Thread on twitter. The paedophilia plan.

[TERFragetteCity]

twitter.com/PankhurstEM/status/991258039511670784?s=19

@ThatDoctorEm waves (great meeting, I think the snow kept away the scary ones that night!) you did make me think about the links between the different strands of misogynistic activism, for want of a better umbrella term for them all - the constant erosion of boundaries, the manipulation of language, desensitisation mentioned in the thread. I was thinking of how those tactics have been used by TRAs, the porn industry and prostitution. Now I'm thinking about paedophilia. God it's relentlessly grim and utterly plausible. I appreciate the work you're doing because it must be harrowing, like being Clarice Starling wading through some awful madhouse or murderer's cellar at times

I'm new here so I should be using my indoor voice but I feel a podium-thumping rant coming on. Two, actually.

First about the feelz and how no feelz should be discriminated against ever.

Bollocks. Does [fill in type of sex here] hurt another person? No? Then it's fine. Yes? It's somewhere on the criminal spectrum, depending on how much damage it does. Just like any other crime. It's a crime. It's not phobic to be against crimes. It's good.

(So that excludes a lot of prostitution and related sales/rent of bodies, and 99.9% of modern porn. Porn that is about what's enjoyable for women and shows men how to be less than useless wouldn't even be called porn at this point, but I digress. Although it relates to the point about the beak who thinks it would be a good idea to show sanitized porn in schools. /endless screaming/)

Trans people who want to get on with their lives? Fine. Stormy Daniels? Apparently she's okay with what she does. Also fine. Misogynist activism great term, Irishfeminist! NOT fine.

And how that relates to children: in order to be mutually enjoyable real mutual consent has to be possible. The power differential between small children and even teenagers, and between teens and adults is just too huge for real consent to be possible. You have to be somewhere in the neighborhood of equal for consent to be possible.

So DUH anyone below the age of consent must be off-limits. It is just gobsmacking that point even needs to be made.

How did we get to this bizarre place?

Second podium-thumping rant.

I'm a biologist by trade. I was just floored by the idea that pedophiles have started pretending their problems are genetic.

In order to be hereditary, a trait has to have some value for survival. Homosexuality, for instance, though it doesn't produce children, will strengthen bonds between people and increase social cohesion. It's easy enough to see how that would increase survival in the group as a whole and lead to the perpetuation of any genetic component. I'm not familiar with the research in that field, but I wouldn't be surprised if the degree of improved evolutionary fitness hasn't already been studied.

Pedophilia? Bamboozling children into sex they have no interest in? Damaging them at the very least physically, because that's what sex with adults does to children. Without modern medicine, that type of damage is likely fatal, and if not, potentially sterilizing. There is no evolutionary advantage by any stretch of the imagination.

So, no, soz. Pedophilia is not going to have a genetic component. It may have a big component of absorbed advertising about infantilized women, but not genetics.

Welcome @quixote9

Thanks for speaking up!

Homosexuality seems to lead to an increased fertility success in relatives - so the close relatives of homosexual men have more children (I don’t think it’s been studied as much in women) - as they are more likely to share genes, any genetic component is carried along. So yes there is an possible evolutionary benefit to homosexuality (which is also seen in many animal species.) its sort of an alloparenting effect without the direct help.

quixote9 I would love to speak more to you about this move to claim paedophilia as genetic. Also, may I post your MumsNet post on my Twitter feed as evidence - i'm working on an academic pro-paedophilia ring, pro-porn ring at the moment (slowly, because it is scream at the wall terrible)? If you can point me in the direction of anti, a.k.a. biology papers I can zing them with that would be fantastic.

Irishfeminist Dr. Bray's book 'Misogyny Re-loaded' was fantastic - she calls it a global fascist movement. Her introduction is a work of art. It is about joining the dots. I will post a thread in here I've just done on queer theory & pomo regarding paedophilia and a resurgence of the Libertine idea (all is permissible and good if it results in a male orgasm - snuff, torture, rape etc.). I would also recoomend the Limits of Liberal feminism - it points it out as the anti-feminist movement it is.

Harrowing certainly, I've just been on both research leave and time away from darkness hence all my replies are so late. Worst one this week: I had a man try to convince me I was a misguided idiot because fellating an infant was a natural continuation of historical wet nursing! Nah, jog on sicko! They are not hiding any more, happy to make these arguments in public.

Regarding the 'Manifesto'/'Plan' I think I may have mentioned this before but it is similar and also a departue to the one published and available on Amazon a few years back www.theguardian.com/books/2010/nov/11/amazon-ebooks-paedophiles-guide.

It has an unlinked academic 'counterpart' to see how these ideas are in academia thanks to queer theory proliferating unchallengable: Judith Levine, Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children From Sex (2002), available to purchase on Amazon.
From the wiki on this book:
'In the book, Levine lambastes United States laws concerning child pornography, statutory rape, and abortion for minors using a variety of studies and interviews with teenagers and adults alike (see Acknowledgments). Levine also analyzes abstinence-only sex education, which Levine considers counter-productive and dangerous.The book also examines the terms "harmful to minors" and "indecency," which Levine considers to be umbrella terms for censorship, as well as the Dylan v. Heather case, and the little-known SPARK-Support Program for Abusive Reactive Kids and STEP-Sexual Treatment Education Program and Services, both of which she claims do far more harm than the child sex offenders did themselves. Because of its controversial nature and content, it was nearly impossible for Levine to find a publisher—one prospective publisher even called it "radioactive." University of Minnesota Press eventually agreed to publish the book, despite cries of outrage from the right wing of Minnesota's political establishment. The book won the 2002 Los Angeles Times Book Award for Current Interest'
-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmful_to_Minors
A feminist critique of Levine's work and Halberstam is here: www.aroomofourown.org/gaga-feminism/

More pro-Paedophile academia, e.g. L. Haroian, 'Child Sexual Development', Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, Volume 3, Feb. 1, 2000
Remi Newman also argues that infants are sexual beings, this is also available on the EJHS.

Suzzan Blac is the expert in this area, her blog Content Warning is very well evidenced: thesexualdevolution.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/the-sexologists-part-one.html

From the Huffingtonpost - Andrew Extein, 'Why Queers Should Care About Sex Offenders' : www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-extein-msw/why-queers-should-care-about-sex-offenders_b_3386970.html

The way a woman can stand by a man who admits he has had sexual activity with a child astounds me The man who did this to my child pleaded guilty at the start of his trial and was sentenced to 3 years in jail It is reported in the newspaper that his partner who has young daughter is standing by him. I was greatful he spared my child the orderal of giving evidence in court They were over 18 when it finally got to court as it takes so long for the justice system to get that far so were required to give evidence and be cross examined as though they were that age when the crime was committed.

Janie143 It is jaw droping. I think it has something to with how manipulative a predator is and we can learn from work in coercive control. Nevertheless, doesn't stop it being WTF.

'implying that there is any overlap between the two'
But above there's mnhq statement that there's overlap between gay/lesbian and Tra tactics. Is that different?
Too much confusion for my autistic brain

Thanks for bumping Super - yes weird isn't it?

Accusing those fighting for trans rights as diluting safeguarding frameworks without any evidence is transphobic

Having been one of many women who tried unsuccessfully to convince the Transgender online community to address the problem of predators and pedophiles when there was clear evidence that children were being preyed on by specific members, to no avail I respectfully suggest you eff off with your DARVO. The evidence is overwhelming.
The victims are speaking up and speaking out. LISTEN TO THEM!
You have no effing credibility when your position is that the worst thing about male violence is that it makes men look bad.

Yes MNhq agreed it was accepted that PIE piggy backed onto the LGB movement in the 70s. So why can’t we also say that paedophiles now are doing the same with the TRA - piggy backing/ following on/ hanging onto their tailcoats. Not saying they are the same thing!

I read this stuff and I think I can handle it and then I realize I am shaking and I have to stop and go outside.
I was seven when I found out that the police are more interested in hearing all about it than they are in doing anything about it.

To keep focusing on TRA, as one of several groups that PIE doubtless are learning from is disingenuous and after a certain point, yes, transphobic. We absolutely wouldn't allow this relentless focus on a connection with LGBQT for eg, and we won't allow this.

Predatory men have used the LGBT and transgender organizations as cats paws for years. They are not learning from them they are infiltrating them.
How is it possible for MNHQ to be ignorant of the efforts to add the P to the LGBT?
How the fuck can you not fucking know that?

I read this stuff and I think I can handle it and then I realize I am shaking and I have to stop and go outside.

Please look after yourself, my lovely. Sending love and

Bumping this in light of recent allegations against Liverpool Lord Mayor Misogyny Joe NONCE ANderson

Is it only me who finds the linking between paedophilia and the ‘trans narrative’ grossly offensive?

Well, apart from the fact that this 'guideline' to normalize something can be used (and may consciously or unconsciously have been used) for many societal changes, from women working jobs, to being gay, to being trans... I will say that TRAs have put themselves in the position of being regarded with suspicion when it comes to kids. As Lisa Muggeridge and others rightly point out: adult people telling kids to go behind parents' backs, disavow parents if need be, encouraging sexualiation (kid drag queens anyone?)... that is textbook grooming of kids.

Not saying all TRAs (let alone trans people) does that consciously, but after the Challenor case, it is quite clear that all the efforts to undermine safeguarding e.g. in Girl Guides and so forth in order to be 'not transphobic' are of interest to paedophiles, too.

And it has worked out pretty well, too, 'cause people often won't dare to point out the obvious - e.g. the convicted girl torturer Challenor father could have easily transitioned full time once the trans agenda is fully implemented and then, as a would have been on over night trips 'caring' for little girls. - 'cause it is apparently beyond the pale transphobic to state the obvious.

oh, and all those typos in my post are for free. you are welcome.