Neil Shenvi Profile picture
Apr 6 9 tweets 2 min read
"Critical Grooming Theory"

When some people hear "groomer," they immediately apply a Western, individualistic lens. But they fail to realize that "grooming" is a systemic, structural problem deeply embedded in our "ways of knowing."

A thread. 1/
When I, as a Critical Gooming Theorist (CGT) say that all progressives are groomers, I'm not saying that they personally support grooming, as defined by the dictionary. I'm saying that they benefit politically from "systems of advantage" that harm children. 2/
When a progressive is offended that he's called a "groomer," that is a symptom of "groomer fragility." He needs to sit with his discomfort and do the work to understand the lived experience of children and detrans folk who are harmed by systemic grooming. 3/
A lot of progressives think there is a category of "not groomer." But one is either "groomer" or "anti-groomer." Being "not groomer" is just a way to perpetuate systemic grooming. 4/
Grooming is one of many interlocking systems of oppression. One cannot be anti-groomer if one is a communist. One cannot be anti-groomer if one is a feminist. To be "anti-groomer" it to recognize the intersections of your communist, feminist, progressive privilege. 5/
Superficial change is insufficient. CGT shows that systemic grooming has been baked into supposedly neutral, objective ideas like "expressive individualism," "identity," and "social justice" from our nation's founding. Dismantling it requires fundamental social transformation 6/
Is this thread satire? Yes. But it's a satire based on statements and reasoning taken nearly verbatim from the Critical Social Justice literature (e.g. Kendi, DiAngelo, Adams, Collins, etc.). CSJ is fundamentally flawed, cynical, and deconstructive. It is a universal acid. 7/
If this thread frustrates you, good. It should. It shows why we need to reject CSJ. It will poison our discourse and tear to shreds the very fabric of our society. Maybe rethink how you've been redefining words like "racism," "bigotry," whiteness," and "Christian nationalism." 8/
If you've been drinking the Kool-Aid of CSJ language and ideology, it's time to wake-up. They're a dead-end. You don't have to choose between embracing CSJ and embracing actual racism/sexism/injustice. You can and must reject both. 9/9

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Neil Shenvi

Neil Shenvi Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @NeilShenvi

Feb 23
Good thread. See my thoughts below. 1/
First, be *sure* to read this clarifying exchange between @rcsprouljr and @JoshDaws 2/
@rcsprouljr @JoshDaws Second, a common refrain I've heard from many of the most vocal current critics of "#BigEva" is that they were truly, sincerely, genuinely huge fans who are still grateful for the people/ideas they are currently criticizing. This is a very important point. 3/
Read 11 tweets
Feb 14
I just realized that my evangelical Twitter Map can help distinguish actual in-group criticism from out-group criticism masquerading as in-group criticism.

For example, if I said "POC like myself need to recognize the dangers of 'wokeness'!!!" 1/
shenviapologetics.files.wordpress.com/2022/02/map5fi…
that might be valid criticism, but it would not be in-group criticism. Why? Because my Twitter in-group is not "POC" but "anti-woke people."

In the same way, when Robert Jones says "White evangelicals like myself need to recognize our racism" that might be valid criticism 2/
but it is not in-group criticism because his Twitter in-group is not "white evangelicals" but progressives and antiracists.

In both cases, we wouldn't be running the risk of alienating our base. Rather, we'd be guaranteed dozens of likes and retweets. 3/
Read 4 tweets
Jan 15
LONG-AWAITED EVANGELICAL TWITTER MAP #3. Accounts are grouped by the algorithm into various clusters/subclusters by the number of shared followers alone.

Needless to say THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF SHARED IDEOLOGYENNEAGRAM SCORE/FAVORITE DISNEY PRINCESS 1/
This version can be read as a kind of "relief map." The "peaks" are regions with darker background that indicate a higher percentage of shared followers. As you move "down" the contours, larger and larger clusters generally have smaller shared follower overlap. 2/
While clusters and subclusters indicate a larger % of shared followers than we'd expect from chance alone, note that all of these accounts would be in the SAME cluster ***relative to a random Twitter user*** because all of them are (broadly) evangelical accounts! 3/
Read 10 tweets
Jan 15
what what? The data scaping is done already?!?!?!?!

The clusters are being calculated as we speak:
ARGH THE SUSPENSE
Posting here, so I don't forget:
christiantoday.com/article/how-mi…
Read 7 tweets
Jan 14
HERE WE GO. Evangelical Twitter Map #2. Green lines indicate more mutual followers than expected. Red lines indicate fewer mutual followers than expected.

Some surprises, but overall it looks right. Key below if you don't recognize the pic. What accounts do you want added?
Cluster 1: Thomas Kidd, Brett McCracken, Derek Rishmawy, James KA Smith, Alistair Roberts, Jake Meador

Cluster 2: Melissa Kruger, Trevin Wax, Brian Tabb, Michael Kruger, Denny Burk, Jordan Copper, Joe Rigney, Andy Naselli, G. Ortlund, D. Ortlund, Jonathan Leeman, NightLightOasis
Cluster 3: Kristin Du Mez, Andrew Whitehead, Rich Villodas, Samuel Perry, Beth Allison Barr, Sarah Bessey

Cluster 4: K.S. Prior, Leah B Sassy, Bradly Mason, Aimee Byrd, Michael Bird, Ben Marsh, Hunter Crowder, Dwight McKissic
Read 4 tweets
Dec 2, 2021
David Gushee was the first to frame the work of Du Mez, Barr, Tisby, Butler, Jones, Whitehead, and Perry as an evangelical "deconstruction project."

Here's a thread of my detailed reviews of their individual books.
1/
Jesus and John Wayne: Du Mez offers "A Needed Critique" but "no exegesis of key biblical passages about gender, power, or authority. Indeed, the book offers little if any theological reflection at all on these issues." 2/
shenviapologetics.com/cowboy-christi…
Barr's Making of Biblical Womanhood: we should "ask whether our vision of female participation in the mission of the church has been shaped more by culture than by Scripture" but her "reasoning amounts to a heads-I-win-tails-you-lose argument." 3/
shenviapologetics.com/unmaking-the-p…
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(