To date, Colleen Ballinger's legal team has only spoken up twice: About the "black face" video and denying the copyright claims being made regarding her non-apology song. The not-black face featured in the Vanity Fair "article" that was actually a smear campaign against a now 20 year old Adam McIntyre. From this old lady's perspective, Adam & the rest of the kids are acting far more mature than Ballinger and her ilk (including the so-called journalist of the aforementioned article).
There is a sort of false equivilancy going on here, using minor discrepancies to cast doubt on the larger issue(s). When common misconceptions regarding things like grooming are thrown into the mix, waters are further muddied. Which I believe is precisely the point. It seems to be a common tactic used by those who wish to avoid accountability (and those that assist them) in order to both diffuse and defuse the situation. The hope, I belive is, that any allegations will eventually dwindle into nothing.
Diffuse verb meaning "to spread out" or an adjective meaning "not concentrated."
Defuse verb meaning "to make less dangerous or tense."
Andy Signore, accused of sexual misconduct back in 2017 managed to dig up old messages between him and one of the 9 accusers, April, that had the most henious allegations. These allegedly prove that they'd had a consensual affair at one point. He somehow managed to convince people that this means he couldn't have possibly committed a felony. You know, because it was "consensual" at one time. As though people in a relationship can't be raped. As though consent cannot be removed at any time for any reason.
The problem was that April left the affair part out of her story when she filed her grievences. For me, it doesn't matter, due to the fallacy that those who've willingly engaged in certain acts cannot later be forced to engage in the same. He dismissed the other 8 as "awkward flirting." My husband "awkwardly flirts" with me and the two are not even remotely the same. Read any of their stories on Nick Monroe's blog and let me know what you think.
These more recent allegations illustrate that Andy hasn't changed in the least. He's good at deflecting these new claims and deriding the victims dismissing them as home-wrecking, psychotic, clout-chasing, mean girls. He's conflated this situation with the previous one in a rather masterful act of distraction.
I'd like to take a moment to discuss Brittany and Jade, two of his victims from 2021/2022. Both speak publicly on both their Twitters ... er X's... and on their YouTube channels about how they were blamed, shamed and bullied into silence. Brittany wonders, "So I guess the question is - did I really ever give consent or was I coerced by using his power dynamics. This was not a consensual relationship." Which, to me, illustrates that Andy has no clue or care about what "consent" actually means.
Let's talk about "grooming" for a minute. From Grooming: an expert explains what it is and how to identify it
Different forms of grooming
Grooming can be sexual, romantic, financial or for criminal or terrorism purposes, and can target both children and adults. The common aspect is that a perpetrator manipulates a victim by building trust and rapport. The key to grooming is a power dynamic within the relationship: age, gender, physical strength, economic status or another factor.
Technology has allowed groomers to identify and target victims in new ways. Predators use threatening models of coercion and grooming in which they manipulate their victims (children or adults) to send naked images.
Sexual predators may now use dating and social media apps to facilitate their conversations with victims. This has led to personal disclosures, sexualised conversations and sometimes image exchanges. This mirrors the process highlighted in early investigations, where seemingly normal interactions are manipulated by groomers.
Romance fraud such as “catfishing” is also a form of grooming. Predators may form (false) relationships with their victims to scam them out of money, using social media to establish whether victims have support networks around them that may challenge their behaviour.
Let's dissect this a bit: Grooming can be romantic/sexual or financial. While Andy uses it for both reasons, I think, for Colleen, it was more of the later. Free labor, anyone? Victims were definitely manipulated and, as Britt said, were subject to a power imbalance via the social capital garnered by big YouTubers (and far more, in Colleen's case). The ability to direct/private message allows for coercion and grooming of victims via said manipulation.
Both Andy & Colleen have a history of blurring boundaries. We can always hope they will one day learn to take accountability for their actions. Or, sadly, perhaps Colleen will just learn how hide it better like Andy did.