Pedophile Manifesto

[Jog22]

Very interesting twitter thread on this;
twitter.com/PankhurstEM/status/991258039511670784?s=19

Newspapers please copy. And publicise the crap out of this horrific document, and what is paving the way to it.

One of the biggest issues with self ID in it's proposed form as I keep pointing out to my very pointless MP, is precedent. If a person is of the opposite sex because they say they feel they are - no other proof necessary - and can therefore access all provisions for that sex in spite of the severity of the impact on other uses of that sex - then how do you argue with a fifty year old man who says he identifies as six years old and is entitled to attend an afterschool club, and go away to camp with the Brownies? If a passport can be changed to reflect personal choice rather than fact, how will public bodies deal with someone who identifies as severely disabled and would like 'equality' of access to a car for the disabled for their wheelchair, carers and disability benefit?

At some point, someone is going to have to have the guts to draw a line; this is the bloody yellow brick road to utter chaos. I wish the liberal elite in their bubble would realise this stuff will not wash with Essex Man and White Van Man, and someone actually trying this stuff on someone's child will lead to seeing lynching make a return to the UK. It is going to create a hell of a backlash against inclusion where there was no real problem, and it will be down to gutlessness and heads up backsides. I have honestly never been more disgusted with the entire political establishment.

Knicknackpaddyflak absolutely spot on, DH is and has friends of the Essex/White van man variety, I have broached various issues raised by the TRA movement. The almost unilateral response was that men abusing this, or perceived to be abusing self id to gain access to their female relatives, will get their heads kicked in.

If any of this becomes a reality, I predict a violent backlash and I am genuinely concerned for those individuals with genuine GD, who have gone about their lives unobtrusively, being caught in the cross fire.

I have broached various issues raised by the TRA movement. The almost unilateral response was that men abusing this, or perceived to be abusing self id to gain access to their female relatives, will get their heads kicked in.

Yes, I'm sure you 'explained' it in a way that would elicit that type of response.

If any of this becomes a reality, I predict a violent backlash and I am genuinely concerned for those individuals with genuine GD

Your concern is genuine and touching.

Nope, women are not responsible for "bringing forth a violent response" from men. Not in domestic violence situations in not in any other situation either. Men are responsible for their own actions.

Nope, women are not responsible for "bringing forth a violent response" from men. Not in domestic violence situations in not in any other situation either. Men are responsible for their own actions.

No one's talking about domestic violence so don't try and change the subject. If you go around spreading lies about a group of people, then you take some responsibility for the negative reaction that brings forth, whether it's verbal or physical.

Man arrives and pronounces.

"Shut up, you women, in case you upset me and make me hit you".

Where have we heard that before?

I think the two varieties of excusing male violence by arguing that women provoked it are far closer in motivation than Milly would like to admit.

3rd rule of misogyny: Women speaking for themselves are exclusionary and selfish.

Women are being demonized for spreading the truth.
Not just women, either, which is an indication of how powerful the lobbyists are.

If any of this becomes a reality, I predict a violent backlash and I am genuinely concerned for those individuals with genuine GD, who have gone about their lives unobtrusively, being caught in the cross fire.

Transsexuals have been highlighting this for ages.

Self ID will be abused. And it will cause suspicion.

Transsexuals are genuinely concerned.

(And no, it's got nothing to do with women talking about it. God, it's never ending isn't it?)

Yes, I'm sure you 'explained' it in a way that would elicit that type of response

What!
Interesting you're defending the aggressors by saying their action was provoked. The law doesn't agree.

So your thinking, as well as threats of retribution for speaking out about the violence, is clear for all to see.

If you go around spreading lies about a group of people, then you take some responsibility for the negative reaction that brings forth, whether it's verbal or physical.

If you are aware of male violence and deliberately provide them with exactly the one-sided information to bring forth a violent response then you are complicit in their violence.

MillytheKid This is quite extraordinary to read, especially on a feminism and women's rights board of a parenting website.
I'm not easily shocked.

If you run any campaign based on smears and lies, knowing the propensity for yobbery of a large part of the population then you are partly responsible for the consequences. Irresponsible lies and smears about foreigners during the Brexit campaign make some of the leaders responsible for the well-documented rise in racist incidents in my opinion and I know many people who would agree with that. A large part of the campaign against self-ID revolves around perverts supposedly queuing up to gain access to women's spaces, trans people supposedly trying to force lesbians into sex etc. Given the amount of times Mumsnet mods have had to step in on this forum and delete posts/issue warnings when people have been deliberately trying to blur the line between trans people and paedophiles, I'll wager that talk of perverts etc has been the cornerstone of a lot of the 'I peak-transed another person today' incidents that people crow about on here. There's nothing extraordinary about drawing a link between negative propaganda about a particular group and negative consequences. What is extraordinary is denying it or saying you had nothing to do with it when some numbskull beats up a trans person because he thinks they're all perverts.

Hey Milly this is the feminist forum. Here we talk about women's rights issues. Try Reddit for your woman blaming MRA nonsense.

If you run any campaign based on smears and lies, knowing the propensity for yobbery of a large part of the population then you are partly responsible for the consequences

nope, nope and nope

1. the people on this thread are not running a campaign, they are stating an opinion
2. a person's 'propensity for yobbery' is their own business and the extent of it is known only to them

or should people who as a group are disproportionately prone to violence (let's call them 'men' for ease), carry cards with the degreee of their propensity for yobbery recorded on them?

then women can ask to see the cards and make an informed decision about what subjects to talk to those individuals on. thus taking their proper degree of responsibility for male violence

try again chum

Well said.

If you are aware of male violence and deliberately provide them with exactly the one-sided information to bring forth a violent response then you are complicit in their violence.

This is the feminist board Milly! I can’t believe you are victim blaming to excuse male violence!

Milly seems a bit shocked by the idea that some people (let's call them "feminists") believe men to be responsible for their own actions.

GC women have been called Nazis, among other things.
Are you saying that women would be justified in using violence against losing women only spaces, Milly? And that trans people would only have themselves to blame?

That document in the Twitter thread, where is it from?

I know, as linked above, that there were hoaxes around adding the P to LGBT. What is this 'paedophile manifesto?'

I have quite grave concerns around the erosion of safeguarding rules which seem to be going on at the moment, keeping disclosures confidential, encouraging children to talk to adults they don't know without telling their parents etc.

But I was under the impression that any attempts to 'legitimise' paedophilia are just a hoax/joke?

I also can't see this working, as there is one thing very different from, for example, gay and trans rights, which is that the liberal left was always pretty much on the side of those and bound to support them when they came to the fore (however imperfectly this support may have been given sometimes), whereas there is universal disgust at paedophilia whatever your politics.

The Right Wing often puts out this idea that the Left will be bleeding hearts for any cause and therefore, for example, gay marriage is a slippery slope for legalised zoophilia or paedophilia when it doesn't follow at all.

The men at my workplace, when a co conversation came up about this were firmly of the belief that

People with dicks should under circumstances be in changing rooms, toilets with women, or competing against them at sports.

One expressed deep concern about the number of creepy fuckers who would take advantage.

Men have wives/ mothers/ sisters / daughters that they feel protective of, and they know what men can be like. This is the entire basis of their often overbearing restrictions on our lives, compared to our male relatives. In this case however, their instincts are fine by me. Because in this case they are wanting to maintain protections that we fought for in the first place.

I'm in my 40s and I strongly suspect that if my dad saw a male person heading into a public toilet or changing area where I was he'd still go into protective parent mode. It's a normal and entirely reasonable reaction to the awareness that predatory males exist in significant numbers.

Not read the thing but PIE got a long way in the 70s. Let's not forget that.

There has been an upswing in the press in the last few years of sympathetic articles about paedophiles who claim they don't offend. It's just a sexual orientation, poor me etc. I forget what they call them.