FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

Drag Queen - National Theatre

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Not sure if any of you heard but a Drag Queen (Sharon ale Grand) got themselves into hot water at a family friendly event at the National Theatre when addressing a crowd and suggesting “we need to teach our children to open their hearts, to teach our children to open their minds and to teach our children to open their legs”. Understandably the NT disapproved and banned Sharon from future events.

I’m led to believe the last line was delivered in a risqué joke format but I must confess to having mixed feelings. I don’t like the idea of kids and sex being in the same conversation but I also believe in risqué offensive humour. I think Sharon got the setting wrong and may have been better placed at a comedy night club although I’m led to believe Sharon isn’t a comedian. So what was Sharon’s intention? Was it to make people smile whilst their with their families (lead balloon as parents don’t want kids mentioned in that context) or expressing an aim/desire?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Not sure if any of you heard but a Drag Queen (Sharon ale Grand) got themselves into hot water at a family friendly event at the National Theatre when addressing a crowd and suggesting “we need to teach our children to open their hearts, to teach our children to open their minds and to teach our children to open their legs”. Understandably the NT disapproved and banned Sharon from future events.

I’m led to believe the last line was delivered in a risqué joke format but I must confess to having mixed feelings. I don’t like the idea of kids and sex being in the same conversation but I also believe in risqué offensive humour. I think Sharon got the setting wrong and may have been better placed at a comedy night club although I’m led to believe Sharon isn’t a comedian. So what was Sharon’s intention? Was it to make people smile whilst their with their families (lead balloon as parents don’t want kids mentioned in that context) or expressing an aim/desire?"

*Sharon Le Grand

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Keeping in mind we only know of the incident third hand via the media it, what is reported is absolutely appalling. Imagine walking along the Thames and hearing somebody on stage nearby suggesting children should open their legs? Disgusting what some folk think they can get away with.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heNerdyFembyWoman
over a year ago

Eastbourne (she/they)

I think it was a bad joke at a bad time.

I also think Jimmy Carr regularly tells much worse jokes at all kinds of venues and nobody bats an eye.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

What do tehybekan by family friendly?

Was this person the main act?

Were people there specifically to see them?

What was the context of the joke ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I think it was a bad joke at a bad time.

I also think Jimmy Carr regularly tells much worse jokes at all kinds of venues and nobody bats an eye."

Funnily enough Jimmy Carr sprung to mind when I wrote the post.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"What do tehybekan by family friendly?

Was this person the main act?

Were people there specifically to see them?

What was the context of the joke ?"

River Stage Festival, various acts were booked, members of the public were welcome to sit in the deckchairs on hand watch the acts, so no admission and open to all, I guess that was what was meant by family friendly. Sharon was speaking of tolerance and the joke delivered.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uddy laneMan
over a year ago

dudley

I could not see Mr carr or his agent agreeing to be booked for Mr carrs style of comedy, when the audience would be made up of families.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Keep in mind this was a stage in the open air on the bank of the river Thames. It wasn't a gig behind closed doors.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Thanks both.

I think risque jokes need a degree of consent. If you but a Carr ticket there's a degree of accepting you may hear a blue joke that offends.

It also feels like a bang average shock jock joke. Very contrived. No real twist. The shock is simply that they said it... Rather than being an unexpected twist ...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Thanks both.

I think risque jokes need a degree of consent. If you but a Carr ticket there's a degree of accepting you may hear a blue joke that offends.

It also feels like a bang average shock jock joke. Very contrived. No real twist. The shock is simply that they said it... Rather than being an unexpected twist ...

"

That's right. It boils down to the audience. Was there a sign of what they were getting into?

I am a big fan of Jimmy Carr and Ricky Gervais. I know what sort of jokes they make. When it comes to comedy clubs with unknown comedians, it's a matter of venue. Some venues tend to choose those edgy comedians while others prefer to keep it vanilla.

In this case, I don't think the audience had any clue what to expect.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

This all suggests Sharon was completely unaware of how inappropriate the comment was given the circumstances. I can’t determine what the motivation was. I must confess had I been present with my 4 year old daughter I may have reacted in a violent fashion.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heNerdyFembyWoman
over a year ago

Eastbourne (she/they)


"This all suggests Sharon was completely unaware of how inappropriate the comment was given the circumstances. I can’t determine what the motivation was. I must confess had I been present with my 4 year old daughter I may have reacted in a violent fashion."

Wow... violence?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"This all suggests Sharon was completely unaware of how inappropriate the comment was given the circumstances. I can’t determine what the motivation was. I must confess had I been present with my 4 year old daughter I may have reacted in a violent fashion.

Wow... violence?"

I know, not a good default position but in the heat of the moment I think I would’ve surmised that Sharon was suggesting kids open their legs not for jokey/risqué purposes but for another purpose. I’m still at a loss about the motivation. Given time to dwell on this my reaction is different but I’m stating that I think my reaction being present would’ve been one of a Fagher of a 4 year old girl.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"This all suggests Sharon was completely unaware of how inappropriate the comment was given the circumstances. I can’t determine what the motivation was. I must confess had I been present with my 4 year old daughter I may have reacted in a violent fashion.

Wow... violence?

I know, not a good default position but in the heat of the moment I think I would’ve surmised that Sharon was suggesting kids open their legs not for jokey/risqué purposes but for another purpose. I’m still at a loss about the motivation. Given time to dwell on this my reaction is different but I’m stating that I think my reaction being present would’ve been one of a Fagher of a 4 year old girl. "

*Father

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heNerdyFembyWoman
over a year ago

Eastbourne (she/they)


"This all suggests Sharon was completely unaware of how inappropriate the comment was given the circumstances. I can’t determine what the motivation was. I must confess had I been present with my 4 year old daughter I may have reacted in a violent fashion.

Wow... violence?

I know, not a good default position but in the heat of the moment I think I would’ve surmised that Sharon was suggesting kids open their legs not for jokey/risqué purposes but for another purpose. I’m still at a loss about the motivation. Given time to dwell on this my reaction is different but I’m stating that I think my reaction being present would’ve been one of a Fagher of a 4 year old girl. "

And why would you assume it was not for jokey/risqué purposes?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You don't make jokes like that in open air to the public. If you're dumb enough to do that you better be prepared for consequences as some folk really don't take kindly to talk about children like that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"This all suggests Sharon was completely unaware of how inappropriate the comment was given the circumstances. I can’t determine what the motivation was. I must confess had I been present with my 4 year old daughter I may have reacted in a violent fashion.

Wow... violence?

I know, not a good default position but in the heat of the moment I think I would’ve surmised that Sharon was suggesting kids open their legs not for jokey/risqué purposes but for another purpose. I’m still at a loss about the motivation. Given time to dwell on this my reaction is different but I’m stating that I think my reaction being present would’ve been one of a Fagher of a 4 year old girl.

And why would you assume it was not for jokey/risqué purposes?"

Upon initially hearing it, I’m not sure how I would’ve processed it. If the act discussed tolerance “hearts and minds” and then follows with a comment about opening legs, I may have interpreted it in a certain way. Context is required, to listen or read what was said for the whole act would be helpful as again, it would answer to motive.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rumpyMcFuckNuggetMan
over a year ago

Den of Iniquity

I saw this story and ( if ) true then it was extremely bad taste wether risqué or not ..

There were clearly children present ..

Know your audience

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heNerdyFembyWoman
over a year ago

Eastbourne (she/they)

If you are going to resort to violence because a Drag Queen told an unacceptable joke... you are also unacceptable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"If you are going to resort to violence because a Drag Queen told an unacceptable joke... you are also unacceptable.

"

I was talking hypothetically, so potentially unacceptable. The thing is, we don’t know the motivation for including that line. The benefit of the doubt would lead all of us to assume a joke and not to assume a sinister motive but as I said, I’m not sure, not 100% sure, I would’ve reacted well. Parents are very protective of their kids

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uddy laneMan
over a year ago

dudley

What is funny about wanting children to open their hearts minds and legs.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heBirminghamWeekendMan
over a year ago

here

Someone explain what the joke is ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heNerdyFembyWoman
over a year ago

Eastbourne (she/they)


"What is funny about wanting children to open their hearts minds and legs. "

Absolutely 100% Nothing, it is an atrocious joke that shouldn't have been told.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *igNick1381Man
over a year ago

BRIDGEND

Violence would be unnecessary, but booing them off the stage, absolutely

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Violence would be unnecessary, but booing them off the stage, absolutely "

Agreed but the natural impulse when hearing something like that if your kids are with you might have manifested into violence

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heNerdyFembyWoman
over a year ago

Eastbourne (she/they)


"Violence would be unnecessary, but booing them off the stage, absolutely

Agreed but the natural impulse when hearing something like that if your kids are with you might have manifested into violence "

I have an 8 year old. my instinct would not have been violence.

If you think it might be for you I would kindly suggest you ask yourself if that is healthy or not.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Violence would be unnecessary, but booing them off the stage, absolutely

Agreed but the natural impulse when hearing something like that if your kids are with you might have manifested into violence

I have an 8 year old. my instinct would not have been violence.

If you think it might be for you I would kindly suggest you ask yourself if that is healthy or not."

I’m acknowledging that might have happened. I’m glad I wasn’t there so that I wouldn’t find out my reaction. From a legal perspective, I would’ve been in trouble if I reacted. Again, we are missing the context which led to that comment by the act.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heNerdyFembyWoman
over a year ago

Eastbourne (she/they)


"I’m acknowledging that might have happened. I’m glad I wasn’t there so that I wouldn’t find out my reaction. From a legal perspective, I would’ve been in trouble if I reacted. Again, we are missing the context which led to that comment by the act."

We have discussed it was made in public with a family audience who prolly were not expecting the joke. With the common consensus being that the joke was completely unacceptable. (Unacceptable being the word I chose but others words have echoed this)

What more context is there?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I’m acknowledging that might have happened. I’m glad I wasn’t there so that I wouldn’t find out my reaction. From a legal perspective, I would’ve been in trouble if I reacted. Again, we are missing the context which led to that comment by the act.

We have discussed it was made in public with a family audience who prolly were not expecting the joke. With the common consensus being that the joke was completely unacceptable. (Unacceptable being the word I chose but others words have echoed this)

What more context is there?"

I’d like to know more about the full script, also what led the act to include that line, bearing in mind such acts are rehearsed or well thought out beforehand. How was the act expecting that comment to go down with the audience. I’m entertaining the idea that it was either a poor taste comment or was asking for acceptance in a change of attitude towards children and sex.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uddy laneMan
over a year ago

dudley

Were they booked as a comedian.?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Were they booked as a comedian.? "

A good question and one that would help having the answer to.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *heNerdyFembyWoman
over a year ago

Eastbourne (she/they)

I think the fact that it happened in the middle of June and that only 2 news articles about it exist, both by the Daily Mail will probably tell you that a lot of the story has been sensationalised.

Le Grand told an unacceptable joke and has been Banned from performing there again.

Do you really NEED to know more?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"I think the fact that it happened in the middle of June and that only 2 news articles about it exist, both by the Daily Mail will probably tell you that a lot of the story has been sensationalised.

Le Grand told an unacceptable joke and has been Banned from performing there again.

Do you really NEED to know more?"

Yes, I would like to know more and I’m not in favour of shooting the messenger, in this case the DM

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top