The ‘Groomer’ Accusation Is Counterproductive - Cuckservatives are too afraid to call groomers out for what they are

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-groomer-accusation-is-counterproductive/

https://archive.ph/2NxWp

“Groomer” has become the fashionable charge to level against anyone who opposes Florida’s parental-rights bill. It’s counterproductive. And not because it isn’t super creepy to see so many liberals invested in ensuring prepubescent kids, trapped in state-run schools, are force-fed post-modern, pseudoscientific ideas about sexuality and transgenderism in direct contradiction of the wishes of their parents.

And it’s not because leftists, who habitually dehumanize and smear their opponents as racists, rapists, bigots, and nihilists, don’t deserve it. Just this week, the head of the DNC called a U.S. senator “a maggot-infested man.” We would be knee-deep in feigned outrage had this been aimed at a Democrat. Professional hysterics would be calling it “pre-genocide talk.” So please spare us the tone-policing.

And it’s not because the political frustration isn’t understandable. The entire “Don’t Say Gay” accusation is based on a lie, perpetuated by virtually every mass-media outlet. Democrats not only get to give their bills misleading names like “The Freedom to Vote Act” or “Build Back Better,” they get to misname Republican bills, too. Which must be nice.

Rather, the accusation is wrong because it isn’t really true. Most opponents of the bill, I’m sure, aren’t “grooming” kids for sexual acts. They simply don’t believe that parents should have a say in their kids’ education. They want to normalize half-baked identitarianism and gender ideology against the will of parents. That’s bad enough.

Though most of this “groomer” debate is very online, I also question its political efficacy. The pugilistic inclination among conservatives these days isn’t a bad one. You can’t bring a knife to gun fight, and so on. But, in this case, it makes little sense. Turning it to eleven on every issue has diminishing returns. It didn’t work for Democrats in Virginia. And it isn’t working in Florida. Why do some conservatives believe it will always work for them? Florida Republicans passed the parental-rights bill — a far more consequential victory, incidentally, than dunking on Twitter accounts — without using hyperbolic language. Every poll quoting the bill verbatim, or even framing it a halfway-honest way, finds overwhelming bipartisan support. “Groomer” is a distraction that allows progressives to stop defending the idea that kindergartners should be taught that there are 72 genders, and instead, make it about how Republicans think every teacher is a would-be pedophile.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

This is a lie and you know it. There are millions of people who hear someone called a nazi 10,000 times and their mental image of that person becomes a nazi,

They're not just being called a "nazi", though-- they're being called a Nazi, or Nazi-adjacent, by several people, all in institutions that are broadly uncritically trusted, with sociopolitical alignments that are broadly understood as some level of "good".

 

[Fomo Hoire]

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

- CS Lewis

The extended quote is good as well.

They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.

 

[Screw Danlon]

They're not even that long, though. They just packed with stuff you don't like, presented as "uncomfortable truths"-- the reality of truthfulness aside.

And, you know what? I kind of agree. At some point, this is going to stop being effective-- either because they'll go mask-off and all but say they want to groom your children while being in a position of being supported by society and its powers at large, or because they'll stop caring about the jeers of people who mostly aren't truly thinking about what they're communicating when they call someone a "groomer" (there will likely come a time when a substantial portion of people throwing around this epithet will not be able to explain exactly why they're doing so), much less people who generally ideologically oppose them-- especially since the situation is technically somewhat more nuanced than "they're grooming your kids!". I imagine the majority of the teachers that give instructions like "don't talk to your parents about what we talked about here", or administrators that keep away from parents the fact that they're providing spaces for their children to crossdress and act out a sexual delusion, aren't themselves trying to prime these children for "willing" sexual activity with adults. Rather, it's more likely that they're suggesting to students to do what they had to do themselves as closeted teenagers, delusionally believing them to be kindred spirits.

That doesn't mean that what they're doing isn't any less harmful. They encourage children to become sexually confused based on not neatly fitting sexual stereotypes. They will then, based on a disposition they instigated, encourage them to take drugs that will render them infertile and globally stunted, in addition to setting them up for a host of chronic illnesses like gonadal cancers, sepsis, and osteoporosis. They introduce their gender studies nonsense even in the course of subjects such as English or math. In particular jurisdictions, they will allow students to leave campus in order to pick up their puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

But the current efficacy of the epithet cannot be understated, and I couldn't say what epithet that better addresses the issue as a whole would also be at least as effective as "groomer". Especially since, even if it's not an accurate barb, those to whom it's directed then have to explain themselves, and it becomes clear that what they're actually doing isn't much better. More than that, the chance to reconsider the epithet is almost certainly long gone-- trying to change course now could only be seen as ceding ground to an actually harmful opposition, and merely making longer but more accurate charges against said opposition won't have the same offensive power as "groomer".

Perhaps it's not necessary to be as accurate as conceivably possible when trying to smother clearly harmful trends.

I know I already usually agree with you, but this was almost exactly what I wanted to say, but with better foresight. Great points.

 

[The Ugly One]

Oh look, National Review once again whining that the popular uprising against leftist overreach is disreputable, uncouth, and downright rude.

Interesting point. I don't think that's entirely fair to Buckley because that was back in the 1960s. The Democrats and Republicans were not the absurd diametrically opposed enemies as they both stand today. John Birch was out there by accusing Eisenhower of being communist sympathizer. It was straight up political suicide to attack Eisenhower.

The purge of the Birchers represented a fundamental shift in American politics. Imagine if someone prominent today accused the President of being some kind of clandestine Russian agent, or took those accusations seriously. His political or media career would be over.

 

[Allanon]

This is a lie and you know it. There are millions of people who hear someone called a nazi 10,000 times and their mental image of that person becomes a nazi, to the point where every Republican office holder feels the burning need to insist they are not a nazi at all every time they speak. It plants the idea in the heads of everyone that's not really paying attention, hearing the accusation over and over. It creates the frame of reference the bulk of the population works within.

Today's Democrats do want to abuse children and make life easier for other people that want to abuse children. It is true that they are groomers, and calling them that over and over will plant the idea in millions of people's heads. That needs to happen and it is a good thing that it finally is. You are just being a useless, retarded autist by insisting that it's all wrong because you think you've found some technical inaccuracy in calling groomers what they are too much, too often.

Stop posting and kill yourself.

There really aren't, though. Up until the left started militarizing themselves and both attacking people on the street and openly just firing and blacklisting people for wrongthink, being called a Nazi was effectively a joke. For a while it did matter, just like being called a commie mattered for a while. And then both the accusation of being a dirty commie and the accusation of being a Nazi became so watered down nobody cared. They still don't care, but it is now a real threat to be called a Nazi because the people in power use that label as a targeting device. If you have ever spoken to a normal human being, even now, you will know that they roll their eyes at both Nazi and commie. And this is the same for all buzz words eventually.

I would honestly say that the groomer trend is even worse than those and more along the lines of 'all Democrat politicians and associates eat baby brains and dance naked in front of blood altars every night' - At most charitable it will be ignored the same way someone saying 'All Republicans want to kill all gays and enslave blacks' are ignored, but more likely you'll be dumped in the QAnon and lizard alien gutter by anyone with above room temperature IQ.

Alas, I cannot make you less of a moronic monkey, but I can at least point out that you are stupid and shouldn't continue to be stupid. If your response is to start screaming and throwing fecal matter around your cage, I suppose that's just to be expected.

 

[The Ugly One]

There really aren't, though. Up until the left started militarizing themselves and both attacking people on the street and openly just firing and blacklisting people for wrongthink, being called a Nazi was effectively a joke. For a while it did matter, just like being called a commie mattered for a while.

Being called a commie stopped mattering because National Review types whined that it was rude and unhelpful. After they got the dirty rabble to simmer down and stop calling people commies, open Marxists ascended to positions of key institutional power.

I would honestly say that the groomer trend is even worse than those and more along the lines of 'all Democrat politicians and associates eat baby brains and dance naked in front of blood altars every night' - At most charitable it will be ignored the same way someone saying 'All Republicans want to kill all gays and enslave blacks' are ignored, but more likely you'll be dumped in the QAnon and lizard alien gutter by anyone with above room temperature IQ.

The Democrats are going to the mattresses to be allowed to show 7-year-olds drawings of gay men sucking each other off.

 

[Exelxi]

Forming all of your opinions based on 'what will my political enemies think?!' is brain dead. But so is thinking that you, a random nobody, has 'political enemies'. Being extreme and painting people you dislike with a broad brush of some mean word or another is idiotic and ineffective when leftists do it, and it's idiotic and ineffective when people on the right do it. If you think somehow 'groomer' is in any way different from cuck, simp, or sjw in the long term just because it's indicating criminal activity, I question whether you suffer from brain damage.

Normies just ignore it. It's ineffective. The only reason it appears to have an effect is because it's used to label acceptable targets and unwanted elements by their own side. Until there are groups of right wing thugs running around punching people for being called an SJW groomer and hugely powerful conglomerates who are deeply devoted to right wing politics and ready to fire and blacklist those who dare step out of line, you will never replicate this effect from the other side. You will only see the true effect, which is engagement fatigue.

People that want to turn my kids into trannies are indeed my enemies. If that's not the case for you, maybe you shouldn't have kids.
Attaching a stinky label to your enemies is of course a very effective thing to do. Of course you wouldn't realize it because people like you never win anything.

Another delusion that you seem to be experiencing is that some kind of "debate" doesn't and will never work, the line keeps being pushed to the left while useful idiots like yourself play-pretend to be intellectuals spouting diarrhea online about how that "that isn't the dictionary definition of the thing X".

We know what those people are, if you support people sexualizing the kids (which of course is a thing and if you haven't seen multiple attempts at normalizing pedophilia you're blind). you are a groomer.

 

[Allanon]

Being called a commie stopped mattering because National Review types whined that it was rude and unhelpful. After they got the dirty rabble to simmer down and stop calling people commies, open Marxists ascended to positions of key institutional power.



The Democrats are going to the mattresses to be allowed to show 7-year-olds drawings of gay men sucking each other off.

I mean you are right but not quite because of that. Being called a commie stopped mattering because the people in control of the Red Scare lost power and being called a commie didn't carry the risk of you getting cancelled into oblivion anymore. Because it was impotent, it quickly became simply 'rude and unhelpful' and lost power. Just as Nazi no longer mattered as the real Nazis disappeared and there was no real consequences to being called one, up until people seized power who made it so that being called a Nazi carries the risk of you getting cancelled into oblivion. If you can somehow gain power and make getting called a groomer come at great personal risk to a person in the same way the Red Scare and Wokeism works, then sure, weaponize it all you want.

As it is, though, there's no intrinsic power or threat behind calling someone a groomer, only the implied one associated with the crime you're accusing them of. Without the ability or interest in providing evidence and taking the accused to court over it, though, the initial shock value of the word will rapidly fade and it will become nothing more than an ugly word used by the right against people they don't like on the left. And when that happens, people will tune it out like they do chud and incel from the left.

People that want to turn my kids into trannies are indeed my enemies. If that's not the case for you, maybe you shouldn't have kids.
Attaching a stinky label to your enemies is of course a very effective thing to do. Of course you wouldn't realize it because people like you never win anything.

Another delusion that you seem to be experiencing is that some kind of "debate" doesn't and will never work, the line keeps being pushed to the left while useful idiots like yourself play-pretend to be intellectuals spouting diarrhea online about how that "that isn't the dictionary definition of the thing X".

We know what those people are, if you support people sexualizing the kids (which of course is a thing and if you haven't seen multiple attempts at normalizing pedophilia you're blind). you are a groomer.

Yes, I know. You're very smart and woke and there will definitely not be threads in A&H weeping and gnashing their teeth about how degenerate the world is next year when nobody cares about the word groomer anymore. Because the bad people you don't like are actually ultra super bad and their only weakness is mean words thrown ad nauseum. If only you keep screaming groomer, surely the masses will see and believe you.

 

[InsulindianPhasmid]

> Well Intentioned

Probably makes it even more insidious if what you're saying is true. But you really have to work hard to justify it to yourself regardless.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”​

- CS Lewis

That is an excellent quote. And yes, I do believe the majority of these idiots are “well intentioned” - they think they are helping the next generation become well adjusted, “sex positive” people, they think that they are helping gay and trans children by being accepting and affirming.

Remember these people have been living in an echo chamber, and any dissent or questioning of dogma is ruthlessly stamped out. What’s more, They think they are being role models to children. They are evangelicals of a different stripe. And just as Christian missionaries forced their religion on heathens the world over, so the genderwankers are doing the same. They think this is how you build a better society- by indoctrination of the children. Luckily for the paedos, all of this gives them ample opportunity to find and groom victims because these zealots are ignoring safeguarding principles because they regard them as transphobic or homophobic.

 

[Larry David's Opera Cape]

If they're directly enabling them, sure. But most of these people have no sexual interests toward kids whatsoever and would be horrified by the idea of anyone having sexual interest toward children. The kinds of people who believe in teaching kindergartners about genderfluidity and gay marriage are also the kind of people who think if you like the idea of Rogue from the X-Men movies getting with Wolverine in a fictional context you're enabling pedophiles and should therefore die. They are not themselves groomers nor do they support it intentionally, and so using the term on them repeatedly devalues it.

More importantly, the article is less about this specific situation and more about the fact that people are starting to use the term 'groomer' more and more, and the perceived success of it in this situation will only cause it to happen with increasing frequency going forward, under the false impression it will get 'wins' when what's really going to happen is that it's going to devalue into uselessness like every other buzzword.

"Would be horrified" is doing a lot of work here, and there is a lot of assuming powering that "would." The people primed to support trooning out kids and "educating" them about nonbinary pronouns would likely only require "sexual interest towards kids" to be reframed before they accepted it. That's the whole point- the reframing is in process and progressing rapidly. Sure if you tell them "Bob wants to rape a kid is that ok with you?" they would say "dear God no!" But if you reframe it according to the ideology and terminology their jellified brains are already primed to accept- "Bob has gender dysphoria and age dysphoria. Because Bob was denied a proper boyhood, having been AFAB, he now must be re-parented and re-experience the rites of passage he missed having been incorrectly gendered as a girl. Bob has been chatting with Susie, a very mature 14 year old, who has been empowered with information from her counselor at Planned Parenthood and feels ready to take the next step. What say you?" They might hesitate but they will come around to it. That's why they are if anything more dangerous than the outright kid rapist wannabes, and deserve every ounce of shame and horror they may feel being labeled as groomers along with them.

 

[Ita Mori]

Lol wtf is he talking about? Calling someone a groomer legit freaks then out IRL.

Online? Sure, it wears thin fast. But expose the nose in reality and watch them scour.

 

[LurkTrawl]

If you want the accusation of groomer to continue to carry weight, stop using it on everyone who you don't like. Or keep doing it. This time next year there'll be a thread with a bunch of people stomping their feet, whining and crying about how degenerate the world has become because nobody cares when you call them a groomer anymore. KF is about pointing and laughing at people who inflict their own troubles upon themselves, so imagine that result will only be a net positive for the site.

That logic hasn't followed wrt racism as an accusation so I don't get why you would think so of this insult.

 

[The Ugly One]

I mean you are right but not quite because of that. Being called a commie stopped mattering because the people in control of the Red Scare lost power and being called a commie didn't carry the risk of you getting cancelled into oblivion anymore.

Right, but the people in control of the Red Scare lost power because William F Buckley ascended to some kind of high clerical position in conservatism, and made Not Being Rude the central organizing principle of the movement.

It also worth noting that National Review has never proposed a successful strategy for anything except recruiting young men to suck off their donors.

 

[Aero the Alcoholic Bat]

I should also note that normies care far more about culture than about economics.

Accusing someone of being a "communist" doesn't carry as much weight (not even as much weight as accusing someone of being a nazi), since many people believe it to be an economic system, rather than an extremely divisive, hateful ideology that justifies violence against people merely for being successful or owning property, or for supposedly being part of an "oppressor" class.

However, people care a GREAT DEAL about being able to raise their children in a safe environment, free from crime or degeneracy. Even if they don't know anything about economics or how it works, they are becoming increasingly aware that the political left is increasingly sympathetic to pedophiles and criminals, and almost certainly always have been.

 

[Akumaten]

So, what I'm getting from this is that actually both parties fuck kids, it's just that one would also like to forcefeed them horsepiss pills and chop their cocks off.

The GOP are known as Ghey Ol Pedophiles and majority of Democrats go for ghey prostitutes.

 

[NJBear]

I was going to take the wife and cubs to Petco for snacks and toys. But then read the signs.

 

[verissimus]

They're right, though. Any time you turn a word into a buzzword it loses all meaning and severity. Nobody cares about being called a Nazi except if it means you're going to get physically assaulted by crazies. Nobody cares about racist, homophobe, or transphobe except the people who are doing the accusing. The words don't mean anything anymore because they apply to anyone who disagrees with the person speaking. Cuck, simp and incel are also pretty much meaningless words. If you just toss around groomer constantly, people are going to start tuning out the moment they hear 'groomer' sooner rather than later.

Except "labels" do work for the un-initiated or the heavily prejudiced which is a significant number.

Edit : Now that I further think about it, piss right off. The Left for 4 years called Trump an agent of Russia, a racist, a sexist, a NAZI, etc. and millions of people bought it hook, line, and sinker. If "labels" didn't work (at all or well enough) as you suggest it doesn't, the Left would have long abandoned that tactic. You are flat out wrong.

 

[Allanon]

"Would be horrified" is doing a lot of work here, and there is a lot of assuming powering that "would." The people primed to support trooning out kids and "educating" them about nonbinary pronouns would likely only require "sexual interest towards kids" to be reframed before they accepted it. That's the whole point- the reframing is in process and progressing rapidly. Sure if you tell them "Bob wants to rape a kid is that ok with you?" they would say "dear God no!" But if you reframe it according to the ideology and terminology their jellified brains are already primed to accept- "Bob has gender dysphoria and age dysphoria. Because Bob was denied a proper boyhood, having been AFAB, he now must be re-parented and re-experience the rites of passage he missed having been incorrectly gendered as a girl. Bob has been chatting with Susie, a very mature 14 year old, who has been empowered with information from her counselor at Planned Parenthood and feels ready to take the next step. What say you?" They might hesitate but they will come around to it. That's why they are if anything more dangerous than the outright kid rapist wannabes, and deserve every ounce of shame and horror they may feel being labeled as groomers along with them.

Apparently you don't spend any time in the hard leftists spheres. The general sentiment is great anger and disgust toward the supposed trans-agers and that whole thing. While I actually agree that they are primed to allow adult-minor sex under certain contexts, you're completely wrong about where that target is. The actual target is the so-called "POC" whom they infantilize and dehumanize to the point of animals who cannot be responsible for anything they do. This has, on record, caused them to outright ignore the rape of children by someone who 'just couldn't help it' and regularly causes them to look the other way and cover up incidents to avoid anyone blaming 'the rest'. It's also what caused the left to shift from burning hatred of Cuties to excusing it. Ranting about how the left's double standards allow adults to diddle kids belongs in some refugee thread.

That logic hasn't followed wrt racism as an accusation so I don't get why you would think so of this insult.

It has, though. If you would get out of your bubble of extreme politics you'll find most people just do not care. The only reason it carries weight is because the same people using the insult enforce the consequences of it, which is not possible with groomer.

Except "labels" do work for the un-initiated or the heavily prejudiced which is a significant number.

Edit : Now that I further think about it, piss right off. The Left for 4 years called Trump an agent of Russia, a racist, a sexist, a NAZI, etc. and millions of people bought it hook, line, and sinker. If "labels" didn't work (at all or well enough) as you suggest it doesn't, the Left would have long abandoned that tactic. You are flat out wrong.

They don't. The uninitiated do not believe you, and they get very quickly exhausted and disconnected from hearing the same accusation over and over. As stupid as you may view the masses, they are not so stupid that they forget you called the last fifty people a groomer, nor are they incapable of thinking "Huh, well it just doesn't seem possible that fifty people all at once, unconnected to each other, could all actually be actively grooming and harming kids, right?"

"Millions of people" did not, in any way, 'buy it hook line and sinker' when the news spammed the Trump insults (even though it had MSM to confidently back this up, which you do not have for your groomer accusations). In fact, the normies were exhausted by the Russia panic six months into the presidency and made satire pieces on it. Trust, viewership, and subscriber bases to such outlets sharply declined throughout Trump's presidency. The sole reason they continued on with their insane name calling was to whip up the extreme elements on their side into causing problems to attempt to create a smoke screen to make the country seem worse under his reign, and to allow and excuse literally any efforts whatsoever that they took to remove him. Brainlets like you then fail to see what actually happened and believe the majority of the country actually fell for the name calling, and then attempt to replicate it without any of the necessary backing, wasting your time.

In the end the discussion is irrelevant, though. If I could somehow drill through the thick skulls of A&N it wouldn't convince the even more vapid /pol/tards, gabbers and other associated rabble from continuing to jam the shiny button until it breaks. We will still have the thread where people cry and throw tantrums about how it's unfair that when the left uses namecalling it works but every time the right does it the strategy has rapidly diminishing returns.

 

[Jonah Hill poster]

I personally don’t have anything intellectual to say, so I’ll just repost this picture whenever I get challenged and can’t back up my statements with statistics that I found on the Internet.

 

[LurkTrawl]

It has, though. If you would get out of your bubble of extreme politics you'll find most people just do not care. The only reason it carries weight is because the same people using the insult enforce the consequences of it, which is not possible with groomer.

I don't live in a bubble of extreme politics. The fact that you'd say that I have to for "racist" to seem like an accusation that sticks brings about more questions than if you had disagreed through your original point rather than accusing me of being some kind of echo-chamber extremist.

It also makes me think that you personally dislike the accusation of groomer for reasons of political affiliation rather than any actual good-faith argument against it. Acting as if though it's going to suddenly be okay to be a groomer because of people throwing around the accusation (in what I think is a rather correct context) seems to me to be a cop-out.