In the four to six years since "underage celebrity drag queens" became a thing - and Desmond "Desmond is Amazing" Napoles and Nemis Quinn "Lactatia" Melancon-Golden rose to fame at the ages of ten and seven, respectively - people have been wondering about "where the line is", in regard to how much children should be allowed to experiment with cross-dressing within the view of adults.
When Nemis (stage name "Lactatia") was asked onstage, in 2017 - by an adult male drag queen - whether it was his first time doing drag, he responded "Um... not really," to which the mostly male audience responded with laughter.
[Note:
Nemis began doing drag shows at the age of seven.
If that was funny, then it was funny for two reasons: 1) it's normal for little boys to want to wear girls' clothes, and so, people laughed because they could relate to what Nemis said; and 2) the audience probably wasn't full of pedophiles.
The reason why the audience wasn't full of pedophiles, was that the audience showed up expecting adult male drag queens. They weren't expecting to see a child. Which means they didn't specifically come to that event knowing that there would be cross-dressing children there.
But that was early-on in the course of the "famous child drag queen" phenomenon.
But 2017 was then; this (2023) is now.
What happened at that event with Nemis, is completely different from the kind of widespread, mass-scale, intentional grooming of children into experimenting with drag - in front of audiences full of adults who show up knowing that they will be seeing cross-dressing children - which is happening in some places today.
In mid-2022, a Dallas-area gay bar called Mr. Misster held an event called "Drag the Kids to Pride", billed as a "family-friendly drag show".
According to reporter Jay Wallis, "drag performers danced and walked down the aisle in the center of the room. At times, the dancers would take dollar bills from some of the children. Kids also walked with the dancers down the aisle...".
The bar also featured a sign - inside the bar - which read, "It's Not Gonna Lick Itself", an obvious sexual entendre which appeared to refer to ice cream.
http://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/dallas-family-friendly-kids-drag-show-mr-misster-protest/287-c7984c66-6141-4690-97b1-ec0b9882b4bbhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV50Fx8Kkt4
The event was greeted with protests.
[Note:
Cauldron Ice Cream (located in Plano, Texas, a suburb of Dallas) has displayed the exact same "It's Not Gonna Lick Itself" sign inside of its physical business, and also displayed it as part of an advertisement on Facebook. Cauldron is a "naughty" sexually-themed ice cream store, which sells desserts bearing names such as "rim jobs" and "gang bangs".
While Cauldron Ice Cream has not hosted any drag shows, nor any events involving children, parents should still think carefully before deciding to bring their children there, given the inappropriate names of the desserts, and the sign inside. Also, Cauldron is worth mentioning, because it's a possible explanation for the origin of the sign seen at Mr. Misster.
Cauldron opened in Plano in 2019.Watch me explain the Mr. Misster scandal and its connection to Cauldron Ice Cream at the following address:
http://rumble.com/v20bqwv-are-people-using-ice-cream-to-groom-children.html]
Most recently - in December 2022 - a Christmas-themed drag show called A Drag Queen Christmas allowed people under the age of 18 to attend, and went on tour, reportedly doing 36 shows in 18 different locations.
The show featured adult men humping each other in reindeer costumes to Christmas songs with dirty lyrics, the adult male host asking a child "Are you confused yet?", and a man with giant fake breasts with fake nipples visible.
Reporters have commented that the vast majority of children present were brought there by single mothers, and that there were few (or zero) fathers present.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11541477/Armed-protestors-clash-outside-ages-Christmas-themed-drag-show.htmlhttp://texasscorecard.com/local/christmas-drag-show-for-kids-met-with-protests-in-san-antonio/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjZ2rJY0GTA
The most important question to ask, in all of this, is "Are these children actually being abused?"
Well, in a strict legal sense... yes.
Objectifying a child's body or sexuality - in a manner which causes them to become exploited in exchange for money - is one of the legal definitions of sexual exploitation of a minor. If it's on film, it may even be legally considered child pornography, or at least video evidence that grooming has occurred.
Objectifying a child's body or sexuality - in a manner which causes them to become exploited in exchange for money - is one of the legal definitions of sexual exploitation of a minor. If it's on film, it may even be legally considered child pornography, or at least video evidence that grooming has occurred.
But morally? Also yes.
Children are not old enough to be capable of giving fully informed consent, regarding all of the potential negative consequences associated with things that could affect them for their entire lives; these things include being groomed for sex by adults, having sex, getting married, getting tattoos and intimate piercings, and undergoing forms of genital mutilation.
They can't consent to allow their bodies, and sexuality, become the focus of adult conversation. The "no" becomes assumed (or, at least, should be assumed), due to the child's lack of ability to give a "yes" which would have fully informed consent to back it up.
And the idea that parental consent (or judicial consent, for that matter) can override that presumed, automatic no on the part of the child, becomes difficult to argue, the younger the child being discussed. The idea that a child much younger than 16 or 17 years old could possibly consent to sex, grooming, marriage, or genital surgery, should be unthinkable.
But right now, it is not, so here we are.
One problem is that the police don't even know that what's happening is technically illegal, and don't know that they are within lawful authority to arrest the planners and financiers of events which aim to profit off of such grooming and exploitation.
They can't consent to allow their bodies, and sexuality, become the focus of adult conversation. The "no" becomes assumed (or, at least, should be assumed), due to the child's lack of ability to give a "yes" which would have fully informed consent to back it up.
And the idea that parental consent (or judicial consent, for that matter) can override that presumed, automatic no on the part of the child, becomes difficult to argue, the younger the child being discussed. The idea that a child much younger than 16 or 17 years old could possibly consent to sex, grooming, marriage, or genital surgery, should be unthinkable.
But right now, it is not, so here we are.
One problem is that the police don't even know that what's happening is technically illegal, and don't know that they are within lawful authority to arrest the planners and financiers of events which aim to profit off of such grooming and exploitation.
Wherever the law prohibits exploitation of a child for commercial purposes - i.e., everywhere - the local county police can enforce the relevant law as liberally as they please.
This could include: 1) talking to children about their sexuality; 2) inviting children to dance in inappropriate manners and in inappropriate places (such as bars and places where "dancing poles" - a/k/a "stripper poles" are present); and 3) allowing children to (sometimes) wear revealing clothing, or even take off some of their clothes, in front of adults.
Desmond "Desmond is Amazing" Napoles, took off some of his clothes, while dancing to the No Doubt song "I'm Just a Girl". And he did it while accepting dollar bills from the adult men who were present.
However, Desmond's supporters were confused about this, because they falsely believed that "In order to be considered a stripper, you have to take off all of your clothes, and therefore what Desmond did was not stripping."
But critics of what Desmond is being allowed to do, have noted that there are laws in some states which prohibit even adults from taking off all of their clothes. In their verbiage, those state laws treat partial and total removal of clothing the same; they are both forms of stripping. That's why they are (supposed to be) regulated as such.
So is anybody coming to save these kids?
Desmond, Nemis, and the kids who are admittedly "dragged" to events designed to hyperfocus on whatever few sexual thoughts these children might happen to have (which is apparently public information now)?
They are trying to.
Police officers having no idea that grooming kids like this, is illegal - and no idea why it's illegal - certainly doesn't help.
Nor does it help that - on November 19th, 2022 - a man killed five people (and shot twenty-five others) inside of a gay night club called Club Q, in Colorado Springs, Colorado. This shooting was blamed on homophobia and transphobia, because the shooter, Anderson Lee Aldrich, shot the club up "just as Club Q was wrapping up its weekly Saturday evening drag show."
http://www.npr.org/2022/12/27/1138674412/drag-show-threats-bans-club-q-shootinghttp://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/21/opinion/colorado-springs-shooting.html
http://isdglobal.org/digital_dispatches/groomer-discourse-intensifies-and-neo-nazis-celebrate-in-wake-of-colorado-springs-attack/
To the horror of the LGBTQ+ community, the accused shooter subsequently claimed to identify as nonbinary.
It's not clear whether Club Q's November 19th, 2022 event was attended by children, nor is it clear whether children were permitted to attend the event. This makes it difficult to determine whether the shooter chose Club Q as his target because he thought they were hosting and sponsoring the grooming of children.
Now - largely because of that shooting, and the way the mainstream media and the public interpreted it - people who show up to protest events where they suspect grooming is occurring, are treated as if they are armed, and want to bring violence.
Well, could you blame them?
When did it become wrong to use "violence" - not initiative or aggressive force, but the use of power and strength for defensive purposes - to protect vulnerable children who have no idea that what is happening to them is not only illegal, but also wrong? Children, who have not gained the ability to give informed consent to speak to total strangers about their gender identity (and perhaps even sexual preferences)?
The use of force, in defense of those who are incapable of defending themselves, is not violence.
The vast majority of the people who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, 2020 were unarmed. So are most of the people who protest drag shows geared towards children.
And an ordinary citizen would be no more wrong to bring a gun to a place where a child is being illegally exploited, than it would be wrong for a police officer to bring a gun to such a place in order to arrest the planners and financiers of the event.
That's because someone who is crazy enough to objectify a child in front of a whole crowd full of people who paid to be there, might be crazy enough to abduct or molest a child, and perhaps even crazy enough to use a weapon - and use it - in order to facilitate such a kidnapping.
Children are much smaller than adults are. They cannot obtain gun licenses. They need adults to protect them. Can you really blame someone for being prepared to defend himself while he attempts to collect evidence that children are being exploited?
In one final, gut-wrenching twist of the narrative, "groomer" is now being described as an epithet specifically designed to equate gay and trans people to pedophiles, rather than an epithet describing all pedophiles who groom children in general, which is what it really is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR5srUjgqr4
This, the pedophile elite running mainstream media apparently hope, will lead to anyone and everyone caught using the word "groomer", being described as both a homophobe and a transphobe.
All of this makes it very difficult to even mention the possibility that a particular gay or trans person abused a child, without being described as homophobic or transphobic.
Children are much smaller than adults are. They cannot obtain gun licenses. They need adults to protect them. Can you really blame someone for being prepared to defend himself while he attempts to collect evidence that children are being exploited?
In one final, gut-wrenching twist of the narrative, "groomer" is now being described as an epithet specifically designed to equate gay and trans people to pedophiles, rather than an epithet describing all pedophiles who groom children in general, which is what it really is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR5srUjgqr4
This, the pedophile elite running mainstream media apparently hope, will lead to anyone and everyone caught using the word "groomer", being described as both a homophobe and a transphobe.
All of this makes it very difficult to even mention the possibility that a particular gay or trans person abused a child, without being described as homophobic or transphobic.
But the research must continue.
We don't know much about the crimes committed against the multitude of particular children who attended A Drag Queen Christmas and other drag shows.
Suffice it to say that they were spoken to in objectifying manners (i.e., hyper-focusing on sexuality while speaking to them), and groomed by adults through desensitization to inappropriate dancing and dress. Although the children's names are unknown.
But, as for Desmond and Nemis, it's clear that they were groomed. But indecent exposure, drugging, and even rape are possibilities in their cases.
In a late 2018 or early 2019 issue of Huck Magazine, Nemis appeared (pretending to gasp) in a photograph with a nearly-naked man.
The man wore a loin cloth that was so small, it was barely visible, and displayed tattoos and nipple piercings. He also wore a wig and high-heeled shoes.
Huck Magazine has since deleted all evidence, on the internet, that it published that article.
We don't know much about the crimes committed against the multitude of particular children who attended A Drag Queen Christmas and other drag shows.
Suffice it to say that they were spoken to in objectifying manners (i.e., hyper-focusing on sexuality while speaking to them), and groomed by adults through desensitization to inappropriate dancing and dress. Although the children's names are unknown.
But, as for Desmond and Nemis, it's clear that they were groomed. But indecent exposure, drugging, and even rape are possibilities in their cases.
In a late 2018 or early 2019 issue of Huck Magazine, Nemis appeared (pretending to gasp) in a photograph with a nearly-naked man.
The man wore a loin cloth that was so small, it was barely visible, and displayed tattoos and nipple piercings. He also wore a wig and high-heeled shoes.
Huck Magazine has since deleted all evidence, on the internet, that it published that article.
The man in the photo is named Paul Jason Dardo. He was born in 1992, and goes by the stage name "Violet Chachki". Dardo uses she/her and they/them pronouns.
Dardo won Season 7 of RuPaul's Drag Race, a show in which adult male drag queens compete in beauty pageants, dance contests, and make-overs.
Thankfully, there is no evidence that Dardo abused Nemis either sexually or physically.
But it's possible that Dardo's nearly exposing himself to Nemis could qualify as indecent exposure to a minor. Even though Dardo wore a loin cloth that covered his genitals, the case could easily be made that Dardo sought sexual gratification in the act of exposing 99% of his body to the child.
Dardo won Season 7 of RuPaul's Drag Race, a show in which adult male drag queens compete in beauty pageants, dance contests, and make-overs.
Thankfully, there is no evidence that Dardo abused Nemis either sexually or physically.
But it's possible that Dardo's nearly exposing himself to Nemis could qualify as indecent exposure to a minor. Even though Dardo wore a loin cloth that covered his genitals, the case could easily be made that Dardo sought sexual gratification in the act of exposing 99% of his body to the child.
As for Desmond, his case is much more grim, and unsettling.
Police were apparently unresponsive after being flooded with calls, in 2019, that Desmond was exploited when he danced for money while engaging in partial stripping.
An article from Buzzfeed, criticizing those who tried to get police involved, published a quotation from Desmond's mother Wendy: "They're basically saying queer kids equal pedophilia and sexuality. It's really quite disgusting they're seeing kids like this".
http://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/laurenstrapagiel/desmond-is-amazing-child-drag-queen
In 2018, Desmond - then ten years old - appeared on Episode #442 of the Pee-ew! web show, hosted by former New York "Club Kids" Michael Alig and Ernie Glam.
In that video, Desmond appeared drugged. If he wasn't drugged, then he was at least very tired, as he could barely keep his eyes open. That could also be attributed to the large, heavy fake eyelashes he was wearing at the time, however.
But also, in that video, while Michael Alig drank something from a pink cup, he asked someone off screen for more "tea". This prompted Ernie Glam to laugh. In the background, directly behind Desmond (who sat in between Alig and Glam), there was a painting hung up on the wall, that (according to YouTuber AnnaMae Renee) was painted by Michael Alig himself. That painting contained a little girl jumping rope, next to the letters "ROHYPN". These are the first six letters of the drug "rohypnol", commonly known as "roofies", and "the date-rape drug".
These facts have led to speculation that Alig might have drugged Desmond with rohypnol.
This concern that Alig potentially drugged Desmond is not without warrant, though, as Alig has long been known as the kind of person who drugs people.
On an episode of Geraldo's The Geraldo Rivera Show, Michael Alig appeared - alongside fellow "Club Kid" Michael Musto (the Village Voice columnist) - in an episode about "Club Kids", the New York City scene of the 1980s and 1990s which was comprised of gay bars, discos, and drag events. In that episode, Geraldo accused Alig of giving his own mother a club drug without her knowledge.
Additionally, Alig had Hepatitis-B, and invented a drinking game in which the loser had to drink from a glass that he had contaminated with Hepatitis-B.
If you still don't think Michael Alig is untrustworthy after reading that, it is worthwhile to note that he was also a confessed and convicted murderer. He and then-roommate Robert Riggs murdered Andre "Angel" Melendez following a dispute about drug money.
Alig was sentenced to 10-20 years in prison, and was released in prison in 2014.
http://www.villagevoice.com/2014/05/16/lets-not-forget-michael-alig-brutally-murdered-and-dismembered-angel-melendez-then-bragged-about-it-for-months/
Even if Desmond was not drugged - which seems unlikely, due to the above information - it was still potentially dangerous to allow Desmond to be around Michael Alig (being a murderer who drugged his own mother, and could potentially pass Hepatitis B to Desmond whether intentionally or unintentionally).
And a person who's crazy enough to drug his own mother, and give people diseases for fun, is probably crazy enough to use said drugs to lure a child into a more vulnerable state. Ketamine and rohypnol were reportedly Alig's favorite drugs.
This video, titled "Desmond is in Danger" - posted to YouTube in 2020 by AnnaMae Renee - explains the threats which Michael Alig, and Desmond's own mother Wendylou Napoles, might have posed to Desmond, while attending drag shows, while Desmond appeared in Episode #442 of the "Pee-ew" web show, hosted by Michael Alig and Ernie Glam:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7J-hW_GO6o
During that episode, Ernie Glam presented Desmond with a stuffed panda toy, and a shirt with a panda face and black-and-white bars on it. It would be easy to argue that the black-and-white bars resembled prison bars. This is worth noting because "Panda eyes" is reputed to be a code phrase, used by pedophiles and/or other sexual predators, to refer to a victim of rape who has black eyes because they have been beaten by their rapist.
The Desmond controversy is not the only sex scandal in which pandas have popped up; Lady Gaga has worn panda eyes, the stuffed bear in the Balenciaga child model scandal was a panda, and pandas are associated with Elvis Presley (whose wife was underage when they met, and possibly also when they married).
Another possible code word - which connects Alig, Glam, and Lady Gaga - is "monster". Lady Gaga refers to her fans as "monsters" and her child fans as "little monsters". Michael Alig was the focus of the film Party Monster. Ernie Glam published a book called Dressing the Monster. The book, which is about fashion, was published in 2018, and bears the menacing subtitle "Party Clothes for the Club Kid Killer".
http://www.amazon.com/Dressing-Monster-Party-clothes-killer/dp/1986485757
In late December 2020 - two years after filming Episode #442 - Michael Alig died due to a drug overdose. Heroin and fentanyl were present in his system.
This means that Ernie Glam is likely the only person alive (except, perhaps, Desmond's mother) who knows, for sure, whether Michael Alig drugged Desmond Napoles, and whether he molested him.
It is not clear whether Desmond's mother Wendy has ever met Ernie Glam, or Michael Alig, or another transvestite male in whose presence Desmond mimed the snorting of a drug.
But at some point, Wendy Napoles must have allowed Ernie Glam, Michael Alig, or both, to take temporary (not legal) "custody" of Desmond, for long enough to film the episode. Either that, or Wendy Napoles was present when the video was filmed.
This means that, even if Wendy Napoles did not outright illegally decline to report sexual abuse of a child (which is a possibility), then she at least allowed her son to fall into the hands of people whom she reasonably should have known, would have been likely to abuse her son.
The author of the video mentioned above, believes that Desmond's mother may have allowed Michael Alig to prey on her son (or, at least, risked it) as part of a vain effort to regain her youth, and/or get into what is left of the New York City club scene.
Regardless of why she might have done it, if Desmond was molested or raped, then Wendy Napoles could - and should - be charged with reckless endangerment of her child. And, if she profited off of it, she could - and should - be charged with commercial exploitation of a child, and/or pimping (depending on the verbiage and definitions used in the jurisdictions in which those crimes may have occurred).
What happened to Desmond Napoles - i.e., possible drugging, molestation, and rape - is certainly not typical of children who cross-dress. Especially not children who cross-dress without adults first giving them the idea to do it. [The best place or a child to cross-dress is where that child will have privacy.]
But what happened to Nemis - i.e., being almost flashed, made to dance, and exposed to nudity - is typical of children who are exposed to cross-dressing by adults.
Furthermore, the idea that "drag can be for kids too" is being used to mask the possible child drugging and child rape that might have happened to Desmond "behind the scenes" after filming for the Pee-ew! web show with Michael Alig and Ernie Glam.
Drag can be for kids too. And there is nothing wrong with that idea, in and of itself.
Unless and until you start getting adults involved. And unless and until events focusing on children's sexuality become so widespread and predictable, that they literally become profitable shows.
At that point, pedophiles who want to see children dress in revealing clothing, can reliably predict where children will be groomed - or scantily-clad - for adults to watch, and where people will be off their guard about child protection.
And that is where child predators will strike. Not solely because that's where people are more "tolerant", but because that's where people are least suspicious.
Please see the infographic below, for more information about how the people mentioned above, are connected to each other, and to RuPaul.
[Notes about the infographic:
I do not intend to imply that Michael Musto is a pedophile.
Nor do I intend to imply, with any certainty, that RuPaul is a pedophile.
RuPaul said that he knew Alig, but didn't like him, and wrote in his first book that Alig spit into his mouth.
On the other hand, RuPaul did briefly consider creating adult and child versions of his hit show RuPaul's Drag Race.
http://www.out.tv/se_SE/news/rupaul-proposes-a-childrens-and-senior-version-of-drag-race/
The subject of whether RuPaul (and/or his show) is grooming children, needs to be researched further, before any conclusions on that matter can be drawn.
It is perhaps also worth noting that a former contestant of the show - Nina West (a male drag queen) - has written a book for children. The book is called The You Kind of You and it is about kindness.
http://celebsecrets.com/drag-queen-nina-west-is-spreading-kindness-in-her-new-childrens-book/
Additionally, there is a book, for children, about RuPaul. Written by Maria Isabel Sanchez Vegara, the book is called Little People, Big Dreams. It came out in 2020.
http://forreadingaddicts.co.uk/new-releases/new-childrens-book-about-rupaul-will-teach-children-about-drag-and-the-power-of-being-yourself/
It's unclear whether these books contain any material which could be described as questionable based on the books' target age groups.
As for Geraldo, it wouldn't be a stretch to describe him as a "pedophile enabler". That's because, in 2020, he made statements defending Ghislaine Maxwell (Jeffrey Epstein's accomplice and girlfriend). He said that Maxwell - accused of sex trafficking minors - should get out on bail.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ny-geraldo-rivera-ghislaine-maxwell-bail-20200715-uso6xym3s5dh5lr3vapnujka7u-story.html
Whether RuPaul and Geraldo are sympathetic towards child abusers or not, we should be asking ourselves, "Even if just a handful of people involved in drag are pedophiles, did we just accept the drugging and rape of a 10-year-old boy, as the price of normalizing children dressing in drag in front of adults?"
Additionally: "Are we willing to accept that price?"
Unfortunately, since Michael Alig (Desmond's possible rapist) is now dead, it seems that we do not have a choice in the matter.
Click on image, and open in new tab or window,
or download, in order to see in full resolution.
Written on January 18th, 2023.
Image created on January 18th, 2023.
Published on January 18th, 2023.
No comments:
Post a Comment