I wanted to highlight a Twitter thread about grooming in schools that I think is quite important. I disagree with the labeling the author, a Christian podcaster named Josh Daws, uses because grooming children is not the goal of “The Left”, it is the goal of leftists who are unwitting (or in some cases witting) Marxists. However, the focus on “The Left” is apt, because there are many on “The Left” who buy into the marketing materials of leftists and will zealously support them in their wrongdoing.
“The left doesn’t want to diddle kids. They want to create little revolutionaries. To do that they need to sever the bond between students and the parents they believe are raising their children to be hateful bigots.
In order to sever the bond between parents and their children, the left is using a two-pronged approach. Critical Race Theory and radical gender ideology (properly known as Queer Theory) are not two unrelated sets of ideas. They are two parts of the same strategy.
CRT is usually the first set of ideas to be introduced. This is often enough to radicalize racial minorities, but it’s merely step one for white (or white adjacent) students.
CRT instills in these students a negative self-identity as they’re taught to believe they’re recipients of enormous privilege that was stolen from others and that they are complicit in historic and ongoing injustice. In child terms, they’re taught to believe they’re bad.
Apart from the shame and guilt, this also gives them a worldview at odds with the one their parents grew up with and are trying to pass on to their kids. Step one is complete.
Once CRT is done tearing down these kids and leaving them with a negative self-identity, Queer Theory (QT) is introduced and offers them a wide assortment of positive self-identities to choose from.
Instead of living with the shame and guilt of being a member of the oppressive dominant culture, these students can be celebrated for coming out as gender nonbinary or pansexual.
In an instant, these kids can trade their negative self-identity and all the accompanying guilt and shame of being an “oppressor” for a positive self-identity as a much-venerated “oppressed” minority.
At this point, the left desperately wants this new identity to stay at school, so it has time to be cemented before the parents find out. In the guise of helping these students, schools withhold this information about their child’s new identity from mom and dad.
Once the parents do find out about their child’s new identity it’s firmly in place and an adversarial relationship between the child and parents has been manufactured. It takes extraordinarily deft parenting to repair the relationship once it has reached this stage.
The parents’ tendency will be to overreact and push the child further into the arms of the woke radicals who now have the little revolutionary they wanted from the beginning. The bond between parents and child has been severed ending the perpetuation of hate and bigotry.”
– Josh Daws (link)
Now, after reading that thread, the important question is: Is this actually happening, and if so, how prevalent is it? I can confidently answer the first part: it is happening. You can find plenty of videos of teachers boasting about creating inappropriate relationships with their young students. Here is a teacher boasting on TikTok about his “transition closet” which is a closet he keeps in his classroom so students can “wear the clothes their parents approve of, come to school and then swap out into the clothes that fit who they truly are”. I cannot so confidently answer the second part. I do not know how prevalent it is, but I do have a few data points.
As I said, there are a lot of videos of teachers boasting about inappropriate teaching practices (you can find some of them on the Twitter page Teachers Exposed).
There is also a 2020 Gallup poll which found that 15.9% of Gen Z (born between 1997-2002) Americans identified as LGBT, which is an increase from the 9.1% of Millennial (born between 1981-1996) Americans, which itself was a large increase from previous generations which were all under 4%. We can see with that poll that with each generation, the percentage roughly doubles. I think we can all accept that one factor contributing to the increase is a greater tolerance for LGBT individuals. Some people polled would have been alive when being LGBT was a serious crime with inhumane punishments. Today we have pride parades and people are congratulated when they identify as LGBT. However, that has been true for some time, so why would the number be growing at an increasing rate? Sure, it could be just due to the increasing acceptance of LGBT individuals, but that is not the only valid hypothesis.
Children are very impressionable and can be molded into almost anything. I do not know Abigail Shrier’s (P.S.) work intimately, but I know she has shown that young girls will, in increasing numbers, take on an LGBTQ identity to get attention from their peers or approval from adults. This can happen with young boys as well.
That is the best case I can make for the prevalence of “grooming” (P.P.S.) in schools. The prevalence may turn out not to matter, though. Josh Daws says “The left doesn’t want to diddle kids. They want to create little revolutionaries. To do that they need to sever the bond between students and the parents they believe are raising their children to be hateful bigots”. This would mean that as parents begin to try and wrest control of their children back from the groomer teachers, the groomer teachers will see their resistance to the parents attempts as valiant and in service of the child. The parents will grab one arm and the groomer teachers will grab the other, and the tug of war over children will ensue. However, the groomer teachers may find that other teachers will join them and grab a hold of the child’s arm. Teachers will broadly attest that parental involvement in education tends to be net negative. It introduces red tape and stifles the ability to teach and so many regular teachers who are either unaware or in denial of the grooming will also fight against parents trying to gain more control in schools. To the parents, it will look as if the teachers are united in the attempt to indoctrinate their children.
From parents who believe they are protecting their children from predators, expect no nuance, mercy, or restraint. Expect doom for those who stand against them.
P.S. As I was brushing up on Abigail Shrier’s work, I visited her Wikipedia page. I knew that Wikipedia was bad, but I did not realize how bad. From the page (bold added by me): “Abigail Krauser Shrier (born 1978) is a transphobic American freelance journalist… is probably best known for her 2020 book Irreversible Damage, an anti-trans tirade that claims girls are being driven to become boys by a social contagion”. That does not sound like an honest, objective Encyclopedia to me. It reads instead like what it has become: an activist-captured electronic Encyclopedia. If you find a page that you think is filled with opinion and activist language, you can click on “Fossil Record” to cycle through the revisions and watch how it developed into that.
P.P.S. There is a lot of debate about whether or not the word “groomer” is appropriate in this context. Typically, “groomer” has been used to describe adults having a non-sexual relationship intimate relationship with children to groom them into a sexual relationship when the children come of age. I happen to think that the term has more potential, and that is just one type of grooming. As Josh Daws lays out in his Twitter thread, the leftist teachers are forging inappropriate relationships with their underage students with the goal of grooming them into a revolutionary leftist.
P.P.P.S. The examples of grooming in schools goes to show how important and fragile parents’ trust in the institution of public schooling is. A good teacher can make much better decisions for a student (in an academic context) than that student’s parent can. They are not just babysitters. When parents get involved, they tend to disrupt what teachers are trying to do for their children and the quality of education falls. If a parent trusts the teachers and the school to have similar goals to their own for their child, they can comfortably sit back and send their child to school. Any signs of a divergence of goals will destroy that comfort.
P.P.P.P.S. I just recalled another odd example of the leftists taking a strange adversarial stance towards parents over children. The San Francisco Gay Men’s Choir made a YouTube video of them singing a song called “Message from the Gay Community”. The song is allegedly parody, but includes lyrics like “We’ll convert your children, happens bit by bit. Quietly and subtley and you will barely notice it” or “We’ll convert your children, someone’s gotta teach them not to hate”. Give it a watch and decide for yourself (they took the video down after receiving backlash, but seem to have reposted it since).
- Short Takes: Martha’s Vineyard, Pronouns, Gender Identity
- The Crumbling Case for Abortion Bans
- But I’m Right: An Opinion on Abortion That Everyone Will Hate
Follow My Blog
Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.