Quote:
Originally Posted by RickeyM
I'd like to hear, from the Reich-wingers that like to throw those words around so much, what they actually think they mean. Some Republicans like to brand Democrats and liberals with those terms. I'd really like to hear what they think the Dems & Libs are grooming and/or indoctrinating children to be or do.
Given what they (cons & neo-cons) think CRT and woke are, the answers to my question might be interesting.
|
Love your use of pejorative terminology. It certainly invites conversation. LOL!
Regardless, this is my honest take on what's happening with this aspect of our culture.
I went through high school in the mid-late 1970s. Back then, calling another kid "gay" or a "fag" was considered a pretty nasty insult. No doubt those words were also stigmatizing to their intended targets.
However, we were kids. We were balancing the teenage concept of "knowing better" with the teenage desire to "fit in". Kids are less likely to call out another kid's behavior or choice of insults hurled at a "less popular" kid for fear of retribution from their peers.
Fast forward to today: My twin daughters are high school juniors. The way they tell it, being gay, or bi, or sis or whatever is like a personal brand that kids use. Some kids will say they're gay or bi to fit in with other kids, some use it to get attention, and some use the terms to accurately describe themselves and their preferences.
What changed? The culture changed, of course. What drove the change? Lots of different factors, some good and some not-so-good.
So, what's grooming? In the broadest use of the term in this context, it means to prepare or train a person for a particular purpose or activity. As some might use the term in this it means forming a relationship with (a child or young person) with the intention of getting them to do something they wouldn't likely aspire to do on their own.
Are there forces out there trying to "groom" kids to become gay or transgender? Specifically, is there a group or groups of persons specifically targetting straight kids or questioning kids with the goal of convincing them that they're gay or that they need "gender-affirming" care? No, I don't think so. I also think the use of "extreme" terminology like "grooming" can be self-defeating because it may misstate or overstate root causes.
I do think that efforts to "normalize" the LGBTQ+ community, while well-intended, may have some unintended consequences. There are "extremists" on both sides of any issue. Those "extremists" can alter the discussion and cloud the debate about what is appropriate what is not appropriate. When it comes to kids who are confused or seeking information about their identity, this just clouds the water even more.
Having legislation, like the bill currently pending in WA state, that would create a legal and physical barrier between kids and their parents while the kid is making life and body-altering decisions as a child is, to me just all kinds of wrong. This would be an example of the law of unintended consequences and taking things to extremes in full bloom.