Culture Why are Republicans so concerned about "grooming?" - Your kids actually belong to us

  • 🔧 Issue with uploading attachments resolved.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Article
Archive

Suddenly the American right is fairly exploding with accusations of sexual "grooming" against its political opponents.

Christina Pushaw, the spokesperson for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, used the term last month to defend the so-called "Don't Say Gay" bill. "If you're against the Anti-Grooming Bill," she tweeted, "you are probably a groomer or at least you don't denounce the grooming of 4-8 year old children." Rod Dreher, who writes at The American Conservative, has in recent days lobbed the term at "pervy" Disney for its (belated) opposition to the new law, and labeled Democrats the "party of child mutilators & kidnappers." And MAGA outlet American Greatness on Monday printed a broadside against "Groomer Fragility."

"It's not a very nice word, to be sure," wrote the American Greatness author. "But the right must decide: Do we prefer to play nice with perverts who are very sexually interested in our children? Or do we prefer to stand up for the innocence of childhood against societal forces that seek to mutilate little kids for political gain?"

It's hard to know how much of this is sincere hysteria and how much is ugly, McCarthyist politics. Mostly the latter, probably: In its normal usage, "groomer" suggests a sexual predator, carefully prepping their prey for assault. But Dreher — who has long been obsessively shrill about the rise of gay and trans identities in American culture — says that's not really what he means.

"I think it is coming to have a somewhat broader meaning: an adult who wants to separate children from a normative sexual and gender identity, to inspire confusion in them, and to turn them against their parents and all the normative traditions and institutions in society," he wrote last week. "It may not specifically be to groom them for sexual activity, but it is certainly to groom them to take on a sexual/gender identity at odds with the norm."

Maybe — maybe — that's what he means. Most Americans will hear the term, though, and understand it to mean something much more violent than "encouraging kids to question their sexuality and the church."


That misunderstanding is almost certainly intended. Accusations of pedophilia and child rape are old hat in today's Republican Party. In 2020, Trump shared a tweet falsely accusing Biden of being a pedophile. Karl Rove reportedly inspired a similar whispering campaign during an Alabama judicial campaign back in the 1990s. Sometimes the ugliness is overt, as during the QAnon conspiracy theorizing that led, in part, to the Jan. 6 insurrection. And sometimes it's a bit more subtle, as with Republicans accusing Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson of being lenient on child predators.

Those accusations and rumors were untrue, unfair, and ugly, and just another piece of performative politics. The point isn't to protect children. It's to weaponize concerns about their safety in the service of conservative political power.
 
No wonder the "journalist" is complaining about this, he literally looks like a groomer.
1649109785523.png
 
Why are we concerned about it now? Because it's become blatant and public. Some are victims themselves.

Where there's smoke, there's flamers.
 
Accusations of pedophilia and child rape are old hat in today's Republican Party.
As are accusations of Naziism and white supremacy from today’s Democratic Party.
In 2020, Trump shared a tweetfalsely accusing Biden of being a pedophile
Falsely? Hair-sniffer in Chief whose own granddaughter accused him of creeping on her? Innocent until proven guilty, and all that so I’m not saying he’s definitely guilty. But it definitely doesn’t look good.
as with Republicans accusing Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson of being lenient on child predators.
They accused her of it because she was, and they demonstrated it by use of numbers and her deviation from standard sentencing, plus she admitted to doing it.
 
The old leftist argument of "why do you even care?" always makes me laugh. It's one of very few arguments where the most damning response is to ask the same argument in return in some form.

And yeah, a lot of people are going to ask, "why are you so concerned about people not being concerned with grooming children?".
 
You know what? Let's let felons vote. They have pretty based views on this kind of thing, by the way they treat child abusers in general pop.
 
I think a better question is "Why are you putting sexually explicit books in school libraries? You know, ones that depict minors having gay sex?"
 
"Why are Republicans so concerned about "grooming?"" this faggot asks as he's probably lubing his cock up to fuck a ten year old in the ass.*

The gaslighting with this shit is very telling, I also like how Woke engages in gaslighting constantly despite being the ones who popularized the phrase.

It's always "Huh, what are you talking about? Can you cite any examples? No, it's not" when it's fucking plain as day obvious something is real.

*Allegedly
 
The Groomer is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a communist, faggot, grifter, brainwasher, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a Groomer and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: "I've been found out."
 
Ackshually, this is fake news. 3 Republicans, Mitt Romney, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski, have just voted to confirm Kentanji Brown Jackson, a judge who is proven to have given lenient sentences to actual pedophiles, to the Supreme Court. So Republicucks are NOT concerned about grooming. *sigh*
 
Back
Top Bottom