BLUF: Would Senator Roberts be upset if drag queens were teaching firearm safety or prepping, instead of reading to kids?

SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 7-51-1401, is amended by adding
the following language as a new subdivision:
“Adult cabaret performance” means a performance in a location other than an
adult cabaret that features topless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers,
male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient
interest, or similar entertainers, regardless of whether or not performed for consideration;
SECTION 2. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 7-51-1407, is amended by adding
the following language as a new subsection:
(c)
(1) It is an offense for a person to engage in an adult cabaret
performance:
(A) On public property; or
(B) In a location where the adult cabaret performance could be
viewed by a person who is not an adult.

Awa has talked about the law of unintended consequences on several occasions. We all understand, too clearly, just how laws can “drift” unless thoroughly vetted for good language. The above is an example of a law which is horrific in its language. When you go to read the entire section of this law (Tennessee Senate Bill 3), as this now reads, it drips unintended consequences.

I understand what the purpose of the law was. They wanted to stop the whole “drag queens reading to kids” thing. I’m going to admit, I really don’t know why. Senator Roberts says it’s to stop kids seeing obscene things. Until Senator Roberts is also going after most of evening television and pretty much all movies these days, I don’t see that it has much reality to it. To make a law to stop only one specific type of performance, without addressing obscenity at all, seems disingenuous.

If the problem is that men in women’s clothing doing non-sexual things is in and of itself overly provocative, then we’ve got to outlaw judges’ robes, graduation robes, kilts, sarongs, and any number of other items which I’m morally certain were not intended to be included in this. Why, you ask? Because you can’t find a legal definition that draws a difference between a man in a dress, and a man in a kilt, without getting into legal messes like “well it’s cultural”.

If the problem is people doing sexual things in front of kids, we already have laws to stop that. If there are people in outlandish clothing doing sexual things in front of kids (and cameras, and parents, and librarians), then why hasn’t someone reported it? I’ve heard of men dressed as women reading to kids, but nothing sexual or perverted (even by my own obscenely low standards). Now, I have heard of so-called trans kids abusing and allegedly raping girls in the school bathroom, and that’s definitely Not Right by any means, but it’s not the same thing, and that’s not what the law appears to be about.

The thing is, the above is NOT the problem. The problem is that some people have gotten their panties in a wad over the idea of men dressing up in women’s clothing to entertain kids under some VERY specific circumstances. Since they can’t figure out how to make a law that stops that type of entertainment, they’re creating bad laws that have unintended consequences galore.

Under the current law, Klinger from MASH would be outlawed. The movies Tootsie, Dumplin’, Some Like It Hot, Rocky Horror Picture Show, Victor Victoria, Mrs. Doubtfire, half of Shakespeare’s plays (if done with gender roles as they “should be today”… ALL of Shakespeare’s plays if done as they were done at the time), Yankee Doodle in Berlin, Bringing Up Baby, I Was A Male War Bride, La Cage Aux Folles, Yentl, To Wong Foo Thanks For Everything, and dozens (if not hundreds) more can’t be played in a public theater or performed as plays. Most of British comedy shows are right out. Half the cosplays (female Malcolm Reynolds, for instance) are gone. Bob Hope must be rolling in his grave.

Let me be clear. If someone is grooming or diddling little girls and boys, that person should be shot, drawn and quartered, covered in honey, and left on a hill of fire ants. Every single groomer and diddler I’ve met so far has purported to be a straight male and has been vehemently against all things not “hetero normative”, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t some drag performers out there who are perverts. And if they are, they should be prosecuted. Or handed over to the parents, cousins, uncles and aunts, etc. I’m good with either.

But that’s not what I’m seeing. I’m seeing a group of politicos getting upset because people in more swag and satin than most women can handle are managing to entertain kids. I’m not sure how they got from that, to “every drag performer is a groomer”, but that’s happened somewhere. It smacks of the same stuff I heard in the 80s, about how “every gay man was after young boys”, and “Dungeons and Dragons will make your kids into immoral wretches who do drugs and cause destruction and rapine”, and we all know those were outright lies.

So what is the point of the law? The purpose is to restrict performances and free speech. Admittedly, it’s speech and performance art that the senators in question find offensive, but we’ve established time and time again on GFZ that personal offense is NOT a good enough reason to enact a law.

Since you can’t enact the law as currently written, without interfering with the art above, without inadvertently making it illegal for women to wear pants and men to wear kilts, I think I can safely say that this is a bad law. The attempt to stop the behavior that some senators dislike MUST be centered in Constitutionally correct mindset, or it is bad. This law is not Constitutional.

The First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The above law specifically abridges (infringes) upon the freedom of speech. Worse, it attempts to make a certain class of people illegal. It’s okay to not LIKE them. But they do have the right to exist.

Let’s not forget the Ninth Amendment:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

And of course the Fourteenth:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Everyone knows the Second. A lot know the First (or think they do). But these others seem to be forgotten, at times. In what way is this Tennessee law not abridging (infringing) upon the privileges of citizens? Is it not indeed depriving an entire class of people of life and liberty?

I don’t have to like men (or women, though the senators seem to have little or no problem with THAT) in drag. Whether I do or not doesn’t bear on this at all. It is the law itself that is unconstitutional, by its very nature. I get that a bunch of people really don’t like drag story time. By all means, don’t let your kids and grandkids go. Keep them home, and read to them yourselves! Frankly, if enough of us were reading to our kids at home, it probably wouldn’t have become an issue to begin with.

But don’t make up laws that pretend to protect children when that is not the result, intended or otherwise. That’s just not cool. It’s just as “not cool” as playing word games to restrict (infringe) upon the right to keep and bear arms.

I believe in keeping people I don’t like out in clear sight. Let’s take Nazis and people claiming to be such. I don’t want to ban them. Beyond being unconstitutional to do so, it also doesn’t actually achieve anything. It simply pushes them underground, where I can’t keep an eye on them. I want them to feel comfortable enough that they make mistakes that they CAN be prosecuted for, thank you very much.

Hagar

Welcome to another episode of Hagar ranting about something that affects Left and Right equally. I’m talking about our women folk. I realize it’s not PC to use that term, but FTITCTAJ.

Most of the women I know are afraid. They’re afraid to walk at night. They’re afraid to walk in public spaces. They’re afraid to go to their car after dark. They’re afraid that big, scary men might do bad things to them.

This leads to women walking like prey. Yes, you read that right. The vast majority of women walk like prey, like something that is bred to be preyed upon.

What does that mean? It means that women walk hunched over. They walk with their head ducked down. They don’t make eye contact. They actively attempt to make themselves look small. They avoid interactions in public spaces. They clutch their bags to their bodies. They shuffle their feet, look at the ground, and are both hyper-fixated and horridly unaware of their surroundings. It’s awful.

Read More

B.L.U.F. – This is a subject that I think we could achieve a middle ground for, if the loudest and most extreme could just be removed from the equation. As it is, we’re going to end up even more polarized than ever. I apologize in advance for the VERY LONG and rambling nature of this missive. It’s hard to write, and I’m doing my best.

***

Abortion is a terribly touchy subject. I hate talking about it, because I really don’t have any interest in fighting over it. However, it’s a topic which I almost definitely have a “more left” stance on than anyone else on GFZ, so I will share.

First and foremost, Roe Vs. Wade was a terribly written law that should not have stood as long as it did, if at all. That it was overturned was inevitable. That doesn’t bother me. The idea of States being able to ban abortion entirely does bother me, but not too much so long as interstate travel for medical care is still allowed.

I would love to live in a world that didn’t require abortions. However, I live in a world that has rape, incest, accidents, and medical problems. I don’t foresee a change in that anytime soon, no matter how much I hope. That means that I can never be 100% against abortion. As long as there’s a chance that a living, breathing, adult (in body if not in mind) woman could be harmed by carrying a child to term, I have to support at least some cases of abortion.

I got pregnant when I was 19. It was most definitely an accident. I was on the Pill, and he was wearing a condom, and we both screwed up somehow. At the time, in my very misspent youth, I was actively drinking and using drugs frequently, and I was not eating well. I was malnourished, stressed, and in physical/medical distress. I won’t even go into my mental health at the time; suffice to say it was dismal. I found out at 5 weeks. I agonized over the decision, because I had suffered several miscarriages (likely a good thing, I say now as an adult with a large number of years under her belt… at the time it was devastating). I had to be honest, though, that any child I had at that moment would have been undernourished, likely exposed to a large number of chemicals (before I found out), and would have lived in extreme poverty. I chose to abort the child. By the time I managed to get in for an appointment, I was just shy of 12 weeks along (remember that for later in this discussion). That was over 30 years ago. I still mourn that child.
Read More

Hagar has agreed to accept a chance to answer questions from you, our readers. This posting is in the feedback category so anybody can post comments. Questions should be in by Friday, Feb 24th.

The comment posting rule still stands, “Don’t be a dick”.

Hagar will answer every question you post of her. The answer my be a short “I don’t know” or “I won’t answer this question.” Those are answers.

So put your thinking caps on and ask away.

I spend time each evening listening to TikTok videos. They’re short, and I follow a bunch of really funny people. They make me laugh, and are often a source of relaxation for me. Lately, though, I’ve had a spate of odd ones show up in my feed. Bear with me here.

The first one is a person who is … obviously trans, male to female. She’s in a red dress with ridiculous lipstick that I’d call “slut colored”. But whatever… some people have bad fashion sense (I’m one of them, just in a different direction). Then she proceeds to “explain” to “cis women” that “we have to talk”. Sorry for all the quotes, I need to be clear that it isn’t ME saying it. And that I’m expressing… dislike. In any case, this “lady” (in quotes because her attitude is not lady-like) then explains that we women need to stop calling ourselves women. We need to stop saying woman, and breastfeeding, and mother, and a bunch of other gendered words.

Most of the iterations of that particular video are what we call a “stitch”. It’s when you start showing someone’s video (in this case, the “lady in red”) and then break in and make your own commentary. Most of the commentary I’ve been seeing is from women. Angry women. And they’re women across the spectrum: left, right, white, black, old, young. More old than young, though, definitely. They’re all saying the same thing, however. They’re telling the “lady in red” to stuff it, all corners, in a variety of interesting and often both polite and educated ways.

I’ve found it fascinating, because the responses are SO across the divide. The only clear defining thing is that the older women are most vehement, I think because we spent so long fighting for equality in a bunch of different venues.

There are several replies that I found to be truly educational. These women were strong, and they put their responses in words that I wish I had thought up. Some of my favorites (all paraphrased, be aware):

When you go to Starbucks, do you order “coffee” or “caffeinated coffee”? You order “coffee”. Why? Because that’s the natural state of coffee: caffeinated. If you want decaffeinated coffee, you can order it. Some people will look askance at you, but it’s your right, you’re an adult, go right ahead and drink the dirty water like the heathen you are. 😉 But there’s nothing WRONG with asking for decaf. Just don’t expect it to be the default. The same is true with trans women. You want to be a trans woman, fine. BE ONE. But leave me and mine alone, because we *aren’t* trans women. We’re just women. Just like we like coffee. Not decaf coffee.

And…

I am a mother, a woman, and I breast fed my kids. They are labels and things that I simply AM. I will always be these things regardless of what someone else chooses. You can choose to be a trans woman, or chest feed. Go for it. That’s YOUR decision. But you trying to make ME change MY terms? That’s domination. There is a “baseline”, we can all agree on that, because otherwise, there would be nothing to transition from or to. Men are not being asked to change their words (penis, prostate, etc) to make people more comfortable. Just women. And they’re only being asked that by trans women… who used to be men, who have canalized men’s thinking. There’s nothing WRONG with them wanting to be trans women, but they have to stop acting like men and asking women to suppress their own womanhood to make the trans women feel more comfortable. This is internalized misogyny. Use whatever terms you like for yourself… but those are all alternatives to baseline terminology.

I will admit, I had not noticed that similar changes were not being asked of men in regards to trans men. I went and actually looked, because I wondered if it were true. It is. These demands for women to change their language, their own labels, their self-worth in many cases, are not coming from anyone who was, at any point, a biological woman. And they are not being lobbed at biological men by trans men. These are important things to note, because they indicate that it’s not a “trans problem”… it’s a man problem.

Now, before you go all gaga on me, understand, I like strong men. I like men with beards, who are covered in sawdust (man glitter), who can handle a shotgun and a gutting knife. Those men aren’t the problem. YOU men aren’t the problem (meaning those I’ve interacted with here on GFZ).

The problem appears to be ONLY with men who have decided to become women, but who are doing so to gain something outside of self-satisfaction.

You might ask why that’s important. Let me explain. I have a number of trans friends. Most, you’d never know. My friend Charlie, she looks like a girl (so so so like a girl… more than me LOL), talks like a girl, dresses like a girl, walks like a girl, talks like a girl. She sits down to pee. She’s a girl. If you met her in public, you’d assume she was a girl, as much as you’d assume I’m a girl (maybe more LOL). And you’d be right. She’s not the problem. She went through what she did to become a girl, having been born in a male body, because SHE’S A GIRL.

The problem (IMO of course) is those who have decided that their current discomfort in themselves, their lack of self-esteem, their inability to meet mates or make friends, comes because they have a penis. They’re not girls. I’m not even certain they’re boys, to be quite frank, but that’s a whole other conversation. There’s nothing about them that makes them female. They mistakenly believe that cutting off their offending appendage will suddenly make them likable, to everyone else and to themselves. And that is not the case.

Based solely upon my own observations (obviously biased), I would say that this is a new trend that comes about because the “incels” (to use the leftist term) are looking for yet another way to demand attention. I see true trans people as fitting in (aka “normal”), being comfortable in their new gender, because it is an external reflection of their internal selves. They tend to be well dressed, well spoken, well adjusted. These angry ex-men seem to be poorly dressed in outfits that often highlight the disparity between what they claim to be and what they are. They smear bright colored make-up across their faces, in almost a caricature of women.

When women across the field all call someone out for this kind of negative behavior, it can actually become a healing thing. We ladies need to remember that we can draw together. It’s part of “what we do”, often at a genetic level. It’s more than just women, though.

In observing this phenomenon, I have ended up populating my TikTok feed with a lot of stuff I normally wouldn’t. Suddenly, I’m seeing transTok, and I’m seeing people who are angry or upset about this whole thing. And they’re largely my age. It appears that the trans extremists have managed to irritate GenX to the point where we’ve been forced to stand up and do something. Damnit, get off my lawn!

Addendum several days after writing the base article:

So the people responding to this whole thing are not just women (I’m noting this here because this article was written over a period of two weeks while I actually went and looked things over). In fact, there are a number of people who are apparently trans who have been “passing” (meaning you can’t tell they used to be another gender) for 20 or more years, who are standing up. Why are they standing up? Because they want to make it crystal clear that the few people who are making these absurd claims are extremists. They’re not representative of the trans community. Well thank heavens for that. So now we have bio men and women AND trans men and women, speaking out against these … well, domestic terrorists is what they are, really.

I’ve talked a bit about media bias and how the media manipulates our viewpoints by feeding us things that they believe will sell to us. There are a grand total of four people who are behind this entire debacle. Four. This entire media storm has been brought about by LESS than a handful of people who are being ridiculous and borderline criminal (in my opinion). The only reason I’m not naming them is because I don’t want to give them anymore attention than they already have. If you go look it up, you’ll be flooded, I assure you.

I don’t care what you want to call yourself. If you want to be called JollyWhoopCat, I’ll do my best to remember that, and I’ll try not to giggle when I say it. But don’t expect me to change what I call myself. I believe we should be comfortable being individuals. I am who I am. I will use what terms I choose, for myself. I’ll try and be mindful of what other people want to call themselves. The ultimate in letting others live… but I expect the same in return.

The base issue with all of this, is that there are a few out there who want me to change myself, to make them more comfortable. The answer to that is quite simple: NO.

If you want to change yourself to be more comfortable (be that with piercings, tattoos, gender changes, dyed hair, whatever), I’ll hold your hand and support you. Go for it. I know people who find collecting firearms makes them more comfortable in their own skin. I’m good with that, too. Do not, however, be thinking you can change ME. Only I can do that, and in this case, I’m quite fine just as I am.

‘Nuff said. Discuss (or don’t… you do you, Boo).

Heuristic Hagar

Turkey and Syria were hit with a massive earthquake on Feb. 7th. There’s a lot of coverage about it. If you’d like to see pics of the devastation you can look here. It’s not pretty. There is drone footage here, as well. You can also read a bit about the where and why of it here.

Yes, we can blame shoddy building for some of the damage. There’s the usual groups talking about how people are stupid for living on fault lines. Their president is being told he could have prevented it (sort of like Bush was supposed to prevent the levees breaking in New Orleans after Katherine?). There’s a small amount of merit in all of these statements, but not a lot.

The bottom line is that you cannot really prepare for this kind of destruction. Yes, it happens. Yes, it happens more often when you live on a fault line. But this is the largest quake in decades. It’s just not something you can plan for. In a world that’s rapidly becoming overpopulated, we can’t simply seal off huge tracts of land because “something bad MIGHT happen.”

Some of you reading this probably live in Tornado Alley. Some may live on fault lines. Others live near nuclear reactors. And so forth, and so on. There’s only so much you can prepare for, and only so much you can avoid. Humans aren’t meant to live in bubble wrap, after all.

But how can we prepare for survival? And what should we prepare FOR? That’s the question that you have to answer for yourself.

Me, I live in New England, on top of a hill, near a number of clean bodies of water. I don’t need to worry about floods, because by the time flood water gets high enough to affect my ho use, there will be too many other problems to worry about. I don’t have to worry about running out of water to drink and clean with. I do have to worry about cleaning that water, though, because if disaster happens, I can’t be certain that the water will remain clean and potable either due to the disaster itself or other people being idjits.

I am not near a major city, so it’s likely that if disaster does hit, it’ll be weather related. The most usual types of issues in my area are loss of power, loss of running water, and lack of food. I determined this over the past ten years, observing what happens in my area, as well as researching what’s happened here historically over the past 200 years.

I know how to cook without power. I do so on a pretty regular basis, actually. I have a nice fire pit that I use for fun. Still, cooking over an open fire is not a great way to do daily cooking. In an emergency that lasts more than a few days, an open fire pit will be detrimental to my own safety. For that reason, I’m working on plans for an outdoor kitchen behind the house, where it’s private and no one can see. I’ll be putting in a small wood burning stove of some type (likely cement with metal parts) that works like a rocket stove. I’m hoping to build a cobb oven in which I can bake breads and other foods.

My home is full of oil lanterns, solar lanterns, and stores of candles. Seeing what I’m doing in the dark is not going to be an issue. I have the means to carry water from nearby places to my home, and methods to use to clean that water so it’s safe to drink under most circumstances. I know how to grow a garden, hunt, and raise and butcher animals for food.

Whether the disaster that hits my area is ecological, weather-related, or political doesn’t matter. I have my plans, and all of them are tested. When the power goes out, it’s no big deal. I’ve gotten the kids to the point where power loss equals fun stuff, because we pull out the popcorn and make special foods, and we spend time around the wood stove in the living room reading and playing games. No panic, just preparation and readiness.

I can’t tell you how to prepare. Everyone is different. I look at the disaster in Turkey and I find myself in tears. But I know I would never live in a high rise apartment, even one that was supposedly earthquake proof. I’ve seen too many buildings go down like jenga blocks in the past 25 years. That’s MY choice. Other people make their own choices.

I would say that if you have to live in an apartment or multi level condo of some kind, make sure you have preps elsewhere. If your building is burning because someone played a stupid game and won stupid prizes, you may not have access to go back and get your preps. If you are facing a social uprising, you may want to get out of Dodge rapidly, and having 2000 lbs of goods isn’t going to be the least bit helpful. If you are running because of flooding, mudslide, or earthquake, there may be no time to load up with your preparations. Always have your eggs in more than one basket.

Even I do this, and I’m personally in a “best case” situation with my preps. I have most of my preparations “in big”… food, water, filters, weapons, ammo, etc. all stored neatly and out of the way. I cycle through some stuff (food, ammo) and leave the rest for long term storage. But I also have car kits for every car we own. Mini versions with food, shelter, first aid, water, and information. Why? Because we might be away from home when disaster strikes. We may be caught up in something. We may need to flee. We may need to hide temporarily, for a longer or shorter time. And for those reasons, I have caches of all those things, too. In several places. Because I cannot know what MIGHT happen, some random day between tomorrow and forever.

Beyond all of that, however, the single most important prep you can have? Skill sets. Learn to do for yourself. Think about what might happen, from most likely to least likely, and prep for what you can. Practice it. Turn off the power at the main breaker at odd moments and force the family to practice rusty skills. Learn how to cook over a fire. Know what foods you can eat from your local tract of land. Understand how to filter water. Practice making a fire (because if you lose your Bic, then what??). On and on. Continue to acquire skills until you literally cannot anymore (ie you’re dead).

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

-Robert A. Heinlein

I am DAMN proud that I can do most of those things. I’ve never had the opportunity to conn a ship, and solving equations is probably my weakest point. And I’ve never died gallantly, and hope to avoid it for some time to come. But I’ve done all the rest. What can you do?

Heuristic Hagar

Over on “But HE said it first!”, Crawford mentioned:

Colleges are teaching students that “whiteness must be eliminated”. Granted, they don’t strictly mean white people, but the way they define “whiteness” maps to traditional American values.

I decided that I would see what my Left (and other) friends would say about this. I posted up something on my FB wall, basically asking people why I ought to be embarrassed or upset about being white. I mean, I’m lily white. I have Magyar blood on one side and British on the other. The only thing whiter than me is a Scottish redhead.

Yet I feel no shame over this. I know the media is speaking about how whiteness is some sort of disease we need to get rid of. I don’t see any of my friends saying it, but because of who I am In The Real World [tm], I sort of self select. But I know that a lot of those people read the media that’s presenting this message. So I asked, at noon on Feb 2nd.

And here it is, some 6 days later, and I had a mere handful of responses. Most were of the type to say, “That’s crazy, no one should be saying that.” They all expressed concern over what I was reporting. Because they’re my friends, they all went and checked out the links I sent, and then went off to process what they’d read.

And then there was that one. I’m sure you know the type. Presents as cute, fluffy, innocent… right up until something challenges their world view.

That one wrote a lengthy reply to me, basically saying that if someone had ever accused me of racism, that was obviously my own fault. They couldn’t possibly consider introducing me to people of color after my statements. Apparently, by this person’s commentary, I am responsible for how those OTHER people chose to label me, even though those others don’t know me (and this one person actually does, in person). I was online when it was posted, and went to read it. By the time I tried to reply (about 30 seconds later), the comment had been removed.

I wondered if it was FaceBook, because goodness knows, FB does that sometimes. But nope. Not only was the comment deleted, the person in question felt that my statement required them to unfriend me.

Don’t get me wrong, the person is welcome to unfriend me. After reading what they wrote, I was considering doing the same thing to them. I just found it interesting that they would write something that was victim blaming, and then delete it. I would think they saw the error of their ways, were it not for the unfriending.

So there you have it. I challenged my Left friends as I challenge my Right friends, and got mostly crickets. Those few replies I did get were the type to say, “That’s horrible; I’m not saying that.” I pointed out to them (as I did to people on here) that if they’re standing on the left side of the great divide with those people, then they are literally WITH those people. If they don’t want to be supporting those people, they need to step farther away from them.