This is an insane attempt at equivocation between different contexts of “drag shows.” The key difference being the overt sexualization of modern drag shows (i.e. twerking, skimpy clothing, spreading legs, putting dollar bills in g-strings, etc.) vs cross dressing as comedy.
▪️Remember, the plot of Mrs. Doubtfire was that an unreliable screwup, but well-intentioned and devoted father, was kept from having custody of his children. So he used his talents and went to great lengths (pretending to be a woman!) in order to be with his kids.
▪️The obvious differences between this “drag show” and those resembling strip teases is that Mrs. Doubtfire never believed he was actually a woman, nor was there a “grooming” sexual element involved with the character. The shtick of Mrs. Doubtfire was that she was wholesome.
▪️Even so, the movie was rated PG-13, meaning that it wasn’t considered appropriate for children at the time. Although that was likely for language and drinking, not the cross dressing aspect.
▪️There’s also reportedly a rated R version where Robin Williams ad libs with dirty jokes, but it hasn’t been released.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/22/entertainment/mrs-doubtfire-robin-williams-intl-scli/index.html
As with the leftist freak out over “banned books” this is not banning books, it’s still easy to get Harry Potter and bookstores should be able to limit whatever books they want for whatever reason. But not only does it show a double standard, the rationale is far less justifiable than removing certain content from school libraries. At least there the justification was the content of certain books are inappropriate for children, clearly not every book should be available in a school library. Here, there’s no argument about the content they just don’t like the author’s politics!
Because news came out about his letter to the FBI, revealing he was a nutcase. The letter was rambling and incoherent, claiming he was trained by the US military off the books, and that Walz had instructed him to kill Amy Klobuchar so he could run for Senate. None of it made any sense (Walz is not running for Senate) and none of the assassinations made any sense, even in a diabolical way.
Nearly all of his hit list was Democrats (including Walz) and abortion clinics, but he was supposedly working for Walz?! Plus, one of the guys he killed wasn’t even on his list, and others were no longer in office or deceased. None of it makes sense from any coherent angle.
Basically, it appears the guy was mentally ill and neither the left or right can use the incident to push their agendas anymore, so the story was dropped.
This is so dumb. First, this means LA began as Spanish land founded to support Spanish missions (i.e. colonialism). Which contradicts their entire premise. But the reality is that Los Angeles is a quintessential American city.
▪️When the US acquired California in the 1840s, LA was a small town of less than 2,000 people. It was basically nothing. It became large only after the gold rush and the railroads completed in the 1870-80s, which brought thousands of new settlers and a booming commercial center.
▪️But LA had a major issue limiting its growth, no water. It wasn’t until Mulholland found a water source and built an aqueduct down from Northern California that LA had the infrastructure to grow into a major city.
▪️Then, a combination of oil, real estate and the film industry caused it to boom in the early 1900s. Post WWII, industries like aerospace continued its spectacular growth. Calling this “Mexican land” is a brain dead take. Neither the Mexicans, Spanish nor ...
