Conservatism

[UKMikey]

lol. lmao.

**** me, that National Review crowd .

"Artificial intelligence has a well-known liberal bias."

Can't wait for the fashing police to start popping an artery over the new Velma Dinkley series. @Populuxe, you may want to check it out by the way.

 

[Populuxe]

**** me, that National Review crowd .

"Artificial intelligence has a well-known liberal bias."

Can't wait for the fashing police to start popping an artery over the new Velma Dinkley series. @Populuxe, you may want to check it out by the way.

Mindy Kaling as Velma? Oh hell yes.

 

[Roo]

"'Drag show' means a show or performance for entertainment at which a single performer or group of performers dress in clthing and use makeup and other physical markers opposite of the performer's or group of performers' gender at birth to exaggerate gender signifiers and roles and engage in singing, dancing or a monologue skit in order to entertain an audience of two or more people."

That's what's being deemed obscenity to justify prohibition. But there is no justification as there is no legitimate harm. It's purely expressive acts of which these rats disapprove. Absolute insanity.

Expressive rights? No.
Associative rights? No.
Parental rights? No.
Individual rights? No.

All absent indication of specific, legitimate harm.

Mental. Illness.

No 30th anniversary showings of Mrs Doubtfire then?

 

[TexRex]

No 30th anniversary showings of Mrs Doubtfire then?

Authors should make clear the performance format (live, film, etc.) prohibited by proposed statutes and amendments to statutes, but if these proposals were actually thoughtful, pen would never have touched paper.

 

[UKMikey]

No 30th anniversary showings of Mrs Doubtfire then?

Or this movie, much of which was actually shot in Nebraska:

 

[Sprite]

Or this movie, much of which was actually shot in Nebraska:

View attachment 1222528

Great film, also no showings of “Birdcage”, “Rocky Horror” or “Pricilla Queen of the Desert” wonder if “Junior” will be covered too. Utter lunacy.

 

[UKMikey]

Great film, also no showings of “Birdcage”, “Rocky Horror” or “Pricilla Queen of the Desert” wonder if “Junior” will be covered too. Utter lunacy.

Well, nobody's perfect.

 

[Sprite]

Well, nobody's perfect.

I really don’t think they have considered all areas where some form of Drag is used. It’s a legitimate art form, I’d hate to think how dull my childhood would have been without Lilly Savage, Dame Edna & Rocky Horror to name just a few. I’m sure there are many many others.

Do they consider Glam Rock as Drag too? I just find it all a little surreal things like this can be pushed through and considered law and a benefit for everyone.

 

[TexRex]

I just find it all a little surreal things like this can be pushed through and considered law and a benefit for everyone.

Moral panic.

 

[Famine]

These guys would burst if they ever discovered the traditional British panto.


Edit: Just for the benefit of non-Brits (less a select handful of other random nations, mostly touched by the Empire), a traditional British panto is...

• A play
• At Christmas
• Usually one of the things Disney has made into a cartoon (Aladdin being popular - as the original Chinese story rather than the pretend Arabian Nights version)
• The lead character is male and played by a very attractive young woman
• The lead character's mum is female and played by a commonly gay, late-middle-aged comic/thespian in drag
• The lead character's love interest is female and also played by a very attractive young woman
• It's behind you!

 

[TheCracker]

• Oh, no it isn't!
• Oh, yes it is!

 

[Jezza819]

I really don’t think they have considered all areas where some form of Drag is used. It’s a legitimate art form, I’d hate to think how dull my childhood would have been without Lilly Savage, Dame Edna & Rocky Horror to name just a few. I’m sure there are many many others.

Do they consider Glam Rock as Drag too? I just find it all a little surreal things like this can be pushed through and considered law and a benefit for everyone.

My younger years go back even further to Monty Python's Flying Circus. I don't know if there was a single episode or movie of theirs where they weren't in drag at least once.

Also yesterday one of the guys in my department had one of the streaming services playing music through his phone and Queen's "I Want To Break Free" came on and I immediately thought that in a conservative world that music video would have to be banned in case children were to see it. A gay man parading around dressed as a woman? Oh harumph, harumph.

 

[UKMikey]

These guys would burst if they ever discovered the traditional British panto.


Edit: Just for the benefit of non-Brits (less a select handful of other random nations, mostly touched by the Empire), a traditional British panto is...

• A play
• At Christmas
• Usually one of the things Disney has made into a cartoon (Aladdin being popular - as the original Chinese story rather than the pretend Arabian Nights version)
• The lead character is male and played by a very attractive young woman
• The lead character's mum is female and played by a commonly gay, late-middle-aged comic/thespian in drag
• The lead character's love interest is female and also played by a very attractive young woman
• It's behind you!

You forgot the most important thing... intended for children.

(If repressive performative legislation like this ever makes the books I'd like to think a slew of test cases will demolish it.)

 

[TexRex]

These guys would burst if they ever discovered the traditional British panto.

Yes, please.

You forgot the most important thing... intended for children.

Okay, groomers.

(If repressive performative legislation like this ever makes the books I'd like to think a slew of test cases will demolish it.)

There's basically no way it withstands constitutional challenge. I'd like to think SCOTUS wouldn't even grant cert on appeal of a lower court's injuction, but that injunction certainly doesn't get reversed. I don't know what the majority looks like, though. A practical ideal would be 7-2 with Thomas and Alito dissenting, the latter authoring a sweeping, 17-page bitchfit in which the soul of the nation is invoked.

Obviously state legislatures pushing this lunacy will take their laws being upheld by the Court, but they're not actually designed to be. This is purely performative culture war posturing designed exclusively to engage the idiot base. Modern American conservatism is mental illness.

 

[UKMikey]

Okay, groomers.

Oh no, we aren't! ("Oh yes, you are!", etc)

This is purely performative culture war posturing designed exclusively to engage the idiot base.

It's designed to push buttons (to make another panto-related pun).

 

[TexRex]

So I've posted this over in Banned Books, but I'm posting it here as well because it's illustrative of the contemporary tendency toward regressive conservative ideology.

Lunacy.

A logical interpretation of statutory definitions:



Per the language to be added to the NDCC by this proposal, any photograph of any individual is deemed "explicit sexual material," as even one clothed and groomed conventionally--satisfying any supposed moral standard--according to their sex at birth is displaying gender identity.

Explicit sexual material:

Sheer lunacy.

Modern American conservatism is mental illness.

 

[TB]

What the hell, North Dakota?

At least South Dakota was only on meth...

 

[TexRex]

What the hell, North Dakota?

These are the two members of the State Assembly who introduced the bill:

Mike Lefor | North Dakota Legislative Branch

President, Blackridge Enterprises, LLC DSU Graduate President, Dickinson Park Board (2006-2014); Chairman, CHI St. Joseph Hospital (2008-2014); City Commission (2016); Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission (1993-2003) Married (Sherryl); 3 children House since 2015

ndlegis.gov

Contact Information
P.O. Box 564
Dickinson, ND 58602-0564
Cell
701-290-0539
Email
mlefor@ndlegis.gov

Vicky Steiner | North Dakota Legislative Branch

Owner, Big Sky Condos; Realtor, Home and Land Company BS, MSU Moorhead, MN Energy Supply Taskforce, National Council State Legislatures; Legislative Energy Horizons Institute Certificate (2018); Badlands Advisory Group; DSU Nursing Program Advisory Committee; Badlands Right to Life; Rotary...

ndlegis.gov

Contact Information
859 Senior Avenue
Dickinson, ND 58601-3755
Email
vsteiner@ndlegis.gov

 

[TexRex]

TX bill would make labeling 'fetal tissue food product' mandatory

The FDA says there's no such thing.

www.chron.com

Texas State Sen. Bob Hall is taking anti-abortion measures even further by proposing a bill that would require labeling for food products that contain fetal tissue. What's causing people to scratch their heads, however, is that no such food exists.

"There are no conditions under which the FDA would consider human fetal tissue to be safe or legal for human consumption," a U.S. Food and Drug Administration official said via email.

Hall filed Senate Bill number 314 (SB 314) as an amendment to the Health and Safety Code that specifically targets foods that contain, are manufactured using, or were created through research using human fetal tissue.

An informational one-pager from Hall's office compares labeling "fetal tissue food products" to other food labels such as organic, kosher or vegan, in an attempt to allow "consumers the ability to purchase products that align with their preferences or religious requirements."

"Unfortunately, many Texans are unknowingly consuming products that either contain human fetal parts or were developed using human fetal parts," the one-pager states. "While some may not be bothered by this, there are many Texans with religious or moral beliefs that would oppose consumption or use of these products. They have the right to know what is in the products they are consuming."

It is unclear what group(s) of people would feel comfortable eating fetal tissue. When asked if Hall believes that fetal tissue is found in food, his office doubled down on the labeling aspect without examples: "If a food does not contain fetal tissue, there is no need to label it."

"Human fetus tissue" is "tissue, cells, or organs obtained from an aborted unborn child," according to the bill.

This definition is meant to include products developed through research using human fetal cells. Among the most widely known cell lines is HEK 293, a kidney line cell that has been at the center of controversy since it was first used in the 1970s. According to the one-pager, HEK-293's "flavor receptors are used to develop artificial flavor additives."

This is referring to a reoccurring rumor that PepsiCo has aborted fetal cells in its drinks. The allegation dates to at least 2011 when the anti-abortion group Child of God for Life said it would boycott the company because it used aborted fetal cells to test products.

A 2008 patent filed by biotechnology company Senomyx mentions the use of HEK-293 cells, but a 2011 CBS News report suggested that the patent was for a process to engineer the cells to work like taste-receptor cells. "This way, Senomyx can test millions of substances to see if they work as different types of taste enhancers without subjecting human volunteers to endless taste tests," the report states.

Whatever the use was for the patent, Firmenich, the company that acquired Senomyx, told Reuters that none of the company's products have ever contained any human cell or material.

PepsiCo went a step further with its statement to Reuters, saying that "PepsiCo absolutely does not conduct or fund research that utilizes any human tissue or cell lines derived from embryos or fetuses.”

It is important to note that the bill defines "human fetal tissue" as from an "aborted unborn child." Fetuses used for research purposes are from induced abortions, yes, but also spontaneous abortions and stillbirths. The National Institutes of Health also requires signed permission from the woman who donated the fetal tissue. Hall's office has not confirmed what the bill means by "aborted unborn child" at the time of publication.

While human fetal tissue is not found in our food, the bill also addresses an area where it is commonly used: in medical research.

Human fetal tissue is largely used by researchers to create vaccines. It is especially necessary when studying how certain diseases such as Zika can affect the fetus and in turn, the child. In order to learn how childhood cancers such as retinoblastoma and rhabdomyosarcoma develop, researchers need access to fetal cells to determine how the cells change. "Without access to fetal cells, we cannot understand and effectively combat diseases that begin in utero," states an article by Science.org, a publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

When asked about the implications on scientific research if this bill passed, a statement from Hall's office reiterated once again that the intent is only to label the product. "A well-informed consumer can make whatever choice they decide on purchasing a product so long as they have all of the information in hand to make the choice."

The Texas Senate bill includes mandatory labeling for cosmetics that contain human fetal tissue. The one-pager specifically names NEOCUTIS as a company that "freely and proudly admits its use of human fetal cells."

No information could be found on the NEOCUTIS site that specifically names human fetal cells as a part of its makeup, but the brand is founded on the "basis of extensive wound healing research in Lausanne, Switzerland." That research did determine that human fetal cells, specifically the skin cells of aborted fetuses, could rapidly heal severe burns and other skin wounds. NEOCUTIS did not immediately return a request for comment Wednesday.

Hall is not the first state senator to file such a bill. Oklahoma State Senator Ralph Shortey introduced a similar bill in 2012, which the Oklahoma legislature did not pass.

Mental illness.

 

[UKMikey]

LOL this has got to be performative. You're right that it's completely whacked, though.

 

[huskeR32]

Or this movie, much of which was actually shot in Nebraska:

View attachment 1222528

I'm a little late seeing this post, but there's a train scene from that movie that was filmed in my tiny hometown of 800 people. I remember everybody dying to get a glimpse of Snipes and Swayze, and nobody caring one bit that the movie featured drag. Today, I'd imagine a number of those same people are happily onboard with our legislature's anti-trans shenanigans. sigh

 

[TexRex]

Connie bitch obsessed with kids' genitals projects that obsession on male pairings (he means the gays).

It's a reboot (except that it never really went away) of the decades-old rhetoric that inspires the connie moral panic over what they've termed "grooming" (which is to say acceptance of the condition that gender and sexuality are not as simple as they'd like).

More than that, the sentiment at the start is itself deeply flawed. Blood shouldn't be considered safe simply because they're blood. The "stranger danger" moral panic made that much clear. Plus the danger that blood may represent certainly isn't limited to males.

 

[Danoff]

Connie bitch obsessed with kids' genitals projects that obsession on male pairings (he means the gays).

It's a reboot (except that it never really went away) of the decades-old rhetoric that inspires the connie moral panic over what they've termed "grooming" (which is to say acceptance of the condition that gender and sexuality are not as simple as they'd like).

More than that, the sentiment at the start is itself deeply flawed. Blood shouldn't be considered safe simply because they're blood. The "stranger danger" moral panic made that much clear. Plus the danger that blood may represent certainly isn't limited to males.

Genetic relation definitely does not prevent sexual assault... obviously. But also, I think he doesn't realize how much this is aimed at all adoptive parents. I'm a male who adopted a child, he strongly implies that I'm a huge risk to my adoptive kid - though I'm sure the fact that I'm not gay would somehow make that better for him.

Very much comes across as gay = pedophile.

 

[HenrySwanson]

But also, I think he doesn't realize how much this is aimed at all adoptive parents.

I'm more trusting of Chat GPT's critical thinking skills over this guy.

 

[McLaren]

First off, it’s from the Gateway Pundit which I believe is a right wing rag so who knows what misleading info they’re sharing.

2nd off, Matt’s a ******* weirdo obsessed with thinking young girls are in their prime so by his logic, all conservatives are weirdos obsessed with young girls & genitals.

 

[Danoff]

all conservatives men are weirdos obsessed with young girls children & genitals.

FTFY

 

[TexRex]

First off, it’s from the Gateway Pundit which I believe is a right wing rag so who knows what misleading info they’re sharing.

I'm not about to check GP to see if its coverage is factual (to your point, it's demonstrated a propensity to skew and even wholly ignore facts in service to its preferred narrative), but it's a real story from August of last year.

Georgia couple accused of producing child sex abuse images using adoptive children

The sibling pair in the couple's care were taken to safety, officials said.

www.nbcnews.com

Props to NBC here as they have opted, unlike entirely too many other outlets, to not refer to the exploitative materials that the pair produced as pornography. Pornography is when participants consent not only to activities to be documented and distributed but also the documentation and distribution. Absent consent to both, these are sexual abuse materials or something in that vein, and those involving minors are child sexual abuse materials (CSAM) or, again, something to that effect.

Edit: The story is from August but it's been picked up again recently by conservative pundits for some reason.

Prominent right-wing commentators still have a problem with same-sex parents

www.mediamatters.org

 

[TexRex]

 

[UKMikey]

Aside from the massive disrespect to Breonna and her family, there's also this:

 

[TexRex]