Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

93 replies

PamelaTodd · 27/08/2019 12:04

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?

OP posts:
CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:02

just talking to a man dressed as a dog.
Which is a fetish.

Is that the agenda you actually want to get us on to?

Sorry homophobia, phone autocorrected.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:03

Are you the OP?

Yes I'm the op, report me and have me me banned, in return you win the fiver.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:05

Can you explain how objecting to children stroking men in fetish gear is homophobic?

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:09

It's the only way you can argue against it isn't it, there is no other way, you HAVE to group it into homophobia, even though it has nothing to do with sexual orientation and it's dodgy as fuck.

Vasya · 27/08/2019 13:18

Can you explain how objecting to children stroking men in fetish gear is homophobic?

I didn't say it was. I'm saying I don't have any particular issue with fetishists continuing to attend Pride - something they have always done and are entitled to do, in my opinion, given their long history of fighting at the coal face for equality and protection of rights - and that, in my opinion, it's not always appropriate for children to attend Pride for that reason. Some parents obviously make the decision to bring their children to Pride, and it's up to those parents to decide how far their children should interact with other attendees. If a parent decides it's fine for their child to speak to someone from a fetish group, it's not fair to accuse the members of that group of grooming, exploitation or child abuse. They have more right to be at Pride than a child, and shouldn't be forced out because of the emerging trend for children at Pride.

I don't think it's appropriate for children to interact with fetish groups. But I think it's up to parents to manage that - not the groups themselves who are at Pride.

tellmewhenthespaceshiplandscoz · 27/08/2019 13:22

Jesus Christ the picture of the purple penised fella and a mum seemingly ok with her kid hugging it. Perhaps I'm old and need to loosen up a bit but how can she be ok with that? She's allowing her child to participate in something he may be getting sexual kicks from.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:23

I didn't say it was.

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

Saying pedophiles are at pride is not the same as saying Everyone at pride is a pedophile.
You linked them together in your very first post, saying it's homophobic. Not one other person has.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:30

So, i now have your assurance that it's not homophobic to think children should not be stroking men in fetish gear and that people who get sexual pleasure from this are pedophiles?

70sWitch · 27/08/2019 13:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Vasya · 27/08/2019 13:34

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

Saying pedophiles are at pride is not the same as saying Everyone at pride is a pedophile.

That's not the point. Suggesting that pedophilia is a sexual orientation in the way that homosexuality or bisexuality is is homophobic. Pedophilia is inherently and inescapably abusive. Legitimate sexual orientations are not.

you linked them together in your very first post, saying it's homophobic. Not one other person has.*

The OP has. Your mental gymnastics to pretend otherwise are unsubstantiated and unconvincing.

You seem very confused by my first post. Let me spell it out for you.

Fetishes engaged in by consenting adults are not child abuse.

Kinks participated in by consenting adults are not child abuse.

Sexual orientations are not child abuse.

It's homophobic to suggest that sexual orientations are comparable to child abuse, or that pedophilia is a sexual orientation.

Original poster
PamelaTodd · 27/08/2019 13:34

CaptainKirksSpookyghost is doing a better job than I can (thanks) because I just don’t have the verbal skills to express this clearly.

My point was (partly) about contrasting the attitudes and mores of a society in which authorities were aware, and therefore implicit in appalling abuse, and the attitudes and mores of a society that may finally be doing something about it. Maybe when everything is frowned upon, it’s harder to distinguish between them.

In the recent past gay men were criminalized, hunted and killed by vigilantes while a judge turned a blind eye. All these things were being lumped together, and despite the intolerance, appalling abuse of children was openly tolerated.

Surely if any of those authorities had followed up, people like Mountbatten and Saville would have been discredited and despised.

OP posts:
70sWitch · 27/08/2019 13:36

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

No, it's not. However this link is exactly what paedophiles - now rebranded as MAPs - are trying to establish.

OP, I think you're right. Kink shaming and 9 year old "drag queens" and the prurient reporting of shocking child abuse are two sides of the same coin.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:38

Suggesting that pedophilia is a sexual orientation in the way that homosexuality or bisexuality is is homophobic.

Nobody has done this.

Fetishes engaged in by consenting adults are not child abuse.

We are talking about children, children stroking men in fetish gear, we are not talking about two adults, we are talking about adults and children.

The only way you can argue against this is if you keep returning it to adults, which isn't what we are talking about, we are talking about children.

Vasya · 27/08/2019 13:38

So, i now have your assurance that it's not homophobic to think children should not be stroking men in fetish gear and that people who get sexual pleasure from this are pedophiles?

Why do you need my assurance of this when it's blindingly obvious?

What I don't accept is that everyone attending Pride in fetish gear is getting sexual pleasure from talking to children who also attend. It may be happening, and in those cases the adults involved are pedophiles. But I'm not going to condemn every fetishist who attends pride and has a conversation with a curious child because that child's parent has decided it's an appropriate place for their kid to be.

70sWitch · 27/08/2019 13:42

Sorry about the massive nonsense post above. I have reported myself. I'm not drunk honest Grin

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:42

Why do you need my assurance of this when it's blindingly obvious?

Because you have spent 2 pages arguing against it.

Vasya · 27/08/2019 13:42

Suggesting that pedophilia is a sexual orientation in the way that homosexuality or bisexuality is is homophobic.

Nobody has done this.

You know that repeating a lie doesn't make it any more true?

Fetishes engaged in by consenting adults are not child abuse.

We are talking about children, children stroking men in fetish gear, we are not talking about two adults, we are talking about adults and children.

The only way you can argue against this is if you keep returning it to adults, which isn't what we are talking about, we are talking about children

You are blaming fetishists attending Pride for the fact that some parents take their kids to Pride and let them talk to fetishists. Someone who dresses as a dog for kinks isn't a child abuser because a child talks to them at Pride. It's not their decision to have kids at Pride and they're more entitled to be there than the child.

I'm bisexual. I love and support Pride, but I wouldn't take a child to a parade because of how sexualised some elements of it are. But it I did take my kid and they spoke to someone dressed as a dog, I wouldn't be accusing that person of pedophilia as a result. Would you? What's your view on parental responsibility here?

Vasya · 27/08/2019 13:45

Because you have spent 2 pages arguing against it.

What is it about the phrase 'consenting adults' you can't understand? I've said it over and over and it's like you honestly can't see it. Why are you struggling so much?

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:47

You are blaming fetishists attending Pride for the fact that some parents take their kids to Pride and let them talk to fetishists.

No, I'm not I'm explaining to you that MAPs (minor attracted people) are at pride as it provides sexual access to children.

What's your view on parental responsibility here?
I don't think it's okay to involve children in my fetish because the parents are too stupid to stop it. I would not do anything sexual around children.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:48

What is it about the phrase 'consenting adults' you can't understand? I've said it over and over and it's like you honestly can't see it. Why are you struggling so much?

We are discussing adults with children here.
You keep repeating that it's okay for adults, but that isn't what we are discussing.
We are talking about children, children stroking men in fetish gear, we are not talking about two adults, we are talking about adults and children.

The only way you can argue against this is if you keep returning it to adults, which isn't what we are talking about, we are talking about children

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 27/08/2019 13:50

The attitude that it's okay for pedophiles to interact with child if the parents are stupid enough to let it happen is very telling.

dottiedodah · 27/08/2019 13:51

The reason was I think that we lived in a very male dominated era back then.Women and children were very much second place to men especially rich powerful ones .They could do more or less what they wanted and get away with it!.Thankfully attitudes have changed somewhat in recent times and there is no hiding places anymore!.In the past many things were "brushed under the carpet" as no one knew how to handle it .Many children who did come forward were disbelieved as people would be (rightly ) shocked and appalled .So the done thing was to bury it and carry on regardless!.As the modern world is more able to confront this behaviour head on ,it would be easier to report wrong doing of this nature .

tellmewhenthespaceshiplandscoz · 27/08/2019 13:52

I don't think it's okay to involve children in my fetish because the parents are too stupid to stop it. I would not do anything sexual around children.

//// this. Totally.

tellmewhenthespaceshiplandscoz · 27/08/2019 13:53

70sWitch Grin

Vasya · 27/08/2019 13:54

No, I'm not I'm explaining to you that MAPs (minor attracted people) are at pride as it provides sexual access to children.

Call them pedophiles. Using the term they choose in an attempt to sanitise their abuse only gives them legitimacy they don't deserve.

And the fact that some of them attempt to insert themselves into pride in order to legitimise their abuse does not mean that they are welcome, or that pedophilia is a sexual orientation.

What's your view on parental responsibility here?
I don't think it's okay to involve children in my fetish because the parents are too stupid to stop it. I would not do anything sexual around children.

People who attend Pride aren't doing anything sexual, even if they happen to be wearing fetish gear. Fetishists shouldn't be stopped from attending Pride in case children happen to be there. It's not their fault some parents take the view that it's a suitable place for kids.

There's a lot of debate over whether fetishists should be welcome at Pride. I happen to think they should be, because as I said upthread a lot of the time they've been at the forefront of striving for tolerance and equal rights. Others don't, and think it leads to an implication that sexual orientations are the same as fetishists. I understand that viewpoint, even though I don't agree. But whether you think fetishists belong at Pride or not, it's absurd to suggest that they are automatically abusive to children for representing their fetish at Pride, when it's 100 times more problematic for a kid to be there than a fetishist.