Is this a False Equivalence?

From here:

The alphabet mob on the other hand cheer and parade their pedophilic acts for the world to see. They extoll the likes of "Desmond is Amazing," a boy who dances in drag for grown men and even strips for them, like it's wonderful.

Except Drag itself is not inherently sexual. Drag for an adult audience almost always plays with sexuality.

Is stand-up comedy inherently sexual? Of course not. But if you go to a stand-up show at midnight next to a bar, might you hear some sexual humor? 

Indeed, that might be the issue, because drag plays with hyper-sexualized/feminine ideals and heteronormativity tends to conflate both and thus with the idea of arousal.

Yes, the statement in question employs a false equivalence, among other logical fallacies and biases. Let's break down the aspects that contribute to the faulty reasoning:

### False Equivalence
A false equivalence arises when two substantially different scenarios or things are treated as if they are equivalent in value or impact, without acknowledging the significant differences between them.

- **Drag Shows vs. Pedophilia**: The statement attempts to equate drag performances involving minors to pedophilic acts. This is a false equivalence because drag performances are a form of artistic expression and entertainment, not inherently sexual or abusive, whereas pedophilia involves sexual exploitation and harm to children.

### Cognitive Biases
Several cognitive biases might be at play here:

- **Confirmation Bias**: The author might selectively focus on examples that confirm their pre-existing beliefs while ignoring instances or evidence that contradicts those beliefs.
- **Moral Panic**: The statement may be influenced by sensationalism and moral panic, which can distort perception and lead to irrational fear and hostility towards a group based on extreme examples.

### Poor Logic and Reasoning
Several issues undermine the logic and reasoning in the statement:

- **Hasty Generalization**: The author makes a broad claim about the "alphabet mob" (a derogatory term for the LGBTQ+ community) based on a specific and unrepresentative example (Desmond is Amazing). This generalization unfairly tangles the entire community with the actions of one individual or a small group.
- **Strawman Fallacy**: The argument misrepresents the LGBTQ+ community's support by implying they universally endorse inappropriate or harmful behavior, which is not accurate.
- **Slippery Slope**: There's an implied argument that accepting drag performances involving minors inevitably leads to pedophilia, which is an unwarranted escalation and logically flawed.

### Addressing the Analogy with Stand-Up Comedy
The analogy drawn with stand-up comedy highlights the context-dependency of content, which is a sound point that weakens the initial argument. Just as stand-up comedy is not inherently sexual but can contain sexual humor in certain contexts, drag performances are also not inherently sexual and can vary based on context and audience.

In conclusion, the statement employs a false equivalence between drag performances and pedophilia, driven by biases and fallacious reasoning. The analogy with stand-up comedy aptly illustrates the context-dependency of content, thereby refuting the initial flawed claim.

The critique you quote is not criticizing drag in general, just one instance of drag. I would first ask if this example is true then how much if any is exaggerated. There is no claim here saying this example is equivalent to something else.

People who emphatically support ideologies tend to have a blindness for extreme examples of practices or examples of their ideology, rationalizing and excusing behavior and actions that they never otherwise would (think "the Jan 6th felons were 'just tourists'"). I would think any reasonable person can see an issue with a child being sexualized and see a larger issue with adults being entertained by this. However, if this example is pure fabrication, then it is simply a form of deception and manipulation.

Another possibility is that this is a real example, but an extreme outlier, meaning that it is so rare of an occurrence it is unfair to associate it with drag. People who are lazy thinkers use black and white thinking and have difficulty with nuance. In their ape brain, they think something like "drag good" and fail to draw metaphorical lines at which point expressions of drag become "bad". Again, this is the same for any ideology and strong belief where people substitute activism for critical thinking.