Thread on twitter. The paedophilia plan.

But Kate...

Paedophile tactics include diluting safeguarding frameworks for nefarious purposes.

Transactivist tactics include diluting safeguarding frameworks in order to protect the privacy of and make life easier for trans people.

The problem is that the former will try to take advantage of the latter.

This is the feminist case for opposing some of the transactivist agenda. It's not anti-trans - it's pro-safeguarding.

It is not offensive do this, surely? Community members on a parenting website are bound to put safeguarding of their children first.

I met Dr Em at a WPUK meeting, she is really impressive.

That thread is a hard but necessary read.

By and large society is obedient. Most of us pay our taxes, observe the Highway Code, tolerate each other peacefully and send our children to school to be educated by adults other than ourselves.
When we realise these adults, who by and large we trust to do the best for our children, are now being put in positions of making life changing decisions about our children without even consulting us then this rocks the very foundation of society.
Girl Guides is already openly telling us parents will not be informed if a male shares a tent or a shower with our 10Yo+ daughter.
Now we hear Porn is being advised as suitable material for school classrooms by suspect powerful men who also do not care about parental concerns.
I won't be the only parent pulling my children out of the system. I think a revolution is coming and unusually it will be female led.
Paedophiles are everywhere and as high up and powerful in society as you can imagine. (Yes, in THAT family too).
Enough. I can't save everyone but you're not having my daughters.

Thank you MNHQ for allowing a discussion of a very challenging issue.I appreciate that conflating the issues is problematic. We all agree that the document referred to in the OP is repellent.

Parents are tenacious and fierce when protecting their children. It benefits everyone when there is an open and confident debate about boundaries, safety and safeguarding of children. It would be constructive to hear some input as to why some organisations are challenging established safeguarding practice (confidentiality, right to consent etc).
Surely those wanting to vary thresholds / boundaries about consent, and child safety would want to be very clear what the thinking is behind this?

It is the lack of informed debate that fuels suspicion and it does society no good when safeguarding becomes a war zone. Everyone needs to be open and clear about identifying abuse and not fearful of being accused of hate crimes. This is too important to get wrong.

This is all so sinister and upsetting but I will fight it until my dying day.
No child should live a life where their body is abused, mutilated, tortured, beaten or even killed.
Every child deserves safety, shelter, enough food, clothing and warmth at the barest minimum.
Any man or woman who deliberately uses a child for their own warped sexual gratification is the vilest most despicable being to walk this planet.
Paedophiles are disgusting.

If we were to discuss how in the past PIE adopted LGB campaign tactics in a search for legitimacy would that also be forbidden?

Which one is #TransAge, Kate?

I simply don't understand why Safeguarding is sliding out of fashion - fast. It was everything a few years ago, and now the buzzword is Transgender. Younger teachers seem very enthusiastic about stamping out any kind of discrimination - but there appears to be a hierarchy of discrimination and only self id seems to get mentioned now. There's a huge rush to have gender-neutral toilets, but with no reference to the girls in school and it is seen as desperately un-woke to raise any objection.

I can see that the next battle will be the right to self id as anything, or any age. Dsis, teaching in a school on the south coast raised safeguarding concerns regarding the age and lewd behaviour of some refugee boys in her class. Apparently they felt 15 and dsis was told that was that.

I had a comment deleted that was quite different from other deleted posts so I'm not sure about a common link.

My deleted post explicitly stated that I was not implying anything about TRAs (mentioning what I specifically wasn’t implying). I then went on to describe how the tactics described in the document in the Twitter thread for the promotion of pedophilia were a copy of those currently being used by TRAs.

My post was all over Twitter as an example of transphobia.

I think someone upthread said they now had a policy of deleting comments which had appeared screen-shotted in twitter posts. Which would be a bit strange. I remember one of the deleted posts ('cos it happened to be a couple of posts after one of mine) and it was entirely unobjectionable, simply agreeing with something a previous poster had said (and the post they were referring back to still stands).

As far as I can see, there are a few posts mentioning named individuals, either because those individuals have criminal convictions, or because those individuals have said things about themselves in the public domain which are being quoted.

No one on here has made blanket statements about "all of group A are guilty of crime B" - what they have said is "people guilty of crime B are trying to use people of group A, most of whom are completely blameless, as a cover for their criminal activities." And people have also said "where there's a straight clash between an individual's right to self-expression, and child safeguarding, child safeguarding should come first." I can't see that either of these positions are contentious or deletable.

Ie a common theme? I'm confused.

I agree athing.

What is the nature of delete posts?

Can someone please start a new thread in site stuff or AIBU?

MNHQ has been through and deleted half this thread.

What are you for, HQ? Are you here to parent's lives easier, or paedophiles?

IMO, this is why our mantra needs to be safeguarding. Safeguarding, safeguarding, safeguarding. Let the blue haired kids occupy their toilets.

We need to protect the children.

Ekphrasis Thank you for your kindness. The police really don't need to investigate. Thames Valley have had the evidence for ten years.

If you look at this email from inside the GMC you will see that Angie Murray told them I had done all the investigation and that he was going to be interviewed by appointment.

She also said that it was my word against his when that is certainly not the case:

shaolinmonk.net/smeacock/kmpi/2008-08-20_phone-msg_shaun-moggan.shtml

Then she emailed me to say that she was going to arrest him: shaolinmonk.net/smeacock/kmpi/2008-08-18_email_arrest-khoosal.shtml

After interviewing him on September 4th 2008 she told me that she gave him the internal records and he said they were "perfectly normal". She didn't believe him when he said that he didn't remember me. And that they would not do anything because he is very eminent and well protected.

I went to the police partly because of Haslam and Kerr who sexually assaulted a lot of women in North Yorkshire www.thetimes.co.uk/article/conspiracy-of-silence-allowed-nhs-rape-spree-rb20glg8cqh

Kathy Haq who is mentioned in the article, sent me a nice message some years ago congratulating me on my efforts. Dr Liz Miller, the mind champion, put a comment on my blog in 2009 about how it was going on in the Maudsley and she wanted to do some thing about it

I wonder if you have read this book? I met Peter and told him my story in 1988 in his study in Falmouth: "I think you will go through hell and then you will be a wise woman and then you will be able to do the same work I do: on the principle of the wounded healing the wounded"

His predictions were a real inspiration and have turned out to have some truth; with all humility, one suicidal young woman said to me "you're so nice and you listened to me, thank you".

It's frustrating that Khoosal is still harming people and they are complaining that he is a "nasty" cruel unpleasant old fashioned patriarchal socipath on Reddit all these years later.

I even had a long conversation with the clinical director, Dr Bryan Timmins in 2015 and nothing happened

Absolutely light - the aspect of training I'm talking about is also for the benefit of staff, supporting anyone struggling also.

Yes Ekphrasis
Ask questions about safeguarding - be prepared to consider the unthinkable. But equally, be clear, objective, factual. Don't dismiss instinct but be prepared to consider whether it is founded in reality or prejudice - and never work alone.
It's a difficult and challenging area - but once you see abuse, you can't unsee it.