I'm going to go out on a limb and suggests the medical profession is doing a bit more science than the people who've roped arguments about detransitioning into their campaigns to ban drag shows to stop the "demons and imps" prevailing...

You don't think medical misconduct exists?

Well, it does exist. You are incredibly naive. There is also a long history of misguided medical interventions.

Some of them even condemned by your crowd, like attempts to cure homosexuality.

Suuuuure, the legislators prattling about demons and imps and banning drag shows are the ones doing dispassionate scientific research and the medical practitioners calmly doling out or denying regulated courses of treatment who are swept up in a moral panic.

You only pick some strawmen to support your own bias.

Of course there are doctors who are critical of the yrans hype.

And people calmly cutting off children's (teenager's) sexual organs or sterilizing them, denying them ever having an orgasm are probably evil psychopaths who belong in prison.

Nothing screams "moral panic" quite like people bringing up their own orgasm-deprivation fantasies to explain why the medical profession isn't doing science as well as they are.

MY fantasies? It is a possible side effect of the transitioning methods. You seem completely unaware of any actual facts regarding the whole topic.

Ah bless. The person who waded in to deny that there was any moral panic amongst the book-banners and explain that the real problem was doctors being evil orgasm-denying psychopaths for performing the operations their patients demanded wants to talk about awareness of facts.

You're the one who is trying to rope different arguemnts into the discussion here. That some people you detest who argue B also argue A is irrelevant when it comes to arguements for/against A.

Nope. In case you haven't noticed we're replying to an article about "moral panics". Somebody upthread pointed out that there is currently a moral panic centred on transpeople. Politicians talking about "demons and imps", banning drag shows and "eliminating" trans identity or introducing the felony offence of having the wrong books in the classroom examples of this phenomenon. Despite the OP's denials, this phenomenon is very much in evidence; the scientific research concluding the net harm of any and all forms gender-affirmative care recently criminalised by the same politicians isn't (and even if it existed, that still wouldn't mean moral panics over transpeople didn't exist)

I've never heard demons and imps as an argument.

Can you explain to me why children need to see drag shows, which are about sexual attraction, and why they need porn in the classroom?

It was an argument from one of the definitely-not moral panicking Florida legislators whose legislation you're defending. Sounds super scientific to me!

Drag shows aren't necessarily about sexual attraction and most the definitely not moral panicking laws in question makes being a "male impersonator" or "female impersonator" in the presence of children (or in some cases within quarter of a mile of them!) a felony rather than the actual content, which would be a shame for the pantomimes I used to attend as a kid. And strangely, there wasn't much porn in classrooms before the definitely-not-moral-panicking parent vetting organizations started picking titles like Anne Frank's Diary as "sexually explicit"

I never mentioned any specific laws or senators, you did.

But I have seen videos of such drag shows with kids, and examples of the debated books.

So stop bullshitting me. It is absolutely about sexualization and pornographic content. That other examples may exist is besides the point. Specific laws may be badly written, but the intent is certainly not to make Ms Doubtfire illegal.

And even Anne Frank may not be appropriate for children of all ages. Afaik it does contain passages about sex.

haha, the person arguing that laws which explicitly don't mention sexualised behaviour and explicitly do call out such horrors as "sings, lip syncs and dances" whilst being "a performer which exhibits a gender identity that is different than the performer's gender assigned at birth" is really all about sexualization and pornography whose legal status is unchanged is accusing me of bullshitting. Funny how they're all so badly written that Mrs Doubtfire would have to avoid singing, but a red blooded alpha male can tell all the smutty jokes to an audience of minors he wants! What next? It's "beside the point" that black people were targeted by Jim Crow laws because it was absolutely about efficient use of bus space?

There's no moral panic here, actually it's entirely normal to make it a criminal offence to have Anne Frank's diary in a classroom if a parent complains!