you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2023
987 points (100.0% liked)
Atheist Memes
5537 readers
6 users here now
About
A community for the most based memes from atheists, agnostics, antitheists, and skeptics.
Rules
-
No Pro-Religious or Anti-Atheist Content.
-
No Unrelated Content. All posts must be memes related to the topic of atheism and/or religion.
-
No bigotry.
-
Attack ideas not people.
-
Spammers and trolls will be instantly banned no exceptions.
-
No False Reporting
-
NSFW posts must be marked as such.
Resources
International Suicide Hotlines
Non Religious Organizations
Freedom From Religion Foundation
Ex-theist Communities
Other Similar Communities
!religiouscringe@midwest.social
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This TikToker actually goes through all the news stories and logs every child abuse case and whether or not it's a drag queen or trans person. She even publishes all the data so you can fact check. Currently the count of drag queens abusing kids is ZERO since she started. So... no, you're wrong.
You'd be quite internet famous if you found inaccuracy. Please go for it.
Check it out, if you're interested in learning or being correct: https://www.whoismakingnews.com/.
To be fair, we've got a pretty big backlog of priests that need prosecution so counting articles might bias the results.
And that's on top of the untold thousands of children the Catholic (and other) churches murdered in their schools over the course of decades.
It's kind of cheating when your compound has a graveyard.
Link #3 is concerning, but not assault. That is a pedophile with CP.
Drag queens, and pretty much everyone else, have a substantially lower incidence rate of child assault than the clergy.
But if your point is literally trying to say "But 'most' isn't the same as 'all'!!1!!", yeah fine. Be happy with your technicality, and miss the point completely.
It isn't misinformation, you're simply making inferences that aren't inherent to the post you've read. Exactly what the post title and text says is true. You're either unable to cope with something like OCD (and therefore unable to accept the post as anything other than what you personally would consider ideal) or you're being obtuse in order to derail the post as much as you can. But really it just seems like you just need to maybe chill out a bit, have a chuckle or don't, and then move on.
Your indignation is probably religiously based, so you're automatically incapacitated to "look at reality objectively".
To me it seems that on lemmy (as it was/is in reddit) the majority of users is leaning more to one side (if not the extreme side) of the ideologies and people who try to be reasonable get quickly shut down for not fitting this or that narrative. That's sad in my opinion because all it's doing is replicating what used to be the norm on the opposite side of the spectrum and you can clearly see that most don't even notice it. For all intents and purposes they believe 100% that they are right and therefore no nuances are allowed, period. But you know, maybe the biggot is you for not accepting that last 1% of the current narrative... I feel I'm in the same boat as you though.
So many of these instances are how folks come across, some are coarse and some not so much. Active voice, authoritative tone, and missing the vibe can really impact perception. Of course reality is highly nuanced, but low stake comment sections often aren't. Just my 2c.
But you're not being logical. The meme title states that one group has definitely hurt children. That's simply a fact.
You then said: "But the way it’s worded is basically a claim into itself that the bottom group has NEVER…EVER harmed a child. Which, being an absolutist statement probably doesn’t hold water."
That's your non-factual interpretation of the statement. That's how you saw it and that wasn't based on any of the words contained in the title but what you thought they were trying to imply.
If you're going to claim you're solely interested in logic and fact then you really need to own that position.
The meme states that one group has hurt kids....and that's it. And that is a fact. One group has hurt kids. You're interpretation that the meme is saying only one group has hurt kids is just that - your interpretation. I'm asking you to look at the your statements that you are basing your opinion on logic and facts and weigh that against the exact wording of this meme. Factually, the meme states one group has hurt kids. It does not say only one group has hurt kids. The truth of that can be seen by simply coldly and logically reading the title of the post/meme.
But if you're now saying that facts and logic aren't the only thing that come into play here then I agree with you. In that case, we have to look at context and probability, neither of which can be factual as the data is scant. But it's also pretty reasonable, based on what we do have, that its accurate to refer to priests as a group that hurt kids. We can't really say that about drag artists.
Your correction reveals some kind of hatred, but that between you, your psychiatrist and your meds.
Searching with a microscope for any case that gives credence to a sick group of haters doesn't speak well of you, so I don't particularly care about being unflinchingly objective. You don't seem to be worth it.
First link was a crime from 2022, which is before the data set started. But also, the perpetrator wasn't a drag queen. She was a pervert that liked dressing kids up in drag. That's a straight non-drag person being psycho: https://nypost.com/2023/04/25/mom-who-mentored-drag-queen-11-sentenced-for-child-sex-crimes/. Not a drag queen.
Your second link was a guy who read at drag story hour in 2018, and assaulted a kid before that. No indication that he ever did drag before he assaulted the kid.
And if you need to stretch back to 2018 to find something... which weren't even drag queens but were just tangentially related..., but only had to stretch back to last week to find a non-drag assaulter, are you really being honest? Or are you just trying to be correct?
Doesn't have to be after 2022. I was talking about that one website.
This is the first link you've provided that has a drag queen being an abuser. That one is horrible. Super bad. She should be punished.
More importantly, do you just... collect these? You got a weird kink my dude.
That explains the poor quality links.
I've followed that other site for a couple months. She's great on TikTok.
I claimed there were none on that site. This was accurate.
You should talk to someone about that need for pedantry. It shows a lack of understanding of how communication works. Maybe get a diagnosis. It will help. It helped me.
I tire of correcting you. Have a night!
I can't see the top story as I'm in the EU but the second one committed offences in 2008. From what I can tell, the TikToker is only recording 'new' cases i.e. cases where offences occurred after she started doing this. The third one you should definitley tell her about. There's an email on her page.
I don't think anyone can realistically suggest that any group of people is 100% pedo-free. There are pedo priests, pedo cops, pedo mums, pedo traffic wardens etc etc so there is going to be a non-zero amount of drag artists that are pedos simply by virtue of the fact that pedos exist unfortunately.
I don't agree that the spirit of this meme is suggesting no drag artist has ever hurt a child and I think it's pretty fair to say, based on the data that does exist (poor quality though it is) that drag artists, as a group of people, are extremely low on the offending against kids front.
The arguments being used by some to suggest drag artists, as a group, are dangerous to kids (and I'm not suggesting you're one of the people doing this) could be applied to any group of people that come into contact with any other group of people. I mean, Dennis Rader used to be a census taker - does that mean census takers as a group are fair game to be treated as likely to murder people by torture?
Both serial killers and librarians kill innocent strangers for no reason. Whew, I’m glad I’m being so clever and avoiding the black and white fallacy!
The real fallacy is religion
“Gotta rip that Band-Aid off now. You’ll thank me later.”
Sorry to burst your bubble but drag queens and the trans community didn’t suddenly appear in the 2020s when ultra right wing media decided they were all diddlers. You don’t even need to dig deep. You’ve got surface level, mainstream examples like John Waters and Divine were killing it in the 70s. Shit, Gore Vidal wrote Myra Breckenridge in the 60s and had a movie made of it with Raquel Welch
Plus, if you want a more academic history of sexual expression and gender expression, Foucault and Butler have written plenty. And all their books are old as fuck and talk about people from a long ass time ago
Add onto that, the Catholic Church’s history of child abuse is pretty much always analyzed across the latter half of the 20th century and now the 21st century. When’s the last time you saw someone call out the church over pedophilia by saying, “hey, did you know that Pope Innocent III molested an altar boy in 1203 A.D.”
So yeah naw. Roasting the church harder than drag queens isn’t biased, it isn’t reactionary, and the academic interest isn’t missing.
“Group” is the keyword here.
Some people in the bottom group hurt children (like in mostly every sizeable group, unfortunately), while the top group as an entity hurt children. There’s no Drag Queen organization protecting drag queens with proven child molestation records. Meanwhile, churches have done that for ages, and I don’t remember of a single priest facing consequences from the church itself for illegal behavior around children.