The kids never came back to big-city public schools, and now districts face budgetary "Armageddon."

[chipbennett]

I'll accept that definition of the term as it is frequently being used on the right currently.

It strikes me as Newspeak as that was not what "grooming" was defined as before very recent times.

How is it particularly/meaningfully different from prior usage? I suppose I understand prior usage to apply to manipulation efforts of (particularly minors) for sexual exploitation, and/or similar manipulation efforts in other contexts (e.g. cult recruiting).

 

[chipbennett]

Oh, I think teachers are teaching grooming as part of health classes for K-3, but the grooming is combing your hair and brushing your teeth.

So, all those videos reposted by LibsOfTikTok, of elementary school teachers, describing not only their actions but also their motives, are faked?

 

[HoughMade]

How is it particularly/meaningfully different from prior usage? I suppose I understand prior usage to apply to manipulation efforts of (particularly minors) for sexual exploitation, and/or similar manipulation efforts in other contexts (e.g. cult recruiting).

Sexual grooming - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The definition you used and that linked above do not seem to be equivalent.

The use of the term "grooming" currently is clearly intended to imply that anyone who is advancing LGBTQ+ causes to minors is knowingly and purposefully promoting pedophilia.

While I am not at all in favor of gender confusion and minors being indoctrinated regarding said issue, this is clearly propaganda, unfair and untrue as to most educators and others it is aimed at.

 

[BugI02]

You really do not believe that teaching little kids this stuff is “grooming“ them to accept it and normalize this, particularly behind parents backs?

I'm still waiting for him to offer some sort of rational explanation of why it is so IMPORTANT to the left to incorporate such issues into curricula for K-3 (that's 5 to 8 year olds) that it would set off the level of caterwauling that it has

I also don't get the stubborn resistance to informing parents about how controversial subjects will be presented and getting parental approval for that when it IS considered appropriate to discuss them. Presenting both sides of an issue and encouraging the student to evaluate and decide for themselves without prompting never seems to be an option

It is plainly indoctrinating children to hold the left's views on issues of racial and sexual identity politics as well as climate catastrophism, among other objectionable ideas. I believe indoctrinating children to ANY viewpoint should be considered highly off limits

 

[2in1evtime]

We appealed our property taxes when they tried to double our value and got it reduced back to previous value, also filed for the 65 and over deduction which helped too, noticed the biggest change on where money went after the 65 education was to schools went from like 700 to 125?? doesn't bother me i never felt it was right to tax someone for something they didn't use and i am not a big fan of the money being spent on sports in schools either!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Jaybird1980]

Sexual grooming - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The definition you used and that linked above do not seem to be equivalent.

The use of the term "grooming" currently is clearly intended to imply that anyone who is advancing LGBTQ+ causes to minors is knowingly and purposefully promoting pedophilia.

While I am not at all in favor of gender confusion and minors being indoctrinated regarding said issue, this is clearly propaganda, unfair and untrue as to most educators and others it is aimed at.

I always heard it used as shaping someone's behavior. Like grooming them for the job kind of thing.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

The use of the term "grooming" currently is clearly intended to imply that anyone who is advancing LGBTQ+ causes to minors is knowingly and purposefully promoting pedophilia.

While I am not at all in favor of gender confusion and minors being indoctrinated regarding said issue, this is clearly propaganda, unfair and untrue as to most educators and others it is aimed at.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you about it being clearly "untrue."

Teaching children about sexual perversions is pushing towards pedophilia. Period.

The only thing I guess we can't know for absolute certain is whether they are ALL doing it "knowingly and purposefully." I suppose there may exist some people out there who are really so incredibly stupid that they don't realize that teaching five- and six-year-olds about all the different kinds of perverted sexual behaviors out there is inevitably going to lead us towards a wholesale acceptance of pedophilia at worst, and a far easier time for pedophiles at best, but even it today's world, that kind of stupidity has got to be rare.

 

[BugI02]

I'll accept that definition of the term as it is frequently being used on the right currently.

It strikes me as Newspeak as that was not what "grooming" was defined as before very recent times.

Well, if you want to get obtuse 'groomed' once referred to clean, clean shaven, hair neatly trimmed as well as clean fingernails also neatly trimmed

First use of the term 'grooming' in 1992 in a seminal paper on child-abuse by then FBI agent Ken Lanning

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/149252NCJRS.pdf

Lanning’s position that language has evolved in the discussion of groom- ing in child sexual abuse is clear and the history he outlines is certainly con- sistent with our recollections. His major thesis is that the term of grooming has mainly helped explain the impact on victims and, in particular, the com- pliance of the victim with the offender. This conceptualization in part has come about to help educate the public to the complicated reactions during and post event since most of our knowledge is arrived at after the abuse itself has occurred. His major conclusion is that the emphasis on seduced or groomed is less important than the nature and development of the relation- ship between the abused and the abuser. We agree.
Lanning’s perspective comes from his work with offenders and information on victims that he could derive to understand how, when, where, and possibly why the abuser targeted the victim, gained access and maintained control.

https://calio.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/on-the-origin-of-grooming.pdf

 

[DadSmith]

I'll accept that definition of the term as it is frequently being used on the right currently.

It strikes me as Newspeak as that was not what "grooming" was defined as before very recent times.

Grooming could and possibly should be replaced with indoctrinating.

 

[HoughMade]

Grooming could and possibly should be replaced with indoctrinating.

But that wouldn't have the shock value....regardless of the fact that it is more accurate.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

But that wouldn't have the shock value....regardless of the fact that it is more accurate.

I guess I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around this. Do you really believe that teaching kids about sex is purely a matter of indoctrination? That they really only want kids to think about this stuff abstractly, and believe it's okay, but have no intentions whatsoever of encouraging kids to engage in these sorts of behaviors?

 

[HoughMade]

I guess I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around this. Do you really believe that teaching kids about sex is purely a matter of indoctrination? That they really only want kids to think about this stuff abstractly, and believe it's okay, but have no intentions whatsoever of encouraging kids to engage in these sorts of behaviors?

I do not believe that everyone, or even the majority, of people who want to teach about LGBTQ+ issues in school are pedophiles.

I think they want to get more people to believe the same way they do and starting young is a good way to do that.

There have been Communists for a long time, but there was never a "communist behind every tree." Likewise, there are pedophiles, but they are not ubiquitous. But I get it- casting those who do not share our beliefs as child molesters riles up the base.

 

[Ingomike]

I suppose there may exist some people out there who are really so incredibly stupid that they don't realize that teaching five- and six-year-olds about all the different kinds of perverted sexual behaviors out there is inevitably going to lead us towards a wholesale acceptance of pedophilia at worst, and a far easier time for pedophiles at best, but even it today's world, that kind of stupidity has got to be rare.

The younger teachers have been indoctrinated themselves…

 

[AndreusMaximus]

I do not believe that everyone, or even the majority, of people who want to teach about LGBTQ+ issues in school are pedophiles.

I think they want to get more people to believe the same way they do and starting young is a good way to do that.

There have been Communists for a long time, but there was never a "communist behind every tree." Likewise, there are pedophiles, but they are not ubiquitous. But I get it- casting those who do not share our beliefs as child molesters riles up the base.

Okay, I think I understand where we are differing now.

I guess when I hear grooming/groomer, I don't think it automatically means that the person doing the grooming is always, themself, the pedophile. So, I'm not saying that every school teacher who teaches LGBT indoctrination is a pedophile, but they are molding kids into a mindset that make them far easier prey for pedophiles, and even leads in a direction where pedophiles won't have to even look for prey, either because the kids will be happy to go along, or because society will have accepted such behavior as normal. Maybe my definition of grooming is off, but it still seems like it's an accurate fit to me.

 

[DadSmith]

I do not believe that everyone, or even the majority, of people who want to teach about LGBTQ+ issues in school are pedophiles.

I think they want to get more people to believe the same way they do and starting young is a good way to do that.

There have been Communists for a long time, but there was never a "communist behind every tree." Likewise, there are pedophiles, but they are not ubiquitous. But I get it- casting those who do not share our beliefs as child molesters riles up the base.

The good book says if you approve of such behavior in this instance LGBTQ indoctrination you are just as guilty. Yes it is sin to be LGBTQ according to the good book. Does being LGBTQ more sinful than another sin? No because all sin is sin.

 

[phylodog]

I'm not sure that is a fact.

Politicians are telling me we need to, and people are pointing to internet articles stirring up fear, but looking locally, I come to a different conclusion.

Politicians and the internet also tried to scare me into wearing a mask...


I'm going to take my time and try to understand this issue and what's really going on and the full impact. Any source that uses the word "grooming" will not be considered by me.


Ironically, if you really think America is the sickest nation on earth, then you should be in favor of letting in as many refugees as possible - their views on sexuality are far more conservative than your average American.

It is an absolute fact. It's this simple: Should a person other than a parent be allowed to discuss sex or sexual topics with prepubescent children? If your answer is anything but an immediate and unequivocal NO then you are a part of the problem.

Any other countries spending tax money to fund transsexuals reading books to children in the public libraries?

 

[phylodog]

I'll accept that definition of the term as it is frequently being used on the right currently.

It strikes me as Newspeak as that was not what "grooming" was defined as before very recent times.

That term has been used in the military and law enforcement since long before I was involved in either and it was used to describe preparing someone for a specific position or specialty from a very early stage in their career. Typically through special treatment and/or access to things not typically available to their peers.

 

[churchmouse]

COVID-19 Policies Wrecked Public School Enrollment and Student Outcomes

The kids never came back to big-city public schools, and now districts face budgetary "Armageddon."

reason.com

Looks like people are keeping their children home and going to home schooling. This effectively defunds teachers unions and the public school systems.
Some parents seem to have had enough of the public school experience.

"Two new studies further indicate that the biggest two-year declines correlate strongly with the most restrictionist school-opening policies, particularly in Democratic-controlled big cities."

If a parent paid attention during the scamdemic it was obvious as to the
Being shoveled out by the teachers.
We watched it with the terrorists and now their parents are opting for a Magnet school or a private institution.

 

[phylodog]

I'm still waiting for him to offer some sort of rational explanation of why it is so IMPORTANT to the left to incorporate such issues into curricula for K-3 (that's 5 to 8 year olds) that it would set off the level of caterwauling that it has

I'm gonna guess he'll say that isn't the issue, it's the reaction but the conservatives that is of real concern.

 

[JettaKnight]

So, all those videos reposted by LibsOfTikTok, of elementary school teachers, describing not only their actions but also their motives, are faked?

Do you honestly think I've seen those?