Commentary: The Concerns Over Drag Queen Story Hour
In recent years, Canadians have shown a willingness to support the rights of individuals who identify as “trans,” “non-binary,” or “queer.” These demands for rights and entitlements, even when encroaching on women’s rights, are backed by the government and mainstream media. They have permeated all aspects of our society, from culture to therapy to social institutions. However, amidst this widespread acceptance, there is a growing resistance among citizens when it comes to K-12 education. This resistance is primarily focused on Queer Theory, a gendered form of Marxism that challenges societal norms surrounding sexuality and questions the idea of childhood innocence.
One particular aspect of this resistance is centered around Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH), an event that has sparked concern among parents. A video clip of Pride marchers chanting “We’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children” went viral, causing outrage and prompting LGBTQ advocates to claim that the words were taken out of context. However, many question what acceptable context could possibly justify teaching children provocative dance moves and simulating sexual acts.
A majority of Canadians now feel that this sexualized messaging to young children is going too far. They no longer see DQSH as family-friendly entertainment but rather as a form of grooming. Parents argue that these events are not simply about teaching diversity but about building trust in men with an agenda that goes well beyond that concept. Protests against events like a four-day drag theater camp in B.C. have gained momentum as concerned citizens speak out against what they see as dangerous influences on their children.
However, some progressive journalists are quick to dismiss this opposition, labeling the use of the word “groomer” as homophobic. They argue that it harkens back to the vilification of the LGBTQ2+ community in the past. While it is true that a subset of gays was indeed vilified in the 1970s and 1980s, a little research would show that there were advocates at the time who sought to normalize pedophilia. The Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) in Scotland, for example, actively campaigned for the abrogation of the age of sexual consent. They were linked to gay rights activism and openly lobbied for the normalization of pedophilia. Similarly, the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) attracted support from prominent gays, including beat poet Allen Ginsberg, and was affiliated with the International Lesbian and Gay Association until 1994.
While it is important to note that these organizations do not represent the entire LGBTQ community, their association with pedophilia has tainted the reputation of the broader community. Ordinary people may not be able to distinguish between those advocating for pedophilia and the larger LGBTQ population, leading to further fears and concerns.
Under the umbrella of Queer Theory, children are now exposed to explicit content and sexual themes, often without the consent of their parents. This exposure is justified as education on gender diversity and inclusion, but some argue that it crosses boundaries of traditional sexual morality and decency. Drag queens, who are touted as symbols of acceptance, have been found to have ties to sex offenders, exacerbating worries among parents.
It is worth noting that not all members of the LGBTQ community support or condone these actions. Many rational gays and lesbians are distancing themselves from Queer Theory, feeling that it tarnishes their hard-earned reputation as unthreatening individuals. Organizations such as “Gays Against Groomers” have formed to counter the damage caused by this ideology.
In a recent paper published in the journal Curriculum Inquiry, titled “Drag pedagogy: The playful practice of queer imagination in early childhood,” the agenda of DQSH is laid out. The authors argue that DQSH is not only meant to teach about queer lives but also to show children how to live “queerly.” They suggest that the traditional family home is a prison and that DQSH provides an alternative mode of kinship.
Given these revelations, it is essential for the public to be fully informed about the implications of DQSH and the ideology behind it. Engaging in discussions with experts who can provide a comprehensive analysis, such as cultural Marxism expert James Lindsay, can shed light on the underlying issues. It is crucial to move beyond defending actions by claiming they are taken out of context and instead address the genuine concerns expressed by many Canadians.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Source link
