Zone1 Calling/accusing other members "groomer"

[Dogmaphobe]

how is that shitting on you to make a statement about the differences in attitudes in changing times?

So, you support the sexual molestation of boys like me because of "changing times"?

OK.

I am not allowed to disagree any more.

 

[toobfreak]

This "ruling" applies to member-on-member usage. Posting threads about legit news and events concerning child grooming IS allowed. When posting replies in those threads, keep the personal attacks OUT - absolutely NO accusations towards members of this forum that can be construed as calling them a groomer or pedophile.

Thanks for succinctly clearing that up, Aye. ITMT, two other related resulting points:

1. You need to teach then your little minions like Beale then not to over-zealously read too far into well-intended innocent text (an actual warning telling someone else to watch THEIR comments aren't misconstrued!) making blind baseless assumptions, accusations and inferences on things NOT said assuming how it was intended to imply then ACTING on them as if they WERE said!
2. If NO accusations of calling members here a PEDO is the rule then why is Litwin still posting here unscathed without interruption (I checked) after flagrantly calling me a PEDO twice for no reason at all just because I was commenting on one of his Ukraine-rant threads about Zelesnsky's weapon demands, despite it being reported BOTH times?

 

[Care4all]

Yes, she said that the use of the word grooming to describe grooming is now Verboten!

she said personally accusing a poster of pedophilia/grooming children to accept their sexual advances is not allowed....if you see and truly believe a poster is a pedophile or pedophile wannabe, report it, or call the cops.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Accusing everyone and their brother of being a paedophilia groomer,

just gives cover for the real pedophile groomer....

It weakens the gravity and harmfulness of the real paedophile, it gives cover for them.

Accusing everyone and their brother of being a paedophilia groomer,

just gives cover for the real pedophile groomer....

It weakens the gravity and harmfulness of the real paedophile, it gives cover for them.

Thanks for succinctly clearing that up, Aye. ITMT, two other related resulting points:

1. You need to teach then your little minions like Beale then not to over-zealously read too far into well-intended innocent text (an actual warning telling someone else to watch THEIR comments aren't misconstrued!) making blind baseless assumptions, accusations and inferences on things NOT said assuming how it was intended to imply then ACTING on them as if they WERE said!
2. If NO accusations of calling members here a PEDO is the rule then why is Litwin still posting here unscathed without interruption (I checked) after flagrantly calling me a PEDO twice for no reason at all just because I was commenting on one of his Ukraine-rant threads about Zelesnsky's weapon demands, despite it being reported BOTH times?

View attachment 754023
View attachment 754024

This is all about silencing all of us who HAVE been molested.

Those of us who have been molested in the past are pariahs here as Aye has made very clear.

 

[The Duke]

Idk, but for some reason this thing makes me feel nauseous about the state of society.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

she said personally accusing a poster of pedophilia/grooming children to accept their sexual advances is not allowed....if you see and truly believe a poster is a pedophile or pedophile wannabe, report it, or call the cops.

Gotta silence the voices of us who have experienced things you have never experienced, don't ya know?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Idk, but for some reason this thing makes me feel nauseous about the state of society.

People on the receiving end of sexual abuse are pariahs here at USMB.

It is now official.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Grooming is when someone builds a relationship, trust and emotional connection with a child or young person so they can manipulate, exploit and abuse them.

Grooming

Children and young people can be groomed online or in the real world, by a stranger or by someone they know. If you're worried about a child, we have advice to help.

www.nspcc.org.uk

Like what happened to me as a child and what you have decided I can no longer oppose?

Hey -- thanks so much!!

 

[The Duke]

she said personally accusing a poster of pedophilia/grooming children to accept their sexual advances is not allowed....if you see and truly believe a poster is a pedophile or pedophile wannabe, report it, or call the cops.

What about political or school board policies that lend themselves to the grooming of children to think about sex prematurely. I.E. : What has been happening in schools for the past 20 years? No prepubescent children need "the talk" or to be taught about condoms and things like that before it's time. Especially not by government sponsored entities or NGOs. "Drag Queen story hour" and things like that.

 

[Foxfyre]

I've been reading through this thread maybe pretty much hindered by naivete' as I haven't seen anybody call anybody a groomer. Some lovely people here at USMB have called me every ugly/hateful/insulting name in the book and I just consider the source and move on. So far I have not been accused of being a groomer.

But I wonder when I am accused of being a 'threat to democracy', 'terrorist', 'insurrectionist', supporting a coup or other illegal acts, why is that permitted but calling somebody a 'groomer' is not tolerated? What distinction makes the difference? I don't want to call anybody any of those things and can't imagine doing so, but it does seem a wee bit inconsistent to single out one term and not all? All are federal offenses.

Grooming is a federal offense, and many of us do take exception to policy that is absolutely consistent with softening up or training kids to accept sexual advances from adults or other kinds of abuse. I think it is healthy and important to educate people on this ugly trend and resist the policies that could encourage it. And I think we should be able to call that 'grooming' when that is what it is or at least what we think it is.

I don't have a problem with policy saying members cannot accuse other members of ANY illegal activity on an open forum. Singling out one or two illegal activities such as 'grooming' and 'pedophilia' does raise questions why those terms are protected by policy and other criminal activity is not?

Child Grooming Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

Child grooming refers to an act of deliberately establishing an emotional connection with a child to prepare the child for child abuse. Child grooming is undertaken usually to carry out sexual abuse

definitions.uslegal.com

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Under NO circumstances are forum members allowed to call and/or accuse another member of being a child groomer.

If someone on this forum is suspected of being a groomer or pedophile, DM the mods and tell us why you suspect it and give us the evidence. We will look into it and notify the proper authorities.

This "ruling" applies to member-on-member usage. Posting threads about legit news and events concerning child grooming IS allowed. When posting replies in those threads, keep the personal attacks OUT - absolutely NO accusations towards members of this forum that can be construed as calling them a groomer or pedophile. You can and should question members on their views if you do not agree with them or do not understand them. You are NOT allowed to call them a groomer or imply that they are a groomer.

1. Wouldn't it be easier to make any discussion/thread started about pedophilia a ZONE 1 forum and just label the forum Pedophilia to eliminate the rule you want to impose?

2. What about rapists and rape enablers, are they going to be given the same type of..... USMB protection?

*****SMILE*****

 

[westwall]

kinda like the boy who cries wolf

No, we accuse GROOMERS, of being groomers. Just because you are gay, does not make you a groomer.

But, if you are a hetero, and you sexualise children so that you can rape them, you ARE a groomer.

The same applies to the LGBTQ community, if you sexualise children you are doing it for the explicit purpose of raping them in the future.

That is the ONLY reason for grooming kids.

 

[The Duke]

Children don't need to be sexualized at all. They don't need adults talking about homosexuality or any of that.

When I was in school it was not talked about and if teachers did talk about their sexuality, they would be fired immediately. That's K-12.

1st freshman class at college the prof says he's gay on orientation day.

He was a good teacher, I didn't care. You're a young adult by the time you reach college, though.

 

[SweetSue92]

I am not a victim. I am just a person trying to prevent future victims.

There is nothing I could say to make anything better. It makes me feel physically ill to read these things. I'm sorry you had to live with this.

And

It's so bad now that me, a 30 year teacher, cannot say I love kids. It seems prurient, that's how far gone we are. Isn't that sad?

But simply for the fact that I am a public school teacher, I have been called a "groomer". That's uncalled for too.

 

[SweetSue92]

Children don't need to be sexualized at all. They don't need adults talking about homosexuality or any of that.

When I was in school it was not talked about and if teachers did talk about their sexuality, they would be fired immediately. That's K-12.

1st freshman class at college the prof says he's gay on orientation day.

He was a good teacher, I didn't care. You're a young adult by the time you reach college, though.

I agree with this 100%. There is SO much children need to discover. Sexuality is not one of them. Teachers who use the classroom for their own needs should be purged. Children are not there to validate your sexuality. They are not there so validate you at ALL, and often will not.

 

[The Duke]

There is nothing I could say to make anything better. It makes me feel physically ill to read these things. I'm sorry you had to live with this.

And

It's so bad now that me, a 30 year teacher, cannot say I love kids. It seems prurient, that's how far gone we are. Isn't that sad?

But simply for the fact that I am a public school teacher, I have been called a "groomer". That's uncalled for too.

Leftists are definitely degrading western civilization. Can't say this; can't say that. But boy can you flaunt your homosexuality and racism and hate for traditional American things and tell lies about history.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Grooming is when someone builds a relationship, trust and emotional connection with a child or young person so they can manipulate, exploit and abuse them.

Grooming

Children and young people can be groomed online or in the real world, by a stranger or by someone they know. If you're worried about a child, we have advice to help.

www.nspcc.org.uk

Thanks!

Though I must confess that it's baffling to me why the definition being made applicable and to serve as the model for usmessageboard would be premised upon a for profit children's charity out of the UK with an agenda attached to it.

If it were me...which it is not...but if it were, it would seem that it would be more conducive to premise the terms of controversy on the definition provided by a source like...oh...I dunno...let's pick the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART)

Particularly given the glaring difference in depth and relevance between its definition and that of the foreign children's charity with the agenda attached to it.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_interest/child_law/resources/child_law_practiceonline/child_law_practice/vol-34/november-2015/understanding-sexual-grooming-in-child-abuse-cases/

Some highlights from the more relevant source and from within our own Legal jurisdiction...

Grooming is a method used by offenders that involves building trust with a child and the adults around a child in an effort to gain access to and time alone with her/him. In extreme cases, offenders may use threats and physical force to sexually assault or abuse a child. More common, though, are subtle approaches designed to build relationships with families.


''Sexual grooming is a preparatory process in which a perpetrator gradually gains a person’s or organization’s trust with the intent to be sexually abusive.

The victim is usually a child, teen, or vulnerable adult.''(see bulletpoints in reference to underlined - mine)

Some of the more germane/applicable aspects which are noted for the purpose of grooming as well as behaviors which may be used during the grooming process are activities that can be sexually arousing to adults who have a sexual interest in children.

These behaviors include:

• to manipulate the perceptions of other adults around the child.
• discussing sexually explicit information under the guise of education
• showing the child sexually explicit images.

Didn't see anything like that on the link which was provided to the children's charity in the UK.

Anyway. May we ask why the children's charity with the agenda attached to it over there in the UK was chosen to model usmessageboard's rules and definitions, rather than a more germane, more thorough model sourced from something like the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART)?

Additionally, was staff provided this children's charity source in the UK by the web site administration itself and therefore directed to model the definition/rule on it specifically? Or was it just a source that one of the mauds personally felt that it should be used because they were perhaps very eager to do their part and help or whatever?

These are just casual questions. Not interested in debating them, but more curious given the difference in geography and jurisdiction as well as the differing Laws and interpretations of the two jurisdictions. Notwithstanding the glaring different in relevance and depth between the Foreign agent and the the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking.

Thanks again!

 

[SweetSue92]

Leftists are definitely degrading western civilization. Can't say this; can't say that. But boy can you flaunt your homosexuality and racism and hate for traditional American things.

But in this case the censorship comes from fellow conservatives. I'm already suspect just for being a public school teacher; certainly we are all at least "indoctrinators". So if I say I love kids, or even love working with kids--that's it. I'm the G word now.

So stupid. As I have said many times, fellow conservatives are doing to education what the Left did to police. It will end just as badly.

 

[The Duke]

But in this case the censorship comes from fellow conservatives. I'm already suspect just for being a public school teacher; certainly we are all at least "indoctrinators". So if I say I love kids, or even love working with kids--that's it. I'm the G word now.

So stupid. As I have said many times, fellow conservatives are doing to education what the Left did to police. It will end just as badly.

Idk how to stop all this. Wish I did. I know kids in kindergarten don't need to be putting condoms on bananas. I do know that.

 

[SweetSue92]

Idk how to stop all this. Wish I did. I know kids in kindergarten don't need to be putting condoms on bananas. I do know that.

Well as I have said many times before, maybe my fellow conservatives could learn and execute a little nuance. Because there is a 25 yo Leftist teacher in Berkeley, CA who teaches her first graders gender identity does NOT mean the 2nd grade teacher in Anytown, SD, who teaches Sunday School, is indoctrinating HER students.

But you know. Nuance. Clear thinking. We have lost all of it.