










































Gender Performance: From the 
Freak Show to Modern Drag

It is the season six finale of 
RuPaul’s Drag Race, and the top 

three queens are waiting to see 
who will be crowned America’s 
Next Drag Superstar. The 
finalists’ bodies exceed our almost 
unattainable beauty standards, and 
their hair seems to defy gravity. 
Courtney Act, one of the finalists, 
is a singer from Australia; her 
normally blonde wig has been 
replaced with a bright pink one, and she’s wearing a technicolor dress that 
looks like something out of a Bowie video. Next to her is Adore Delano, 
another singer, whose fire red wig hangs down to her ample bosom (thanks 
to a chest plate), while her black gown screams of sequins. And on the very 
end is Bianca Del Rio, a comedian queen who specializes in insult comedy 
and more traditional drag, wearing one of her typical wigs: large, black, and 
topped with a huge spray of colored fabric. Her eyes are made up in her 
typical fashion, with copious amounts of white eyeliner to feminize her eyes 
and make them pop. The queens entertain the audience with an opening 
number, the whole time “serving” face, body, and total drag realness as they 
try to convince Ru that they deserve the crown. In the end, it goes to Bianca 
Del Rio; as the crowd’s deafening roars fill the award hall, the crown is 
placed on her head (“The Finale”). 
 According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, drag or being in 
drag is defined as “clothing more conventionally worn by the opposite 
sex, especially women’s clothes worn by a man” (“Drag”). While drag has 
a long history that can be traced back to ancient civilizations, in America 
drag really got its start in the freak show. In the American freak shows 
of the nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries, men would perform in 

  -  Olivia Germann, Ball State University

Abstract
This paper explores how gender performance in 
the freak show grew into the modern drag scene 
as we know it today. By examining some of the 
modern elements of drag, it is possible to see how 
these performers circumvented the laws, preju-
dices, and discrimination aimed towards them to 
create a booming industry where drag queens 
appear on national television and are treated with 
the respect that they had previously been denied.

66

Digital Literature Review, vol. 3 (2016). © Ball State University. All Rights Reserved.
Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce critical edition to dlr@bsu.edu.



women’s clothes to the accompaniment of jeers and laughter. Unlike drag 
today, which celebrates the men who wield gender as a form of costumed 
performance, the freak shows used drag as a way to separate the “normal” 
from the “abnormal” (Taylor, Rupp, Gamson 108). From the ashes of the 
traditional freak show arose the multi-billion dollar industry of modern 
American drag, replacing ragged performers with queens. Reclaiming the 
glory and respect that was denied to the drag queens of the freak show, the 
modern drag scene is a pertinent example of the aftermath of the freak 
shows as well as a story of reclamation and family for those who partake in 
it. 
 Gender performance formed the basis for many popular attractions 
in the freak show, drawing crowds full of curiosity and searching for 
entertainment. While other attractions based on gender roles, such as 
bearded ladies, called up similar issues, drag was specifically defined as men 
dressing and performing as women. For freakshow audiences, drag was seen 
as a form of ritual humiliation (Sears 177). It was meant to be so outlandish 
that the audience could not contain their laughter. Thus, when men dressed 
as women, the audience responded as if it were a farce. The audience’s 
reaction created a space where the challenging of gendered stereotypes was 
mocked, therefore reaffirming and solidifying the “acceptable” beliefs of the 
time. 
 But the real fascination with drag came from the strict crossdressing 
laws that swept the nation from 1848-1900. These laws banned people from 
appearing in public wearing clothes not associated with their “natural” sex. 
The purpose of these laws was to suppress non-normative behavior, but it 
had the opposite effect. As author Claire Sears points out: 

such laws could also incite cultural fascination and the desire to 
see, which entrepreneurs could exploit. . . Another manifestation 
was the newspaper scandal, which splashed cross-dressing 
practices across the front page, as local editors ran sensational 
stories and interviews with those who broke the law. These 
scandals publicized normative gender boundaries and ridiculed 
transgressors, representing gender difference as a titillating 
private eccentricity or individual moral flaw. (177)

These laws started a conversation that was fueled by drag, a topic that 
previously was ignored and considered taboo. Drag performers and 

Germann

67



other crossdressers finally had a voice. Even though the drag queens 
were not the only ones affected by these laws, Sears argues that “the 
starkest manifestation of this cultural fascination was the dime museum 
freak show, which displayed non-normative bodies and cross-gender 
performances in seeming conflict with the law” (Sears 177). But the freak 
show circumnavigated the law skillfully, taking advantage of a loophole in 
the law stating crossdressing was not allowed in public. As freak shows were 
held on private property, indoors, there was implicit consent in buying and 
attending the freak show (177). Drag then began its boom. 
 While these laws were meant to stamp out crossdressers and drag 
queens, this plan ultimately backfired. Yet, while this interest in drag may 
seem positive, drag queens still faced untold amounts of abuse, mockery, 
and violence due to the anti-crossdressing laws and the treatment that they 
faced in the freak shows. American freak shows were infamous for their 
terrible working conditions and pay. Not surprisingly, drag performers 
were also subjected to these conditions and often forced to live in squalor. 
According to scholar Heath Diehl, addictive substances were sometimes 
used as a way to keep performers effectively caught in the freak show. 
The owners were able to trap a performer in a low-paying contract by 
controlling their access to drugs and alcohol (31).
 With the new anti-crossdressing laws in place, queens finally had 
audiences that filled tents and sold-out shows, making queens some of 
the most valuable performers in the show; but outside the tent, in the real 
world, they were considered public enemies. Police would arrest queens out 
in public and often turned a blind eye to the violence that was afflicted upon 
them (Sears 180). This behavior was nothing new to drag queens. Many 
associated drag with prostitution, filth, and rampant sexual behavior, which 
went against the dominant religious and moral views. The fear that drag 
would somehow infect people with immoral thoughts and behaviors or ruin 
the American lifestyle was prevalent.
 But the discrimination lasted long past the freak shows and the 
crossdressing laws. Negative attitudes towards drag queens, who were 
mostly gay men, continued long after the crossdressing laws came and 
went. Drag queens were very visible performers who exemplified queerness 
and challenged the gender norms on which society was rooted, even after 
so much “progress.” Many queens tell stories upon stories of meeting 

Germann

68



opponents of drag, whether they were morally opposed church groups, 
violent crowd members, or random perpetrators of violence (Sears 181). 
The AIDS crisis (which was originally called GRID, for gay related immune 
deficiency) had a hand in increasing the already excessive violence and 
hatred towards drag queens (Taylor, et al. 123). The “gay panic” that reigned 
from the 1980s through the early 2000s made drag appear dirty and 
diseased.
 What is it about drag that creates such a strong backlash and incites 
such violence? And why does the majority of the violence and hate 
speech come from men? In a recent online study conducted by a group 
of researchers, it was found that men who agreed with hyper-masculine 
statements were more likely to have a negative attitude toward drag. What 
this suggests is that the uncomfortableness of being confronted with an 
alternate gender role makes men more likely to try to bolster their sense of 
masculinity, often resulting in bashing of the “feminine” men involved in 
drag. It is this fear of compromised manhood that seems to drive men to 
anger and hatred when confronted with drag, showing just how toxic hyper-
masculinity can be (Bishop, et al. 557). 
 According to Judith Butler, gender is defined by “the extent that one 
is not the other gender, a formulation that presupposes and enforces the 
restriction of gender within that binary pair” (Butler 22). What drag does is 
confront the idea that manhood is defined by the absence of womanhood. 
Drag takes men and puts them in the costume of womanhood and 
femininity; this then confuses us as to where queens fit within the binary. 
Are they male because they are physically male? Are they female because 
they are in women’s clothes? Or are they now something else, something 
unnamed and unknown? 
 Butler also speaks about drag as questioning the idea of a “real” or 
“natural” gender identity. By existing in this gray area, drag confuses and 
seems to challenge the very gender binary that many people hold as an 
integral part of their identity. The violence, then, is an expression of the 
fear that a spectator’s identity might be in question, that if drag queens 
do not neatly fit into the gender binary, then maybe spectators do not 
either (Bishop et al. 557). When queens get up on stage and complicate the 
gender binary, even though the audience is not actively partaking in the 
complication themselves, they are ultimately implicated and forced to 

Germann

69



acknowledge and think about the confusion and how it could or could not 
apply to them.
 This fear was clearly echoed around the country in the form of the 
anti-crossdressing laws and still affects attitudes towards drag queens today. 
But now with the success of mainstream television shows like RuPaul’s Drag 
Race and the more accepting attitudes of the “millennial” generation, drag 
in America finally exists as a full-fledged art form that is beloved and widely 
accepted. While there may always be push-back against drag for religious 
reasons, homophobic reasons, and other factors, we are now entering a 
golden age of drag.
 Drag today is an example of a group of people who were 
discriminated against and taken advantage of but who then turned the 
avenue of their suffering into stunning performance art. They are clearly 
visible, adopting names that emphasize gender and sexuality, such as “Detox 
Icunt” and “Alaska Thunderfuck 5000,” while sporting wigs and fantastic 
costumes that rival anything on the runways of Paris. Although there are 
many different facets of drag and an incredibly diverse array of talents, 
there are some aspects of drag performance that still harken back to the 
days of the freak show. For example, performers have taken the words 
used to belittle and humiliate them and turned them into a part of the drag 
vocabulary. According to Stephen Mann, the language of drag queens is 
made up of the stereotypical insults the performers hear on a daily basis. 
 Words such as “ladyboy,” “pussy,” “sissy,” and “faggot” have been 
reclaimed by the drag community. These words are now anthems, and the 
queens embrace them with pride where there once was shame (Mann). 
The term “queen” itself is one of these reclaimed words, one that was a 
derogatory slur towards gay men (LGBT News) but now is an identifier. 
Another term that the community has reclaimed, harkening directly back 
to their history in the freak show, is the word “freak” itself. The word “freak” 
has been applied negatively to drag queens since the beginning; it is meant 
to be a derogatory and humiliating insult. But what these queens have done 
is embrace it and claim it as a moniker of positivity and great ability. It is 
frequently used to describe a performer that is exemplary, and the title is 
considered a high honor (“Definition of Freak”).
 Of course the mother of drag queens, RuPaul, is a shining example 
of reclaiming language, especially in her wildly popular music video from 

Germann

70



2014, “Sissy That Walk.” In the title alone, Ru tackles reclaimed language, 
and flaunts such terms throughout the song. Some examples include: “[a]in’t 
no T, ain’t no Shade,” “I’m a femme queen,” and “my pussy game is on fire” 
(RuPaul). This video is an internet sensation with over five million views. 
The video was created on RuPaul’s Drag Race season six and became an 
anthem for drag queens everywhere. 
 Along with reclaimed language, there is also an original drag 
vocabulary used by queens. It varies by region but has a core vocabulary 
and stylization that is found nationwide, tying queens of different walks 
of life together. Much like Ebonics functions as a means of subcultural 
communication in urban black communities, this created language binds 
queens together (Mann 797). Looking at RuPaul’s Drag Race, many people 
scratch their heads at the frequent use of the terms “girl” and “mamma,” 
in addition to the liberal use of well-known drag phrases such as “no T no 
shade,” which means that a queen is telling the “T” (or truth) straight up. 
Or “beating my face,” which refers to how heavily drag queens apply their 
makeup. Within the community, these terms create a sense of belonging 
and a common language, a way to mark oneself as a drag queen. RuPaul, as 
the originator of many of these terms, not only celebrates this language but 
also works them into the competition on RuPaul’s Drag Race. 
 On the show, Ru always says that the four talents needed to be 
America’s next drag superstar are charisma, uniqueness, nerve, and talent. 
According to scholar Nathaniel Simmons, these factors (abbreviated as 
CUNT, a joke that never gets old on the show) also include nailing the 
speech and language of drag. And that, along with the CUNT factors, are 
what make a true winner, or ideal drag queen. Focusing specifically on 
season four of RuPaul’s Drag Race, Simmons says, 

Throughout RPDR Season four, contestants’ talk revealed 
appropriate patterns of behavior which are acceptable and 
unacceptable for ANDS (America’s Next Drag Superstar). These 
culturally specific codes revealed not only what is appropriate 
for the winner of RPDR, but also what it means to speak, and act, 
like a drag queen. (Simmons 635-636) 

Not only is this reclaimed language a way to find common ground, but it 
is deemed a necessary part of participation in the drag community for all 
queens.

Germann

71



 Language is only part of someone’s identity as a drag queen. 
Returning back to our working definition of drag, which is wearing “clothing 
more conventionally worn by the opposite sex, especially women’s clothes 
worn by a man” (“Drag”), the biggest aspect of drag is the look of it, 
especially since it is primarily a visual art. While there are many different 
types of queens with different styles, subtlety is not in any drag queen’s 
vocabulary. From plus-sized queens, pageant queens, comedy queens, 
fishy queens, and butch queens to all the other personas and aesthetics 
employed, drag is “screaming vulgarity” (63), as Daniel Harris puts it. While 
some queens, such as Courtney Act, have made their careers on their more 
“natural” drag looks, much of drag is more concerned with highlighting the 
illusion of femininity in the extreme. Queens pad and cinch their bodies 
in order to create the ideal feminine shape, tuck their genitalia tightly so 
no bulges can be seen, and don incredibly realistic breast plates and other 
breast substitutes. 
 Makeup is also a part of the illusion, one that comes with specific 
expectations. Drag queen Alaska Thunderfuck 5000 famously said in 
her song “Nails,” “If you’re not wearing nails, you’re not doing drag!” 
(Thunderfuck) Queens are expected to enter fully into the illusion in order 
to do “proper drag,” which includes nails, wigs, fake lashes, and pounds upon 
pounds of makeup. The goal of drag is not to appear like a “real” woman but 
rather to inflate femininity far beyond what we conceive as normal. This is 
the power of theatre at work, twisting the perspective of our “normal” world. 
In the words of scholars Verta Taylor, Leila J. Rupp, and Joshua Gamson, 
drag is “performing protest” (105) by engaging specifically in “contestation, 
intentionality, and collective identity.” (105) When queens get up on stage, it 
may not seem inherently obvious since the performance is so fantastic and 
over the top, but, by refusing to be demure and quiet, their performance 
serves as a rallying cry, queens will not let you ignore them and their 
dresses. 
 Yet, the idea that drag is about men “passing” as women is a toxic 
one. In fact, in July of 2015, the popular gay pride parade in Glasgow—Free 
Pride Glasgow—banned drag queens from participating, claiming not only 
that drag was offensive to transwomen but that the concept of drag itself 
holds up strict ideals of femininity and reaffirms the age-old belief that it 
is only a woman’s job to be pretty (Gremore). While this angle on drag can 

Germann

72



certainly bring up some valid points, especially since it is an art obsessed 
with and focused on beauty, it is an oversimplification. Beauty is a concept 
that we as humans have been obsessed with in multiple forms, from fashion 
to sculpture, and drag is a modern art form expressing new ideals of beauty 
while breaking open perceived gender barriers. 
 The idea that drag is offensive to transwomen exposes again how 
much backlash drag performers receive from people perceived to be part 
of their “community.” Mann brings up the point that drag queens are aware 
of their status as men and are consciously pushing against it as a means of 
satire and humor; this is completely different from being a transwoman, 
which is a matter of being rather than choice. Drag queens choose to be 
drag queens, and, while some drag queens, like Carmen Carrera and Kenya 
Michaels, have come out as trans, drag does not disqualify the existence of 
transpeople; rather, drag queens offer their voices and support for those 
fighting against gender stereotypes for men, women, non-binary, and 
transpeople everywhere. Drag scholar Daniel Harris tackles the argument 
between drag queens and the trans community in his article, “The Aesthetic 
of Drag,” by saying, 

While many people believe that the primary purpose of drag 
is to enable men to ‘pass’ as women, verisimilitude has never 
been the guiding aesthetic principle at work when gay men dress 
up as bearded nuns on roller skates, topless baton twirlers with 
rhinestone pasties, or whorish prom queens” (62)

Again, this scholar emphasizes that drag is not concerned with passing but 
rather with performance, making the line between being a transperson and 
a drag queen very clear. 
 The community aspect of drag is just as important as the art form 
itself. Because drag often attracts gay performers, it serves as a haven of 
support and expression for people that have often been rejected by their 
families or ostracized by their communities. This connects back to the 
freakshow roots of drag, as the freak show also provided a form of family 
to performers when they had none. One way drag creates community is 
through the time honored tradition of drag families. When entering into 
drag and joining the community, an older queen who has been in the 
business takes the new queen under their wing and becomes their “drag 
mom.” This queen then helps them navigate the world of drag and helps 

Germann

73



introduce the queen to other queens to broaden their own family (for more 
information on drag families, I recommend looking at the piece “Drag 
Orphan” by Tom Bartolomei). A notable example is famous drag queen 
Alyssa Edwards and her drag daughter, LaGanja Estranja, both of who 
appeared on RuPaul’s Drag Race. By forming these families, queens make 
their community their home. Many queens have been kicked out of their 
homes, rejected by their families, and suddenly thrown into a world that 
is both exciting and frightening. These drag families take new queens in 
and train them, so that, when they retire, their drag daughters are ready 
to become drag mothers themselves and continue the cycle of love and 
support.
 Uniting sexuality and theatre, drag queens are the phoenixes that 
have risen from the ashes. From a long history of suffering comes this 
bright age where drag performance is prominently featured as a viable and 
respectable form of both entertainment and performance. While the ties to 
the freak show can still be seen in multiple aspects of the drag community, 
it is now a form of art that helps include members of society who have often 
been shunned. Just as the freak show functioned as a safe place for those 
unwanted by the world, drag works as a modern haven and land of honey 
for those who dare to live and perform outside the norms of gender and 
sexuality.  

Germann

74



WORKS CITED

Bishop, CJ, Mark Kiss, Todd Morrison, Damien Rushe, and Jaqueline Specht. 
“The Association Between Gay Men’s Stereotypic Beliefs about Drag 
Queens and Their Endorsement of Hypermasculinity.” Journal of 
Homosexuality 61.4 (2014): 554-567. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Oct. 
2015.

Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge, 1990. Print.

“Definition of Freak.” The Online Slang Dictionary. 21 Apr. 2013. Web. 19 
Oct. 2015.

Diehl, Heath. Wasted: Performing Addiction in America. Surrey: Ashgate, 2016. 
Print.

“Drag.” Merriam Webster. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Jan. 2016.

Etkin, Jaimie. “RuPaul’s Drag Race Dictionary.” The Daily Beast. 24 Apr. 2011. 
Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

Gremore, Graham. “Drag Queens Officially Banned From Gay Pride Event 
For Being ‘Offensive’” Dragoholic. Queer TV, 1 July 2015. Web. 19 Oct. 
2015.

        
Harris, Daniel. “The Aesthetic of Drag.” Salamangundi 108 (1995): 62-74. 

JSTOR. Web. 21 Oct. 2015.

LGBT News. “10 Historical Photos and Stories of Drag Queens.” Huffpost 
Queer Voices. 10 Feb. 2015. Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

Mann, Stephen L. “Drag Queens’ Use of Language and the Performance of 
Blurred Gendered and Racial Identities.” Journal of Homosexuality 58.6/7 
(2011): 793-811. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Oct. 2015.

RuPaul. “Sissy That Walk.” Youtube. WOW Presents, 12 May 2014. Web. 19 

Germann

75



Oct. 2015.

Sears, Clare. “Electric Brilliancy: Cross-Dressing Law and Freak Show 
Displays in Nineteenth-Century San Francisco.” Women’s Studies 
Quarterly 36.3/4 (2008): 170-187. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Oct. 
2015.

Simmons, Nathaniel. “Speaking Like a Queen in RuPaul’s Drag Race: 
Towards a Speech Code of American Drag Queens.” Sexuality & Culture 
18.3 (2014): 630-648. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Oct. 2015.

Taylor, Verta, Leila J. Rupp, and Joshua Gamson. “ Performing Protest: Drag 
Shows as Tactical Repertoire of the Gay and Lesbian Movement.” 
Authority in Contention 25 (2004): 105-137. Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

“The Finale.” RuPaul’s Drag Race Season 6. Dir. Nick Murray. Logo. 14 May 
2014. Television.

Thunderfuck, Alaska. “Nails.” Youtube. 8 Dec. 2013. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.

Germann

76


