Peter Tatchell Eloquent defence of critical thinking

[lucasthecat]

Just watched Peter Tatchell make a very eloquent defence of Muslim People on Sky News - whilst arguing very strongly that Islam is nothing more than an idea and it should be open to criticism and challenge due to the way people can use Islam to damage Women and Gay people - He further challenges the use of the word of Islamaphobia - as it shuts down legitimate debate and discussion - Obviously what he says is correct - why can’t he make the tiny leap of substituting - Transphobia for Islamaphobia - Protect and defend Trans people - but question and challenge the fuck out of the ideas that Men can magically become women by saying a spell/prayer - that damage Women Children and Gay People - Religion and Trans ideology are Belief systems backed by no logic or facts - yet somehow you can be an atheist without automatically labelled an anti Semite or islamophobe - Sorry to ramble - but why the fuck can’t peter Tatchell and millions others see this

Peter Tachell also publicly supported the baker in the 'gay cake' issue in Ireland recently. I.e. in defence of the right to refuse to do the cake with the pro gay marriage message.
He can see both sides (presumably) but has a position he champions.

He does understand. He just doesn't care about women and children (unless useful to shore up his islamophobia arguments).

why the fuck can’t peter Tatchell and millions others see this

They can see it.

Peter Tatchell, for example, has openly and publicly supported adults friends of his having sex with children as young as 9, he knows that reducing boundaries around women and children will work in favour of these people he supports.

He and others like him understand fully, they support not because they don't understand it, they support it because they have their hearts set on free unquestioned access to children.

Obviously what he says is correct - why can’t he make the tiny leap of substituting - Transphobia for Islamaphobia

Identity politics is more likely to lead to lowing of the age of consent.

Tatchell does see it. It just suits his agenda to pretend otherwise.

His agenda is dangerous to women and especially children.

Several of my friends - gay and straight, male and female - had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy. While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.

Peter Tatchell, letter to The Guardian, 1997.

All say it was their conscious choice

It's called grooming, Pete.

Nine year olds, ffs.

Like most men, he's interested in the lives, happiness, rights of his fellow men.

That's about it really.

He does understand full well. About five years ago he got piled on and no-platformed for sticking up for free speech in the trans debate. He obviously didn’t think it fitted with his image so he did a giant u-turn and spent his time slating women until the woke crew let him play with them again. Huge coward in this respect.

This is also why the NSPCC are teaching children that it's only abuse if it hurts.

Yes, forgot about that.

It's a push in one direction from many different quarters.

You would not expect a devote Muslim to make the arguments he made. He is a devout follower of the Church of Gender, he could never make a critical argument against it, he actually believes in it. And he is a pedophile apologist.

And I do not know how to spell devout

This is also why the NSPCC are teaching children that it's only abuse if it hurts.

What the???? These idiots need to watch Finding Neverland (and the amazing post-discussion with Oprah).

One of the main reasons CSA victims suffer such feelings of shame is because at the time, even if it feels wrong, It also FEELS GOOD.

I thought it was ‘it’s only bad if it hurts’? Either way, a load of toss.

Sorry other way around ‘it’s only abuse if you are scared’.

These idiots need to watch Finding Neverland

Those "idots" could probably teach Micheal Jackson a thing or two. They know what they are doing, it's not idiocy, it's a very slow calculated move to change understanding of boundaries in children.

‘it’s only abuse if you are scared’

Yes, that's it.

Does anyone have a link to the NSPCC thing? That’s absolutely shocking.

Peter Tatchell is a copper bottomed ocean going misogynistic fuckwit.

Pota2

Here are a few links to things Tatchell would like to see.

www.christian.org.uk/news/tatchell-is-wrong-on-the-age-of-consent-sex-is-for-adults/

ianpace.wordpress.com/tag/peter-tatchell/

Re NSPCC definition, hope this link works.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3611569-Is-NSPCC-school-guidance-for-kids-re-sexual-abuse-shifting-the-Overton-Window-Need-expert-advise-to-break-this-down#prettyPhoto

Thanks. Wow, that is pretty worrying.
Also concerned with how people now seem to think that exposing kids to BDSM fetish stuff and gimp masks is fine because it’s all in the name of inclusivity. I also vehemently dislike the term kink-shaming because it is used all the time to excuse seriously abusive behaviour, especially from men. Why should you get a free pass because you claim to be turned on by your otherwise unacceptable actions.

Also saw an organisation that claimed to deal with child sexual abuse ‘in a sex-positive way’. What the absolute fuck? Sex-positivity (which is a term that is mainly used to promote male rather than female sexual gratification) has zero relevance or place in anything to do with children.

Gaaah, I guess people felt like this in the 70s with PIE and the public eventually woke up but I wish the waking up would come soon.

People are waking up, slowly but they are.
It's not the general public who are backin this, it's people in government, which means that 99% of the country can be against it and it'll still happen.