The ‘transgender’ movement is increasingly interested in spreading the myth of the ‘trans child’ – including the idea of ‘child drag queens’, reports of which have been circulating in the media and on Twitter recently. One motive for this is that focusing on children discourages the public from thinking of cross-dressing as a sexual fetish (even though for adult men, it usually is). More importantly, whether as a knock-on effect or an intended consequence, the ‘trans’ movement is breaking down safeguarding measures that protect children. We OBJECT.
Child ‘Drag Queens’ – Increasing Men’s Sexual Access to Children
The confusing, illogical idea of ‘transgenderism’, combined with the shutting-down of debate on the topic, is very effective in allowing men increased sexual access to children. This is clearly demonstrated by the stories of ‘drag queen’ kids that have been reported in the media recently.
OBJECT shared one such story on Facebook earlier this week: “Letting an 8-year-old be a drag queen isn’t progressive, it’s child abuse.”
The article (Russell, 2018) describes the exploitation of two young boys (Desmond and Nemis, aged 10 and 8 respectively) who are taken to ‘drag shows’ by their parents, where they are dressed in the style of clothing and heavy make-up that women often wear in the prostitution and pornography industry (i.e. in sexual slavery). The boy called Nemis is referred to by his stage-name ‘Lactatia’ – his ‘fans’ are revoltingly named ‘Lactators’.
Despite this, some people who commented on the article vehemently insisted that ‘drag’ isn’t sexual; that it is ‘art’ and merely a form of ‘expression’ or ‘performance’.
For adult men, ‘drag’ is about dressing up in ‘women’s clothes’ and performing extreme ‘femininity’. It is generally not about dressing up in the sort of outfit an ordinary woman would wear; it is about dressing in overtly sexualised clothes.
‘Drag’ performances are allegedly forms of ‘comedy’ and ‘entertainment’ – the ‘humour’ is based upon misogyny, such as laughing at the stupid clothes and subordinate behaviours that women are pressured to adopt. For women, it is often advantageous, or even necessary for survival, to behave in these ‘feminine’ ways in order to be socially accepted, to be treated well and to be allowed career advancement. For men, it is just a game or a ‘performance’. Women’s degradation, such as via uncomfortable/painful/restrictive clothing, is the biggest turn on for men in our society. As an ‘art’ that degrades women, ‘drag’ is therefore ‘sexual’.
Alongside misogyny, the ‘humour’ incorporated into ‘drag’ shows sometimes includes laughing at the sexual abuse of children. For example, at Brighton Pride 2011, a ‘drag’ performer ‘joked’ that he was “sweating like a paedophile in Mothercare it’s so hot in here.” This man, Robert Clothier, was later caught by a police sting operation – he had arranged to rape two children, aged 8 and 11, who were being pimped out by their father (Robinson, 2013). He spoke openly in court about how aroused he was by the children’s underwear he had purchased in preparation for the attack (ibid.). The police also found him in possession of child pornography (ibid.). The judge sentenced him to 26 months in prison, adding: “I take into account that you are of previous good character” (ibid.).
When adult males engage in ‘drag’, this is to the sexual excitement of both performer and male audience. However, when children are dressed up in this manner and paraded on stage, it is only the male audience who are ‘entertained’. It is irrelevant whether or not the child being abused feels as though he is having fun or enjoying himself. It is common for victims of abuse not to recognise themselves as having been abused. The idea that a child’s perception of abuse in any way vindicates it, is reminiscent of the defense that Peter Tatchell wrote of paedophila in a letter to the Guardian in 1997, where he suggested that a 9 year old child is capable of making a “conscious choice” to have sex with an adult – and that if a child receives “great joy” from rape, Tatchell apparently considers it harmless.
In December 2018, Desmond from the aforementioned article on ‘drag’ kids, now aged 11, danced on stage at a gay bar “in a sexual manner” and collected dollar bills from men in the audience (Prestigiacomo, 2018), as if he were performing in a strip club. One man left a disgusted review of the event, stating, “I left after seeing a child dance on stage for money at nighttime. This was on Saturday night and I have been feeling disturbed ever since.” The club had a strict ban on mobile phone use, enforced by sealing all phones into magnetic pouches (ibid.).
A blog post published by ‘Vigilant Citizen’ yesterday examines Desmond’s abusive background in detail. It is mentioned that Desmond has autism – like many of the children being referred to London’s Tavistock & Portman gender clinic. The blog post also shows a screenshot from a Youtube video where Desmond sits alongside Michael Alig, a convicted murderer (Citizen, 2019). Also in shot is a poster displaying the word ‘Rohypnol’ – the name of a ‘date-rape’ drug. The video was filmed only months after Michael had been released from prison (ibid.) Why would a parent would allow their child to be interviewed by a man who had brutally murdered someone with a hammer, dismembered the body and chucked it into a river? Perhaps the same sort of parent as the father who pimped out his children to ‘drag’ performer Robert Clothier?
The other boy, Nemis, has also been enduring escalating levels of abuse. This week, a photo of him posing with a naked adult man circulated on Twitter, causing uproar. The man is apparently the winner of RuPaul’s Drag Race. He is almost naked, except for a tiny patch of fabric covering his genitals. He is also teetering on extremely high heels, dangling a hand bag, wearing heavy make-up and leaning in towards the child. The young boy is wearing a black dress, his eyes and mouth wide open, and his hand touching the man’s upper arm. This image was allegedly taken by photographer Jonathan Frederick Turton and first posted on Instagram. The man in the photo is Jason Dardo, whose ‘drag’ name is Violet Chachki.
If this isn’t child pornography, then what is? Why are the parents enabling this abuse? Are they blinded by the rhetoric? After all, nudity is just ‘freedom of expression’ and Peter Tatchell asserts that 9 year olds can consent to sex with adults. Are children being ‘groomed’ to become ‘drag kids’ for men’s entertainment? Is it ‘transphobic’ to question the abuse of a child? Or ‘pedophobic’? Either way, the response from those who defend the exploitation of ‘drag’ or ‘trans’ children is likely to be the same – no debate. Is it accidental that Stonewall’s harrowing slogan, “Acceptance Without Exception,” offers a haven of protection to paedophiles (alongside other sexual abusers, such as those who use/abuse prostituted women)? Or are paedophiles pulling the strings?
The image shows a ‘pawn’ in drag as a ‘queen’! Is the ‘T’ of ‘LGBT’ really a ‘P’ in drag? Does the ‘trans’ movement hide a pro-paedophile agenda? Both movements serve the sexual interests of men. Whether international or not, the politics of ‘queer theory’ (which includes the idea of ‘transgenderism’) appears to act as a good cover / ‘drag-act’ for men who wish to gain greater sexual access to children.
Conclusions
There’s No Such Thing as a ‘Transgender’ Child
The fabrication of the ‘transgender’ child (or the child ‘Drag Queen’) is similar to the creation of the child ‘sex worker’. These misleading labels are placed on ordinary children in order to disguise and excuse the exploitation of these children in the fulfillment of an adult agenda – in both cases, to cater to the sexual interests of adult men.
Men’s Sexual Rights Dressed Up as ‘Children’s Rights’
The ‘trans rights’ movement reframes the removal of children’s safeguarding as granting children ‘freedom of expression’. This is similar to paedophiles advocating for the ‘sexual rights of children’. In both cases, the proponents of these movements are actually interested in promoting men’s ‘sexual rights’.
In Summary:
We OBJECT to the abuse and exploitation of children, including the labeling of children (by adults) as ‘trans’ or as ‘drag’ kids. The post-modern politics of ‘transgenderism’ appears to act as a smokescreen, blinding people to blatant cases of abuse. There has been a spate of pro-paedophilia accounts appearing on Twitter recently, hoping to hop on the LGBTQWTAF bandwagon – but there is little need to add a ‘P’ to ‘LGBT’ if the ‘T’ is already enclosing children under the ‘trans umbrella’.
‘Trans’ people are obviously NOT all paedophiles. However, the idea that children can change sex (‘transgender’) was invented by adults – not by the children themselves – why? Are paedophiles using the idea of ‘trans kids’ / ‘drag kids’ in order to gain greater sexual access to children, covering their motives by claiming that they are helping children to ‘be their true selves’? Paedophiles have long tried to hijack the lesbian and gay liberation movement. Instead, the ‘T’ has infiltrated. But is the ‘T’ just a ‘P’ in drag?
Written by Hannah Harrison