Originally Posted by
ClassicalComics
There are different kinds of grooming. The one people automatically think of is an adult shaping an underage person to be a future sexual partner. But the original meaning of the term was larger. Meaning, it could apply to teachers and media shaping a child's sexual values. And even in topics that aren't sexual in nature, can constitute grooming via indoctrination. Or grooming someone to be be in a role, which can be harmless if you're speaking about an employ groomed to be CEO. But, the phrase has many uses. I mean, in the final season of Clone Wars, Maul mentions that Anakin Skywalker has been groomed to be the new apprentice of Palpatine. So, I wouldn't say that the term is misused en masse. Rather, people are discussing grooming into sexual mores and the reaction to said labelling is acting as if it's grooming a future sexual partner.
But onto this specific circumstance. It is clear that the parents were very irresponsible with their daughter. They are activists and let her become an activist at age 9. They let her hang with famous people who travelled to Standing Rock to protest and let her go overseas with them. Which isn't to say that their claims are not credible. I would say that regardless of how it happened, they are more likely to be credible. Given the actor's history and the fact that he and the family are very much in the same boat with regard to politics. And her Instagram response is hardly proof that their charges are untrue. Moreover, it's proof that some guiding force turned her against her parents. Put that together with the apparent fact that he's on the run. We shall see what happens.