parents … oppose public indecency at Pride on the grounds that it may upset children, the opposite is more likely the case.” He continues, “their children might like it, and that upsets the parents, not the children.”

The assertion that “children might like it,” with “it” referring to adult nudity and kink, blatantly contradicts the common moral understanding that children should be entirely removed from adult sexuality. Through this statement and the entire article, it becomes apparent that this understanding is one Fischel is actively working to undermine.  
...
Fischel attacks the family even more blatantly in his concluding paragraph when he writes “we ought to celebrate kink, butts, and boobs… especially for those kids whose opportunities and curiosities are stifled by racist violence, economic inequality, or their heterosexual nuclear family.”

"{Yale University associate professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Joseph J. Fischel} attempts to justify his argument that children should be exposed to public displays of kink and gay sexuality by taking the laughable position that such exposure will help combat 'racism and homophobia.'"

"{Fischel inquires} 'What is the presumptive harm if a child …. sees an adult’s butt cheeks, or even an adult’s genitals or breasts?'"

"Fischel continues, asking if a child would feel violated after witnessing any of these things, or if they’d be 'as likely to respond with curiosity?'"

"{Fischel states that 'children might like'} public indecency at Pride."

"{Fischel states that} we ought to celebrate kink, butts, and boobs… especially for {children}."

I disagree with Prof. Fischel. 

Do you agree or disagree with Prof. Fischel?

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

By the very nature of their location, no minors are allowed into bars, so no children are seeing drag shows that are meant for adult entertainment.  

How do you account for the events described above?

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

Have you ever seen a "drag show" of this nature somewhere other than a bar?  

I have never attended a drag show.

I recall this story about a drag show in a bar in which children were invited, and which venue included a big neon sign declaring "It's not gonna lick itself!"

Dallas protesters show up to 'Drag the kids to pride' family-friendly drag show

"Drag the Kids to Pride."

"It's not gonna lick itself!"

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

If you have seen such a show, were the child's parents present also?  

I have never attended a drag show.  Some parents apparently were in attendance at the Dallas event noted above.

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

Have you ever seen a drag queen read a story in a library to children where the parents were not also present?

I have never attended a Drag Queen Story Hour.

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

Quote

I think any sexualization of children is wrong.  

Yeah me too.  

I am glad we agree on that.

I wonder if we agree on the parameters of what constitutes sexualization of children."

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

But as you said, drag queens are not inherently sexual.  

Again: "Drag shows are very frequently and deliberately sexualized, and the art form itself is built on gender parody, exaggeration, and adult-oriented performance traditions that often incorporate sexual humor, innuendo, and provocative elements."

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

So why do you keep attacking them as harmful to children?

I reject the characterization of "attacking." 

I also reject the reference to "them."  I have not been speaking of all drag queens, but rather the subset that are engaging in highly sexualized behavior in the presence of children.  Other than this subset, I don't give much thought to drag queens.  While I think they would be better off abandoning such behaviors, they are adults and can do as they please, within the confines of the law.

Again:

Quote

A non-sexualized drag show?  I suppose not "inherently."  Drag shows are not inherently “sexual” in the strict sense that every single one must involve explicit sex acts or pornography-level content.  However, the honest answer is, I think, more nuanced: Drag shows are very frequently and deliberately sexualized, and the art form itself is built on gender parody, exaggeration, and adult-oriented performance traditions that often incorporate sexual humor, innuendo, and provocative elements.
...
“Family-friendly” or “kid-friendly” drag story hours are the ones that spark controversy. Performers usually tone down the raunch, but they still feature exaggerated sexualized costumes (breast pads, hip pads, heavy makeup, high heels, etc.) and read books that introduce gender/sexuality concepts to children. In my view, this is still sexualizing because it exposes kids to adult gender performance and ideological messaging about sex and identity.
...
Not every interaction is overtly sexual, but the context is highly sexualized for many viewers: adult male in drag makeup and gown performing femininity in front of and with prepubescent girls.  My understanding is that developmental psychology and child-protection experts generally conclude that exposing young children to adult cross-dressing or drag performance in an intimate setting can be confusing, boundary-blurring, or emotionally disruptive, even if the performer is not behaving maliciously.

I am likewise critical of exposing children to sexualized behaviors in other venues that do not necessarily involve drag queens or "Pride" stuff.  

As a Latter-day Saint, I believe sex is a beautiful and sacred gift from Heavenly Father, reserved for marriage between a man and a woman and intended to create eternal families (see ‘The Family: A Proclamation to the World’). Because it is sacred, it deserves decorum and reverence — not casual public spectacle. Exposing children to any adult sexualized context — whether Drag Queen Story Hour, burlesque shows, child beauty pageants, suggestive dance routines, or events like Mardi Gras and Hooters-style venues — confuses their developing understanding of gender, modesty, and healthy boundaries. Even if a specific performance isn’t overtly explicit, the context (exaggerated sexual stereotypes, provocative costumes/moves, or adult entertainment norms) sexualizes childhood and erodes innocence.

I apply this standard equally across the board because the Lord’s counsel on chastity and modesty protects all of His children, not just one group. In my view, we should let kids be kids, and reserve adult expressions for adult spaces.

People on this board do not seem to spend much time trying to defend / rationalize / justify exposing children to sexualized behaviors, with the troublingly notable exception of sexualized behaviors as Pride parades, Drag Shows, etc.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited April 6 by smac97

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Notatbm said:

https://ia800400.us.archive.org/16/items/BYUaversionTherapy/McBride Effect of Visual Stimuli in Electric Aversion Therapy BYU Dissertation Aug 1976_text.pdf
 

pp46 of the actual pdf… described how study subjects could avoid being shocked or what would cause them to be shocked. No where in the pdf could I find evidence the test subject shocked themselves

Thanks for posting the actual dissertation and the corrections.  I needed the reminder not to trust Chat even with googling.  It swore on its honor the dissertation wasn’t accessible.  Obviously I have been getting even lazier with it than I realized. I haven’t read the entirety yet, will later.

Thorne was talking about pictures he used for his therapy when he said they brought in their own pictures.  I can’t comment on whether that is accurate without documentation (at this point I want documentation from him, not memories), but he did claim imo that no porn was used at BYU in this area and it looks to me like that is contradicted by McBride’s paper.

While I don’t assume all nudes even in Playboy are porn***, the probability they were is high.  And even if they weren’t, the inclusion of adolescent boys is highly disappointing.  It makes sense to figure out what can help decrease unhealthy attractions, but directly using materials that are exploitative, whether of adolescents, women, or men is wrong, imo.  I see porn as exploitative as well as anything sexual with minors.

I have changed my opinion about the appropriateness of the materials used and the wisdom of those involved.  And my trust has dropped for Thorne’s memory (whether intentionally downplayed or wishful thinking rewrote what happened or he didn’t actually pay that close of attention).

The field of medicine and psychiatry is full of exploitation that moved the science ahead, but at what a cost.   A cost that should not have been paid in many cases.

***yes, I have seen Playboy magazines, was keeping a friend company while they were taking care of a home for someone on vacation and my friend was interested in how a young Mormon would react, curiosity won that day.  

Edited April 6 by Calm

[longview]

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

On 4/5/2026 at 1:33 PM, california boy said:

Quote

Again: Drag shows are not inherently “sexual” in the strict sense that every single one must involve explicit sex acts or pornography-level content.  However, the honest answer is, I think, more nuanced: Drag shows are very frequently and deliberately sexualized, and the art form itself is built on gender parody, exaggeration, and adult-oriented performance traditions that often incorporate sexual humor, innuendo, and provocative elements.

I don't quite understand this.  You admit that drag shows are not inherently "sexual"

"Drag shows are not inherently 'sexual' in the strict sense that every single one must involve explicit sex acts or pornography-level content."

The number one "sex organ" is the brain. Filthy speech and lurid body language by itself are already explicit. Reading passages that are highly suggestive constitute child abuse which will lead children to a lifetime of mental disturbances and inappropriate behaviors.

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1Hw91N5Vgd/

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, longview said:

The number one "sex organ" is the brain. Filthy speech and lurid body language by itself are already explicit. Reading passages that are highly suggestive constitute child abuse which will lead children to a lifetime of mental disturbances and inappropriate behaviors.

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1Hw91N5Vgd/

Any interaction with anything sexy anywhere will warp them forever? Oh please. So the weirdos giving their ten year old son a birthday party at Hooter’s were warping him forever? Or showing him a PG-13 movie?

Being propositioned or assaulted or coerced into sex WILL do everything you said but transgender people aren’t the primary culprits in that sense. It is the cishet men doing most of that. You should go after them. Or are they not an easy enough target?

[california boy]

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

"Drag shows are not inherently 'sexual' in the strict sense that every single one must involve explicit sex acts or pornography-level content."

Yes.  "However, the honest answer is, I think, more nuanced: Drag shows are very frequently and deliberately sexualized, and the art form itself is built on gender parody, exaggeration, and adult-oriented performance traditions that often incorporate sexual humor, innuendo, and provocative elements."

What is it about this do you not understand?

I don't think I said that.

No.  Again: "{Other than drag queens who are engaging in highly sexualized behavior in the presence of children,} I don't give much thought to drag queens.  While I think they would be better off abandoning such behaviors, they are adults and can do as they please, within the confines of the law."

Are all drag queens gay?

If they are doing so while engaging in highly sexualized behavior in the presence of children, yes.  Otherwise, I don't give much thought to women dressing up as men.  Adults can do as they please, within the confines of the law.

Back in 2022 you and I were in a thread that discussed instances of events which, in my view, sexualize children:

That one was about a Pride parade.  What is your perspective? 

Do you support an public event where children watch "a bare-chested man in dark sunglasses whose black suspenders clipped into a leather thong ... {being} spanked playfully by a partner with a flog"?

Don't Look Away: These Are the 'Family-Friendly' Pride Events the Left Is Pushing On Kids

I disapprove and am opposed to events such as those described above.

What is your perspective?  Do you support children attending events exhibiting the above behaviors?

Prepping Kids for a Pride Parade

What is your perspective?  Do you support children attending events in which they will see nude adults engaging in sexualized behavior, including behaviors like "Beanie Babies with giant penises on them"?

Do you think children should "laugh and enjoy" these things?

Journalist Witnesses Naked Men Playing with Kids at Pride

Children watching a public event involving "a bunch of men that are butt naked and they’re riding around on bicycles ... exposing their genitalia to children who came to attend the event, which was advertised as a family friendly event."  

"{S}ome of these cyclists were covered in body paint while the majority were fully exposed, leaving nothing unseen to the eye."

"{D}ozens of fully naked men and women playing in the fountain with children."

I am opposed to events such as those described above being characterized as "family friendly" and having children as attendees (and, to an extent, participants ("fully naked men and women playing in the fountain with children")).

Are you?

DC Pride parade marked by depravity, grooming of children despite ‘family friendly’ billing

"'{A} man with breasts' marching ahead of young children wearing little more than a bikini bottom walking straight up to a police officer, bending over, and shaking his rear at the cop."

I am opposed to events including stuff like this.

Are you?

Pride Parade Clips Show Shocking and Bizarre Moments — with Children in Attendance

"{O}ther men walked by {children}, clad in rainbow-colored speedos with tight bulges on display."

"{A} drag queen standing on an eggplant emoji float, proclaiming — with young children present — 'We have genitals and lube.'"

"{C}hildren were present at a drag show featuring several men disrobing and suggestively dancing on stage."

"Christina Aguilera was seen wearing a green, bejeweled phallus, with which she repeatedly stroked during her performance at the all-ages event on Saturday night."

"{A}n adult forcing her reluctant child to watch the Pride parade."

What are your thoughts about children being exposed to these behaviors?

Pride Month Jumps the Shark

"Young children can be seen handing money to twerking drag queens. A bright pink neon sign saying 'It’s Not Going to Lick Itself!' added an extra layer of creepiness."

Do you approve or disapprove of events such as the one described above?

Yale Professor Wants Your Kids To See Sex At Pride Parades So They’re Not ‘Homophobes’

"{Yale University associate professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Joseph J. Fischel} attempts to justify his argument that children should be exposed to public displays of kink and gay sexuality by taking the laughable position that such exposure will help combat 'racism and homophobia.'"

"{Fischel inquires} 'What is the presumptive harm if a child …. sees an adult’s butt cheeks, or even an adult’s genitals or breasts?'"

"Fischel continues, asking if a child would feel violated after witnessing any of these things, or if they’d be 'as likely to respond with curiosity?'"

"{Fischel states that 'children might like'} public indecency at Pride."

"{Fischel states that} we ought to celebrate kink, butts, and boobs… especially for {children}."

I disagree with Prof. Fischel. 

Do you agree or disagree with Prof. Fischel?

How do you account for the events described above?

I have never attended a drag show.

I recall this story about a drag show in a bar in which children were invited, and which venue included a big neon sign declaring "It's not gonna lick itself!"

Dallas protesters show up to 'Drag the kids to pride' family-friendly drag show

"Drag the Kids to Pride."

"It's not gonna lick itself!"

I have never attended a drag show.  Some parents apparently were in attendance at the Dallas event noted above.

I have never attended a Drag Queen Story Hour.

I am glad we agree on that.

I wonder if we agree on the parameters of what constitutes sexualization of children."

Again: "Drag shows are very frequently and deliberately sexualized, and the art form itself is built on gender parody, exaggeration, and adult-oriented performance traditions that often incorporate sexual humor, innuendo, and provocative elements."

I reject the characterization of "attacking." 

I also reject the reference to "them."  I have not been speaking of all drag queens, but rather the subset that are engaging in highly sexualized behavior in the presence of children.  Other than this subset, I don't give much thought to drag queens.  While I think they would be better off abandoning such behaviors, they are adults and can do as they please, within the confines of the law.

Again:

I am likewise critical of exposing children to sexualized behaviors in other venues that do not necessarily involve drag queens or "Pride" stuff.  

As a Latter-day Saint, I believe sex is a beautiful and sacred gift from Heavenly Father, reserved for marriage between a man and a woman and intended to create eternal families (see ‘The Family: A Proclamation to the World’). Because it is sacred, it deserves decorum and reverence — not casual public spectacle. Exposing children to any adult sexualized context — whether Drag Queen Story Hour, burlesque shows, child beauty pageants, suggestive dance routines, or events like Mardi Gras and Hooters-style venues — confuses their developing understanding of gender, modesty, and healthy boundaries. Even if a specific performance isn’t overtly explicit, the context (exaggerated sexual stereotypes, provocative costumes/moves, or adult entertainment norms) sexualizes childhood and erodes innocence.

I apply this standard equally across the board because the Lord’s counsel on chastity and modesty protects all of His children, not just one group. In my view, we should let kids be kids, and reserve adult expressions for adult spaces.

People on this board do not seem to spend much time trying to defend / rationalize / justify exposing children to sexualized behaviors, with the troublingly notable exception of sexualized behaviors as Pride parades, Drag Shows, etc.

Thanks,

-Smac

I am going to sum up my answer to your lengthy post by putting some perspective on all of your examples.  I haven't gone to a lot of pride parades.  And the only one I have been to is the one held in San Francisco.  A couple were enough for me because they tend to be pretty repetitive.  If you have seen one, you have seen them all.  That said, the San Francisco pride parade brings in about 1 million people, which is pretty insane.  Evidently a lot of people love the parade and the vibe that surrounds the event.  I did notice that many parents bring their kids to the parade. They are the parents, not me, not you, but them.  In the video that you posted, there were also a lot of parents present at the drag show event.  The fact that these events continue to be popular tells me that these parents choose to bring their children  to these events more than once.  Which means they are perfectly clear what their children are going to see.  I have talked to some of these parents as well.  They tell me about how much they enjoyed the event and how they were happy their children saw the parade.  Why would they say that?  Most respond that in their opinion, more than anything, gay pride events celebrate diversity.  They celebrate that you can be different than that one single monolithic standard that you might have.  People can have different ideas on how they choose to live their lives.  Their children can made different decisions than the ones they have made.  Frankly it is one of the biggest reasons why I love living in San Francisco.  This is not a city that the population conforms to a very narrow dictation of how you are suppose to live your life.

I remember visiting my brother several years ago when he was living in Sandy Utah.  Like a lot of neighborhoods in Utah, the Mormon church was just a couple of blocks from his house, 10 mutes before church was about to start, almost every garage door in the neighborhood went up, a Surban pulled out, there was literally a traffic jam on the block for about 5 minutes until everyone was in the church parking lot.  Quite honestly it freaked me out.   It is definitely not the environment I want to live or the environment I wanted to raise my children.  So maybe in Utah, everyone has the exact same agreed upon prescribed way their children should be raised, but personally, I find life way more full and interesting and prefer to have diversity in opinions and ideas of how people raise their children.  

Since you asked, I do personally believe that not every pride type event is suitable for every child.  Even in a single family, for some children it would be acceptable and for others not.  I think the biggest pushback I am going to give you is you seem to be condemning the events offered but say noting about the choices the parents are making.  Do you believe all gay pride type events should be stopped because some parents are ok with their children attending?  Do you think you know other peoples children better than they do and should be able to dictate what they are allowed or not allowed to bring their children to?  

My suggestion?  Don't take your children to gay pride type events.  You seem to think it is inappropriate to them.  And I respect that decision.  But I don't think you have the right to tell about 1 million people that a gay pride type event is harmful to their children and the event should not allow anyone under 21 to attend.  And you don't have the right to judge others based on what you think is acceptable.  

I find your high horse morality judgement to be so totally lacking because you ignore completely other sexually charged events, celebrities, beaches, etc as somehow ok. And as a word of warning just incase you are completely ignorant of such things, but after spending 14 summers sailing in Europe, there are plenty of thongs, topless women, speedos, and naked people on the beaches there. I spent several of those years in Barcelona.  In particular, there is a promenade that follows the beach the entire length of the city.  Some of those beaches have 4 head shower where you can rinse off the sand.  People strip totally naked and wouldn't even think of keeping their sandy bathing suits on.  These showers are about 10' from the promenade with a constant stream of people and nothing blocking their view.  Those poor european children must be scarred for life.  I mean the beaches make any gay pride event definitely look way more G rated.  Again, this just points out the diversity of how parents choose to raise their children.  So yeah, my life experiences seems much different than yours.  Maybe other parents have had a different life experience than you as well.  

[california boy]

7 hours ago, smac97 said:

And yet it is "that high."  Support for same-sex marriage has more than doubled in my adult lifetime.  See, e.g., here:

This is an remarkable level of support, even in a pluralistic society such as ours.

Human Rights Campaign in 2023: ICYMI: New Data Shows Support for LGBTQ+ Rights Reaches Highest Rates Ever Recorded

And yet CB, in 2026, is stating: "Healing from that trauma are the first steps in realizing that it is ok to be gay, even if it seems the whole world wants to shame you out of it."

I'm not sure what you are saying here.  To what do you attribute this "big difference"?  Are people just lying?  Mouthing what they think they need to say ("public appearance of support") even though it may not actually reflect what they genuinely thing ("private respect and acceptance")?

I found this article interesting: Have Young Americans Turned Against Gay Rights?

An excerpt:

And this (from The Advocate in March 2026) : Fewer young Americans support LGBTQ+ protections, survey finds

"Just."

The article goes on to speculate as to the decrease:

Radical trans ideology seems to be dragging down the "LGBT Community."

And here (November 2025) : Support for Same-Sex Marriage Has Dropped, Amid Conservative Attacks

I wonder if the explanation pertains to what could be called "Activism Fatigue."  I have previously commented on "March of Dimes Syndrome" here:

Apology for the Priesthood Ban / "March of Dimes Syndrome" / "Mission Creep" / "Spencer's Law"

The article itself is here: The March of Dimes Syndrome

A Grok summary of the article:

As regarding LGBT groups (from the article) :

Mr. Tierney is, I think, not alone in perceiving a substantial drift away from what the Gay Rights Movement originally was intended to achieve.  See here (June 2025) : Gay journalist says LGBTQ movement has gone from civil rights success to 'madness'

"{R}ewrite rules of biology" = Trans ideologies positing positing that a man can become a woman by "identifying" as one, "trans women are women," biological men in women's sports, bathrooms, prisons, re-defining "woman," etc.

"{A}dvocating for child transgender treatment" is self-explanatory.

I think he has a point.  This stuff has been a bridge too far.

I think that regular folks, regardless of where they originally stood and now stand on the core topics in "gay and lesbian rights" (particularly same-sex marriage), are getting wary of, and/or tired of, the endless emphasis and discussion and activism associated with this "seemingly infinite number of new niche identities."

Fair questions, these.

Hoo, boy.  Is he spot-on with this observation.

The other "bridge too far."

I think he has a solid point here, as does Tierney above.  The "they," is the "gender revolutionaries," not all gay/lesbian folks.

I've previously stated in this thread: "Self-appointed State actors and strangers assigning to themselves the right to decide what "abuse" means, and to scare children, and to secretively alienate children from their parents, and to seek to actively subvert parental rights, are engaging in wrongful and deeply creepy behavior."

I agree with Mr. Sullivan on this point.

"{T}he most radical of all."

I suspect that he is correct about the adverse effects of this "radicalism," but I would like to see more discussion/data about it.  

This is where Tierney's article comes back into focus.  I don't think activists are willing to close up shop, so they continue to push and push and push, even to the point of doubling and tripling down on what Sullivan aptly calls the "madness" associated with "abolishing the sex binary for the entire society" and "preoccupation with children’s sexual orientations."

Thanks,

-Smac

I have a friend that is 22 years old.  Just graduated from University and has his first job that is a fantastic job in the tech business.  He got his degree in Southern California, but other than his college years, has always lived with his parents.  He has been a straight A student his whole life.  His family is Asian and very traditional.  They have huge expectations on him and at this point he has lived up to those expectations.  Now that he has graduated and has a great job, they are putting not so subtle pressure for him to find a wonderful woman and start a family.  But he is gay.  It is one of the main reasons why he got his own apartment.  He is terrified to tell his parents.  

Sometimes statistics on how many people accept gay marriage or are friendly to the LGBT community really doesn't matter.  If you can't understand that, then I am afraid nothing I will say will get you to understand that sometimes statistics are meaningless.

Edited April 7 by california boy

[california boy]

9 hours ago, Notatbm said:

What did you think of the use of pictures of clothed and nude adolescents? I’m wondering how people read this doc and completely miss that? Sounds like some LE agency needs to do some digging to see if this involved child porn. Surely the researcher is still alive or many of the study participants are. 

Horrified.  I know there are guys that experienced this still living.  Research or not, those showing child ponography should go to jail.

Edited April 7 by california boy

[The Nehor]

11 minutes ago, california boy said:

Sometimes statistics on how many people accept gay marriage or are friendly to the LGBT community really doesn't matter.  If you can't understand that, then I am afraid nothing I will say will get you to understand that sometimes statistics are meaningless.

In addition there are many who support gay marriage and transgender people in the abstract but then fall apart when it is a child or a sibling that is queer and try to “fix” them or talk them out of it. Being fashionably open-minded in the abstract but rejecting it when it comes too close to home.

[smac97]

14 hours ago, california boy said:

I am going to sum up my answer to your lengthy post by putting some perspective on all of your examples.  

I think it would be productive to tell me what you think of those examples, since those are the types of events which I have found problematic.

14 hours ago, california boy said:

I haven't gone to a lot of pride parades.  And the only one I have been to is the one held in San Francisco.  A couple were enough for me because they tend to be pretty repetitive.  If you have seen one, you have seen them all.  That said, the San Francisco pride parade brings in about 1 million people, which is pretty insane.  Evidently a lot of people love the parade and the vibe that surrounds the event.  

I hope the event does not include sexualized behaviors.  Alas...

Quote

Pride is a family-friendly, all-ages event. People of all ages are welcome and encouraged to attend. Parents should use their discretion as Pride is a large, crowded adult event with some mature content and themes.

A guide to taking kids to San Francisco's Gay Pride Parade

Quote

To help families going to Sunday's parade have a smooth experience, SFGate gathered some words of wisdom and practical tips from parents who've taken their children over the years.

Don't worry. "We have been bringing our daughter annually since she was a baby," shares S.F. mom Beth Winegarner. "Yes, there is some nudity and leather but there's little to no overt sexual stuff as there is at, say, Folsom Street Fair. Kids in general aren't at all fazed by seeing nudity — after all they like to run around and play with as little on as possible, too."
...
Explain what's happening. "I guess the most important tip I can give is to stay calm," S.F mom Gladyss Hana suggests. "Don't act shocked at what you see, instead, explain that everyone has their own personalities and each person expresses them individually. It's such a fun and colorful day, it helps to let the little ones express themselves as well. Go with an open mind and be ready to have fun."

SF Cop Says Nudity Around Kids is OK at Pride Parade

Quote

Reporter: I'm a news reporter.  So there's obviously a lot of nudity here.  Men, women, transsexual stuff going on.  And there's kids, you know, wandering around event.  I'm not sure on San Francisco's laws or California's laws.  Is it legal for nudity to be presented in front of kids?

Police Officer: Nudity is legal, yeah.  Within certain boundaries. 

Reporter: What are the boundaries? 

Police Officer: Anything coupled with a lewd act.  Anything being done for sexual gratification that involves other people.

Reporter: Okay.  But this event wouldn't be considered for sexual gratification?

Police Officer: No.  If they're walking around and its 'out,' that would be different than if they're masturbating.   

Sounds like the event you are describing is pretty much par for the course.

Graphic “Pride” Parades Attacking the Innocence of Children

Quote

Some of the scenes that unfolded were so obscene that one can’t even describe them in much detail. ... One bit of footage that emerged from one “Pride” celebration in San Francisco, billed as ‘family friendly,’ showed two men pantomiming perverse sexual practices, as their truck rolled slowly down the street before gazing hordes of adults and children.
...
In some particularly notorious jurisdictions, such as San Francisco, certain “Pride” events are known to feature actual (not simulated) public sex acts, to which the police simply turn a blind eye, as the sidewalks and streets are turned into a public brothel. 
 

I won't ask if you are in favor of this stuff.

Quote

One video that has received a lot of negative attention in recent days, however, shows a crowd of marchers in the New York City “Drag March.” In the video, some of the participants can be heard chanting, “we’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children.”

The video comes at the same time as many conservative and pro-family activists have been accusing extremist LGBT activists of “grooming” children into sexually perverse lifestyles. While media have consistently called these claims a “conspiracy theory,” the chant does little to assuage the concerns of parents who have woken up to the fact that LGBT activists seem hell-bent on introducing sexually explicit materials widely into school curricula, children’s entertainment and (as “Pride” celebrations show) on the streets of our cities.

In response to the backlash from the troubling chant at the New York parade, NBC News published a far-from-reassuring article. As the LGBT activists interviewed by NBC News explained, people shouldn’t be concerned about the chant, not because participants didn’t in fact chant the troubling words, but rather because the chant is a common chant by participants in Pride festivals.

As NBC reported: “The ‘coming for your children’ chant has been used for years at Pride events, according to longtime march attendees and gay rights activists, who said it’s one of many provocative expressions used to regain control of slurs against LGBTQ people.” One activist told the news agency, “It’s all just words. It’s all presented to fulfill their worst stereotypes of us.” Another called the chant nothing more than a “bad joke.”

“{W}e’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children.”

“The ‘coming for your children’ chant has been used for years at Pride events."

San Francisco Pride Parade features public nudity around kids, 'Fetish Zone' with urine

Quote

The recent San Francisco Pride Parade featured nude adults walking around in front of children and a "Fetish Zone" where men urinated on each other in a kiddie pool and performed other sex acts.
...

TENET Media field reporter Taylor Hansen interviewed multiple nude men on the street who attempted to justify their public nudity in front of children as natural and sometimes even good for them.

"None of the crybabies and parents who complain about it can ever explain exactly how a child is harmed by seeing the human body, and every study that's been done on the subject shows that it's not harmful. Children who grow up with it are more well-adjusted," said one naked man who described himself as "a nudist and an artist."

"I think that kids are born naked and that as long as there’s not any kind of sexuality added to it, that it’s just nude. That’s all it is," another man said, who removed his towel to expose himself mid-way through the interview.

A 9-year-old girl Hansen spoke to recounted how she saw a man wearing a Darth Vader helmet and cape "with nothing else," which she said made her feel "grossed out."

Two naked men who described themselves as "non-binary" and "pan[sexual]" also made light of the nudity.

"Just in general, sex work is OK, so is being nude in public. San Francisco's kind of all about that," the man who identified as non-binary said.

"I know there's kids," the pansexual man said. "I don't really like that. I also want them to experience this event too, so I just try to be really respectful about it, and when I see kids, I go walk the other way. It's tough, it really is." He floated the idea of having an adults-only part of the event.

Hansen also posted a thread on X detailing more footage he captured of naked adults in front of children at the parade, including one man who positioned himself at the front of the crowd as multiple school districts and the Boy Scouts of America marched by in the parade.
...
Footage taken by reporter Savanah Hernandez at the event's Fetish Zone showed a bearded man in an inflatable kiddie pool being urinated on by a woman as others around them watched. Hernandez reported that despite the area being 18+, the attendant was not checking IDs.

Footage of the same pool taken by Hansen showed a similar situation, but which also included fellatio. When Hansen approached police about the incident, they reportedly told him it's a "pick your own battles kind of day."

Other booths in the Fetish Zone reportedly featured men getting whipped and spanked, as well as other simulated sex acts.

"A 9-year-old girl Hansen spoke to recounted how she saw a man wearing a Darth Vader helmet and cape 'with nothing else,' which she said made her feel 'grossed out.'

"Hansen also posted a thread on X detailing more footage he captured of naked adults in front of children at the parade, including one man who positioned himself at the front of the crowd as multiple school districts and the Boy Scouts of America marched by in the parade."

14 hours ago, california boy said:

I did notice that many parents bring their kids to the parade. They are the parents, not me, not you, but them.

In the video that you posted, there were also a lot of parents present at the drag show event.  The fact that these events continue to be popular tells me that these parents choose to bring their children to these events more than once.  Which means they are perfectly clear what their children are going to see.  I have talked to some of these parents as well.  They tell me about how much they enjoyed the event and how they were happy their children saw the parade.  Why would they say that?  Most respond that in their opinion, more than anything, gay pride events celebrate diversity.  They celebrate that you can be different than that one single monolithic standard that you might have.  People can have different ideas on how they choose to live their lives.  Their children can made different decisions than the ones they have made.  Frankly it is one of the biggest reasons why I love living in San Francisco.  This is not a city that the population conforms to a very narrow dictation of how you are suppose to live your life.

Again:

• "This...er...performer? In spandex, standing next to men in thongs, shouting 'We have bandanas and lube!' from a float parading in front of young kids."
• "Christina Aguilera sporting a green strap-on penis at a concert advertised as an 'all-ages' pride event in Los Angeles."
• "This man in drag exposing his pantyhose-clad crotch at a 'kid-friendly' brunch."
• "A toddler watches as men in thongs and bondage gear whip one another at a pride parade."
• "A group of half-naked people - including men and women - gyrate on stage and simulate sex acts at a 'family-friendly' drag and pride event in Austin, Texas."
• "This drag queen wearing pop-up prosthetic genitalia that actually sprayed liquid on to a crowd that included kids."
• "Drag queens and men in women's lingerie danced provocatively in front of a crowd that included one very confused little girl."
• "This bare-breasted person twerking and gyrating near a cop, only feet from children marching in the same parade in Washington, D.C. "
• Children watching a public event involving "a bunch of men that are butt naked and they’re riding around on bicycles ... exposing their genitalia to children who came to attend the event, which was advertised as a family friendly event."  
• "{S}ome of these cyclists were covered in body paint while the majority were fully exposed, leaving nothing unseen to the eye."
• "{D}ozens of fully naked men and women playing in the fountain with children."
• "'{A} man with breasts' marching ahead of young children wearing little more than a bikini bottom walking straight up to a police officer, bending over, and shaking his rear at the cop."
• "{O}ther men walked by {children}, clad in rainbow-colored speedos with tight bulges on display."
• "{A} drag queen standing on an eggplant emoji float, proclaiming — with young children present — 'We have genitals and lube.'"
• "{C}hildren were present at a drag show featuring several men disrobing and suggestively dancing on stage."
• "Christina Aguilera was seen wearing a green, bejeweled phallus, with which she repeatedly stroked during her performance at the all-ages event on Saturday night."
• "{A}n adult forcing her reluctant child to watch the Pride parade."
• "Young children can be seen handing money to twerking drag queens. A bright pink neon sign saying 'It’s Not Going to Lick Itself!' added an extra layer of creepiness."
• "{Yale University associate professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Joseph J. Fischel} attempts to justify his argument that children should be exposed to public displays of kink and gay sexuality by taking the laughable position that such exposure will help combat 'racism and homophobia.'"
• "{Fischel inquires} 'What is the presumptive harm if a child …. sees an adult’s butt cheeks, or even an adult’s genitals or breasts?'"
• "Fischel continues, asking if a child would feel violated after witnessing any of these things, or if they’d be 'as likely to respond with curiosity?'"
• "{Fischel states that 'children might like'} public indecency at Pride."
• "{Fischel states that} we ought to celebrate kink, butts, and boobs… especially for {children}."

I have asked whether you agree or disagree with this stuff.  And you have not answered, and instead referenced the San Francisco, which is elsewhere described in similar ways as the above:

• "'Kids in general aren't at all fazed by seeing nudity.' ... 'It's such a fun and colorful day, it helps to let the little ones express themselves as well. Go with an open mind and be ready to have fun.'"
• "{T}wo men pantomiming perverse sexual practices, as their truck rolled slowly down the street before gazing hordes of adults and children."
• “{W}e’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children.”
• “The ‘coming for your children’ chant has been used for years at Pride events."
• "{R}eporter Taylor Hansen interviewed multiple nude men on the street who attempted to justify their public nudity in front of children as natural and sometimes even good for them."
• "{N}aked adults in front of children at the parade, including one man who positioned himself at the front of the crowd as multiple school districts and the Boy Scouts of America marched by in the parade."
• "A 9-year-old girl Hansen spoke to recounted how she saw a man wearing a Darth Vader helmet and cape 'with nothing else,' which she said made her feel 'grossed out.'
• "Hansen also posted a thread on X detailing more footage he captured of naked adults in front of children at the parade, including one man who positioned himself at the front of the crowd as multiple school districts and the Boy Scouts of America marched by in the parade."
   

14 hours ago, california boy said:

I remember visiting my brother several years ago when he was living in Sandy Utah.  Like a lot of neighborhoods in Utah, the Mormon church was just a couple of blocks from his house, 10 mutes before church was about to start, almost every garage door in the neighborhood went up, a Surban pulled out, there was literally a traffic jam on the block for about 5 minutes until everyone was in the church parking lot.  Quite honestly it freaked me out.   It is definitely not the environment I want to live or the environment I wanted to raise my children.  

The San Francisco Pride, which apparently involves all sorts of sexual depravities exhibited in front of children, is pretty much in line with quite a few events where children are exposed to highly sexualized adult behaviors.  

When it comes to Latter-day Saints going to church services: "It is definitely not the environment I want to live or the environment I wanted to raise my children."

We live in a pluralistic society.

14 hours ago, california boy said:

Since you asked, I do personally believe that not every pride type event is suitable for every child.

Okay.

14 hours ago, california boy said:

I think the biggest pushback I am going to give you is you seem to be condemning the events offered but say noting about the choices the parents are making.  

Not sure what you are saying here.

I don't think parents should be taking their children to watch highly sexualized public behaviors.

Did I really need to say that?

14 hours ago, california boy said:

Do you believe all gay pride type events should be stopped because some parents are ok with their children attending?  Do you think you know other peoples children better than they do and should be able to dictate what they are allowed or not allowed to bring their children to?

My suggestion?  Don't take your children to gay pride type events.  You seem to think it is inappropriate to them.  And I respect that decision.  But I don't think you have the right to tell about 1 million people that a gay pride type event is harmful to their children and the event should not allow anyone under 21 to attend.  And you don't have the right to judge others based on what you think is acceptable.

I find your high horse morality judgement

To be clear: The "high horse morality judgment" which you are condemning is my disagreement with children being exposed to the following behaviors:

• "This...er...performer? In spandex, standing next to men in thongs, shouting 'We have bandanas and lube!' from a float parading in front of young kids."
• "Christina Aguilera sporting a green strap-on penis at a concert advertised as an 'all-ages' pride event in Los Angeles."
• "This man in drag exposing his pantyhose-clad crotch at a 'kid-friendly' brunch."
• "A toddler watches as men in thongs and bondage gear whip one another at a pride parade."
• "A group of half-naked people - including men and women - gyrate on stage and simulate sex acts at a 'family-friendly' drag and pride event in Austin, Texas."
• "This drag queen wearing pop-up prosthetic genitalia that actually sprayed liquid on to a crowd that included kids."
• "Drag queens and men in women's lingerie danced provocatively in front of a crowd that included one very confused little girl."
• "This bare-breasted person twerking and gyrating near a cop, only feet from children marching in the same parade in Washington, D.C. "
• Children watching a public event involving "a bunch of men that are butt naked and they’re riding around on bicycles ... exposing their genitalia to children who came to attend the event, which was advertised as a family friendly event."  
• "{S}ome of these cyclists were covered in body paint while the majority were fully exposed, leaving nothing unseen to the eye."
• "{D}ozens of fully naked men and women playing in the fountain with children."
• "'{A} man with breasts' marching ahead of young children wearing little more than a bikini bottom walking straight up to a police officer, bending over, and shaking his rear at the cop."
• "{O}ther men walked by {children}, clad in rainbow-colored speedos with tight bulges on display."
• "{A} drag queen standing on an eggplant emoji float, proclaiming — with young children present — 'We have genitals and lube.'"
• "{C}hildren were present at a drag show featuring several men disrobing and suggestively dancing on stage."
• "Christina Aguilera was seen wearing a green, bejeweled phallus, with which she repeatedly stroked during her performance at the all-ages event on Saturday night."
• "{A}n adult forcing her reluctant child to watch the Pride parade."
• "Young children can be seen handing money to twerking drag queens. A bright pink neon sign saying 'It’s Not Going to Lick Itself!' added an extra layer of creepiness."
• "{Yale University associate professor of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Joseph J. Fischel} attempts to justify his argument that children should be exposed to public displays of kink and gay sexuality by taking the laughable position that such exposure will help combat 'racism and homophobia.'"
• "{Fischel inquires} 'What is the presumptive harm if a child …. sees an adult’s butt cheeks, or even an adult’s genitals or breasts?'"
• "Fischel continues, asking if a child would feel violated after witnessing any of these things, or if they’d be 'as likely to respond with curiosity?'"
• "{Fischel states that 'children might like'} public indecency at Pride."
• "'Kids in general aren't at all fazed by seeing nudity.' ... 'It's such a fun and colorful day, it helps to let the little ones express themselves as well. Go with an open mind and be ready to have fun.'"
• "{T}wo men pantomiming perverse sexual practices, as their truck rolled slowly down the street before gazing hordes of adults and children."
• “{W}e’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children.”
• “The ‘coming for your children’ chant has been used for years at Pride events."
• "{R}eporter Taylor Hansen interviewed multiple nude men on the street who attempted to justify their public nudity in front of children as natural and sometimes even good for them."
• "{N}aked adults in front of children at the parade, including one man who positioned himself at the front of the crowd as multiple school districts and the Boy Scouts of America marched by in the parade."
• "A 9-year-old girl Hansen spoke to recounted how she saw a man wearing a Darth Vader helmet and cape 'with nothing else,' which she said made her feel 'grossed out.'
• "Hansen also posted a thread on X detailing more footage he captured of naked adults in front of children at the parade, including one man who positioned himself at the front of the crowd as multiple school districts and the Boy Scouts of America marched by in the parade."

You think it is wrong to object to or be concerned about the foregoing behaviors in front of children?

14 hours ago, california boy said:

to be so totally lacking because you ignore completely other sexually charged events, celebrities, beaches, etc as somehow ok.

You are simply incorrect here.  I have elsewhere condemned pornography and other sexualized materials and events.  See, e.g., here (re-posted in this thread for the second time, as you apparently missed the first) :

Quote

Quote

Of course you are equally repulsed by people who take their 8 year old sons to Hooter’s for their birthday party and take pictures with deliberately sexualized women.

Yes, I am repulsed at that.  Same goes with Mardi Gras and other public displays of sexual licentiousness and depravity.  

Quote

This happens a lot more of course. Only a few pride parades and events have that level of sexualized content.

And those are the events I find problematic.

Quote

For some reason I don’t see the same level of outrage about exposing kids to that kind of sexualization.

I think plenty of people are repulsed at any sort of efforts to sexualize/groom children.  

Consider these:

• Yes, kink belongs at Pride. And I want my kids to see it.
• Don't Look Away: These Are the 'Family-Friendly' Pride Events the Left Is Pushing On Kids
• Prepping Kids for a Pride Parade
• ‘GROOMING FESTIVAL’: Journalist Witnesses Naked Men Playing with Kids at Pride
• Children as Sex Objects: Why NYC Gay Pride Parade Is Being Called a 'Celebration of Pedophilia'
• DC Pride parade marked by depravity, grooming of children despite ‘family friendly’ billing
• Pride Parade Clips Show Shocking and Bizarre Moments — with Children in Attendance
• Pride Month Jumps the Shark
• Yale Professor Wants Your Kids To See Sex At Pride Parades So They’re Not ‘Homophobes’

And on and on and on.

If and when you find articles endorsing the sexualization of children in a "heterosexual" context, feel free to post them and I will join you in condemning them.

Again: "I have never previously excused or rationalized exposing children to other-than-drag-queen sexualized behaviors."

Again: 

Quote

Again, please note that I acknowledged and addressed the sexualization of children by people in Pride events (typically involving gay people engaging in sexualized behavior), drag shows (trans people engaging in sexualized behavior), Mardi Gras ("straight" people engaging in sexualized behavior), and so on.

My condemnation of the sexualization of children has been plenary.

You have essentially nothing to say about the behaviors in the bulleted list above.

You instead critique me for not sufficiently objecting to the sexualization of children in other contexts (while ignoring several instances in this thread where I have done precisely that).

And then you accuse me of sitting on a "moral judgment high horse" for objecting to the sexualization of children.

Henry was right.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited April 7 by smac97

[Notatbm]

18 hours ago, Calm said:

Thanks for posting the actual dissertation and the corrections.  I needed the reminder not to trust Chat even with googling.  It swore on its honor the dissertation wasn’t accessible.  Obviously I have been getting even lazier with it than I realized. I haven’t read the entirety yet, will later.

Thorne was talking about pictures he used for his therapy when he said they brought in their own pictures.  I can’t comment on whether that is accurate without documentation (at this point I want documentation from him, not memories), but he did claim imo that no porn was used at BYU in this area and it looks to me like that is contradicted by McBride’s paper.

While I don’t assume all nudes even in Playboy are porn***, the probability they were is high.  And even if they weren’t, the inclusion of adolescent boys is highly disappointing.  It makes sense to figure out what can help decrease unhealthy attractions, but directly using materials that are exploitative, whether of adolescents, women, or men is wrong, imo.  I see porn as exploitative as well as anything sexual with minors.

I have changed my opinion about the appropriateness of the materials used and the wisdom of those involved.  And my trust has dropped for Thorne’s memory (whether intentionally downplayed or wishful thinking rewrote what happened or he didn’t actually pay that close of attention).

The field of medicine and psychiatry is full of exploitation that moved the science ahead, but at what a cost.   A cost that should not have been paid in many cases.

***yes, I have seen Playboy magazines, was keeping a friend company while they were taking care of a home for someone on vacation and my friend was interested in how a young Mormon would react, curiosity won that day.  

I had either watched or listened to an interview several years ago where a participant at byu described his experiences and specifically stated gay porn  pics were used. I don’t  recall his name, but this discussion led me to search specifically for evidence of that. The McBride paper is the first one I have ever read and frankly I’m shocked temple recommend holders couldn’t find any better topic of research to do and went to this level. They should be embarrassed. 

i have read a couple fair articles about it and they were fairly detailed I guess. This link I am posting below specifically described porn was used by McBride, but somehow whatever team collaborated on the article all missed the fact nude images of adolescents were used. I’m thinking they are smarter than that and it is no accident that info was omitted. 
 

as you are connected in some way to fair maybe you could reach out to them and let them know they either purposely or accidentally left out the use of nude adolescent images? Perhaps they can publish a correction. ?? 
 

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/home-page/current-events/aversion-therapy-for-homosexuality-in-scientific-historical-context

Edited April 7 by Notatbm