Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Accept and Advocate or Else.
Drag Queen Storytime is scheduled this month at three of the local libraries where I live. I’m told in the comments on Facebook that if I disagree with it that I’m bigoted, narrow-minded, and hateful.
In 2010 I was invited to a forum to discuss the impending repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. A panel came to visit the Marine Corps base where my husband was stationed and military wives were invited to take part in the discussion. Many were vocally opposed to the repeal. We knew that it would open the door to much more than simply securing the rights of a specific group of individuals to serve openly in the military. I vividly remember one woman relaying that she was both apprehensive and concerned about the repeal of DADT because of the impact it would potentially have on DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). She decidedly explained to the panel and to her fellow military wives that if DADT were to be repealed that DOMA would soon suffer the same fate, and so a snowball effect would sweep the nation.
We were adamantly assured that this repeal would have no effect on DOMA. We were assured that those pressing for the DADT repeal were only interested in the rights of gays to serve openly and that it would not impact marriage. That’s not what they were after. At least that’s what they said.
DADT was repealed by President Obama in December of that year.
Three years later DOMA was struck down as unconstitutional.
We have been told repeatedly when it comes to gay rights, that the goal is simply basic human rights for an oppressed and marginalized group of people. The LGBTQ community only wants the same rights as everyone else. They just desire to live how they choose and it won’t affect anyone else.
We all know what a blatant lie that turned out to be.
Bakers, florists, photographers, and others can attest to just how destructive the LGBTQ lobby has been to their businesses and their livelihoods.
And now, four years after Obergefell was decided (just two years after DOMA was struck down), the claim that all they wanted was to be able to marry has been proven a lie as well.
Last week I received an email from our local library listing 15 events included in their new “Rainbow Connection and Collection.” Three of those events are Drag Queen Storytime. No surprise there. We’ve watched over the past several years as these bizarre events have swept the nation’s public library spaces, funded by taxpayers, and targeting the youngest and most vulnerable among us.
But what we’re witnessing with these “inclusive” programs, events, and books is not just a group of people who want basic human rights. It’s the gay lobby forcefully pushing their agenda on every single American citizen and also entities bending over backward to appease, accept, promote, and push the LGBTQAI+ agenda. There is no end in sight.
There is an apparent connection between the progression of law and the changes we have witnessed in our culture over the past decade. How is it that there was an overnight change in the societal acceptance and praise of all things LGBTQ?
Nancy Pearcey writes extensively about what we have experienced in her book Love Thy Body. She argues that when society adopts certain practices as normative, acceptable, and good, and when it then enshrines such practices into law, the society also then absorbs the practice’s accompanying worldview.
In simple terms, a worldview is a lens through which an individual or a collective views the world regarding such things as truth, epistemology, ethics, and values.
The worldview that accompanies the LGBTQ agenda and culture is one that argues for no objective truth or biological facts. All is governed by what you feel you are, by what you decide in your mind to be, by your desires, feelings, and personal experiences. Truth, facts, evidence, and biology become not just less important, but irrelevant altogether. It is a Postmodern, Secular Humanist worldview which is in stark opposition to the historically dominant worldview of western civilization, namely a Christian theist worldview.
We are observing how law influences our collective values. And not just law, but the law that has been thrust upon the majority and implemented by a minuscule minority.
Now we are told, “It’s the law. You will accept it. You must embrace it.”
But the law is not the only way these practices and their accompanying worldview have become normative and accepted. This happened through a very calculated strategy that is outlined in the 1989 book After The Ball: How America Will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s. It was written by Marshall Kirk, a neuropsychiatry researcher and Dr. Hunter Madsen, an expert in public persuasion tactics and social marketing. Albert Mohler wrote a thorough and excellent review of the book in 2004.
To sum it up, their purpose was essentially to shift focus away from the immoral and unnatural behavior of homosexuals and onto the human rights denial and attack of “gay” citizens.
Their three-part plan included desensitizing people to homosexuality. We primarily experience this through media and marketing as Hollywood has been more than happy to oblige. The second step uses “jamming” which equates anyone who is opposed to LGBTQ individuals or the agenda with Nazis or the KKK. They are considered bigots and hate mongers. We saw headlines like “Gay is the New Black” meaning to oppose gay rights is tantamount to being a racist. Lastly is conversion which encourages, demands even, that people not only accept homosexuality, transgenderism, gender nonconformity, and all the rest (hence the + at the end of LGBTQIA), but that people advocate for and promote their cause.
Get used to it, embrace it, and promote it.
It has been 30 years since After the Ball was written. Their strategy has been successful and worse, we now are seeing the LGBTQ lobby vigorously target youth.
Hence: Drag Queen Storytime.
It is well understood that to get a hold of young minds, and to “groom” them early as one drag queen recently testified before the Lafayette City-Parish Council, is to rapidly progress an ideology among an entire culture and society. The sooner those Secular Humanist worldview lenses are on our children, the easier it will be to see the outcropping of that worldview and ideology. Young children grow up to be adults who determine the values, lifestyles, laws, and standards of a culture.
This worldview may be cloaked in rainbows, sparkles, love, tolerance, and acceptance, but the cold, hard reality is that there is no room for tolerance in the LGBTQIA+ ideology. Anyone who deviates from the acceptance of and promotion of it will be label “bigot” and dealt with accordingly. Soon it won’t be just bakers, florists, and photographers who suffer. It will be all of us. We will either accept and advocate or else.
Published in General
Thank you! The Board of Trustees has called a special meeting for Thursday because of all the phone calls they have received in opposition. I’m not expecting them to change their minds, but I hope they do! There will be plenty of parents there voicing our disapproval. And I hope others do the same in their towns.
I remember when the Supreme Court passed gay marriage. I took a breath, wiped my brow, figured: all right then. It’s done. I’m sick of being called a homophobe anyway.
I think we had about a 72-hour rest before Target changed their bathroom policy.
Even our (male) gay married couple friends agree now that it was a mistake. That we should have made a bulwark there; they are appalled at the issues my daughter and her family have had to deal with.
When my younger brother was 4-5 years old, he thought he was a cat named “Fluff”. For several weeks he wore a white blanket as a cape – for some unknown reason – and spent most of his time under the dining room table “meowing”. I guess its a good thing my parents didn’t pursue “species transition surgery”
Kids that age don’t have any idea who they are and what sex means.
That was not me. But that’s very interesting.
We have been seeing this insistence on a change in language for some time now. What’s bizarre to me is that people, librarians and others, go along with such insanity. I mean, hello Biology and Grammar? Two things that just don’t really matter anymore I suppose.
Hopefully someone or many someones will video the proceedings. There should be no objection to doing so. This is a public meeting dealing with a taxpayer-funded facility.
How will you pressure the Library to cancel any future events? They are publicly funded. Who controls that budget? The City Council? Those are the people who need to be approached. The library must be threatened with having their funding cut off if they proceed. You need friends on the City Council.
These are the connections that must be built before they’re needed, so that they can be drawn on when needed.
@jessi-bridges
Libraries are public spaces – unlike bakeries and florist shops. Why shouldn’t gay people and trans people and drag queens have the same access to them and use rights that you do?
They can use them the same as I do. Check out books. Discover a good movie. Read the magazines. I object to them using libraries to teach preschoolers how to twerk.
No one is saying that gay people and trans people can’t have access to a library. The issue is whether men who are drag queens and who dress like cartoon hookers are using public libraries to indoctrinate and groom young children and whether parents in the community feel that that’s appropriate. There have already been cases where at least two story hour drag queens were found to have a criminal record for pedophilia.
Do you feel it’s appropriate that men dressed as hookers dance and prance and play with young boys? Do you really not see any potential harm in this?
Do you think it’s appropriate that young children who never entertained thoughts or desires to be the opposite sex are encouraged to experiment and perhaps develop gender dysphoria which has a high suicide rate compared to the general population?
I believe you’re projecting your fears – fears based on your unfamiliarity – on to what’s going on and I doubt your characterization of it is accurate. No, I do not believe there’s likely to be any harm in what’s actually going on. To the contrary, I think this entire thread is kind of the textbook definition of “prejudice.” “Pre-judging” (unusually about things or people we don’t know or understand).
By the way – “you can read there, just don’t hold any events that reflect who you are or how you live” kind of reminds me of “you can practice your religion – but only on Sunday, in church.” I think we need a little more tolerance of people we don’t understand – whether drag queens or religious fundamentalists. We’re all a little scared of people we find foreign but “you make me uncomfortable” isn’t a good enough reason to limit your rights in the public square. Most of the people on this thread make me a lot more uncomfortable than any drag queen.
I’ve seen enough video of drag queens in libraries with children to make me sick to my stomach. It has nothing to do with fear and everything to do with disgust at watching a grown man with a perverted sense of self and a perverted and warped sense of reality, as well as a militant LGBTQ movement out to brainwash and indoctrinate innocent children. That you find this acceptable is quite sad.
Remember when we were all assured there was no need for a constitutional amendment on marriage?
All our betters in the beltway class assured us we had nothing to worry about.
You’re right, of course. And if anyone tried to prevent a gay person from checking out a book, I’ll march right next to you (and probably next to the librarian, who may be gay and is certainly a social liberal).
But suppose a female, heterosexual prostitute wanted to do story time with the kids. That would be fine, of course, as long as she dressed appropriately for children (not overly sexual), read a story that did not have anything to do with her occupation, and did not mention any topics inappropriate for children. Which, I presume, would be no problem for her. Prostitution is her occupation, not her entire being. There is more to her than a prostitute. Like, perhaps, someone who enjoys reading Dr. Seuss stories to children.
Many of my activities and thoughts are inappropriate for children. But they don’t come up during story time, for Pete’s sake. I’m too busy saving the red ripe strawberry from the big hungry bear. With sound effects. (I love that book.)
So I’m happy to have drag queens, or anyone else, read to my children. As long as they’re appropriate for children. During story time.
Anyone who reads to children with another agenda needs to grow up. Children are uninterested in your agenda, and in mine. And they should be. They’re children, for Pete’s sake. They just want to hear about the big hungry bear.
But to be clear, I agree with your point. Anyone can use a library, of course.
This isn’t about you. It’s about children being exposed to dudes dressed like hookers — you know, “for fun” — using public tax-subsidized resources. How about we have porn movie night at the library and invite the kiddies? Anything wrong with that? Any objectionable events you can think of that are reasonable and not so judgy?
It seems totally predictable that someone who separates the procreative and child-rearing aspects from marriage and makes it about personal fulfillment and public affirmation would also find drag-queen story time unobjectionable, sadly.
As if our kids aren’t already jaded at younger and younger ages… now it’s preschoolers learning to twerk from drag queens. People in the West are so, so bored and indifferent to excellence.
Are you kidding? John Dewey was an early progressive ( who just got tossed for past sins against current PC culture by the librarians)….
…the great task of the school…[is] to counteract and transform… the influence of home and church.
John Dewey (1859–1952)
From Lifesite a few months ago:
Public libraries need funds. You folks need to make it plain as can be that if they promote this stuff the next time they come around hat in hand begging for money, they will hit a wall.
Public Library Deletes Pictures Of Drag Queens Fondling Children At Story Hour
From The Federalist:
You might be interested in this gay man’s perspective, Cato:
Mixing Kids With Drag Queens Sets Gay Rights Back Decades
Promoting adolescent boys as drag queens and setting up events in which adult entertainers perform before children has reignited fears the LGBT community spent 30 years fighting.
See also:
21,460 Attend Library Conference Featuring Workshops On Drag Queens And Queering Elementary Schools
This is, as the author writes, more destruction of the trust the public once had in its institutions. For good reason. Libraries tend to think very highly of themselves and their place in communities. Will their communities feel the same way if they violate the trust put in them? You don’t win that trust back easily. It’s best not to destroy it in the first place.
Yea, he’s basically warning that things like this are going to trigger people like the people on this thread. He doesn’t say it’s a threat to children. I agree with him. Any time gay people get uppity, religious people get triggered. It’s the old “I don’t care what you do in your bedroom, just don’t ‘shove my face in it'” (by, for example, kissing your same sex spouse goodbye at the airport, or sharing a table in a public restaurant). It really is an awful lot like the leftists who think your religion is fine as long as you keep it to that hour on Sunday and don’t let it go feral in the public square.
Cato, can you think of any objections to public libraries inviting in all the preschool children for Drag Queen Story Hour that you wouldn’t dismiss as bigotry? Because it’s that dismissal that prevents us from finding any common ground as conservatives here.
That’s kind of a simplification of what he was saying, and completely ignores his criticisms. Your thoughts on this portion?
Out of curiosity – Why do you assume that I am unfamiliar? Unfamiliar with what exactly? That I live in a world where gay lifestyles are tolerated and accepted by a vast majority of people (unless it’s a strict Muslim country)? Do you think that I haven’t interacted with homosexuals throughout my career in a respectful manner? Do you think I don’t have friends who are gay? How familiar would you like me to be? Familiar in what way? Is there some sort of awareness program that I should take? What is this presumed ‘fear’ based on if I’m quite familiar with gay people and the gay lifestyle? Given the references I’ve cited, do you think I’m exaggerating about how drag queens interact with young children?
From First Things: (emphasis mine)
“This is not a drag performance, there’s no agenda attached to this. It’s actually very sweet,” librarian Brooke Converse, of Contra Costa County Library, argues. But videos of past story hours reveal pornographic adult entertainment: provocative outfits, sexual dancing, and twerking. Some drag queens even wear clothing used for BDSM, such as dog collars. It’s hard to interpret this adult entertainment as “sweet,” especially when the librarians hosting these events sometimes fail to do proper background checks: Two of the “queens” featured in story hours in Houston—William Travis Dees and Albert Garza—were later exposed as convicted sex offenders and pedophiles.
“It’s like a sex show for little kids, a sexist minstrel show,” Anna Bohach, a mother of four from Spokane, told First Things. “It’s hatred of women.” Bohach has organized a group called “500 Moms Strong” to stage a sit-in to protest an upcoming story hour at the Spokane public library. Her opposition is rooted in her Catholic faith, but also in her dislike for the inherent misogyny of drag queen culture, which reduces femininity to crude stereotypes. The answer, she says, is to fight—not to simply stay away from the library on the day of the story hour: “Would that be a sufficient response if a racist was donning black face to read Uncle Tom at a library?” she asked. “We should not allow women to be mocked in the same fashion.”
Just like old times …
It does depend on the content of the program. If the drag queens were reading porn, or stripping, or actually doing something I didn’t think proper for children, I’d object. But I don’t object to the fact of their being drag queens. They’re just people who dress different. Until proven otherwise, that doesn’t justify assuming some ill-purpose.
Editor Note:
Personal attack on another member. -Max[redacted]
I was responding to your comment and your characterization of what these events are like. So I believe you believe what you said you believed.
Oh yea, First Things. There’s an objective middle of the road source on a subject like this. What, the Family Research Council hasn’t put out a memo yet?