I mean, a drag performer is a co-author!
Yes, I know, which is why it is telling. It was co-authored by a prominent drag performer that is behind the Drag Queen Story Hour and outlines what the goals are. When you understand how grooming works, it is clear that the goals line up well with the initial steps of grooming. Do you not think that an article that says one thing cannot also show something else unintentionally?
The article does not support the 'grooming' conclusion you're drawing.
Tell me, what do you think grooming is? It isn't some quick process where you take a child, show them porn, and go "let's do that!" It is a slow process where you guide them step by step, normalizing each step along the way, until they end up doing sexual things.
Hell, many people that were groomed into being porn stars first step in the process was ordinary modeling.
Early stages of grooming can seem very innocuous, but they serve a clear purpose in priming them for each next step.
You're saying a particular group of individuals is guilty of priming kids for sexual contact while also admitting your have no evidence to support that
That is not what I said at all.
The article I linked clearly shows that part of the intention is grooming (though it does not use that word and the authors likely have some cognitive dissonance in that regard). Saying "they aren't being convicted" is not saying "there is no evidence", as anyone that has studied the porn industry could tell you. Looking at what is happening with child drag performers, the normalization of such things, etc. is also an important point that you have seemingly refused to address.