We're talking about performances
that are patently offensive to
the average person and violate
community standards with respect
to what is suitable for minors.
And that's what they were
talking about in the House State
Affairs Committee this morning,
a bill that would put a civil penalty
on anyone allowing a minor to see
any sort of live sexual exhibition.
Promoters, organizers, performers,
they all must take reasonable
steps to keep that from happening.
And if they don't, well,
any parent of said child,
or even that kid,
could sue for up to $10,000 after four
years after that supposed exposure.
It's another bill brought forth by
the Idaho Family Policy Center,
the President, Blaine Kazadi,
who he just heard from,
saying it isn't targeting any
specific performance.
It would treat any drag show,
****** dancing or burlesque equally if
they were to be deemed to be sexually
explicit conduct or patently offensive.
And none of them would be allowed
in a public place like a park where
children might be hanging around.
Several members of the drag community showed
up to testify against this bill today,
believing it is targeting them specifically,
especially.
After the attention a couple
of drag shows in Coeur,
d'alene and Boise received last summer,
they all made a point of saying
they tailor their performances
based on location and audience.
Something in a park would
certainly be less provocative than,
say, at a private bar,
which requires an ID just
to get through the door.
Republican representative Brent
Crain asked each of those people that
showed up should children be present
at a sexually explicit performance?
To which each of them replied no,
representative crane using this
line of questioning as a way
to show the intent of the bill.
So do you see anything in this bill
that's going to prohibit you from
performing a TV friendly show? Ultimately
that would depend on those viewing
it from an outsider's perspective.
It could be taken in very different ways
and what we consider to be very calm,
collective family friendly
to others in the community.
Who would simply want to backlash at us?
It could be taken as oh,
that's inappropriate simply
because of how we are.
Dressed, even if it is like
fully dressed as I am today.
The vagueness was a kind
of a touching point today,
where the vagueness of Community standards,
that's that's there's this accepted notion.
If you accept Community standards,
you accept that there's an accepted
notion of what is appropriate for minors.
There was a common concern that was today,
one pointing to how many kids
show up to R rated movies.
To kind of prove their point,
one parent's idea of appropriate for
that may not line up with another.
But I can tell you that there are parents
out there that believe just being queer
in a public place is inappropriate,
that two women kissing is inappropriate.
That wearing the clothing opposite
of the gender assigned to you
at birth is inappropriate.
So what is the Community standard when
they're part of the community feels that
your mere existence is inappropriate?
The bill's author, Kazadi,
again argued the community
standards are not subjective.
They're based on the US Supreme Court,
what they decided years ago.
But they do vary from one
community to another.
No, even in this hearing
there was an example of how
touchy this topic can be.
Chair, I'm gonna ask that you
ask the page to leave the room so
I can read from the bill text.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
See, apparently the legal
language of this bill would be
inappropriate for minors to hear,
according to Representative Craig.
Another committee hearing we have
to determine if it would be allowed
in a library, but I digress.
Another point of contention today,
the part of the bill that
defines sexual conduct,
specifically this section sexually
provocative dances or gestures
performed with accessories that
exaggerate male or female,
primary or secondary sexual characteristics.
Secondary sexual characteristics
could include a lot of things.
Facial hair, muscular build,
hip shape.
This is where the drag comes in.
They're attacking our silicone
chests and pads, you see, and nobody
said anything specific about drag,
but those are the things that
is being targeted by this bill.
Kazadi countering again today,
saying they aren't banning the
exaggeration of those characteristics.
Just if those exaggerated
characteristics are seen based on the
aforementioned Community standards,
then it can't happen in front of a kid.
Many of you might be asking,
like Democratic representative Brooke
Green did, what about a concert where
there might be some of that stuff
happening in the unlikely event,
say, Cardi B comes to Idaho,
Kazadi said community standards would make
it unlikely a kid going to her concert
would be in violation of this bill.
By the way, I know already has a law
against uncovering your private parts
and displays of sexual acts in public,
and they're pretty clear standards,
which kind of goes against
this bill complaining.
It's pretty vague standards lay
lined out here, so now it is.
To the house to decide if this
bill will become move on to the
next step to become law and if it
passes the State Affairs Committee.
It did,
I should say it passed the State
Affairs Committee today with a due
pass recommendation to the House.