As a quick summary, the Rolling Stone piece features several former fans, most of whom were very young when they got involved with her, who claim that they were exploited in various ways and/or exposed to sexual inappropriate discussions. Specific examples of the exploitation are along the lines of doing work, be it performances, administrative work, or promotion, without compensation. The sexual inappropriateness I would describe as a fairly typical group chat among 20-somethings who didn’t take into consideration that there were teens and tweens in the chat, or who didn’t consider the relatively immaturity of those teens and tweens.
There’s also an allegation that Ballinger’s brother made sexually inappropriate remarks to a 13 year old. I want to set this incident aside because it is 1) obviously very, very wrong and 2) not on the same level as the bulk of the allegations.
Anyway, if you’re more familiar with the story than I am and it sounds like I’m downplaying the seriousness of the allegations, then I hope that helps you understand the thread title. I read through the Rolling Stone article expecting some kind of bombshell that never dropped. Yes, it doesn’t sound like this was a particularly healthy environment for teenagers to get swept up into. But in terms of toxicity, I don’t feel that it even approaches, say, an Ellen, let alone a Weinstein. The entertainment industry has always been inherently exploitive, given the nature of fame and the importance of connections. And with the democratization of entertainment on YouTube and social media, I think we’re seeing the democratization of Hollywood-style exploitation.
I guess the topic for discussion here is, aside from the example I set aside, is there really any story here? Am I just jaded by the heaps of much, much worse exploitation I’ve read about in various entertainment industries over the decades?
I saw a few articles about this last week and they were all “Miranda Sing was grooming kids!” but nothing in the articles really seemed to support that. How she acted with them was inappropriate but I’d think that “grooming” has an actual end purpose, usually sex but maybe exploiting them for money or something and nothing suggested that was the case. It felt more like the actions of an emotionally stunted adult who thinks they connect better with younger people and relies on them for praise or support than someone actively working to maliciously exploit them.
This doesn’t excuse in inappropriateness of her actions – she’s still the adult and liable. I just think that calling it “grooming” was a bit sensationalistic. For what it’s worth, I was only tangentially aware she existed prior to all this and have no reason to defend her based on who she is/does.
I agree with all of the above. “Grooming” has become a catch all for many levels of inappropriate behavior. I saw nothing to indicate she was grooming anyone for anything. She’s a comic who’s videos found an audience with a younger crowd but she is not a children’s act. I guess she said things in group chats that weren’t age appropriate to all ages but I didn’t understand where the grooming charges came from. The whole thing confused me so I stopped trying to figure it out.
I had no idea who she was until Seinfeld did an episode of Comedians in Cars with her. With the character. He seemed very amused by her but I hated it. I would have been much happier if he did the episode with Colleen not Miranda. I’m not a fan of a character that is supposed to be funny because they are annoying.
An almost 30 year old has a group chat with a bunch of teens and pre-teens, in which she talks about sex and relationships and asks them for pictures of their butts?
I think that I can see where the idea that there was grooming going on came from.
Nitpick because this is a peeve of mine – she asked 1 teen for 1 picture of their butt; neither of those things should be plural. And in context, this didn’t seem sexual to me. I’m struggling to follow all of the people involved in this but I believe the target of that comment is gay and the comment was more akin to something a woman may say to her girlfriends.
The age difference, of course, still makes that comment inappropriate at worst, and super awkward/cringey at best. But I think your post here is a textbook example of how this would require some spin to look like grooming. There’s nothing here to indicate any sexual intent*. Just a complete lack of maturity from supposed adults.
*Again, the creepy brother trying to fuck a 13 year old is the exception.
29 year old adult, 14 year old kid. Online chat about sex and relationships, flirtatious teasing. If you would like to defend her, that’s fine, I didn’t accuse her of anything. But it is very obvious why other people are.
I suppose I’ll be the one to point out that this level of confusion doesn’t usually exist when it’s a 29 year old man and a 14 year old girl.
Apparently Seinfeld’s daughter really liked Miranda Sings and that is how she ended up on Comedians in Cars. I think it was one of the worst and most awkward episodes.
I don’t think anyone is seriously “defending” her so much as thinking that the “grooming” angle is more for clickbait than realism.
If I know a teen and act the perfect gentleman as I support them and assist them and help them achieve some goal and MY goal is to wait until they’re thankful and emotionally suggestive so I can prey on them, I’m grooming
If I’m sadly trying to connect with a teen through sexual humor, talking about their dating partners, oversharing from my life, etc in an attempt to get validation through fourteen year olds thinking I’m cool then it’s 100% inappropriate but it’s not grooming.
What she did was inappropriate; no need to defend it. I don’t think that calling it “grooming” is accurate based on the articles. She doesn’t seem to have been trying to set them up for a rendezvous in her tour bus, but she was interacting with them very poorly.
Thank you for stating that better than I could have. Sensationalizing the allegations also doesn’t help. As we see, her rebuttal was a video where she denies being a “groomer” specifically, calling out that characterization as absurd while sidestepping the actual accusations.
There’s no need to play into her defense by condoning the sensationalism.
That’s the impression I got from the article. I’d never heard of Miranda/Colleen before. She seems like an immature person who failed to learn boundaries.
OK. We disagree about whether pointing out that we only know of one time she asked for pictures of a teenaged boy’s butt, that it didn’t seem sexual in context, and that it was “inappropriate at worst” is a defense of those behaviors.
It seems very obvious to me that the reason people are using the word “groomer” to describe her is that she seems to have done a lot of things groomers do. The reason grooming is called grooming and not, say, sexual abuse, is that it is not sexual abuse in and of itself; it’s behavior that prepares a person to be sexually abused without a dramatic shift in the relationship. Sexualizing conversations with children is what groomers do. It is what this lady apparently did. If you’d like to take the position that the right word for that is inappropriate, that’s quite all right with me.
The proper use of the word grooming is if there is an intent to groom them for something. It’s equal to calling someone a pedophile. They are grooming someone who is underage in order to later sexually assault them. It’s a serious accusation that should have proof behind it. Why it’s important to use the term properly is because right wing assholes like to use groomer to describe gay and trans people with no other proof other than they are gay or trans. I prefer to distance myself from them as much as possible.
So don’t call it grooming! Save it for proper occasions.
I didn’t start a thread and tell you all you had to call this lady I never heard of a groomer. I responded to people saying they couldn’t possibly understand why anybody called her a groomer, to help them understand that the reason people called her a groomer appears to be that she did the things groomers do.
In case anyone has forgotten, those things are:
Ballenger would send sexually suggestive messages, according to screenshots provided by McIntyre and reviewed by Rolling Stone , asking questions like, “Are you a virgin?” and, “What’s your fav position?” Once, in response to a message from McIntyre that read “my ass looks so good today,” Ballinger responded “pics Adam.”
Dance?! How could I possibly be any clearer. Literally all of the information I have ever received about this person is from the article in the OP. I’m explaining to you the things in the article that are leading to people calling her a groomer. I have no additional information about her activities.
You don’t need to explain the things in the article. I posted the article, I clearly read it. I don’t think the behavior described is groomer behavior. It is not “the things that groomers do,” or at least not the things that make groomers groomers.
Some people disagree; they think those those behaviors are groomer behaviors. I know that already. I think those people are wrong. You’re not really trying to explain why I’m wrong and they’re right, you’re just restating the premise, that they think those things described are groomer behaviors.
