I just hate suffering so much, even the suffering of those deliberately causing suffering. It's a weird philosophical paradox I struggle with and I'm not sure how to resolve it.

[–] RelentlessArts 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well you're better than me because I have definitely relished in the suffering of those who've caused suffering. World needs less of me tbh.

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't think it's "better", necessarily. It's partly a protective measure against empathising with people who cause suffering. Because I don't want to suffer.

Aggression against people who cause suffering is a different protection mechanism, and we are both just products of our experiences.

The world needs more people who can engage with self-awareness and evaluating their motives and actions, which you seem able to do. I wish you no suffering!

[–] skulblaka@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago

Having both types of people is important to a healthy society. The world needs paladins, those willing to wield violence in the pursuit of justice. A society without them would be ripe for strongarming by anyone with a loose set of morals and empty pockets. But we also need people like you, to keep us in check, so that the whole world might not go blind from our eye for an eye.

[–] CountZero@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's not that hard to resolve. In an ideal situation, the fascists would drop dead without feeling anything. I agree that suffering is wrong, but death is natural and comes for everyone eventually.

Also, if you got hit with I gun that big I don't think there would be much time to suffer.

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago

Perhaps I should clarify, actively causing death is what I struggle with. At what point does adding to death cause less deaths? How do we determine that? Even if we are able to somehow cause those deaths to be as painless and targetted as possible, it still causes suffering and inspires revenge from their family and friends. Under what circumstances do we justify it?

I haven't found an answer I'm satisfied with yet that doesn't somehow require clairvoyance.

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 29 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Fascists: Interrupting drag shows since 1938!

[–] Black616Angel@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago

Actually ~~not~~ it's complicated.
Fascinating as it may sound, transvestites were mostly allowed in the third reich, when they weren't homosexual.

The even got their own pass:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transvestite_pass

After reading the German and English version I am a little puzzled, since the German version says, that they were kept and transvestites stayed unharmed when not homosexual while the English version says:

After the Nazis came to power, most passes were revoked or German police refused to recognize them.

The German original source says the following:

Sofern Trans*personen den „gegen sie erhobenen Homosexualitätsverdacht entkräften konnten, lässt sich in keinem Fall eine Strafverfolgung nachweisen. "

Which translates to:

If trans*persons "could invalidate the suspicion of homosexuality, there is no evidence of criminal prosecution."

[–] Holodeck_Moriarty@lemm.ee 20 points 2 years ago

This is somehow more intimidating than uniforms.

[–] CheeseAndCrepes@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago

I think it should be law that folks in drag are allowed to shoot nazis. Whether it’s actual members of national socialism or just anyone who gets too loose drawing swastikas.

[–] poopypants205@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

I’m proud to upvote this.

[–] Granite@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago

When drag queens were men.

Wait…

[+] KoofNoof@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago (4 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] BrandoGil@lemmy.world 39 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What, pray tell is a "real" drag show, then?

[+] KoofNoof@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The vast majority of drag I've seen has not been shocking in the least. The biggest shock is at the awesome skills people have that I could never do. But that's not what you meant by shock humour.

Rick and Morty or South Park are way more shock humor, I guess they have done drag too though.

[+] KoofNoof@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

No, that's not a reaction where I live for the majority of people. As you can see from the OP's photo, men dressing up as women has happened for a long time. Women weren't even allowed as actors on stage in England until the 1660's, and also weren't allowed in ancient Greece. More recently the English speaking world has had Monty Python in the 70's who did a lot of drag in the tradition of English panto which was hugely popular for 100 years, Dame Edna Everage was an Australian icon who passed this year but had done female impersonation for a good 50 years. Buddhist countries like Thailand and Cambodia have had a drag scene since the 50's and have historically been fine with gender differences. The US had vaudeville in the 1800's... There have been movies about drag queens for decades (Priscilla Queen of the Desert was in 1994), drag queens were plot points in US 1970's sitcoms and dramas.

For many of us in less religious areas (which is where I see the most objection coming from), drag has been a very normal part of the entertainment scene for decades, if not hundreds of years. It's just costume.

I don't think about how silly ice skaters usually look in sparkly leotards either. Although some of them are... a choice.

[–] sweetviolentblush@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Maybe from the view of someone who isn't in the LGBT+ community, I guess? But most of us aren't so hung up on that stuff. It's just good entertainment and performance art in my eyes.

[–] sweetviolentblush@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Shock humor is absolutely a drag thing, Divine is a great example

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Drag can and does contain shock humour, like Divine definitely did a fair amount of, but most drag isn't based in shock humour, which is what the other poster was saying. Some of the more recent famous drag queens are known for their insult comedy... and there are definitely a lot of drag queens who do some very dirty jokes, but even the most shocking thing about RuPaul these days is that she's fine with fracking and still hasn't forgiven Courtney Act for rightfully calling her out on transphobia.

Like if you want shock drag queens, you really have to go looking for them. It would be very difficult to accidentally stumble into a show that resembles Divine during her John Waters days. You're way more likely to find a trained dancer and their own dance-pop album.

[–] sweetviolentblush@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

Ah I see, I missed where the poster said "it’s all just shock humor" I misread it as "it’s just shock humor". Yeah no, thats a shitty take.

[–] CountZero@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I just knew there was going to be a Well akshually post like this. As if men putting on fancy feminine dresses and dancing around is only a ""drag show"" if it happens where you expect it to.

And WTF do you mean by vulnerable-minded?

[–] ondoyant@beehaw.org 15 points 2 years ago

it was exactly like they were having an actual drag show. maybe not the modern cultural understanding of one, but they were dressing up as women to play feminine roles in the context of a performance, which fits under the definition of a drag show. it was a common practice in both the British and US militaries.

[–] animelivesmatter@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

lemmy.ml moment

[–] sorebuttfromsitting@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

this is confusing. what happened?

[–] skulblaka@kbin.social 31 points 2 years ago (2 children)

1940, some British soldiers were rehearsing for a drag show that they were putting on within their platoon because they could and because it was fun, it helps keep morale up during wartime. During rehearsal, the Germans begin their raid on Shornemead Fort, where said drag rehearsing troops were stationed. British Chads, without even stopping to change back into uniform, immediately man the naval guns and return fire on the Germans. One of them, instead of passing the ammo, took a photo of this because how could you not, it's incredible.

[–] Kruemel@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago

Thanks for context. Here some examplary "source", shornemead fort brings up alot in search. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/british-soldiers-in-drag-nazis/

[–] sorebuttfromsitting@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 years ago

yes, thank you for the context

[–] Wanderer@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

Drag shows then seem different to drag shows now.

The joke is that is it men in drag. It's funny. I dressed as a woman on a rugby trip and got voted as best girl on tour. It was a funny humourous thing. In the way man play the evil ugly woman in a panto. "Lol jokes. That "woman" is so ugly she sounds and looks like a man."

Drag shows where the drag part of it is normalised. That ruins the entire original premise. That why it is entirely different.

It's the difference between a comedian playing a character that pretends to be disabled (the joke being the audience knows they aren't disabled and they are just lazy. The other characters do not). Verses an actor pretending to be disabled in a drama.

Same thing but entirely different.

[–] Smorty@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So what's up with Nazi stuff currently? Why's that a topic?

[–] littlecolt@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago

We just love to discuss how awful Nazis are. Don't you agree?

load more comments