Florida Hotel Fined $5,000 for Allowing Minors To Attend Holiday Drag Show
While minors were required to be accompanied by an adult to attend the event, state regulators still went after the "not appropriate" drag performance.

A Miami hotel has agreed to pay a $5,000 fine to settle a legal battle with the state of Florida over a drag performance that state regulators claimed was "not appropriate to display to children" and a violation of Florida law.
Last December, the Miami Hyatt Regency hosted A Drag Queen Christmas, a touring drag show with former RuPaul's Drag Race contestant Nina West. Minors were allowed to attend the event, provided that they were accompanied by an adult. According to CBS News Miami, the event included instances of "simulated sexual acts and showing prosthetic female breasts on stage."
The event came under fire from state regulators in March, who claimed that the show violated a Florida provision barring "lascivious exhibition" in front of children under 16. In retaliation for these alleged violations, the state attempted to revoke the hotel's liquor license.
Following the incident, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the "Protection of Children Act" into law in May, which banned minors from attending "any show, exhibition, or other presentation in front of a live audience which, in whole or in part, depicts or simulates nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement," including "lewd exposure of prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts." Those in violation of the law could have their business licenses revoked or removed, a far harsher punishment than the attempted removal of a liquor license.
"Florida is proud to lead the way in standing up for our children," DeSantis said in a press release at the time. "As the world goes mad, Florida represents a refuge of sanity and a citadel of normalcy."
However, enforcement of the law was halted in June, when a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction against the statute.
"Florida state law, presently and independently of the instant statutory scheme, permits any minor to attend an R-rated film at a movie theater if accompanied by a parent or guardian," Judge Gregory A. Presnell of the Middle District of Florida ruled. "Such R-Rated films routinely convey content at least as objectionable as that covered by" the law.
"Moreover, existing obscenity laws provide Defendant with the necessary authority to protect children from any constitutionally unprotected obscene exhibitions or shows," Presnell wrote. "The harm to Plaintiff clearly outweighs any purported evils not covered by Florida law and a preliminary injunction would not be adverse to the public interest."
While Florida's punitive new law was stopped, the state continued its original attempt to punish the hotel for hosting the drag performance. Ultimately, a settlement was reached this week in which the hotel agreed to pay a $5,000 fine and bar minors from future events with actual or simulated sexual activity. However, records show that "the settlement did not find any violations of administrative or criminal laws," according to the Miami Herald.
The Florida state government's actions in cracking down on drag shows are part of a national trend attacking the performances. Several states, including Tennesee and Montana, have attempted to ban outright a wide range of drag performances, while others have enacted vague laws targeting performances with sexual content in an effort to curb drag shows.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
So the government threatens illegal lawsuits to force the entertainment industry to implement ratings for movies and songs, and makes it illegal for minors to appear in bars and strip clubs, and that's all fine and dandy ...
... until a bunch of perverts who dress up as over-sexualized parodies of women and insist they will only read to children who are too young to read, and want to parade down Main street in front of those same children ....
... and suddenly you get outraged by censorship?
Get out of DC.
Fire KMW.
Think liberty first, pragmatism second.
^Needs a Spongebob-Cousteau-esque "50 yrs. later" clip between the first and second ellipsis.
So the government threatens illegal lawsuits to force the entertainment industry to implement ratings for movies and songs, and makes it illegal for minors to appear in bars and strip clubs, and that’s all fine and dandy …
Who said that was all fine and dandy?
Are you arguing kids should be able to go to strip clubs and put their lunch money in a strippers g string?
Like you would be opposed to that.
Well, I wouldn't let my own kid do it before he was 18.
Nice that you know the difference between being a kid, and being an adult.
There’s hope for you yet!
Is he another a Shreek sick?
Or Jeffy?
I can't control what other people do with their kids if I want them to return me the same favor.
Imagine what would happen if we let government control how we parent our children. I do t want that.
Does this theory apply to abusing your kid too?
The problem with libertarianism is that attracts people who want to fuck kids.
Define abuse. I mean other than sexual. That’s clearly not legal.
My wife’s father beat her, her siblings and her mother. Her older sister still defends those beatings as proper dicipline.
My father spanked me for wetting my pants in Kindergarten.
Some people physically discipline their children with a belt on the bare butt. Other set no upper limit on what violence they will use to keep their kids in line.
So yeah, define abuse please.
Edit: I have never raised a hand to my son. Neither has my wife. We realizes our own parents were horrible and we did nothing that they did in regards to our son.
The panty wearing crotches pf those grown men that dress in burlesque women’s clothing should have the right to have the asses of young children seat themselves…while reading a book.
"which banned minors from attending "any show, exhibition, or other presentation in front of a live audience which, in whole or in part, depicts or simulates nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement," including "lewd exposure of prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts."
Buttplug and Jeff are outraged by this attack on their freedom to act inappropriately in front of minors.
For buttplug and jeff libertarianism is only about abolishing the age of consent.
Mammary-Necrophilia-Farter-Fuhrer and ALL of Her Perfect Internet Cesspool Followers AND the Lizard people ALL are outraged by this attack on their freedom to DECIDE FOR EVERYONE twat is, and twat is snot, "inappropriate", dammit!!!!
Even insane homeless people run when they see you, don’t they?
No surprises that Sqrlsy wants to dry hump Rudolph in front of preteens.
Why hasn’t anyone had SQRLSY put down yet?
Look, the market isn’t perfect, ok?
Mammary-Necrophilia-Farter-Fuhrer and ALL of Her Perfect Internet Cesspool Followers AND the Lizard people ALL are TRULY Perfect, though!!! ALL HAIL Mammary-Necrophilia-Farter-Fuhrer!!!!!
It’s like you’re not even trying anymore.
Sad.
A couple of things here.
1. The Florida law in question prohibited minors from shows such as these. It's NC-17, not R. ...the "Protection of Children Act" into law in May, which banned minors from attending "any show, exhibition, or other presentation in front of a live audience which, in whole or in part, depicts or simulates nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement," including "lewd exposure of prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts."
According to CBS News Miami, the event included instances of "simulated sexual acts and showing prosthetic female breasts on stage." It would be the same if they held a stripping competition with actual, real women.
2. Miami Hyatt Regency. This is the Pritzker hotel chain.
https://nypost.com/2022/12/31/how-pritzkers-became-key-backers-of-bail-reform-gender-affirming-care/
The Pritzkers are irredeemably evil people.
Another family that should face execution.
But if a parent accompanies the child they can go to an R rated movie. Is a drag show the same thing as an R rated movie? Hell, kids are watching crap like Game of Thrones at home and how is that not the equivalent of an X Rated movie. Maybe the camel has his neck and shoulders already in the tent. This drag show business is the rest of the camel.
The hotel did not require children to be accompanied by a parent—only that they be accompanied by “an adult”. If a child had been there sitting on Jeffy’s or Buttplug’s lap, that would have been OK with them.
Is a drag show the same thing as an R rated movie?
They can be much worse. The videos have been linked to several times here.
Hell, kids are watching crap like Game of Thrones at home
Yes, if their parents are incompetent or perverts.
At the very least the hotel should have to require parental supervision, not some random guy off the street.
As for Game of Thrones I agree. That's just porn.
"But if a parent accompanies the child they can go to an R rated movie."
Depends if they're seven or seventeen. Most of the kids at the Drag Queen Christmas were preteens.
If a religious person can drag their 7 year old to be indoctrinated in the ramblings of a group of syphalitic bronze age goat herders then why not a rated R show, or rated X for that matter. Parents have the right to screw their kids up. To a point... You can't have sex with your kid. Not yet, I'm sure the left wants that to be legal as well.
It seems to me that you aren’t completely opposed to the idea of sexualizing children.
No, I am opposed to government interfering in parenting choices.
I've seen female bikers show up here in Sturgis in little more than chaps, panties and pasties. The ones who can pull it off without making men vomit tend to be the parents of younger kids. Should those women be forced into a hijab until their kids are 18?
I've seen preteen girls show up trick or treating looking like they are turning tricks. Have you looked at the Halloween costumes for sale for kids these days?
I don't want government to have the power to make Halloween costumes for the under 18 set have ankle length skirts and high necks. I don't want the government stopping attractive women from showing their assets.
I can't justify letting the nose of the camel under the tent because some parents want their kids to watch men dress as oversexualized women and dance.
I figure those kids are going to grow up to be horrible people and their parents will bankrupt themselves bailing them out and paying off fines so in the end they will suffer for their poor choices.
Of course, ML's solution is that it should be technically legal for parents to take their kids to drag shows, but that the parents should face some 'street justice' in the alley out back with a wink and a nod from the authorities.
Back when Trump was president I'd suggest such "crimes" be punished by having the "criminal" serve as the First Lady's personal assistant for a month.
You certainly ky are a booster for the sexualization of young children. Are you another Shreek sock?
No, he appears to be none other than Nick Gillespie.
https://reason.com/2023/11/30/prepare-your-kids-for-a-successful-launch/?comments=true#comment-10337148
Sorry, I'm not that old or that good looking.
That wasn't an R-rated movie.
That was an NC-17 movie.
>>Last December
story won't die if we don't let it.
Is this a Pussy Riot type issue, where the choice is between over-punishment and letting the other side shove it in your face?
Twat do you mean, "pussy riot"? Shit is ALL about pussy GRABBING, dammit! And Orange Man Bad will show us the way!!!
Orange Man Bad-Ass Pussy-Grabber all right!
We CAN grab all the pussy, all the time, and NONE will be smart enough to EVER grab our pussies right back!
These voters simply cannot or will not recognize the central illusion of politics… You can pussy-grab all of the people some of the time, and you can pussy-grab some of the people all of the time, but you cannot pussy-grab all of the people all of the time! Sooner or later, karma catches up, and the others will pussy-grab you right back!
I don't get the parents of these kids. What the hell is wrong with people to make them think a child needs to be exposed to kinky sex and mental illness? Do they let their kids watch them have sex? Do they let there pre teens drink beer and get plastered? Do they smoke their kids up? If not, why not? If you want your kids to be mentally traumatized then why stop at drag shows.
This seems the perfect example of the old mind experiment. What do you do if a person puts their newborn baby on display in a window with a sign, "Starving this child to death for public entertainment," Techically by the Non Afression Principle this is acceptable. They aren't hurting you in any way so why should you care. They aren't stealing from you or defrauding you. You have no right to interfere in what they do with their own children.
I see what conservatives WANT to do with these laws and agree in most cases the laws are so badly written that they need to be overturned. They are dancing around the issue of a parents right to screw up their own kids. I know I don't want government telling me I can't raise my child as I see fit. So in spirit I have to support a parents right to takes their kid to drag shows. However if that same parent has sex with their child we have all pretty much agreed the parent needs to go to jail for a very long time. So how close does a drag show come to having sex with your child? That's the question.
The Florida law in question isn’t aimed at parents. It imposes reasonable restrictions on venues, as the law does with other activities restricted to adults.
Interesting point. Venues that seek licenses from governments and seek corporate protections from lawsuits should have to conform to restrictions placed by the government they are sucking up to. That I have no problem with. A private show in a perverts home is another issue.
A private show in a perverts home
States have laws to deal with that situation.
They haven’t caught up with Pluggo yet, unfortunately. I always hope he draws the short straw and is the subject of a no knock warrant executed by a very aggressive SWAT team
That seems to be rather intrusive. The state needs to stop at my door.
The child in the window is being aggressed against by its parents. They are starving it to death. The child is defenseless. Anyone can and should go to the childs defense.
But then you are interfering in how the people chose to raise their child.
The Non Aggression Principle doesn't allow for you to defend others who may or may not be in danger. The non aggression principle is all about YOU not starting a fight but sure as hell finishing it. It's a personal philosophy allowing you to use force only when someone else agresses against you.
Also, how would you like it if, assuming you are like the majority of parents AND that you are or were a parent, you were physically disciplining your child and I who do not see physical discipline as a positive thing were to rescue your child from what I saw as your aggression against your child?
We have to think about the long term effects of giving a government power to punish.
The Non Aggression Principle doesn’t allow for you to defend others who may or may not be in danger.
Bullshit. Go read a book.
We have to think about the long term effects of giving a government power to punish.
We have to think about the immediate AND long-term effects of allowing parents to deliberately harm their children.
Maybe you signed another document than I did. I swore to never initiate force upon or use the threat of initiation of force to gain goods or services from another person. There was nothing in there about vigilante justice against people I think are initiating force against others.
If I had the street justice option there a lot of people who would raise a hand to physically discipline their children would have had my boot up their ass.
Wait, there's a document and an oath?
Yes. Look up The Libertarian Enterprise. It's another libertarian online monthly magazine. They used to have a link to print out a copy and an address to send the signed copy.
I'm not 100% they are still in operation. The guys running it are older than me and may be getting even slower than I am.
"The Non Aggression Principle doesn’t allow for you to defend others" Yes, it does. The parent has violated the Non Aggression Principle against a defenseless child. Another person has the right to come to that child's defense against the aggressor. And I didn't say anything about government.
So when a parent initiates force against their child by spanking the child I can go all Lone Ranger and shoot the parent?
"Techically by the Non Afression Principle this is acceptable. T"
No it isn't.
Ok, so if I see a parent initiate force on their child by swatting the child's butt I can go put my boot in their ass?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXmcq47hVpI
this is the most important issue of our time, judging from the amount of press it gets.
For the most part the people who want to force your kids into church don't want your kids to watch drag shows. That's why their laws keep getting overturned, they aren't writing a law to prevent child indoctrination, they want to prevent a specific kind of indoctrination.
the people who want to force your kids into church
Who are these people? Can you give us some names and link to some quotes?
Did you sleep through the 80s and 90s when Christians were trying to get intelligence design into biology classes?
Did you support intelligent design? If not, then why are you cool with this?
Also a picture of Jesus riding a dinosaur, isn't in remotely the same league as Santa wearing a purple strap-on ass fucking Rudolph in front of preteens, which is what happened at this particular drag show.
Personally I am not cool with this. I'm also not cool with abortion and several other freedoms some people wish to indulge in. But I recognize that letting the government regulate how parents raise their kids is a very bad idea. Government schools are bad enough. Government parent monitors scares me way more.
So basically, if parents want to sexualize their children at a young, who is the government to object, right?
Yeah, you’re totes cool with this.
No. Not cool with it. Not cool with a woman having an abortion either. Not cool with a lot of things. As a result I have a very small circle of friends because I take this shit seriously.
I also take the idea of the smallest government possible real seriously. Giving governments MORE power isn't reducing the size and scope of government. Its doing exactly what the left wants to do. Bigger more intrusive government.
I also take the idea of the smallest government possible real seriously.
So do I.
Giving governments MORE power isn’t reducing the size and scope of government.
Government already has this power in the US.
But I recognize that letting the government regulate how parents raise their kids is a very bad idea.
But government is regulating how parents raise their kids. The government is also financing trans activists, teaching critical theory in schools and universities, and spreading misinformation about sex/gender.
We don't seem to be able to abolish any of that crap. But at least we can fight back against it.
No. Did you somehow miss the difference between a school and a church?
In the 90s the church was trying to get into the government schools. Intelligent design and mandating the lords prayer in the morning along with the pledge of alliance were their more aggregious efforts.
Bullshit. You have to reach back to the 1960s to find The Lord's Prayer mandated in schools.
I didn't say they succeeded. Fortunately the Religious Right overstepped and got shut down. Of course that's when the left rose to power by not being the religious right...
Did you sleep through the 80s and 90s when Christians were trying to get intelligence design into biology classes?
Intelligent design is scientifically unsupported, but it doesn't amount to corrupting children.
*some Christians*?
I've gotten sick of having to say "some muslims" or "some jews". If I am getting tossed in with the right wingers because I disagree with Biden then fuck it. You can edit in your own "some" if you want.
Every church in my home town was on board with burning Dungeons and Dragons books because they were supposed to be instructions for summoning demons or some nonsense. I've got no reason to divide superstitious morons who follow the writings of syphalitic goat herders into good groups and bad groups. The whole monotheist mess is the same as far as I'm concerned.
Yeah man, churches and drag shows are totally the same thing.
You’re dumb enough to write for this garbage rag.
I really don't see a difference legally speaking. A parent has the right to screw their kid up however they want. Be that with primitive superstions or men in women's clothes. If I can't take a Christian's kid away because they are indoctrination their kids in a bronze age superstition I clearly cannot take their kids away for taking those kids to a drag show, or for watching Game of Thrones with them, or really anything the parent approves of.
And people wonder why libertarianism isn’t more popular.
Yes, defending liberty often means demanding tolerance for abuses of liberty. Makes liberty a hard sell.
Tru that.
Used to be we had to defend easy stuff, like yelling fire in a crowded theater. These days it's getting hard to sell the idea to myself.
These freakazoids who want to take kids to drag shows make my skin crawl. I know a 4 year old daughter of a couple of friends and she calls me Pop Pop. I would murder a drag performer for thinking about her, much less waving his plastic boobs at her.
The idea that I have to stand back to be internally consistent with my philosophy when these mentally ill sickos try to get this crap in schools bothers me to no end. But without that philosophy I have no reason to stop myself from initiating force and I know the demons that live in me. I need that philosophy to keep from letting those demons out.
Most people don't want liberty. It's too scary. Most people think they could be trusted with liberty but think you shouldn't be trusted with a spork, much less a gun, drugs, opinions, thoughts.... the list goes on. Selling them on their own liberty is easy. It's selling them on YOURS that is the hard sell.
Yeah, those are equivalent………
You sound like Pedo Jeffy. Are you a Pedo Jeffy sock?
You "sound" angry. Are you angry?
Why do you want the government to get invited in how parents raise their children? Do you believe children are government property?
So now you try to deflect by claiming I’m ‘angry’. And answer this; do you believe parents should be free to abuse their children?
And you sound a lot like Pedo Jeffy. Probably too scared to post on your standard handle after we all shredded you a few days ago.
I am opposed to all forms of child abuse including p
Spanking and indoctrination into a bronze age religion. If I were to agree with governments shutting down what you see as sexualizing children I'd have to support shutting down Sunday schools and church camps because both are efforts to indoctrinate kids as well as aresting parents who spank their kids.
As is I stand back and leave people with idiotic religions alone to indoctrinate their children into superstition and leave people who think drag shows expand a child's experiences alone. They aren't pushing their crap on me or mine.
I've been wondering that, too.
It’s likely that he’s Jeffy. He uses the same sea lioning sophistry with similar phrasing.
Yeah, noticing that too. Has the cadence of Jeffy if he tried really hard to NOT just shitpost, like a drunk trying really hard to enunciate.
Most of the time I post I am drunk.
" A parent has the right to screw their kid up however they want. " No, they don't. Perhaps you want to add some qualifiers there?
Exactly what way can't you screw a kid up? If you can drag them to a Mosque and make them believe in a god of terrorism then I don't see what you can't do. I mean other than have sex with them.
I'm not sure, can a Christian Scientist still treat their child with prayer only and not be prosecuted if the kid dies?
Exactly. You can't rape your kid. Nor can you starve your kid to death. Or beat them to a pulp. Or chain them up and keep them in the basement. Would screw them up, wouldn't it?
There are parents who would argue starving their kid is required to get through to them. I've encountered those types before. Scary fuckers. I doubt they'd draw the line at physical restraints. I knew kids whose parents went to some scary extremes to keep them from getting out when grounded.
Again, where does legal physical discipline end and actual abuse begin? I've yet to find a person who thinks physical dicipliine is acceptable be able to draw that line. I've been told "whatever it takes to get through to my kid."
Note I've said you can't have sex with your kid several times. That is go to jail, do not cross go, do not collect 200 bucks, get your head bashed in by a lifer who learns you didled a kid.
So you similarly then similarly agree DeSantis was right to sign the bill that protects Florida schoolchildren under 9 from sexual discussion in the classroom?
Government schools are controlled by governments. Just keep in mind a Democrat could come to power and decide to stop conservative stuff they don't like from being introduced on schools.
Giving a government power is a bad idea to begin with. Bitching about governments you've given power to using that power against you is just funny.
No they don't.
Nobody's reading to your kids in the public library dressed as Jesus Christ, mate.
No, that was back in the 80s and 90s. Now the left is following the same playback. Taking their religion into public spaces.
Tell you what, I'll be on board with laws against leftist religion in public places as soon as the one ton monuments to the ten commandments are removed from courthouses in the south.
Way to divert and deflect.
Just answering the question. Accusing me of being a puppet is a diversion.
Fuck, fhqwhgads. Why don't you trolls stick to your original handles? You were muted for a reason.
Actually I was considering muting you as a troll...
Good?
Florida Hotel Fined $5,000 for Allowing Minors To Attend Holiday Drag Show
It's sad that trans activists have turned drag shows into a means of corrupting children and that this had to happen. But given that that's the world we live in, it's good that children are protected from it.
They must want that young boyflesh. Just like Pluggo.
Trans activists? They aren't capable of sexual intercourse. They are simply angry eunuchs who want to create more angry eunuchs like themselves.
When I was a kid I thought "Three's Company" was a great show with all of Ritter's physical comedy. He was always stumbling through something.
Later as an adult I haven't been able to get through a stupid episode.
My point is that it doesn't matter.
Good. Just because adult supervision of minors was required doen't mean it wasn't inappropriate for those accompanied minors.
And, frankly, we've let you guys decide how to raise your kids for two generations now and . . . you all suck.
We're long past the days when "accompanied by an adult" meant "under the guidance of someone older and wiser". Nowadays, it means "accompanied by someone tired of forcing adults to agree with them who's moved on to easier targets". 'Accompanied by an adult is a lie', a fig leaf to cover how much more broadly misanthropic adults have become.
A minor offense.
Isn't this Mimi Bobeck from the Drew Carey show?
accompanied by an adult
That's all well and good but what has that got to do with drag performances at a public library, or taking awards away from women and girls, or forcing boys into pre-teen girls restrooms and locker rooms, or forcibly stupifying people as to the last thousand years of biology and science? Oh wait, neither one of us has to tell the other what it has to do with all of those things because, while saying it's got nothing to do with all of those things every last retarded spokesperson and activist has inextricably tied them all together and even put a flag on top.
the event included instances of "simulated sexual acts and showing prosthetic female breasts on stage."
Y'know, for the children.
This is no different than people objecting to PREA. What exactly is it that you're so desperate to expose to children that you feel like you're being wrongfully deprived of something if it's not specifically done in their presence? They're not upset because they've been forbidden from doing something at all, because neither the PCA or PREA law forbids it. They're ONLY upset because they can't do it in front of kids. Why?
There's only one possible answer and we all know what it is, groomers.
Let's be clear about this: this is a restriction on the rights of parents.
The 'children' (and remember, this is the state, everyone under 18 is a child here) were there with parental consent. In other words, parents decided this is something they want their offpsring to see. By punishing the locale you're standing in the way of parental rights. There's no difference between this and a parent deciding they want to allow their offspring to view an R-rated film (or, indeed, choosing the sex ed materials their kid may view, which may sometimes be explicit).
But, of course, most of the 'parental rights' advocates aren't big fans of parental rights - they're fans of parental rights only when it is the right of the parents to promote 'traditional' stuff. Strange, that.