T O P
cedarsauce

FYI, it's not just niche internet personalities with this take anymore either. Tucker Carlson hosted somebody from "gays against groomers" to parrot this argument as well. Just the biggest news organization in the world broadcasting the modern equivalent of "Well if the Jews didn't want Crystalnacht, then they shouldn't have done all that blood libel." No big deal. God, it's going to get bad here...


Rommper

"gays against groomers" more like "shills for money"


LaughingInTheVoid

And from what I've seen elsewhere that the head of that group posts openly Nazi shit elsewhere on social media. Big Ernst Rohm vibes there. But I'm sure that Nazi leopard won't eat their face.


Manifoldgodhead

>My lies have lit the fuse of this bomb, I'm not going to stop lying but what happens next is still not my fault. These lies kill. These liars are killers.


VioletVulgari

The grooming is happening in their churches and families more than at school or by the friendly neighborhood queer.


Paradehengst

But that's the "good kind of grooming" for them. It's better to worship someone being tortured to death on the cross than to tell kids that people can love each other any way they like as long as mutual consent is given. Imagine the horror.


jannemannetjens

>But that's the "good kind of grooming" for them. "It's totally ok to keep children captive and rape them as long as you pretend Jesus told you to do so" ~every conservative ever.


PurpleSmartHeart

Okay but fr the sheer amount of rapist priests makes it weirder that there haven't been more killings of Christian clerical personnel. AFAIK the relatively small number of church shootings in America have been relatively random, not revenge for real injustice.


Rommper

Its not weird when most of the population were and are indoctrinated into a cult that claim these priests are good people and good authorities.


3FootDuck

And now they’re going “what, you associate groomer with LGBTQ people now? Kinda weird when someone says groomer you think gay people” As if these motherfuckers haven’t been using it as a euphemism for months and calling anything LGBTQ related groomers. Unfortunately I can’t say what I’m really thinking because it will absolutely get me banned from Reddit.


Salvaju29ro

What a beautiful freedom of speech, you can practically say almost explicitly that it is right that these mass murders take place and nothing will happen to you <3


CShields2016

…Maybe Elon Musks one man campaign to annihilate Twitter from the inside won’t be such a bad thing after all. 🤷🏻‍♂️


VeteranKamikaze

Elon Musk is directly responsible for Tim Pool being allowed to say this on Twitter in the first place.


ebek_frostblade

"Don't worry guys, this kind of speech will be hidden from the average person, or whatever. idk and idc lol"


lunartree

>"Don't worry guys, this kind of speech will be hidden from the average person" Sure, it will just be algorithmically targeted to the people who commit hate crimes.


G66GNeco

Oh, no no, Elon only wants to hide "hateful" tweets. _He does not consider this hateful._


ebek_frostblade

This is also true.


VeteranKamikaze

Oh he does care though. This isn't neutrality, it's intentionality. Musk is a queerphobic fascist, people like Tim Pool and Chaya Raichik committing acts of stochastic terrorism on Twitter is not an incidental effect of Musk's changes, it's the direct goal.


ebek_frostblade

Idk if he’s that smart tbh. I personally buy into the fact that he feels oppressed. He feels like the mainstream media is his enemy, and the people against him are brainwashed by the media. He bought Twitter so he can make it “unbiased” - aka, friendly to him. I donMt think he’s given the queers a second thought.


Weekly-Shake8740

Wellid reply, he's talked shit on queer people in the past, even recently, and you don't have to be smart to be a fascist, just powerful or craving power


ebek_frostblade

There's a difference between doing it intentionally and it happening by circumstance. Musk isn't smart enough to do the former, nor to prevent the latter. Both are bad.


Weekly-Shake8740

You don't have to be smart to do it intentionally


ebek_frostblade

I think we may have a miscommunication on what "it" is. The "it" I was referring to was to communicate discontent for queer people through dog-whistles that signals to users that he actively wants them to speak out against the LGBTQ+s. It's clear he has contempt for us, but I don't agree it's his MO. He cares a lot more about himself and his image than he does what happens to us.


Weekly-Shake8740

No, there was no miscommunication. You dont have to be smart to do that.


VeteranKamikaze

Alright then you are not informed on the shit Musk says about queer people. Which is fine, but maybe if you don't know much about him don't go spouting off about what you think he believes? And frankly even if you were right (you're not) and he's allowing stochastic terrorism on his website in the middle of a genocide "incidentally" then...that's still intentional. Because once you realize your platform is hosting stochastic terrorism against queer people you either shut it down or you are defacto endorsing it.


ebek_frostblade

lmao I am familiar with Musk's history. Don't result to personal insults because you disagree with me.


ebek_frostblade

>Because once you realize your platform is hosting stochastic terrorism against queer people you either shut it down or you are defacto endorsing it. This part of your message is really interesting to me, because you say that "assuming I'm right." If you're making that assumption, you would also have to assume he hasn't realized that, because he doesn't care enough to even recognize it. To him, it's not possible, because the code will take care of it. We're in agreement here, he sucks. We disagree *why* he sucks. Maybe don't lash out at another queer because we disagree on the MO?


VeteranKamikaze

He's directly interacted with some of these tweets, he knows they're there. Like you just straight up don't know what you're talking about.


ebek_frostblade

No, you still don't understand me. He doesn't think these things are "stochastic terrorism" or whatever. I literally fucking said that: >If you're making that assumption, you would also have to assume he hasn't realized that, because he doesn't care enough to even recognize it. Stop reading my things with the worst possible interpretation just because it, I don't know, makes you feel better than me? Please, continue to insult my intelligence just because you don't understand me.


VeteranKamikaze

Right which from all his behavior towards queer people especially trans people is very very clearly not true. He's not ignorant to what's happening on his platform, he endorses it. He knows it's queerphobic stochastic terrorism, that's what he wants.


farklespanktastic

It’s crazy how quickly queerphobia has seen such a resurgence. For a few years it felt like we were over the hill in public acceptance. Now we have public figures blaming LGBT people for their own murders. And it’s with such an old trope, too. Painting queer people as predators coming for your children and trying to “convert” them. There’s so much blatant misinformation, especially about trans people. I can’t even how many times I’ve seen people mention kids “getting their genitals cut off”. Not only does bottom surgery require you to be at least 18, it requires you to be on HRT for like 2 years. It’s easy to find this out but fear and hate are so much easier to spread and once it takes hold it’s so hard for people to snap out of it. I’m just so tired of having to deal with this bullshit.


chloetuco

I wonder where do they get that childen are being groomed from? Is there any case?


TweedleNeue

No. No group of queer people have organized to groom children. They refer to children being near adult queer people as grooming. It's an attempt to push queer people back into the closet, and have us murdered. Even the most charitable interpretation of conservatives considering drag queens inherently sexual loses all credibility considering taking young boys to Hooters, and Beauty Pageants for young girls, exist and are much more sexual and the domain of conservative America.


DarkSaria

> They refer to children being near adult queer people as grooming. Quite literally this. As a transgender parent of two young children it's deeply disturbing as the kinds of laws they're passing would effectively make it illegal for me to drop my kids off at daycare or school, or take them to activities like swimming lessons. Thankfully I'm not in the US so I don't have to worry about anything like this at the moment but I can't imagine how unbelievably difficult it would be to be someone in my situation in a state like Texas right now


VeteranKamikaze

This goes back thousands of years, if you want to gear people up for genocide, like the genocide that is currently happening in the United States, you tell them the people you want to kill are coming for their kids. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel


lipish

It’s the same concept as introducing the Satanic Panic in the ‘80s. It doesn’t matter that it’s not true, only that it reinforces existing fear and paranoia. The cost of a few innocent victims persecuted for a fabricated crisis is the least people are willing to pay to “protect the children.” The lie just serves to keep frightened groups huddled behind the imaginary protection of the church, state, or other group that needs their support to stay in power. It’s such an old part of their playbook, I feel pedantic/redundant even typing this out. We all know already that this is how they operate.


the-deep-blue-sea

In America it's actually older. There's a 50's psa about how young men should avoid the dreaded "homosexual". Of course the psa was conflating homosexuality and pedophilia and the PSA was actually about avoiding the latter... turns out conflating LGBT people with pedophiles is a demonization tactic used to stir up moral panics over the last century at least. Actually, one of the things that helped the Nazis build support was pointing at the LGBTQ communities of Germany and claiming they were a social contagion. The Nazis claimed more specifically that homosexuals and other LGBT folk were seducing young German men into also being LGBT... If that language looks familiar it should because modern conservatives use similar rhetoric today.


jannemannetjens

It's projection: they groom children into becoming obedient to the clergy. Who pays for the megachurches and private jets? Who pays for the gold plated cathedrals and diamond encrusted relics? People who've been groomed from childhood to believe the creator speaks trough some man who knows what's best for you (but mostly himself).


exciter33

What’s also interesting is that the rightoid hive mind network has realized that people are on to them, and so they’re trying to gaslight people into thinking it’s just a coincidence that the only people they call “groomers” are LGBT, and in fact, if we think it’s targeted at LGBT people, we must clearly associate the two groups in our minds, which means *we’re* the real bigots. A stupid argument, yes, but it doesn’t have to be logically convincing, since they’ve all made up their minds already.


buddhabillybob

Let’s hope the most recent election will give sane Republicans the impetus to push these extremists back to the margins of their party.


bradmaestro

Not even LGBT, but just anyone at the same bar.


AMidwestMonster

Tim Pool needs to get killed.


Salvaju29ro

I have noticed that many in response said that he didn't actually say any such thing and that he is just analyzing the situation. Another said he doesn't actually refer to the LGBT community. Clearly he could not refer to the LGBT community directly, he would have immediately passed on the wrong side (not for everyone of course). As has already been said many times, not naming things directly leaves that sense of ambiguity (which in my opinion isn't there) which allows them to defend themselves later. "He didn't actually mention the LGBT community, why are you complaining? You're not defending the groomers, are you?"


Rommper

If he tried to ambiguity he failed big time because he outright said the grooming don't stop and grooming happened. I don't think he even tried, he knows for long his fake I'm a leftist and liberal mask is off. Now if he really tried ambiguity he would have said something like: Many think its grooming and demand it to be stopped, its not happening therefore its going to continue.


Salvaju29ro

I agree that he failed, it is clear what he is referring to, but some who have replied to Natalie have argued this way. Probably in bad faith.


Legitimate-Record951

Notice how he justify his own views by applying them to "people". This is a pretty common trope among todays extremists.


the-deep-blue-sea

This, fucking this.


shabbysneakers

Time to bash back


keytiri

Nothing will happen next; let’s look at history for an example. What happened after Catholic priests diddled kids? Nothing. What happened after the southern baptist scandal? Nothing. What happens when even the republican terrorists molest or diddle minors? ~~Nothing~~ They get elected to office.


Famous-Ear-8617

That’s all the in group though. Those are groups with actual power. The real goal isn’t protecting the kids, it’s bigotry and political power. You might still be right, but I’m not too confident.


VerminNectar

Doomerism is cringe.


khsqu

[HERE IS MY ANALYSIS](https://twitter.com/KhanneaWilde/status/1595282084423421952)