Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
The term never had any value to begin with. It was a term used by the right-wing to bludgeon drag queens and trans people who want to use a bathroom. Devalue the fuck out of it IMO.
“Grooming” has been apolitically used for decades to refer to manipulation tactics that pedophiles use to convince children to perform sex acts. The right-wing recently began devaluing it by using “groomer” as a pejorative against people who aren’t pedophiles.
Companies trying to covertly advertise their products to children are not “groomers” in the traditional pedophilic sense, so referring to them as such only serves to perpetuate this right-wing bastardization of the word, which in turn makes it much more difficult for people to take the word seriously when someone uses it to refer to actual pedophiles.
You take your DOG to a groomer, not your child, and what I’m asking is that we not apply the word groomer to people that influence children in ways that aren’t pedophilic in nature, which is what the right wing are doing by labeling drag queens and other LGBT people “groomers” whenever they have any association with children.
This is just not fucking true. Child grooming is a real thing, and “grooming” has always been the term for it. Transphobes are the exact people the person you replied to are complaining about abusing the term.
The term never had any value to begin with. It was a term used by the right-wing to bludgeon drag queens and trans people who want to use a bathroom. Devalue the fuck out of it IMO.
You’re confused. Allow me to elaborate.
“Grooming” has been apolitically used for decades to refer to manipulation tactics that pedophiles use to convince children to perform sex acts. The right-wing recently began devaluing it by using “groomer” as a pejorative against people who aren’t pedophiles.
Companies trying to covertly advertise their products to children are not “groomers” in the traditional pedophilic sense, so referring to them as such only serves to perpetuate this right-wing bastardization of the word, which in turn makes it much more difficult for people to take the word seriously when someone uses it to refer to actual pedophiles.
Thank you for typing this so I didn’t have to.
deleted by creator
IDK, I take my dog to a groomer.
People that manipulate kids into sex are child molesters and pedophiles.
The rightwing loves to play games with semantics, we can do the same and not let them dictate the terms of the conversation.
You’re still entirely missing the nuance.
You take your DOG to a groomer, not your child, and what I’m asking is that we not apply the word groomer to people that influence children in ways that aren’t pedophilic in nature, which is what the right wing are doing by labeling drag queens and other LGBT people “groomers” whenever they have any association with children.
It definitely had a meaning before they started abusing it.
This is just not fucking true. Child grooming is a real thing, and “grooming” has always been the term for it. Transphobes are the exact people the person you replied to are complaining about abusing the term.