Well, from the perspective of a biologist, the artificial colouring of the face or parts thereof with something like lipstick is a form of sexual signalling
Mmmm… sort of? A biologist studies biology, lipstick is… a cosmetic- human lips don’t actually turn bright red or blue in sexually healthy subjects. Anthropologists have reported that their research indicates that lipstick is PERCEIVED as sociosexual but is in fact NOT sociosexual. The misconception there is one that any action to increase the perception of attractiveness is sexual- which completely ignores the fact that humans beings can appreciate aesthetic attractiveness in a non sexual capacity. No solid research suggests that humans enjoy the beauty of a sunset or find a well groomed dog attractive based on some sexual perception.
The paper “Evidence that makeup is a false signal of sociosexuality” covers this in depth and can be found in the Rutgers library. University of Kent has some journals and papers archived and referenced with interesting reads for further education on the subject such as an entry by Sarah E. Johns, Lucy A. Hargrave, et.Al titled: “Red Is Not a Proxy Signal for Female Genitalia in Humans”
On the total of works to the contrary I am going to have to refute the concept that wearing makeup is a form of sexual signaling- though it CAN be, which brings us to the other failing in the argument:
Your argument that make up is sexual signaling has no relevance to sexual using children unless you are perhaps putting make up on the child. The presence of makeup on drag queens is irrelevant unless we assume that school teachers and parents should not be wearing makeup around children because that too would by this logic “sexualize them.”
Finally- it ignores the fact that children are not wired to understand sexual signaling or recognize it. Adults put sexual context to things. Is it sexual for a father to bounce his 2 year old daughter on his lap? What about his 5 yo daughter? 17 year old daughter? What about his wife? A child doesn’t see anything sexual in bouncing on daddies lap. By the time she is 17 she might consider it in appropriate or daddy might or the world might because now she’s of age so a child isn’t sexualizing a drag queen and a drag queen is no more likely to sexualize a child than any other adult.
There are countless values to reading to kids, reading to children helps them learn and develop. Who is doing the reading is largely irrelevant, and if a drag queen wants to read to children, why shouldn’t they be allowed? Drag queens can have their own children and they likely read to them as well just as any other parent might do and might want to read to a group of kids no? But- more directly to your point: what is the value in having a clown or a lady dressed as a witch or raggedy Anne doll or a dinosaur or a puppet read to kids? On that level- it’s just a little bit of fun and something maybe different and less boring or ordinary for most kids than some random dull adult. Kids like bright colors and interesting textures. Not only do they like them- it’s good for their development to be exposed to those things which is why you tend to see patterns in the designs and colors used in characters and costumes intended to educate children.
But that leads us to the other value- a social value. What we are exposed to as kids shapes who we become and how we think. Kids exposed to different situations and different language and different types of people while they are developing tend to be imprinted upon. The less a child sees and knows of the world, the more sheltered they tend to be. Human beings are largely wired to a level of xenophobia or caution at that which we don’t know or see as abnormal or different. The more we are exposed to different things at a young age, the more we tend to accept them or like them. They become normalized to us. Ever try to put a sweater on a cat or dog that has never worn one? Most take some time to get used to it or just won’t. Now, if you get them used to it in a manner that feels safe and comfortable as puppies and kitties- they may be perfectly comfortable wearing a sweater as an adult. Same basic idea.
Tl:Dr and in simple terms- drag queens are people and parents, so there isn’t anything wrong letting people in general read to kids and reading to kids has benefits.
Beyond that, there are both social and developmental benefits to kids interacting with a wide variety of people from an early age. Children who grow up with drag queens as a normal- even positive- association in life are more likely to be accepting and comfortable around drag queens and other types of people as they grow up, but exposing the developing brain to things that are new and novel to it also helps with brain development which further benefits the child as they mature and this also benefits society.
At the end of the day in a free country why would we even ask what the benefit of someone doing something is anyway? The question in a free country is: “name a good reason they shouldn’t.”
Can we please just let people read to kids without politicizing it? A lot of queens are awesome performers so I would expect their reading to be emotive and engaging. I couldn't give the tiniest crap what they are wearing, as long as it's fairly modest. Flashing nipples etc would detract from the story.
If you're a biologist, that's so obvious that it's not even a question
On the total of works to the contrary I am going to have to refute the concept that wearing makeup is a form of sexual signaling- though it CAN be, which brings us to the other failing in the argument:
Finally- it ignores the fact that children are not wired to understand sexual signaling or recognize it. Adults put sexual context to things. Is it sexual for a father to bounce his 2 year old daughter on his lap? What about his 5 yo daughter? 17 year old daughter? What about his wife? A child doesn’t see anything sexual in bouncing on daddies lap. By the time she is 17 she might consider it in appropriate or daddy might or the world might because now she’s of age so a child isn’t sexualizing a drag queen and a drag queen is no more likely to sexualize a child than any other adult.
Beyond that, there are both social and developmental benefits to kids interacting with a wide variety of people from an early age. Children who grow up with drag queens as a normal- even positive- association in life are more likely to be accepting and comfortable around drag queens and other types of people as they grow up, but exposing the developing brain to things that are new and novel to it also helps with brain development which further benefits the child as they mature and this also benefits society.
At the end of the day in a free country why would we even ask what the benefit of someone doing something is anyway? The question in a free country is: “name a good reason they shouldn’t.”