Weakening of safeguarding is an acceptable risk for a more progressive society

I feel the same way, @ABitCrapper - that inability to switch off. Thing is, when all the self-iD started being discussed we were told that trans people made up a tiny, tiny percentage and, as such, there'd be no issues... yet everywhere online it would seem that trans people are legion.

Tens of thousands of furries, and hundreds of men with fucking beards and knobs "expanding the bandwidth" and not just advising but CHANGING laws, policies and procedures to such a degree that safeguarding is in danger.

This is not to say that Transgendered People are doing this. Bad people will infiltrate a just cause. Pie anybody?

Yes there is a consistent pattern. It is worldwide.
In no particular order:

Catholic Church - abuses highlighted in Spotlight (movie)
In OZ we have our own scandal. A Cardinal flew to Vatican City to avoid giving evidence in a Royal Commission into CSA.

Belgium - The Dutroux Affair. Citizens so pissed off they took to the streets.

Epstein Island - many politicians and celebrities flew there.

Sex Trafficking - Post War Bosnia. Check out the movie The Whistleblower. All under the watch of the UN. The company involved still continues to be awarded lucrative contracts in third world countries. Er obviously google because company name changed for movie.

Not to mention the recent spate of "respected charities" caught out.

Just scratching the surface. It's sadly an epidemic.

I also am starting to realise that depraved men will do ANYTHING to access victims to abuse, whether that’s women or children (or both)
I actually don’t think it’s possible to be too “paranoid” about the way transgenderism is being used to weaken safeguarding procedures. And the evidence is in front of us, every time something that “never happens” happens

Isn't that a bit "tin hat"?
The whole J Savile episode comes across as 'tin hat' but it actually happened. Nothing is too far fetched (well apart from lizards and clones and all celebrities are transgender).
The numbers are starting to stack up now. It's not just one incident or one individual, there is a pattern which shouldn't be ignored.

LuggsaysNotaWomen

I agree, hell check my user name. As a society we should always strive to maintain protection for children, our most vulnerable members.

I would be actually amazed if anyone actually believes politicians/government ever act in the best interests or tells the truth to their citizens. Regardless of their political stance, I say this as a swinging voter (that's not kinky btw just an Ozism for someone that's vote is not dependent on party loyalty).

Too many examples of people with power and wealth engaging in CSA and being protected. I can provide examples but don't want an excessively long post.

R.E. your mental health. Do what you need to do, but yes, step away from it for a bit, I have to regularly.

Get outside. Watch some comedy, dance round your living room, anything that will give you some relief from the overwhelming nature of it all - it's not a mess of your creating and you are not responsible to clean it up even if you feel called to be a part of it.

Deepwatersolo and Langcleg have already summed up what I wanted to say (and said it better than I could).

I'm a tin foil hat wearer and I don't care. I think that the clues are there that very strongly point towards this as a deliberate onslaught on safeguarding that will lead to a devolution in societal structures and institutions that will enable those that desire it, access to the bodies of vulnerable women and children, along with reduced autonomy for the masses.

Please don't delete. It's an important discussion to be had. Although I'm sure we all understand if you need to to prevent checking. Your MH takes precedence, so do what's best for you. I only post on here intermittently, the whole discussion in general can become emotionally exhausting.

Earlier in the week I rediscovered the joy of reading, for a bookworm I was actually surprised how long I've been distracted from a favourite pastime. Between life, podcasts and internet dramas I couldn't believe how long I'd become distracted from what is an essential escape and comfort. Refind your own happy place.

ABit - can you download a blocking app to stop you accessing MN? Lots of us have been there (I had to block MN for a couple of months to give myself a break from these issues). Please take care of yourself.

Hope you're OK, OP.

I am beginning to think that weakening safeguarding is the true and very deliberate aim of this current trans ideology.

Hey a bitcrapper

I get like that so I just decide to chill and do my gaming- another obsession lols
But it it’s important to have breaks from social media as it is designed to be obsessive. Like gaming
So am posting this then gonna take a break till tomorrow but definitely coming back as I really like the humour here and the ppl who are the dogs 😂😂💪💪
Oh and can’t be arsed to go on that thread but Nicola hare - talks shite

Seriously, ABit, be stern with yourself to the extent that you turn your phone off and do something life affirming. This circus will still be here should you feel strong enough to return, and there are many hands here holding back the tide of horror.

Put your needs first, please, and remember that balance between knowing you have to speak up against what is wrong, and knowing also that it is not all on you to fix it, ok?

There is nothing more pitiful in society than the thwarted penis.

Penis freedom uber alles is progressive.

Safeguarding works to thwart penis and must therefore be abolished in the name of progress.

Honestly, the only group who truly 'benefit' from this shit are sexual predators, who are overwhelmingly men. Unfettered access to women and children.

There are enough rumours, quashed cases, dubious links to PIE members and 'missing reports' that tell me government and institutions in this country are infested with such characters, so I am not surprised this is receiving so much backing, alll under the guise of progressiveness and inclusivity.

Oh, OP, I missed your post.

Don't take things badly. We're all worn down. Self care is vital and we all need a break from time to time.

The irony that weakening safeguarding will let Ian fucking Huntley into a women's prison eh?

Whodathoughtit?

That weakening safeguarding can lead to a more progressive society is a logical fallacy. Weakening safeguarding always benefits those who have power and creating a Society where the powerful can lord over the weak unchallenged is pretty much the polar opposite of a progressive society.

Exactly.

Also: a libertarian society based on individual rights of self declaration is a right wing society. Nothing progressive about it at all. Extreme individualism defaults to extant power structures.

It's one thing to learn lessons to late. It's another entirely to learn the lessons, enact them into practice/law and then tear them down at the behest of a lobby group with no underpinning impact assessments or rationale.

Abit, take care of your mental health xx. But leave this thread up, it's fine.

It would seem to be obvious that they cannot just accept that safeguarding has to be weakened to accommodate their demands, because the world and his wife will see that as a bad thing.

But I'm pretty damn sure there was someone here around the time of the NSPCC and Girl Guides debacle that was ever-so-gently suggesting that we could 'look at' safeguarding in a new way.

I suspect what is in view is going to follow the same incremental pattern that most of the transactivist playbook has gone with so far, bit by bit, slowly shifting the window of what is acceptable so that the ground shifts before most people realize.

'Isn't that a bit "tin hat"?'

Probably! I'm an embittered old bag who's seen more than enough bad things happen in this world which could have been avoided if only we had the will. The loosening of safeguarding can have no possible benefits to the population at large or the most vulnerable among us. We need more safeguarding, not less, or at least what there currently is, implemented. Or we'll be encountering more outrages like Victoria Climbie, Baby Peter, Rotherham and wondering why we learned nothing until it was too late. Again

Define 'progressive'. Because from where I'm standing it looks like 'increased sexual freedom and power for male born people over female born people', where women and children are collateral damage.

When you challenge twits like the NSPCC over this what you get is back to the wall panic. They know. They're too scared to admit it. The general public however will call it for exactly what it is when a serious case review escapes into the press. And it will.