How “Let kids be kids” (instead of sex objects) became a controversial advocacy

“It’s not about homosexuality or heterosexuality. Stop promoting SEXUALITY to our children PERIOD. Let kids be kids.”

^The above text has been shared on facebook by over 14 thousand people over the past 2 days, mostly, I think, because it highlights the inherent absurdity in a practice that is all too commonly celebrated regarding the advocacy and glorification of children being sexually conditioned.

On it’s face, most people would say that’s a bad thing, but if you put it in the context of a pageant where a little girl is wearing bold eye liner, spandex showing lots of leg and upper chest, a big poofy haired wig, and is gyrating wildly for the amusement of a crowd of adults – suddenly for some reason a segment of adults advocate it as adorable and awesome. Likewise, if you put a male child in the same context of a “drag queen” show, where a little boy is wearing bold eye liner, spandex showing lots of leg and upper chest, a big poofy haired wig, and is gyrating wildly for the amusement of a crowd of adults – suddenly for some reason a segment of adults advocate it as empowering and awesome. These people who justify sexualizing kids for their own ideas of what qualifies as entertainment are worth exploring in contrast to the thesis of the meme above.

Recent controversies about touring editions of the “Drag Queen Story Hour”, where the highly sexualized art of males appropriating caricature characteristics of females and feminine sexual allure is performed while reading gender-fluid stories to kids at public library events as part of a larger discussion with the kids promoting growing up to be a gender fluid sex figure themselves, has provoked ire among parents who don’t want their young children socialized into sexual matters while emboldening other parents who are thirsty to virtue signal how open minded and gender-identity-inclusive they are by endorsing and attending the events.

Drag Queen Story Hour

This is an easy issue to rectify by just taking out the sex aspects of burlesque and prostitution signaling that is a part of drag and just make it a fun costume event where the man dressed as a woman isn’t trying so hard to evangelize gender fluidity but instead just exposes kids whom, with their parents encouragement, to the reality that performance and fun is not limited to traditional gender roles and that pretending to be a girl when you are a boy is a thing that exists, whether it appeals to you or not. There will still be parents who find it distasteful and offensive and the parents who have issues wrapped up in traditional societal staples can still fight-the-patriarchy or whatever by putting their kids in the non-sexual reading event without subjecting themselves to legitimate criticism. The fix is so easy in fact, that it begs the question of why these people are so eager to sexually propagandize little kids in the first place…

Then there’s the actual exploitation of a child combined with the sexual propaganda such as the case of a similar recent controversy regarding the use of children as sex objects for the ghoulish pleasure of adults is with the child drag kid known as Desmond Is Amazing. He’s an 11 year old with a spunky personality who likes to feel pretty and sexy dressing up as an adult woman and dancing for adoring crowds – which is a thing thats gonna happen from time to time and isn’t the worst thing a kid could be into, but the public showcasing of him as a sex object is the part that’s drawing criticism.

As LGBTQ+ activists excitedly promote the tenacity they see in many of themselves within young Desmond and view opposition to his drag performances as nothing but unreasonable homophobic small mindedness from haters of any person living outside the conformities of traditional sexual identity roles – this misses the mark entirely as Desmond isn’t opposed personally, it’s his suggestive and burlesque style stripper shows that are being glorified that people are outraged over. It would be one thing if a bunch of nosey haters heard about a childs drag show to friends and family and made it a national spotlight to campaign against but the reality is sort of the opposite: Desmonds Instagram (which a person is supposed to be over 13 years old in order to have, but there is no age verification process on instagram) promoted to his over 100,000 followers a performance he would be making at a Brooklyn gay bar where he did a stripper style dance in a crop top, blond wig, and full face of makeup collecting, also in stripper style, cash tips from the adult men in the audience. (video of another rendition of the same performance)

Desmond Is Amazing at 3 Dollar Bill in Brooklyn. Source: Instagram

While Yelp reviewers were disturbed by the show – no men were reported to have touched the child or shoved the money into his pants like regular-stripper performances – and he was wearing pants (not booty shorts or underwear or anything like that), so there wasn’t any actual abuse – just the simulated sexual portrayal of an 11 year old (or, it was last year, so some sources say he was 10 at the time) but these defense points don’t really go anywhere on a road to justifying it or do really anything at all to the folks who are more inclined to look at something like this and conclude that “Desmond needs saving“.

And while sexualizing a 10 year old girl in tight clothes and makeup for a dance performance at a bar where adults throw money at her wouldn’t be viewed favorably by public consensus and the same for a 10 year old boy doing the same thing – the loophole that is making people endorse Desmond is that he is a gay 10 year old boy dressing up as a girl to dance for an audience of adult men who throw money at him… This sort of performance sure is … different, that’s for certain, and differences from the expected and weird flamboyant boundary pushing performances are a thing that free societies tolerate without much backlash, but when it gets to the point of making highly publicized events out of strip-simulating 10 year olds, it becomes hard to advocate the “push societies arbitrary standards” meme and clouds any legitimate celebration that could be going to a spunky sassy young kid chasing his dream with overwhelming suspicions of why the hell would the adults facilitating and promoting him do it *this* way…

This divide about the way different groups view the sexualization of children adds an unnecessary complication to LGBTQ+ advocacy…

In June 2017, The Advocate, a major LGBT advocacy website and magazine, celebrated Lactacia. The boy has become a celebrity in the LGBT world. Hilton believed he was promoting and celebrating a young boy he considers inspiring to his identity group.

The LGBT world often struggles to separate its sexually explicit culture from its advocacy for equality and rights. In many ways they are incapable of understanding why the outside world would be appalled by explicitly sexual public displays. For them it must be out of malice, hatred, or ignorance rather than reasonable aversion.

Gay pride parades have long been extreme public displays of every form of sexual deviancy imaginable. Gay liberals see no distinction between their sexual selves and their everyday selves. They celebrate the merger of the two as identity and culture

The consequence here is that Hilton and the LGBT world will never be able to fully appreciate the damage being done to a generation of children pushed to grow up faster. The LGBT Left’s intense focus on labeling then exploiting LGBT children holds incredible risk and threatens their futures. Early sexual activity and expression can be devastating to young people, especially LGBT youth. High rates of drug abuse, sexual abuse, and risky sexual behavior are commonHIV rates are extremely high for gay and bisexual young men aged 13 to 24. Nearly 40 percent of homeless youth identify as LGBT, with higher risks of drug use and sex work.

While the LGBT world may not be intentionally trying to harm children or put them at risk, it is time leaders of the movement fully recognize the dangers of using young children to validate their sexual politics. To help further this discussion, we must be careful not to abuse the term “pedophile.” Overuse will diminish the impact of our message and make it more difficult to fight the legitimate scourge of child sexual abuse rampant around the world.

What we must do is call out the dangers of sexualizing children too early, making them vulnerable to people who do wish to exploit and abuse them. LGBT advocacy groups have a responsibility to recognize that every form of sexuality and gender identity can be freely enjoyed by adults in private, but should never involve children regardless of the context or motivation. While they intend to celebrate the uniqueness of the child, they in effect steal the child’s innocence and impose an adult identity onto him, all to validate their own insecurities. We cannot stay quiet and allow more children to lose their childhood to the dreams of progressives who only imagine the future while failing to grasp the trauma they impose in the present.

It all just comes back to the point: heterosexual or homosexual – how bout we just, like, *don’t* sexualize children?…

On the heterosexual cisgender side of child sexploitation that people rationalize into celebrating: while not in recent controversies that are in the news, the people who agree with this “don’t sexualize children” meme would most definitely agree that just as horrifying as the gay and gender-fluid child sexualization examples above are to them, that the “Toddlers in Tiaras” style pageants and competitions are equally horrible mistreatments of children. If you’re unfamiliar with those sorts of things, they do the same as the kids-in-drag style stuff, just with genetic female children instead of genetic-male children dressing like sex doll females.

Cheerleading camps and competitions and dance performances for kids under 12 that feature the same sort of cartoon-whore style makeup and costumes that feature short skirts, booty shorts, and plunging necklines – all things that only exist for the purpose of being visually sexually enticing – on the body of a prepubescent child are just as creepy and wrong to these people. And since “these people” are “most people” – again – why is this a thing that is condoned in any context or any gender?…

That’s probably why the meme above is going around. Repeat:

“It’s not about homosexuality or heterosexuality. Stop promoting SEXUALITY to our children PERIOD. Let kids be kids.”

Men like women who use “guy humor”

Time covers this story, saying “What do guys want? Themselves, apparently.”

Um. “Apparently”? Try “obviously”, ya big dopes. Me with boobs = perf. But Time goes on:

Or at least someone who has an identical sense of humor. According to a study of 331,138 eHarmony male users, the style of humor that men most appreciate from a woman is “sarcastic,” followed by “juvenile”, “geeky” or “raw.” (eHarmony defines those last three as “guy humor.”) While all of these terms are frustratingly vague, we can’t help but feel that they are describing our little brother. And somehow that’s sexy?


Here is the eHarmony info:

Spousal abuse is funny when the dude is the victim

I like how Chris Brown beats Rihanna over cheating allegations and he’s a monster but Tiger’s wife beats him over cheating allegations and she’s a strong independent woman standing up for herself.

SNL did a “my wife is beating the shit out of me, oh no’z” skit which is featured below, and yet is not as humorous as the fact that this weeks musical guest was in fact… Rihanna….

UPDATE: I just saw that the director of the National Council Against Domestic Violence told TMZ she’s “horrified” by the skit.

Males are visually stimulated. Females, NotSoMuch

Women have hard times with generalizations (things that are generally) for some reason (this sentence is an example) so before anyone thinks the title is inaccurate because they get lady-boners all the time over big muscles – stop right there because you’re 2 layers of wrong already. Female visual stimulation is not non-existant – it just has so much less than 1% resemblance

I’m super tired of explaining this to you people as I have been for years. Luckily, best-selling author and nationally syndicated radio talk show host Dennis Prager is undertaking exactly this specific issue in one of his Prager University videos on male/female differences. The male preoccupation with the visual is the first topic raised and it is one that every female needs to learn. NEEDS. The domino effect of other realizations and understandings this knowledge will afford a female brain cannot be understated.

One of the services the video does is it reiterates a point I have been trying to cram into dumb girls dense skulls since 8th grade: What you think is “looking pretty” is in fact, to a guy, “advertising your sex”. When you wear short, low cut, tight things, no male is looking at you and thinking “gosh, she sure is pretty and/or has a great sense of color and style” more than he thinks “gosh, that sure is an artistically looking cut of beef” when he see’s a thick medium-rare Ribeye being sliced on a commercial for Outback Steakhouse. Dennis says this effect on men is impossible for women to understand. He’s probably right. But it is important for a ladies healthy development that she try her damnedest. It will make her more prudent, more happy and be a better wife or girlfriend.

He also briefly mentions strip clubs vs male strip clubs, which is the biggest “duh” ever, that it shows how illogical a females thinking is when I hear the two compared as if they were equal. Please… Male strip clubs are for gay guys and bachelorette party jokes. It’s hilarious for young women to see men strip for their entertainment and its mentally satisfying for middle aged (and older) women to see the younger men that used to be chasing them strip – neither goes out with the girls to see dudes dance as a turn-on and no female goes to these places alone because, like i said, its a gag. It’s the reason Girls Gone Wild is a billion dollar industry and Guys Gone Wild is a one-tape humor-based parody. Open your eyes people… The only reason anyone is dumb enough to equate male and female sexual nature is that college professors are dumb enough to believe it, and America has a hard time understanding how educated people can believe stupidly obvious untruths.

Prager has many more of these 5 minute condensed semesters over at PragerU.com

Letterman affair illustrates male/female difference

Men and Women alike often have a hard time understanding that females are not visually stimulated, sexually. I blame this mostly on the brainwash of college and culture that lies to kids and tells them there are no differences between the sexes and teaches them a black-and-white idiotic philosophy against generalizations (things that are generally true).

The David Letterman “I know you had sex with employee’s” blackmail attempt illustrates this as one of the girls, a former intern named
Holly Hester comes forward about her affair with the Late Nite host.

David Letterman is hot

“I was madly in love with him at the time,” said Hester. “I would have married him. He was hilarious.” It all started in 1990 when Letterman asked her out on a date to see a movie and the secret romance (/affair? he’s been with the mother of his child since 1989. no word on if they had gone on a “break” the year of 1990), until the funnyman called it off because of their age difference (chicks half your age are only good for one thing, and that thing isn’t “long term relationship that ends in marriage”).

So she was “madly in love” with him… because “he was hilarious”… Can you imagine for a second a man saying that about a woman? of course not, Captain Rhetorical. Not in a comparable circumstance (obviously). If the woman is Sarah Silverman, then that’s not quite the same as a 62 year old David Letterman, now is it.