Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Drag Queen Story Times picketed by protestors who claim that it grooms children and promotes paedophilia

I’m sure.

I think the use of the picture is just because it’s a drag queen. The picture editor of a local paper hasn’t used that to add context to what’s basically a court report. Its been used to outrage the likely readers of a local Norfolk coast newspaper. ‘And just in case you didn’t know what one looked like, here they are’. There’s a circus element to the presentation, and it’s not on the side of the drag queen, even if the basic legal facts of the case are.

You can’t move for drag queens these days - except in reality, where they really form no more of a role than they ever did.

So would you have preferred the paper to not use a picture? To not have reported the story at all?

It seems you just decided to slight the paper and its readers with your determination they were trying to rile up whoever was your imagined idea of their reader, someone outraged by the idea or a drag queen I think you thought.
 
So would you have preferred the paper to not use a picture? To not have reported the story at all?

It seems you just decided to slight the paper and its readers with your determination they were trying to rile up whoever was your imagined idea of their reader, someone outraged by the idea or a drag queen I think you thought.
OK.

I said what I said initially, which I stand by. The coverage of this issue, nationally, is out of all proportion. That’s not an accident. None of the things you went on to ask I said are things I said so I’m unable to clarify them - they came from you in their entirety, including the idea that I was saying a murder victims body picture should’ve been placed there instead. None of your questions make sense. None of them relate to what was said.
 
OK.

I said what I said initially, which I stand by. The coverage of this issue, nationally, is out of all proportion. That’s not an accident. None of the things you went on to ask I said are things I said so I’m unable to clarify them - they came from you in their entirety, including the idea that I was saying a murder victims body picture should’ve been placed there instead. None of your questions make sense. None of them relate to what was said.
I’m sure.

I think the use of the picture is just because it’s a drag queen. The picture editor of a local paper hasn’t used that to add context to what’s basically a court report. Its been used to outrage the likely readers of a local Norfolk coast newspaper. ‘And just in case you didn’t know what one looked like, here they are’. There’s a circus element to the presentation, and it’s not on the side of the drag queen, even if the basic legal facts of the case are.

You can’t move for drag queens these days - except in reality, where they really form no more of a role than they ever did.

No.

I think it’s bizarre that the hysteria and moral panic about drag queens has reached such obsessive proportions that there’s some related story in every daily newspaper, and often on television too, to the detriment of other things that are happening. If you like it, go, and have a great time. If you don’t, don’t - including to abuse and/or intimidate the performer and/or audience. This is a fundamentally unimportant issue, which people and media outlets have become completely obsessed by. Meanwhile, a sad murder story takes up the bottom fifth of the page so we can all see Titiana instead. It’s back to front.

The bits in bold are there to see.
 
Oh my god. Get another hobby. You may have the inclination, but I don’t have the patience.

So in short, due to your opinion there has been a disproportionate amount of media reporting on drag queens reading their books to children lately. You randomly decided to criticise a newspaper for reporting the facts of a hate crime and outrageously illustrating the story with a picture of the drag queen that had been abused.

And because I called you out on your accusations that had no basis, you now don't have the patience.

My understanding is that you had an idea in your head of a media storm so decided to impose it on this story and somehow also made it about values (of the paper?) being the wrong way round because, again according to you, the murder of an old woman hadn't received its due attention, and when it was pointed out by others that it had received a lot of attention, again paid no attention but kept doubling down on your baseless opinion.

I am still unsure exactly what level of reporting and illustration a hate crime on a drag queen should receive in the local paper, something that you felt very strongly on before you lost patience.
 
Republican hypocrisy again


The headline doesn't remotely do what happened justice. (Bold mine for emphasis.)

A state house investigation last week determined that he supplied alcohol to the intern and another young staffer, had sex with the intern after she had become intoxicated, and later showed her a threatening email while saying everything would be fine if she kept quiet about the encounter.

She was 19.

Two of the women said they tried to dissuade the intern from spending time with Slaton and suggested his behavior was inappropriate. But the intern, who one complainant described as “naive”, agreed to Slaton’s request to visit his apartment. The other women went with her, and the lawmaker served them alcohol, according to the report.

One of the young women drank enough to vomit, and the others were intoxicated enough to become dizzy and experience “split vision”, investigators said.

Two of them eventually left but the intern stayed, according to investigators.
 
The whole story is horrible, reeking of the kind of double standards and hypocrisy that these men live by.

The Associated Press reported that between 2017 and 2021, at least 120 state lawmakers in 41 states faced public allegations of sexual misconduct or harassment. Efforts to remove them are rare, and they often successfully run again for office.
 
Back
Top Bottom