The thread for Non Drag Queens charged with child sexual assault

[Susheel]

Originally Posted by Matthew Best

Like these people, presumably,, none of whom, as far as I know, are drag queens:

Trans woman jailed for sex with 14-year-old girl

Trans inmate who filmed sexual abuse of 7-year-old daughter

Transgender woman jailed for sexually abusing children

Norwich trans woman had indecent images of children

Very good, despite the fact that this was for non-drag queens. Any hoo, now substitute the perpetrators in those headlines with priest, PE coach, scoutmaster, or congressman...will there be a call to keep children away from them or even cancel them completely?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

I've tried to argue before that they are not drag queens because the cassock is by definition a garment that can only be worn by men.

The best argument that could be mustered against that was "if it looks like a frock and quacks like a frock...".

The argument you actually got was that a cassock is a form of dress.

And of course a woman priest or bishop can and do wear a cassock https://eclergys.com/anglican-cassock-for-women-purple/

Cassocks aren't like trousers which of course only men can wear!

[Matthew Best]

Originally Posted by Susheel

Very good, despite the fact that this was for non-drag queens.

I don't understand the proviso - these ARE all non-drag queens.

Quote:

Any hoo, now substitute the perpetrators in those headlines with priest, PE coach, scoutmaster, or congressman...will there be a call to keep children away from them or even cancel them completely?

Yes, of course. I would have thought that keeping children away from child sex offenders was a given.

[TurkeysGhost]

Massachusetts cops cloaking themselves in glory:

Quote:

Former Hopkinton Deputy Police Chief John Porter indicted on child rape charges

https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/...massachusetts/

Quote:

Three former Stoughton police officers had “inappropriate relations” with a woman they met through a department-run youth program when she was a teenager, according to a newly released internal affairs report. Investigators also found that one of the officers, Matthew Farwell, ended his relationship with the woman, Sandra Birchmore, shortly before she killed herself in 2021.

https://www.wgbh.org/news/local-news...fore-her-death

If you're worried about groomers you probably should be protesting the existence of your local police "explorers" club that puts high school kids in close, private contact with cops.

[Emily's Cat]

Honestly, at this point in my life, I'm highly skeptical of ANYTHING that puts children in close proximity to adults without the direct oversight of their parents. And I expect thorough and detailed background checks on any adults who are engaging with children, as well as swift and harsh action if any adult misbehaves in even the slightest manner, or if any of the content is even borderline inappropriate - it needs to be 100% unquestionably G-Rated material.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Honestly, at this point in my life, I'm highly skeptical of ANYTHING that puts children in close proximity to adults without the direct oversight of their parents. And I expect thorough and detailed background checks on any adults who are engaging with children, as well as swift and harsh action if any adult misbehaves in even the slightest manner, or if any of the content is even borderline inappropriate - it needs to be 100% unquestionably G-Rated material.

Ironically this description does not include drag queen story hours. The opportunity for a drag performer to jump off stage and assault a child in full view of parents and the rest of the audience is basically zero.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Honestly, at this point in my life, I'm highly skeptical of ANYTHING that puts children in close proximity to adults without the direct oversight of their parents. And I expect thorough and detailed background checks on any adults who are engaging with children, as well as swift and harsh action if any adult misbehaves in even the slightest manner, or if any of the content is even borderline inappropriate - it needs to be 100% unquestionably G-Rated material.

Completely nonsensical and unworkable standards are fun to pretend you're blessed by moral clarity but falls apart completely if you've ever actually worked with children. Never swear? Shut down every 'that's what she said' joke from the sixth graders instantly? Doesn't work. Grow up.

And of course what counts as 'G-rated' will never be agreed on. It will always be a source of disagreement both honest and bad-faith. Right now there are laws in force that presume the existence of non-hetersexual, non-cisgender, people are inherently not 'G-rated', and not suitable for students up to eighteen years old.

It isn't difficult to see how just zero-tolerance stances are weaponized by bigots and authoritarians.

EDIT: Frozen and Coco are PG for Hel's sake.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Darat

The argument you actually got was that a cassock is a form of dress.

And of course a woman priest or bishop can and do wear a cassock https://eclergys.com/anglican-cassock-for-women-purple/

Cassocks aren't like trousers which of course only men can wear!

Women can't be priests in the Catholic, sorry I mean Roman Catholic, church, which is what we were talking about.

[Susheel]

Originally Posted by Matthew Best

I don't understand the proviso - these ARE all non-drag queens.



Yes, of course. I would have thought that keeping children away from child sex offenders was a given.

However for the right-wing idiot sphere, Transgenders and Drag artists are one and the same. Also in the examples you provided, the fact that transgenders were perpetrators should also not be justification for painting all transgenders as child molesters.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

Women can't be priests in the Catholic, sorry I mean Roman Catholic, church, which is what we were talking about.

We were talking about cassocks.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Honestly, at this point in my life, I'm highly skeptical of ANYTHING that puts children in close proximity to adults without the direct oversight of their parents. And I expect thorough and detailed background checks on any adults who are engaging with children, as well as swift and harsh action if any adult misbehaves in even the slightest manner, or if any of the content is even borderline inappropriate - it needs to be 100% unquestionably G-Rated material.

Is this only for shows featuring drag performers?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Completely nonsensical and unworkable standards are fun to pretend you're blessed by moral clarity but falls apart completely if you've ever actually worked with children. Never swear? Shut down every 'that's what she said' joke from the sixth graders instantly? Doesn't work. Grow up.

And of course what counts as 'G-rated' will never be agreed on. It will always be a source of disagreement both honest and bad-faith. Right now there are laws in force that presume the existence of non-hetersexual, non-cisgender, people are inherently not 'G-rated', and not suitable for students up to eighteen years old.

It isn't difficult to see how just zero-tolerance stances are weaponized by bigots and authoritarians.

EDIT: Frozen and Coco are PG for Hel's sake.

It also seems that when a drag performer is even part of a show or event the right-wing wants to reverse their usual refrain of parents making the decisions for what their kids see, hear even learn and not the state.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

Ironically this description does not include drag queen story hours. The opportunity for a drag performer to jump off stage and assault a child in full view of parents and the rest of the audience is basically zero.

That would be a very good point to make in a thread that was about drag queens, wouldn't it? Rather than one that specifies Non Drag Queen child sexual assaults?

[Matthew Best]

Originally Posted by Susheel

However for the right-wing idiot sphere, Transgenders and Drag artists are one and the same.

If you're a right wing idiot and were confused, I apologise.

Quote:

Also in the examples you provided, the fact that transgenders were perpetrators should also not be justification for painting all transgenders as child molesters.

Let me know if anyone in this thread does that.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Completely nonsensical and unworkable standards are fun to pretend you're blessed by moral clarity but falls apart completely if you've ever actually worked with children. Never swear? Shut down every 'that's what she said' joke from the sixth graders instantly? Doesn't work. Grow up.

Well, yes, your interpretation here IS completely nonsensical.

ADULTS should be completely capable of not swearing when interacting with children, regardless of what the children do. ADULTS should be completely capable of not making "that's what they said" jokes in front of children.

ADULTS should be capable of behaving in a fashion appropriate for young children. And that doesn't seem like it's too much to ask.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Darat

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Honestly, at this point in my life, I'm highly skeptical of ANYTHING that puts children in close proximity to adults without the direct oversight of their parents. And I expect thorough and detailed background checks on any adults who are engaging with children, as well as swift and harsh action if any adult misbehaves in even the slightest manner, or if any of the content is even borderline inappropriate - it needs to be 100% unquestionably G-Rated material.

Is this only for shows featuring drag performers?

FFS, no! It's right there in my post that you are responding to! At least do me the courtesy of ACTUALLY READING what I post before you go off into la-la-land with your "witty" retorts.

Also... thread title... NON DRAG QUEENS.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

That would be a very good point to make in a thread that was about drag queens, wouldn't it? Rather than one that specifies Non Drag Queen child sexual assaults?

This thread is about drag queens. It's about how the bad faith actors like TERFs and right wing reactionaries (but I repeat myself) smearing queer people as crytpo-pedophiles are actually doing a tremendous disservice to the real examples and causes of child predation.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Well, yes, your interpretation here IS completely nonsensical.

ADULTS should be completely capable of not swearing when interacting with children, regardless of what the children do. ADULTS should be completely capable of not making "that's what they said" jokes in front of children.

ADULTS should be capable of behaving in a fashion appropriate for young children. And that doesn't seem like it's too much to ask.

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Completely nonsensical and unworkable standards are fun to pretend you're blessed by moral clarity but falls apart completely if you've ever actually worked with children. Never swear? Shut down every 'that's what she said' joke from the sixth graders instantly? Doesn't work. Grow up.

And of course what counts as 'G-rated' will never be agreed on. It will always be a source of disagreement both honest and bad-faith. Right now there are laws in force that presume the existence of non-hetersexual, non-cisgender, people are inherently not 'G-rated', and not suitable for students up to eighteen years old.

It isn't difficult to see how just zero-tolerance stances are weaponized by bigots and authoritarians.

EDIT: Frozen and Coco are PG for Hel's sake.

There really isn't anything more needed to rebut your argument than just repeat what I said. Your 'swift and harsh action' for adults who swear (which words count?) around kids and 'everything must be G rated' (who decides that? Being non-straight or non-cisgender is already right out the window but how about miscegenation?) is nonsense moral posturing of no real help.

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Darat

We were talking about cassocks.

Specifically, I was responding to this:

Originally Posted by Parsman

Do we count Catholic priests as drag queens because they dress up in frocks? That might affect the list quite a bit.

ETA: I was also assuming that Parsman was referring to Roman Catholic priests.

[dann]

Bolivia:

Quote:

The head of State emphasized on Tuesday night that “all the instances called by law must investigate and severely punish the criminal acts against our children, with the full weight of the law”.

The reference of the president to this matter is related to the scandal uncovered on April 30 when the Spanish newspaper El País published an investigation on the Jesuit Alfonso Pedrajas (alias Pica).

This priest revealed in a newspaper that he abused at least 85 children and adolescents in vulnerable situations, most of them in Bolivia, and that he was covered up by other members of the Society of Jesus.
Bolivian President demands justice against pedophile priests (Prensa Latina, May 10, 2023)

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Honestly, at this point in my life, I'm highly skeptical of ANYTHING that puts children in close proximity to adults without the direct oversight of their parents. And I expect thorough and detailed background checks on any adults who are engaging with children, as well as swift and harsh action if any adult misbehaves in even the slightest manner, or if any of the content is even borderline inappropriate - it needs to be 100% unquestionably G-Rated material.

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Great- I'll just go ahead and note your support for adults using profanity and engaging in sexualized behavior around children without the supervision or consent of their parents.

What could possibly go wrong?

Honestly, if it's so incredibly hard for you to manage to not use profanity, not talk about sexual activity, and not engage in lewd or suggestive behaviors around children... then you should not be allowed around children. Full stop. You can get on your high horse about "nonsense moral posturing" all you want, but at the end of the day, if you are unable to behave appropriately around kids - and to expect appropriate behavior around children - then you are one gigantic red flag.

You have zero idea how to protect children. Full stop.

But that isn't your motivation anyway. You want to dictate what who is 'even borderline inappropriate'. This isn't hidden by moving the goalpost from 'misbehaves even in the slightest manner' to 'engaging in sexualized behavior'. What is 'sexualized behavior'? Being gay? Trans? Having a spouse of a different race? Any dancing of any kind? What swear words are swear words? Pissed? Allah? Who gets to define what '100% unquestionably G-Rated'? The most constrained definitions that would mean you couldn't teach about the mistreatment of black or native Americans? How about the names of body parts? That no one should touch those body parts without their consent? Doesn't sound 100% G rated does it? These are the points you don't want to engage in because then it becomes obvious your concern isn't about protecting children as much as it is using that as cover for social control.

The most annoying thing is that what you demand isolates kids with a self-selecting group of only superficially trustworthy people. You're describing priests and Boyscout leaders! What could go wrong? At least the priest would never let a swear out around kids!

I'm not arguing for having people who constantly swear and talk about lewd stuff around kids; I'm arguing against your nonsense absolutism and zero tolerance historically used to attack marginalized groups, keep children ignorant of history and danger, and actually makes things easier for child predators. It isn't even good security theater. The false sense of security doesn't keep the bad element out at all and allows parents to take fewer useful precautions.

The school board strongly disagrees with me being 'one giant red flag' by the way. Even if I have sometimes said 'crap' around the students.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

You have zero idea how to protect children. Full stop.

But that isn't your motivation anyway. You want to dictate what who is 'even borderline inappropriate'. This isn't hidden by moving the goalpost from 'misbehaves even in the slightest manner' to 'engaging in sexualized behavior'. What is 'sexualized behavior'? Being gay? Trans? Having a spouse of a different race? Any dancing of any kind? What swear words are swear words? Pissed? Allah? Who gets to define what '100% unquestionably G-Rated'? The most constrained definitions that would mean you couldn't teach about the mistreatment of black or native Americans? How about the names of body parts? That no one should touch those body parts without their consent? Doesn't sound 100% G rated does it? These are the points you don't want to engage in because then it becomes obvious your concern isn't about protecting children as much as it is using that as cover for social control.

The most annoying thing is that what you demand isolates kids with a self-selecting group of only superficially trustworthy people. You're describing priests and Boyscout leaders! What could go wrong? At least the priest would never let a swear out around kids!

I'm not arguing for having people who constantly swear and talk about lewd stuff around kids; I'm arguing against your nonsense absolutism and zero tolerance historically used to attack marginalized groups, keep children ignorant of history and danger, and actually makes things easier for child predators. It isn't even good security theater. The false sense of security doesn't keep the bad element out at all and allows parents to take fewer useful precautions.

The school board strongly disagrees with me being 'one giant red flag' by the way. Even if I have sometimes said 'crap' around the students.

Please stop telling me what you think I "really mean" and what I "really want". You're wrong. There's really nothing more to it than that. You can't see past your own beliefs and your own biases. Stop projecting your windmills on me, Quixote.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Please stop telling me what you think I "really mean" and what I "really want". You're wrong. There's really nothing more to it than that. You can't see past your own beliefs and your own biases. Stop projecting your windmills on me, Quixote.

Yup, you're not interested in dealing with the real issues, and it isn't my fault for noticing. Instead of dealing with the flaws of your own suggestion, you say others are lewd red flags wanting to be sexual around children.

But I'm sure all those 100% G rated Boyscout leaders will be safe for the kids.

[jimbob]

I have split 27 posts from this thread into AAH - it is clear from the title and the OP that to anyone with a rudimentary idea about sarcasm that this thread is comparing the relative risks to children from drag queens compared to non-drag queens.

Responding to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By:jimbob

[dann]

Originally Posted by Susheel

Very good, despite the fact that this was for non-drag queens. Any hoo, now substitute the perpetrators in those headlines with priest, PE coach, scoutmaster, or congressman...will there be a call to keep children away from them or even cancel them completely?

No, not even if there's a 'pedophile epidemic'!

Quote:

The Abused in Scouting lawyers say they've identified 350 predator scoutmasters and represent 800 victims.
(...)
“BSA knew for decades that sexual predators of boys had infiltrated scouting,” the complaint states.
(...)
Most of the victims are from Texas, where the BSA is based, and states like Florida and North Carolina.
(...)
Even more troubling, Kosnoff said, just four of the 800 victims “identify the same abuser.”
“Everybody else is identifying another abuser,” he said.
As for predator scoutmasters, “they’re all over the country” and from a variety of professions, Eisenberg said.
Asked if any of the alleged scout abusers are still involved in scouting, Kosnoff said: “We asked the BSA to help us identify these perpetrators. We’ve hit a stone wall with the Boy Scouts.”
Boy Scouts of America have a 'pedophile epidemic' and are hiding hundreds in its ranks, lawyers claim (NBC News, Aug 8, 2019)

USA: The Paedophile Scandal Among the Boy Scouts I ARTE Documentary (Arte on YouTube, May 12, 2021)

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

I don't know if this was the former president's attempt to address the problem:
Trevor Noah Rails Against Trump for Regaling Boy Scouts with Tales of ‘Yacht Sex’ (TheDailyBeast, July 26, 2017)
The Time Trump Told Boy Scouts About Sexy Yacht Parties (NYMag, Dec 15, 2020)

President Donald Trump's Entire Speech To The Boy Scouts Of America (Full) (NBC on YouTube, July 25, 2017)

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Bogative]

Jacoby was a special education teacher, according to the school's website.

The student was a special-needs individual, the two-year ordeal started when the student was a freshman.

[Bogative]

A former Delaware teacher was arrested for allegedly having a sexual relationship with a student nine years ago.

The relationship lasted 2 months.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Bogative

Jacoby was a special education teacher, according to the school's website.



The student was a special-needs individual, the two-year ordeal started when the student was a freshman.

Out of curiousity because freshman means nothing outside the USA what was the kid's age?

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Darat

Out of curiousity because freshman means nothing outside the USA what was the kid's age?

About fifteen.

Registered Child Sex Offender Continued to Minister to Chi Alpha Students, but don't worry, the 'spiritual guru' was purposefully (performatively) 100% G rated in public because that's what people who want to be predators of children do in order to hide. It's insane that it still works even after being convicted of it.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Honestly, at this point in my life, I'm highly skeptical of ANYTHING that puts children in close proximity to adults without the direct oversight of their parents. And I expect thorough and detailed background checks on any adults who are engaging with children, as well as swift and harsh action if any adult misbehaves in even the slightest manner, or if any of the content is even borderline inappropriate - it needs to be 100% unquestionably G-Rated material.

Okay, children do need to be around adults not under the supervision of their parents. Children need to be exposed to adults with different leadership and teaching styles. They learn important skills about how to get along with various types of authority and how different people employ it. Being around other adults lets them test the waters of interacting with others on their own in a kind learning environment.

There are safe ways to do this. It starts with vetting and then having a plan and a system that assumes vetting didn't work.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Honestly, at this point in my life, I'm highly skeptical of ANYTHING that puts children in close proximity to adults without the direct oversight of their parents. And I expect thorough and detailed background checks on any adults who are engaging with children, as well as swift and harsh action if any adult misbehaves in even the slightest manner, or if any of the content is even borderline inappropriate - it needs to be 100% unquestionably G-Rated material.

Why the exception for the parents, as we know most abuse is carried out by the
close family or family friends.

[Bogative]

Homestead P.E. Teacher Accused of Sex With Student Facing New Assault Charges.

Joseph Edward Tolliver was arrested earlier this year on a charge of lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 to 16 years old, an arrest report said.

The female student was 12 years old.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Craig4

Okay, children do need to be around adults not under the supervision of their parents. Children need to be exposed to adults with different leadership and teaching styles. They learn important skills about how to get along with various types of authority and how different people employ it. Being around other adults lets them test the waters of interacting with others on their own in a kind learning environment.

There are safe ways to do this. It starts with vetting and then having a plan and a system that assumes vetting didn't work.

That would be the second sentence in my post that you quoted.

[shemp]

Meanwhile:

Ohio Catholic priest convicted of sex trafficking, abusing churchgoing minors into adulthood

Quote:

TOLEDO — A Catholic priest in Ohio was convicted Friday on five counts of sex trafficking charges related to three victims, two of whom were minors when first sexually abused.

Michael Zacharias, 53, of Findlay, was charged with coercion and enticement, sex trafficking of a minor, and sex trafficking of an adult by force, fraud, or coercion, News Center 7 previously reported.

Zacharias was arrested without incident at his home in Findlay by members of the Northwest Ohio Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force. Zacharias, the pastor at St. Michael the Archangel parish in Findlay, was then placed on administrative leave due to his arrest.

A trial went underway that presented evidence of Zacharias paying victims to engage in sex acts with him, using the victims’ fear of serious harm to compel their compliance. The evidence showed Zacharias first meeting his victims when they were young boys, and he was a Seminarian at St. Catherine’s Catholic Parish school in Toledo, Ohio.

As far as we know, he was an upstanding citizen, and not at all a filthy drag queen! But if anyone finds evidence that he was a drag queen, please feel free to report this post as off-topic.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Craig4

Okay, children do need to be around adults not under the supervision of their parents. Children need to be exposed to adults with different leadership and teaching styles. They learn important skills about how to get along with various types of authority and how different people employ it. Being around other adults lets them test the waters of interacting with others on their own in a kind learning environment.

There are safe ways to do this. It starts with vetting and then having a plan and a system that assumes vetting didn't work.

Seems like an important step to safe guarding children is early, age appropriate sex education so that kids have some ability to identify potentially inappropriate behavior from adults.

Ironically, reactionaries that are crowing about the "groomer" panic are often quite opposed to teaching sex education to children.

[tyr_13]

While they aren't all child assaults, we could just link to r/notadragqueen and call it a day/month/year.

[Bogative]

Quote:

An Austin teacher was arrested and is facing multiple charges after he allegedly had an inappropriate relationship with a student, according to an Austin Police arrest affidavit.

Victim is a 16-year-old female.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by TurkeysGhost

This thread is about drag queens. It's about how the bad faith actors like TERFs and right wing reactionaries (but I repeat myself) smearing queer people as crytpo-pedophiles are actually doing a tremendous disservice to the real examples and causes of child predation.

Are you happy that this reads as all TERFS are bad faith actors?

[Samson]

I think I am too slow witted to understand the thread topic, but the first 9 minutes of this Megyn Kelley (yes unspeakable I know) is pretty disturbing.

https://youtu.be/51wAdkZEUC8

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Samson

Are you happy that this reads as all TERFS are bad faith actors?

I have no idea about the inner rationalization of TERFs. Whether they are cynically allying with fascists or actually find themselves more or less aligned with their beliefs is a distinction that is entirely academic.