Teacher LGBT School

Is David French right to say that teachers who talk to 5-year-olds about sex aren’t “groomers”?

Sometimes, I get really annoyed with moral relativists for being too compassionate with predators. Whenever I feel like that, a trip to The Federalist to read their amazing women authors fixes me right up. They have so many great authors there. Right now, I am reading everything I can find by Elle Reynolds, Kylee Zempel, Jordan Boyd, Margot Cleveland and Joy Pullmann.

This article from the splendid Kylee Zempel at The Federalist is a must-read. I loved every word!

She writes:

The ranks of progressives and unmistakably pro-LGBT media — who spend their days throwing around insulting hyperbole like “Nazi,” “fascist,” and “silence is violence” — are being joined by so-called conservatives who’ve taken it upon themselves to lecture those to the right of them that ackshuuully it’s not appropriate to call the kids’ entertainment creators and state-sanctioned educators who insist on sexually indoctrinating 5-year-olds “groomers.”

Who are the so-called conservatives?

Here’s David French, who used to be conservative:

David French Groomer

And this guy from National Review, which used to be conservative:

National Review Groomer

Kylee continues:

Have the “conservatives” resisting the use of the “groomer” label forgotten about the concerted effort by gender activists to host drag-queen story hours for little children in taxpayer-funded libraries or “drag-tastic” camps at museums? Have they not seen the pornographic books introducing kids to gay sex and masturbation?

How about government schoolteachers’ documented cult-like allegiance to gay pride? The cover-up of sexual assault resulting from trans bathroom policies? Or the coaxing of children into sex confusion and dangerous gender-bending interventions and then hiding it from their parents?

Have they not heard stories of young people who internalized backward notions about human sexuality during their formative years, were utterly failed by every institution that should have helped them correct course, then underwent destructive procedures that left them full of regret, just disfigured shells of the unique and beautiful people they were created to be?

How about tongue-in-cheek confessions from choruses of gay men that they’ll “convert your children”? Or even manipulation by the president of the United States that those who don’t abide by LGBT orthodoxy “don’t see” and “don’t respect” transgender people and that so-called gender affirmation is the best way to keep kids “safe and healthy”?

There’s a word for adults who build trust with children then condition them in sexual matters without their parents’ consent or knowledge in order to manipulate them for their own pleasure: It’s groomer.

Kylee goes on to quote a list of grooming behaviors from the American Bar Association website. Among them, she finds exactly what the teachers are banned from doing, e.g. – “discussing sexually explicit information under the guise of education.”

She adds:

According to the website ChildHelp, which seeks to prevent child abuse, “grooming includes … gaining trust and access … playing a role in the child’s life, isolating the child, [and] creating secrecy around the relationship.” It goes on to say that signs of grooming include… “talking about sexual topics that are not age appropriate.”

So yes, this is a texbook definition of grooming. David French disagrees, but remember, in 2019, David French called “drag queen story hour” in schools “a blessing of liberty“. This isn’t his first time deflecting criticism of LGBT activists grooming children for sex with adults. He isn’t trying to protect children from predators. He isn’t a good man. He has given up on the male responsibility to protect the weak from predators. He would prefer to virtue signal to the secular left instead.

Open Secrets Teacher Unions
Open Secrets Teacher Unions

You have to focus on what groomer allies write about. They aren’t writing anything against the secular left. They aren’t writing about fathers losing their children to teachers who trans kids. They aren’t writing about parents being arrested for mis-gendering their children. They aren’t writing about the far-left LGBT radicalism of teachers. They aren’t writing about the labeling of parents who dissent from secular left indoctrination as “domestic terrorists”. Etc.

In every case, the fake conservatives have their sights firmly set on ordinary conservative parents, and their children. They want to protect the places where Democrats wield power – like public schools. And when the state comes along to seize the children of Christians, because those parents were supportive enough of LGBT rights, you can bet that the false conservatives will support that, too.

I’ve been writing about what the secular left is doing with children in the schools, divorce courts, etc. I also supported the candidate that pro-life groups endorsed in 2020. I’m a real conservative. David French is not a real conservative. Remember how he sided with far-left public schools against parents. He’s more interested in defending grooming of children for child abuse than your rights as a parent. Can we just judge him by his actions?

7 thoughts on “Is David French right to say that teachers who talk to 5-year-olds about sex aren’t “groomers”?”

  1. There is no such thing as liberals and conarrvatives anymore. There is only pedos and normal people. And so-called conservatives who defend the pedos are not normal people so they’re pedos.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. People like French are worse than the groomers themselves because they pose as conservatives who say you shouldn’t criticize the groomers.

    The groomers don’t like being called groomers. So yeah, let’s call them groomers. Because they really are groomers. They actively want to talk about sexual perversions with little kids and don’t want the parents to know. That’s grooming. My guess is that social media outlets are already shadow-banning posts with the term, so consider typing “gro*mer” instead. Or, as one person suggested, call them Disneys. They won’t censor that, and it seems appropriate.

    Liked by 3 people

      1. Agreed. She’s a wicked, racist, pedo-affirming, Molech-worshiping ghoul. She shouldn’t be a judge at any level, let alone the SC. So sick that any Republicans supported her. Those three should be primaried.

        Liked by 2 people

  3. Friggin perverts. A buddy told me that me & dog live a different life than most in the big city. Says lots go to the local couples sharing joint, says people i actually know of. Another, a short lived divorcee-girlfriend wanted to take me to a strip club; i said why? So we can bring one home, she said…….I gave up, just gave up. I miss dead dog but women, not so much.

    Like

  4. I have to believe these “conservatives” like French believe they’re being reasonable about the whole thing. But “reason” to me belies that angle. I’ve no desire to live in harmony with those whose perversity is not in harmony with God or nature. No harmony can exist with such falseness forced upon the rest of us. We can be compassionate for those trapped in immorality. But the least hint of enabling must never occur. “No. What you’re doing is wrong. You need to stop it, and I’ll help you overcome and learn to cope. I will not allow, tolerate or enable your deviant desires and behaviors.” That’s not what French and those like him are saying in response to those “tolerating” people of the “Agenda That Doesn’t Exist”. Most importantly, leave the kids alone!!!

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s