The law never mentions drag, but refers to performers as “male or female impersonators,”
Following that logic, cover bands are also illegal. Also, a fun loophole – 14th century Europe, men wore dresses and makeup. You’re not a drag queen, you’re a historical representation.
So long, Elvis impersonators
Pathetic. Drag is a political statement and social commentary. These idiots act like they’ve never heard of Milton Berle.
Did they seriously just ban people from wearing clothes and putting on makeup?
Will this extend to the performing arts?
Are they completely repressed or just depraved?
Are they completely repressed or just depraved?
Neither. They’re fascists with a cult that lacks empathy.
ban people from wearing clothes and putting on makeup
They’ll remove the right from the vulnerable group.
Will this extend to the performing arts?
Then, they’ll leverage the precedent to remove the right from everyone.
Arts that produce material goods can be best commodified. Arts as a service may inspire and educate or be leveraged as propaganda, which can be very bad for long term economic growth. (corrective edits)
edit: I’m a straight cis male. I’ve been to a few drag shows. My perceptions were that sex was ingrained into the performance no more or less than on TV, in no more or less crude way. Many of the jokes required sympathy, empathy, or a little thinking. Those are characters on stage, exaggerations of personality often found in comedy.
A drag show is the performing arts. The fact that it’s not for everyone is a clear indicator that it should be defended.
Art as a service can also spread propaganda. Something North Korea knows all too well, as did Nazi Germany.
Make no mistake, I do not want any restrictions on artists and I am a big believer in public arts funding, but I’m under no illusions that the right government can twist that sort of thing for their own use.
I entirely agree with you. After learning about the propaganda of Goebbels and how the concepts were applied to US mass media, the propaganda ingrained in everything is overwhelming.
Saturation is a core tactic, now empowered by communications technology. I’ve had to filter my intake heavily: no Facebook, no reddit, limited Lemmy, no video news, filter articles based on writing complexity, etc.
Seems we both favor trusting others. If I say Engineering of Consent and Manufacturing of Consent are core texts on propaganda then some will read. If I say Hamilton is a genius work of art then some will watch. Propaganda wears off over time. But, wisdom is forever.
I edited my comment above. The clarification you made needed to be there. Thank you.
I don’t think it was absolutely necessary since you already clarified in your reply, but it was probably a good idea anyway.
I sometimes need a couple drafts to accurately and responsibly adapt to an online audience. I mostly live and communicate in contrasted bubbles nearer some extremes.
Yes
Yes
Yes
As featured on Dropout, wrestling counts as drag.
There’s heavy makeup, glittery costumes, fake drama, and both are for entertainment.
Did TN just ban the WWE?
The vague nature of all these “morality” laws the GOP is passing all across the country is very intentional. Vague draconian laws create an environment in society where people will no longer do what is still legal, and likely a clear personal freedom constitutionally, because they fear the vague law will apply to that aspect of behavior. It’s like the fact that no one will do studies on gun violence because a law was passed that any ‘‘anti gun political study’’ will have all funding pulled, so it’s up to the discretion of the people enforcing the rule to decide what that means, no one is willing to risk funding just to find out. Effectively it prevents all gun studies, even thought it world likely be unconstitutional to fully ban gun studies.
This is why you see things like teachers fleeting Florida, the laws likely couldn’t be applied in most cases, but the teachers know they have a target on their back, and that the law could be used against them due to being vauge.
This is the intent, to create fear in people to stop going about their legally protected actions.
Not the Fifth Circuit for once.
Still, I’d like the judge to show us on the doll where the drag queen hurt them.
I’m their mind, they made it up.
Banning clothing and makeup is insane. Any judge who upholds such a thing should be removed by any means possible.
Someone should start a company selling dresses and makeup marketed specifically at men.
Next up.
Police!
Open up we have a search warrant!
We suspect you’re harboring copies of Mrs. Doubtfire!
I are goddamn right I do
How the fuck do you ban drag? People can dress however the fuck they want.
Things to note:
- The Court heard the case en panel. Only three judges heard the case. Plaintiff has asked the case to be reheard en banc, with all the judges present.
- The Court did not rule on merit. The ban was not ruled Constitutional. Instead the case was ruled on procedure in that Plaintiff had no standing.
- The 6th District is 6-10 Judges appointed by Democrats vs Judges appointed by Republicans. Of the ten Republican Judges, six are from Trump specifically.
- The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee case is still on-going. There the Judge has ruled a temporary injunction on the law.
If the case reaches the Supreme Court it’ll be “en mountebanc”
The idea of “standing” has never really sat right with me.
“Sure, the law seems pretty unconstitutional, but until it actually hurts someone, why should we fix it?”
Maybe because you have the power to fix a bad thing.
