Brighton Pride...omg

We don't want kids at pride

You might not. Some fetishitsts and 'allies' seem to though. It might be worth thinking quite hard about why they do.

We haven't snuck in! We've been there from the beginning the "family friendly" image has snuck in! We don't want kids at pride

@Susansbestfriend9 don't reanimate a zombie that's 2.5 years old. Plus you, not surprisingly, missed the point of the thread - about sending young people to be part of it. Is it important to expose children under the age of consent even to 'kink'.

And good luck trying to educate the educated.

🙄

Zombie thread.

Wrong wrong wrong, kink has been at pride since the start. Pride ISNT a place for kids, it's not about kids, it's about the LGBT being proud of who they are and not letting anyone stop then. Kinky people who are proud and willing to show it is what pride was started for.
If you want to be allies, learn!

Well the Lib Dems did fall for PIE ,nothing changes.

To be fair, the NCCL was so taken in that it reportedly affiliated itself with PIE and PAL. The attributed quotations in this piece are in line with the material that I remember floating around at the time.

scepticpeg.wordpress.com/2017/10/01/islington-the-connections-leading-to-pie/

The BBC has removed the picture of the fetishist 'adult baby' and middle-aged males dressed as small girls from its article, and replaced it with an image of a giant rainbow flag.

But we see you and what you support, BBC.

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/save/webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:wuJQhM9M36UJ:www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48893187+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/save/webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:wuJQhM9M36UJ:www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48893187+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

don’t understand how against a background of R v Brown a dead woman can be taken by a court to have consented to extreme acts of sexual violence. If the act is criminal by virtue of R v Brown, would that not ground a murder conviction anyway (ie, consent is immaterial because it cannot affect criminal liability)?

(Clearly the reality is these poor women haven’t consented anyway, the whole thing is vile and grotesque, and a disgrace, I just don’t understand how the argument even has any legal effect against this legal background. Why is Brown not applied?)

It seems to only be applied to homosexual sex acts in practice, not heterosexual. In this, I think they have a point that it's a homophobic law. But I would like to see it used in "rough sex gone wrong" heterosexual cases, not overturned.

re cultic narratives about what it means to be a woman

please find the below video from a vast, extremely dangerous criminal network operating in multiple territories internationally. The video was created by the Mexican branch of network that is active in many territories internationally but that started in Russia

This network has created various schools and training organisations, in this instance this is a "goddess school" where women are taught how to be "goddesses" and "real women" (brainwashed slaves and sex workers)

Unfortunately this network is one of many operating in a similar way

just giving women a heads up about these dangerous groups that promise empowerment but deliver slavery, violence, blackmail and unimaginable abuses

My point is that it is not only that women's rights and identities are being eroded via the transgender agenda, our rights and identities are being eroded via networks that promote narratives about being a woman that are at the opposite end of the spectrum to the transgender agenda

Staying thinking is important, but our capacity to think can be harmed by this odious bullshit.

Also worthy of examination by anyone interested in international relations, propaganda, social engineering etc. is narratives re gender and sex in cults / NRMs emanating from former communist territories in Eastern Europe.

The narratives are very much focussed on biological sex and of the linking of sexual characterises to nature.

Transgender issues and even departure from sex and gender stereotypes is considered unnatural and indicative of demonic forces.

Any exploration of self-ID should really only be considered in relation to the other prevalent narratives in which women are considered passive, spiritual, enfolding, yin etc. and men are considered to be active, dominant warriors.

I will be publishing material on this subject soon

Smearing enemies with allegations of sexual crimes and perversions is nothing new.

We did it in the UK with the Political Warfare Executive as can be seen in this fascinating but deeply disturbing documentary revealing long classified, formerly secret activities

Sex and the swastika (contains very disturbing scenes - viewer discretion advised)

also see
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_Warfare_Executive

Just in case anyone says "do you have evidence of Gerrans promoting satanic ritual abuse conspiracy theories?"

Here is Gerrans promoting the Hampstead SRA hoax

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/save/www.rt.com/op-ed/316642-youtube-art-investigation-research/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/save/www.rt.com/op-ed/316642-youtube-art-investigation-research/

I find this article on transgender issues and self-ID in the Russian propaganda site RT to be very interesting
(archived for safety)

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190707083620/www.rt.com/op-ed/341590-children-gender-identity-toys-boys/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20190707083620/www.rt.com/op-ed/341590-children-gender-identity-toys-boys/

The author, Sam Gerrans, is a very controversial man who gives credence to satanic ritual abuse conspiracy theories.

The reason I am linking to this piece is that it demonstrates clearly that the current situation re self-ID allows propagandists to portray the UK as a seething hotbed of perversion where children are at risk from fetishists.

This is a dangerous situation on many levels.

For the avoidance of doubt;

I do not think that all fetishists are a danger to children

I think that what consenting adults get up to is their own business and nobody else's

I believe thatminors should not be exposed to adult sexual activity, whether fetish orientated or not

I am posting this because I believe that we need to be vigilant about the ways that the transgender agenda plays into anti-UK narratives in relation to international politics, especially given Brexit and the UK increasing isolation internationally

Yes, exactly what womb said. Exactly.

Absolutely Womb

BBC pics from London pride show middle-aged men dressed as little girls and babies (near bottom of article). www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48893187 Each to their own but how long is it going to be before adult babies start turning up in the workplace and demanding special treatment? There's already been a case involving an 'adult baby' at university.www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5089529/University-failed-male-student-baby-role-play-fetish.html

of course this only works if you think that sex is a bit disgusting really but unfortunately I think many people have not truly progressed past this 8 yo view

I think you're right, Womb
I think this also explains how T came to be included with LGB, or rather, how the rest of the world took it as obvious that T belonged with LGB because, ewww, sex, innit.
L,G, B =sex, yuck, rude, naughty, genitals
T=genitals, rude
therefore, LGB=T
QED
except, not.

applauds Womb

homosexuality is not a fetish ffs

What has become crystal clear is that for most liberals who championed gay marriage, they DID see homosexuality as a fetish and a lifestyle choice. They just felt like all fetishes and lifestyle choices should be celebrated. They always thought gay and lesbian people were pervs, and they wanted to see more perversion, so they advocated for it.

That's the part that stings worst. It seems like they never really did believe gay and lesbian people were normal people who just wanted to live and love in peace. They 100% bought that gay and lesbian people actually DO recruit youngsters, and that gayness really does have to do with BDSM, and that this is so closely tied to gay culture that it can't be removed without destroying Pride.

When you make Pride into a "perverts unite" parade, and believe that anything else would be homophobic, you're pretty clearly showing what you think gay people are all about, and it's an ugly, backwards view of homosexuality that should have been stamped out long ago.

R v Brown is regularly maligned. It would be really interesting to see a discussion of the role it may play in protecting vulnerable people. (Where’s that poster who brought it up gone to?)

For instance there have been ‘extreme body modification’ prosecutions recently that rest on R v Brown to at least some extent- people consenting to having their ears completely removed, say (it’s the person doing the removing who is liable to prosecution, on the basis that this level of harm cannot be consented to).

I don’t understand how against a background of R v Brown a dead woman can be taken by a court to have consented to extreme acts of sexual violence. If the act is criminal by virtue of R v Brown, would that not ground a murder conviction anyway (ie, consent is immaterial because it cannot affect criminal liability)?

(Clearly the reality is these poor women haven’t consented anyway, the whole thing is vile and grotesque, and a disgrace, I just don’t understand how the argument even has any legal effect against this legal background. Why is Brown not applied?)

Well the Lib Dems did fall for PIE ,nothing changes.