a defense of drag show/drag queens..

[Flannel Jesus]

06i1rfjwvjua1.jpg

[promethean75]

LOL!

[Walker]

06i1rfjwvjua1.jpg

Official, Louis XVI acceptance of decadence in the King's court, makes decadence appropriate in the eyes of the law, at that time and that place, however folks under the rule of such selective appropriateness may rebel, sometimes violently as in the FR.

Slaughtering babies, i.e. abortion, is also appropriate under the laws of a decadent society that can't teach its children the appropriate ways to behave.

[Walker]

Who'll further the conversation?”

Selective appropriateness, which is the Rule of Man, is what the Left loves because there are thousands and thousands of rules, regulations, and laws on the books that can be selectively applied to their political and ideological enemies, for persecution purposes. Case in point: Trump.

Anyone charge him with spitting on the sidewalk, yet? Keep those phone cameras ready for the opportunity.

Now, the conversation is headed towards principles, and should go higher if folks behave appropriately, and I think we all know the folks we're talking about.

[Walker]

LOL!

You're an intelligent man. We expect more than boyish, evidence-challenged assertions based on beliefs only expressed as gibbering giggles.

[mickthinks]

You're an intelligent man. We expect more than getting bent out of shape and gibbering about how unfair it is when someone can't help laughing at you.

[promethean75]

"We expect more than boyish, evidence-challenged assertions based on beliefs only expressed as gibbering giggles."

Alls I'm sayin is bourgeois males back then had a lot of free time to play dress-up.

[iambiguous]

Who'll further the conversation?

Apparently: no one.

c'est la vie

I'm trying to henry...

I'm not saying that he should be arrested in an ontological/deontological sense. As though it actually could be established philosophically that such behavior is inherently, essentially, objectively immoral. And, as well, that all immoral behavior ought to be illegal.

I'm saying that if there is in fact a law against such behavior in the jurisdiction where the ladies' locker room exists, my own personal opinion, rooted existentially in dasein "here and now", is that I believe the women would be justified in having him arrested.

Whether he was in drag or not.

On the other hand, had my life been different for any number of reasons, I might have become that man myself.

Now, given human autonomy and going back to your God, let's get back to how you actually demonstrate beyond merely believing it "in your head" that drag queens are mentally ill.

From my frame of mind, it's not so much what undergirds, justifies or commends such laws but how, existentially, given the very different lives we lived, we came to think what we do about them. The part I root in dasein. And, given that, is there then a way for philosophers using the technical tools at their disposal, to assess, evaluate and judge such laws so as to apprise us of the most virtuous manner in which all reasonable men and women would be obligated to think about them?

Either from a God or a No God perspective.

Now, in my view, what you need to ask yourself is why you refuse to respond to the points I make above. Is it [perhaps] because my own emphasis here prompts you to explore not what you believe about drag queens but how existentially you came to believe one thing rather than another? Indeed, even you acknowledge that, yes, given access to new information and knowledge you may very well come to change your mind about them being mentally ill. You may well come to champion their right to dress in drag. As, given any new information you provide, I may change my mind and agree that they are mentally ill.

Address my points and let's dig deeper. Otherwise, I may just as well be back in the penalty box, right?

[henry quirk]

Why is inappropriateness a crime?”

Inappropriate actions can be crimes and all crimes are inappropriate actions, however not all inappropropriate actions are crimes.

For example, sex in public can be a crime, because public sex is inappropriate. However, under the right conditions sex is not inappropriate.

That's not an answer to the question.

[henry quirk]

You may well come to champion their right to dress in drag.

Well, champion is a little strong. Anyway, I've already acknowledged the freakish nutjobs, as each has an inalienable and natural right to his, and no other's life, liberty, and property, can each do whatever he likes with himself, from wearin' a sports bra under his three-piece clear thru to havin' his tallywhacker lopped off.

Seems like a square deal to me.

[Walker]

Why is inappropriateness a crime?”

Inappropriate actions can be crimes and all crimes are inappropriate actions, however not all inappropropriate actions are crimes.

For example, sex in public can be a crime, because public sex is inappropriate. However, under the right conditions sex is not inappropriate.

That's not an answer to the question.

It's a correction to the illogicality of your question, with the added bonus of an example to clarify the gist. To clarify the example of the way things are, as explained in the correction of your illogical question, is an added bonus.

[Walker]

"We expect more than boyish, evidence-challenged assertions based on beliefs only expressed as gibbering giggles."

Alls I'm sayin is bourgeois males back then had a lot of free time to play dress-up.

Folks dressed like the slob wearing the Trump shirt, in the topical link, are casino gravy. They pour through the doors of Versailles-rivaling casinos, like in this clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN32RTMJaJI

It’s getting’ so there aren’t many places where a man can dress sharp anymore and not look a dandy. Years ago I saw a fat slob boarding a plane and wearing foam rubber flip-flops, a dirty white undershirt, and gym shorts. At least he wasn’t wearing a wife-beater undershirt. He looked like he had just enough time to roll out of bed. I didn't board the same flight, so I didn't have to concern myself with the possibility that he was the pilot, and standards of appropriate dress had thus fallen so far.

[Peter Kropotkin]

"We expect more than boyish, evidence-challenged assertions based on beliefs only expressed as gibbering giggles."

Alls I'm sayin is bourgeois males back then had a lot of free time to play dress-up.

Folks dressed like the slob wearing the Trump shirt, in the topical link, are casino gravy. They pour through the doors of Versailles-rivaling casinos, like in this clip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN32RTMJaJI

It’s getting’ so there aren’t many places where a man can dress sharp anymore and not look a dandy. Years ago I saw a fat slob boarding a plane and wearing foam rubber flip-flops, a dirty white undershirt, and gym shorts. At least he wasn’t wearing a wife-beater undershirt. He looked like he had just enough time to roll out of bed. I didn't board the same flight, so I didn't have to concern myself with the possibility that he was the pilot, and standards of appropriate dress had thus fallen so far.

K: and how does the "standard of appropriate dress had thus fallen so far"?"
have any bearing on this question of the ''morality of cross-dressing?''

what if he were the pilot? does that any bearing on the quality of
his being a pilot? If a pilot can get me across the country without
crashing, I don't care what he/she looks like or how they dress..
all I care about is not crashing....

many years ago, I hurt my back and needed spinal surgery...
after some research, we pick a guy that was considered to
be the best spinal surgeon west of the Mississippi before we
met him... he had the single worst bedside manner of any
doctor I have ever met.. but given a choice between his truly
terrible communication skills, or being the best possible
surgeon for me.. I bit the bullet and took him as my surgeon...
and I didn't regret it...I am, relatively speaking, mobile and
functional...which is quite a feat given how bad my back was...
this surgeon could have been wearing a dress or a Mumu for
all care.. as long as he was a good surgeon...that is what matter...

Kropotkin

[Walker]

A technically-proficient medically trained scientist is preferable to an empathizer who's there to stroke egos. They've got nurses for that, amongst their other nurturing duties.

Keep in mind that the primary duty of the nurse is as advocate for the patient, and in this age of highly educated nurses the bold ones may even challenge doctors.

The primary duty for the doctor is to do no harm, through science.

[Walker]

You're an intelligent man. We expect more than getting bent out of shape and gibbering about how unfair it is when someone can't help laughing at you.

Easy there, fella. It's no big deal.