Critics sued the state, saying it violated the First Amendment.
And taxpayer dollars, which Republicans claim to be such responsible stewards of, are being wasted to defend lawsuits like this.
Part of the reason I’m trying to move out of this shithole state. Tired of my money funding these hateful fucks.
I assume republicans in Texas blame critics for forcing Texas to use taxpayer money to fight lawsuits
It’s like arguing with a drunk.
This is correct. They actually do care about tax dollars being used to defend lawsuits when they could be used for more conservative things like buying bibles for public schools and funding beauty pageants for tots dressed entirely in ammunition
funding beauty pageants for tots dressed entirely in ammunition
Modern conservatives are the motivation for b-plots on Always Sunny. There’s gonna be a Franks Little Beauties 2, and they’ll obviously be dressed in ammo.
conservatism died a long time ago
deleted by creator
I mean, yeah. Their supporters see sexual and gender differences as degeneracy that will bring down civilization. Of course they support using tax money that way.
1A baybee
Republicans: “No, not like that!”
You mean the document doesn’t start (and end) on 2? Huh…
Ya think?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
U.S. District Judge David Hittner found Senate Bill 12 “impermissibly infringes on the First Amendment and chills free speech.” The struck-down law prohibited any performers from dancing suggestively or wearing certain prosthetics in front of children.
“It is not unreasonable to read SB 12 and conclude that activities such as cheerleading, dancing, live theater, and other common public occurrences could possibly become a civil or criminal violation.”
While SB 12 was originally billed as legislation that would prevent children from seeing drag shows, the final version did not directly reference people dressing as the opposite gender.
In Tuesday’s 56-page ruling, Hittner noted a survey of court decisions “reveals little divergence from the opinion that drag performances are expressive content that is afforded First Amendment protection.”
U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk said that West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler acted within his authority when he canceled a campus drag show.
“Today’s ruling is a celebration for the LGBTQ community and those who support free expression in the Lone Star State,” GLAAD President and Chief Executive Officer Sarah Kate Ellis.
The original article contains 796 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Bad bot. Summary references two federal trial level judges with different opinions, without explaining why there are two different trial level judges. I will read full article to see why there are two different judges on the same case. EDIT: not the same case. Summary omits context - different judges ruling differently in different cases concerning drag.
When you think about it, the cons sure are creepy weirdos - obsessed with things like this so very, very much. Wonder why?
Combination of things:
- Some are just assholes who hate anything they’re told to hate.
- Some are self-hating because they’re in the closet themselves.
- Some have bought into the “groomer” lies.
- And some are child molesters who’ve figured out that if they can get everyone in the first three groups to focus on drag queens, it takes the heat off.
It’s a bit tiring that every single infringement on people’s rights to exist has to be combatted via 1A because the only thing that trumps dAsTaRdLy BeHaViOr In FrOnT oF cHiLdReN is free speech.
Is that literally the only framework US law sees? Can’t it be illegal for lawmakers to force their views on people because they’re hateful bigots?
Can’t it be illegal for lawmakers to force their views on people because they’re hateful bigots?
Of course not, because that would violate their 1A rights to be hateful bigots.
Bigoted speech is itself free speech. It’s fundamentally important that the law doesn’t make subjective judgement calls like this on what views are good or bad precisely because it protects the minority.
Key words: “In front of children”
How does it harm children to see someone in prosthetics dancing and lip synching?
I don’t think it’s good to expose children to grown men in revealing outfits twerking in front of them while kids are encouraged to tuck dollar bills into the dragqueens shirt like a stripper. Which happens and you don’t bat an eye. Just because you’re sexually desensitized doesn’t mean it’s okay to expose children to it.
Why are you under the impression that every drag show is like that? Drag story time at a library does not involve any of that.
If I were to present an example of sexually explicit stuff going down at a children’s drag queen story hour would you change your mind?
No, because that’s anecdotal. My wife is a librarian. I can give you plenty of anecdotes to counter it.
The answer is I’m not under the impression that every drag show is like that, but some definitely are and it seems like you people don’t bat an eye or self police in any way.
Oh, well if some of them are, we better ban all of them.
Go ahead, present to us a video of a drag queen demonstrating: “sexually explicit conduct” meaning actual or simulated— (i) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; (ii) bestiality; (iii) masturbation; (iv) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or (v) lascivious exhibition of the anus, genitals, or pubic area of any person.
In front of 5 year olds, not adults.
You’re not gonna.
https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1681092876313214976 Here’s a video of a drag queen simulating jerking off with children present. Not sure there’s five year olds but there’s definitely children present. One young girl seems to be clinging on to her mother facing away from it, showing discomfort.
https://twitter.com/SaraGonzalesTX/status/1619507742926077952 “I know theres little babies here, but… close your ears. This is just a tradition that all shows normally do. Cheers to you, cheers to me, cheers to those who lick us where we pee”
I expect you to come back downplaying it. But I think most people can agree this stuff is not appropriate for children.
Lol do you know babies don’t understand words? Also the like three 10 year old kids were literally given money by their parents to tip the drag queens in the second video so apparently they thought it was fine. Regardless of what I or you think is appropriate for kids their parents thought it was or they would have left and certainly not given their kids money to tip.
You found two with 99% adults in the audience who were with their parents that made their own decision to not leave and take their kids away.
How many cases have there been in the past year of children getting shot at school or raped by priests though? Spoiler a lot more than 2, and guess what those kids are dead or have ruined lives, not just being grossed out for a few seconds. Most kids see worse on YouTube.
You know what actually happens and none of you bat an eye? Grown men fondling altar boys. You know it happens, but you don’t dare address it, so instead you pretend there’s a much bigger child abuse problem out there that’s more worthy of your time.
But there isn’t. Clergy have demonstrably sexually abused children, and their church organizations have covered it up.
So go ahead, keep protecting pedophiles and protecting your disconcert with it onto everything else. When you’re ready to value protecting kids over protecting religion, let us know.
I’m not religious. Nice try though. I hate pedophile priests too.
Great, so will you support legislation that suspends all Catholic Church events until they can be thoroughly audited? Churches in general, really.
go back to reddit
You seem to be under the impression that anyone gives a shit about your warped and disturbed world view. You keep telling others to go back to reddit but it’s much more your style. Maybe you should start there.
deleted by creator
Key words: straw man. Guessing almost zero drag shows happen in front of children
If I were to present you evidence of sexually explicit actions happening at a drag show in front of children would you change your mind?
It would be immaterial, because that is already illegal and can be enforced using existing laws without resorting to a broad ban of a particular kind of performance art.
Clarifications in law for grey areas are common. It’s very likely people will downplay any sexual activity, as has already happened.
deleted by creator
One time, no. Dozens of times, no I wouldn’t change my mind that it’s basically a non-issue, but I might believe that it’s something that actually happens amongst the hundreds of millions of people that exist in my country.
You can find one example of the most insanely uncommon shit ever and it won’t mean it’s worth talking about for more than 30 seconds per year
What if I found 5 examples? How many do I need before you’ll admit maybe I have a point?
If I can go my entire life and see a handful of articles about something happening, I do not think it’s some sort of menace to society. Probably because I don’t have a hatred of the people involved bubbling underneath every thought I have concerning the issue.
On January 6th alone I received 1000 times more proof I needed that Republicans are fucked up than decades have given me about trans people.
I am confident you’re not canvassing the web with attacks against Republicans
You clearly didn’t read. Can you?
What evidence threshold do I have to bypass in order for you to believe that it’s not “the most insanely uncommon shit ever”
So no. As a Republican, you are proud of your voluntary dyslexia
No. It wouldn’t. Because you’re a prude, and your definition of “sexually explicit actions” is almost certainly over-the-top pearl-clutching nonsense to me.
Would you say simulating jerking off in front of children is a “sexually explicit action”
I don’t give a fuck about your video of a drag performer in Essex pretending the microphone is a phallus. Prude elsewhere.
I know you don’t. You don’t care about children being exposed to sexually explicit things. Thanks for being honest about it. But understand that some people do give a fuck, and you should respect that. You don’t even have kids so you don’t really get a seat at this table.
ASSUMER. I am done talking the moment someone assumes something about me without any evidence.
deleted by creator
I’ll never understand authoritarians who can’t separate “that’s not something I’m interested in” and “that should be illegal”
Do you feel similarly about porn? Should children be able to access it?
You know they are accessing it, right? They have access to the internet.
Yeah and that’s not a good thing. It is still currently illegal to access porn as a minor. Not sure what kind of point you are making.
deleted by creator
Alcohol, R-rated movies, a driver’s license… Plenty of things aren’t suitable for children, so we don’t give them to children. Children shouldn’t be exposed to heterosexual erotica either. Do you want to ban that? Didn’t think so. How about, you know, take some personal responsibility as a parent for what your child should or should not see?
Exactly. Why haven’t we banned Hooters, Tilted Kilt, any strip club, any theatre that shows R rated movies. Gun clubs aren’t safe for children, and restaurants serve alcohol, which also isn’t appropriate for children. Attending church makes a child more likely to be assulted, but so does being near your own family, as well as strangers. Schools pose the risk of indoctrinating kids, but so does their unce Frank. Rainbows? Straight to jail. A Smiley Face? Jail. Any opinion not shared by their parents? Wouldn’t you know it, Jail.
Ban people from doing anything because anything has an effect on kids.
Political bullshit is all it is. Why is this an issue all of a sudden? Who cares? If you don’t want your children to see one, don’t go. Where are all these kids that are going to drag shows unsupervised or without parental permission?
deleted by creator
A man wearing a dress or makeup isn’t sexual. In republicans mind it is though wink wink
Maybe more than two sources exist for this? Since you bet your ass if it happened it makes headlines. Surely if it’s a concern you can name 10 times it happened?
In a world where the tiniest things can’t happen at school without parental consent, I have to conclude you’re a fucking lying piece of shit who is just outraged that trans people continue to exist.
Even native American tribes 1000+ years ago acknowledged trans people and guess what, they didn’t do every goddamned thing possible to coax them into suicide like your ilk is intent on doing. Fuck every person who can’t leave trans people alone. If you had a shred of decency you’d just shut the goddamned fuck up.
I’ll never understand the people that can’t differentiate the things parents have the right to decide for their children and the government having the power to decide for everyone and their children.
not too long ago people were able to do that, regardless of political bullshit.
Parents’ moral panic (especially from conservatives) has been going on for as long as it has been. I certainly remember growing up in the 90s hearing news about parental indignation on Mortal Kombat and South Park, and especially The Simpsons believe it or not.
deleted by creator
Do you find Hooters inappropriate for children too? Should we ban that or are boobies ok but men in costumes not?
deleted by creator
You mean, like a drag show? So, by your own logic, we shouldn’t ban drag shows.
deleted by creator
…but that isn’t happening anyway.
We also shouldn’t allow 1000 lb Kodiak brown bears or Taipan snakes in classrooms. We should start a large political movement that bans those things from school and also bans any mention of those things. Letting children draw bears and snakes is only allowing them to think bears and snakes are okay in school.
The Catholic Church has demonstrably shielded pedophiles from the law who abused children. Should we have laws against them traveling to schools?
Hell, there’s entire schools organized by the Catholic Church. How could you possibility trust them to not hide sexual abuse of students when they’ve already hidden sexual abuse before?
Henceforth, do you support a law that dismantles Catholic schools, or installs an FBI agent who can review any and all communications to ensure there are no cover ups?
If you do, more power to you. It seems that many others would balk at the idea of holding known pedophile protectors accountable.
Out of every person who does do this in the US, I’m willing to bet 99% of them at least pretend to their parents that they are a conservative Christian
Think of the children has 99 times in 100 been absolutely horseshit and not attached to anything real
Approriate things like getting shot at school, right?
deleted by creator
because guns are inappropriate for kids. but they have to live with them, and the fear of getting shot in school on a daily basis. but you sure wouldnt ban guns. or would you? those men in women clothes are way worse, arent they? even if the only one sexualising this is you. and people like you. kids sure dont.
deleted by creator
damn. stawman? how many kids get killed by drag queens? and you call other people ignorant? it would be funny, if it wasnt so sad. but better pop an adderal than kids at school.
non related? i thought you care for kids? but you seem to think guns dont pose a danger to kids in school every day. its just like i said. guns are no problem for you, even if kids, and all kind of innocent people, get shot nearly every day. you do not care for anybody at all. at least i think you dont. you just care about yourself while sexualising men in women clothes. grow up, buddy.
There’s a connection. Focus on that word “appropriate” and you might get it. Words like “appropriate” and “reasonable” are highly subjective and don’t belong in public policy.
If u don’t like it then don’t go to it.
You have no right to take it away from other people just because it makes your pp feel strange. Get over it.
Seriously what do you guys even get out of wasting your life with low effort troll posts on lemmy. Like do you actually not have frejnds or family you would rather spend your time on? Or hobbies? Or even just video games or looking at memes? Is it an extention seeking thing?
Cry harder.
Can the Federal judge tell them that the same thing drag shows are being accused of Churches are actively doing to kids and getting away with it?
At least try harder…
deleted by creator
I for one am fucking sick of hearing about this particular subject. Why is anyone talking about this?
deleted by creator
Are you child? If not, it doesn’t affect your rights, as this law applies to children.
Nah, maybe just that it is fuckall business of government and they should concentrate on real issues instead of poking their nose into what clothes people wear?
deleted by creator
Drag shows are not a real issue, no. You constantly engaging with it as if it is one is exactly what these fuckers want.
I don’t think you realize that if they ban people from wearing clothing counter to their biological sex on stage, it is quite easy to make that law apply offstage as well. This is a step towards making it illegal to be trans and yes, it is a real issue. Maybe you don’t care about trans people’s rights, but I sure as fuck do.
Maybe you don’t care about trans people’s rights, but I sure as fuck do.
He does. He prefers they have none.
Yes. That’s literally the issue being discussed here that you seem to think is “too boring”. You agree with the general sentiment here. Who are you mad at?
I’m mad that you all keep giving them traction by engaging with this toxic shit.
Everyone is well aware of their motivations, but keep falling for it anyway. This is a wedge issue.
“The only way to beat them is to just let them pass laws against people they dislike because otherwise, a lemmy user will get annoyed”.
Totally. It’s lemmy that’s giving these stories traction… my bad, I guess I didn’t realize the pull we had here 🙄
That is the small government republicans are advocating for to bring back “freedom”. Aka enslave poor people, protect richt criminals and tell people what they can and cannot wear. God forbid money being spent on education, healthcare or infrastructure.
i am not an expert on the subject but i would imagine it’s because it has implications for the safety and legal rights of trans people. if they’re able to pass laws banning drag queens, they might then start (incorrectly) claiming that trans people are drag queens and thus those laws apply to them.
Exactly this.
Step 1) Declare that all drag performances are sexually explicit and therefore shouldn’t be allowed near kids. This is false, of course. There are plenty of PG or G rated drag shows where nothing even remotely explicit happens, but they need this lie to be enshrined into law.
Step 2) Declare that trans people, by existing, are “performing drag in public.” Again, false, but this would mean that trans people wouldn’t be allowed to be dressed in their preferred gender anywhere there might be kids. Even simply walking through the grocery store would be declared “sexually explicit behavior in the presence of children” and could result in criminal charges.
The right will stop at nothing to enforce their radical Christian views on the country and they don’t care whose lives they ruin to do this.
Not even just trans people… you know the end game of this kind of shit is to go back to a time where women don’t wear pants (because they legally can’t).
They’re not banning drag queens, they’re banning sexually explicit drag shows for children. Drag shows are still 100% legal.
They think all drag queens are sexually explicit and will enforce the law accordingly. The laws are also nearly always written such that they affect any trans person simply being in public.
most drag queens are sexually explicit and I’m tired of pretending they’re not.
Which drag shows are you going to, exactly?
deleted by creator
The government shouldn’t be able to force people to dress in any way or not to dress in any way.
What? You realize public nudity is illegal right?
Depends on the jurisdiction. It’s not a universal law. Even in my state:
https://www.oregonlive.com/entertainment/2015/06/public_nudity_in_oregon.html
There is a difference between burlesque shows and drag shows. There is some overlap in the venn diagram, but not all drag queens are sexually explicit.
The real question to ask, is if they are SOOOO concerned about sexual performances, why aren’t they banning heteronormative burlesque performances?
Oh, right, because it’s not actually about being sexually explicit.
Read the bill. It explicitly says “sexually oriented performance”. And only in front of minors.
It specifically calls out drag shows. If you believe that all drag shows are inherently sexual, there wouldn’t be a need to say:
“(B)AAa male performer exhibiting as a female, or a female performer exhibiting as a male, who uses clothing, makeup, or other similar physical markers and who sings, lip syncs, dances, or otherwise performs before an audience; and (2)AAappeals to the prurient interest in sex.”
You keep hearing about the GOP vilifying and persecuting LGBTQ+ people because it’s against the supposed ideals of the country and the GOP keep doing it. If you want news about LGBTQ+ issues to stop, you need to make the GOP stop.
You are being distracted. Focus. You CAN eat your local representative. One bite at a time.
People don’t need to know what is in the chilli at the cookout.
Innocent people being villified, persecuted, attacked and oppressed isn’t just a “distraction”, it’s a serious problem that’s heading towards genocide.
We can chew bubble gum and walk at the same time, by which I mean deal with this AND their other fuckery.
It’s actually very simple. Don’t do sexually explicit shit around children. You are free to do it not in front of children and this law has no bearing on that.
Why are you defining drag shows as inherently sexually explicit? If a man wears a flowing dress with bloomers underneath, is it sexually explicit?
You know that’s not what drag shows are. I’ve been to 3 different ones (with a group of a friends, not on my own) and every single one had some serious sexual undertones. The default means of “tipping” was tucking dollar bills down the drag queen’s shirt, or simply tossing it at them like a stripper. They twerked with very revealing clothing on, etc. I wish you would just be honest about what drag shows actually consist of most of the time. Of course there are outliers but I think the history of drag shows clearly show demonstrate the inherent sexual nature of it all.
You went to three drag shows for adults. That’s not what it’s like when kids are there. Just like there are plays for adults and plays for kids or bands that play for adults and bands that play for kids. I saw They Might Be Giants in a bar after their children’s album No came out. They swore. A lot. You would go to that show and say they weren’t appropriate for children.
Ugh, this isn’t a fucking joke, this is people’s lives. You’re allowed to focus on more than one thing too, btw
Because your apathy doesn’t negate the attacks that marginalized people are facing.
I don’t know. You’re the one that clicked on the discussion thread. Seems silly to click a link for a discussion on a topic you’re bored of. Maybe just keep scrolling next time.
Because republicans keep violating the constitution and trying to marginalize anyone who isn’t white hetero Christian.
funny how people here suddenly care about the constitution when it comes to showing children sexually explicit material.
Then read something else.
deleted by creator
This was never a problem until Republicans tried to start banning it. So that’s why people are talking about it
Because keeping us fighting over this keeps us from going after billionaires.
We have a winner.
1A issues are important. I’m just sick of misleading or lying headlines.
You’re telling people to back down from fighting back against persecution? Looking like a target, bruh
deleted by creator
Because people like you keep trying to raise the suicide rate of an already alarming high rate among the group.
