Off-Topic Critical Discussion of Trannies and Pedophilia -

John southern

kiwifarms.net
My research concurs. It does seem that pressure from rad fems and lesbians helped kick out PIE and Nambla. They just move on and change their names. The Trudeau Foundation has the triangular boylover symbol.

In Canada it was the normal folks that forced it. Back then nobody except the LGBT community knew what the fuck the letters in NAMBLA meant,
So long as the public didn't know, they were happy to have them at their events.

There was no Twitter, no Facebook, no smartphones to film and the Internet wasn't a thing. You relied on the media for information and they weren't saying shit
until the 89'/90'.

All the video and photo evidence is now sitting on rotting tapes in drawers or on Microfiche stuffed in boxes in the basement of newspapers, likely to never see the light of day.
 

John southern

kiwifarms.net
They did have cameras though, right?
Sure but Camcorders were still a big and expensive luxury item back then and there was no internet in the home, just dial-up text based Bulletin board systems (BBS). Downloading a single picture could take hours. Computers weren't a common thing in the home either. A PC was $4000 in today's dollars..

The media didn't know, or choose not to report what NAMBLA was.
 

Norman B. Normal

I probably shouldn't be here.
kiwifarms.net
Sure but Camcorders were still a big and expensive luxury item back then and there was no internet in the home, just dial-up text based Bulletin board systems (BBS). Downloading a single picture could take hours. Computers weren't a common thing in the home either. A PC was $4000 in today's dollars..
Okay, but they did have actual cameras with film with which you could take single pictures, right? I definitely remember having one of thems in the 80s.

The media didn't know, or choose not to report what NAMBLA was.
Well, I knew who NAMBLA was in the 80s, and if you claim to remember seeing them openly marching in a pride parade, then so did you, obviously. And I think that would have been worth squeezing off a frame or two on the ol' Instamatic, wouldn't you agree?

(To be clear, NAMBLA did attempt to make inroads into the gay liberation movement, but I've always heard that those efforts had been snuffed out by the mid-70s.)
 

Gustav Schuchardt

Trans exclusionary radical feminazi.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Sure but Camcorders were still a big and expensive luxury item back then and there was no internet in the home, just dial-up text based Bulletin board systems (BBS). Downloading a single picture could take hours. Computers weren't a common thing in the home either. A PC was $4000 in today's dollars..

The media didn't know, or choose not to report what NAMBLA was.
Carroll's Paedophile Information Exchange was affiliated with the National Council for Civil Liberties in the 70's and Patricia Hewitt, future Labour Secretary of State for health, shared a platform with Carroll.


To members of PIE the group was place for men to share their sexual feelings for children with fellow members. To mothers who pelted its activists with rotten fruit at a public meeting, PIE was a menace to children. To a young Patricia Hewitt, PIE was "campaigning/counselling group for adults" which a disgusted public had "misunderstood."

Miss Hewitt shared a platform with PIE founder O’Carroll at a gay rights conference organised by the NCCL. The former Labour minister appeared with him at the one-day event entitled ‘A Fairer Deal for Homosexuals’ and organised by the council’s Gay Rights Committee. A cutting from the left-wing Morning Star, said Miss Hewitt ‘spoke of the council’s work on gay rights over the past two years’.
The Guardian defended Harman and Hewitt's refusal to apologise in 2014


If you had a great-aunt who was a suffragette, probably she once took tea with a eugenicist. If you ever went on a CND march, then doubtless you fraternised with people who want to blow up the royal family. It is extremely easy to taint anybody with anything, so long as you set your bar of what's reasonable and proportionate low enough – as McCarthy found in America, as the German right found when it tried to paint the Green party as a gathering of paedophiles. (To halt anthropogenic climate change? Good plan!)

The only way you could escape censure would be to have never had any political views about anything, and to have sprung, fully formed, into your opinionless existence without the hindrance of parents or other antecedents. This campaign against Harman is nasty, ominous, calculating, anti-intellectual and could happen to anyone. The Daily Mail is like a blackmailer – if you give in to it, it just wants more.

No, she should not have apologised. But there were many things she should have said. In the scramble not to defend the PIE, nobody dares even set it in context; nobody will even discuss what the point was. It should be possible to say "those were different times" without that equating to "paedophilia is a temporally relativistic crime, and was OK in the 70s". The PIE was in favour of lowering the age of consent to 10. This, we are now all in accord, is far too young. But age of consent was a huge topic for debate at that time, for a number of reasons. Homosexuals had to be five years older than heterosexuals before they were considered mature enough to consent. That, to our eyes, looks pretty homophobic. Victoria Gillick, at about the same time, was taking the Department of Health and Social Security to court for allowing her daughter, aged 15, to go on the pill without parental consent. Gillick had 10 children; what on earth did she know about contraception? Easy to say now – that case ran for years.

While the PIE was talking about lowering the age of consent, there were serious conversations going on in the prison service about aversive electric shock therapy for child abusers. You'd attach electrodes to an offender's penis, show him images of little girls with long blond hair and shock him until he stopped responding. That, too, is now a taboo, falling under the category of torture. At the time, the reason they didn't try it was they didn't think it would work.

The document Harman signed that apparently incriminates her, calling for images of naked children to be proven harmful before they were criminal? Judge that against the fact that a woman breastfeeding a toddler, if she took a picture and sent it to be developed at Boots, might be visited by the police (this happened to someone I know).

It was a turbulent era, when the taboos were not the same. The rights of children and adults, charges and guardians, were pitted against one another, and the whole thing hinged on defining that exact moment of transition, from minor to major. Inevitably, there were views in this debate that we now see as wrong, deluded and unpleasant. Most people saw them that way at the time. PIE were never more than a bizarre blip on the civil liberties landscape. Likewise, positions taken in debates today will, in the future, seem sinister and indefensible. Ever the optimist, I'm hoping that most of the Daily Mail's output will fall into this category by 2050.
Notice the way if you're on the left then the Guardian doesn't mind if you associated with eugenicists, pedophiles and terrorists. Of course, if you're on the right and interviewed a white supremacist then you're a Nazi and need to be assaulted and ruined.

Right now, of course, the media laud things like Desmond is Amazing dancing in gay bars with people handing him dollar bills even though they'd rightly condemn things like Bachi Baza, which is the exact same thing, in Afghanistan. Well, I hope they'd condemn it. Maybe Afghanistan, like the 1970's, is like different and stuff and it would be racist and or Islamphobic to condemn it.

The Guardian's reference to evil right wingers calling the Green Party 'a nest of paedophiles' is probably a reference to people like Cohn-Bendit


Cohn-Bendit published a number of provocative statements regarding "sex with children" in the 1970s and early 1980s, notably in his 1975 book The Great Bazaar (Der grosse Basar) where he describes erotic encounters with five-year-olds in his time as a teacher in an anti-authoritarian kindergarten.[13]

Since at least 2001, Cohn-Bendit has been accused of defending paedophilia during the 1970s. This controversy re-surfaced in 2013: as Cohn-Bendit received the Theodor Heuss Prize, there was a rally by anti-paedophilia activists. The president of Germany's Federal Constitutional Court cited the book as grounds for his refusal to give the speech at the awards ceremony.[13] The affair triggered wider research into the pro-pedophilia activism which prevailed in the German Green Party (without direct involvement on the part of Cohn-Bendit) well into the 1980s.[13]

An article in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung uncovered several "repulsive" passages (abstoßende Texte) in Pflasterstrand, a leftist magazine for which Cohn-Bendit was, under press law, responsible. It cited a 1978 defence of Cohn-Bendit's of this editorial practice, as well as an appearance of Cohn-Bendit in a French television talk-show in 1982 where he described a five-year-old undressing herself as an "erotic game". Cohn-Bendit reacted to these allegations by claiming that his descriptions of erotic encounters with pre-pubescent girls were not based on true events but were merely intended as what he today calls "obnoxious provocation" aimed at questioning sexual morals at the time that "shouldn't have been written that way."
As Andrew Gilligan put it


The first chapter of Tom O’Carroll’s book reads a little like a romantic novel, as the author describes his “special friendship” with a “raven-haired little charmer”, spoiled only by the “stupid, blind, socially programmed” parents who “come between” them.

In other places, it’s like soft porn, with fairly graphic descriptions of nudity and sex. (“I knew my little naked body didn’t look like anything… but Uncle Herman looked at me as if I were Sophia Loren,” gushes a female contributor.)

There are, however, several important differences. The book, a manifesto for the legalisation of sex with children, is called Paedophilia: The Radical Case. O’Carroll was a teacher, and the “raven-haired little charmer” was one of his pupils, an 11-year-old schoolboy called Chris. Uncle Herman was in his fifties, and the girl he had sex with was 12.

But most unusually of all, O’Carroll’s foreword, with its passionate plea not to “deny children their sexual life, including the possibility of sexual contact with adults”, expresses his “heartfelt thanks” to those who helped him write his rallying-call, “especially… Ms Nettie Pollard of the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL) [who] read the whole text in draft and made many helpful suggestions”.

O’Carroll had been a “sexually predatory” paedophile, “determined to find a boy, or boys, for what I assured myself would be mutually pleasurable and affectionate sex… All I had to do was pop out to the nearest canal bank, or swimming baths, or park.” After this didn’t work, he “rained letters” on Chris, then turned up on the child’s doorstep “emboldened by drink, and aggressive with it”. O’Carroll was any parent’s darkest nightmare.

Yet at the time this book was published, in 1980, O’Carroll and the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) – a body founded to openly lobby for child sex – were part of NCCL, now Liberty, Britain’s foremost mainstream civil rights organisation.

In 1975, NCCL had granted PIE official “affiliate” status. It put O’Carroll on one of its working groups, it made him a platform speaker at an NCCL conference in spring 1977, and it strongly defended paedophiles against “hysterical and inaccurate” newspaper attacks.

There was, to be fair, internal opposition to this. According to the winter 1978 edition of Gay Left magazine, NCCL’s executive voted not to distribute the transcript of O’Carroll’s 1977 conference speech, a passionate attack on the punishment of sex offenders. NCCL’s union affiliates were reluctant to accept PIE as a fraternal brother, and NCCL’s secretary, Patricia Hewitt, said “public hostility to paedophilia was such that it damaged the cause of gay rights for the gay movement to be associated with it”.

But such voices were a minority; for most of the Seventies and early Eighties, the “right” to sleep with children was one of the “civil liberties” that NCCL supported and the policy differences with PIE were ones only of degree. PIE favoured lowering the age of sexual consent broadly to four (as they generously allowed, a baby below that would “lack the verbal skill to communicate its consent”). The comparative moderates of NCCL backed a reduction merely to 10, so long as it could be demonstrated that consent “was genuinely given”.

NCCL vigorously opposed new cornerstone child abuse legislation. In a letter to the Home Office in April 1978, it argued fiercely that child pornography should not be banned as “indecent” unless it could be shown that the child depicted had been harmed. The NCCL official who wrote this letter was its legal officer, Harriet Harman.

Ms Harman is now, of course, deputy leader of the Labour Party. She presumably no longer believes what she said in the Seventies – though she has never apologised for it. But it is her role then, and that of the Left, that journalists are starting to explore as they try to understand the climate that led to an apparent child abuse epidemic in the Seventies and Eighties, manifest in dozens of major scandals – Jimmy Savile’s only the latest to come to light.

For NCCL was far from alone in its views. In 1977, the social workers’ trade paper, Community Care, published a sympathetic spread, headlined “Should we pity the paedophiles”, talking of the “liberation of children to enjoy their natural sexuality” and reassuring readers that most paedophiles preferred only over-10s, making them “less frightening than [PIE’s] campaign implies”. In 1979, the National Council for One-Parent Families called for abolishing the age of consent.

With the Pill, the legalisation of homosexuality and shrinking taboos against premarital sex, the Seventies was an era of quite sudden sexual emancipation. To some on the Left, sex by or with children was just another repressive boundary that had to be swept away. As Andrew Lumsden, an editor of Gay News at the time, said: “We were fighting against a lot of outmoded laws, and perhaps the ones against paedophilia were as outmoded as those against homosexuality or cannabis.”

Britain’s half-hearted liberalisation of homosexuality – until very recently, the gay age of consent was 21, five years above heterosexuals – also allowed the likes of O’Carroll and PIE to cleverly conflate their perverted agenda with the legitimate demands of young gay adults.

PIE tried to present any attack on paedophiles as an attack on homosexuals generally; as Gay Left put it, “realistically, the moral Right wing cannot get much support out of campaigning against homosexuality as such… but they can hope to build up a new moral consensus [against gays] around the issue of protecting childhood”.

PIE’s members, mostly educated and middle-class, were good at finding “progressive” academics – some useful idiots, others rather more sinister – to fight their cause. As O’Carroll said: “We thought we could manipulate the Establishment and find allies within it.”

In 1981, a respectable publisher, Batsford, published Perspectives on Paedophilia, edited by Brian Taylor, a sociology lecturer at Sussex University. The book’s introduction said it aimed to “inhibit… antipathy towards [paedophilia’s] discussion [and] its indulgence”.

One man, Peter Righton, contributed a strong defence of paedophilia; Righton, later convicted of child sex offences, was a member of PIE and director of education at the National Institute of Social Work.

The presence in PIE of people like Righton has led to claims that child abuse in the era involved an Establishment conspiracy, with “rings” of powerful abusers, including Cabinet ministers, protecting each other. Though there are some justified suspicions about this, hard evidence so far has been lacking. Indeed, in the political sphere, PIE’s activism clearly backfired, sparking a massive public backlash and being completely ignored by ministers – who consistently tightened, not loosened, the law.

Most people, of course, never fell for the paedophile agenda. The obvious problem with any argument that children could “consent to” or “demand” sex is that any relationship between an adult and a child involves massive disparities of power, to the child’s disadvantage. By the early Eighties, the devastating harm that abuse did was quite clear. PIE’s activists, including O’Carroll, mostly went to jail and the group was disbanded in 1984.

Yet in some organisations infected with the ideology of the Seventies and early Eighties, a climate was created where the abuse of children became acceptable. Unforgivably, those organisations included a hard-Left London council, Islington, with thousands of vulnerable children directly in its care.

In the Eighties, an official inquiry found, Islington’s children’s homes were riddled with abuse, sex and paedophile rings. Dozens of sexual predators worked for the council and were, found the inquiry, protected by misplaced “equal opportunities” policies which enabled them to cry “discrimination” if anyone tried to rein in their activities. (One key member of the NCCL executive in the paedophile period, the lawyer Henry Hodge, was married to the then Islington council leader, Margaret Hodge, now reinvented as the chairman of Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee.)

Despite the backlash, what the madness in parts of the Left did create was still dangerous.
 
Last edited:

AnOminous

So what?
True & Honest Fan
Retired Staff
kiwifarms.net
(To be clear, NAMBLA did attempt to make inroads into the gay liberation movement, but I've always heard that those efforts had been snuffed out by the mid-70s.)
They've been repeatedly quashed, but always come back and try to sneak in again. There's also usually at least some misinformed or more nefarious opposition to ousting them from supposed neutrals. The recent incursion of open pedos seems to be being greeted with open arms by the troons.
 

Mariposa Electrique

In 2021, Shit will hit the fan 4 Chris
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
They've been repeatedly quashed, but always come back and try to sneak in again. There's also usually at least some misinformed or more nefarious opposition to ousting them from supposed neutrals. The recent incursion of open pedos seems to be being greeted with open arms by the troons.
You act as if they haven't quietly infultrated the LGBT community already. Just look at Desmond is Amazing and all the fags chasing after him.
 

Allakazam223

We wuz Orkz n shit
kiwifarms.net
You act as if they haven't quietly infultrated the LGBT community already. Just look at Desmond is Amazing and all the fags chasing after him.
Quietly? How many pictures have you seen of various LGBWTF+ rallies and children have been exposed to it?

I would be fine if there was just quiet councelling, doctor's visits, maybe a change of schools and identies, and a genuine attempt to live a quiet public life.

When children are exposed to your sexual fetishes you fuck them up. Period. I don't give a fucking rat's ass what excuse you can come up with, and this constant fucking push for acceptance of unacceptable behaviour, it is going to come to a boiling point.

At what point will society pause and genuinely put a foot down? I'm fucking mad at the internet and society. I miss drinking and not thinking about this shit world.
 

eternal dog mongler

kiwifarms.net
They've been repeatedly quashed, but always come back and try to sneak in again. There's also usually at least some misinformed or more nefarious opposition to ousting them from supposed neutrals. The recent incursion of open pedos seems to be being greeted with open arms by the troons.
Remember when the psychiatric community was all about recovering repressed memories? Which was some stupid shit. And the psychiatric community now realizes that.

But the group who opposed them at the time, if you dig a little deeper, actually had links to pro-pedophilia groups.

I doubt the average LGBTQ+ individual would endorse pedophilia but God damn. Those who will it will find any crevice to sneak in.
 

Spastic Colon

I hate 2020
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Remember when the psychiatric community was all about recovering repressed memories? Which was some stupid shit. And the psychiatric community now realizes that.

But the group who opposed them at the time, if you dig a little deeper, actually had links to pro-pedophilia groups.

I doubt the average LGBTQ+ individual would endorse pedophilia but God damn. Those who will it will find any crevice to sneak in.
Repressed memories aren't total shit, though. Your brain can actually shut down those memories as a means of protection if the trauma is severe enough. The BS part was more about how they recovered them. Some of the therapists were planting suggestions rather than recovering memories.
 

Your mom96

kiwifarms.net
This is a video of Candace Owens interviewing Walt Heyer. If you guys ready know what I post or follow what I post on kiwi farms, then seen this man before. Walt Heyer is a man that transition and detransition. He was sexual abuse by his grandma mentally and by his uncle physically. He went through alot as a child. He have a website call sexchangeregret.com. It's great, you should visit it and support Heyer on his quest to educate people and world.

 

IBrokeBob

kiwifarms.net
This is a video of Candace Owens interviewing Walt Heyer. If you guys ready know what I post or follow what I post on kiwi farms, then seen this man before. Walt Heyer is a man that transition and detransition. He was sexual abuse by his grandma mentally and by his uncle physically. He went through alot as a child. He have a website call sexchangeregret.com. It's great, you should visit it and support Heyer on his quest to educate people and world.

i like Walt. He seems to be very decent and helps people who are dealing with gender dysphoria. He said he spends a lot of time on the phone talking with people and helping them.

I dont know if this documentary has been posted before. Its about 3 men who transitioned to women and regretted it. It is a good documentary and is interesting. So now they have detransitioned. Dont be alarmed at the first minute or two which has one guy reading the bible. Thats the only bible/ religious moment in the video.
Trans regret and detransitioning
 

oKTrooner

In Soviet Canuckistan, tranny punch you.
kiwifarms.net
It doesn't respect the law but expects others to respect it when it's to their advantage/enable their whims. Rightio.
It's even more delightful here in Canada.. Up here if you're a convicted pedo/child murderer, you can also self-identify as a Native/Aboriginal/First Nations/Indian (Whatever the woke term of the week is) and get moved from a high security woman's prison to a nice little Healing lodge nestled in the woods, without any fences, and with summer-camp-like activities such as canoeing, horseback riding, and (fucking literally) basket weaving. just so long as you stay under the media radar, you're good. https://www.iheartradio.ca/newstalk...-moved-from-prison-to-healing-lodge-1.8460245
 

ProtonMailMan

Chins? What chins?
kiwifarms.net
Quietly? How many pictures have you seen of various LGBWTF+ rallies and children have been exposed to it?

I would be fine if there was just quiet councelling, doctor's visits, maybe a change of schools and identies, and a genuine attempt to live a quiet public life.

When children are exposed to your sexual fetishes you fuck them up. Period. I don't give a fucking rat's ass what excuse you can come up with, and this constant fucking push for acceptance of unacceptable behaviour, it is going to come to a boiling point.

At what point will society pause and genuinely put a foot down? I'm fucking mad at the internet and society. I miss drinking and not thinking about this shit world.
You miss drinking? Well whose fault is that?
 

Mr Himmler

Reichsminister für Arschlochbilder
kiwifarms.net
You act as if they haven't quietly infultrated the LGBT community already. Just look at Desmond is Amazing and all the fags chasing after him.
Quietly? How many pictures have you seen of various LGBWTF+ rallies and children have been exposed to it?

I would be fine if there was just quiet councelling, doctor's visits, maybe a change of schools and identies, and a genuine attempt to live a quiet public life.

When children are exposed to your sexual fetishes you fuck them up. Period. I don't give a fucking rat's ass what excuse you can come up with, and this constant fucking push for acceptance of unacceptable behaviour, it is going to come to a boiling point.

At what point will society pause and genuinely put a foot down?
I doubt the average LGBTQ+ individual would endorse pedophilia but God damn. Those who will it will find any crevice to sneak in.
I remember a few weeks ago I watched a JF interview with some academic about the whole drag queen story hour. Many of the faggots brought in are not vetted and turn out to be former sex offenders. It was removed by JF, presumedly due to (((pressure))).

The American Library Association is pretty notorious for pushing lefty garbage like this shit. Decades ago they pushed for Marxist books in libraries and the “Banned books day,” shit was always targeted at getting lefty shit in the hands of young people. You won’t find any (((librarians))) encouraging youths to read books of the volkisch variety.

I tried finding archived versions of the video, not much luck. If anyone has anything please post. The interview provides a lot of insight into the history of the ALA and Drag Queen Story Hour.

Second Drag Queen Story Hour Turned Out Pedo (Archive)

Ages ago I used to use Instagram a lot and was pleasantly surprised to see a lot of LGBT fervently against pedophilia/pedo entry into the LGBT movement. I would often see call to arms to mass report MAP accounts and the like. From my experience it seems the only people pushing for pedo acceptance in the LGBT are closeted pedos or MAPs.
 

Allakazam223

We wuz Orkz n shit
kiwifarms.net
You miss drinking? Well whose fault is that?
I've since started again, so...

I remember a few weeks ago I watched a JF interview with some academic about the whole drag queen story hour. Many of the faggots brought in are not vetted and turn out to be former sex offenders. It was removed by JF, presumedly due to (((pressure))).

The American Library Association is pretty notorious for pushing lefty garbage like this shit. Decades ago they pushed for Marxist books in libraries and the “Banned books day,” shit was always targeted at getting lefty shit in the hands of young people. You won’t find any (((librarians))) encouraging youths to read books of the volkisch variety.

I tried finding archived versions of the video, not much luck. If anyone has anything please post. The interview provides a lot of insight into the history of the ALA and Drag Queen Story Hour.

Second Drag Queen Story Hour Turned Out Pedo (Archive)

Ages ago I used to use Instagram a lot and was pleasantly surprised to see a lot of LGBT fervently against pedophilia/pedo entry into the LGBT movement. I would often see call to arms to mass report MAP accounts and the like. From my experience it seems the only people pushing for pedo acceptance in the LGBT are closeted pedos or MAPs.
Demons and devils exist, they just disguise themselves. A hard, impartial look at who attempts to have any kid exposed or have decided for them (the mother of the 2 year old springs to mind...) to expose, change, halt or alter anything about their bodies before the age of majority.

But I get the feeling this would mean that enough people, without fear of the SJW's attempting to socially ostracize them, to actually stop this demented god damned fucking circus show. But considering they appear to be able to even get people fired for opposing sick fantasies...

Your little guy likes pink. Whoop de fucking do. Don't brainwash him into thinking that he's a girl for it. Pink is a happy colour. He doesn't need gender reassignment, he needs a dirt bike, a fishing trip and some time with his dad. Quit letting the fantasy of "Oh what if we had a (opposite gender) instead?" get to your fucking head.
 

wabbits

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Pink's been the color of girlness in North America only since the World War I era when it happened to be used as a marketing gimmick to sell sex-specific baby gear. Before then, it was a boyness color because it was a lesser version of the male power color, red. That's why you see old paintings of boys in pink a la Gainsborough, 1782.
Screen Shot 2020-03-14 at 8.00.06 PM.pngScreen Shot 2020-03-14 at 8.29.11 PM.png
It was only after the next war that the pink-is-for-girls notion spread slowly around the world with the cultural dominance that the U.S. achieved as the only major industrialized nation that had not had its infrastructure bombed to dust.

Pink is still not globally recognized as the color that girls and only girls crave, so the abrupt shift in the color preference carried by DNA that causes girls to be born in boys' bodies has not been consistent for mysterious reasons that science cannot explain. Perhaps it's caused by Divine intervention.
 
Tags
None