Meanwhile, at the Long Beach Public Library...

[smac97]

16 minutes ago, Analytics said:

For the record, you didn't lead with a story from a reputable news source.

For the record, I lead with a link to a "PJ Media," which in turn provides links to other news outlets.  I also provided links to "TheBlaze" which also provides links to other news stories about it, and to the Los Angeles affiliate of CBS.

So yes, I did lead with a story from a reputable news source.  Moreover, anyone with access to the Internet could google the story and come up with the same list of dozens and dozens of news items about this story.

Quote

You lead with a blog entry from a prejudiced culture warrior.

It was the first one I found.  And I also provided links to other sources.  And all of us, by virtue of having access to the Internet, are easily and quickly able to find as many sources about this story as the individual deems appropriate.

Quote

You asked how people should respond to that, didn't you? I offered my opinion about how I think you, or anybody else, should respond to that. I thought that is what you asked.

Okay.  I was asking about the subject matter of the story, not the person telling the story.

Also, for the record, I disliked the slant of the PJ Media story.  That's why I provided further, more objective, sources about it.

Quote

How you should respond to a story from a reputable news source that is sincerely trying to be insightful and fair is something else. If that is what you are asking about, your response should be a sincere attempt to understand why the library did this, and why, apparently, the kids and parents in attendance liked it and actually thought it was a positive thing.

Tell you what: I'll let you respond to the story as you see fit, and I will not try to lecture you about what your response "should" be.  And I request that you reciprocate.

Now, as to the story (the substance of the news item), what responses to it are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited October 18, 2017 by smac97

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, Analytics said:

That is a fair point, but this does seem to be a bit different. Your original quotations and links were sensationalistic editorials and propaganda about a community event in a local public library.

I provided quotes from the CBS affiliate in Los Angeles, too.  I don't think their coverage was "sensationalistic."

5 minutes ago, Analytics said:

How are you supposed to judge an event at a local public library 1,500 miles away?

There are dozens upon dozens of news items about this story.  And photos.  And video.

I think that if a person can render judgments about Joseph Smith and the Gold Plates, he should be able to render "judgments" about a far more recent and widely-reported story.

5 minutes ago, Analytics said:

Maybe it was a great event. Maybe it fell flat. Maybe it was a disaster. If we want to have an honest conversation about such things we can, but it should be based on facts rather than sensationalistic blog entries.

Oh, brother.  It's not like I am the gatekeeper of information about this story, and you are limited to only those (multiple) sources I provided.

Here is a link to the dozens and dozens of stories about it.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[HappyJackWagon]

4 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Now, as to the story (the substance of the news item), what responses to it are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety?

Thanks,

-Smac

I think I gave my response back on page one. My response may not be perfect but I think it is proper. Essentially, the event is not my cup of tea so I wouldn't be likely to participate but it is not my place to judge the individuals who do. Labeling them, accusing them, pointing my finger from the G&S building would be inappropriate.

[smac97]

7 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I think I gave my response back on page one. My response may not be perfect but I think it is proper. Essentially, the event is not my cup of tea so I wouldn't be likely to participate but it is not my place to judge the individuals who do. Labeling them, accusing them, pointing my finger from the G&S building would be inappropriate.

Okay.  Thank you for your input.

I am still curious about what responses from other people besides yourself to this story are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety.  Any thoughts?

-Smac

Edited October 18, 2017 by smac97

[Analytics]

 

11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Tell you what: I'll let you respond to the story as you see fit, and I will not try to lecture you about what your response "should" be.  And I request that you reciprocate.

Now, as to the story (the substance of the news item), what responses to it are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety?

Thanks,

-Smac

I sincerely thought you were asking about how you should respond to the sensationalistic blog entry you posted, not the "substance" of the news story itself. I hope you can see the source of the confusion. My apologies.

The spectrum of propriety is pretty wide on this. You could look for a similar event at a local library and see first-hand what it is about. Or you could avoid it if it isn't your cup of tea. Perhaps you could talk to the officials at your local library and see what their opinion of it is. You could see if there is a way to make the program better (e.g. perhaps the horns and whole demonic angle were too much, for example?) If it concerns you for some reason, you should really try to learn what it is all about.

Ignoring it is always safe.

I would refrain from chanting "Hail Satan!" That would make a certain segment of society uncomfortable.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

I suppose for you, that represents diversity.  How about at church?

Not sure what your getting at here. You're saying standards of dress and decorum at church are hostile to diversity? Ever hear of the term "Sunday best"?

[smac97]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

For you, it is absurd.  For many in the gay community it is a daily reality.  

You are raving.  How are your "absurd and false accusations" a "daily reality" for "the gay community?"  What on earth are you talking about?

Quote

The response in my view that is totally appropriate is to show in a very visual way that WE ARE NOT ALL ALIKE.  

That is not responsive to my question.  Here it is, yet again: As to the story (the substance of the news item), what responses to it are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety?

One response is "WE ARE NOT ALL ALIKE."  I get that.  Are there any other responses to this story which, in your view, are within the spectrum of propriety?

Quote

So quit killing us.  Quit beating us up.  Quit denying us our civil rights.  Quit demonizing us every chance you get. Quit telling us we all serve Mammon. Quit judging us by what we wear or who we date.  

You are raving.

If you want to participate in the discussion, fine.  Ditch the hysterics and let's have a reasoned discussion.  Short of that, stop deviating from the topic at hand.

Quote

Quit pretending that what one person does in NYC or LA does not represent every person on earth.  

More raving.  I have done nothing of the kind.

Quote

Quit starting threads that you know are inflammatory.  

Quit throwing hissy fits in threads you don't like.

Quit trying to poison the well.

Quit trying to censor discussion that you don't like.

Quote

Should I begin to start threads about all the outrageous things straight people do?  Because I could start one just about every single day.  Would it be helpful if I asked the question, "Why do straight people go around killing 8 year old children"

Since I have not asked a corollary to that question ("Why do gay people go around killing 8 year old children"), no, that wouldn't be helpful.

Here is the question I am asking, and which you are refusing to answer, and which you are trying frantically to distract us from addressing (to the point of flamebaiting with hateful and false and irrelevant rants about "killing" gays and such): As to the story (the substance of the news item), what responses to it are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety?

If you don't want to respond, fine.  Get out of the thread and stop cluttering it up with your rants and hysterics.  It comes across as a form of censorship, of bullying, of you trying to NoPlatform discussions (and people) you dislike.  That just ain't cool.

-Smac

Edited October 18, 2017 by smac97

[smac97]

17 minutes ago, Analytics said:

I sincerely thought you were asking about how you should respond to the sensationalistic blog entry you posted, not the "substance" of the news story itself. I hope you can see the source of the confusion. My apologies.

The spectrum of propriety is pretty wide on this. You could look for a similar event at a local library and see first-hand what it is about. Or you could avoid it if it isn't your cup of tea. Perhaps you could talk to the officials at your local library and see what their opinion of it is. You could see if there is a way to make the program better (e.g. perhaps the horns and whole demonic angle were too much, for example?) If it concerns you for some reason, you should really try to learn what it is all about.

Ignoring it is always safe.

I would refrain from chanting "Hail Satan!" That would make a certain segment of society uncomfortable.

Thank you for your thoughts and insights.

-Smac

[Pete Ahlstrom]

33 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Okay.  Thank you for your input.

I am still curious about what responses from other people besides yourself to this story are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety.  Any thoughts?

-Smac

Satan in drag reading stories to children is clearly designed to get the religious right to respond and/or at least take notice. I wouldn't be surprised if a right-leaning group is the ultimate author of this as a way to drive the right to the polls. It could, however, merely be a thumb in the nose type of move by the left. Either way, I think its result is more division, more propping up of the false right/left paradigm.

[smac97]

6 minutes ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

Satan in drag reading stories to children is clearly designed to get the religious right to respond and/or at least take notice.

Okay.  So this is, in your estimation, gaslighting?  Kind of like the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence?

Quote

I wouldn't be surprised if a right-leaning group is the ultimate author of this as a way to drive the right to the polls.

I don't understand.  So it's multi-level gaslighting?  A "right-leaning group" is conspiring with drag queens in multiple cities to fabricate controversy and "drive the right to the polls?"

Do you have any, um, evidence for this?  It would seem odd for drag queens to conspire with elements of the far right in this way.

Quote

It could, however, merely be a thumb in the nose type of move by the left. Either way, I think its result is more division, more propping up of the false right/left paradigm.

Okay.  I am still curious about what responses from other people besides yourself to this story are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety.  Any thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited October 18, 2017 by smac97

[The Nehor]

Weirdo parents take their kids to weird event. Other weirdo people take this weird event as a harbinger or the End of Days.

For everyone else there is no hysteria or outrage or even much notice beyond a news story which is responded to with a “Huh, kind of odd” moment.

I find these kinds of “outrage porn” stories pretty dull.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

I think there is a danger of group think on all sides. Having said that, it sure is troubling how some on the left want to violently shut down speech, even at Berkeley. How about we bring back the 1st amendment and tolerate each other a little more?

Talk to California Boy.  He's the one trying to NoPlatform this thread.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edit to Add: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/No_platform

Quote

No platform is the practice of of preventing someone—either through policy or through protest—from spreading their ideas through a particular event or website. The term is mostly used to refer to rescinding an invitation to someone asked to speak at an event (such as a guest lecture at a college). The concept apparently originates from a policy used by the British National Union of Students to prevent people they disagree with from giving speeches on UK college campuses. The concept is similar to the political action of cordon sanitaire, where a politician or political party is either unconditionally excluded from coalitions or other forms or cooperation, or even completely ignored. "No platform" is typically invoked for issues such as racism, sexism, homophobia, Holocaust denial, and so forth. As what is and is not acceptable by society changes with the times, so do the targets of "no platform", with 2015 seeing protests of speakers seen as transphobic or Islamophobic who consider themselves progressive as they are feminists or atheists, respectively. No-platforming is, at best, an attempt to prevent a balance fallacy, with protesters refusing to allow tacit endorsement of reactionary views.

Depending on the circumstances, the tactic can be controversial, and has been compared to book burning.^[1] Ignoring a person (or group) also means that no one is directly refuting their arguments. Some have criticized the action as a form of censorship and a violation of the principles of freedom of speech and critical thinking. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education maintains a database of hundreds of incidents^[2] in which invited speakers have been no-platformed on college campuses, showing that the phenomenon has been "steadily increasing over the past 15 years" and is used more often by left-wingers than right wingers.^[3]

And this: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=flame+bait

Quote

1) Flame bait is a message posted to a public Internet discussion group, such as a forum, newsgroup or mailing list, with the intent of provoking an angry response (a "flame") or argument over a topic the "troll" (original poster provoking angry response) often has no real interest in, and finds humour, or entertainment in reactions. 

2) Flame bait can be a person unfamiliar with a certain discussion/topic on an internet discussion group, possibly saying things that would provoke an angry, teasing, or overall negative response.

Yep, that seems to be what California Boy has been trying to do in this thread.  NoPlatforming through Flamebaiting.

Fortunately, it hasn't worked so far.

Edited October 18, 2017 by smac97

[Gray]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

learning takes place in universities?  Hmm, what type of open minded learning are you talking about?  The only thing I see in universities is group think - you must think just like I think or you will be shut up, harassed, and prevented from any form of communication.  Why?  Because your different way of thinking hurts "my" feelings. 

Pot, meet Kettle.  I love the hypocrisy of the Left.

The propaganda is working perfectly. Exhibit A.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

I need to take a little break.  Obviously I am so sick and tired of these kinds of judgements and yes attacks on the gay community by Mormons that I have a difficult time expressing myself in a rational way

You are trying to censor a rational and reasoned discussion about a topic you don't like.  You are trying to shut down discussion through flamebaiting.  By personalizing it, making it about me.  About you.  Anything but the topic at hand.

Stop it.

Quote

Before I take a break however, I want each and every one of you that reads this post that this is a very real issue for just about everyone who is gay.  Imagine what it is like to come to the self realization that you are not like everyone else. That no matter how much your churches, your  leaders, your parents, your family your friends want you to be just the same as them, it is never going to happen.  You are always going to be different.  

Nothing in this thread has anything to do with you and your personal issues.

Quote

You are always going to be that gay guy.  You are always going to be a target just because of who you are.  You are always going to be judged.  And the judgement is always the same.  You choose Satan over God.  You are gay so you must live the lifestyle that Satan has chosen for his followers.  Here are a few scriptures that I want to give to show you how evil you are.  

You are raving.  And bearing false witness.  Nobody here is "target{ing}" you, or accusing you of "choos{ing} Satan over God."

Again, you are just flamebaiting here.  You are trying to stifle/censor a discussion you don't like.

Stop it.

Quote

Everything you do is judged on the gay litmus.  

Oh, stop it.  If you choose to adopt an Everything-Is-Always-About-Me-Being-Gay worldview, have at it.  But don't try to project that nonsense onto us.

I have never met you.  I have no idea as to what you look like, or how you behave, or what your interests are, or what you do for a living, or how good you are at it.  I only know snippets about your personal life based on what you have said in your posts here.  

I have no interest in a "gay litmus" test (I'm not even sure what that means).

-Smac

Edited October 18, 2017 by smac97

[Brother Bear]

6 minutes ago, smac97 said:

You are raving.  How are your "absurd and false accusations" a "daily reality" for "the gay community?"  What on earth are you talking about?

That is not responsive to my question.  Here it is, yet again: As to the story (the substance of the news item), what responses to it are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety?

One response is "WE ARE NOT ALL ALIKE."  I get that.  Are there any other responses to this story which, in your view, are within the spectrum of propriety?

You are raving.

If you want to participate in the discussion, fine.  Ditch the hysterics and let's have a reasoned discussion.  Short of that, stop deviating from the topic at hand.

More raving.  I have done nothing of the kind.

Quit throwing hissy fits in threads you don't like.

Quit trying to poison the well.

Quit trying to censor discussion that you don't like.

Since I have not asked a corollary to that question ("Why do gay people go around killing 8 year old children"), no, that wouldn't be helpful.

Here is the question I am asking, and which you are refusing to answer, and which you are trying frantically to distract us from addressing (to the point of flamebaiting with hateful and false and irrelevant rants about "killing" gays and such): As to the story (the substance of the news item), what responses to it are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety?

If you don't want to respond, fine.  Get out of the thread and stop cluttering it up with your rants and hysterics.  It comes across as a form of censorship, of you trying to NoPlatform discussions (and people) you dislike.  That just ain't cool.

-Smac

Smac, 

between this thread and the one on sex abuse yesterday, you've shown yourself to be a person who  lacks the ability to engage with people who's views and lifestyles differ from your own. You take for granted the idea that others have experienced trauma, abuse, harassment, conflict, and disappointment in a way that, while you likely won't have to experience, you can't be bothered to attempt to even imagine. Instead, you rant about your ideas of what is just and rational without appearing to have enough self-awareness to realize that your words amount to DOG$H!T to the people your responding to. Why you continue to solicit opinions from people when you clearly lack the sensitivity to engage in effective discussion only leads me to conclude that you are, in fact, a hopeless dumb@ss. 

(This is smileymcgee by the way; not trying to be tricky. I started this account when I was having login issues with my other account. Only saying this so that if I get banned for language, make sure you ban both of my accounts)

[smac97]

31 minutes ago, Brother Bear said:

Smac, 

between this thread and the one on sex abuse yesterday, you've shown yourself to be a person who  lacks the ability to engage with people who's views and lifestyles differ from your own.

Having been on this board for many years, I beg to differ.

Quote

You take for granted the idea that others have experienced trauma, abuse, harassment, conflict, and disappointment in a way that, while you likely won't have to experience, you can't be bothered to attempt to even imagine.

Not so.  False.  I reject this characterization.

Quote

Instead, you rant about your ideas of what is just and rational without appearing to have enough self-awareness to realize that your words amount to DOG$H!T to the people your responding to. 

Then feel free to not interact with me.  

Quote

Why you continue to solicit opinions from people when you clearly lack the sensitivity to engage in effective discussion only leads me to conclude that you are, in fact, a hopeless dumb@ss. 

Golly!  I'm glad you're here to give me lessons on "sensitivity" and "the ability to engage with people who's views and lifestyles differ from your own."

Speaking of "rants"...

Quote

(This is smileymcgee by the way; not trying to be tricky. I started this account when I was having login issues with my other account. Only saying this so that if I get banned for language, make sure you ban both of my accounts)

As you like.

This is an interesting exercise.  There's tons of flamebaiting going on.  It's almost as if California Boy, and now Brother Bear / Smileymcgree, want to stifle discussion of topics they don't like.

NoPlatforming through Flamebaiting.  That is what seems to be happening.  Flamebait enough and the thread gets shut down.  The thread gets shut down and Smac is NoPlatformed.  Smac is NoPlatformed and discussion is censored.  Squelched.  Silenced.

Yes, very interesting indeed.

That being said, and as much as it rankles me to let censorious folks kill a discussion, I will nevertheless shut down the thread.  Too much acrimony.  Not worth it.  I've had my say.

-Smac

Edited October 18, 2017 by smac97

[Gray]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Actually, I linked to two stories, one in Long Beach and one in Brooklyn.

And there's a website: https://www.dragqueenstoryhour.org/, which has an "Upcoming Events" section showing events in Los Angeles, New York City, San Francisco and North New Jersey. 

Okay, there are 119,000 or so libraries in the US.

 

Quote

I acknowledge that.

Thanks

 

Quote

What responses to this story are, in your view, within the spectrum of propriety?  

What sort of response do LGBTQ+ folks expect to such things?

Thanks,

-Smac

I can't speak for the LGBTQ community, but I think it's reasonable to say that this particular person's persona is bizarre and not kid friendly. What's next, Pinhead from Hellraiser reads Doctor Suess? But no generalizations need be made about libraries or LGBTQ persons.

As I understand it, some drag queens are straight too. Not sure I'd necessarily lump cross dressing in with LGBT.

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by Gray

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, Gray said:

I can't speak for the LGBTQ community, but I think it's reasonable to say that this particular person's persona is bizarre and not kid friendly. What's next, Pinhead from Hellraiser reads Doctor Suess?

Okay.  Thank you for your input.

5 minutes ago, Gray said:

But no generalizations need be made about libraries or LGBTQ persons.

Agreed.

5 minutes ago, Gray said:

As I understand it, some drag queens are straight too. Not sure I'd necessarily lump cross dressing in with LGBT.

Agreed.  Are they part of the LGBT+ acronym?  See here.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Gray]

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Okay.  Thank you for your input.

Agreed.

Thanks

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Agreed.  Are they part of the LGBT+ acronym?  See here.

Thanks,

-Smac

I'm not sure, not that I'm aware of.  LGBT includes transgender, but that's not the same thing at all as dressing in drag.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

I haven't read any of the thread so I don't know what else has been said.  For me, i wouldn't care if a drag queen read a story to my preschoolers at all.  But I wouldn't want a demonic drag queen (or a demonic anything) to be interacting with my preschoolers at all.  That just seems like all kinds of messed up to be putting kids that age in the presence of someone with that look.

"Drag queens" tend to be over the top sexualized, at least from what I have seen in my limited experience (even in San Fran I never saw one on the street that I can recall).

A well dressed man in drag (meaning the more glam stuff, think princess attire rather than night club) who was dramatic in nonsexual, nonviolent (referring to demonic here) ways and who interacted with kids on a kids' level, I wouldn't have a problem with if I knew ahead of time.  A transvestite who was in every day attire who acted as one would expect any librarian to act during storyhour...no warning needed.

I am totally with you on the demonic aspect.  My kids got nightmares from much less.  My son's first Halloween, nightmares for days until I hit upon having the cute little happy face ghost he could hold in his hand my mom gave him be his guardian as Baby Ghost would make all the big ghosts stay away.