More Cultural and Moral Decay

[california boy]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

This seems thoughtful, well written so far, but only managed a bit. Got to sign off and go to sleep. Will finish in afternoon probably, maybe tomorrow night.  Things got neglected yesterday.  Got to put more effort into reality today.
 

https://eliesheva.medium.com/what-drag-queen-culture-does-to-women-via-rupauls-drag-race-5814c544d0ae

“But here’s where it starts to get messy: when the historically dominant sex, men, are empowered and emboldened to strut, ‘sashay’ and develop their female alter egos to a point that seems to cross a line into an extreme, hyperactive caricaturization of overblown female stereotypes. When is drag queen imagery insulting and belittling? If there is truly a movement to make traditionally feminine beauty genderless, what comes first? The mainstreaming or the extreme?

The way I see it, as a woman, the characterization of a reality TV drag queen series is not ‘gay men are this at the extreme’ or even ‘men can be this at the extreme’ but ‘this is a cartoonish portrayal of overblown women stereotypes now being owned and developed by men for entertainment/a personal fulfillment.’

Maybe I feel this way because I haven’t been all that exposed to real-life drag queens or drag shows. Maybe it’s the time I’m living in. Maybe I’m right, and there is something here to poke at — a misunderstood wound.” 

———

Also just glanced at this one thinking it was the above and this part jumped out and it reminded me of a lot of criticisms I have heard from other women

 https://www.feministcurrent.com/2014/04/25/why-has-drag-escaped-critique-from-feminists-and-the-lgbtq-community/

“In a 2006 paper, entitled “Imitating Others As Control: Is Drag Sexist/Racist?” Kirsten Anderberg writes:

“When men dress in drag and supposedly imitate women, it is most often very sexist in a remarkably similar way to the whites imitating racial minorities… All the things I have shunned as part of the ancient ‘cult of womanhood,’ all the superficial, commercialized, and fake aspects of ‘femininity’ that I have fought to be freed from, these men were embracing as their ‘womanhood!’ Tons of make up, huge dyed bouffant hair-dos, binding lingerie, heels, nylons, shaving…and these men in drag who were supposedly acting like women, also acted giddy, stupid, shallow…it is odd to me that this could be seen as anything but blatant sexism.””

I honestly have never really thought of drag as imitating women per say.  For me, it has been more of a art form that some gay men do to create a persona that allows them to be someone who they are not.  To hide behind some sequins and exaggerated make up and be free of all the judgements and shame that they are forced to take upon themselves in their real lives. It empowers them even for a brief time to not be how the world has always viewed them.  It is kinda like if you are going to accuse me my whole life to be too girly, well then, I am going to take your view of what it is to be gay and explode it to an over the top version of your perception of me.

Gay men also do the same thing by over the top masculine version (what you asked about earlier about men dressing up as men)  The whole leather fetish Tom of Finland type persona where they exaggerate and put on a facade of being big, over the top muscular men with leather hats and biker bad boy attire.  It is the antithesis of drag.

 

But I certainly see your point if one thinks that drag is a characture trying to insult women.  I personally don't see it as that.

Edited September 3, 2022 by california boy

[Calm]

9 hours ago, california boy said:

And the supposition that if your precious little 18 year old child seeing that listing is going to come back to you by the end of the semester with a changed gender.

I think you are misreading her here too. I don’t believe (and will check with her, but I am certain based on other conversations) she is referring to changed gender so much as referring to accepting the ideology or paradigms that contradict the gospel’s teachings on sexuality and gender and the standards that are intended to support those expressions of biology and personality as well as a gospel oriented culture.   

Edited September 3, 2022 by Calm

[california boy]

7 minutes ago, Calm said:

I checked with Cassandra and she is not referring to children at all in her blog, except in that they are parts of families.  On this you have misread her completely.  I was wondering why I couldn’t remember any such references or find them.

Cassandra:  ”My *only* argument against drag shows is they're offensive to womanhood. I could have said more and may do so in the future, but that's all I said. I never say anything about them in re children at all…

I did say drag shows are "a sexualized depersonalization of half of Heavenly Father’s children," i.e. women. Half of Heavenly Father's children are women.”

My real objection to this FAIR article is what I took the time to write out.  If FAIR is suppose to be an organization that tries to find truth and a less bias point of view, this FAIR article is nothing like that.  It's goal is to be outraged that an LGBT club thought it could provide recourse material but in fact was some kind of recruitment instrument to lure students to jump on the operating table come back to their parents as a completely different gender.  Her language and conclusions are inflammatory, inaccurate, bias and anything but fair.  For me it had "we are going to recruit your children into the LGBT lifestyle" written all over it.  The article was NOT about drag shows being an offense to womanhood.  

[california boy]

7 minutes ago, Calm said:

I think you are misreading her here too. I don’t believe (and will check with her, but I am certain based on other conversations) she is referring to changed gender so much as referring to accepting the ideology or paradigms that contradict the gospel’s teachings on sexuality and gender and the standards that are intended to support those expressions of biology and personality as well as a gospel oriented culture.   

I can only comment on the article.  She goes into a heck of a lot of blown out of proportion ideas of how this is a threat to your children turning trans because of one single listing of Planned Parenthood.  If you know her, maybe you could ask her why she went off the rails about this.  It is almost a fourth of the entire article as if the whole brochure was a ploy to turn your child trans.  What this brochure is NOT is a propaganda piece on the joys of becoming trans.  She is the one that made it about that.

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, california boy said:

I honestly have never really thought of drag as imitating women per say.  For me, it has been more of a art form that some gay men do to create a persona that allows them to be someone who they are not….

But I certainly see your point if one thinks that drag is a characture trying to insult women.  I personally don't see it as that.

This has been a not uncommon topic since the 70’s if what I have been reading the past night is accurate and that does match my experience in discussing drag with women in and out of the church…though I am not going to claim it was a frequent topic nor was it a major cause for anyone of them, it was just a consistently expressed dislike and feeling of being dismissed, disrespected. Some did see it as marginalization of women by the gay community. 

I have read a few comments from gay men (not claiming they are spokesmen for all gays, just that the ideas are out there) recognizing the inappropriateness of drag queens and other men using b—- and slut among other aspects as well as certain strains of gay culture being misogynistic in many of their behaviours, so I don’t think it is a huge jump that some women see drag culture as degrading towards women as well. 

But this discussion raises another concern for me as I am rather surprised you were unaware that there were women who interpret drag culture in this way. Maybe I am assuming too much communication in between groups, but I wonder if you were unaware of this, how much this particular women’s perspective has been discussed among gay men in general or among men in the drag culture. Without recognition of difficulties for others, there won’t be communication and hopefully eventually understanding and accommodation to each other’s needs. 
 

(I am laughing because the closing phrase of the old GI Joe cartoons just flashed through my brain as it too frequently does:  “Knowing is half the battle.”)

[jkwilliams]

25 minutes ago, Calm said:

This has been a not uncommon topic since the 70’s if what I have been reading the past night is accurate and that does match my experience in discussing drag with women in and out of the church…though I am not going to claim it was a frequent topic nor was it a major cause for anyone of them, it was just a consistently expressed dislike and feeling of being dismissed, disrespected. Some did see it as marginalization of women by the gay community. 

I have read a few comments from gay men (not claiming they are spokesmen for all gays, just that the ideas are out there) recognizing the inappropriateness of drag queens and other men using b—- and slut among other aspects as well as certain strains of gay culture being misogynistic in many of their behaviours, so I don’t think it is a huge jump that some women see drag culture as degrading towards women as well. 

But this discussion raises another concern for me as I am rather surprised you were unaware that there were women who interpret drag culture in this way. Maybe I am assuming too much communication in between groups, but I wonder if you were unaware of this, how much this particular women’s perspective has been discussed among gay men in general or among men in the drag culture. Without recognition of difficulties for others, there won’t be communication and hopefully eventually understanding and accommodation to each other’s needs. 
 

(I am laughing because the closing phrase of the old GI Joe cartoons just flashed through my brain as it too frequently does:  “Knowing is half the battle.”)

I appreciate your comments here, as I’ve never thought of drag queens as anti-women. I can see your point, which has given me something to think about. I have a good friend from the MTC and BYU who does drag shows, and he’s explained it to me the way California Boy has: it’s embracing the stereotype of effeminacy, in the same way minority groups may co-opt racist terms. 

My issue with the piece is its assertion that gay activists are trying to trap students and alienate them from their parents. That, and the over-the-top descriptions of drag shows as devilish and evil. Skimming some of her other stuff shows her to be a rather strident culture warrior. I honestly don’t know what that has to do with Fair. 

[california boy]

26 minutes ago, Calm said:

This has been a not uncommon topic since the 70’s if what I have been reading the past night is accurate and that does match my experience in discussing drag with women in and out of the church…though I am not going to claim it was a frequent topic nor was it a major cause for anyone of them, it was just a consistently expressed dislike and feeling of being dismissed, disrespected. Some did see it as marginalization of women by the gay community. 

I have read a few comments from gay men (not claiming they are spokesmen for all gays, just that the ideas are out there) recognizing the inappropriateness of drag queens and other men using b—- and slut among other aspects as well as certain strains of gay culture being misogynistic in many of their behaviours, so I don’t think it is a huge jump that some women see drag culture as degrading towards women as well. 

But this discussion raises another concern for me as I am rather surprised you were unaware that there were women who interpret drag culture in this way. Maybe I am assuming too much communication in between groups, but I wonder if you were unaware of this, how much this particular women’s perspective has been discussed among gay men in general or among men in the drag culture. Without recognition of difficulties for others, there won’t be communication and hopefully eventually understanding and accommodation to each other’s needs. 
 

(I am laughing because the closing phrase of the old GI Joe cartoons just flashed through my brain as it too frequently does:  “Knowing is half the battle.”)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention.  I haven't really heard this was an issue with some.  But like I said, I am not involved in the drag community.  Perhaps it is discussed much more among those that are participating and attending those events.  Maybe it is something I should have been more aware about.  Too bad I am no longer at the LGBT event that I was at last week, I could have asked around more among those that performed drag there.

[CV75]

45 minutes ago, california boy said:

I honestly have never really thought of drag as imitating women per say.  For me, it has been more of a art form that some gay men do to create a persona that allows them to be someone who they are not.  To hide behind some sequins and exaggerated make up and be free of all the judgements and shame that they are forced to take upon themselves in their real lives. It empowers them even for a brief time to not be how the world has always viewed them.  It is kinda like if you are going to accuse me my whole life to be too girly, well then, I am going to take your view of what it is to be gay and explode it to an over the top version of your perception of me.

Gay men also do the same thing by over the top masculine version (what you asked about earlier about men dressing up as men)  The whole leather fetish Tom of Finland type persona where they exaggerate and put on a facade of being big, over the top muscular men with leather hats and biker bad boy attire.  It is the antithesis of drag.

But I certainly see your point if one thinks that drag is a characture trying to insult women.  I personally don't see it as that.

Aside from the psychology of why performers might pursue their career or avocation in the arts and entertainment, the kind of drag discussed in this thread refers to the performance of masculinity, femininity or another form of gender expression in a clearly non-conforming manner (e.g., men as queens, women as kings; therein lies the entertainment value). Add to this the trappings of sexual exaggeration, language, humor, behavior and other factors, and the psychology you are describing is hardly a healthy model for children. As to the psychology, I think it does show a form of acting out against women, intentional or subconscious. Or against men, as you pointed out.

[jkwilliams]

7 minutes ago, california boy said:

Thanks for bringing this to my attention.  I haven't really heard this was an issue with some.  But like I said, I am not involved in the drag community.  Perhaps it is discussed much more among those that are participating and attending those events.  Maybe it is something I should have been more aware about.  Too bad I am no longer at the LGBT event that I was at last week, I could have asked around more among those that performed drag there.

I tried to send you a message, but apparently you aren’t allowed. If you want to, you can email me at williams8tx at msn dot com. 

[Calm]

15 minutes ago, california boy said:

fact was some kind of recruitment instrument to lure students to jump on the operating table come back to their parents as a completely different gender

I think that is a misreading as I said above. What the resources are is at the core supportive of some ideas that are seen as antithetical to the gospel, whether or not one chooses to use those services for oneself. By publishing them under BYU’s logo through a school service intended to make life better for students by offering them aids/resources to fill their needs, it implies acceptance, that this resources will be helpful, useful, good and that can even be taken as endorsement by some by BYU and by extension the Church.  You don’t welcome someone by handing them a list of names and saying “welcome to the club, here is a list of activities that will make your life great or miserable or are just ho hum, but you will have to figure out which is which on your own; we are giving this to you to make your life easier.”  I would be throwing that list away as worse then useless.  It makes sense to believe that when a list is given to you as part of a welcome package under the label “resource”, they are being recommended, especially if they are medical.

Planned Parenthood (being the easiest to recognize resource, I will use that as an example) does a lot of good work. But a major part of its work includes offering abortions.***
Even if much of what it does is good, it is so associated in society’s view with abortion support that having it identified in any way with the Church could mislead some to believe the Church had wider exceptions for abortions than it does, imo.  And now it appears to be a major supplier of transitioning hormones for young adults and minors (I am spacing on the correct term and I need to finish this up), the use of which is contrary to church doctrine (at least for transitioning).  I think it best to avoid linking the two organizations. Planned Parenthood isn’t going to want to be confused with an organization that teaches abortion is wrong except in rare cases any more than the Church wants people to think it could be shifting from allowing abortion in rare, dangerous situations to more frequent, disruptive, but not life or health threatening cases.  Same thing with transitioning.

A pamphlet handed out on campus through a service provided and partially funded by the university (the school newspaper) and included in a packet that is meant to be used by students to make their time at BYU better is going to be seen differently by many students than one that gets handed to them by someone not attached to BYU on the corner of the street after they step off of campus, especially since it is well known anyone posting stuff on bulletin boards or having displays or protesting even has to get approval through some BYU department to avoid it being immediately ripped down or booted off campus. 

The Church teams up with groups it disagrees with all the time, but I think when it comes to highly charged, politicized issues it is better to prevent misunderstandings than allow them to occur and then have offended feelings, those who feel betrayed because of those false expectations, etc.  One just has to look at what happened when rumors that BYU was removing any distinction between same sex dating and opposite sex dating awhile back.  Even though all that happened was a return to what had been the same as the previous week, many experienced a sense of loss, that something had been taken away from them.  Or look what happened here when something was originally allowed and then pulled.  This is news where a rejection from the very beginning would have been pretty much ignored as nothing of interest.

***I hold a slightly more liberal view on abortion than the Church does, but I have no intent to try and persuade anyone to view it the same way as it depends on when I believe the spirit enters the body, which is my speculation. I am only sharing this to show I don’t see PP as an evil or corrupt organization, but just one that is mistaken on a rather important issue. 

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, california boy said:

Thanks for bringing this to my attention.  I haven't really heard this was an issue with some.  But like I said, I am not involved in the drag community.  Perhaps it is discussed much more among those that are participating and attending those events.  Maybe it is something I should have been more aware about.  Too bad I am no longer at the LGBT event that I was at last week, I could have asked around more among those that performed drag there.

If you get another chance or come across something online, I would be interested to hear of it. 

[california boy]

2 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Aside from the psychology of why performers might pursue their career or avocation in the arts and entertainment, the kind of drag discussed in this thread refers to the performance of masculinity, femininity or another form of gender expression in a clearly non-conforming manner (e.g., men as queens, women as kings; therein lies the entertainment value). Add to this the trappings of sexual exaggeration, language, humor, behavior and other factors, and the psychology you are describing is hardly a healthy model for children. As to the psychology, I think it does show a form of acting out against women, intentional or subconscious. Or against men, as you pointed out.

Did you ever dress up as the opposite sex for Halloween?  Did you ever see someone dressed up as the opposite sex on Halloween?  Cause I saw that as one of the standard costumes growing up.  It didn't have any affect on me.  I am not transgender.  Changing my sex has never entered into my head.  If you saw such costumes, did it make you want to change genders?  Maybe you could provide actual examples how seeing someone in drag changed a childs desire to change his gender?  Like real facts rather than just emotional accusations?

For me, my role models came from people who were actually in my life.  People who cared for me. People that loved me and showed me the value of embracing attributes that I wanted to emulate.  The only impact i can see that a child might have in coming in contact with a drag queen is realizing that maybe it is ok if you are a little different than other kids.  Embrace our differences is what makes society grow and expand our understanding.  We don't have to all fit some single stereotype that society seems to dictate.  I would have loved to see that it was ok to be different.  It was ok to be gay.  Instead I hid that part of myself from everyone and felt like I was deceiving people my whole life, pretending I was what they wanted me to be.  Living that kind of lie to everyone that loved me became unbearable and destructive.

I grew up when the Church was pushing this very idea.  They passed out cards that had the motto "Dare to be different".  Anyone else remember those cards?  Did that mean, dare to be different as long as you conform ONLY to our version of what different was?  

[california boy]

19 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I tried to send you a message, but apparently you aren’t allowed. If you want to, you can email me at williams8tx at msn dot com. 

I am not allowed to receive messages?  I didn't know.  I sent you an email.

[california boy]

46 minutes ago, Calm said:

I think that is a misreading as I said above. What the resources are is at the core supportive of some ideas that are seen as antithetical to the gospel, whether or not one chooses to use those services for oneself. By publishing them under BYU’s logo through a school service intended to make life better for students by offering them aids/resources to fill their needs, it implies acceptance, that this resources will be helpful, useful, good and that can even be taken as endorsement by some by BYU and by extension the Church.  You don’t welcome someone by handing them a list of names and saying “welcome to the club, here is a list of activities that will make your life great or miserable or are just ho hum, but you will have to figure out which is which on your own; we are giving this to you to make your life easier.”  I would be throwing that list away as worse then useless.  It makes sense to believe that when a list is given to you as part of a welcome package under the label “resource”, they are being recommended, especially if they are medical.

Did they use the BYU logo?  I didn't know that.  Yeah, I would agree if that is the case, that would be wrong.  I thought it was a brochure from the LGBT club on campus and identified as such.  

 

46 minutes ago, Calm said:

Planned Parenthood (being the easiest to recognize resource, I will use that as an example) does a lot of good work. But a major part of its work includes offering abortions.***
Even if much of what it does is good, it is so associated in society’s view with abortion support that having it identified in any way with the Church could mislead some to believe the Church had wider exceptions for abortions than it does, imo.  And now it appears to be a major supplier of transitioning hormones for young adults and minors (I am spacing on the correct term and I need to finish this up), the use of which is contrary to church doctrine (at least for transitioning).  I think it best to avoid linking the two organizations. Planned Parenthood isn’t going to want to be confused with an organization that teaches abortion is wrong except in rare cases any more than the Church wants people to think it could be shifting from allowing abortion in rare, dangerous situations to more frequent, disruptive, but not life or health threatening cases.  Same thing with transitioning.

I was unaware that Planned Parenthood has moved into helping trans people with drugs.  So I did learn that from this whole blowup.  And I can see why BYU would not want a student to go to Planned Parenthood for those transitioning drugs.  But I have to say, if I was trans, the LAST place I would go to receive counseling is a BYU resource offered on campus.  I would probably also already know about what Planned Parenthood is offering.  And I wouldn't need a brochure to find the contact information on where Planned Parenthood was at.  

BYU has long lost any kind of trust within the LGBT community.  By the loss of that trust, it has almost forced those dealing with LGBT issues to go to other resources completely and far away from any connection to BYU.  There is no way in hell I would go to anyone connected to BYU to discuss anything about me dealing with any LGBT issues.  

One of my pet peeves about how the Church approaches this whole LGBT issue is this underlying implication that a kid can be talked into being gay.  Like if he goes to a counselor, the therapist is going to convince him that he should leave the church and go off to San Francisco, join the drug infested gay culture and be dead in 2 years (this is exactly what my family though I would choose to do when I came out).  Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.  However therapy by a qualified counselor can be very helpful in helping a person deal with some very complicated issues.  At this LGBT gathering I just came back from, there were several discussions at the table I was at that talking about how helpful some guys found therapy be.  It helped them stop hating their families for how they were treated for one thing.  Therapy can have a stigma that prevents many who could actually use some help stay away from it.  By BYU suggesting that it is wrong to go to any therapist that is not approved by BYU and by extension the Church is not the best message to be sending to anyone, especially LGBT students. It leaves them right in the middle.  Not trusting BYU counselors and getting a message that they should also not trust outside counselors. 

46 minutes ago, Calm said:

A pamphlet handed out on campus through a service provided and partially funded by the university (the school newspaper) and included in a packet that is meant to be used by students to make their time at BYU better is going to be seen differently by many students than one that gets handed to them by someone not attached to BYU on the corner of the street after they step off of campus, especially since it is well known anyone posting stuff on bulletin boards or having displays or protesting even has to get approval through some BYU department to avoid it being immediately ripped down or booted off campus. 

I would agree with that.  And I am guessing that the pamphlets that were returned to the LGBT club went right over to the Kiwanis park to be distributed there at the drag event.  Or handed out to students that sought the club out.  Which is probably a better place to distribute the information anyway.  It is a much better way to target the audience anyway.  

46 minutes ago, Calm said:

The Church teams up with groups it disagrees with all the time, but I think when it comes to highly charged, politicized issues it is better to prevent misunderstandings than allow them to occur and then have offended feelings, those who feel betrayed because of those false expectations, etc.  One just has to look at what happened when rumors that BYU was removing any distinction between same sex dating and opposite sex dating awhile back.  Even though all that happened was a return to what had been the same as the previous week, many experienced a sense of loss, that something had been taken away from them.  Or look what happened here when something was originally allowed and then pulled.  This is news where a rejection from the very beginning would have been pretty much ignored as nothing of interest.

Yeah that was a huge loss of trust in believing that LGBT students would be treated equally on campus.  If I was deciding what school to attend today, BYU would not be on my list.  They have drawn such a sharp line in the sand, I can clearly see why so many youth are leaving the Church.  The Church continues to make it pretty unbearable certainly for LGBT members to want to be a part of it.

46 minutes ago, Calm said:

***I hold a slightly more liberal view on abortion than the Church does, but I have no intent to try and persuade anyone to view it the same way as it depends on when I believe the spirit enters the body, which is my speculation. I am only sharing this to show I don’t see PP as an evil or corrupt organization, but just one that is mistaken on a rather important issue. 

I agree totally.  I feel the same way.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Aside from the psychology of why performers might pursue their career or avocation in the arts and entertainment, the kind of drag discussed in this thread refers to the performance of masculinity, femininity or another form of gender expression in a clearly non-conforming manner (e.g., men as queens, women as kings; therein lies the entertainment value). Add to this the trappings of sexual exaggeration, language, humor, behavior and other factors, and the psychology you are describing is hardly a healthy model for children. As to the psychology, I think it does show a form of acting out against women, intentional or subconscious. Or against men, as you pointed out.

So it is all a nefarious plot by the non-binaries to rule the world?

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

I grew up when the Church was pushing this very idea.  They passed out cards that had the motto "Dare to be different".  Anyone else remember those cards?  Did that mean, dare to be different as long as you conform ONLY to our version of what different was?  

Yes.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Did you ever dress up as the opposite sex for Halloween?  Did you ever see someone dressed up as the opposite sex on Halloween?  Cause I saw that as one of the standard costumes growing up.  It didn't have any affect on me.  I am not transgender.  Changing my sex has never entered into my head.  If you saw such costumes, did it make you want to change genders?  Maybe you could provide actual examples how seeing someone in drag changed a childs desire to change his gender?  Like real facts rather than just emotional accusations?

For me, my role models came from people who were actually in my life.  People who cared for me. People that loved me and showed me the value of embracing attributes that I wanted to emulate.  The only impact i can see that a child might have in coming in contact with a drag queen is realizing that maybe it is ok if you are a little different than other kids.  Embrace our differences is what makes society grow and expand our understanding.  We don't have to all fit some single stereotype that society seems to dictate.  I would have loved to see that it was ok to be different.  It was ok to be gay.  Instead I hid that part of myself from everyone and felt like I was deceiving people my whole life, pretending I was what they wanted me to be.  Living that kind of lie to everyone that loved me became unbearable and destructive.

I grew up when the Church was pushing this very idea.  They passed out cards that had the motto "Dare to be different".  Anyone else remember those cards?  Did that mean, dare to be different as long as you conform ONLY to our version of what different was?  

Ok so you're still preferring the pathology you were describing. Nice!

32 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

So it is all a nefarious plot by the non-binaries to rule the world?

At least this strawman is framed as a rhetorical question.

Ha ha...! It's kind of like the sort of drag that distorts or exaggerates another's gender in some kind of extreme way, and confronts the laughter as if the underlying actor is the one receiving the derision.

[jkwilliams]

14 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Ok so you're still preferring the pathology you were describing. Nice!

At least this strawman is framed as a rhetorical question.

Ha ha...! It's kind of like the sort of drag that distorts or exaggerates another's gender in some kind of extreme way, and confronts the laughter as if the underlying actor is the one receiving the derision.

Are you saying that doing drag is pathological behavior indicating psychological problems?

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

At least this strawman is framed as a rhetorical question.

Ha ha...! It's kind of like the sort of drag that distorts or exaggerates another's gender in some kind of extreme way, and confronts the laughter as if the underlying actor is the one receiving the derision.

It wasn’t a strawman. It was a joke.

If feminism wants to bash on drag acts they are welcome to it I suppose. I think the complaint against it is pretty fringe. It is kind of a derail in any case. It is not as if the forces that are suddenly vilifying drag acts are doing so because they are deeply concerned with women’s rights, dignity, and autonomy.

[CV75]

2 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

Are you saying that doing drag is pathological behavior indicating psychological problems?

No -- read californiaboy's anecdote where he describes a couple of acquaintances (and then a generality) where such is the case -- that is the specific I was addressing.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

It wasn’t a strawman. It was a joke.

If feminism wants to bash on drag acts they are welcome to it I suppose. I think the complaint against it is pretty fringe. It is kind of a derail in any case. It is not as if the forces that are suddenly vilifying drag acts are doing so because they are deeply concerned with women’s rights, dignity, and autonomy.

Ok it's a joke. That's why I wrote "Ha-ha...!" about it. See above. My conversation with califormnia boy was specific to his anecdote. I do understand most of the posts from sideliners here are generalized, emotional venting.

Edited September 3, 2022 by CV75

[california boy]

10 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Ok it's a joke. That's why I wrote "Ha-ha...!" about it. See above. My conversation with califormnia boy was specific to his anecdote. I do understand most of the posts from sideliners here are generalized, emotional venting.

Honestly, I don't see any other explanation for BYU being worried about a brochure that list therapist and outside support groups that are not "approved".  Does the Church have to control everything that tightly in order to allow dissemination of information?  Or does it just like the opportunity to be passive aggressive.  The whole "We love LGBT members to attend BYU, we just want to be completely in charge of every single decision they make" thing.

[Calm]

7 hours ago, california boy said:

I am not allowed to receive messages?  I didn't know.  I sent you an email.

More likely your inbox is full or you have marked your preference as no messages. Even limited can send and receive messages. 
 

Publishing under BYU’s logo….that was a very poorly written comment, I was looking for a shorthand way of saying it was included inside a paper that is published by BYU and all that implies of the process.  I assumed the paper itself has BYU’s  logo on it (the student paper must have the logo right?).  The logo wouldn’t be on every page though or is it?

 It sounds like the pamphlet itself was made by the group (or whatever copy place they took the original to in order to save their printers from heart failure) and inserted into the paper.  But a piece of paper inserted into others tends to be grouped with them.  And the cover for all of them identifies it with BYU to at least some extent.  There was a comment about BYU approving the insert here and certainly I thought on those lines as well, having it in the newspaper means it went through a vetting process (my guess is the person who approved it has been put through the wringer, possibly even let go as this is one major mistake or an intentional ignoring of BYU standards Imo).

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Honestly, I don't see any other explanation for BYU being worried about a brochure that list therapist and outside support groups that are not "approved".  Does the Church have to control everything that tightly in order to allow dissemination of information?  Or does it just like the opportunity to be passive aggressive.  The whole "We love LGBT members to attend BYU, we just want to be completely in charge of every single decision they make" thing.

On a more practical level BYU probably just doesn’t want to deal with some overwrought parent calling the school upset that their child “turned gay” due to a pamphlet they got from “THE LORD’S UNIVERSITY”. More likely to be wanting to avoid annoyances rather than any attempt at picking a side.

[CV75]

14 hours ago, california boy said:

Honestly, I don't see any other explanation for BYU being worried about a brochure that list therapist and outside support groups that are not "approved".  Does the Church have to control everything that tightly in order to allow dissemination of information?  Or does it just like the opportunity to be passive aggressive.  The whole "We love LGBT members to attend BYU, we just want to be completely in charge of every single decision they make" thing.

What does this have to do with our conversation?

Please provide the university's policies for approving communications and disseminating information and we can discuss that.