James Dreyfus calling for support/action

What is interesting is exactly how many reasons some people can come up with for shutting down women who talk about this.

*J. K. Rowling is too rich.

Posie Parker is too outspoken and gobby.*

*The Daily Mail is too right wing.

Or you're too white, too middle-class, too straight.*

*The only people who are allowed to talk about this are those with no voice, no reach, no readership, no power and, in terms of influence, no chance.

Funny that.*

This reads like a poem, Datun. I could frame it. 👏

Yeah, no.
I'd still rather it was a credible paper. That would've better.

I'm not going to change my mind on that. Have a nice day.

What is interesting is exactly how many reasons some people can come up with for shutting down women who talk about this.

J. K. Rowling is too rich.

Posie Parker is too outspoken and gobby.

The Daily Mail is too right wing.

Or you're too white, too middle-class, too straight.

The only people who are allowed to talk about this are those with no voice, no reach, no readership, no power and, in terms of influence, no chance.

Funny that.

@DidoLamenting I do think the Mail is less credible than the right leaning broadsheets though. Tabloids tend to be.

I agree with those two posts above by Dido.

Dread to think..

Nevertheless, I urge you to try it sometime.

So would most of us - the women here skew very much to the left

I don't. I'm utterly fed up of the left and their sanctimonious assumption that being on the left automatically makes them good people.

The Mail and The Mail on Sunday recently have shown far more credibility on women's and children's issues (not just trans issues) than The Guardian has.

@Skyliner001 so would I. So would most of us - the women here skew very much to the left. But that doesn't mean I won't accept whichever paper is willing to report on the story if the end result is to make people aware of the organised growth of paedophilia, and I assume you're on the same page with that.

We also need a range of views. Absolutely this would be better from Times or Telegraph - a broadsheet - if the Graun won't touch it, but it's better from the Mail than nobody. And the Mail has a massively higher readership than anyone else, as it happens. That matters, too.

That they can wax lyrical all the live long day about paedophilia, and that is entirely acceptable, as long as they ain't touching kids

they claim on twitter they aren't

paedophiles lie

I'm not going to change my mind on that. Have a nice day.

The daily mail? Dread to think. Vile paper. They hate and shame women all the time.

Well yes, @Skyliner001, it would be lovely if the Guardian were remotely interested in exposing the tolerance towards paedophiles on major online platforms. But they're seemingly too busy condemning female-centred feminism, while remaining silent on eg Cologne, to find the time - which is an interesting reflection, perhaps, on which papers truly "hate and shame women all the time". Right now, the Guardian do it as much as the Mail. They just come at it from another angle.

Personally, I'm happy we have mainstream rightwing press in this country, because when you don't, that makes space for the likes of Breitbart. If you don't allow for the possibility that people who don't think as you do may just want access to the news, too, then you create a market for extremist hatemongers, which is what has happened in the USA.

And when it comes to this subject I don't really care who exposes it, just as long as someone does.

If you can convince a bastion of moral righteousness like the Guardian to cover it, go right ahead.

Those responses are grim.

They genuinely believe that telling people they are non-offending, is some kind of Teflon coating. That they can wax lyrical all the live long day about paedophilia, and that is entirely acceptable, as long as they ain't touching kids.

They are actually attempting to take the moral high ground.

Ugh. Truly, how can this be acceptable?

Those responses are very worrying indeed, and the one from Pedophiles about Pedophilia insisting they are not a risk, is especially disturbing.

OMG! Those responses....grim.

Well apparently they're some of the most sensitive and sweet human beings on the planet so I guess they've got that going for them

Those people are sick and I can't believe some of the replies she got. Well I can, thats why I'm no longer on Twitter, I notice one of the respondents (@TNF_13) describe themselves as Minority perspective amplifier what does that mean?

[quote RoyalCorgi]Katherine Denkinson, who wrote the piece for Mail on Sunday about MAPs, tweeted her article a few weeks ago. Have a look at the responses:

twitter.com/KDenkWrites/status/1277121290999136263[/quote]
Good God, I have never been a ‘string them up and chop off their balls’ type, I agree that there needs to be more research into paedophilia and how we can manage it. But those replies! Actively campaigning to lower the age of consent to as young as 4 years old?!! I feel that for some children even 16 is too low an age....

Oh God, those comments. Someone asking why the journo didn't reach out to more people in the 'community.'

I feel fucking sick. How the hell have we got here?

I also like him but it's a low fucking bar when we are relieved to have a man speaking out against paedophilia

Fucking hell those responses.

Katherine Denkinson, who wrote the piece for Mail on Sunday about MAPs, tweeted her article a few weeks ago. Have a look at the responses:

twitter.com/KDenkWrites/status/1277121290999136263

Neurotrash - it's very encouraging to see that the Mail is planning a big investigative piece on this. Really looking forward to what they come up with.