Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

11 yr/old drag kid worshiped within LGBTQ community (Mod warning op)

Options
1…4748505253…88

Comments

  • Options
    #1472
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Bambi wrote: »
    if it was Dissident republicans or a bunch of Christian Brothers at this lark, no one would be going "ah lads, it doesn't matter what they are, they're just reading some kids stories"
    Right. Because a drag act is the same thing as terrorists and paedophiles.
    How Soon Is Now wrote: »
    This is all about promoting sexuality to kids getting thrm onside at a young age
    Is this sentence supposed to make sense? What is "promoting sexuality"?

    If by "getting them onside", you mean "teaching kids to accept people's differences", then I don't see the problem.
    Kenna Fresh Teflon wrote: »
    Seamus, when you say "it's homophobia, end of", you are resorting to the same tactics that someone who is trolling would resort to. Because (i) You know it's not true, and (ii) It's to wind people up.
    Oh it's true all right. Look at the context. Demands that the group be Garda vetted. Horrified that they're not.

    But only for this drag act. Library staff? Meh. Other performers? Meh. But men dressed as women? Garda vet them, stat!

    It's homophobia.
    then there is the rest of us, who just take issue with an adults-only act (with sexually explicit elements also on their social media pages) giving a talk to very young children - whether gay or straight.
    Except that's not what's happening.

    The idea that there would be an adult act put on for children - and that they'd be "instructing" the children in any way - was entirely fabricated by a homophobic agenda. And people lapped it up, even though it had no basis in fact.

    Even though, as you say, the idea that a public library would put on a sexually-explicit talk for young children is completely absurd, some people accepted this disinformation without question. Including you apparently. You have to ask yourself why.

    A reading was scheduled to be put on for children, featuring performers who in other contexts do drag acts for adults.

    If that makes someone uncomfortable, then I doubt they're going to be able to understand why that's their problem and theirs alone.


  • Options
    #1473
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    seamus wrote: »

    But only for this drag act. Library staff? Meh. Other performers? Meh. But men dressed as women? Garda vet them, stat!

    It's homophobia.

    So wrong, so consistently.
    So Seamus


    seamus wrote: »
    A reading was scheduled to be put on for children, featuring performers who in other contexts do drag acts for adults.

    seamus wrote: »
    A risqué entertainnent show was scheduled to be put on for adults, featuring performers who in other contexts do readings for children.


  • Options
    #1474
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    AustinLostin wrote: »
    I don't think we know if they were garda vetted or not so that's an assumption. I imagine they would be at a event in a public library. If the council are not vetting people who organise events for kids at the library, that is a far bigger issue than this one event. You should follow up on this immediately in the interest of child safety as this would be a major oversight on the part of the council - as you appear to have a source which is saying they weren't vetted.

    Yes, they obviously had agreed the event & performance with the library - it was scheduled on the library website.

    I don't know why you would think they would protest in a provocative and shocking fashion at a children's event. I don't understand the basis you have for thinking this.

    I worked in the public libraries all my life, and it was absolutely imperative that anybody attending the children's Library for giving classes, performances etc had to be Garda vetted. In fact more casual former (pre Garda vetting era) trusted guests who had for long given art, drama classes, puppet shows etc, had to either give up or else go through the process of Garda vetting as well as tax clearance. The formalities of people doing stuff like this in any public service venue are great. I used to see all these formalities in process, it was time-consuming ticking all the boxes.

    I would hate to see children attending anything with such a horribly suggestive name as “glitter hole” doing the deed. We all known kids absolutely love playing with glitter, so would zoom in on the performing group’s name. It is disgusting that children are being eased on board the adult’s world of sexuality. It is quite enough early diversity education to show that men and women can “get married/partnered to each other” in the three combination permutations. Bring in all the other stuff at early teen level where adolescents are more in a position towards giving full consent.


  • Options
    #1475
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    So wrong, so consistently.
    So Seamus
    Hey, you're the one who hasn't a clue why and when Garda vetting is required. You make the same mistake as so many people who think that being Garda vetted makes you an expert on child protection.


  • Options
    #1476
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    Seamus, of course they're not going to give the children a talk with sexual aspects to it but they are an adults only act - see their logo and social media material. If a heterosexual act with the same kind of logo and material were booked to give a talk to children about books (even though they're not going to be including sexual elements) I would feel the very same. And I'd bet you would too (if they were straight). An adults-only act suddenly giving a talk to young children is absurd, and this is not homophobia so stop insulting everyone who thinks this would be inappropriate and in poor taste by calling them homophobic, because it's dickish, trollish and you are exploiting your status as a long-term member and former mod/admin, as you know you'll get away with it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1477
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    Sorry Seamus, you just aren't selling me on this homophobia schtick!

    I personally have no issue with anyone's sexuality.

    I just see absolutely no reason for some bloke reading stories to kids in a library to be wearing a god damn frock. Why?

    I can see why one might be dressed as an animal, or a robot or some cartoon character or something like that to appeal to the kids, but why a woman?

    It's not like there is a shortage of actual women?

    Maybe it's me, I could never see the appeal of drag queens - I generally just find them pointless and irritating to be honest. The Desmond thing actually revolts me.

    There's no way I'd bring my kids to anything like this.


  • Options
    #1478
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    seamus wrote: »
    Hey, you're the one who hasn't a clue why and when Garda vetting is required. You make the same mistake as so many people who think that being Garda vetted makes you an expert on child protection.


    Never said anything of the sort Helen

    Heres a pro tip. Being Garda vetted doesnt mean youre not actually a paedo. Its just a simple process to try and ensure children are in safe environments as is reasonably practical and parents can have reasonable trust in those taking car of their kids.


  • Options
    #1479
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,241 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    I can see why one might be dressed as an animal, or a robot or some cartoon character or something like that to appeal to the kids, but why a woman?

    It's not like there is a shortage of actual women?

    Why not? Is there an actual shortage of animals, robots or cartoon characters?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #1480
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I would hate to see children attending anything with such a horribly suggestive name as “glitter hole” doing the deed.
    Aye, crass beyond belief - whether gay or straight.


  • Options
    #1481
    klaaaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    All the Gemma O'Doherty fans getting offended about a man in a dress reading a book, welcome back 1950's Ireland.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1482
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote:
    Why not? Is there an actual shortage of animals, robots or cartoon characters?

    Yes. A massive shortage of ones that can turn up and tell stories to children.


  • Options
    #1483
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    @Seamus. Library staff ARE vetted. All teacher/performers attending children’s Library for purposes of educating/entertaining them ARE Garda vetted, not just the ones you are particularly defensive about.

    I have known a pedophile/pederast or two (personally and unfortunately) who have waved the homophobia and “prude” flags aloft, so it doesn’t sit with well with me that people should try to bring children into the world of adult sexuality other than for the normalization of the loving nature of same-sex and make/female relationships, which is quite enough for very young minds.


  • Options
    #1484
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »
    Why not? Is there an actual shortage of animals, robots or cartoon characters?

    Well, ones who can read, yes I believe they're quite few and far between!


  • Options
    #1485
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Kenna Fresh Teflon wrote: »
    Seamus, of course they're not going to give the children a talk with sexual aspects to it but they are an adults only act - see their logo and social media material. If a heterosexual act with the same kind of logo and material were booked to give a talk to children about books (even though they're not going to be including sexual elements) I would feel the very same. And I'd bet you would too (if they were straight). An adults-only act suddenly giving a talk to young children is absurd, and this is not homophobia so stop insulting everyone who thinks this would be inappropriate and in poor taste by calling them homophobic, because it's dickish, trollish and you are exploiting your status as a long-term member and former mod/admin, as you know you'll get away with it.
    You can keep accusing me of trolling all you like if that reduces your discomfort. If I talk about homophobia in a general sense, and you feel personally attacked.... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    If I heard that Lily Savage was giving a children's book reading at a library I'd be intrigued. Not outraged. Would you? How about Mrs. Brown?

    Ultimately what this comes down to is hysteria. We take it for granted that when a children's show is being put on, that the content is age-appropriate, regardless of who was doing it.

    If I heard that Billy Connolly was doing a comedy gig for children, I'd think, "Wow, this should be interesting, how will he swing this?", not "OMG, we have to protect the children, he'll be f'in and blindin all over them".

    Likewise, if you book a drag group for a children's book reading, it can be taken for granted that they're not doing sexually explicit material.

    If instead someone immediately jumps to, "OMG they'll be twerking in the kid's faces", then that says a lot about the kind of person they are. They're either really stupid, or straight up believe that gay people are not normal human beings.


  • Options
    #1486
    Will I Am Not
    Registered Users Posts: 3,495 ✭✭✭Will I Am Not


    If you market yourself as an overtly sexual act and go by the name glitter hole, don’t be surprised if you don’t get to do the kiddie gigs.


  • Options
    #1487
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    klaaaz wrote:
    All the Gemma O'Doherty fans getting offended about a man in a dress reading a book, welcome back 1950's Ireland.

    Yes. Ireland (who overwhelmingly voted in favour of gay marriage and has a gay leader) is so regressive because they don't want children told stories by an adult drag act.


  • Options
    #1488
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    klaaaz wrote: »
    All the Gemma O'Doherty fans getting offended about a man in a dress reading a book, welcome back 1950's Ireland.

    I'm not offended.

    Why is he wearing a dress?


  • Options
    #1489
    klaaaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    I'm not offended.

    Why is he wearing a dress?

    What's your problem with a man wearing a dress?


  • Options
    #1490
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    seamus wrote: »
    If I talk about homophobia in a general sense, and you feel personally attacked.... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    See that was completely unnecessary and dickish but you'll get away with it so all good.

    Throwing out unsubstantiated provocative comments at everyone who disagrees with you does not have to be resorted to. You know full well that not everyone here is homophobic. Full well.

    I wouldn't give a hoot if Lily Savage et al gave a talk at a children's library, because they don't have butt logo or a sexually suggestive name or highly sexualised stage shows. The fact they are gay is irrelevant to me.


  • Options
    #1491
    zapitastas
    Closed Accounts Posts: 498 ✭✭zapitastas


    klaaaz wrote: »
    What's your problem with a man wearing a dress?

    Children might catch the gay off him if they witness it. Putin style logic


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1492
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Deleted User wrote: »
    @Seamus. Library staff ARE vetted. All teacher/performers attending children’s Library for purposes of educating/entertaining them ARE Garda vetted
    Nobody said they weren't. Though it's not necessarily a legal requirement in all cases, and definitely not a legal requirement for irregular performances.

    IIRC, the vetting bureau won't even accept an application for an irregular event.
    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    Why is he wearing a dress?
    Why did forty coats wear forty coats? Does it matter?
    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    Heres a pro tip. Being Garda vetted doesnt mean youre not actually a paedo. Its just a simple process to try and ensure children are in safe environments as is reasonably practical and parents can have reasonable trust in those taking car of their kids.
    No way!
    Imagine then if you're attending a one-off public event where your kids remain entirely in your own care and - get this - the performers aren't Garda vetted! GASP!

    Seriously, drop the Garda vetting bit. You're just embarrassing yourself.


  • Options
    #1493
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    klaaaz wrote: »
    What's your problem with a man wearing a dress?

    Whats he accesorizing it with?


  • Options
    #1494
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    klaaaz wrote: »
    What's your problem with a man wearing a dress?

    What's the point of the man wearing a dress?


  • Options
    #1495
    klaaaz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭klaaaz


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    What's the point of the man wearing a dress?

    The objections from a few posters here to a man in a dress reading a book are exactly the same as the objectors from the US Bible Belt.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47203976

    6034073


  • Options
    #1496
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Kenna Fresh Teflon wrote: »
    Lily Savage ... don't have ... highly sexualised stage shows
    Ah here, good luck to you.


  • Options
    #1497
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    seamus wrote: »
    Why did forty coats wear forty coats? Does it matter?

    Mattered enough to put it on in the first place!


  • Options
    #1498
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    seamus wrote: »
    Ah here, good luck to you.
    Devastating comeback. Does she have a bare arse logo? Does she have a sexually suggestive name like Glitter Hole?


  • Options
    #1499
    The Bishop Basher
    Registered Users Posts: 4,279 ✭✭✭The Bishop Basher


    seamus wrote: »
    If I heard that Billy Connolly was doing a comedy gig for children, I'd think, "Wow, this should be interesting, how will he swing this?", not "OMG, we have to protect the children, he'll be f'in and blindin all over them.

    The thing is, he wouldn’t. It’s not his act. It just wouldn’t work and wouldn’t be funny. He’d have to completely reinvent his stage persona from scratch for it to be suitable for kids.

    Which makes me ask myself what glitter hole get out of all of this apart from the obvious publicity.


  • Options
    #1500
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    klaaaz wrote: »
    The objections from a few posters here to a man in a dress reading a book are exactly the same as the objectors from the US Bible Belt.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47203976

    6034073

    It's a simple enough question!

    Why is he wearing a dress, while reading stories to kids in a library?

    If you don't know the answer that's fine, I don't know myself, that's why I'm asking the question.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1501
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    the people of south dublin are perhaps not quite as woke as we were led to believe?

    maybe we can have roy chubby brown reading nursery rhymes in the kilmore civic centre?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement