I've seen this a few times already from the drag apologists, it's supposed to be some retarded gotcha moment. Yes it's true that kids shouldn't be in either of the places, however last time I checked Hootters wasn't a public educational institution.
Exactly. It's a restaurant. If the food's good, then that would have been more than enough to keep my attention for a 30-minute period as a kid. What the fuck are children supposed to be doing during a drag show event? The adults stripping and showing bondage outfits is nowhere near comparable to women wearing white shirts that show off a bit of cleavage. Unlike the pedos from drag shows, the hooters waitresses aren't encouraging kids to fondle them and follow suit.
Comparing a restaurant to a show with very prominent sexual overtones is moronic in the first place.
Hooters might have been risque once. Now, its just that you have well figured women wearing more clothes at Hooters, than the animals only in thongs on the street.
Firstly it's a false equivocation of normal sexuality with demonic perversion. And secondly they deliberately avoid putting up any pictures of the thing they're trying to defend. Because any normal human being who lays eyes on it immediately begins thinking that violence would be justified in stopping it.
You've got to stop using words like "demonic," it undermines any good points you make and people can fixate on it to dismiss your point of view. Can you prove or competently argue "demonic" presence? No, but you can easily argue against drag nonsense and false equivalencies.
Nah, you do your own arguments and the rest of us anti-leftists a disservice. You can nail the gross unethical conduct and lack of logic by leftists with argument, but when you introduce your own illogical or speculative stuff and leave the realm of rationalism, you're really no better than they are. Religious nutjob retards with accusations of "demons" aren't going to win jackshit.
Leftist nonsense is ideology, religion is ideology with a spiritual twist. Congrats, you're now just throwing dogma against dogma and are easily dismissed for the same reasons leftists are totally and obviously wrong -- they can't objectively back up shit and they live in a fantasy land.
See, this is where you don't seem to understand. I'm not trying to "win" the normies over. I don't think they matter. Democracy is an immoral farce, one I have no interest in participating in any longer, save for overthrowing it.
You can take your "muh facts and logic" and have fun with it. The left isn't just wrong, they're evil. They worship the devil and most of them will admit it these days. You aren't going to win a religious war by tisking at a bunch of pedophile baby killers. They aren't interested in a debate and they won't be persuaded.
Leftist nonsense is ideology, religion is ideology with a spiritual twist. Congrats, you're now just throwing dogma against dogma and are easily dismissed for the same reasons leftists are totally and obviously wrong -- they can't objectively back up shit and they live in a fantasy land.
Ideologies are just set of beliefs and values shared by people. Atheism is an ideology, so is Agnosticism, for instance. We're always throwing dogma against dogma no matter what, especially when it comes to politics / morals / ethics / etc.
Even if you focus 100% on science, there's many things science will never be able to explain, and realistically our science is more often wrong than right anyway. We also saw that with Covid, it's just as easy to manipulate science as it is to manipulate any religion (or lack of). Basically, it's super easy to turn science into yet another ideology, because humans always go back to simple ideas that are easy to remember.
Also, science is amoral, it won't be able to tell you if killing someone is ok or not. It won't be able to tell you if drag queens shows are ok or not. You know what can? The Bible and the Word of God, something that helped create the foundations of civilization and managed to survive and thrive through thousands of generations already. Granted its success over the entire world and how it helped us reach this point where people can complain about their own freedom, I'd say it's proved it's reliable at this point.
Evil can be lustful, greedy, envious, jealous, wrathful, or prideful, but does not need to enjoy being those things.
Demonic evil, on the other hand, takes great pleasure in being deceitful, manipulative, and exercising the vices most aligned with the person exhibiting it.
One of the most famous "Drag queen story hours" had his costume with actual demon horns and makeup. Most of their costumes are actual demonic invocations, because that's the current trend among them. In this case, its not philosophical demonic. Its literal.
If someone dismisses it because of the now very secular word "demonic" (it has actual definitions in the dictionary, you should look it up), then they aren't smart enough to be worth convincing anyway.
Have you been to a hooters lately? I had never been to one my entire life until going to a few this past year and I was pretty surprised at how mild it was. Legit its just standard bar food and waitresses wearing a uniform that shows a bit of cleavage. Probably less sexual than the girls that wear yoga pants that show the exact shape of their ass, and you see that everywhere now.
Would I be rushing to take a young child there? No, but equivocating it to drag shows is retarded.
It isn't because this isn't the 90s. Waitresses at many, many restaurants are openly titillating to try and get tips. They might have started the trend, but the march of society has made them blase.
The difference is while yes, it is an uncomfortable image having kids near clearly lightly sexually dressed women (as what is their uniform, a tight shirt and hot pants), they aren't acting sexual or trying to ENGAGE in sexual like activities with customers especially the children.
Drag shows on the other hand, I see it ALL the time trying to get children there to 'join in the fun'.
When even comparing yourself to hooters and such establishments is a false equivalency, a rational person can only conclude they are more interested in corrupting children than be a gimmick business with slight titillation to draw in customers.
The funny thing is: they fully understand why someone wouldn't want a kid at Hooters.
If there's a valid reason for someone to have a problem with kids at a mildly sexual
(private) restaurant, then there's obviously a valid reason for someone to have a problem with taking a kid to see a sex clown at a (public) library.
If you do, next step up is 'you can't show a heterosexual couple kissing in front of kids because kids can't be around any kind of sexuality because that's what you said the rules are.' It's ok for kids to be around light heterosexual themes. It's not ok for kids to be around queer themes. A 'double standard' is absolutely justified here, because one is natural and normal, and the other is degenerate and immoral.
Despite this, drag shows and hooters are obviously different. So you don't have to invoke the 'double standard' to know this is a dumb argument. While I don't think it's classy to take your kids to hooters, differences between hooters and a drag show are:
Hooters waitresses are just normal women and not a queer (and I use that word in a specifically Foucaultian sexual transgression/perversion sense) minstrel show
Hooters waitresses don't promote or participate in any sexual or faux-sexual activity
Hooters waitresses aren't trying to queer/trans/straight/whatever your kids. Drag performers doing it for kids explicitly are.
Seriously, though, their terms are acceptable, except they won't accept them because they know that would be one less avenue for them to being able to groom children.
there is literally nothing wrong with taking a kid to a hooters. it's just a restaurant like any other. nothing happens. stop accepting this retarded premise.
The second one is just a restaurant with slutty waitresses, a child probably won't even notice that cause to him boobs are just a part of a woman and he doesn't care. It's a little weird and probably it would be better to avoid that situation anyway, but it's not even close to how terrible exposing them to faggotry is.
"I'm an Aromantic Demisexual, which means I can only have sex with people I have romantic relationships with, and I can only form exclusive relationships with those people. That means I can only enjoy my wife, which means my fetish is also my sexual minority status and you are discriminating against my sexual minority status."
"SON OF A BITCH"
Editors note: write that shit down. Aromantic Demisexual is what that means, so you should 100% use that as a weapon to classify yourself as a normal person and as a sexual minority status during any interactions with DIE. Simply put: it means: "non-slut only tolerating committed relationships" but in the language of retards.
I don't know that restaurant, but if that's just a restaurant, who cares. They are still dressed up, and wouldn't be very shocking if they were outside like that in public. That's basically an outfit at least 20% of all women wear in summer.
Should we stop kids from going to the beach because there are women in bikinis over there? That's just absurd.
Last time I checked, restaurants weren't the one with text saying "Lick where my pee comes from" or whatever bullshit message that was.
Looks like the whore copy machine was busy at Hooters. Love how these whores were all happy to have their pics taken with the kids. Reverse the sexes, and you'd have feminists, libs, and conservatives screaming.
Sexual conditioning, even one as innocuous as this, is still grooming. Keep your kids away from adult activities!
What the fuck are you talking about now, retard? I am GeneralBoobs/Getmetothebaboon on retarddit. Unlike the stormfag who keeps getting banned, I don't need alts. I take my Ls like a champion loser I am.
Considering the way 50 Shades, Magic Mike, and Chippendale are treated like fun multigenerational family activities in some girl's families, no I'm not convinced of this "but muh other side" argument.
You probably shouldn't take your kids to Hooters, but its literally just girls with large tits existing near them. Its not a strip club, despite how some people seem to treat it.
I've seen this a few times already from the drag apologists, it's supposed to be some retarded gotcha moment. Yes it's true that kids shouldn't be in either of the places, however last time I checked Hootters wasn't a public educational institution.
Exactly. It's a restaurant. If the food's good, then that would have been more than enough to keep my attention for a 30-minute period as a kid. What the fuck are children supposed to be doing during a drag show event? The adults stripping and showing bondage outfits is nowhere near comparable to women wearing white shirts that show off a bit of cleavage. Unlike the pedos from drag shows, the hooters waitresses aren't encouraging kids to fondle them and follow suit.
Comparing a restaurant to a show with very prominent sexual overtones is moronic in the first place.
Considering what women wear normally nowadays I'd call Hooters pretty tame.
Hooters might have been risque once. Now, its just that you have well figured women wearing more clothes at Hooters, than the animals only in thongs on the street.
And it explicitely admits that there's an issue with sexualizing kids, and everyone knows it.
That completely demolishes the "there's nothing sexual with drag shows" argument.
Notice the inherent dishonesty here.
Firstly it's a false equivocation of normal sexuality with demonic perversion. And secondly they deliberately avoid putting up any pictures of the thing they're trying to defend. Because any normal human being who lays eyes on it immediately begins thinking that violence would be justified in stopping it.
You've got to stop using words like "demonic," it undermines any good points you make and people can fixate on it to dismiss your point of view. Can you prove or competently argue "demonic" presence? No, but you can easily argue against drag nonsense and false equivalencies.
Sure I can. Google "Strzock smile.". Then tell me demons aren't real.
Nah, you do your own arguments and the rest of us anti-leftists a disservice. You can nail the gross unethical conduct and lack of logic by leftists with argument, but when you introduce your own illogical or speculative stuff and leave the realm of rationalism, you're really no better than they are. Religious nutjob retards with accusations of "demons" aren't going to win jackshit.
Leftist nonsense is ideology, religion is ideology with a spiritual twist. Congrats, you're now just throwing dogma against dogma and are easily dismissed for the same reasons leftists are totally and obviously wrong -- they can't objectively back up shit and they live in a fantasy land.
See, this is where you don't seem to understand. I'm not trying to "win" the normies over. I don't think they matter. Democracy is an immoral farce, one I have no interest in participating in any longer, save for overthrowing it.
You can take your "muh facts and logic" and have fun with it. The left isn't just wrong, they're evil. They worship the devil and most of them will admit it these days. You aren't going to win a religious war by tisking at a bunch of pedophile baby killers. They aren't interested in a debate and they won't be persuaded.
Ideologies are just set of beliefs and values shared by people. Atheism is an ideology, so is Agnosticism, for instance. We're always throwing dogma against dogma no matter what, especially when it comes to politics / morals / ethics / etc.
Even if you focus 100% on science, there's many things science will never be able to explain, and realistically our science is more often wrong than right anyway. We also saw that with Covid, it's just as easy to manipulate science as it is to manipulate any religion (or lack of). Basically, it's super easy to turn science into yet another ideology, because humans always go back to simple ideas that are easy to remember.
Also, science is amoral, it won't be able to tell you if killing someone is ok or not. It won't be able to tell you if drag queens shows are ok or not. You know what can? The Bible and the Word of God, something that helped create the foundations of civilization and managed to survive and thrive through thousands of generations already. Granted its success over the entire world and how it helped us reach this point where people can complain about their own freedom, I'd say it's proved it's reliable at this point.
Evil can be lustful, greedy, envious, jealous, wrathful, or prideful, but does not need to enjoy being those things.
Demonic evil, on the other hand, takes great pleasure in being deceitful, manipulative, and exercising the vices most aligned with the person exhibiting it.
He's being entirely rational here though.
One of the most famous "Drag queen story hours" had his costume with actual demon horns and makeup. Most of their costumes are actual demonic invocations, because that's the current trend among them. In this case, its not philosophical demonic. Its literal.
If someone dismisses it because of the now very secular word "demonic" (it has actual definitions in the dictionary, you should look it up), then they aren't smart enough to be worth convincing anyway.
I do not believe in anything supernatural.
But I don't think that what a lot of these freaks are doing, or how they look, is distinguishable from genuine supernatural demonic possession.
I wouldn't personally use "demons" as a descriptor, but at this point I don't fault anyone who does.
Hooters is just fully clothed girls with big tits. They don't do anything sexual or inappropriate.
Drag shows are disgusting abominations prancing around in BDSM gear and talking about weird sex shit.
Also the smug Jim meme is extremely cringe.
"Hooters isn't sexual" is a really dumbass angle to try to take.
In comparison, it really isn't.
Have you been to a hooters lately? I had never been to one my entire life until going to a few this past year and I was pretty surprised at how mild it was. Legit its just standard bar food and waitresses wearing a uniform that shows a bit of cleavage. Probably less sexual than the girls that wear yoga pants that show the exact shape of their ass, and you see that everywhere now.
Would I be rushing to take a young child there? No, but equivocating it to drag shows is retarded.
It isn't because this isn't the 90s. Waitresses at many, many restaurants are openly titillating to try and get tips. They might have started the trend, but the march of society has made them blase.
I'm gonna back you up on this. I get the contrast, but I'm not going to use this line of argumentation in public.
I'm not convinced the Hooters sluts are nearly as pedophillic as the drag queens.
Kids at Hooters is not currently the sacred cow of the Republican party.
Progs pull this same shit with "child pageants" which pretty much everyone, everywhere, is disgusted and disturbed by.
Hooters sluts are there for the paycheck.
Trannies in drag shows are there for another reason.
The difference is while yes, it is an uncomfortable image having kids near clearly lightly sexually dressed women (as what is their uniform, a tight shirt and hot pants), they aren't acting sexual or trying to ENGAGE in sexual like activities with customers especially the children.
Drag shows on the other hand, I see it ALL the time trying to get children there to 'join in the fun'.
When even comparing yourself to hooters and such establishments is a false equivalency, a rational person can only conclude they are more interested in corrupting children than be a gimmick business with slight titillation to draw in customers.
The funny thing is: they fully understand why someone wouldn't want a kid at Hooters.
If there's a valid reason for someone to have a problem with kids at a mildly sexual (private) restaurant, then there's obviously a valid reason for someone to have a problem with taking a kid to see a sex clown at a (public) library.
They haven’t been arguing with any conservatives they are arguing with straw men in the shower and posting what they thought was a winning argument
Every single conservative circle I'm in says no one should go to Hooters.
Don't accept the libs premise on this one.
If you do, next step up is 'you can't show a heterosexual couple kissing in front of kids because kids can't be around any kind of sexuality because that's what you said the rules are.' It's ok for kids to be around light heterosexual themes. It's not ok for kids to be around queer themes. A 'double standard' is absolutely justified here, because one is natural and normal, and the other is degenerate and immoral.
Despite this, drag shows and hooters are obviously different. So you don't have to invoke the 'double standard' to know this is a dumb argument. While I don't think it's classy to take your kids to hooters, differences between hooters and a drag show are:
Seriously, though, their terms are acceptable, except they won't accept them because they know that would be one less avenue for them to being able to groom children.
Hooters is less revealing than a beach.
Not even remotely equivalent, but I agree; The terms are acceptable.
They're more than acceptable, even. They're outright stacked in our favour.
there is literally nothing wrong with taking a kid to a hooters. it's just a restaurant like any other. nothing happens. stop accepting this retarded premise.
The second one is just a restaurant with slutty waitresses, a child probably won't even notice that cause to him boobs are just a part of a woman and he doesn't care. It's a little weird and probably it would be better to avoid that situation anyway, but it's not even close to how terrible exposing them to faggotry is.
"Oh yeah? Well! What if we ban degeneracy?"
"Okay."
"Wait! No! I mean, what your fetishes?!!"
"I love my wife."
"Ew. Gross. Loving your wife is a fetish now..."
"YOU'VE JUST ACTIVATED MY TRAP CARD."
"wat"
"I'm an Aromantic Demisexual, which means I can only have sex with people I have romantic relationships with, and I can only form exclusive relationships with those people. That means I can only enjoy my wife, which means my fetish is also my sexual minority status and you are discriminating against my sexual minority status."
"SON OF A BITCH"
Editors note: write that shit down. Aromantic Demisexual is what that means, so you should 100% use that as a weapon to classify yourself as a normal person and as a sexual minority status during any interactions with DIE. Simply put: it means: "non-slut only tolerating committed relationships" but in the language of retards.
You need to degenerate a lot to understand OPs argument.
These females could be naked and it would be better for the kids to be around than near a "drag queen" pervert.
OP kill yourself. Cleanse the planet.
I don't know that restaurant, but if that's just a restaurant, who cares. They are still dressed up, and wouldn't be very shocking if they were outside like that in public. That's basically an outfit at least 20% of all women wear in summer.
Should we stop kids from going to the beach because there are women in bikinis over there? That's just absurd.
Last time I checked, restaurants weren't the one with text saying "Lick where my pee comes from" or whatever bullshit message that was.
Sure, for no other reason than I want to go to places like Hooters to AVOID dealing with children if I were to dine out.
Looks like the whore copy machine was busy at Hooters. Love how these whores were all happy to have their pics taken with the kids. Reverse the sexes, and you'd have feminists, libs, and conservatives screaming.
Sexual conditioning, even one as innocuous as this, is still grooming. Keep your kids away from adult activities!
Did you forget which alt you were logged in on?
What the fuck are you talking about now, retard? I am GeneralBoobs/Getmetothebaboon on retarddit. Unlike the stormfag who keeps getting banned, I don't need alts. I take my Ls like a champion loser I am.
Considering the way 50 Shades, Magic Mike, and Chippendale are treated like fun multigenerational family activities in some girl's families, no I'm not convinced of this "but muh other side" argument.
You probably shouldn't take your kids to Hooters, but its literally just girls with large tits existing near them. Its not a strip club, despite how some people seem to treat it.