Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Drag Queen Show for Children on PBS


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, djmich said:

Thanks, that makes sense.  What I have some difficulty reconciling is that drag queens are representative of LGBT culture.  Is that how most in the LGBT community would want children exposed to their community?

They have been considered part of the LGBT+ community since the 50s and 60s by those who are in it, so they are representative.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, djmich said:

lol yah, thats my confusion that I was trying to express earlier.  The theme of this thread is that kids should be exposed to drag queens to be more tolerant.  But a drag queen is a guy who dresses as a woman (in an exaggerated fashion) to entertain people.  It actually can be interpreted as a bit mocking of women.  So its ok for the comedic performative element, I'm sure the children are entertained, but who is being tolerated more.

Do we need to lobby more for men dressed in dreadlocks, beards and v neck shirts to be more tolerant of pirates?

 

 

Men in drag is like a white person wearing black-face. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, cockroach said:

Men in drag is like a white person wearing black-face. 

No, that is not really analogous because the intent is usually not to mock, ridicule or parody women. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, squistion said:

No, that is not really analogous because the intent is usually not to mock, ridicule or parody women. 

The definition of drag queen is a parody of women. It's right there in the title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, crackattack said:

This seems like a "no big deal" to me. Don't want your kids to watch, then turn the channel. Wanna watch and explain drag queens, then watch and have that conversation. That's the great thing about personal choice!

Better yet, don't donate to them any longer.

4 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

I think the issue is public funding of such shows, not that it's drag queens.

Funding by individual viewers and private corporations.  Those providing the funding have the ultimate say.

It's sad because it's synonymous with early children learning shows, Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers.  But ultimately they should be trying to provide content that keeps those donations coming in.  Maybe this has no effect, maybe they loose funding.  My guess is that it is short lived.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tonydead said:

The definition of drag queen is a parody of women. It's right there in the title.

If anything it's a parody of the word queen which is a term used affectionately within the gay community

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, killface said:

If anything it's a parody of the word queen which is a term used affectionately within the gay community

Affectionately because gay community exhibits woman characteristics.  They literally dress up like women, that's what they do.

Edited by tonydead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, killface said:

If anything it's a parody of the word queen which is a term used affectionately within the gay community

From what I've read, It didn't start out as a parody. The gay community sometime in the 50s or 60s started using the term "queen" to describe gay men who had various traits or proclivities, such as a "drama queen" was a gay man who was overly dramatic, a "Nelly queen" was one who was over-the-top effeminate, while a "drag queen" was a gay man who liked to dress up as a woman (for whatever reason).

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, squistion said:

From what I've read, It didn't start out as a parody. The gay community sometime in the 50s or 60s started using the term "queen" to describe gay men who had various traits or proclivities, such as a "drama queen" was a gay man who was overly dramatic, a "Nelly queen" was one who was over-the-top effeminate, while a "drag queen" was a gay man who liked to dress up as a woman (for whatever reason).

I considered myself more educated

Thanks

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FairWarning said:

And is this something a 3-YO should be exposed to?  

It's a kid's show where, apparently, they sing and dance. It will be hosted by men that like to dress like women. I'm not sure what harm would come to a child that watches a kid's show hosted by a man that wears clothes and make up that are traditionally worn by women. 

There are a lot of things that I don't think you kids should be exposed too. Little girls dancing around for a crowd in their underwear, for example, which is highly accepted in this country (often by the same folk that would find this kid's show inappropriate). 

And even if there were some grave long-term damage to children realizing that there's such a thing as men dressing as women, it's PBS, so it'll be a small impact. Most people don't watch PBS. I love the station and it's podcasts, but it's hell to get their frequency via antenna and few streamers carry it. And again, it's PBS. It doesn't have reality shows about idiots, murder porn, Chuck Lorre comedies, or sports, which are about the only shows in this country that people reliably watch. 

Very few kids will be exposed to this show. And pretty much all their parents will be able to successfully navigate the conversation explaining that sometimes dudes like to dress like women. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pollardsvision said:

It's a kid's show where, apparently, they sing and dance. It will be hosted by men that like to dress like women. I'm not sure what harm would come to a child that watches a kid's show hosted by a man that wears clothes and make up that are traditionally worn by women. 

There are a lot of things that I don't think you kids should be exposed too. Little girls dancing around for a crowd in their underwear, for example, which is highly accepted in this country (often by the same folk that would find this kid's show inappropriate). 

And even if there were some grave long-term damage to children realizing that there's such a thing as men dressing as women, it's PBS, so it'll be a small impact. Most people don't watch PBS. I love the station and it's podcasts, but it's hell to get their frequency via antenna and few streamers carry it. And again, it's PBS. It doesn't have reality shows about idiots, murder porn, Chuck Lorre comedies, or sports, which are about the only shows in this country that people reliably watch. 

Very few kids will be exposed to this show. And pretty much all their parents will be able to successfully navigate the conversation explaining that sometimes dudes like to dress like women. 

As long as there are no drag queens on Antiques Roadshow, we’re good.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, crackattack said:

Then I'd have them watch Too wong foo thanks for everything

C'mon, everyone knows that the original, Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, starring Agent Smith from The Matrix and the guy from Memento was WAAAAAAY better.

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, is the unease about drag queens tied to unease with male homosexuality?  I know not all drag queens are gay, but there isn't the same reaction the other way - ie if women are parading around as men.  Just curious where people's uncomfortableness comes from on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

Honestly, is the unease about drag queens tied to unease with male homosexuality?  I know not all drag queens are gay, but there isn't the same reaction the other way - ie if women are parading around as men.  Just curious where people's uncomfortableness comes from on this.

I don’t think its appropriate for a little kid.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

So we can’t show an Asian man in a Dr. Seuss book with traditional Asian garb and holding chop sticks, but we can have a show where a Drag Queen addresses his 3 year old audience as “drag queens in training” and dances to a song called "The Hips on the Drag Queen Go Swish, Swish, Swish."

Progress!

Edited by ekbeats
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

Ultimately this comes down to how you view gender roles.  Conservatives are more likely to want to teach kids traditional behaviors. Liberals are more open to allowing kids to be different.

Or, when it comes to sexuality, maybe 3 years old is a little too young to address it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

Or, when it comes to sexuality, maybe 3 years old is a little too young to address it?

They are kids, they probably don't give 2 poops.   It's the parents, and not sure why you would have to talk about their sexuality anyway.  Do you do that with straight people on their shows?  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really don’t understand the pearl clutching here. While this is not necessarily something I’m excited for my six-year-old daughter to be exposed to or watch there’s a pretty simple solution for that in our household, we don’t put it on for her to watch.  🤷🏻‍♂️  
 

While I don’t think this is necessary damaging it’s just also not a door that needs opening for my 6yr old yet in my opinion.  So we won’t watch.  If other parents feel differently cool, they can watch.  Really don’t see why this would be a big deal.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

The Drag Queen Story Hour isn’t sexual.

Are you serious?  The narrator is a man dressed as a woman signing “The Hips on the Drag Queen Go Swish, Swish, Swish."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dkp993 said:

Really don’t understand the pearl clutching here. While this is not necessarily something I’m excited for my six-year-old daughter to be exposed to or watch there’s a pretty simple solution for that in our household, we don’t put it on for her to watch.  🤷🏻‍♂️  
 

While I don’t think this is necessary damaging it’s just also not a door that needs opening for my 6yr old yet in my opinion.  So we won’t watch.  If other parents feel differently cool, they can watch.  Really don’t see why this would be a big deal.  

I just find it interesting what Liberals think is acceptable for kids and what is not.  They think kids are smart enough to discern racist tropes in Dr. Seuss and Curious George, but they are oblivious to sexuality when confronted with a drag queen singing suggestive songs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Really don’t understand the pearl clutching here. While this is not necessarily something I’m excited for my six-year-old daughter to be exposed to or watch there’s a pretty simple solution for that in our household, we don’t put it on for her to watch.  🤷🏻‍♂️  
 

While I don’t think this is necessary damaging it’s just also not a door that needs opening for my 6yr old yet in my opinion.  So we won’t watch.  If other parents feel differently cool, they can watch.  Really don’t see why this would be a big deal.  

Or why people would think its appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think that state run television - funded by ALL taxpayers - shouldn’t be so openly political and controversial.  The content should be as neutral as possible.  That’s always been my criticism of PBS, and I’m a big fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

Are you serious?  The narrator is a man dressed as a woman signing “The Hips on the Drag Queen Go Swish, Swish, Swish."

 

6 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

I just find it interesting what Liberals think is acceptable for kids and what is not.  They think kids are smart enough to discern racist tropes in Dr. Seuss and Curious George, but they are oblivious to sexuality when confronted with a drag queen singing suggestive songs.

I think both groups of people are being silly and overly dramatic.  

That line you quoted is about as risqué as the Hokey-Pokey.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

Are you serious?  The narrator is a man dressed as a woman signing “The Hips on the Drag Queen Go Swish, Swish, Swish."

I see your point. Interesting how different this story is covered. I watched the NewsHour clip.

Anyway, that seems so mildly sexual that I’m skeptical that many people would object for that reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

I think both groups of people are being silly and overly dramatic.  

That line you quoted is about as risqué as the Hokey-Pokey.    

Not really. "Mommy, what's a swish? Why swish?"

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

I also think that state run television - funded by ALL taxpayers - shouldn’t be so openly political and controversial.  The content should be as neutral as possible.  That’s always been my criticism of PBS, and I’m a big fan.

Including drag queens and the LGBT community. Any other groups you find distasteful you might want to exclude?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Really don’t understand the pearl clutching here. While this is not necessarily something I’m excited for my six-year-old daughter to be exposed to or watch there’s a pretty simple solution for that in our household, we don’t put it on for her to watch.  🤷🏻‍♂️  
 

While I don’t think this is necessary damaging it’s just also not a door that needs opening for my 6yr old yet in my opinion.  So we won’t watch.  If other parents feel differently cool, they can watch.  Really don’t see why this would be a big deal.  

This is where I'm at. I don't watch anything on PBS anymore really. I don't have a problem if someone wants to make a drag queen show for kids. I personally wouldn't but to each their own. 

Where I think the contention lies is that it is on PBS which is publically funded. If this was on ABC, NBC, CBS hell even Nickelodeon or Disney Channel I think MOST (not all) of the detractors would be like "whatever my kid ain't watching that ####." You'd still have those that would hammer home about it being wrong regardless but those people rally against gay marriage and such anyway. 

So I understand the argument since PBS gets public money. Otherwise I don't really care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Insein said:

So I understand the argument since PBS gets public money.

I don’t understand this argument. Is the suggestion that PBS can only air programs that 100% of the people agree on?

 

I am not sure that exists. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Amused to Death said:

Including drag queens and the LGBT community. Any other groups you find distasteful you might want to exclude?

Distasteful is your word, not mine.  Inappropriate for young children is what I’d call it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Within the realm of things that young kids are exposed to that are inappropriate, this is pretty tame. I'm not inclined to let my 4 yr old daughter watch it, mostly because I don't want to have to come up with answers to questions she might have (although she would probably not even have any, she'd just enjoy the song and dance). Some of the crap that younger kids watch has to be more damaging, like pretty much anything with a realistic depiction of violence, of which there is plenty to choose, like the news for instance. I suspect this would be less damaging than the freaky circus clown episode of Scooby Doo, which traumatized at least three generations of children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Not really. "Mommy, what's a swish? Why swish?"

My daughter liked to "swish" in her dress and skirts that made noise.   IMO this is as controversial as the parents make it.  Kids don't care - they just want to watch fun ####.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FairWarning said:

Or why people would think its appropriate.

Because everyone is different in what they believe?   I’m confused I thought the right was about individual choice and the left was about controlling your thoughts?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Insein said:

This is where I'm at. I don't watch anything on PBS anymore really. I don't have a problem if someone wants to make a drag queen show for kids. I personally wouldn't but to each their own. 

Where I think the contention lies is that it is on PBS which is publically funded. If this was on ABC, NBC, CBS hell even Nickelodeon or Disney Channel I think MOST (not all) of the detractors would be like "whatever my kid ain't watching that ####." You'd still have those that would hammer home about it being wrong regardless but those people rally against gay marriage and such anyway. 

So I understand the argument since PBS gets public money. Otherwise I don't really care.

Sure. But I’m guessing a part of the public finds this acceptable and is happy about the program. They funded it too right?  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dkp993 said:

Sure. But I’m guessing a part of the public finds this acceptable and is happy about the program. They funded it too right?  

Which is my point as well. The comment was made that it was inappropriate especially because it was funded by all tax payers. All would include members of the subject community. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ekbeats said:

I just find it interesting what Liberals think is acceptable for kids and what is not.  They think kids are smart enough to discern racist tropes in Dr. Seuss and Curious George, but they are oblivious to sexuality when confronted with a drag queen singing suggestive songs.

I long ago gave up trying to figure out what liberals or conservatives think. To much hypocrisy on both sides.  I stick to my own thoughts and what I think is right for my family. It’s all I can control anyways.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Amused to Death said:

Ok, controversial. What makes it controversial and political?

To be honest I just don’t think any level of sexuality is appropriate for a three year old.  I don’t have any problems with drag queens or gays, I actually like them.  I’m genuinely fascinated by the subject, that’s all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/20/2021 at 6:04 PM, ekbeats said:

Do you think tax dollars should be used for this type of programming? 

 

 

May have been a forced trade. A woke cancel culture zealot might have said we want these 8 things on PBS or we will attack all your funding. PBS weighs it out and makes a risk assessment and says we can give you this one thing ( the least punitive thing to them on the list) but we will never give you the other 7, that's the deal. Now PBS can say they have something woke as a defense to any future accusations.

The times in business where your hand is most forced is when money chokes out and when you are just starting. When you are just starting, you have to take clients, compromises, contracts, jobs and situations you'd turn down in any other circumstance. With a blown out economy and a horizon of future instability, I'm sure donations to PBS have been down in general. COVID changes some of their filming and projects lists. It all adds up.

When PBS Newshour is compromised, then I'll worry.

It's easy to say Company X bent the knee but these situations are extremely complex. Taking on this show might have been the difference between laying off a certain number of PBS rank and file employees or not. You also have to weigh out all the possibilities in a protracted public war over something like this.

A lot of "negotiations" just turn into structured buyouts. PBS says "Here's your woke token, now go away and leave us alone."

Best response is what I've said to Conservatives from the beginning. Unite and demonetize. Individual firefights in the dark don't help win a war. A lot of valued contributors at Parler were invited off the site into other platforms long before the shut down. No heavy hitter there believed Parler would last. All of the major discussions I was a part of discussed demonetization.

1) A competitive web browser that would filter out all anti-Conservative/anti-Republican sites and businesses and/or hard ID them as such. If Don Lemon has a cousin with a restaurant then it's turfed. It might not go out of business. But if it loses 20 percent of it's potential customers because they will never see it on a web page listing then that's a problem. This is why I said Sigmund Bloom should delete the PSF entirely. A lot of this would run on various algorithms as well and if the risk is having 10-20 million people not see your commercial site period, that's a problem. The Coinbase CEO saw this coming long before many others.  I pushed for an exemption list because there's a lot of deeper context before you turf people for good. I want more due regard shown than the radical left has shown their opposition.

2) Mirror services and platforms when possible. If all hardware stores are woke, then Conservatives/Republicans need to find a way to have a hardware chain friendly to it exist. This is why Ben Shapiro and Daily Wire, right or wrong, have produced a movie ( Run Hide Fight) and signed Gina Carano to a movie deal. They want to cash in Conservatives who want to spend their money with other Conservatives.

3) Hard vetting and active relentless investigation. When you see politicians getting caught doing something on camera that blows up, that's not a coincidence. Obviously there are political paparazzi, but both sides have investigators bird dogging their opposition around the clock. Once you find something, you release it to the public. On my end,  I said it matters if it's true, it has to be true. I saw some argue to use the exact same tactics as the current MSM, but I don't agree with that. If you have the facts and you stick to the facts, eventually it will shine through any other defense in front of you.

What I dislike about the radical left is the bent ideology that the public cannot be trusted to come to their own conclusions and need to be led to the "right outcome"  Because I dislike that, I also understand there are things many people aren't going to want to see or be exposed or have their kids be around it, but there is value in coming to your own conclusion on what is not acceptable to you.

I disagree with the radical left that everything needs to be "fair" at all  costs. Life isn't fair. Nothing can make it fair. Trying to force "fairness" is just virtue signaling for leverage. But I also believe we cannot practically remove all unfairness either. We have to pick our battles as Conservatives.

If Conservatives unite and start demonetizing, that has a better impact, a better effort to results ratio, than these small conflicts abound. Yes, I get why small conflicts can turn into large ones if left unchecked, but you have to go after the money first. Once you take the money, everything else falls into place. For example, if I want to change FBG, I can argue morality all day long. I can argue semantics and split hairs. But if I can give or take a thousand subscribers on my own, then that generates traction.

I  don't like it personally. I have nothing against the LGBT community. Many of them have struggles I'll never truly understand. Many of them have suffered in ways I'll never understand. Like any group, some within will be shining examples. Some will be good people. Some will be mediocre, probably lots of them. Many will offer nothing good nor nothing bad, they are just warm bodies in the masses. But also some of them are just plain bad people. Because any group is a range and has a cross section of real life people within it. It extends beyond a bedroom and into a question of the human condition.  I refuse to see them all as victims or targets or zealots or heroes. Because I will not rob them of their humanity to do it.

But whether or not I like it, doesn't change the question - Is this the right fight at the right time for Conservatives?

I've said this for 15 years here, everything is resource management. You have limited time, money, energy and will power to fight. You have to known when and where to make your stand. I don't believe this issue is it.

Edited by GordonGekko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

To be honest I just don’t think any level of sexuality is appropriate for a three year old.  I don’t have any problems with drag queens or gays, I actually like them.  I’m genuinely fascinated by the subject, that’s all.

That's fine as is your choice. Others may consider it a good thing. We all pay taxes that support it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Amused to Death said:

That's fine as is your choice. Others may consider it a good thing. We all pay taxes that support it.

Just curious how old you are and if you have kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

May have been a forced trade. A woke cancel culture zealot might have said we want these 8 things on PBS or we will attack all your funding. PBS weighs it out and makes a risk assessment and says we can give you this one thing ( the least punitive thing to them on the list) but we will never give you the other 7, that's the deal. Now PBS can say they have something woke as a defense to any future accusations.

The times in business where your hand is most forced is when money chokes out and when you are just starting. When you are just starting, you have to take clients, compromises, contracts, jobs and situations you'd turn down in any other circumstance. With a blown out economy and a horizon of future instability, I'm sure donations to PBS have been down in general. COVID changes some of their filming and projects lists. It all adds up.

When PBS Newshour is compromised, then I'll worry.

It's easy to say Company X bent the knee but these situations are extremely complex. Taking on this show might have been the difference between laying off a certain number of PBS rank and file employees or not. You also have to weigh out all the possibilities in a protracted public war over something like this.

A lot of "negotiations" just turn into structured buyouts. PBS says "Here's your woke token, now go away and leave us alone."

Best response is what I've said to Conservatives from the beginning. Unite and demonetize. Individual firefights in the dark don't help win a war. A lot of valued contributors at Parler were invited off the site into other platforms long before the shut down. No heavy hitter there believed Parler would last. All of the major discussions I was a part of discussed demonetization.

1) A competitive web browser that would filter out all anti-Conservative/anti-Republican sites and businesses and/or hard ID them as such. If Don Lemon has a cousin with a restaurant then it's turfed. It might not go out of business. But if it loses 20 percent of it's potential customers because they will never see it on a web page listing then that's a problem. This is why I said Sigmund Bloom should delete the PSF entirely. A lot of this would run on various algorithms as well and if the risk is having 10-20 million people not see your commercial site period, that's a problem. The Coinbase CEO saw this coming long before many others.  I pushed for an exemption list because there's a lot of deeper context before you turf people for good. I want more due regard shown than the radical left has shown their opposition.

2) Mirror services and platforms when possible. If all hardware stores are woke, then Conservatives/Republicans need to find a way to have a hardware chain friendly to it exist. This is why Ben Shapiro and Daily Wire, right or wrong, have produced a movie ( Run Hide Fight) and signed Gina Carano to a movie deal. They want to cash in Conservatives who want to spend their money with other Conservatives.

3) Hard vetting and active relentless investigation. When you see politicians getting caught doing something on camera that blows up, that's not a coincidence. Obviously there are political paparazzi, but both sides have investigators bird dogging their opposition around the clock. Once you find something, you release it to the public. On my end,  I said it matters if it's true, it has to be true. I saw some argue to use the exact same tactics as the current MSM, but I don't agree with that. If you have the facts and you stick to the facts, eventually it will shine through any other defense in front of you.

What I dislike about the radical left is the bent ideology that the public cannot be trusted to come to their own conclusions and need to be led to the "right outcome"  Because I dislike that, I also understand there are things many people aren't going to want to see or be exposed or have their kids be around it, but there is value in coming to your own conclusion on what is not acceptable to you.

I disagree with the radical left that everything needs to be "fair" at all  costs. Life isn't fair. Nothing can make it fair. Trying to force "fairness" is just virtue signaling for leverage. But I also believe we cannot practically remove all unfairness either. We have to pick our battles as Conservatives.

If Conservatives unite and start demonetizing, that has a better impact, a better effort to results ratio, than these small conflicts abound. Yes, I get why small conflicts can turn into large ones if left unchecked, but you have to go after the money first. Once you take the money, everything else falls into place. For example, if I want to change FBG, I can argue morality all day long. I can argue semantics and split hairs. But if I can give or take a thousand subscribers on my own, then that generates traction.

I  don't like it personally. I have nothing against the LGBT community. Many of them have struggles I'll never truly understand. Many of them have suffered in ways I'll never understand. But also some of them are just bad people. Because any group is a range and has a cross section of real life people within it. It extends beyond a bedroom and into a question of the human condition.  I refuse to see them all as victims or targets or zealots. Because I will not rob them of their humanity to do it.

But whether or not I like it, doesn't change the question - Is this the right fight at the right time for Conservatives?

I've said this for 15 years here, everything is resource management. You have limited time, money, energy and will power to fight. You have to known when and where to make your stand. I don't believe this issue is it.

First time I actually read one of your posts.  Very  interesting, especially the demonetizing part.  Just curious - do you think Conservatives have more money than Liberals? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

Just curious how old you are and if you have kids.

I'm 53 and my wife and I just welcomed our first grandchild into the world this week.

American culture, as viewed by the rest of the world, is kinda confusing. We allow violence on our tvs but we're prudish with our sexuality. Our kids are exposed to so much violence but we shield them from the human body. A man dressed as a woman is considered off-limits, but we grew up on cartoons blowing things up and shooting people in the face. I'm not saying I would have let my kids watch the show in question, but that's not for me to decide if others choose to.

A childhood friend of mine spent 15 years in Germany following college. From the things he's told me about his experiences, a drag queen or any member of the LGBT community being an influence on a child would be far more welcomed than an anvil being dropped on a character's head or being blown up by an Acme bomb.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...