7 ms·

I thought that fashion show was great, the empty pit of mud is just hysterical, it is a bit of a shock act. The hole thing just seems like an inside joke that s

I thought that fashion show was great, the empty pit of mud is just hysterical, it is a bit of a shock act. The hole thing just seems like an inside joke that some people took too serious. This is a common problem with communicating things ironically, someone is bound to not get it. Dunno what happened with the photo shoot but probably the director was like put some paper on the table, and someone was like what papers, supreme court document, find some on the internet, I found a ruling about free speech and child porn, Ok great. You may say this is a stupid thing but then the highest court in the country decided to spend its time on the important legal distinction between child porn and free speech. Like that are very serious grown people spending their time on that. Fashion is stupid but at least is obvious to everyone and everyone but the biggest autist know everyone knows. Also I don't see the difference between the work by Lotta Volkova and some drawings by Goya.

incrudible 4y ago
- hairofadog 4y ago
  How many incidents of “preschool leather daddy” have there been?
  - incrudible 4y ago
    At least one, but it's not something I'm willing to google to find out precisely how common it is.
    - hairofadog 4y ago
      My first guess would be zero, but even if it is in fact one, the answer to your question regarding how many times it would take to make me believe this fashion show is part of a child-porn conspiracy is "more than that". Drag queens have more to do with clowns than with sex. I can't see anything wrong with drag queen story hour.
    - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
      I'm just pointing out that if you're too uncomfortable to educate yourself on the superficial level of googling if its actually real/a problem, you're likely unable to engage with this subject matter in a way that actually works to prevent child abuse. Yes, it's an ugly subject. Most children who are sexually abused are abused by their own family, not by random drag queens, not by whatever viral thing you heard but you can't google because it's too gross for you. If you want to actually make a difference, educate yourself on the very real harm that is done to children. Volunteer for anti-child abuse organizations. Advocate for real policies, such as banning child marriages across all states. Call your government about the hundreds of migrant children that ICE just "lost". Advocate for the removal of domestic abusers from police and civil servant positions. etc.
      - incrudible 4y ago
        This is a subtle form of whataboutism. First of all, this is not my personal activist cause. It's just something where I see people being naive (like the person I replied to) and I want to tell them to stop being naive. If this was about child marriage, I'm sure many arguments along the lines of "it's part of their culture, we need to respect it" can be made. Indeed, such things are normalized in certain cultures. They are not even considered child abuse. I suspect we are early on in a trajectory where we are normalizing child abuse under the guise of supporting LGBT. What we decide now matters not so much to the children today, but in the indefinite future. Human morals appear to be quite flexible in that regard.
        PuppyTailWags 4y ago
        It's not whataboutism, it's pointing out that you're making some suspected wild trajectory of child abuse when actual child abuse currently exists in a widespread, normalized fashion. There's no need to invent gay people clandestinely abusing children as if straight people don't openly abuse children already. Like I said, marrying underage children is legal, and it certainly isn't the lgbtq people that put that law there.
        incrudible 4y ago
    - p0pcult 4y ago
      [Citation missing]
- woodruffw 4y ago
  I'm sorry, but what exactly do either drag queens or men in leather have to do with pedophilia? I'm not exactly a member of either community, but my understanding of drag is that it's performance art. My understanding of the leather community is that it's (1) a cornerstone of gay male culture, and (2) the polar opposite, in terms of sexual preferences, of the things people normally see as child-abuse-adjacent. You're entitled to whatever opinion you have about the age appropriateness of "preschool leather daddy," if that's a thing that has ever even existed. But I see no reason to enshroud that opinion in the same old tired fearmongering tropes about gay people.
  - incrudible 4y ago
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      > which is a stated goal of certain queer activists. None that I'm aware of. Given your own stated recalcitrance to actually search for resources and information about these things, I suggest (as gently as possible) that you're way off base here.
      - incrudible 4y ago
        I gave a Youtube link in the opening comment, I suggest you watch it.
Loughla 4y ago
>Dunno what happened with the photo shoot but probably the director was like put some paper on the table, and someone was like what papers, supreme court document, find some on the internet, I found a ruling about free speech and child porn, Ok great. There is absolutely zero chance that any choice associated with a professional photo shoot was made flippantly, especially for fashion of any kind. Every hair, every spec of dirt, and every single thing in every single shot is intentional.

incrudible 4y ago

hairofadog 4y ago
How many incidents of “preschool leather daddy” have there been?
- incrudible 4y ago
  At least one, but it's not something I'm willing to google to find out precisely how common it is.
  - hairofadog 4y ago
    My first guess would be zero, but even if it is in fact one, the answer to your question regarding how many times it would take to make me believe this fashion show is part of a child-porn conspiracy is "more than that". Drag queens have more to do with clowns than with sex. I can't see anything wrong with drag queen story hour.
  - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
    I'm just pointing out that if you're too uncomfortable to educate yourself on the superficial level of googling if its actually real/a problem, you're likely unable to engage with this subject matter in a way that actually works to prevent child abuse. Yes, it's an ugly subject. Most children who are sexually abused are abused by their own family, not by random drag queens, not by whatever viral thing you heard but you can't google because it's too gross for you. If you want to actually make a difference, educate yourself on the very real harm that is done to children. Volunteer for anti-child abuse organizations. Advocate for real policies, such as banning child marriages across all states. Call your government about the hundreds of migrant children that ICE just "lost". Advocate for the removal of domestic abusers from police and civil servant positions. etc.
    - incrudible 4y ago
      This is a subtle form of whataboutism. First of all, this is not my personal activist cause. It's just something where I see people being naive (like the person I replied to) and I want to tell them to stop being naive. If this was about child marriage, I'm sure many arguments along the lines of "it's part of their culture, we need to respect it" can be made. Indeed, such things are normalized in certain cultures. They are not even considered child abuse. I suspect we are early on in a trajectory where we are normalizing child abuse under the guise of supporting LGBT. What we decide now matters not so much to the children today, but in the indefinite future. Human morals appear to be quite flexible in that regard.
      - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
        It's not whataboutism, it's pointing out that you're making some suspected wild trajectory of child abuse when actual child abuse currently exists in a widespread, normalized fashion. There's no need to invent gay people clandestinely abusing children as if straight people don't openly abuse children already. Like I said, marrying underage children is legal, and it certainly isn't the lgbtq people that put that law there.
        incrudible 4y ago
  - p0pcult 4y ago
    [Citation missing]
woodruffw 4y ago
I'm sorry, but what exactly do either drag queens or men in leather have to do with pedophilia? I'm not exactly a member of either community, but my understanding of drag is that it's performance art. My understanding of the leather community is that it's (1) a cornerstone of gay male culture, and (2) the polar opposite, in terms of sexual preferences, of the things people normally see as child-abuse-adjacent. You're entitled to whatever opinion you have about the age appropriateness of "preschool leather daddy," if that's a thing that has ever even existed. But I see no reason to enshroud that opinion in the same old tired fearmongering tropes about gay people.
- incrudible 4y ago
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    > which is a stated goal of certain queer activists. None that I'm aware of. Given your own stated recalcitrance to actually search for resources and information about these things, I suggest (as gently as possible) that you're way off base here.
    - incrudible 4y ago
      I gave a Youtube link in the opening comment, I suggest you watch it.

Loughla 4y ago

>Dunno what happened with the photo shoot but probably the director was like put some paper on the table, and someone was like what papers, supreme court document, find some on the internet, I found a ruling about free speech and child porn, Ok great. There is absolutely zero chance that any choice associated with a professional photo shoot was made flippantly, especially for fashion of any kind. Every hair, every spec of dirt, and every single thing in every single shot is intentional.