Woke watch.

[Max B Gold]

.Back on the block list for you, I think.

On no!! Not the dreaded J K CEBling block list.

Abuse reported.

[CEB]

“Look, we only had a paedophile rights activist who had openly advocated that it should be normalised to suggest that children can’t be assumed to not be able to consent to sex on the board of trustees of a children’s charity which secretly and discreetly advocates puberty blockers for gender non conforming children for two months! What’s two months? We made sure he had no contact with children though, cos I guess we recognised that that might not be a good idea”

Oooofff. Even some trans activist organisations like Pink News now distancing themselves from Mermaids(even though the same guy was a staff writer for them…)

But I guess JK Rowling must be a bigot, I mean SOMETHING she said must justify all the rape threats she’s had from trans activists…

[Max B Gold]

Mermaids having a major problem with a trustee and Rowling tweeting about it doesn't mean she isn't a bigot. HTH.

[Max Fowler]

These Paedophile Aid groups - which until now I had no idea about - are helping paedos sort their problem, I presume?

So aren’t they a good thing?

[CEB]

Supporting paedophiles to get help is a good thing (though would still be incompatible with being a trustee of a childrens charity)

You might want to look into what this guy actually advocates though, cos he aint “find yourself fancying kids? Pop to the gp”; he’s “normalise the idea that traditional notions around childrens capacity for consent are outmoded”, so yes - he’s a nonce apologist, not an advocate for nonces to get help to not nonce.

[Dunners]

These Paedophile Aid groups - which until now I had no idea about - are helping paedos sort their problem, I presume?

So aren’t they a good thing?

No. You're dealing with some inherently manipulate people here. They are predators. And not the cool 80s movie/central American jungle kind.

A section of m firm does community rehabilitation work, and unfortunately this is a type of offender that, from experience, can never be trusted or assumed to be acting in good faith. Never presume good intentions.

[CEB]

Dunners is right.

I’ve seen Brass Eye. This isn’t that. This is what happens when an organisation that supports vulnerable children regards scrutiny as hatred. The whole reason I care about this (and am happy to risk coming over as nuts about it) is cos I know what safeguarding is

[CEB]

It’s important to me that I clarify when I’m wrong, and it turns out that on this, I was wrong. Mermaids didn’t appoint a paedophile apologist to be a trustee, and I’m happy to retract.


They actually appointed a paedophile.
His words:

[Max Fowler]

Blimey.

[Max Fowler]

These Paedophile Aid groups - which until now I had no idea about - are helping paedos sort their problem, I presume?

So aren’t they a good thing?

No. You're dealing with some inherently manipulate people here. They are predators. And not the cool 80s movie/central American jungle kind.

A section of m firm does community rehabilitation work, and unfortunately this is a type of offender that, from experience, can never be trusted or assumed to be acting in good faith. Never presume good intentions.

So what should a nonce do?

[Long slender neck]

LGBTP?

[CEB]

LGBTP?

That’s literally what he advocates (and is part of why the “+” is a controversial addition to the letters, among many gay and lesbian people who are not happy about which groups might include themselves under that)

[Max Fowler]

LGBTP?

LGBTMAP, please.

[Long slender neck]

It’s important to me that I clarify when I’m wrong, and it turns out that on this, I was wrong. Mermaids didn’t appoint a paedophile apologist to be a trustee, and I’m happy to retract.


They actually appointed a paedophile.
His words:

Where is that from?

[CEB]

From his own blog.

Thread with some disturbing highlights here

[Dunners]

From his own blog.

Thread with some disturbing highlights here

I'm not opposed to the idea of trying to understand paedophilia better so to minimise risk and prevent harm. I tried reading a few pages of that blog, but soon recognised certain red flags of a manipulator trying to normalise something which most people would find abhorrent.

Take this quote as an example:

"I find the immediate connection between the sexual desire for youth and its pathologization, internalization and criminalisation to be problematic."

First, it's quite clear from his writing that when he euphemistically refers to "desire for youth", what he really means is "minor attracted persons" or, as they are commonly known, paedophiles. Both of these are being deployed as euphemisms to normalise and destigmatise something.

He then is trying to assert that the real problem isn't so much with having a desire to want to shag children, but the fact that society has adopted a default hostile reaction to this as what is wrong.

And the use of the word "problematic" has become a dog whistle for the identarian obsessed, wet-liberal left. He knows his audience.

[CEB]

Yep.

The whole thing has been wrongly framed as culture war stuff

[Max Fowler]

From his own blog.

Thread with some disturbing highlights here

I'm not opposed to the idea of trying to understand paedophilia better so to minimise risk and prevent harm. I tried reading a few pages of that blog, but soon recognised certain red flags of a manipulator trying to normalise something which most people would find abhorrent.

Take this quote as an example:

"I find the immediate connection between the sexual desire for youth and its pathologization, internalization and criminalisation to be problematic."

First, it's quite clear from his writing that when he euphemistically refers to "desire for youth", what he really means is "minor attracted persons" or, as they are commonly known, paedophiles. Both of these are being deployed as euphemisms to normalise and destigmatise something.

He then is trying to assert that the real problem isn't so much with having a desire to want to shag children, but the fact that society has adopted a default hostile reaction to this as what is wrong.

And the use of the word "problematic" has become a dog whistle for the identarian obsessed, wet-liberal left. He knows his audience.

I think you should have read a few more - no need for euphemisms or spotting red flags, his views are made perfectly clear in some of those. 'Intergenerational sexual activity' is ok in his book.

[CEB]

I can’t stress enough that this is exactly why I’m “obsessed” with this. And I 100% completely get that it has probably sounded mad. I’m the first to scrutinise and rip the piss out of anyone buying into mad theories. My opinions on this are what I was left with after trying, and failing, to put “transphobes” right on points on which they’re unsure.
There’s a reason that I went from actively and casually arguing on this board that yes, Kellie Maloney is a woman and bigots should shut up, to being (as I’ll admit) focused on this issue. And it’s because the critics of trans activism are right.
There’s a reason I’m so angry with people like Brendan on this - the casual dismissal people like him used when people raised concerns made it hard to talk openly; my “obsession” on this is that I made sure I understood what I was talking about, and once you’re aware of the extent of this scandal, once you understand the reality behind the euphemisms, you’re equivalent to someone knowing the Savile scandal in advance, wondering why it’s not taken seriously - and wondering why people you admired would not even bring themselves to watch a BBC news report because they didn’t want to know.

Since I’ve talked about this here, The Tavistock has been ordered to close after the interim findings of the Cass report and Mermaids has been found to have hired a nonce as a trustee. I can be flippant and strident but overall, my background is in working with vulnerable kids and I’d rather have been wrong on this. But I wasn’t

[Dunners]

[CEB]

Imagine dismissing out of hand the idea that this is misogyny

[StillSpike]

Imagine dismissing out of hand the idea that this is misogyny

It certainly seems very wrong. At the risk of displaying my own ignorance - please can you explain (to an oldish and not terribly with it) person, how this is misogyny.

[Max Fowler]

I’ve only seen this on my small phone so couldn’t make out the full details but was this a fully naked person with boobs and a penis?

[CEB]

Imagine dismissing out of hand the idea that this is misogyny

It certainly seems very wrong. At the risk of displaying my own ignorance - please can you explain (to an oldish and not terribly with it) person, how this is misogyny.

Because he claims to be a woman. Literally a woman. And is part of an activism that demonises women who recognise that he is male

[CEB]

And yes, it’s a man with a penis. Though he claims to be a woman. He certainly seems to be experiencing distress at the mismatch between his sex and his gender identity, right?