Zone1 Drag Shows in the U.S. military during WWII

[HeyNorm]

I want to emphasize that “drag performance,” like being gay or wearing women’s clothes — however you or I may personally feel about all that — have very long and varied histories … in many contexts and cultures, including military ones.

I don’t think one can argue very rationally that by itself such “freedom” (perhaps born of necessity in some cases) or such sex-bending “performance” art … is necessarily leads to whatever social degeneration, moral degeneration, or whatnot you are afraid of. It certainly didn’t, in the military context of WWII, lead in any way to an inability to do hard and dangerous soldiering. Quite the contrary it seems.

To me at least, any suggestion that military-sanctioned WWII entertainment — highlighting drag performances — had a negative “slippery slope” effect on our culture today … is preposterous.

Perhaps you were being a bit hysterical, or maybe just not clear — and I am misinterpreting what seemed to be indicated by your own words …

Using an article, written by a member of the group you want normalized is suspect at best.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I found this unusual article on the history of GI DRAG SHOWS entertaining the troops during WWII … which some MAGA types — and Liberals too — should find interesting.

The author is gay, an historian, an elementary school teacher, and a prominent educator involved in Louisiana state controversies over curriculum, “CRT,” etc.

Read it and see how our nation managed to come together when sorely tested in the past. It shows how our military managed to use and even encourage “drag shows” to entertain culturally diverse — and still racially segregated — soldiers.

It was a time when gays (in an out of the military) were almost entirely still “in the closet.” At that time our nation as a whole was more culturally “conservative” yet was led by a far more united and “progressive” political leadership than in our more hysterically divided present.

GIs as Dolls: Uncovering the Hidden Histories of Drag Entertainment During Wartime | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans

Back in the day, people dressed up in women's clothing and did a performance because it was fun.
These days the whole "cancel culture" people (the people saying these words are doing these words too) are like "oh, it's harmful"....

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Using an article, written by a member of the group you want normalized is suspect at best.

I absolutely want gay men (and lesbian women) — in and out of the military — to receive all the “normal” respect other citizens get.

The writer wrote a fascinating article. If you have any complaints or disagreements about what he actually wrote, please mention them.

 

[HeyNorm]

I absolutely want gay men (and lesbian women) — in and out of the military — to receive all the “normal” respect other citizens get.

The writer wrote a fascinating article. If you have any complaints or disagreements about what he actually wrote, please mention them.

Not delving into fantasy bro.

Just another attempt at “it’s been around since the beginning of time” nonsense.

As has been murder, rape, child molestors and a whole host of other “lifestyles” that should not be enabled.

Now report my post, it don’t fit into your monologue. Hit me back when you want a real discussion

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

As has been murder, rape, child molestors and a whole host of other “lifestyles” that should not be enabled…

So you associate drag performance and shows in which men played women in WWII entertainment for U.S. soldiers … as you do “murder, rape, child molesters and a whole host of other ‘lifestyles’ that should not be enabled”? Hmmm …

 

[westwall]

So you associate drag performance and shows in which men played women in WWII entertainment for U.S. soldiers … as you do “murder, rape, child molesters and a whole host of other ‘lifestyles’ that should not be enabled”? Hmmm …

Ummmm, no. That is you doing that.

 

[HeyNorm]

So you associate drag performance and shows in which men played women in WWII entertainment for U.S. soldiers … as you do “murder, rape, child molesters and a whole host of other ‘lifestyles’ that should not be enabled”? Hmmm …

I think I made myself clear. Just because something had been around for centuries, does not necessarily make it good for society.

 

[HeyNorm]

I absolutely want gay men (and lesbian women) — in and out of the military — to receive all the “normal” respect other citizens get.

The writer wrote a fascinating article. If you have any complaints or disagreements about what he actually wrote, please mention them.

Normal? That’s a laugh.

In normal military service, men and women are barracked in different housing. Why? Because the two are sexually attracted to each other.

So normal would be that gay men could not be housed with straight men and lesbians could not be housed with straight women. In fact, the “normal thing” would be that gays would have to be housed alone, individually.

That is, unless, we, as a society, want to follow gay protocol in the military, all sexes would be housed together.

Now have this post removed even though you brought the subject up of how gays should be treated in the military.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I think I made myself clear. Just because something had been around for centuries, does not necessarily make it good for society.

Well, I certainly understand that much. Many terrible things existed for centuries, and many of them went unpunished or unrecognized as crimes for centuries…

But could you be a little clearer here?

Do you think that dressing up as women and acting in WWII army shows was “bad for society” or army morale?

In general, do you think “being gay” and living a gay lifestyle, or straights watching drag shows … by itself is “bad for society”?

 

[HeyNorm]

Well, I certainly understand that much. Many terrible things existed for centuries, and many of them went unpunished or unrecognized as crimes for centuries…

But you could be a little clearer, here?

Do you think that dressing up as a women and acting in WWII army shows was “bad for society” or army morale?

In general, do you think “being gay” and living a gay lifestyle, or straights watching drag shows … by itself is “bad for society”?

When done, as is the case in war, to entertain a bunch of away from home soldiers? In small drips and dab, not so much. It’s a bit like people dressing up like animals to entertain. If presented as a lifestyle, as we see today. Then it is horrible for society, especially for women who are losing rights because of a stupid, immature fetish

 

[TNHarley]

Why do people keep trying to compare adult drag shows to drag shows for kids?
How intellectually dishonest does one have to be? I mean, SERIOUSLY?
The fact that you compare them, makes you look like a freak!

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Normal? That’s a laugh.

In normal military service, men and women are barracked in different housing. Why? Because the two are sexually attracted to each other.

So normal would be that gay men could not be housed with straight men and lesbians could not be housed with straight women. In fact, the “normal thing” would be that gays would have to be housed alone, individually.

That is, unless, we, as a society, want to follow gay protocol in the military, all sexes would be housed together.

Now have this post removed even though you brought the subject up of how gays should be treated in the military.

Why on earth would I try to have this comment removed? You raise some relevant questions about military norms and the often VERY powerful sexuality of young male soldiers.

The article itself points out that the very well received drag performances were somewhat phased out towards the end of WWII … as more women by then had entered the service through the WAVES and WACs and could play female parts — but ironically at this point there was considerable resistance, especially from well-respected WACS woman commander Colonel Oveta Culp Hobby, who …

“was concerned that the WAC performers would be too sexually risque to perform for the all male audiences overseas. Colonel Hobby went even further issuing directives barring WACS from ‘singing and dancing in connection with any presentation.’”

The issue of maintaining a “good image” of American women in service, and professionalism in the army, were widely understood as very important in that era.

Operational efficiency was also an important issue that kept the races segregated in army units and on the stage. It is hard for us today to appreciate the intensity of the feelings of many white soldiers, especially those from the South, who were repulsed and disgusted by social integration with Negros in that same period:

“It wasn’t until near the end of the war that some performances were racially integrated; however, even on the stage the presence of interracial relationships were not permitted.” Of course this only reflected the lower caste status blacks were long forced to accept in American society as a whole.

The racial issues were largely the result of powerful historical taboos that arose with slavery, and clearly the sexual issues were even more profoundly rooted in human traditions and biology. But despite the problems, even women have been “integrated” into the armed forces today (and more than ever before into the workforce and society as a whole) … though of course not completely.

Today ours is not a male draft military with women volunteers, as was the case in WWII, and our armed forces have many different needs than before that women can seemlessly and without controversy fill.

Of course there can still be special allowances in the armed forces for women’s barracks (seems reasonable to me) but this is not the case for homosexual men or women. Given today’s customs and social norms, and the “threat level” to unit coherence, I think it is your proposal to “normatively” house gays and lesbians separately … that is rather laughable.

What do others think about this?

 

[HeyNorm]

Why on earth would I try to have this comment removed? You raise some relevant questions about military norms and the often VERY powerful sexuality of young male soldiers.

The article itself points out that the very well received drag performances were somewhat phased out towards the end of WWII … as more women by then had entered the service through the WAVES and WACs and could play female parts — but ironically at this point there was considerable resistance, especially from well-respected WACS woman commander Colonel Oveta Culp Hobby, who …

“was concerned that the WAC performers would be too sexually risque to perform for the all male audiences overseas. Colonel Hobby went even further issuing directives barring WACS from ‘singing and dancing in connection with any presentation.’”

The issue of maintaining a “good image” of American women in service, and professionalism in the army, were widely understood as very important in that era.

Operational efficiency was also an important issue that kept the races segregated in army units and on the stage. It is hard for us today to appreciate the intensity of the feelings of many white soldiers, especially those from the South, who were repulsed and disgusted by social integration with Negros in that same period:

“It wasn’t until near the end of the war that some performances were racially integrated; however, even on the stage the presence of interracial relationships were not permitted.” Of course this only reflected the lower caste status and racial reality experienced by blacks in American society as a whole.

The racial issues were largely the result of powerful historical taboos that arose with slavery, and clearly the sexual issues were even more profoundly rooted in human traditions and biology. But despite the problems, even women have been “integrated” into the armed forces today (and more than ever before in the workforce and society as a whole) … though many problems remain. Of course today ours is not a draft army with women volunteers, as was the case in WWII, and our armed forces have many different needs than before as well.

We of course still make special allowances in the armed forces for women’s barracks (seems reasonable to me) but not for gay men or gay women. Given today’s customs and social norms, and the “threat level” to unit coherence, I think it is your proposal to “normatively” house gays and lesbians separately … that is rather laughable.

Why is it laughable? Gay men are sexually attracted, not only to other gay men, but to straight men.

In fact, not only should the military segregate gays from other gays, and from straights of the the same sex, but that should become strict public policy in places like the YMCAs and other locker rooms.

Now your response will be that the answer should be private lockers and private showers. Way to expensive and completely unnecessary. The general public should not have to absorb any expense to facilitate your kink.

 

[Resnic]

Those drag shows were done for fun and humor to make people laugh, lighten their moods and give them a chance to just relax and be entertained for a while during a war.

It was completely devoid of gender or sexuality. They didn't have all the forms of entertainment we had today. And comedy shows with men dressed as women silly and goofy to them and made them laugh.

Today's drag shows are absolutely nothing like them in any way, shape or form.

Trying to draw comparisons is as stupid as trying to draw comparisons between Kabuki theater from feudal Japan where men dressed as women for performances and ru Paul's drag show.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Why do people keep trying to compare adult drag shows to drag shows for kids?
How intellectually dishonest does one have to be? I mean, SERIOUSLY?
The fact that you compare them, makes you look like a freak!

I and the author of the OP article have carefully not mentioned the separate issue of “drag shows for kids.” I am certainly not comparing the two cases at all. You mention it and are apparently focused on it, but such a hyper-politicized issue would better be discussed elsewhere.

 

[HeyNorm]

Those drag shows were done for fun and humor to make people laugh, lighten their moods and give them a chance to just relax and be entertained for a while.

Today's drag shows are absolutely nothing like them in any way, shape or form.

Trying to draw comparisons is as stupid as trying to draw comparisons between Kabuki theater from feudal Japan where men dressed as women for performances and ru Paul's drag show.

Todays drag shows are an expression of sexuality and demean women. They insult women and should be banned on that basis alone.

 

[TNHarley]

I and the author of the OP article have carefully not mentioned the separate issue of “drag shows for kids.” I am certainly not comparing the two cases at all. You mention it and are apparently focused on it, but such a hyper-politicized issue would better be discussed elsewhere.

lolz yeah ok

 

[HeyNorm]

I and the author of the OP article have carefully not mentioned the separate issue of “drag shows for kids.” I am certainly not comparing the two cases at all. You mention it and are apparently focused on it, but such a hyper-politicized issue would better be discussed elsewhere.

Why? The apparent reasoning for the OP and for using an LBGTQ author to illustrate you point was to show why drag queens should be an everyday slice of our lives?

I don’t think your winning this battle, regardless which zone you place it in.

 

[Polishprince]

I found this unusual article on the history of GI DRAG SHOWS entertaining the troops during WWII … which some MAGA types — and Liberals too — should find interesting.

The author is gay, an historian, an elementary school teacher, and a prominent educator involved in Louisiana state controversies over curriculum, “CRT,” etc.

Read it and see how our nation managed to come together when sorely tested in the past. It shows how our military managed to use and even encourage “drag shows” to entertain culturally diverse — and still racially segregated — soldiers.

It was a time when gays (in an out of the military) were almost entirely still “in the closet.” At that time our nation as a whole was more culturally “conservative” yet was led by a far more united and “progressive” political leadership than in our more hysterically divided present.

GIs as Dolls: Uncovering the Hidden Histories of Drag Entertainment During Wartime | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans

There is a far chasm between "drag" entertainment and simply a man dressed up like a broad for comedic purposes.

Curly was not performing "drag" back in the day, it wasn't highly sexualized at all, and was designed to foil the liberal elite society folks they were partying with. Not to mock sexual mores.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Todays drag shows are an expression of sexuality and demean women. They insult women and should be banned on that basis alone.

Did they demean women in WWII? Much drag performance culture in the “gay world” actually “worships” women. For example, Judy Garland became a cult heroine to many gays, at least when I was young.

Drag also includes women impersonating men, sometimes as an act of “cool,” other times as a show of rebellion and independence, sometimes satirically. Is all that to be banned too? Who decides? Would you ban all the many comical movies that playfully highlighted drag performances?

I get that some of it may be “in very poor taste.” I don’t like that stuff either! But straight films and plays often show heterosexuals acting as killers, perverts, rapists, sadists, etc. Ban all of this too?