Gays Against Groomers

Gays Against Groomers was founded and is led by **Jaimee Michell**, a former far-right social media operative who is the public face, spokesperson, and director; she founded the group in June 2022 and represents it on Fox News, OAN, and Tucker Carlson. SPLC lists her as president/director of marketing with a documented personal history of QAnon and election conspiracy promotion. The organization is closely identified with her individually.[2][1][6][5] The available reporting also shows that the group originated as a Twitter account created by Michell before it became a formal nonprofit, which reinforces the organization’s reliance on a single, recognizable founder for identity and messaging.[1][2] Advocate reported that Michell and her partners were former ultra-MAGA Trump followers who spread anti-transgender propaganda with QAnon conspiracy theories and links to extremist militias, while other coverage notes that she has been a frequent guest on Fox News and Tucker Carlson’s show and has been promoted by One America News and Infowars.[5][6] The SPLC account further states that Gays Against Groomers Inc. was incorporated in Wisconsin in September 2022 and received tax-exempt status in March 2023, but that leadership has experienced turnover, indicating that the group’s public continuity still centers on Michell even as some internal roles change.[2] In short, the group’s external profile, founding history, and media strategy are all tightly tied to one founder rather than diffused across a broad institutional structure.[1][2][5][6]

The group treats as a foundational axiom that “heteronormativity is an immutable truth” and that gender-affirming care and LGBTQ visibility are inherently child “grooming” or sexualization. These claims are presented as self-evident truths rather than debatable positions, and dissent is framed as betrayal. This shared premise functions as a non-negotiable sacred assumption uniting members.[2] The SPLC describes the group as operating on the premise that people who support LGBTQ+ inclusion in public schools or in public settings are “groomers,” and it notes that the group links opposition to inclusive education with fear about children.[2][7] Newer coverage likewise describes Gays Against Groomers as an organization campaigning against gender-affirming care for minors and school curriculum content with LGBTQ themes, indicating that its worldview depends on a fixed moral story in which LGBTQ-related education and care are presumptively harmful.[1][3] The organization’s own materials reinforce this certainty: its site says it is a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization to “protect children,” and the group’s social media framing presents its mission as defense against “sexualization, indoctrination, and medicalization” of minors.[3][5] Taken together, the record shows not merely policy disagreement but a hardened worldview in which the group’s defining claims are treated as axiomatic and identity-confirming.[2][3][5][1]

The group frames its work as an existential mission to “protect children” from sexualization and “indoctrination,” equating gender-affirming care with Nazi eugenics and an existential threat to childhood innocence.[2][1][3] Its own website describes Gays Against Groomers as a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization to “protect children,” and other reporting says Michell said she cofounded the group to combat the “sexualization, indoctrination, and medicalization” of children.[3][5][6] SPLC reports that the group characterizes people and institutions as “groomers” because they support gender-affirming care or provide LGBTQ+ spaces, and that this anti-inclusive education ideology is tied to fear on behalf of white children.[2] The organization has also been described as using the slur “groomer” with ambiguous messaging to perpetuate the LGBTQ grooming conspiracy theory, and GAG has helped organize campaigns against drag story hours and school curriculum content with LGBTQ themes.[1][7] Those features give the group a transcendent child-protection narrative: the issue is not presented as one policy dispute among many, but as a civilizational struggle for children’s safety and moral survival.[2][3][1] That framing is visible in the group’s public branding and in the repeated stress on minors, innocence, and protection as the organizing purpose of the movement.[3][5][6]

Gays Against Groomers’ public messaging repeatedly subordinates individual identity to collective campaigning. SPLC says the group has used its national and chapter-led social media accounts to attack trans people and to engage in harassment and intimidation campaigns against individual teachers, doctors, and politicians.[2] That pattern does not merely target ideas; it turns the organization’s members and affiliates into a coordinated apparatus for naming, shaming, and mobilizing against specific people.[2] The group’s own sloganized messaging also compresses identity into movement participation: it describes itself as “a coalition of gays against the sexualization, indoctrination and medicalization of minors under the guise of ‘LGBTQIA+’,” a formulation that centers adherence to a collective cause rather than distinct member experiences.[5] Academic coverage of the group describes its “homonormative cooptation” of identity politics and argues that it virtually erases child molestation from anti-“grooming” speech while recasting transgender people and progressive gender politics as threats, which suggests that individual nuance is overwritten by group narrative.[6] Wikipedia and watchdog coverage likewise note that the group uses “groomer” rhetoric with ambiguous messaging and that it claims legitimacy on the basis of being a coalition of gay people, even while spreading anti-LGBTQ propaganda.[1][4] The result is a strong pattern of disciplined identity flattening: members are not foregrounded as distinct individuals but as interchangeable voices for a tightly managed public campaign.[2][5][6][1]

The available evidence does not show physical seclusion or a closed commune, but it does show forms of social and informational insulation. The group’s website describes it as “a coalition of gays against the sexualization, indoctrination and medicalization of minors under the guise of ‘LGBTQIA+’,” which sets a strong boundary between insiders and outsiders by defining membership around opposition to a named ideological enemy.[5] SPLC says the group characterizes supportive institutions as “groomers” because they back gender-affirming care or provide LGBTQ+ spaces, which means ordinary schools, doctors, and advocacy settings are reframed as hostile terrain rather than neutral civic institutions.[2] Wikipedia and watchdog reporting indicate that GAG is not an ordinary grassroots association but a coordinated social-media-driven organization, launched as a Twitter account and amplified through a network of right-wing media appearances and chapter accounts.[1][6][7] That structure can reduce exposure to outside perspectives because participation is organized around a narrow, repetitive message environment rather than a broad deliberative membership culture.[1][2][7] However, the record also shows public-facing advocacy, legislative testimony, and media appearances, so the isolation is best understood as discursive and networked rather than total social separation.[3][5][6][1]

GAG built a distinctive in-group vocabulary centered on “groomer”/“grooming” applied to LGBTQ people and gender-affirming care, plus coded evasions like “gr__mer” when platforms restricted the term.[2][1] It uses conspiracy lexicon such as “deep state,” “alphabet movement,” and “alphabet extremists.” These terms mark insiders and reframe mainstream concepts in the group's worldview.[2][1] GLAAD and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue describe “groomer” as a slur that attempts to link LGBTQ+ people to pedophilia and to block LGBTQ rights from being enshrined in law or taught in schools, which helps explain why the term functions as an ideological password inside the group’s messaging ecosystem.[3][4] SPLC further notes that the group operates on the premise that people who are visible in public and support LGBTQ+ inclusion are “groomers” of children, illustrating how the vocabulary turns ordinary civic participation into moral threat language.[2] Academic analysis likewise says activists have transformed “groomer” into an anti-LGBTQ slur.[5] The language is therefore not merely descriptive; it is a specialized lexicon that encodes the group’s worldview and distinguishes adherents from outsiders.[2][1][3][4]

The group uses explicit us-versus-them framing, declaring “You're either with us or against us. This ends now,” and pitting “regular gay people” against “alphabet extremists” and “trans activists” depicted as societal threats.[2][1] Members have called trans people a “parasitic cult” and compared them to the Taliban, reinforcing a binary enemy model in which disagreement is treated as allegiance to the opposing camp.[2][1] In response to criticism, GAG has also claimed that because it is a “coalition of gay people,” it cannot be anti-LGBTQ, a defensive move that still depends on separating legitimate insiders from illegitimate outsiders within the broader LGBTQ label.[1] SPLC says the group connects its anti-inclusive education ideology to racialized fear on behalf of white children, which extends the same inside/outside logic to social and cultural boundaries.[2] Reporting from Them and Advocate describes the organization as rapidly rising among right-wing audiences through anti-trans propaganda and QAnon-linked narratives, further indicating that its public identity is built around confrontation with a defined enemy class rather than broad coalition-building.[4][5] The documented messaging is therefore persistently antagonistic and polarizing, with group identity formed in opposition to a demonized outgroup.[2][1][4][5]

The record does not show a conventional labor-exploitation scheme, but it does document a pattern in which labor, outreach, and content production are heavily centralized in a small leadership circle while the organization solicits support from a broader public base. SPLC reports that the group uses its national and chapter-led social media accounts to conduct harassment and intimidation campaigns, which implies recurring promotional and moderation work carried out through a centralized content apparatus rather than a broad democratic membership structure.[2] ProPublica lists Jaimee Michell as president with no salary reported in the nonprofit filing record, showing that the organization exists as a formal entity with named officers rather than as an informal volunteer cluster.[15] Advocate reported that Gays Against Groomers sells merchandise and accepts donations online in support of its divisive rhetoric, indicating that audience attention and volunteer energy are being converted into organizational support and public amplification.[5] Wikipedia’s summary that the group began as a Twitter account and later grew into a 501(c)4 suggests a model in which digital engagement and unpaid online labor are folded into the organization’s growth strategy.[1][5] On the current record, however, there is not enough evidence to document coercive labor practices, unpaid internal labor demands, or systematic exploitation of members as workers in the classic sense.[2][15][5][1]

The available evidence shows meaningful exit friction through public backlash, account loss, and internal instability. Wikipedia reports that as of April 2023 the social media accounts for Trans Against Groomers were no longer active and their website was gone, and that in July 2023 more than 22 GAG members quit the organization.[1] Advocate likewise reported that the group was “imploding” as dozens of leaders abruptly quit, suggesting that departure was both visible and organizationally disruptive rather than routine.[5][11] External platform sanctions also matter: SPLC says GAG’s X account was suspended in July and August 2022 for using “groomer” to refer to LGBTQ+ people, and GLAAD reported that as of October 2023 Google, Google Pay, PayPal, Venmo, Printful, and Wix.com had suspended or cut ties with the group for policy violations.[2][14] Those actions can increase the cost of exit because former members or affiliates may lose visibility, infrastructure, or monetization channels if they disassociate after public commitment.[2][14] At the same time, the record shows that some people did leave, so the exit barrier is not absolute; the evidence supports friction, reputational cost, and organizational pressure rather than formal confinement.[1][5][2][14]

The group has escalated to documented harassment and incitement: SPLC reports statements such as “jail is far too kind” and calls for “burning this cult to the ground” regarding trans people and care providers, along with doxxing of doctors, teachers, and politicians and vandalism/trespassing by members at a New York City Council office.[2] Michell also called the Colorado Springs nightclub shooting “expected and predictable,” which an activist characterized as a “crystal clear threat,” and false accusation campaigns triggered death and bomb threats.[2] In addition, SPLC reports that the group’s X account was suspended in July and August 2022 for using “groomer” to refer to LGBTQ+ people, and GLAAD later documented suspensions or cutoffs from Google, Google Pay, PayPal, Venmo, Printful, and Wix.com for policy violations.[2][14] This pattern shows a willingness to use extreme rhetoric, public accusation, and pressure tactics even when they produce downstream harm or platform sanctions.[2][14] The available record also ties the group’s public message to QAnon-linked conspiracy narratives and anti-trans propaganda, reinforcing the inference that escalating means are defended as necessary in service of its child-protection mission.[5][2][1] This is a documented pattern of instrumentalizing fear and confrontation as part of the organization’s activism, rather than a single isolated incident.[2][14][5]