Another Anti-Drag Lawmaker Caught in Drag Himself

[j-mac]

A Texas state congressman who authored a bill restricting drag performances appears to have done drag himself.

The second legislator in a week to be caught for this hypocrisy, first-term Texas state Rep. Nate Schatzline has admitted it was him in videos that surfaced on TikTok and Twitter showing a man in a dress performing skits to the song “Sexy Lady” by Javi Mula.



The second legislator in a week to be caught for this hypocrisy, first-term Texas state Rep. Nate Schatzline has admitted it was him in videos that surfaced on TikTok and Twitter showing a man in a dress performing skits to the song “Sexy Lady” by Javi Mula.

Although Schatzline’s bill argues the mere existence of drag is sexual, his own dalliance with playing dress up was just “a joke,” he said.

Schatzline is the latest Republican caught in the disconnect between their own frivolous drag attempts and their movement to villainize the LGBTQ community as sexual groomers.

Earlier this week, a photo emerged of drag-banning Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee dressed as a woman in high school, something his office waved off as a “lighthearted” school tradition. And earlier this year, embattled liar Rep. George Santos was exposed for his own drag past, which he eventually admitted he “had fun” doing.

Another Anti-Drag Lawmaker Caught in Drag Himself

But Nate Schatzline characterized his as a “joke back in school.” He's authored a bill seeking to classify any drag-allowing business as “sexually oriented.”

www.thedailybeast.com

So, now we’re digging back to high school in some cases to smear politicians trying to keep sexualization of children from happening?

Whats wrong with you people?

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

You provided a link to a State site containing someone's messy "summary" of the bill within one of several tabs.

I provided the final bill's actual text in pdf format. SB0003.

You can read it or keep relying upon bureaucrats to interpret things for you.

You are wrong, and I am inclined to think you are being deliberately deceitful by posting such nonsense without taking a few moments to check your facts. Yet, you doubled-down.

You posted the original draft, not the full text.
I posted the updated legislation which was passed.
We both had the same official source, the Tennessee General Assembly.

Oh, but you posted a PDF, LOL.

Here, have the PDF of the Amendment which was passed by both the Senate and House.

https://legiscan.com/TN/amendment/SB0003/id/153680/Tennessee-2023-SB0003-SA0002.pdf

Pfffffft. Quit trolling.

 

[Coyote]

It's not about me .. it's about the collective whole, and we've already seen females stripped of scholarships, sponsorships, professional opportunities, etc because men kicked their asses. We've also seen females highlight bathroom and / or locker room / showers with grown men.

You are conflating different issues here.

1. Treatment for youth and adults with gender dysphoria. This is a medical and psychological issue.

2. Cultural acceptance of transgender people - how should they be accepted in our society in a fair and equitable way.

On the first, this needs to be determined by patient,, doctor and family of a minor, not politicians.

On the second it is more complicated and I get the concerns. Instead of an all or nothing approach, we need to look at each concern individually, listen to the arguments, and address them as fairly as possible.

Are transgender women, women? No. But neither are they men. In many societies they were in a third category and treated with the same respect as a man or a woman. That seems a good solution to me but each side must give a little.

On sports. No. Transgender women should not compete against biological woman because biology plays a role in physical attributes. Since we are talking about an extremely small number of an extremely small minority, what is a fair compromise? For competitive sports, if they compete with women, it’s for exhibition only. For team-sports, in schools, I’m not sure. But this is how we should be talking about it, not using the issue as a red flag the bait tbe base.

On bathrooms. I do, now, get the issues and the intensity of feeling around it. For a transgender woman, to have to use a men’s locker room is not only humiliating, but dangerous. Violence against transgender people is far far higher than then anything they might do. I also get the discomfort and even fear of women and parents at having a biological male in a girl’s area. Best compromise that addresses both would be more unisex bathrooms in public facilities.

Outside of that .. it's just fact that men will never be women (or vice versa), and yet .. we are expected (demanded) to accept this, sometimes forcibly and there's no reason not to discount punitive measures in the near future.

No one demands you “accept” anything. There are no laws mandating that on you. Unlike the laws being passed or proposed against transgender people, even to the point of targeting and banning medical treatment. Talkabout punative measures!

 

[Coyote]

Neither do you

I am not the one making a huge political deal of it.

 

[Mac-7]

I am not the one making a huge political deal of it.

Actually you are

Child pageants is your shtick to change the subject from lib child grooming

 

[Coyote]

Actually you are

Child pageants is your shtick to change the subject from lib child grooming

I love how you keep deflecting from child pageants which are far more widespread than “grooming”. My pointing out how horrible it is, is not making it political. On the other hand, passing Orwellian laws targeting what people can say and who can get medical treatment. It is clearly political.

Keep trying. You aren’t exactly on a winning streak here.

 

[Mac-7]

I love how you keep deflecting from child pageants which are far more widespread than “grooming”. My pointing out how horrible it is, is not making it political. On the other hand, passing Orwellian laws targeting what people can say and who can get medical treatment. It is clearly political.

Keep trying. You aren’t exactly on a winning streak here.

The topic on this thread is drag queen grooming

You are the one deflecting

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Are transgender women, women? No. But neither are they men.

Hard science disagrees.

“Transgender women” are men, albeit ruined and mutilated forms thereof.

Biology does not yield to the insane delusions of fucked-up mental cases. It never has, and it never will.

 

[Mac-7]

“Transgender women” are men, albeit ruined and mutilated forms thereof.

Well said

 

[Grumblenuts]

You are wrong, and I am inclined to think you are being deliberately deceitful by posting such nonsense without taking a few moments to check your facts. Yet, you doubled-down.

You had already doubled down. Now you've tripled down. Let's review..

On Wednesday, March 1st, in response to cnm, you said:
"You haven't even read the bill"
To which I replied:
"Have you?
https://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/113/Bill/SB0003.pdf
..Now how much would you pay?"

On Thursday, March 2nd, in response to me, you said:
"Excuse me, but my link included the amended text which was voted on, passed, and signed into law."

Right off, you already admitted to not posting either the bill's text nor a link to its text,.. which was clearly my point. You lost the argument but just couldn't let it go.

Your original link "Tennessee General Assembly Legislation" does not, in fact, supply any bill's entire text. Certainly not in any direct fashion. Plus it updates automatically, so what it said on March 2nd could easily be different than what it said on March 1st.

Why does that matter? From your same link (with no tabbing):

Signed by Governor.	03/02/2023
Transmitted to Governor for action.	03/02/2023
Signed by H. Speaker	03/02/2023
Signed by Senate Speaker	03/02/2023
Enrolled and ready for signatures	03/02/2023
Sponsor(s) Added.	03/02/2023
Concurred, Ayes 26, Nays 6 (Amendment 1 - HA0011)	03/02/2023

On March 1st, the Senate hadn't even passed the House Amendment yet. The Governor hadn't signed yet.

I supplied you with the (unsigned) current bill's entire text for your reading pleasure on March 1st. And just look at the thanks I get..

Face it. You're an idiot.

 

[Coyote]

Hard science disagrees.

“Transgender women” are men, albeit ruined and mutilated forms thereof.

Biology does not yield to the insane delusions of fucked-up mental cases. It never has, and it never will.

“Hard science” is not your friend here, particularly since you cherry pick what you want or discard it when inconvenient.

Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia

Actual research shows that sex is anything but binary

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Contrary to popular belief, scientific research helps us better understand the unique and real transgender experience. Specifically, through three subjects: (1) genetics, (2) neurobiology and (3) endocrinology. So, hold onto your parts, whatever they may be. It’s time for “the talk.”

Nearly everyone in middle school biology learned that if you’ve got XX chromosomes, you’re a female; if you’ve got XY, you’re a male. This tired simplification is great for teaching the importance of chromosomes but betrays the true nature of biological sex. The popular belief that your sex arises only from your chromosomal makeup is wrong. The truth is, your biological sex isn’t carved in stone, but a living system with the potential for change.

Good read.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

“Hard science” is not your friend here, particularly since you cherry pick what you want or discard it when inconvenient.

Genuine hard science absolutely supports my position, and absolutely refutes yours.

Men are not women, and cannot become women.

Women are not men, and cannot become men.

Your insistence on denying the biological distinction between men and women is madness, nothing more.

And your insistence that sane people, and even children, should be dragged into this madness is pure evil.

 

[Coyote]

Genuine hard science absolutely supports my position, and absolutely refutes yours.

men are not women, and cannot become women.

Women are not men, and cannot become men.

Your insistence on denying the biological distinction between men and women is madness, nothing more.

And your insistence that sane people, and even children, should be dragged into this madness is pure evil.

You have no clue what “genuine hard science” is. You just parrot the term as if you think it supports your position.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia

Actual research shows that sex is anything but binary

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Contrary to popular belief, scientific research helps us better understand the unique and real transgender experience. Specifically, through three subjects: (1) genetics, (2) neurobiology and (3) endocrinology. So, hold onto your parts, whatever they may be. It’s time for “the talk.”

Nearly everyone in middle school biology learned that if you’ve got XX chromosomes, you’re a female; if you’ve got XY, you’re a male. This tired simplification is great for teaching the importance of chromosomes but betrays the true nature of biological sex. The popular belief that your sex arises only from your chromosomal makeup is wrong. The truth is, your biological sex isn’t carved in stone, but a living system with the potential for change.

I'm old enough to remember when Scientific America was considered a credible publication. For nearly all of my childhood and youth, my father subscribed to it, and I often read articles in it myself.

But that was a very, very, very long time ago. The Scientific American of my youth would never have considered running a blatantly bullshit article like that, and any who were worthy to have their writings published therein would have regarded this cretin as worthy of nothing but the cruelest of mockery and ridicucle.

Without even reading the article, the title gives it away, that the article is written to promote a political agenda, and not to offer any attempt to scientific truth.

It didn't take much Googling to find out just what sort of fucked-up mental case the freak is, that wrote that article. Definitely not anyone who would have ever been published in any credible scientific journal, as Scientific America used to be. It's clear enough what bias drives him to try to twist and corrupt “science” in order to try to justify his own fucked-up mental condition.

Simón(e) Sun - I knew I was trans because of science [Part 1] - ABC listen

Science is way personal.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You have no clue what “genuine hard science” is. You just parrot the term as if you think it supports your position.

Someone who believes in “transgenderism” is casing aspersions on my understanding of science.

And yes, genuine science absolutely supports my position here, in spite of the insane rantings of fucked-up freaks like the author of the Scientific American article that you cited.

 

[EMH]

TN Republicans believe Lee is a Christian...

Is he...

 

[Coyote]

I'm old enough to remember when Scientific America was considered a credible publication. For nearly all of my childhood and youth, my father subscribed to it, and I often read articles in it myself.

But that was a very, very, very long time ago. The Scientific American of my youth would never have considered running a blatantly bullshit article like that, and any who were worthy to have their writings published therein would have regarded this cretin as worthy of nothing but the cruelest of mockery and ridicucle.

Without even reading the article, the title gives it away, that the article is written to promote a political agenda, and not to offer any attempt to scientific truth.

It didn't take much Googling to find out just what sort of fucked-up mental case the freak is, that wrote that article. Definitely not anyone who would have ever been published in any credible scientific journal, as Scientific America used to be. It's clear enough what bias drives him to try to twist and corrupt “science” in order to try to justify his own fucked-up mental condition.

Simón(e) Sun - I knew I was trans because of science [Part 1] - ABC listen

Science is way personal.

www.abc.net.au

View attachment 762567

Again, you are showing you don’t understand how science works. Just because it doesn’t conform to your bias’ doesn’t mean it is wrong. I’m presuming you didn’t even read it.

 

[Coyote]

Someone who believes in “transgenderism” is casing aspersions on my understanding of science.

And yes, genuine science absolutely supports my position here, in spite of the insane rantings of fucked-up freaks like the author of the Scientific American article that you cited.

View attachment 762568

Genuine science is not within your understanding apparently.
Gender and sex are more than just gonads.

More Women Than Expected Are Genetically Men - Novo Nordisk Fonden

BY MORTEN BUSCH Sex chromosomes usually determine whether you are female or male. Women are XX. Men are XY. However, genetically, a few women are actually men. They grow up as women with a woman’s body, and most only discover well into puberty that they are different. Danish researchers map for...

novonordiskfonden.dk

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Again, you are showing you don’t understand how science works. Just because it doesn’t conform to your bias’ doesn’t mean it is wrong. I’m presuming you didn’t even read it.

Boys are not girls.

Girls are not boys.

I know plenty about genuine science, enough to know that any “science” that claims that a boy is a girl is just plain bullshit.

And anyone who thinks that a boy can be a girl is in no position to cast any doubt on my grasp of science.

As far as just confirming one's bias, did you actually read the bullshit Scientific American article that you cited?

Google the author, to see what a fucked-up freak he is. The entire po9int of his article is to confirm his bias; to put a false face of “science” over the insane delusions of his fucked-up mind.

The Scientific American that I read in my childhood and youth would never have given that freak a platform.

I bet you wouldn't even be able to read and understand any article sin the old Scientific American. Try getting your hands on an issue from the 1970s or 1980s, and see if you can make any sense of any of the articles. I bet most of them are way above your intellectual level, very much unlike the dumbed-down Scientific American of today.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Genuine science is not within your understanding apparently.
Gender and sex are more than just gonads.

More Women Than Expected Are Genetically Men - Novo Nordisk Fonden

BY MORTEN BUSCH Sex chromosomes usually determine whether you are female or male. Women are XX. Men are XY. However, genetically, a few women are actually men. They grow up as women with a woman’s body, and most only discover well into puberty that they are different. Danish researchers map for...

novonordiskfonden.dk