Do conservatives have a functional definition of Groomer yet

Do conservatives have a functional definition of Groomer yet

Attached: 20220706_092157.jpg (680x590, 79.89K)

Other urls found in this thread:

newgon.net/wiki/Grooming
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

They don't need one.
As long as it whips retards into a frenzy it's doing exactly what it needs.

>Children go through a normal developmental stage where they question their identity and their relationship to it
>groomers take advantage of this self-doubt for their personal gains be it ideological, sexual or both
this is what the mean when they say "groomers" so when LGBT communities come out in defense of these people it signals to the conservatives that all LGBT people are groomers and out to corrupt and rape their children. For instance, the Parental Rights in Education "don't say gay" bill in Florida. It's about how teachers are obligated to inform parents of any mental issues their children are having unless such information would lead to abuse then the teachers are obligated to inform DCF. but the groomers are angry because that makes it impossible for them to secretly pray on vulnerable children. Meanwhile the LGBT community is screaming about how this bill is bad without bothering to look at it. How hard is it to understand that pedo groomers are bad people and not part of the LGBT community?

People who tell kids to cut off their weiners and butts

You’re such a dishonest little weasel. Why is it that all rightoids act like the nazi caricature of the lying Jew? You know full well that the florida law is written so harshly that school districts are mandating teachers tell parents when their child has decided they are gay or trans, even though such a realization has nothing to do with ‘mental issues.’ You inveterate little creeps are the actual groomers, demanding that teachers spy on children so that you can reinforce you heterosexual grooming. Someone should slap some cement shoes on your feet and throw you into Biscayne Bay

>Children go through a normal developmental stage where they question their identity and their relationship to it
then why do parents beat abuse and disown their kids for a "normal developmental stage" user?

No, but neither does anyone else.

>Grooming is a term used to describe the way in which a (usually non-familial) adult is popularly perceived to flirt with a person under the age of consent. It is therefore a term employed primarily when there are:

> a) Conflicting values between primary and secondary socialization agents
> b) And where simple consent is present from the younger partner

>Commonly referred to as "child grooming", theories of it's "exact form" and purportedly prepubescent and passive victims have recently been problematized from within the victimological CSA discourse. This has been followed by widespread abuse of the term by conservative pundits, in which it is used to refer to permissive use of "sexual themes" aimed at young people in the media, and trans-affirmative sex education.

>In law, grooming typically refers to adults using the internet to solicit under-age persons or minors for sex.

newgon.net/wiki/Grooming

Attached: Mapgymnastics.png (524x488, 189.82K)

it's weird that rightoids actually think that rhetoric works on anybody but themselves. I really don't know who they're trying to fool especially posting here. They're so used to everyone agreeing with them on their pol threads or their facebook groups about "ivermectin trump jesus" or whatever that they forget other groups exist and they don't fall for braindead propaganda.

they also forgot that we can go right on Poland see what they actually think about wanting to kill all the gays and troons in the streets because Moloch demons or something

Attached: 1654614699907.jpg (2048x1024, 533.44K)

Harsh

it's not, they're completely right