Some thoughts on grooming
Jimmy Saville is not dead ten years and the BBC is forcing gender identity ideology down our throats
‘Grooming’ is not the real name of this TV program. A very kind subscriber who can navigate photoshop was happy to change it for me.
No, grooming is not the name of the program, but it is the aim of the program.
Grooming is defined by the NSPCC as “the action by a paedophile of preparing a child for a meeting, especially via an internet chat room, with the intention of committing a sexual offence” but anyone who’s seen the Netflix program ‘Abducted in Plain Sight’ will know that this is too limited a definition.
The paedophile at the heart of that documentary groomed a whole family, a whole neighbourhood, to get close to one child. He spotted the fault lines in a marriage (a gay, closeted husband, his lonely wife) and used that knowledge to divide and confuse the couple, so he could get closer and closer with his target. Most people who watch the programme cannot believe the ‘stupidity’ of the parents, but again, they misunderstand the nature of grooming (and its closest moon, gaslighting).
Groomers are master manipulators. They shape reality so events tell the story they want to be told.
There is surely now no doubt that by indulging the current fad for gender identity ideology, society is sleepwalking into a world where men’s sexual rights are placed above women’s rights. You only have to listen to the testimonies of transwidows, stories such as ‘Princess Mom’ and Aimee Challenor or the awful events at Vancouver Rape Relief to know that something is deeply wrong with this ideology, this fad, this trend, this spell under which so many privileged, always-online, white middle-class kids have fallen.
Women and children across every level of society are suddenly in danger because of an absurd, incoherent belief system, pushed by American academics, teenagers on Tumblr, and politicians too lazy or frightened to examine the issue properly. And if it takes just a few well-placed people to groom an organisation, it takes just a few such organisations to groom a society.
Replacing the real category of ‘sex’, with the fantasy category ‘gender’ is a huge societal shift, and once people know the implications, they reject it. This is an ideology that places mediocre men like Rachel McKinnon in women’s sports and hypnotises a whole country into accepting a male projected onto Dublin barracks on International Woman’s Day.
The reason we are only beginning to see mass resistance to this insulting appropriation of the lived reality of women (how insulting? This insulting) when the response to Rachel Dolezal was instant outrage, is that we have been groomed. We have been groomed by the most powerful demographic on earth—straight white men— working at the most powerful communication platforms on earth, into believing that the least powerful demographic on earth are…straight white men.
That’s some M. Night Shyamalan Roald Dahl tales of the unexpected shit right there.
How does this grooming manifest itself? Well, I’m glad you asked. Let’s look at the rainbow of ways in which we have been groomed.
We have been groomed to accept straight white men on lesbian dating apps. We have been groomed to accept straight white men in women’s prisons. We have been groomed to accept straight white men in women’s sports. We have been groomed to accept straight white men in women’s hospital wards and, finally, most disgracefully, in rape crisis centres.
If we measure a society’s attitude to women by how it treats the most vulnerable among that number, then I cannot imagine a greater betrayal of women than the one committed by those who voted against the Lamont Amendment.
There’s only one explanation for this appalling, evil insanity. We, as a society, have been groomed. We are all the parents in ‘Abducted In Plain Sight’. People will say of us, as TV critics said of them, “how could they have been so stupid?” I am not ashamed of Ireland for falling for it, as I know it was done quietly and surreptitiously, but I am proud of the UK for resisting it. Perhaps the UK did not fall as quickly as Ireland and Canada because the wounds caused by Saville and Rotherham are still fresh, whereas Ireland imagined that misogyny had gone into exile along with the priests.
‘My Life’ and the Australian drama ‘First Day’ have something in common, apart from both being aimed at children. They depict situations that are so rare in real life as to be almost non-existent. It is men, not women, who are transitioning in their middle-age. It is girls, not boys, who are identifying out of their sex class, because of their despair at a society that thinks of them as a collection of holes and functions. (You know, Cariad Lloyd, I was prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt until you signed that letter condemning JK Rowling.)
But reporting or depicting this phenomenon accurately… well, that would be a downer. If ‘First Day’ was about the huge uptick in young women transitioning, it would have to talk about double mastectomies and loss of sexual function. If ‘My Life’ was about the men who decide in late middle age that they’re actually women…well, it’s hard to create a heartwarming scene out of shopping for fishnets with your porn-addicted Dad.
As a result, we have these heart-rending dramas that bear no resemblance to what many worried kids, and many worried parents, are going through at the moment.
In the echoing chambers of the BBC, and Amnesty and Equity and Liberty, reality must not intrude. I believe the BBC is betraying its remit by refusing to hold a debate on a crucial matter, a matter that could not be more central to human life. It is also *the* feminist issue of our time, and the BBC insults women everywhere by refusing to conduct the debate. The mere idea is unthinkable. They would rather force out Jenni Murray or harangue Suzanne Moore than give it countenance. No, far better to just do what you’re told and say the words you’ve been groomed to say.
There are several reasons the two programmes mentioned above are aimed at children. The first is quite obvious; they are grooming future generations, just as they have groomed this one. The second reason is that both programmes would attract too much analysis, too much scrutiny, if they were aimed at adults.
A programme which advances the view that there is no such thing as biological sex would gather unwelcome attention if it wasn’t aimed at children. You can just imagine the heated debate on a special audience discussion show afterwards. No, far better to quietly slip it to the children, while the adults are getting on with adult things, like surviving covid and making a living.
And what’s the harm? The kids are indoors, so they’re safe, right? Well, we have a new story coming about Aimee Challenor that might change your minds on that one. When you read it, please do remember that Challenor was on a board at Stonewall when Helen Watts was expelled from Girlguiding for resisting the new safeguarding rules passed down by…Stonewall.
Stonewall was groomed by Challenor, and men like him, and Girlguiding was groomed by Stonewall, and organisations like it.
So. We have an ideology which advances by stealth, that tries to indoctrinate children while their parents are engaged elsewhere. And when the parents try to win their children back? Well, if you’re unlucky enough to be in Australia, the state steps in.
How have we arrived at this awful place, where children are deliberately alienated from their parents by random strangers on the Internet?
Well, I hate to press a point.
But we have been groomed.
We have been groomed at a societal level by people who were supposed to be the adults in the room, by the people with whom we entrust our kids. The BBC should either stop showing these dishonest, contentious programmes or conduct the national debate that is so desperately needed on this matter.
Jimmy Savile is online and he is connected with every other Jimmy Savile in the world. This is a national emergency, and the BBC is failing us. Again.
I guess there’s always ITV.