• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Netflix to order two seasons of "AJ and the Queen" Netflix agenda show, starring a Drag Queen and underaged kid.

May 22, 2018
1,179
2,509
415
No it wasn't, you're just not competent enough to articulate your point. Even the comparison you were clearly trying to make doesn't make sense, you can't compare "surface level" complaints at thins like what Resetera does to putting a kid in a show around adults that practice a sexualization activity which is what Drag is regardless if the kid was sexualized or not (which several people complain about the show say she was and theorize they made her look like a boy on purpose..)

It's like complaining about a kid wearing a shirt with a gun from a video game on it, and then plopping the kid in a middle of a actual gun fight just for fun. One doesn't harm the kid, one does.

You need better comparisons. But then again you are completely fine with this so you are never going to get it, I don't know why you guys just won't say the kids should be left alone but apparently that's hard.
Shit, if you're this upset about the treatment of an actor who happens to be a child acting in a movie about drag queens don't watch Trainspotting. It is deplorable how they treated the baby in that movie. Fuckin kid got so high on heroin it was crawling on the ceiling! And then it overdosed! The kid overdosed for cinema!
 
  • Like
Reactions: sol_bad

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
7,156
5,447
1,075
Shit, if you're this upset about the treatment of an actor who happens to be a child acting in a movie about drag queens don't watch Trainspotting. It is deplorable how they treated the baby in that movie. Fuckin kid got so high on heroin it was crawling on the ceiling! And then it overdosed! The kid overdosed for cinema!
^Stunning and Brave
 

Vicetrailia

Member
Mar 12, 2019
1,055
524
410
You are triggered by the existence of a Netflix show. Just like people do on ResetEra.

The reason the kid was acting like a boy in the show because she was homeless and thought that people would be less likely to mess with her if they thought she was a boy.

No kids were harmed by this show so stop with the cancel culture bullshit, snowflake.

Yup. They're just mad at the idea of it because they don't like a main part of the content, trans/drag. So they make up all of these conspiracy theories to justify their woes. It's 100% triggered mentality. They aren't judging the actual content of the show.
 

OmegaSupreme

Member
Apr 17, 2019
691
1,001
385
Yup. They're just mad at the idea of it because they don't like a main part of the content, trans/drag. So they make up all of these conspiracy theories to justify their woes. It's 100% triggered mentality. They aren't judging the actual content of the show.
Lol. Do you have children? If not you have no right to a opinion on this. Drag shows are often sexual in nature and I don't see the utility in putting pre pubescent children in them.
 

belmarduk

Gold Member
Nov 19, 2019
478
471
440
Lol. Do you have children? If not you have no right to a opinion on this. Drag shows are often sexual in nature and I don't see the utility in putting pre pubescent children in them.
My god.. telling someone they have no right to their own opinion.. some of you are hilarious.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: Spukc

OmegaSupreme

Member
Apr 17, 2019
691
1,001
385
My god.. telling someone they have no right to their own opinion.. some of you are hilarious.
On the subject of children yes. I see no problem with that. I notice you didn't answer that or answer what the utility of putting pre pubescent children in drag shows is.
 

belmarduk

Gold Member
Nov 19, 2019
478
471
440
On the subject of children yes. I see no problem with that. I notice you didn't answer that or answer what the utility of putting pre pubescent children in drag shows is.
Its a show that involves a child and a drag queen which does not sexualize the child. The utility of it is for people to watch it and make money for Netflix. If you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to watch it.
 
  • Like
  • Fire
Reactions: sol_bad and Spukc

OmegaSupreme

Member
Apr 17, 2019
691
1,001
385
Its a show that involves a child and a drag queen which does not sexualize the child. The utility of it is for people to watch it and make money for Netflix. If you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to watch it.
Exposing the pre pubescent child to sex is my problem and any parents. And the defense of "it's a show to make money" is bullshit. That doesn't defend the content of the show its self.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The_Berserker_Armor

TUROK

Member
Aug 27, 2010
4,714
684
810
Yup. They're just mad at the idea of it because they don't like a main part of the content, trans/drag. So they make up all of these conspiracy theories to justify their woes. It's 100% triggered mentality. They aren't judging the actual content of the show.
Pretty much.

This place comes across as bizarro ResetEra fairly often.
 
Last edited:
Oh damn you caught us. That's it. It's a trans/drag thing. It's not about the kids having sex pushed in their faces at all.
Can you cite any example of that happening in reference to this thread?

The only thing I can see is a child actor acting in an adult TV show. So, at worst, it would be 1 kid, not kids, and I don't know if working a job even qualifies as pushing it in their faces.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: belmarduk

oagboghi2

Member
Apr 15, 2018
5,603
7,217
460
Yup. They're just mad at the idea of it because they don't like a main part of the content, trans/drag. So they make up all of these conspiracy theories to justify their woes. It's 100% triggered mentality. They aren't judging the actual content of the show.
Yes, people don’t like mixing kids with transgender and drag queen culture. Is this news to you? Why do you think people object to things like Desmond is amazing or drag queen story time.

Oh wait, you’re one of those let me guess

“If you don’t love (insert trans thing here) you are a nazi”. 🙄
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: OmegaSupreme

belmarduk

Gold Member
Nov 19, 2019
478
471
440
Exposing the pre pubescent child to sex is my problem and any parents. And the defense of "it's a show to make money" is bullshit. That doesn't defend the content of the show its self.
There are no sex scenes involving children. None. I watched the whole thing. There's no nudity in the show at all and no more sexual scenes than any other Netflix show.

It is rated TV-14. So if you don't want your child watching it, you can change the settings.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: Spukc

OmegaSupreme

Member
Apr 17, 2019
691
1,001
385
There are no sex scenes involving children. None. I watched the whole thing. There's no nudity in the show at all and no more sexual scenes than any other Netflix show.

It is rated TV-14. So if you don't want your child watching it, you can change the settings.
Well that's great I was worried about netflix showing a child being fucked. Jfc. Hey I'm glad you enjoyed it. Why watch it though? What did you get out of it? What does the kid add to it?
 
Last edited:

OmegaSupreme

Member
Apr 17, 2019
691
1,001
385
Your definition of sex being pushed onto children is a kid standing next to RuPaul.

I'm not entirely convinced that you know what sex is.
Sure buddy. That's it. What does a kid add to the show? Who's this for? What's its purpose?
 

belmarduk

Gold Member
Nov 19, 2019
478
471
440
Well that's great I was worried about netflix showing a child being fucked. Jfc. Hey I'm glad you enjoyed it. Why watch it though? What did you get out of it? What does the kid add to it?
The kid is an integral part of the story. The child in the story is homeless due to her mother's drug addiction and wants to stay with her grandfather in Texas. Rupaul's character has a drag show to perform in Texas, so the child hides in his RV to get a ride.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: Spukc

OmegaSupreme

Member
Apr 17, 2019
691
1,001
385
The kid is an integral part of the story. The child in the story is homeless due to her mother's drug addiction and wants to stay with her grandfather in Texas. Rupaul's character has a drag show to perform in Texas, so the child hides in his RV to get a ride.
I see. So this ends how? The kid does drag? Look I'm all for accepting alternative lifestyles and different people. I think any sane person agrees with that. It just seems a bit odd to me to put a young kid in this. Why not make the kid a teenager? Exposing kids to sex to soon is a trigger for me lol. Not trying to attack you or anyone else. The choice of such a young kid seems suspect and I question the motives. That's all.
 

OmegaSupreme

Member
Apr 17, 2019
691
1,001
385
If you really wanted answers to these questions, you'd watch the show.

But I already know whining about things is a hobby for you lot.
Or you could answer the questions. Why watch a show I know I won't enjoy? And who's "you lot"?
 

belmarduk

Gold Member
Nov 19, 2019
478
471
440
I see. So this ends how? The kid does drag? Look I'm all for accepting alternative lifestyles and different people. I think any sane person agrees with that. It just seems a bit odd to me to put a young kid in this. Why not make the kid a teenager? Exposing kids to sex to soon is a trigger for me lol. Not trying to attack you or anyone else. The choice of such a young kid seems suspect and I question the motives. That's all.
It ends with a touching mother and child reunion. You could say that the girl does drag in the beginning but only because she is homeless and thinks people would be less likely to mess with her if they thought she was a boy. Its definitely not sexualization. The show itself is that sort of "odd couple takes a road trip" type of plot that I'm sure you've seen before. Its nothing nefarious, I promise.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: Spukc

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
18,728
33,811
1,450
Australia
"You could say that the girl does drag in the beginning but only because she is homeless and thinks people would be less likely to mess with her if they thought she was a boy."

Oh, well that makes it totally fine then.
 

belmarduk

Gold Member
Nov 19, 2019
478
471
440
Its probably what I would've done if I would've been in that situation.
There are far too many sick people in the world who would have tried to take advantage.
 

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
7,156
5,447
1,075
OP, I'm a little hurt you didn't bother to respond to my post, I put real time into that!
Because you didn't spend time or effort you just made a pointless rant they went around in circles showing you didn't even try to do any research and if you did you just went on google and spend 2 minutes on it if that.

The fact you decided to come back just to try and stroke your ego doesn't help your case at all and it's clear that you and some others are obsessively defending children being put in situations they shouldn't be in. There's nothing more to talk about other than it's disgusting and sad.

You didn't even tag me, just tried to be a slick little cunt on the slide thinking you would get away with it. Shows you have no case.

None of you or your other defenders are even making an argument you keep ignoring people pointing out the issues and then you move the goal posts to "know sex scenes" which wasn't the concern or "companies are making money" yet I bet you there are shows you don't support where that excuse doesn't work so why would it work here?

Something is wrong with you, hope you get it cleared up soon.

Sure buddy. That's it. What does a kid add to the show? Who's this for? What's its purpose?
They are defending it just to defend it. Notice they haven't actually answered the question and only moved the goal post to weird things like "having sex scenes with kids" which you never mentioned.

It's because they can't answer the question. Don't bother.

"You could say that the girl does drag in the beginning but only because she is homeless and thinks people would be less likely to mess with her if they thought she was a boy."

Oh, well that makes it totally fine then.
Girls usually get more sympathy, so the show takes place in an area where people are more likely to mess with girls because they like boys better?

Color me not surprised at the obvious agenda with that one. I wonder how this show is going to impact the little girl when she grows up on her psyche.
 

Contica

Member
Feb 1, 2016
1,157
776
440
If you have a problem with kids being exposed to sex, your energy would probably be better spent fighting against shit like ex on the beach and paradise hotel than a show like this.

This tread is basically just a lot of whining from people having strong opinions about something they haven't seen.

Because you didn't spend time or effort you just made a pointless rant they went around in circles showing you didn't even try to do any research and if you did you just went on google and spend 2 minutes on it if that.

The fact you decided to come back just to try and stroke your ego doesn't help your case at all and it's clear that you and some others are obsessively defending children being put in situations they shouldn't be in. There's nothing more to talk about other than it's disgusting and sad.

You didn't even tag me, just tried to be a slick little cunt on the slide thinking you would get away with it. Shows you have no case.

None of you or your other defenders are even making an argument you keep ignoring people pointing out the issues and then you move the goal posts to "know sex scenes" which wasn't the concern or "companies are making money" yet I bet you there are shows you don't support where that excuse doesn't work so why would it work here?

Something is wrong with you, hope you get it cleared up soon.



They are defending it just to defend it. Notice they haven't actually answered the question and only moved the goal post to weird things like "having sex scenes with kids" which you never mentioned.

It's because they can't answer the question. Don't bother.



Girls usually get more sympathy, so the show takes place in an area where people are more likely to mess with girls because they like boys better?

Color me not surprised at the obvious agenda with that one. I wonder how this show is going to impact the little girl when she grows up on her psyche.
Who hurt you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: belmarduk
Aug 28, 2019
1,206
1,470
355
OK so, I'm gonna ask...how many of you have...actually.....watched at least the first episode?

See, I was gonna talk mad crap about it too but said "'ya know what, maybe I should give at least the first episode a watch", so I did. And to be honest, it...wasn't the cringefest I was expecting. In fact there wasn't really too much overt propaganda I could've noticed, either.

Anyone who's thinking the kid is actually at the drag shows, well at least for the 1st episode I can confirm they are never present at that venue, which is actually only even present for the first scene or two. Most of the episode RuPaul isn't even in drag, same goes for their friend. A lot of the episode is situated at the apartment building, and some parts at a police station (deals with a plot point in RuPaul's character being betrayed and reporting the crime), an RV (end of episode) a Chinese restaurant and...more apartment buildings. The little drag club seems to have the least amount of time in the whole episode TBH.

RuPaul and the kid interact a lot but the kid is kind of a douche so most of that interaction is in the form of an adult trying to get a misbehaving kid from messing with them and their money. Nothing about the drag lifestyle is actually mentioned to the kid honestly. In terms of any virtue-signaling, there isn't any in the first episode I noticed. Yes you can argue there's a "melting pot" of minority characters (black, Latino, Asian, gay etc.), but it's also fucking New York City, what do you expect xD? Some will probably try saying the homosexual stuff in the episode is pandering (there's a scene with a cop at the police station in particular I'm referring to), but again, the little kid themselves isn't present and that stuff is played for laughs and comedy (it got a few chuckles out of me). And while that was present, I didn't feel like it was being "shoved down my throat"; it seemed to play up on tropes associated with LGBT and drag scenes in a way that wasn't belittling a straight person.

Overall the 1st episode is "okay", even if just talking in terms of acting and plot. There's no overt virtue-signaling or victimhood complex syndrome on display (in the ways of far-left idpol stuff anyway; what misery does befall certain characters feels earned as well as logically and emotionally driven much the same way you'd get with a "normal" character in a conventional story), no preaching or morals I can notice, lighthearted playing on certain stereotypes, cliches and tropes (in fact there's probably some things in the episode that'd make an actual SJW kind of mad depending on how they read into them), etc.

Basically, is the show woke? Well again, I've only watch the 1st episode and it's not exactly a show I'm clamoring to watch more of in the first place like a must-see, but the answer to that question is "No". I don't think a show or movie featuring drag people as central characters in and of itself makes it 'woke', just like how I don't think something featuring LGBT or ethnic minorities or women as central characters makes it automatically "woke". The people who think that way really are only affirming the negative opinions others have about them.

For something to be "woke", IMO, it has to also marry any of that outward diversity with actual messaging, writing, and propaganda in the story itself which caters to the usual far-left SJW talking points, and I didn't see that in this first episode. So people claiming otherwise, especially if they've not bothered to watch even the first episode, don't really know what they're talking about.

Oh damn you caught us. That's it. It's a trans/drag thing. It's not about the kids having sex pushed in their faces at all.
I think they mean in terms of how a lot of anti-SJWs tend to act and "rationalize" just like SJWs...

...which is unfortunately true
 
Last edited:

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
7,156
5,447
1,075
OK so, I'm gonna ask...how many of you have...actually.....watched at least the first episode?
Watching the first episode doesn't mean anything. Many shows that were cut short or got a lot of backlash received such because of later episode. First episode (which is still disturbing) not being off the walls like later doesn't mean the show is fine, nor does it mean there wasn't an agenda being pulled with the format regardless of the quality of said first episode.
 

Vicetrailia

Member
Mar 12, 2019
1,055
524
410
"You could say that the girl does drag in the beginning but only because she is homeless and thinks people would be less likely to mess with her if they thought she was a boy."

Oh, well that makes it totally fine then.
I didn't know that townboys were the first drag, now it all makes sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: belmarduk

Vicetrailia

Member
Mar 12, 2019
1,055
524
410
OK so, I'm gonna ask...how many of you have...actually.....watched at least the first episode?

See, I was gonna talk mad crap about it too but said "'ya know what, maybe I should give at least the first episode a watch", so I did. And to be honest, it...wasn't the cringefest I was expecting. In fact there wasn't really too much overt propaganda I could've noticed, either.

Anyone who's thinking the kid is actually at the drag shows, well at least for the 1st episode I can confirm they are never present at that venue, which is actually only even present for the first scene or two. Most of the episode RuPaul isn't even in drag, same goes for their friend. A lot of the episode is situated at the apartment building, and some parts at a police station (deals with a plot point in RuPaul's character being betrayed and reporting the crime), an RV (end of episode) a Chinese restaurant and...more apartment buildings. The little drag club seems to have the least amount of time in the whole episode TBH.

RuPaul and the kid interact a lot but the kid is kind of a douche so most of that interaction is in the form of an adult trying to get a misbehaving kid from messing with them and their money. Nothing about the drag lifestyle is actually mentioned to the kid honestly. In terms of any virtue-signaling, there isn't any in the first episode I noticed. Yes you can argue there's a "melting pot" of minority characters (black, Latino, Asian, gay etc.), but it's also fucking New York City, what do you expect xD? Some will probably try saying the homosexual stuff in the episode is pandering (there's a scene with a cop at the police station in particular I'm referring to), but again, the little kid themselves isn't present and that stuff is played for laughs and comedy (it got a few chuckles out of me). And while that was present, I didn't feel like it was being "shoved down my throat"; it seemed to play up on tropes associated with LGBT and drag scenes in a way that wasn't belittling a straight person.

Overall the 1st episode is "okay", even if just talking in terms of acting and plot. There's no overt virtue-signaling or victimhood complex syndrome on display (in the ways of far-left idpol stuff anyway; what misery does befall certain characters feels earned as well as logically and emotionally driven much the same way you'd get with a "normal" character in a conventional story), no preaching or morals I can notice, lighthearted playing on certain stereotypes, cliches and tropes (in fact there's probably some things in the episode that'd make an actual SJW kind of mad depending on how they read into them), etc.

Basically, is the show woke? Well again, I've only watch the 1st episode and it's not exactly a show I'm clamoring to watch more of in the first place like a must-see, but the answer to that question is "No". I don't think a show or movie featuring drag people as central characters in and of itself makes it 'woke', just like how I don't think something featuring LGBT or ethnic minorities or women as central characters makes it automatically "woke". The people who think that way really are only affirming the negative opinions others have about them.

For something to be "woke", IMO, it has to also marry any of that outward diversity with actual messaging, writing, and propaganda in the story itself which caters to the usual far-left SJW talking points, and I didn't see that in this first episode. So people claiming otherwise, especially if they've not bothered to watch even the first episode, don't really know what they're talking about.



I think they mean in terms of how a lot of anti-SJWs tend to act and "rationalize" just like SJWs...

...which is unfortunately true
It was pretty clear that they were just virtue signaling, and never had intentions of knowing what the show was about. They're just mad at the idea of a drag being the MC. The kid is the convenient and blanket virtue excuse.
 
Last edited:

root number

Neo Member
Jan 17, 2020
30
12
95
Probably not the best example for children.

However, I don't think Children 'turn'.

You're either straight, gay, bi, or uncomfortable as your gender. Some bi people may seem to turn, no, they're bi.

I can tell you're 'buttstressed' OP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: belmarduk

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
18,728
33,811
1,450
Australia
Probably not the best example for children.

However, I don't think Children 'turn'.

You're either straight, gay, bi, or uncomfortable as your gender. Some bi people may seem to turn, no, they're bi.

I can tell you're 'buttstressed' OP.
How do you explain child sex abuse victims commonly engaging in similar behavior as adults? Does this not suggest some kind of pre-puberty sexual malleability?
 

root number

Neo Member
Jan 17, 2020
30
12
95
How do you explain child sex abuse victims commonly engaging in similar behavior as adults? Does this not suggest some kind of pre-puberty sexual malleability?
Perhaps that's due to being physically marked or mentally scarred; more submission, than 'turning'. Though, you may be right and I am wrong.

Perhaps these children are bi.

Does it happen in all/most cases?
 
Last edited:

root number

Neo Member
Jan 17, 2020
30
12
95
What I'm trying to say is, being raped is not the same as watching a bit of telly - or is it? I'm not sure now.

It should be easy to 'turn' them back, then, but some children are relentlessly homosexual.

Perhaps it's an environmental problem that permenantly grooms the mind, and this abstraction - if removed - turns gay people straight.

Worry less about what's on TV, but the TV itself.
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
18,728
33,811
1,450
Australia
What I'm trying to say is, being raped is not the same as watching a bit of telly - or is it? I'm not sure now.

It should be easy to 'turn' them back, then, but some children are relentlessly homosexual.

Perhaps it's an environmental problem that permenantly grooms the mind, and this abstraction - if removed - turns gay people straight.

Worry less about what's on TV, but the TV itself.
I think both nature and nurture can play a role. I think some people are genuinely born gay, though I don’t know what the biological cause is and as far as I’m aware studies looking for the gay gene have turned up nothing to date. I also think that socialisation can also play a role, especially before all of the hormonal changes that puberty brings on. That’s why I brought up the sexual abuse example, not to equate homosexuality with abuse but to demonstrate that sexuality is at least partially malleable and that “born this way” does not appear to apply in all cases.

Homosexuality is not a desirable trait because you do not get to pass on your genes. That’s literally the meaning of life: to make more life. However, that doesn’t mean that I think homosexuals should be persecuted or treated unequally under the law, just that it shouldn’t be encouraged or overly-exposed to children if sexuality is indeed malleable as I suspect.
 

Winter John

Member
Mar 9, 2014
1,890
1,150
640
I don't know why you're responding, you lied saying nothing that I pointed happened, and then I posted the quotes by you showing that you said exactly what you claimed you didn't.

You lost the argument move on, go outside and breath some fresh air, you have proven to be incompetent and as of this point all your thread derails won't even be taken at any value. You're finished.

I know children like to get the last word so go ahead, but you're response won't even matter as you have now proven that you have zero credibility. Also you sure bring up this "sexual activity" stuff a lot, seems you're having some issues and are projecting it on to others.

Lol, what a joke.
You know why I'm responding. I told you I read your Christmas hate blog and I felt sorry for you. How could anyone not feel sorry for you. You spent your Christmas posting hate blogs. That's not normal is it. Happy, well adjusted people don't spend Christmas posting irrational hate blogs.

Here's a famous quote from Bruce Wayne -

"Life's most persistent and urgent question is, 'What are you doing for others?"

Indeed. Selah.

What are you doing for others? Is what I asked myself when I saw your latest weird, hyperbolic anti human thread. The answer was very clear, become like Batman and save this poor soul.

And so dressed as a bat I swooped down from the heavens and began my epic quest to help you begin your path back to salvation.

"Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness. ”

That's a famous quote from Peter Parker. A man who parades around New York in skin tight lycra bodysuits.

You could parade around New York in a skin tight bodysuit if you wanted to. Imagine how much better that would be for your mental health. Wouldn't it be more fun to parade around New York with a feather boa and some sparklers than to waste your life posting hateful nonsense about minorities?
 
  • Like
Reactions: belmarduk

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
7,156
5,447
1,075
You know why I'm responding.
No I don't, you lied about what you said and claimed you didn't say it. I quoted you for each thing you lied about. There's nothing to discuss here you have zero credibility an acted like people can't just go back and read what you said.

Every other post since than is just a random rant that has no relevance at all and only serve for you to get the last word. But if you want it that badly you can have it since you want to use kindergarten tactics so much. It's not going to help you overall problem though sorry. Have fun.
 

Winter John

Member
Mar 9, 2014
1,890
1,150
640
No I don't, you lied about what you said and claimed you didn't say it. I quoted you for each thing you lied about. There's nothing to discuss here you have zero credibility an acted like people can't just go back and read what you said.

Every other post since than is just a random rant that has no relevance at all and only serve for you to get the last word. But if you want it that badly you can have it since you want to use kindergarten tactics so much. It's not going to help you overall problem though sorry. Have fun.
Indeed people can go back and read everything, although you might not want them to because every time you call me a liar it only makes you look worse.

As for credibility. This isn't about your credibility or whatever imaginary forum reputation you think you have.. I've told you, this is about bringing you back into the light.

I am the Batman. You are the Silly Goose.
 
Feb 22, 2018
3,699
4,782
760
China
What questionable organisations are funding it?

Netflix.

I don't know man. This seems wrong in a very bad way. A kid prancing around with a cross dressing performer in seedy venues is not how I envisioned 2020. I got nothing against drag queens, but they are adult entertainment imo. Kids being included is mucho mucho gusto bad.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: matt404au
Aug 28, 2019
1,206
1,470
355
Watching the first episode doesn't mean anything. Many shows that were cut short or got a lot of backlash received such because of later episode. First episode (which is still disturbing) not being off the walls like later doesn't mean the show is fine, nor does it mean there wasn't an agenda being pulled with the format regardless of the quality of said first episode.
Watching the first episode at least shows you've engaged on some level with the subject you speak about. Not saying the show doesn't have any of these things, but from what I saw in the 1st episode, it wasn't really present.

But we've got an online culture now of people on both sides who don't even partially engage with stuff they talk about before praising or criticizing it. That's irksome.

Netflix.

I don't know man. This seems wrong in a very bad way. A kid prancing around with a cross dressing performer in seedy venues is not how I envisioned 2020. I got nothing against drag queens, but they are adult entertainment imo. Kids being included is mucho mucho gusto bad.
TBF there are all kinds of kids in violent movies, like Robocop 2 or even recently like Doctor Sleep, and they even get shot up/killed. I don't see too much an outrage to that however. So is one okay and the other isn't, and if so, why?

My personal opinion? It really comes down to how tastefully it's handled, and whether it's there as a way to tantalize/pleasure the audience or to be neutral (or even to provide a negative critique on it, as long as the message isn't hamfisted and preachy). Some of the best stories ever have fucked-up shit in them, but the reason they work is because they usually very clearly aren't including those things to be merely cool or endorse them at all. That stuff is usually there with some sort of purpose in critiquing its nature and whether it's right or wrong, and letting the audience come to their own conclusions (hopefully they have the maturity to come to reasonable conclusions).

I'm not going to say a show like AJ and the Queen shouldn't exist out of some moral high ground, because that's basically me asking for censorship. If I watch a couple more episodes and I notice stuff present and presented in such a way that's both just irresponsibly wrong and endorsed as a positive/right thing to do, then I'll have some strong words. But at least I have the option to do that, just as I have the option to not watch it any further.

But I also think media doesn't have AS strong an influence as some people like to think it does (not on healthy-minded adults, anyway, or kids who have good parents around), therefore I think even if there are people who like something I personally take issue with, those people aren't going to come under direct influence of that show or movie, by and large. I think the vast majority can separate fiction from reality, still.
 
Last edited:
Because you didn't spend time or effort you just made a pointless rant they went around in circles showing you didn't even try to do any research and if you did you just went on google and spend 2 minutes on it if that.

The fact you decided to come back just to try and stroke your ego doesn't help your case at all and it's clear that you and some others are obsessively defending children being put in situations they shouldn't be in. There's nothing more to talk about other than it's disgusting and sad.

You didn't even tag me, just tried to be a slick little cunt on the slide thinking you would get away with it. Shows you have no case.

None of you or your other defenders are even making an argument you keep ignoring people pointing out the issues and then you move the goal posts to "know sex scenes" which wasn't the concern or "companies are making money" yet I bet you there are shows you don't support where that excuse doesn't work so why would it work here?

Something is wrong with you, hope you get it cleared up soon.
My dear, dear fellow Forum Poster Afro Republican Afro Republican .

(Post in question, for reference, I'd suggest you re-read it: https://www.neogaf.com/threads/netflix-to-order-two-seasons-of-aj-and-the-queen-netflix-agenda-show-starring-a-drag-queen-and-underaged-kid.1520064/post-256566465)

I broke down your thread as simply as possible, to make it easy to follow along with. Each numbered point covered a different part of your OP, and how you were factually and purposefully wrong, about, well, everything. If the rant was "pointless" you should have no issues debating my *3* numbered points. I also, rather painstakingly, explained my research, which in fact did take longer than 2 minutes, though I was not keeping a counter running the whole time.

If you wanted to post an OPINION thread about Children palling around with Drag Queens, sure, go ahead. I'd probably even agree with you. But you didn't, you posted specifically (and very incorrectly) about a show you know nothing about, and refused to concede that fact. You pass your opinions off as truth and fact, which isn't great to begin with, but is actively harmful when you've been proven to be 100% incorrect.

"Stroke my ego"? What does that even mean in this context? Proving you're wrong, and have hate in your heart doesn't prove me right, or better than you, it just shines a light on whatever is wrong with your state of mind at the moment.

"You didn't even tag me" is another great one from Afro Republican Afro Republican . I quoted your OP *&* tagged you *4* times in my post. Please review the original post, and no, I didn't sneak back in to edit it, this is verifiable by the edit timestamp of Wednesday 1/15/2020. Why would I post, however many words that was, and NOT tag you. "Thinking I would get away with it"? With WHAT? Literally WHAT? I was addressing YOU PERSONALLY. I was asking you to fight and defend the points YOU ( Afro Republican Afro Republican ) posted in YOUR ( Afro Republican Afro Republican ) OP. So, since your sentence was now absolutely proven to be false, does that prove I do, in fact, have a case?

"None of you or your other defenders are even making an argument you keep ignoring people pointing out the issues and then you move the goal posts to "know sex scenes" which wasn't the concern or "companies are making money" yet I bet you there are shows you don't support where that excuse doesn't work so why would it work here?"

Just... what? Do you even read what you write after you've typed it? I honestly am going over the above words over and over again trying to make sense of it. Let's try.

#1. "None of you or your other defenders are even making an argument"

I am pretty certain I laid out my argument in my (long, detailed) post. I'll restate, as simply as I can: Your OP is wrong, and you should feel bad. Nothing you posted in the OP is true, and really that kind of OP shouldn't be allowed on NeoGAF. I then went into detail, line by line, how you're OP is wrong/bad/etc. I more than welcome you to refute any of my findings, and would be more than happy to retract or recant my words if proven wrong. This is your time, Afro Republican Afro Republican , this is your moment to shine. Don't deflect when you can be a star!

As for the others, they have made their argument, and while I touched on it as well, it is their argument to defend. The show does not sexualize children to any extent worse than any other adult TV show featuring child actors.

#2. "you keep ignoring people pointing out the issues and then you move the goal posts to "know sex scenes" which wasn't the concern or "companies are making money" yet I bet you there are shows you don't support where that excuse doesn't work so why would it work here?"

Parsing this one is a little rough. I don't think anyone (outside of you, tagged Afro Republican Afro Republican ) is ignoring people. We don't see eye to eye, but that is not ignoring the issue. You have been ignoring people who have watched the whole season, telling you there isn't anything bad in here, and just instead going with, what I assume is, your gut, and saying the show is awful. The goal posts were (and still are) from your OP: The show was funded by questionable organizations and the show was being pushed in the kids section (from what you "heard"). You've so-far refused to name these nefarious "questionable organizations" nor provide any kind of proof that the show is being marketed towards kids (nor it being renewed for a 2nd season...). Kick a ball through the goal posts you, yourself setup first Afro Republican Afro Republican !

I don't even know where you're going with the "companies making money bit" or shows I don't support, so I can't address those, I do apologize. If you could clarify, I'd be happy to take a whack at it.

Something is wrong with you, hope you get it cleared up soon.
Uhh, I'm rubber, you're glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.

To be real for a moment, and since NeoGAF is growing/expanding again, I'd like to ask EviLore EviLore what the rules are for truth in Off-Topic topics. I checked the FAQ and it was not immediately clear. Are members allowed to post new threads with completely fabricated details passed as fact? That is the crux of my argument here, as I think Afro Republican Afro Republican should be free to hate Trans/Sexual/Vestite/Gender/etc as much as he wants, but he should not be letting his own internalized hatred result in posting topics that are completely & factually incorrect. (See post #72 for breakdown of how/why this OP is completely wrong, possibly in a malicious way.) This seems like it would be a bad precedent to set, as anyone could purposefully shitpost, thus putting the burden on verifying it on other posters/mods/admins.
 

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
7,156
5,447
1,075
My dear, dear fellow Forum Poster Afro Republican Afro Republican .

(Post in question, for reference, I'd suggest you re-read it: https://www.neogaf.com/threads/netflix-to-order-two-seasons-of-aj-and-the-queen-netflix-agenda-show-starring-a-drag-queen-and-underaged-kid.1520064/post-256566465)

I broke down your thread as simply as possible, to make it easy to follow along with. Each numbered point covered a different part of your OP, and how you were factually and purposefully wrong,
You're trying way too hard here to dig up something. This is clear based on how long you waited to post until now out of the blue.

If it makes you feel better I will admit that the ordered rumors wa\ere changed by the source I got it from, but that was why it was carefully worded in the first place, But that small thing really doesn't have much to do with the point of thread or you scrapping the barrel for points.

The point of the thread is the show stars a drag queen and a underaged child and we have multiple posts from many users show that they have a problem with it, as do I. So I really don't get why you are making these insanely large posts filled with gibberish trying to find some extra layer to the thread.

But ok let's go over some of your "points" https://www.neogaf.com/threads/netflix-to-order-two-seasons-of-aj-and-the-queen-netflix-agenda-show-starring-a-drag-queen-and-underaged-kid.1520064/page-2#post-256566465

UH OH. Scary wording really sucks in the reader and gets us to perk up. QUESTIONABLE?! ORGANIZATIONS?! (Aside, If I am being honest, using "questionable" in this way really reads like a left-wing post, are they "problematic" too?) Anyway, I decided to do 5 minutes of basic research to uncover these (sinister) questionable (and despicable) organization behind AJ and the Queen.
Yes Netflix and its partners are among the usual suspects, yes they are questionable to people who care about the well being of kids, as shown by some posters in this thread even. Is this one of the "points" you wanted me to address?

A point that has nothing to do with the thread and just has you being overly sarcastic?

OH SHIT. This is where it gets good. Netflix is basically acting like a drug dealer pushing Drag Queens on unsuspecting children. Those fuckers!
Can you quote to where I said or implied that Netflix was acting like a drug dealer? This doesn't help whatever "argument" you think you have since you're self-assassinating your character.

You said this is going to be pushed into the Kids section of Netflix
Actually I didn't say that at all, I said I heard that. Which is quite a bit different from the paragraph of nonsense you meltdown into.

I did not realize the kid in this is a little girl. Color me surprised. I watched the trailer again and, yeah it's more obvious, but I thought for sure it was a little boy upon first viewing. This doesn't really change anything, just an interesting observation. I suppose the "Gay man traveling with little girl" aspect is a bit less weird than "Gay man traveling with a little boy", if only due to traditional preconceptions.
None of this has anything to do with the OP, which was just a few sentences.

RuPaul is GAY! GAY GAY GAY! SO GAY! He is so gay even his character in this is gay! GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! Okay. I understand and acknowledge that alone is enough to turn some people off (and others... on, bazinga), but I don't know that it's a reason to twist the premise into immediately trying to turn the kids (and frogs) gay. If it is content you don't like or agree with, absolutely do not watch it. Don't be a dick though and just complain and complain into the void forever. I don't like anything Harry Potter-related. I never did. I just avoid it. I don't go around looking up Harry Potter articles to bitch & moan about.
This also has nothing to do with the OP, which was just a few sentences. Also note all your sarcastic inserts that are nothing more than pointless and were never said by anyone in this thread but you.

It's not a kids show. See: Entertainment Weekly
I never said it was, I said there was a kid in the show.

So this is more like a Leon: The Professional (Drag Queen) or (Ride the) Poltergeist or The Road (to GAAAAAAAAY) or any number of other ADULT movies/shows with ADULT content that feature child/kid actors.
Nothing to do with OP, and notice how your entire pointless rant is nearly unreadable because of pointlessness statements and overly dramatic sarcasm which I also never said or hinted at.

This is why I said you're entire post was garbage, you barely made half of a point

See the issue with your rant (which is filled with lies buried under the sarcasm) is that the OP was only a few sentences. Half of your rant had nothing to do with the OP, nearly another half of it was making random sarcasm (like saying "he's gayyy") which had and still has no relevance to the OP and shows you're a bad actor trying to act push some stupid narrative.

The only reason why you made your first rant was to stroke your EGO and nothing more. I'm SURREEEEEE YOU WILLLLLLLL (WOOSH) RESPONNNDDDDDDDDDD WITH MOREEEEEEE(BEEP BEEP) SARCASMMMMMMMM THOOOOOOOOOOO RIGHTHHTTTTTT????? JUSSTTTTTT LIKEEEE THIISSSS (MY GAWD)

For some reason you thing weird writing like that constitutes an argument but it doesn't.
 
Last edited: