Grooming in Schools

[Cognisant]

Homosexual adults lead the way for mainstream acceptance of homosexuality, they fought an uphill battle against the necessity of secrecy, they came out of the proverbial closest chanting "we're here, we're queer, deal with it" and now in schools today gay people are just people, it's no more significant to most kids than height or hair color.
(at least in my experience in Australian schools, admittedly that was over a decade ago)

How does grooming children and teens to be trans lead to mainstream acceptance?
Can someone explain to me what's actually going on here?

 

[Hadoblado]

Homophobia is still a thing in schools. It's a lot more likely that there will be someone there who accepts you too, but being queer at school still isn't easy. I've had to have a lot of conversations with children over this sort of bullying.

Does the video show that grooming is statistically associated with transgenderism?

 

[Cognisant]

I am quite comfortable saying this guy is a lot smarter and better educated than I am, this video is not a youtuber shit-take meant to hate on the transgender community but rather an expose on groomer activities.

Does the video show that grooming is statistically associated with transgenderism?

There's definitely a correlation but it seems opportunistic and largely politically motivated, people who want to push their far left political ideology and see teens (transgender teens in particular) as easy marks.

 

[Hadoblado]

I watched a bit (not all). He does seem more measured than typical reactionary youtube, but he's speaking in vagueries and at least one of his sources (libsoftiktok) is full clown world. He's listing anecdotes, some of them sound shocking, some of them sound like probably not a big deal.

What I'd want is a hard comparison. I can tell you for example that males sex offenders outnumber female at least four to one. But despite having read mountains of evidence on the gender differences in child sex offenders, I'm yet to see any meaningful number for non-binary offenders (not that I was specifically looking). Because IMO if people are worried about grooming, they should start by asking what causes it and who's doing it etc., not listing the crimes of a specific demographic.

 

[Cognisant]

If you watch the video to the end you'll see that's not what he's doing, indeed it was notable to me that in the examples given a lot of the groomers didn't appear to be non-binary themselves.

 

[Hadoblado]

Fair enough.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

I can appreciate the awareness the video brings to certain situations. But the way they were delivered to me was dubious.

this guy: I'm gonna aggregate a whole bunch of internet clips and articles that support a point...Cool.

For me, shit teachers and intense parents have always been a thing. For all we know students saw some shit on their smartphone/ipad that made them behave in such a way and parents are blaming supportive teachers for example.

The more radical things mentioned can be left to being cherry picked, though obviously alarming.

The idea that teachers are systematically grooming students is pretty funny because most teachers I know have trouble conducting a classroom of 20 kids half the time.

Something interesting however, is around the 11:40 mark, the supposed parent cites something the principle said, that Title IX, 1975 amendment or something like that, supports Trans rights. I knew it as equality of sexes. Something like, if there is a Boys soccer team, there has to be a girls soccer team, or the school can be sued. But apparently the legal system in recent years has affirmed this ruling from 75, as supportive of Trans rights. Interesting.. So (some aspect of) this all might just be school avoiding being sued.

 

[Cognisant]

The idea that teachers are systematically grooming students is pretty funny because most teachers I know have trouble conducting a classroom of 20 kids half the time.

So you're saying that because it's not all teachers all the time therefore its not happening and you're so confident in this belief (despite having just watched evidence to the contrary) that you find the notion so absurd as to be amusing?

That sounds like something a groomer would say.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

Systemic institutionalized racism queering is a thing or no?

I actively acknowledge what was said. I just don't see it the same way you do. I'm seeing the aftermath and instances of something and angry people making upset pleas to validate their anger at school boards and the such. I have no idea what's happened in between. There's that one tumblr post he looked at that talked about someone being sexually trafficked across the entire east coast. Big if true?

Am I to think hat this is a new form of sexual /psychological abuse that is different, that it is to be added to the total amount of sexual/psychological abuse that already happens in schools?

I already pointed to the Title IX thing. It was the most interesting thing about the video and the guy doesn't even talk about it.

Title IX Education Amendments

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sex discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.

www.hhs.gov

If legislation is used to actually protect these people that would be a bad thing. Institutions, even educational ones behaving a certain way because they're afraid of a litigation battle is bad, and pedos that exploit that chink in the legislation and hold everyone hostage with press and media coverage is a very bad thing.

 

[Hadoblado]

Are you a pedophile Cog?

 

[Cognisant]

Explain to me how "teachers systematically grooming students" is in any way funny and I will concede that accusing ER of downplaying the issue was unfair.

 

[Hadoblado]

Are you trying to cancel them? What the fuck virtue signal bullshit is this?

 

[Cognisant]

No, cancelling someone has far more severe consequences.

I wanted ER to reassess their position, I'm sure they don't see themselves as a groomer so me accusing them of speaking like one should prompt introspection.

What the fuck virtue signal bullshit is this?

Punching fascists is fair game right? Anyone that decides "might makes right" is practically asking for it and what better way to refute them than respond in their own anti-democratic terms.

As I see it this groomer nonsense is largely a consequence of virtue culture, some of these groomers (the more ideologically minded ones) seem to legitimately believe its their moral imperative to be a groomer. What better way to refute this virtue culture than using its own tools against it, beat it on its own terms, don't hate the player hate the praxis.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

Explain to me how "teachers systematically grooming students" is in any way funny and I will concede that accusing ER of downplaying the issue was unfair.

It's the main idea being sold by the video, because if you don't buy that narrative, which no I don't think teachers are systematically grooming students, then this just becomes cherry picked cases.

The moon landing hoax is a funny idea

Jews controlling the media is a funny idea.

Lizard people are a funny idea.

If you believe this conspiracy, it's because you're on the line of thinking adjacent to "post-modern neomarxist are graduating college and going to schools to spread their doctrine in the youth" THEN you have to think they are interested in spreading feminist trans gender ideology which is an even more unlikely subset of these people.

No, cancelling someone has far more severe consequences.

I wanted ER to reassess their position, I'm sure they don't see themselves as a groomer so me accusing them of speaking like one should prompt introspection.

My introspection is precisely what lead me to come to my conclusion. You'd have to be the one to talk me off the ledge you see me on.

It never quite sat with me right when a history teacher would tell us that slavery wasn't that bad, that slaves were friends with their masters and that masters were sometimes fair, when even the textbooks everybody could read didn't whitewash that extremely.

It's not a question of is abuse being perpetuated on students for me. It is. It's whether this is a unique abuse that has arisen out of emerging cultural values, or if the values that make people want to perpetrate this abuse has been there for a long time. Asking the question "would this sexual abuse be perpetuated by these people if our culture hadn't taken the turn it has in the past 5 10 years?"

You seem to already have your conclusion and want the evidence to fit that, instead of trying to prove yourself wrong first.

 

[Hadoblado]

I'm a little flabbergasted tbh. These last two conversations are truly difficult ones that you've initiated, but you're so insanely lazy about it.

Why are you talking about punching Nazis?

Why, unprovoked, are you calling people groomers when you don't believe it?

Why are you blaming grooming on "virtue culture"?

The culture war has poisoned your brain and it's fucking tragic.

 

[Cognisant]

Why, unprovoked, are you calling people groomers when you don't believe it?

I didn't call ER a groomer I said they were speaking like one.

These last two conversations are truly difficult ones that you've initiated, but you're so insanely lazy about it.

Yeah I realize that.

 

[Hadoblado]

I didn't call ER a groomer I said they were speaking like one.

Nah that's bullshit, like what a weaselly dumbfuck pedophile would say, and you know it.

 

[Cognisant]

Normally I enjoy getting you riled up, because I need to work for it, but this seems to be something you're very sensitive about.

Having considered it, I know you have a background in education and I know I call you woke to rile you up, but I didn't mean to for this thread to be an attack on you indeed it only occurred to me now that it could be interpreted as such.

I wanted to shit-stir and get a debate going but I've clearly taken it too far, I'm sorry.

 

[Hadoblado]

I don't see it as an attack on me.

There are two separate discussions.

One where your boy spams anecdotes about grooming in education with no point of comparison. While not straight propaganda, I see this as one layer removed. Without comparing rates within education to those without, it's meaningless. I do think the groomers that do exist in education need to be excised, they are positioned to do more harm, especially if they metastasise into some sort of systemic grooming.

The second issue is you recklessly calling people groomer. This I do take issue with. It creates cover for real pedophiles (the consequences of whose actions I've had to deal with), and harms men (again, I've supported victims of these allegations). It's a brutally ugly side of humanity and for you to frivolously start chucking it around for attention does upset me somewhat.

I want men to partake in the education of children, I see this as an inter-generational healing for both the men of today and the men and women of tomorrow. Following the 2013 commission into institutional responses to CSA, and the err... institutional response to this information, I've lost a lot of hope in people's capacity to make use of available information and subsequently left the sector.

So I see your actions as interpersonally tasteless, but that doesn't matter much to me. The main thing is I see it as an iteration of systemic posturing that hurts everyone except active pedophiles.

FYI, I wasn't actually going hard. I was just mirroring your practice to highlight how ookie it is to be the recipient. Once when you insinuated it, once when you implied the insinuation was meaningfully different from an accusation. It probably wasn't wise, as in this environment there is no social momentum. There is no weight to the insinuation like there would be if either of you worked with children. So still an overreaction on my part.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

The dude points out how this is a common tactic among conservatives at the beginning and you indeed took the first opportunity you had to frame me in such a way.

My language was facetious I suppose, but that's only because I'm not going seriously consider this as a "high magnitude" problem from a clearly inflammatory tabloid video such as this one. I hardly have any faith in the public school system as it is to create healthy adults, and this dude is going to pretend like there is a trend that is going to somehow make it worse, and it's feminist philosophies that motivate it? Mind=blown.

 

[Old Things]

I don't have a problem with most of the laws for equal rights for LGBTQ+ people. Where I draw the line is when they advocate for MORE rights than cis straight white males, which is what they are pushing for.

 

[Hadoblado]

Examples?

That's broadly an agreeable standard, but at the same time, this area is full of language and interpretation games surrounding "equal" and "equitable".

 

[Old Things]

Examples?

That's broadly an agreeable standard, but at the same time, this area is full of language and interpretation games surrounding "equal" and "equitable".

There was a law here in the US about protecting gay persons' employment outside of discrimination, I believe. Cis white straight white males have no such advocation of that sort.

 

[Hadoblado]

Okay. I suspect we disagree here.

The way I see it, cis white men don't have this protection because they don't need it (as much). For every law there is a cost in bullshit, so needless laws = needless bullshit. CIS white men get preferential treatment not because they are celebrated, but because they are the assumed "default" in the eyes of the masses. Nobody is assuming you are a thug because you're white, or that your uncle wants to take over Hollywood, or that you're just looking for someone to bankroll your pregnancy.

In a perfect world, the laws would be blanketed, but I see this as an exercise in triage. I want male issues to be taken seriously, but I don't want them to suck oxygen from other conversations. Systemic issues warrant systemic responses.

If you're arguing for men's rights to protection, then I think we're in the same ballpark. If you're arguing that gays shouldn't have protections because straights don't, I take issue. You say cis white men don't have advocates, there is nothing stopping you. Advocacy tends to be a response to disadvantage.

 

[Black Rose]

maybe cog should take a bath, and comb his hair.

 

[Old Things]

CIS white men get preferential treatment

Not anymore they don't.

 

[Black Rose]

CIS white men get preferential treatment

Not anymore they don't.

somehow it's bad to be one nowadays
at least the culture war is trending this way

 

[Hadoblado]

Okay so we agree that they did but we disagree that they no longer do. What advantage did men have that they no longer hold? I'm open on this, I haven't read anything on it in a while.

 

[Black Rose]

cis white men are a minority on the planet, half of the children born in white countries are white when it was nearly 90% some time ago - the talk in the culture war is that empires created by white people is bad and so science is white = bad. Science is used as a power grab by imperialists who are white to rob ethnic minorities of their culture and dominate their ancestry. cis white males will be gone someday and a new power grab will happen. or not if we educate people enough about imperialism.

 

[Old Things]

Okay so we agree that they did but we disagree that they no longer do. What advantage did men have that they no longer hold? I'm open on this, I haven't read anything on it in a while.

Businesses today want to be so "inclusive" that they will hire people who are not cis white males over cis white males. There's also the Coca-Cola thing of "Try to be less white" which they plastered on their cans until they got enough backlash to retract that. There are other examples such as the shaving company Gillette changing their motto for a short time to, "The best a man can be," which didn't last because men don't want to hear that they are arbitrarily limited in how good they can be by whether they shave or not.

 

[Hadoblado]

Disagree on Gillette but we've covered that on the forum already. Haven't heard of the Coca-Cola thing but it sounds cringe.

Regarding hiring practices, I understand these quotas as intended to mitigate bias. As in, there is bias, so the inverse of this bias is seen as reducing this bias. I don't agree with this, as I see it as leading to exactly the sort of conversation we're having now, but for you to believe that hiring practices are no longer biased towards men, you should be able to see this shift in a statistic somewhere.

i.e. what you've said just now would be false if the total bias for men was 10, but the total quota hirings mitigating this bias was 1. In my understanding, men are still favoured and quota-based hirings are mostly a way for companies to virtue signal and to avoid negative press. I do care about representation, but I don't see quotas as a useful solution.

 

[Old Things]

Disagree on Gillette but we've covered that on the forum already. Haven't heard of the Coca-Cola thing but it sounds cringe.

Regarding hiring practices, I understand these quotas as intended to mitigate bias. As in, there is bias, so the inverse of this bias is seen as reducing this bias. I don't agree with this, as I see it as leading to exactly the sort of conversation we're having now, but for you to believe that hiring practices are no longer biased towards men, you should be able to see this shift in a statistic somewhere.

i.e. what you've said just now would be false if the total bias for men was 10, but the total quota hirings mitigating this bias was 1. In my understanding, men are still favoured and quota-based hirings are mostly a way for companies to virtue signal and to avoid negative press. I do care about representation, but I don't see quotas as a useful solution.

People say things like, "Black people are less wealthy than white people. Therefore, they are oppressed." But then they don't stop to consider that women make up a bigger portion of those going to college than men and this, for them, does not mean that the system is corrupt. What's the lynchpin here, is that some of the CRT people have said that Black people are oppressed because white students put on their application that they are some sort of minority so they have a better chance of getting into their preferred college. We no longer live in a logically functioning society. Of that much I am sure.

 

[Black Rose]

I do not think you need a college degree to have the advantage, not if you are white. White people are still preferred at hiring. That is why jobs not requiring college are important to the workforce. these are the types of jobs that sustain the middle class. without a middle class, things function improperly. What keeps the poor, poor is the notion that the poor should remain in subsidiary living standards, low-quality jobs, and pay. elite bankers run the economy based on theories absent of global equability. if the poor grow this causes instability in poorer countries. China can only grow if the poor in America are subsidiaries and so are the middle class once jobs leave, leaving low-skill jobs. the goal of the elite bankers is to destroy highly skilled jobs the person with a high school diploma can do and be midlleclass.

 

[Hadoblado]

TBH I think you're only engaging with the weakest version of the argument Old Things. You're not only explaining what they say, you're explaining what thoughts have even occurred to them. But these are views held by many millions of people, and many of them have had these ideas occur to them.

 

[Old Things]

TBH I think you're only engaging with the weakest version of the argument Old Things. You're not only explaining what they say, you're explaining what thoughts have even occurred to them. But these are views held by many millions of people, and many of them have had these ideas occur to them.

I am not speaking into anyone's thought process. I am only going based on what I have heard and read. The only place that this is not the case is when I say people don't claim the system is corrupt by there being more women in college than men. That would only be an argument from silence if it was expected that people wouldn't see the system as corrupt logically. But it's an inconsistency. Hence why I said we no longer live in a logical culture, along with my other points. It just gets more and more absurd the deeper you dig.

 

[Black Rose]

how can college be corrupt if more women than men enter it Halodo, yah

 

[EndogenousRebel]

Around when do you think society started and then stopped operating under principles of logic, Old Things?

 

[Black Rose]

2016

 

[Old Things]

Around when do you think society started and then stopped operating under principles of logic, Old Things?

That's a great question that is somewhat hard to answer since there are not really clear lines in the sand with this. I'd say the scientific enlightenment is probably when it started with guys like Newton. It probably started to end sometime in 2012 or so but it has just gotten worse. I don't dislike @Animekitty answer of 2016 either.

 

[scorpiomover]

Can someone explain to me what's actually going on here?

They're breaking the law. The US has a constitutional rule that humans have a right to privacy. All laws that violate constitutional rules are invalid. They are simply not laws.

They think that the law doesn't apply to them, because they think that if you're doing something that you believe is a good idea, even if they are being completely irrational and it's completely nonsensical, then you should be able to do it, and if it's against the law, then the law is wrong and should be ignored.

A lot of people think this way today.

 

[scorpiomover]

Around when do you think society started and then stopped operating under principles of logic, Old Things?

If you don't mind, I'll respond. Logic became popular in the Age of Rationalism. People had plenty of evidence then. But they didn't use logic very well, and so came to very irrational conclusions, which led to mass murder, genocide, and many other horrible things. So people realised that "to err is human", and we have to check our reasoning.

The point of logic was to point out when you believe fervently that you're helping the world, but are actually not making sense.

You know when you're being logical, because it feels like you're being kicked in the teeth, because you're finding out that many of the things you WANT to do, ARE crazy.

It hurts like crazy to have your desires and goals cut down.

But any intelligent person will tell you that is NORMAL for intelligent humans, because "TO ERR IS HUMAN."

It stopped, once humans started believing that they didn't have to assume that they're very likely to be wrong, and so stopped checking their reasoning. The time was roughly about the time that they downgraded maths, because in the history of Western civilisation, people were taught about what was good reasoning in maths classes.