Not necessarily true. If someone claims
all events are dangerous and pornographic, that would be intolerance. However, to deny or pretend there are no bad actors and never any dangerous and pornographic occurrences is, at the very least, myopic, and discreditable at worst. There are various inappropriate and dangerous situations, e.g. drag queens at events found to be
registered sex offenders and cases of
indecent exposure.
See, this argument doesn't really sit well with me, because you can literally use this argument about
anything.
For instance, a non-zero number of gay men are paedophiles. That is a thing we can say, quite justifiably
HOWEVER
When people make the argument "Allowing gay men to work with children will make those children vulnerable to paedophiles", would you say that is an accurate statement? I mean, if we agree that a non-zero number of gay men are paedophiles, and we allow gay men to work with children, then it stands to reason that the statement is accurate in the sense that
increasing the people who have access to children increases the likelihood of those people being paedophiles. But is that the real, underlying
intent and implication of the statement? Because we can literally say the same about any group.
A non-zero number of women are abusive, so exposing children to women makes them more likely to be abused.
A non-zero number of dogs kill children, so exposing children to dogs makes them more likely to be killed.
A non-zero number of trees fall on people, so exposing children to trees makes them more likely to be crushed by one.
We can admit that there may be abusive or negative behaviours within a group,
but when we specifically single out a group in that context we are not just making a statement akin to the above, because that statement is functionally meaningless.
It's not an issue of people denying that there ARE "bad actors" among the group, it's the IMPLICATION given by the statement that the group poses a DISTINCT THREAT GREATER THAN THAT OF OTHER GROUPS by an innate quality of who they are that is the issue. Again, the statement "some gay people are paedophiles and therefore allowing gay people to work with children will expose them to paedophiles" is not a novel statement - it's taking a rule that applies to literally all groups and demographics and only SELECTIVELY applying it to one group in order to IMPLY that group poses a unique risk.
I don't think I've ever seen anyone say that there aren't dangers, or that there aren't instances in which children have been brought to inappropriate drag shows. It's that
these instances are not novel to these particular groups, and are often brought up not to highlight individual bad behaviour but to create an impression that ALL BEHAVIOUR within that group poses a risk.
To use your argument, are there some drag queens who are registered sex offenders and some drag shows that are inappropriate for children? Definitely, yes. But the argument isn't
whether these things are the case but
whether these things are sufficient that "drag shows", as a category, should be called out as uniquely harmful.
This is something that is CONSTANTLY happening with the trans and drag debate.
"Allowing trans people to use gendered bathrooms poses a threat to women."
"Allowing trans women into women's sports will literally be the death of women's sports."
"Drag shows are inappropriate for children."
These claims are made CONSTANTLY and with no regard for nuance, or differentiation or exceptions. They're not made in good faith to raise genuine concerns - they're used to create an impression that trans people and drag queens pose an INNATE threat, as a category. The framing isn't there to encourage real discussion of actual concern, it's scare-mongering.
We can have lots of healthy discussions about how to ensure broadening access to women's spaces doesn't increase risks to women, or about what categorisations or specifications would have to exist within sports to ensure equality within male and female competition if trans people wish to compete, or about whether or not certain drag shows are appropriate or inappropriate for children. These would be productive conversations. And yet,
they rarely, if ever, seem to occur, because the people making the above claims very rarely want to talk about them. They only want to bar trans women from bathrooms, or sports, or outlaw drag shows.
