Tell me, Ben Kallos, when we talk about EQUALITY, and how NOBODY should be ridiculed or stereotyped for their RACE or their GENDER, how are these two images different?
They both look like white guys dressing up in GARISH STEREOTYPE that is offensive.
Why do it? Why, especially, do this and say it's a GOOD thing for CHILDREN?
Put it another way: does anyone want a Drag Queen working in the Public Library? Being a bus driver? A bank teller?
NO. Why? Because it's INAPPROPRIATE. There's such a thing as "the privacy of your own home."
We don't have nudists delivering the mail. We don't have Walmart greeters in S&M regalia. And we protest when idiots march in KKK outfits and NAZI outfits and spread a message of hate.
We say "It's sick in the head to hate blacks or Jews or Catholics or Muslims. We don't care HOW you became sick in the head. CUT IT OUT."
As Bill Maher's said often enough, the Democrats are wimps. They don't get it. They bend over backwards to anyone and anything. They cave in and look weak, ridiculous and clueless in the name of political correctness. Whether it's opposing the death penalty for child murderers or defending the right of a terrorist to come back to the country she vowed to destroy, the DEMOCRATS make it way too easy for the Trumpies to trumpet.
The latest example of Liberal assholery is Ben Kallos proudly spending taxpayer time on "DRAG QUEEN STORY TIME" for children.
What is the point of bringing a drag queen to a children's library?
And what goes on in the library toilet? Is she going to hoist her dress and show that SHE has a DICK and can use a urinal just like any boy in the boy's room?
If not why not, what's "inappropriate" about it? It's just a lesson in biology, right? Anything goes, right?
That's how the Trumpies trumpet the stupidity and dangerous myopia of Liberals and Democrats. And I registered as a Liberal, and when the party collapsed, I became a Democrat. It's MY people who are looking like ASSHOLES.
Liberals always had a whiff of hypocrisy. Phil Ochs said they were "10 degrees to the left of center in good times, 10 degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally."
Well, hypocrisy is part of human nature. So is being stupid. So is bending over backwards for idiocy.
It's common sense to simply state: whatever mental quirk you have sexually, KEEP IT IN THE BEDROOM. We do NOT need drag queens in libraries reading to children, any more than we want infantilists doing it, or S&M devotees. Kids don't need to know that spanking can be a GOOD thing. There's a reason why we have R-rated movies, and why we PROTECT CHILDREN.
OK Benny Boy, who is NEXT to read stories to the CHILDREN at a New York Public Library, in the name of diversity? How about THESE GUYS?
There are kiddie books explaining how some kid has "two fathers" or "two mothers." But is that really enough? Is that reality? THESE two guys are reality. They march in parades. They have pride. So 10 year-old kids should know about this, right along with drag queens.
How about a DRAG KING? Surely children at a New York Public Library should be exposed to somebody like this:
And since an eight year-old or a ten year-old might still wet the bed once in a while, why not bring in THIS guy to read a story or two?
That's ABL -- Adult Baby Lifestyle. Shouldn't children stop being innocent, and learn all about diversity?
How about bringing in a hunter, to explain why it's fun to shoot a bird out of the sky? That's his lifestyle.
How about the guy who clubs baby seals, or sets traps in the woods so that an animal has to gnaw off its own leg to escape? Diversity, Benny. Some people LOVE fur coats.
Lord knows, the people who LOVE fur coats were BORN that way.
The people who go to a dominatrix for games that end up bloody were BORN that way.
Hitler, John Wayne Gacy, Ed Gein, Son of Sam, Richard Speck and Mark David Chapman were all BORN that way. So let's show tolerance. Let's have "story time" in which we teach children about these people. You can't start too young with this stuff.
What we want is tolerance. Yes. Don't make fun of the black, the Jew or the transsexual.
At the same time, we don't want BLACKFACE or JEWFACE or DRAGFACE. ANY of that is questionable, even on Halloween. Megyn Kelly got fired for wondering if Blackface was ok during Halloween. Kenan Thompson on "Saturday Night Live" shouted "NO, it is NOT ALL RIGHT, even on Halloween!" So that would also mean dressing up as a Hasidic Jew with a giant fake nose? And it would mean stereotypical, grotesque DRAG?
Charles Pierce didn't call himself a "drag queen." The very term is insulting. A question might be if "female impersonator" is all right. RuPaul didn't quite dress up in the grotesque style favored by so many of the contestants on "Drag Race," the ones he rejects and tells to "sashay away." Real women don't sashay. Real Jews don't shout "Oy VEY" all day and real blacks don't speak like Willie Best. It was an irony that some of Jimmie Walker's cast members on "Good Times" resented and fumed over his stereotypical behavior, but the money was too good for them to walk out in protest.
You want to argue that these two are "celebrating" women, then I argue that Ben Kallos should stand in front of a library and proudly salute a free screening of Al Jolson in "The Jazz Singer."
It seems that "intent" and good intentions aren't enough, and there's ZERO TOLERANCE for what was once considered sympathetic, or just some kind of joke (in the case of certain scenes in Marx Brothers and Laurel & Hardy movies and Warner Bros. cartoons).
Intent. Al Jolson wasn't intending to make fun of blacks. As a minority member himself, that would've been furthest from his mind. Similarly, when Billy Crystal imitated Sammy Davis Jr., his intent wasn't to make fun of Sammy's blackness.
And yet, look what happened to the white woman who "identified" as black, and had a deep tan, and colored her hair. She got fired and remains a pariah. Her intentions were good. She wasn't talking like Butterfly McQueen in "Gone with the Wind." But she was OFFENSIVE.
It would be one thing if the Liberals and the Democrats said "it's ALL permitted," but they don't. Kallos would be the first to declare "blackface" to be despicable, right? But here he is, PROMOTING drag queens to children.
"Some Like It Hot" was a situation comedy. Two guys had to hide from being murdered, so they went into costume. Not drag. Costume. "Tootsie" was a situation comedy, too. But there's nothing funny about DRAGFACE, when the intent is to promote a stereotype of women as nothing but bubble-headed dress-up Barbies, especially when it's broadened (pun intended) to include effeminacy which is a blatant in drag as a Stepin Fetchit accent would be for somebody doing Blackface on Halloween.
As a Liberal Democrat, I'd be the first to tell the rednecks to put down their clubs and their torches and NOT hassle the black man, the Hasidic Jew, the Muslim woman in the burqa, or the gay couple who moved into a house and are trying to live their lives. These people are what they are.
But somebody in a KKK outfit, in Nazi regalia, or someone putting on a Jew nose and a Star of David, or somebody mincing around making fun of how women make themselves up and dress? I'd say "educate these people on when, if EVER, it's appropriate." And in most case, the answer would be NOT AT ALL.
We are getting bewildering mixed messages about race and gender these days. We're getting a lot of hypocrisy, too. It's doubtful that Ben Kallos would be smiling and standing next to a "Drag King," a woman in a motorcycle outfit and a black mustache and sideburns, waving a tire-iron and smoking a cigarette, and saying, "This is the guest who will be reading to our children in the Public Library today."
One rule for one type of stereotypical offensive behavior and another rule in some other case? Look at the top picture. BOTH are offensive, but it would only occur to Ben Kallos to promote the garish image of the DRAGFACE and not the image in BLACKFACE. And that's wrong.
