Democrat Party Agenda

Homosexuals and Transsexuals using brightly colored d**dos in contests geared toward children is without a shadow of a doubt an attempt at marketing their lifestyle to preteen children (grooming). No matter what spin you try to put on it, most people can see through the insanity & condemn this attempted manipulation.

Perhaps you failed to read the many additional examples that I provided on my prior comment.

However, Such grooming extends beyond teachers & television and is embedding its roots deep into our culture. An increasing number of children’s books aim to inculcate or expose young children to topics related to homosexuality transsexuals, sex and gender ideology.

For example, the book Jacob’s New Dress by Sarah and Ian Hoffman is aimed at 4-year-olds and highlights a young boy who dresses as a girl with the smiling approval of his mother. The book Jacob’s School Play Starring He, She, and They by the same authors also promotes gender ideology to kids aged four through eight and suggests that the word “they” should be used as a singular pronoun for the “gender-nonconforming” and that “There’s more than just boy and girl.”

Another children’s book for kids aged four through eight called This Day in June by author Gayle Pitman features pictures of leather-wearing same-sex couples dancing and kissing in a Pride parade. These children’s books serve as a foundation for the flood of pornographic material in K-12 curricula and public libraries.

The ideological and destructive nature of these exercises may best be exemplified by a song and a so-called “summer camp.” In 2021, the San Francisco Gay Men’s Choir released a song and video boasting that they were targeting children with an LGBT agenda. Following a backlash, the organization claimed it was “tongue-in-cheek” humor. A sampling of the lyrics include:

You think that we’ll corrupt your kids if our agenda goes unchecked

Funny, just this once, you’re correct

We’ll convert your children

Happens bit by bit

Quietly and subtly and you will barely notice it.

You can kick and scream and try to put any spin on it that you would like but you, or anyone else will ever convince the majority Americans to approve of this disgusting manipulation of children.

A recent analysis profiled by Harvard University outlined the alarmingly high rates of depression for girls and self-identified LGBT students in high school. It showed nearly 76 percent of self-identified LGBT high-school students and 57 percent of female students are feeling persistently sad or hopeless, percentages that far exceed the number of black students or males. The article attempts to offer four explanations, but not one of the potential factors explores the erosion of self-conception–and the inherent loss of confidence and mental stability–that stems from grooming children at an early age into adopting radical sexual concepts and gender identity.

Axios recently provided generational data compiled by Gallup. The information reveals an exponential increase in the population self-identifying as LGBTQ, rising to an astonishing 21 percent of Generation Z. That is double the number of Millennials. While more analysis needs to be done, this data heavily suggests that the prevalence of grooming practices in K-12 schools and the prevalence of Queer Theory in cultural institutions is producing a socially-induced effect whereby people are overwhelmingly choosing to be a member of the LGBT community.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has revealed an alarming increase in the number of suicides of homosexuals and transsexuals. From 2007 to 2018, the rate of suicide for 10 to 24-year-olds increased by an astounding 60 percent. These rates occurred years before COVID, lockdowns, and school closures. It is worth exploring how much of this increase is related to grooming activities pushing children into novel sexual and gender identities from a young age.

Harvard University’s Center on the Developing Child argues, “The brain is indeed connected to the rest of the body–and early childhood policy in the 21st Century must focus on the overwhelming evidence that early experiences affect the foundations of both educational achievement and lifelong physical and mental health.”

It is critical for parents and concerned citizens to be concerned with the extent and consequences of the grooming epidemic for these very reasons. There has been a great deal of research done regarding the long-term negative effects of institutional and societal grooming of children: physically, emotionally, mentally, and spiritually.

The meme makes complete sense to the major majority of the 93% of men and 87% of women who identify as completely heterosexual.

"No it doesn't, because not all heterosexual people believe that garbage about LGBTQ people grooming kids"

Which part of "MAJOR MAJORITY of the 93% of men and 87% of women who identify as completely heterosexual." did you not understand?

Perhaps a remedial course in elementary reading comprehension would help your understanding of the English language.

https://imgflip.com/gif/75hsvh

Obviously, you're not a parent, because if you were, you would know that the MAJOR MAJORITY of heterosexual parents are against pedophilia as are the MAJORITY of all Americans.

Do you really believe that MAJORITY of adults endorse the practice of grooming children?

Quite possibly, you were groomed and manipulated as a child & this is why you are defending this manipulation of children.

Below are a handful of examples from among hundreds of self-published videos from K-12 public school teachers:

A 5th-grade teacher in Maryland bragged about the “gender unicorn” assignment she uses to teach 10 and 11-year-olds how to “determine” their gender identity, gender expression, and physical attraction to other people.

A pre-school teacher in California boasted about forcing the 4-year-olds under her supervision to choose “pronoun pins” every day.

A 1st-grade teacher at a Massachusetts charter school informed Kindergarteners through 2nd-graders over Zoom that he is transgender and that when a baby is born doctors “make a guess about whether the baby is a boy or a girl.”

A pre-school teacher in Florida who moonlighted as a “drag king” proclaimed that she will not follow the Parental Rights in Education Act when it comes to the 4-year-olds under her supervision.

An elementary school teacher in Florida stated that she “would rather lose her job than out one of my students to their families” and that she has no intention of following the Parental Rights in Education act when it comes to young children and minors under her supervision.

An elementary school teacher in New York stated that “kids as young as 3 and 4 are aware of their gender identity” and claimed that saying pre-K through 3rd graders aren’t ready to be exposed to sexual concepts and gender identity is “internalized homophobia and transphobia.”

A high school teacher in Pennsylvania instructed other teachers on how to “be really sneaky about supporting specifically queer students” without the knowledge of parents.

If you were a parent (and obviously you are not) you would be concerned with the extent and consequences of the grooming epidemic. There has been a great deal of research regarding the long-term negative effects of institutional and societal grooming of children: physically, emotionally, mentally, and spiritually.

The parental rights movement has helped uproot the radical ideologies that have taken hold in K-12 schools, most notably the Marxist-derived ideology of Critical Race Theory. However, CRT is not the sole radical ideology immersed in curricula and instruction in school systems.

Queer Theory, sometimes referred to as Gender Theory, is the genesis for much of the grooming material and behavior in K-12 schools and cultural institutions. This theory manifests itself in many different forms, but broadly frames heterosexuality as a societal norm structuring society to the detriment of self-designated marginalized communities who operate outside heterosexual and the biologically-binary gender practices and beliefs. In this manner, the theory’s rejection of malignant “systems” falls in line with CRT and other Marxist off-shoots of radical critical theory.

One of the leading purveyors of this theory, Michel Foucault, was a Marxist French philosopher and activist who authored Queer Theory’s seminal work The History of Sexuality. This book argued that sexuality is a social construct and is inherently tied to hetero-dominant systems of power. Foucault is also known for challenging the “stigma” of pedophilia.

Foucault signed a petition to decriminalize pedophilia and lower the age of consent in France to 13-years-old before he died of complications from HIV/AIDS in 1984 (surprise,surprise,surprise). After his death, evidence emerged that Foucault had sexually abused underage boys–underscoring the flippancy with which he viewed such acts in his various writings. The direct influence of Foucault continues in classrooms today, particularly with the increasingly common redesignation of pedophilia among gender activists as just another sexual orientation, specifically an orientation known as “minor-attracted persons” or MAP.

The primary day-to-day impact of grooming behavior and activities, however, can be summarized in a three-fold manner:

1) It undeniably serves to affirm the desires or proclivities of non-parent adults at the expense of children who are captive audiences;

2) It undeniably fosters an environment where sexual predators can thrive, thereby endangering children;

3) It undeniably creates the conditions to rupture nuclear families and drive a wedge between children and their parents; and

Common sense also suggests that grooming is indeed heavily contributing to the epidemic of adult sexual misconduct and crimes against children in K-12 schools.