By Jonathon Van Maren
Last fall, writer and long-time gay “rights” activist Andrew Sullivan weighed in on the intramural conservative civil war over Drag Queen Story Hour, mocking the idea that drag queens were in any way a sexual phenomenon. Drag queens, he asserted, were rather like clowns, and thus having them come to public libraries and read to children is much the same as having any other costumed performer do the same. Anyone claiming that there is something sexual about drag queens, he concluded, was engaging in ignorant hysteria.
I’ve thought about Sullivan’s take fairly often as the Drag Queen Story Hour phenomenon spreads across North America (and elsewhere—in Ireland, parents were outraged to discover that a drag troupe called “Glitter Hole” specializing in sexually explicit performances was scheduled to read to children). I wonder what he’d think of a recent story in the Daily Star noting widespread backlash to the decision of Glencoates Primary School in Scotland to bring in a drag queen called “Flowjob” (introduced to the children as “Flow”) with a history of explicit sexual content on social media.