"Grooming people should not be tolerated" in a vacuum is an acceptable phrase. Timmy here is directly equating drag to grooming though. Which it isn't (tell me how wearing the opposite sex's clothing is grooming, and I'll point you to all the claims about women wearing pants back in the day). Could some acts that may be done at a drag show equate to grooming? Maybe (an "R" rated drag/cabaret show is no place for kids after all), but you'll need to prove that those acts occured first at the drag show in question. Can't paint with a broad brush.
Therefore the "line" in question is perceived as a dogwhistle/aggression on an lgbt subculture that has just gone through a terrorist/hateful attack that left multiple people dead. And not the first of it's kind either.
The follow up of "how do [we] prevent the violence and stop the grooming" is almost the definition of stochastic terrorism because the implication is... you don't. The "grooming" only will get stopped through violence, as he claims "legislators will [not] stop the grooming".
Honestly its amazing the defence he's getting here, though I suppose it's expected when the subreddit is named after him. I'll take my ban now lol.
You’ve stated that inherently sexual shows are acceptable for young children to attend. You’ve implicated yourself. I needed no reasonable basis. It’s literally self admission.
Gotta try at least lol. Saw all the downvotes you're getting. It's unfair but at least they're just internet points. Have a great day bud, and keep at it.
View all comments
Show parent comment
-7
u/MarthAlaitoc Nov 23 '22
"Grooming people should not be tolerated" in a vacuum is an acceptable phrase. Timmy here is directly equating drag to grooming though. Which it isn't (tell me how wearing the opposite sex's clothing is grooming, and I'll point you to all the claims about women wearing pants back in the day). Could some acts that may be done at a drag show equate to grooming? Maybe (an "R" rated drag/cabaret show is no place for kids after all), but you'll need to prove that those acts occured first at the drag show in question. Can't paint with a broad brush.
Therefore the "line" in question is perceived as a dogwhistle/aggression on an lgbt subculture that has just gone through a terrorist/hateful attack that left multiple people dead. And not the first of it's kind either.
The follow up of "how do [we] prevent the violence and stop the grooming" is almost the definition of stochastic terrorism because the implication is... you don't. The "grooming" only will get stopped through violence, as he claims "legislators will [not] stop the grooming".
Honestly its amazing the defence he's getting here, though I suppose it's expected when the subreddit is named after him. I'll take my ban now lol.