to wonder why powerful men abusing vulnerable children is newsworthy now?

[PamelaTodd]

I’m not suggesting that the rape and exploitation of children and vulnerable women isn’t reprehensible, but my question is why is this an issue now ?

In the case of Mountbatten, his habits were an open secret. The FBI has a file about him, based on information from people in his social circle. It has been suggested that the Gardai, RUC, IRA and MI5 were all aware of his activities with the Kincora Boys home. But it just didn’t seem to matter to anyone very much.

Epstein doesn't seem to have been discreet, even if his friends all claim an astonishing degree of naïveté and myopia. The news stories being released in the last month aren’t new. They’ve been held in editor’s vaults until now. Why now? Why didn’t any of this matter to us (the public interest) until now?

If anything society is more tolerant than ever of kinks and fetishes, as well as the spectrum of sexual orientation. I can’t find the post now, but there was a mention of paedophiles (or “minor attracted persons”) openly meeting up at one of this year’s pride march.

It seems odd to me that the more buttoned up society of the past would sweep this under the carpet, and our hyper sexualised tolerant society is so shocked. If I’m honest I’m a little bit scared that this is just a step in normalizing it. That we’re supposed to absorb the idea that this sort of thing is so widespread and endemic that there’s nothing we can ever hope to do about it.

There have been attempts before by victims of these (and other injustices) to come forward but they’ve been discredited, or silenced. Why are we listening now? What’s changed?

And what else is locked away in news editors’ values that we should know about?

It seems odd to me that the more buttoned up society of the past would sweep this under the carpet,

The more 'buttoned up' society swept it under the rug, because they didn't know how to deal with it, so just turned a blind eye.

We are definitely (thankfully) living in a 'know better do better' society.

and our hyper sexualised tolerant society is so shocked. If I’m honest I’m a little bit scared that this is just a step in normalizing it.

Those 2 statements are COMPLETELY opposite to each other. How can a society that's shocked by behaviour equate to a society that's normalising (hence accepting) it? You're either shocked or accepting. That's an absolute reach.

I'm glad that we are continuing to move forward and evolve, and we're not allowing things like this to be hidden anymore.

They aren't listening now the reason it's out there more is because the internet makes it harder for news to be suppressed, the BBC no longer have the hold it once did on public opinion.

It is however being normalised so in a few years underage sex will be a nothing thing, as long as the rapist is kind and good at grooming.

I don’t think they are opposites though. If you ask your grandparents there are lots of things that were shocking to their generation that are normal to ours.

Why couldn’t they have done something in the past? They had laws. They had media.

@CaptainKirksSpookyghost the internet is a big factor, I think you’re right

Put it this way, in 2019 you you can by underpants that help disassociate children from their genitalia.
You can go to a bar and watch a 9 year old pole dance for money.
You can by child sex dolls.

And it's all legal.

Secrets are harder to keep in the Internet age. The Panama papers showed how vulnerable information is to hacking.
I think as people are more open about sex and prepared to discuss things then behaviour is harder to hide or justify.
As well as Savile I remember how much came out about Cyril Smith after his death. 20 years earlier it would have been hushed up because the media wouldn’t have touched it and there was no other form of mass communication.

If anything society is more tolerant than ever of kinks and fetishes, as well as the spectrum of sexual orientation.

Child abuse is not a kink, a fetish, or a sexual orientation and it's wildly homophobic to link them in this way.

Pedophiles are not welcome at Pride, whatever they themselves try to assert. Pride organisers have repeatedly denounced any attempt by pedophiles or pedophile apologists to be included in any way in Pride.

Society was a different beast even as little as thirty years ago. Jimmy Saville is a case in point, the rumours surrounding him where an open secret that everyone seemed to know. I would argue his death seemed to trigger a shift in the public’s reaction to victims speaking out of their abuse at the hands of people with a lot of clout behind them.

Don’t forget the media has changed exponentially in a relatively short period of time. The internet has made keeping something quiet much harder (the main news was on at 6 and 9 o’clock, that was it and newspapers obviously have biases and boards to keep happy). News sources aren’t treated as the all-knowing gurus they once were and people tend to seek out alternatives - although now confirmation bias is a bigger problem. Couple that with a deference to class and men in the past that is visibly eroding in some ways now.

Show me a society that isn’t sexualised in some way. Carry on films of the 60’s and 70’s are ridiculously sexualised and the Romans loved a romp and plastered their walls with various scenes which the modern counterpart of would be considered pornographic. Current sexualising at least seems to carry an element of respecting consent and taking advantage of vulnerable people is frowned upon.

It’s multifaceted and very interesting, we’re living in times that are shifting fast and occasionally for the better.

Pedophiles are not welcome at Pride

Apart from Peter Tatchell.

Child abuse is not a kink, a fetish, or a sexual orientation and it's wildly homophobic to link them in this way.

Why is it homophobic, fetishes and Kinks have nothing to do with homosexuality?

It's incredibly homophobic to suggest gay people have some kind of fetish Vasya.

Why is it homophobic, fetishes and Kinks have nothing to do with homosexuality?

It's indisputably homophobic to suggest that pedophilia is akin to a sexual orientation.

It's not necessarily homophobic to link fetishes and kinks with child abuse, but it's still not right - fetishes and kinks participated in by fully consenting adults are not abusive, and those who choose to participate in them shouldn't be tarred with the same brush as child abusers.

It's incredibly homophobic to suggest gay people have some kind of fetish Vasya

Not something I've ever said, but nice reach

t's indisputably homophobic to suggest that pedophilia is akin to a sexual orientation.

Nobody has done this.

fetishes and kinks participated in by fully consenting adults are not abusive

What about when they involve kids?
Like the Pups?

Not something I've ever said

You grouped Sexual fetish and homosexuality together above. you own words are linking fetish and sexual abuse is homophobic.

Child abuse is not a kink, a fetish, or a sexual orientation and it's wildly homophobic to link them in this way.

You are the only one who has linked them.

Pride organisers have repeatedly denounced any attempt by pedophiles or pedophile apologists to be included in any way in Pride.

Can you explain the photos of “pups” encouraging children to pet them at various Pride events this year then?

From pictures I've seen from various Pride's - some in the LGBT community are linking kink/porn/fettish with 'gayness' far more effectively than the rightwing press ever have

t's indisputably homophobic to suggest that pedophilia is akin to a sexual orientation.

Nobody has done this.

Op has. She said:

If anything society is more tolerant than ever of kinks and fetishes, as well as the spectrum of sexual orientation. I can’t find the post now, but there was a mention of paedophiles (or “minor attracted persons”) openly meeting up at one of this year’s pride march.

This suggests that because society is more tolerant of the spectrum of sexual orientation, it is surprising that it's not more tolerant of pedophilia. This suggests that the two are akin to one other.

OP also linked pedophilia with Pride, again suggesting that pedophilia is something that could be celebrated at Pride - I.e. a sexual orientation.

Op also said:

It seems odd to me that the more buttoned up society of the past would sweep this under the carpet, and our hyper sexualised tolerant society is so shocked.

This suggests that tolerance of sexuality should lead to tolerance of pedophilia - again, suggesting they are comparable.

fetishes and kinks participated in by fully consenting adults are not abusive

What about when they involve kids?
Like the Pups?

I already said 'by fully consenting adults', but if you point out which part of that phrase you're struggling with I'll see if I can make it clearer for you.

^society is more tolerant than ever of kinks and fetishes, as well as the spectrum of sexual orientation. I can’t find the post now, but there was a mention of paedophiles (or “minor attracted persons”) openly meeting up at one of this year’s pride march.*

This suggests that because society is more tolerant of the spectrum of sexual orientation, it is surprising that it's not more tolerant of pedophilia. This suggests that the two are akin to one other.

if you point out which part of that phrase you're struggling with I'll see if I can make it clearer for you.

Maybe you should re-read the OP, slowly.

society is more tolerant than ever of kinks and fetishes, as well as the spectrum of sexual orientation.

there was a mention of paedophiles (or “minor attracted persons”) openly meeting up at one of this year’s pride march.

Which bit of this links these two together?

Not only are they separate things, that are no separate lines in separate sentences.
You have linked them.

@CaptainKirksSpookyghost I don't know what your agenda is here, but you're being deliberately obtuse. In one single paragraph OP references sexual orientations, and then suggests pedophiles might be involved in Pride. Pride is, explicitly, an event to celebrate the spectrum of sexual orientations.

I can't account for the mental gymnastics you want to engage in to pretend that OP's point isn't that it's surprising that a society tolerant of different sexual orientations isn't tolerant of pedophilia, but it's written there clear as day.

What's your skin in this game? Why are you so motivated to defend the OP making this link?

I don't know what Sexual orientation these men are, but there's no way they should be having children participate in their sexual fetish.

I would hope you do not either Vasya, now if you can explain for me how objecting to this is transphobic?

OP's point isn't that it's surprising that a society tolerant of different sexual orientations isn't tolerant of pedophilia, but it's written there clear as day.
This isn't the OP's point.

I don't know what Sexual orientation these men are, but there's no way they should be having children participate in their sexual fetish.

I also don't know what their orientation is, or what this event is. The parents of that child are, however, the ones responsible for safeguarding her, not those men. They've clearly decided it's fine for her to speak to them. Without knowing any more context than that photo, it's impossible for me to judge whether she's 'participating in a sexual fetish' or just talking to a man dressed as a dog. Her parents presumably did judge the situation, and if you disagree with their choice (which you're more than entitled to do) then it's them you should be directing your ire at.

Pride has always had representation from fetish groups along side those exclusively celebrating the diversity of sexual orientation, and for that reason it's not always an appropriate place for children. Parents can and should make decisions on an individual basis about the extent to which their children interact with Pride events. The fact that some parents choose to take their children to Pride events doesn't mean anyone who participates in a fetish and also attends Pride is grooming or abusing children.

I would hope you do not either Vasya, now if you can explain for me how objecting to this is transphobic?

I haven't said anything about transphobia. Is that the agenda you actually want to get us on to?

This isn't the OP's point.

Are you the OP? Unless you're a sock puppet I don't see how you can do authoritatively contradict what she's clearly written.