The constant use of Groomer against TRAs is doing the GC cause harm

[RobynMiller]

Just seen this posted by Glinner
https://x.com/Glinner/status/2106504469651579047
Text
Russell T Davies says I called him "a paedophile and a groomer" in this. It's a lie. I did call him a groomer, because he used Doctor Who to push gender ideology, in which no child would believe unless an adult had planted it in his or her head.

And I just find it disingenuous from him. It's no secret I don't love his decent into more, let's call it, aggressive strategies on social media, but they are now coming home to roost and won't be good for any of us.

The word Groomer has a very specific history when it comes to CSA so to use it as often as he (and other) do and then claim you don't mean it in the very well accepted way is always meant just doesn't sit right with me.

Is there a term we can use that isn't sp precariously close to slandering someone as a Child sex abuser?

Here is the article he is referring to in the tweet

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2026/oct/03/russell-t-davies-interview-doctor-who-fierce-fandom-love-grief

Which is not the same as using it themselves on multiple threads which is what you actually claimed.

Didn't you know? Women are responsible for what men do. This whole discussion is, as my Gen Z siblings are fond of saying, "a nothing burger." When I hear the word "groomer", I automatically think of dogs. I don't know what it is lately with this board and the frequency of bucket-scraping threads, the whole thing reeks of desperation.

People saying they can understand why someone may use it isn’t evidence that people are regularly using it. There is zero evidence that it is used on MN by GC feminists. So all the ‘concerned’ citizens can stand down.

I think I said I’ve seen it used on here, by a minority of posters. Which is a pretty mild claim.

But as you’re so insistent ‘groomer’ is not used by GC posters on here, I presume you are in agreement it’s an appalling / bonkers thing to say?

Are you meaning that ‘abuse’ means sexual abuse? For example that calling someone who is encouraging a child in believing they are transgender ‘an abuser’ is the same as calling them a child sexual abuser?

If so, I disagree.
This summer Hilary Cass brought up the example of a child ‘transitioned’ by his parents:
^^
“I ask noble lords to consider the case of a child who I will call Jo who was a biological male, socially transitioned at two and a half by his parents. At eleven, she – which I say advisedly because the chances of her reverting to her biological gender is vanishingly remote – she has been in stealth and will not go to secondary school because she is so afraid of being outed in that environment. She’s now refusing to come out of her room except very rarely and she now has weak bones, not as a result of puberty blockers but through inactivity. I ask the noble lady the minister should her subsequent treatment be decided by politicians or by the clinicians who are looking after her?”

Transgender Trend wrote:

”Cass, in a few sentences about an eleven year-old, has made the strongest case yet against not only the low age limit for the puberty blockers trial but the premise of the trial itself. In addition,* she has inadvertently exposed the act of ‘social transition’ as the child abuse* it really is.”
https://www.transgendertrend.com/abuse-two-and-a-half-year-old-child/

The accusation of child abuse here is obviously not that it is child sexual abuse but psychological abuse.

I agree that it is psychological abuse, with very serious consequences.

Agree

I don’t think it’s appalling because I understand that it can be used in various contexts other than child sexual abuse and that it always has been. If Glinner believes gender is an ideology and that some people are pushing it on others, then using the word groomer is fine. I don’t police people’s language, and like another poster said, I’ve seen plenty of TRAs outright call him a paedo so…

Grooming is pervasive in trans ideology and queer theory.

WPATH as an organisation has been groomed by child sex abuse fetishists to accept that “Eunuch identity” is real, and is a gender identity (that the usual suspects on this thread can’t define). It allowed a chapter on this to be in WPATH’s SOC8.

Children are told it’s okay to keep their bodies in a prepubertal state.

Society has been groomed into the acceptance of “love is love”. It’s time to dust off Derrick Jensen again.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n-NseFg2kno&pp=ygUbZGVycmljayBqZW5zZW4gcXVlZXIgdGhlb3J5&ra=m

just one example - is somone like @Soontobe60 just saying they understand why someone might use the term groomers, or are they just saying they thinks people supporting trans rights are groomers, on their post on this thread? (It’s the latter)

that no one is forced to watch…………

but thousands of children and teenagers do.

Right. If you think it’s a fine thing to say I don’t know why you’re so invested in claiming nobody DOES say it (despite of evidence to the contrary on this very thread)….

but I am getting used to the weird rabbit holes / circular arguments / imagined gotchas that characterise this forum 🤷‍♀️

Because by and large we don’t really say it on here so it’s weird you’re claiming we do. I’m just a bit sick of people mangling language and making out that perfectly normal usage of words is wrong or telling women off for words used by men.

I also wonder if you spend any time at all posting about pro trans posters and the vile language they often direct at women which is far more worse than using “groomer.”

Far right mimicry in the gender Critical movement is simply a natural conclusion of a movement that is essentially conservative coded in its resistance to change, preference for existing conditions, established institutions and traditional ways of doing things over modern innovations. Its essence is conforming in nature so its going to attract all that goes with that: good & bad.

Personally, I prefer encouraging far right proponents to let their freak wig fly as a community service. Its important for the general public to understand who these people actually are (& their actions point to that) so they can accurately assess where this train is actually going…& not anywhere good.

That's not to say the gender critical movement's intentions aren't societally helpful in terms of caution to harm, they clearly are, but that the far right historically has a way of exploiting & distorting caution into authoritarianism & bigotry that is anything but pro women's rights so important to allow them to show who they are.

If it it walks like a duck…

It's pretty simple.
Someone claims a group constantly do action X and it is very harmful.

Members of the group respond pointing out that both elements of the original claim are exaggerated or inaccurate.

It ain't what you say...

@RobynMiller You come across as deeply insincere and hoping to be manipulative (but failing).

Grooming doesn’t mean just sexual. I think it’s a helpful term in a number of different contexts.

With respect, whether she thinks someone who “is party to misinforming children that it’s possible to change sex is guilty of grooming children” (which is slightly different from someone who supports trans rights) is neither here nor there. The accusation is calling someone a groomer damages the reputation of the ‘GC movement’ (whatever that is). Presumably because it is public. Unless you’re now policing what people think as well as what they say.

They are explaining its meaning because you do not seem to understand it. It is a word with a context dependent meaning and the grooming in this context is clearly not ‘grooming for sex with a child’.

When people explain a meaning of a word it does not mean they themselves particularly favour using it. They may or may not.

Exactly. The entire concept of Adolescence and the Tate brothers, incel culture etc involves the acceptance that young males are being groomed into these cultures.

It’s accepted that young Muslims can be groomed into Jihadist beliefs.

As a society, we now recognise grooming takes many forms, and that’s s good thing, it improves safeguarding.

And one of those forms is telling children it’s possible to change sex, it’s okay to keep their bodies in a prepubertal state, and it’s okay to keep secrets from their parents.

Depends on what you mean by supporting trans rights.
If you mean anyone who is promoting gender ideology to children then yes they are all groomers.
If you mean people saying trans identifying males belong in women's spaces i think the terms misogynist, women haters and delusional would be more accurate
If you mean people saying that trans identifying people should be allowed to work, rent a home and not be abused then no

Its a far right catch call that has its historical roots as a device to demonise groups that particularly gained a claim to fame by the Nazi's about Jews, homosexuals, socialists etc & their alleged cultural spreading of 'degeneracy'.

The idea is non conformity/'degeneracy' isn't an autonomous innate expression but rather a taught 'groomed' one. It's problematic to anyone who understands an aversion/'disgust' of non conformity & self determination is socially harmful.

What bullshit. I’m sick of these attempts to smear people who care about women’s rights as far-right.

A movement that uses the same rhetoric & frames their philosophy is the same ideas as the far right only has themselves to blame if they come to be associated to them.

Ignore HowseItChopping, just the usual nonsense, wait until the Wikipedia links start, then it’s really nonsensical.