Ralph wrote: ↑Mon Feb 13, 2023 9:16 pm
The thing is, it's not about the fact that it's a man doing the performance. I wouldn't want someone who is AFAB performing in front of my children wearing an exaggerated, hypersexualised caricature of womanhood either, any more than I would want a performer of either sex in front of children with a massive phallic attachment barely contained by the fabric of his or her trousers. For me, at least, it's not about the closing so much as about a sex show in THE most inappropriate venue possible, and I don't mind supporting legislation to put an end to that.
The thing is, drag is not inherently sexual though. If I do a google image search for "drag queen story hour" I don't see anything you could describe as sexual. Even if I look at Ru Pauls Drag Race, the clothing is unusual and extreme, but I wouldn't call it sexual (there's probably exceptions but the general gist looks fine). If you consider all those thing sexually tinted, I think that says more about American culture than drag as such. It probably does have a sexual tint when done in adult locations, but then everything does there, even the things that involve no crossdressing. Nothing to do with drag.
(Yes, it's well known that (Western?) Europe is much more relaxed about these things than puritan America).
And if we're worried about kids seeing barely constrained phallic attachments, they should be forbidden from watching the Tour de France, because those bike shorts leave little to the imagination.
Ralph wrote: ↑Mon Feb 13, 2023 9:16 pm
Unfortunately I can't see any way to word such legislation carefully enough that it would keep the sex performers out of children's venues and not lay a hand on transwomen, female-presenting men who crossdress in a non-sexual way (that is, in conformity with community standards for appropriate clothing), or men who present as men but wear skirts and dresses. Word it too strictly and the drag queens will find a loophole that lets them technically adhere to the letter of the law while completely demolishing the spirit of the law; word it too broadly (ha, no pun intended) and it can indeed capture crossdressers up in the net.
Bingo! That's because there is no objective difference, the difference is in the minds of the people looking. They are either choosing to be offended, or have been trained to consider it offensive. There are places in the world where bare-breasted women on the street are perfectly normal. Culture cannot be easily legislated, and I would argue you shouldn't try.
(When Napoleon formulated his Code, one of the goals was to avoid codifying anything that regulated interpersonal relationships. So nothing about homosexuality, nothing specific on publicly decency, etc. It's probably one of the reasons it spread so far, because it avoided all the cultural minefields).