What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Desantis files complaint against restaurant with drag show citing state's 1947 SC ruling against men impersonating women (1 Viewer)

I don’t, but I’m not saying that they are.  Young kids are very impressionable though.
I keep asking for someone to show me the evidence that the kids are being harmed. My mind is open and kids at drag shows is not a hill I am going to die on. 

I'm a reasonable man. I understand some of you truly believe that children are being harmed at these shows. I offered it before but let's try it again. I'll agree to kids under 16 not being allowed at drag shows if kids under 16 are not allowed to attend stuff like this.  I'd have a much easier time proving these kids are being harmed.

We got a deal? 

 
As @Osaurusand @The Commishcan attest to, the home insurance situation in Florida is a full blown crisis, so we're glad to see our beloved governor tackling real issues like this. 
Yup. Political theatre, as Ronny D likes to say, for his base. Nothing more. We have way bigger issues in FL, but it seems like he’s working for a higher level position. 

 
I do think he gets a lot more attention because he’s a possible presidential candidate.  His actions will be magnified and scrutinized from all angles.  It applies to Newsom also.
I see the flip here; its because he's a possible presidential candidate, that he wants his actions on these culture war issues magnified.  He's getting the exact attention he wants -

 
Back in the 1950s, Elvis was called a "fairy" and "He’s soon arrested for “crimes of lust and perversion." Times change. Pete and Chastain can show affection in public, Miley Cyrus can twerk in an audience full of kids, and Ariana Grande's young fans get a math lesson, 34+35.

>>As a boy, Elvis peeks in at a man and a woman dancing suggestively to R&B music. He later sees other Black performers using the sexually suggestive moves that he adopts and exaggerates on stage. In fact, the film promotes that early shaking sexuality as the camera focuses on his crotch and women (both young and old) begin screaming over his hip-thrusting moves. Elsewhere, a male audience member calls Elvis a long-haired “fairy.”

In Elvis’ early days, his on-stage gyrations raise the ire of a local politician (who’s backed by Confederate flags) who compares his moves to the “animal behavior” of “Negros.” He is labeled with the moniker of “Elvis the Pelvis.”

Col. Parker clearly sees the money-making potential of his client’s sex appeal. As girls swarm the young singer, someone worries that they might hurt Elvis. Parker replies, “Hurt him, they want to—,” before being cut off. He calls Elvis a “piece of forbidden fruit.” Soon after, women begin throwing panties on stage as tributes to Elvis’ appeal. He’s soon arrested for “crimes of lust and perversion.”

We see Elvis and several other Black performers with their shirts off. And the camera catches a peek at a woman in Elvis’ hotel room who is lying on his bed dressed only in skimpy underwear.

Elvis and his young love interest, Priscilla, kiss. And later, after being married for a number of years, they kiss goodbye as she leaves him. We also see Elvis kissing lots of women from his audience, while Priscilla watches.<<

https://www.pluggedin.com/movie-reviews/elvis-2022/

 
I keep asking for someone to show me the evidence that the kids are being harmed. My mind is open and kids at drag shows is not a hill I am going to die on. 

I'm a reasonable man. I understand some of you truly believe that children are being harmed at these shows. I offered it before but let's try it again. I'll agree to kids under 16 not being allowed at drag shows if kids under 16 are not allowed to attend stuff like this.  I'd have a much easier time proving these kids are being harmed.

We got a deal? 
I doubt many do, but it’s not my scene either.

 
Do you think he’s the only one who does it?    It’s all about style points these days. 
In this particular incident, from a political perspective, it's about the politician.  In one instance he demands parents have a say in what their kids are exposed to.  In another he's trying to dictate what a kid is exposed to ignoring that the parents approved and decided it was ok.  This guy holds no real, meaningful philosophy in terms of "what's best for kids".

Again, my belief is that this is 100% political theater....he's not even trying to hide it at this point.  It's all for headlines.  The last thought in his mind is "damage to the child".  If that were a legit concern, he'd have filed "complaints" on dozens of places by now.

 
BTW, I'm getting the sense that none of you guys have actually been to a strip club. What goes on at a strip club is quite different than what is in that video. 

To answer anyone's question, would I bring a child to an actual strip club? No. 
They have these big bouncer guys that make sure one meets the height requirement.

 
In this particular incident, from a political perspective, it's about the politician.  In one instance he demands parents have a say in what their kids are exposed to.  In another he's trying to dictate what a kid is exposed to ignoring that the parents approved and decided it was ok.  This guy holds no real, meaningful philosophy in terms of "what's best for kids".

Again, my belief is that this is 100% political theater....he's not even trying to hide it at this point.  It's all for headlines.  The last thought in his mind is "damage to the child".  If that were a legit concern, he'd have filed "complaints" on dozens of places by now.
I’m trying to determine what people are more upset about - the freedom of how to raise their kids vs trying to knock down DeSantis.   What is the Florida general view, or is this geared to the national audience?  

 
Should twerking be outlawed in the presence of a toddler? What about hip gyrations, ala Elvis? These are way more sexually suggestive than anything in the R House video.
While at my niece's wedding I was amazed at the way the younger generation "dances" these days. This one gal was grinding her butt right into her dance partners crotch- I mean really grinding. I approached and said, "mind if I cut in?" They both just laughed and the guy said, "Unc, you cray!"

In my day I danced like the Eddie Murphy white guy dance impression.

 
I’m trying to determine what people are more upset about - the freedom of how to raise their kids vs trying to knock down DeSantis.   What is the Florida general view, or is this geared to the national audience?  
I can't speak for the rest of Florida.  I can only give you my view and I have no idea how the nation is presented this stuff through our "media".  It DOES seem to be incorrect because there's A LOT of misinformation that gets floated into these positions that detract from the facts of what's going on.

My issue with Ron is, and has always been his "You are free to do what you think is right for you and your children as long as we agree on what is right" approach.  This is just another example of his flip flop on "parents should be responsible for what is right/wrong for their kids" in my view.  He does this with businesses as well.  As long as they are making choices he approves of, everything's good.  As soon as they make a choice he doesn't like vague, toothless legislation is passed for the headline and apparently people lap it up.  In this case, apparently he's found some old 1940s law to create the headline so nothing new needed to be created.

 
While at my niece's wedding I was amazed at the way the younger generation "dances" these days. This one gal was grinding her butt right into her dance partners crotch- I mean really grinding. I approached and said, "mind if I cut in?" They both just laughed and the guy said, "Unc, you cray!"

In my day I danced like the Eddie Murphy white guy dance impression.
Yeah, I remember volunteering as chaperone for one of my daughters Jr High dance (over 20 years ago!) -- that was the last time 😮   ....laughed at all the stickler moms jumping right between/ breaking up the grinding 😆

 
I can't speak for the rest of Florida.  I can only give you my view and I have no idea how the nation is presented this stuff through our "media".  It DOES seem to be incorrect because there's A LOT of misinformation that gets floated into these positions that detract from the facts of what's going on.

My issue with Ron is, and has always been his "You are free to do what you think is right for you and your children as long as we agree on what is right" approach.  This is just another example of his flip flop on "parents should be responsible for what is right/wrong for their kids" in my view.  He does this with businesses as well.  As long as they are making choices he approves of, everything's good.  As soon as they make a choice he doesn't like vague, toothless legislation is passed for the headline and apparently people lap it up.  In this case, apparently he's found some old 1940s law to create the headline so nothing new needed to be created.
As someone who pays a little bit of attention to Florida politics, the bolded seems to be the case time after time on these "issues" that for some reason seem to have arisen with inordinate regularity recently in Florida. Using quotes on "issues" here because it rarely seems to be about important legislation, more like usually furthering the inane culture war issues and creating in groups and out groups in typical authoritarian style. There seemingly hasn't been a week that's gone by where Florida's state government hasn't put its thumb down on one issue or another, on its citizens or its businesses. I guess that's what Free Florida is all about though. Overly governing the crap out of people who don't seem to mind because they agree with the target. That's all well and good, until they come for you. No thanks.

 
As someone who pays a little bit of attention to Florida politics, the bolded seems to be the case time after time on these "issues" that for some reason seem to have arisen with inordinate regularity recently in Florida. Using quotes on "issues" here because it rarely seems to be about important legislation, more like usually furthering the inane culture war issues and creating in groups and out groups in typical authoritarian style. There seemingly hasn't been a week that's gone by where Florida's state government hasn't put its thumb down on one issue or another, on its citizens or its businesses. I guess that's what Free Florida is all about though. Overly governing the crap out of people who don't seem to mind because they agree with the target. That's all well and good, until they come for you. No thanks.
yeah --looking forward to the official move here next month 🙃

 
As someone who pays a little bit of attention to Florida politics, the bolded seems to be the case time after time on these "issues" that for some reason seem to have arisen with inordinate regularity recently in Florida. Using quotes on "issues" here because it rarely seems to be about important legislation, more like usually furthering the inane culture war issues and creating in groups and out groups in typical authoritarian style. There seemingly hasn't been a week that's gone by where Florida's state government hasn't put its thumb down on one issue or another, on its citizens or its businesses. I guess that's what Free Florida is all about though. Overly governing the crap out of people who don't seem to mind because they agree with the target. That's all well and good, until they come for you. No thanks.
This is part of it.  The other part is some of this "legislation" that they've put out there (thinking of parents in education and woke bills dealing with companies) are legislation based on things happening in other parts of the country and don't address anything that IS happening here in any meaningful way rather things that MIGHT happen at some point.  I perfect example is the parental rights in education legislation.  It is COMPLETELY unclear as to whether that legislation would even address the "incident" that allegedly started the whole uproar.  Many say they don't see how it would even apply as written, that more clear and concise verbiage is desperately needed.

All this is happening in lieu of addressing sea level rise, contamination of our waterways, home insurance issues, housing affordability issues etc.  

 
Long before Ron DeSantis there was Bill O’Reilly and the war on Christmas. Bill said that he was only trying to protect the baby Jesus. 

The roots are the same: cultural conservatives are constantly afraid that liberals are out to destroy American/western/Christian society by polluting it with decadence and immorality. It goes all the way back to Martin Luther and Jean Calvin, and before that to the Biblical story of Sodom and Gommorah. Transsexualism is only the latest “vice” in a long line of them. 
 

But don’t blame guys like DeSantis or Tucker Carlson too much. They’re opportunists for sure, but they wouldn’t be successful if they didn’t have an audience. 

 
yeah --looking forward to the official move here next month 🙃
This is part of it.  The other part is some of this "legislation" that they've put out there (thinking of parents in education and woke bills dealing with companies) are legislation based on things happening in other parts of the country and don't address anything that IS happening here in any meaningful way rather things that MIGHT happen at some point.  I perfect example is the parental rights in education legislation.  It is COMPLETELY unclear as to whether that legislation would even address the "incident" that allegedly started the whole uproar.  Many say they don't see how it would even apply as written, that more clear and concise verbiage is desperately needed.

All this is happening in lieu of addressing sea level rise, contamination of our waterways, home insurance issues, housing affordability issues etc.  
Understood. And I appreciate all of the great insight from Florida FBGs. I also think there may be a little bit of "OMG did you see what happened in Florida!!" going on, which I should be cognizant of, and the local input does help a lot with bringing perspective to the table.

Florida and Floridians are amazing, to be clear. I just don't agree with the style of governing, and think Florida deserves better. Not even a party thing, just talking about the style and approach. 

 
Understood. And I appreciate all of the great insight from Florida FBGs. I also think there may be a little bit of "OMG did you see what happened in Florida!!" going on, which I should be cognizant of, and the local input does help a lot with bringing perspective to the table.

Florida and Floridians are amazing, to be clear. I just don't agree with the style of governing, and think Florida deserves better. Not even a party thing, just talking about the style and approach. 
Just one last thought on this approach and how it isn't just related to party. Andrew Cuomo absolutely took a dictatorial approach to governing New York, with one-party complicity. In fact, the biggest check on Andrew Cuomo's power came from the NYC mayor, not from another branch of state government. I am criticizing Andrew Cuomo for this approach to be consistent. Sometimes it's easy, or convenient, to lose sight of the fact that even in a state like New York, somewhere in the neighborhood of 40-45% of the people voted for the other party. Therefore governing as if 100% of people agree with you is a problem IMO. America doesn't want kings, or at least we didn't used to want them.

 
I'll agree to kids under 16 not being allowed at drag shows if kids under 16 are not allowed to attend stuff like this. 
My god… that’s a million times worse than some kid walking around holding hands with a drag queen.

Telling children that Harry Potter should be put to death because he is the enemy of god…

gross, disgusting, abuse… 

Thanks again religion…

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My god… that’s a million times worse than some kid walking around holding hands with a drag queen.

Telling children that Harry Potter should be put to death because he is the enemy of god…

gross, disgusting, abuse… 

Thanks again religion…
So far our "but the children" folks are radio silent. Could it be that what's obviously harmful to children to us is no big deal to them?  

Eta - there's worse in the movie. That woman leading the camp is not shy about training these kids up to fight the enemy (Muslims in this situation).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just one last thought on this approach and how it isn't just related to party. Andrew Cuomo absolutely took a dictatorial approach to governing New York, with one-party complicity. In fact, the biggest check on Andrew Cuomo's power came from the NYC mayor, not from another branch of state government. I am criticizing Andrew Cuomo for this approach to be consistent. Sometimes it's easy, or convenient, to lose sight of the fact that even in a state like New York, somewhere in the neighborhood of 40-45% of the people voted for the other party. Therefore governing as if 100% of people agree with you is a problem IMO. America doesn't want kings, or at least we didn't used to want them.
Oh...this isn't unique to DeSantis.  He's following in the footsteps of the Governors before him starting with Jeb Bush.  Best I can tell, that's where the obvious overreaches began.

 
Centrally West Palm Beach -- looking up and down coast ~20 min or so from WPB --Jupiter, Juno, Boynton --
Can you swing a little further north to martin county and the Stuart area?  That would be my preference.  My wife grew up in PBC and MOST of her family is still there.

 
So far our "but the children" folks are radio silent. Could it be that what's obviously harmful to children to us is no big deal to them?  

Eta - there's worse in the movie. That woman leading the camp is not shy about training these kids up to fight the enemy (Muslims in this situation).
I don’t know where to start… So much wrong in just the couple minutes I watched…

And people wonder why there are mental health issues in this country.

 
A couple things that come to mind when people are bringing up these cases of "sexualizing children" - pageants and dance teams.  In both cases even I, who I consider to be way more on the permissive side of this topic than some around here, get a bit uncomfortable and think "WTF is going on here".   

There was a dance team performance at halftime of one of my kid's basketball games and I remember the look my wife and I gave each other, and afterward we joked to each other to remember to not let our 7yo become interested in the local dace team.   I believe this was a MS or younger team, and was a bit surprised at what they were wearing and the moves they were doing.  

Anyway, a bit of a tangent, just something that comes to mind when I read about these protests and "protecting the kids".  It starts a bunch of questions in my head - are these examples not as troublesome as this example?  If no - why not? If yes - where is the equal level of outrage and disgust?  

To me what it feels like is that it's not about the sexualization and protecting the kids because we probably could think of dozens of other examples like mine where we don't blink an eye over it.   It really just feels like all the outrage is more about this sexualization when it's involving the LGBTQ topics.    If it's not, why don't I see a ton of examples of people equally mad about other examples.   

No,  I am not taking my kid to a show like the example.  What I am trying to understand is how is that example in the video sexualizing kids any more or causes any more damage to the kids than this dance team with barely any clothes and doing the moves they were doing.   I would argue that in the cases we act as though they are "normal" are currently more of a clear case of oversexualizing kids, because it directly involves what they are wearing and doing.  

Anyway, long rambling to just say that I am probably more in Cranks' camp than not - it doesn't matter what I think, it's more about what lines are drawn when we want outside intervention.  I wouldn't do either with my kid, just trying to provide an example where I just don't get the standards at large. 

 
So far our "but the children" folks are radio silent. Could it be that what's obviously harmful to children to us is no big deal to them?  

Eta - there's worse in the movie. That woman leading the camp is not shy about training these kids up to fight the enemy (Muslims in this situation).
Jesus Camp is a freaky ### movie.  

 
A couple things that come to mind when people are bringing up these cases of "sexualizing children" - pageants and dance teams.  In both cases even I, who I consider to be way more on the permissive side of this topic than some around here, get a bit uncomfortable and think "WTF is going on here".   

There was a dance team performance at halftime of one of my kid's basketball games and I remember the look my wife and I gave each other, and afterward we joked to each other to remember to not let our 7yo become interested in the local dace team.   I believe this was a MS or younger team, and was a bit surprised at what they were wearing and the moves they were doing.  

Anyway, a bit of a tangent, just something that comes to mind when I read about these protests and "protecting the kids".  It starts a bunch of questions in my head - are these examples not as troublesome as this example?  If no - why not? If yes - where is the equal level of outrage and disgust?  

To me what it feels like is that it's not about the sexualization and protecting the kids because we probably could think of dozens of other examples like mine where we don't blink an eye over it.   It really just feels like all the outrage is more about this sexualization when it's involving the LGBTQ topics.    If it's not, why don't I see a ton of examples of people equally mad about other examples.   

No,  I am not taking my kid to a show like the example.  What I am trying to understand is how is that example in the video sexualizing kids any more or causes any more damage to the kids than this dance team with barely any clothes and doing the moves they were doing.   I would argue that in the cases we act as though they are "normal" are currently more of a clear case of oversexualizing kids, because it directly involves what they are wearing and doing.  

Anyway, long rambling to just say that I am probably more in Cranks' camp than not - it doesn't matter what I think, it's more about what lines are drawn when we want outside intervention.  I wouldn't do either with my kid, just trying to provide an example where I just don't get the standards at large. 
relevant

 
A couple things that come to mind when people are bringing up these cases of "sexualizing children" - pageants and dance teams.  In both cases even I, who I consider to be way more on the permissive side of this topic than some around here, get a bit uncomfortable and think "WTF is going on here".   

There was a dance team performance at halftime of one of my kid's basketball games and I remember the look my wife and I gave each other, and afterward we joked to each other to remember to not let our 7yo become interested in the local dace team.   I believe this was a MS or younger team, and was a bit surprised at what they were wearing and the moves they were doing.  

Anyway, a bit of a tangent, just something that comes to mind when I read about these protests and "protecting the kids".  It starts a bunch of questions in my head - are these examples not as troublesome as this example?  If no - why not? If yes - where is the equal level of outrage and disgust?  

To me what it feels like is that it's not about the sexualization and protecting the kids because we probably could think of dozens of other examples like mine where we don't blink an eye over it.   It really just feels like all the outrage is more about this sexualization when it's involving the LGBTQ topics.    If it's not, why don't I see a ton of examples of people equally mad about other examples.   

No,  I am not taking my kid to a show like the example.  What I am trying to understand is how is that example in the video sexualizing kids any more or causes any more damage to the kids than this dance team with barely any clothes and doing the moves they were doing.   I would argue that in the cases we act as though they are "normal" are currently more of a clear case of oversexualizing kids, because it directly involves what they are wearing and doing.  

Anyway, long rambling to just say that I am probably more in Cranks' camp than not - it doesn't matter what I think, it's more about what lines are drawn when we want outside intervention.  I wouldn't do either with my kid, just trying to provide an example where I just don't get the standards at large. 
This is the point I'm trying to press. It's easy to say "X situation is not appropriate".  It's a whole other to reconcile it with the variety of other things that you're giving a pass. Worried about sexualization? Shut down children's beauty pageants and dance routines. Worried about indoctrination and grooming? Shut down Jesus Camps. 

Or, the easiest way to not come out a hypocrite on this is to admit we all have our own sense of what's ok and it's up to parents to decide what's appropriate for their kids (as long as the child is not being harmed).

 
This is the point I'm trying to press. It's easy to say "X situation is not appropriate".  It's a whole other to reconcile it with the variety of other things that you're giving a pass. Worried about sexualization? Shut down children's beauty pageants and dance routines. Worried about indoctrination and grooming? Shut down Jesus Camps. 

Or, the easiest way to not come out a hypocrite on this is to admit we all have our own sense of what's ok and it's up to parents to decide what's appropriate for their kids (as long as the child is not being harmed).
It’s all about the gay. That’s at the core of this, NOT the sexualization. 

 
It’s all about the gay. That’s at the core of this, NOT the sexualization. 


No it's not.  It's about the children.  It always has been.  You can accuse others of all kinds of hateful things you want, but the fact of the matter is there is only ONE group of posters here defending, protecting and looking out for the children here, and it isn't Team Blue posters.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No it's not.  It's about the children.  It always has been.  You can accuse others of all kinds of hateful things you want, but the fact of the matter is there is only ONE group of posters here defending, protecting and looking out for the children here, and it isn't Team Blue posters.
If it were about the children, most of south beach would be shut down and 30ish percent of Key West would be shut down. 

This is nothing but political theater, once again. 

And to be crystal clear, Id never put my kids in the situation found in the video. 

 
A couple things that come to mind when people are bringing up these cases of "sexualizing children" - pageants and dance teams.  In both cases even I, who I consider to be way more on the permissive side of this topic than some around here, get a bit uncomfortable and think "WTF is going on here".   
I had a moment like this two years ago. My daughter who was 5 at the time had a dance recital. The dance we put her in was the fun kind, we have no desire to live the dance life in our family. It’s too vapid for my taste.  Anyways in this recital they have dance groups of all ages. 3 to 14.  The groups of 3,4,5 and 6 year olds were all super cute and fun.  Out came the 7 yr olds and they were all shaking their asses and doing like a mild twerk.  I was disgusted and had my jaw on the floor in shock.  The crowd of other parents?  All laughing and cheering.  I couldn’t believe it.  It was the first time in my life I felt super old, super conservative and stuffy.  To this day I don’t understand the need to sexualize these kids so early. The time to be innocent and free from that is just so fleeting, why push them into it? I just don’t get it.

 
What I am trying to understand is how is that example in the video sexualizing kids any more or causes any more damage to the kids than this dance team with barely any clothes and doing the moves they were doing.   I would argue that in the cases we act as though they are "normal" are currently more of a clear case of oversexualizing kids, because it directly involves what they are wearing and doing.  
It’s no different for me. Both are problems imo. 

 
To be honest, I don't approve of that, but I can live with it.  Nudism generally isn't sexual, whereas the performance in the video is highly sexualized.

This is a helpful point of comparison, IMO.  Without having giving the subject a massive of thought, it seems to me that if we're talking about where I personally draw the line between "Not for me, but you do you" and "The state is justified in getting involved here," taking a kid to a nude beach is borderline but on the okay side of the line.  It's a good line-defining thought experiment.
Just so you know, this post does eliminate your "post a link" challenge.  You are arguing that the nude beach is fine, but I imagine anyone here would get a timeout/ban for posting a camera stream.

Note: I'm not weighing in on the rest of the thread topic.  I haven't watched the video.

 
The R House toned down the show a little at their brunch. One couple, 2 dads, brought their 3 year old twins. 

>>The only children in sight were 3-year-old twins in matching rainbow dresses. Their dads, at a table with their friends, cheered and clapped for the dancers as their kids smiled and wiggled in their seats. “They had a great time,” said one of their fathers, Jose Palacios, a 43-year-old Miami resident. “They were drinking lemonade; they were dancing.” Palacios said he noticed the drag performers seemed hesitant to take tips from his table, which he called an understandable reaction considering the state complaint. But he saw nothing wrong with bringing his children to this daytime drag show.

"There was nothing that would be inappropriate for kids. If we saw anything inappropriate we would have left,” he said. “I wouldn’t expose them to anything that would be harmful to their development.” Palacios said he wants to raise “great, responsible women,” and for his family that includes attending family-friendly drag shows and marching in Miami Beach pride, like they did earlier this year. “At the end of the day, it should be our choice,” he said.<<

Somehow, I have an article about Brooks Nader see-through mini dress in my news feed. It reminds me of the non-sexualized SI swimsuit covers. NOT. As a teenager, I glued a Farrah Fawcett jigsaw puzzle to a poster board. IIRC, it was a Christmas gift from my mom.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article263983401.html

 
Just so you know, this post does eliminate your "post a link" challenge.  You are arguing that the nude beach is fine, but I imagine anyone here would get a timeout/ban for posting a camera stream.

Note: I'm not weighing in on the rest of the thread topic.  I haven't watched the video.
I don't deny that there's nudity at a nude beach.

Squis was trying to deny that the episode in question could be characterized as a strip show.  He's untethered from reality that way, but not quite untethered enough that he can't snap back into it when there are consequences.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't deny that there's nudity at a nude beach.

Squis was trying to deny that the episode in question could be characterized as a strip show.  He's untethered from reality that way, but not quite untethered enough that he can't snap back into it when there are consequences.
There's a reason I have that particular poster on ignore.  Just pointing out that "you wouldn't post a link to X" isn't really a good argument that X should be banned.

 
If it were about the children, most of south beach would be shut down and 30ish percent of Key West would be shut down. 

This is nothing but political theater, once again. 

And to be crystal clear, Id never put my kids in the situation found in the video. 
Some of the participants in this thread are proving as much.

 
I don't deny that there's nudity at a nude beach.

Squis was trying to deny that the episode in question could be characterized as a strip show.  He's untethered from reality that way, but not quite untethered enough that he can't snap back into it when there are consequences.


Because it isn't a strip show. You keep calling it that doesn't make a strip show. 

 
Because it isn't a strip show. You keep calling it that doesn't make a strip show. 
Technically, he claimed it was a "sex club". Seems he is now trying to re-write the history after you called out that ridiculous assertion. I'm guessing he is now at "strip show" because he realized how outlandish that initial posting was, but it is still an incorrect characterization.

Really poor form to resort to hurling personal insults against you for simply pointing out his exaggerations. 

 
Because it isn't a strip show. You keep calling it that doesn't make a strip show. 
A performer with large breasts dancing topless in front of an audience while spectators stuff bills into the performer’s thong sounds absolutely nothing like a strip show. 

Edit:  Again, I’m not calling for the place to be shut down or the parents to be questioned. But it sort of is what it is, which is why most of us have stated that we wouldn’t take our toddlers to the show depicted in the video. 

P.S. I’ve been to a local drag show in my town a couple times and wouldn’t have an issue taking my kids because the drag performers there were impeccably dressed and incredibly talented.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Technically, he claimed it was a "sex club". Seems he is now trying to re-write the history after you called out that ridiculous assertion. I'm guessing he is now at "strip show" because he realized how outlandish that initial posting was, but it is still an incorrect characterization.

Really poor form to resort to hurling personal insults against you for simply pointing out his exaggerations. 
I feel extremely comfortable with my characterization.  Anybody who watches the video is free to form their own conclusions about which of us is arguing in good faith -- I'm cool with that.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top