We're not grooming the children, we just want them to play with drag queen action figures as toddlers.

submitted by iamonlyoneman from shop.mattel.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Hematomato 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (54 children)

I remember when "grooming" meant "laying the foundation to have sex with a child when they reach the age of minority."

Now it means, I don't know, something like "not hating the queers."

[–]Questionable 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (51 children)

"laying the foundation to have sex with a child when they reach the age of minority."

That's what it means here.

"not hating the queers."

There is no good reason to introduce drag shows to children. Sexualized toys is a good reason to hate degenerates. So, why not both?

[–]ILOVEPUPPIES 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

i couldnt have said it better.

[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Why it even had to be said, I do not know.

[–]DesertOfMirrors 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

I don’t think RuPaul is particularly sexualized. I mean yes, he’s the epitome of crass pop-culture, not my cup of tea, but I don’t think in this case this counts as grooming. Maybe just woke, lax parenting.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Drag is inherently sexual.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

That toy isn't.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Drag is inherently sexual.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No. If you get sexually aroused when you think about drag, that's just a personal fetish of yours.

It's not universal.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

wrong

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Unless you stick it up your ass and masturbate, it's not. And it's not made for that. That would be you using it as a sex aid, outside is design.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

See, you're ALREADY thinking of using it for sex!

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I believe I'm not. I'm trying the thought experiment where that toy is in some way, shape or form, sexualized. And it's failing.

[–]DesertOfMirrors 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It’s shitty entertainment, but it isn’t inherently sexual. At least not RuPaul’s version. The stuff that children were being exposed to at gay bars a few months ago definitely was. I would call that grooming. My point here is to maintain a sense of scale. Black-and-white thinking isn’t going to help us get out of the mess we are in collectively.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Pretending to be the opposite sex, is sex-based. It is also shitty entertainment.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Woke, lax parenting allows for their children to be groomed. Pointing this out, and labeling it with an alternate name, doesn't excuse this.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

What exactly is the chain of events that leads from that toy to sexual abuse?

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Grooming.

[–]Hematomato 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (30 children)

That's what it means here.

So, just to be clear, your belief is that Dave Jenkins or whatever at the Fisher Price corporation approved selling RuPaul dolls to five year olds because he's hoping that in thirteen years they'll say "Holy shit! You're Dave Jenkins and you approved a line of dolls I liked playing with; allow me to offer you my pussy"?

I mean, come on, man.

[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (28 children)

It's to receive ESG funds. And it's the people who push these funds that hold this agenda. There is no reason to sell toys of men in dresses to children other than to sexualize them.

I mean, come on, man.

[–]Hematomato 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (25 children)

It's to exchange cheap Chinese plastic products for money. And that's the reason for selling anything to children - profit.

And while that itself may be unsavory, it's a far, far cry from "various Fisher Price executives want to fuck their customers the minute they turn 18," which is what you're bizarrely alleging with the word "grooming."

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (24 children)

It's to exchange cheap Chinese plastic products for money. And that's the reason for selling anything to children - profit.

A simple view from a simple man, motivated solely by cash, and easily manipulated. And yet you have accused China of being behind this. What an odd choice. And you say their only motive is money? Nothing else? and you act as though it can't be more than one thing simultaneously. So, with that logic, China can sell meth to Americans and their only motivation is money? And that's fine? Correct?

It's a man in a dress, dancing for children. It is inappropriate as a toy, and promotes a sexual agenda. I'm sorry that you finds this 'bizarre', but it is in fact the reality of this, that you must finds bizarre. As that is the reality of the matter.

various Fisher Price executives

Stop pointing fingers at straw men. Stop making up narratives and attributing them to me. It's not as simple as you are.

You claim this to be motivated by money? Yes, that's the carrot in the form of ESG funds to push the agenda. You push the agenda for the WEF, you get paid. These are called useful idiots at best.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

And yet you have accused China of being behind this.

See I read it, and found that he accused China of being the place that manufacturers plastic toys most cheaply.

What the fuck did you read?

Yes, that's the carrot in the form of ESG funds to push the agenda. You push the agenda for the WEF, you get paid. These are called useful idiots at best.

Are you sure it's not simpler than that?

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Speak of the Devil. I was just talking about you.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Again: See I read it, and found that he accused China of being the place that manufacturers plastic toys most cheaply.

What the fuck did you read?

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

And yet you have accused China of being behind this. What an odd choice.

I assure you that, like all cheap plastic goods, those toys are made in China.

And you say their only motive is money? Nothing else?

That is correct. That is why both Fisher Price and Chinese factories exist: to make money.

So, with that logic, China can sell meth to Americans and their only motivation is money? And that's fine? Correct?

It may not be fine, but it is not child grooming. It's just drug trafficking.

Stop making up narratives and attributing them to me.

But you specifically agreed that grooming means "laying the foundation to have sex with a child when they reach the age of majority."

Just by accepting that definition, you specifically agreed that the Fisher Price executives who decided to sell these toys are doing so as part of some plot to fuck people who will turn 18 a decade or so from now.

So maybe you're having second thoughts about the definition now...

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (19 children)

I'm having seconds thoughts about who you are. You're style seems very familiar. Like a bad faith Satanic Robot. Your ignorance of reality is profound and disturbing.

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

You're sitting here telling me that Fisher Price is making RuPaul toys because the executives think it will help them diddle kids... and you think I have a problem with reality. Yeah, man, we'll just have to see how that works out for you.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (17 children)

I'm not saying that. You are saying that. I'm saying that this toy is sexual. It was produced to secure ESG funds for profits. ESG funds used to promote lbgqt+ agendas. That groom kids. Which is part of a divide and conquer campaign orchestrated by the banks and foreign governments to destabilize the nation, using cash incentives.

It's not as simple as you are. Nor the claims that you are making. Honestly, are you controlled opposition?? Who's leading who here?

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You thing dresses are necessarily sexualized?

Or you think men are necessarily sexualized?

The reason the toys are of famous people. You're looking for something to be usual about, but there's nothing there. You need to understand why you have a massive erotic reaction to drag or RuPaul, because most people don't.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Your Questions don't make sense. Your assertions are irrelevant and wrong. Go fish elsewhere.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most intelligent saidit user

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You're hallucinating. That toy is not sexualized.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

It's a toy for adults. Best case scenario.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They make heaps of them.

They're not sexual

[–]BOOB-SMASHER 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

In the distant realm of Zynthar Prime, a luminescent planet bathed in the glow of flintor crystals, a great prophecy foretold the coming of a hero. Dralnok, a brave adventurer with a heart of vornith and the spirit of a glixar, emerged from the ancient city of Sornith Blivon.

Driven by the call of the Quelthor, a sacred artifact said to hold the key to the destiny of the Zyntharian people, Dralnok embarked on a perilous journey. His path took him through the treacherous jungles of Zyntara, where the flora and fauna communicated in the mysterious language of Jantara.

As Dralnok ventured deeper, he encountered the elusive Quelthor Vandrix, a sentient being of kalthorn energy. The zephyrion bralnix resonated with the very essence of the planet, revealing forgotten secrets and unlocking the dormant powers within Dralnok.

With newfound abilities, Dralnok faced the challenges that awaited him in the Folaris Abyss, an otherworldly dimension where time and space intertwined. There, he confronted the ancient guardians who spoke in the resonant tones of the unknown language, a dialect lost to the ages.

Amidst the cosmic battle, Dralnok uttered the sacred words of the prophecy, invoking the power of Zynthar Prime itself. The guardians, moved by the sincerity in his voice, granted him the wisdom to wield the Quelthor and restore balance to their world.

As Dralnok emerged victorious, the people of Zynthar Prime celebrated the fulfillment of the prophecy. The once-lost language, now imbued with the hero's journey, became a symbol of unity and resilience for generations to come.

And so, the lumidra of Zynthar Prime continued to shine, casting its light on a world forever changed by the bravery and determination of Dralnok, the hero who spoke the language of destiny.

[–]iamonlyoneman[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

k