Another one hiding in plain sight? Dr Bruce Hensel

[SunsetBeetch]

twitter.com/Sseltse/status/1194987547002359813?s=19

Bruce Hensel, Former NBC chief medical correspondent, and prominent trans rights campaigner arrested for asking 9-year-old for sexually explicit photos!

#inplainsght #safeguarding #brucehensel t.co/3mqUaFn478

nypost.com/2019/11/14/ex-nbc-correspondent-bruce-hensel-arrested-for-asking-9-year-old-for-sexual-photos/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

abc7.com/amp/ex-tv-medical-correspondent-arrested-by-lapd-juvenile-division/5624361/?__twitter_impression=true

Dr. Bruce Hensel, an Emmy-winning former television medical correspondent in Los Angeles and New York, was arrested today for allegedly asking a 9-year-old girl to send him sexually suggestive photos.

t.co/51vYH7lHeX

twitter.com/PatriotAM1150/status/1195038649810923520?s=19

Who will benefit from the dismantling of appropriate safeguarding? What category of person will benefit from the wholesale dismantling of safeguards around children?

You can't seriously be suggesting that anyone would be using the bullishly effective transactivist movement as a cover for an extremely nefarious agenda, surely? Predators would never stop so low as to use any and all available means to gain access to victims! The very idea! Why, this kind of suggestion could lead to us being suspicious of everyone who demands access with negligible oversight, to women and children in vulnerable situations. You'd end up scrutinizing the church, youth organisations, popular tv personalities. Unthinkable!

@mnhq we really would like to know what we are not allowed to say about paedophiles and children safeguarding...?

Are we allowed to say paedophiles are bad? That dismantling safeguarding puts vulnerable adults and children at risk? Or does that go against some guidelines?

What about Dr Hensel, do we get a strike if we condemn his behaviour?

Would be handy to know, so I can avoid doing these things if it is against guidelines.

You'd end up scrutinizing the church, youth organisations, popular tv personalities. Unthinkable!
Yes totally unthinkable Floral
And probably unsayable on here. But I'm almost saying it.

I think that would fall under the rule against a negative generalization about any group of people in the special FWR rules. Not in the sipriti, you see.

Wow horrifying. Have they got back to you yet?
No, not yet. I emailed them Friday night, and am still waiting with bated breath...

I also got into communication with the snitch line - they don’t auto send deletion messages these days - and outlined my argument and backed up with some facts of what was mentioned in my statement. I didn’t hear back.

Maybe they are all now tied up and gagged by the Bad Men People? I’m a bit worried. How very, very awful...

How awful. Bless my yawning biscuits.

(Just for clarification, I'm talking about the deletion of those two posts which I bet were completely innocuous.)

It is awful. Why very awful. Too too awful.

I have competed a Haiku in my distress.

Sob. I cried when then
My post was cruelly gone
Too awful for words

Maybe best to wait until Monday to obtain clarification for MNHQ, when some grown ups might be present. There need to be uniform moderation guidelines applicable. And there needs to be an explanation why concern for dangers abused my paedophiles are moderated so severely. This is making me queasy.

I think the issue here is people here attempting to link paedophilia to trans people which is harmful and incorrect and should not be allowed on this forum.

I think the issue here is people here attempting to link paedophilia to trans people which is harmful and incorrect and should not be allowed on this forum.

I (And i would guess most others) think the issue is that peadophiles are joining the trans rights campaigns because they are supportive of breaking down safeguarding around children..

Not one person has linked paedophilia to trans people.

Pedophilia is mostly among males. Trans women are males therefore the risk is the same with trans women as it is men because they are male and statistics don’t change because they take hormones.

I think the only person on the thread that has linked paedophilia to trans people on the thread is vickyjgo. Which is berh bad form for a TRA. Will probably lead to a slapped wrist. Norty.

What is in question is why someone involved in promoting the general Transactivist movement as an innocuous authentic identity movement, as this guy has been with his documentary work, would get a protective pass from Transactivists when he turns out to be a really creepy paedophile. You lot are always the ones who play the guilt by association when feminists dare to read things you don't approve of. This one is yours. Enjoy basking in the associated glow. Dying on Nonce Hill will be a nice change from Rapist Hill, I suppose.

So do we need to put in a disclaimer that, of course we recognise NATPALT if we’re discussing a person IN THE NEWS who is a paedophile and a trans/transactivist?

FFS MNHQ - come on. Enough now, I thought we talked about this - several time and at exhaustive and exhausting length.

No one is saying all transpeople are paedophiles just that the blurring of boundaries into women’s and children’s protective spaces to allow at-will access to male-bodied persons also leaves the door open to those with bad intentions. That shouldn’t be deletable.

How very interesting. Back one day and I've had a deletion for saying that nonces welcome weakening of safeguarding and that those pressing for the weakening of safeguarding don't actually seem to care about that.

This kind of absolute bullshit from a parenting site is why I stayed away. Fucking despicable, primarily the reporting people who don't want parents to be allowed to talk about child abusers being given free rein, but also the fact that MNHQ are facilitating that and despite TalkingInTheDark's post on Kitten's thread, are still going along with this. Eventually, you have to start asking if it's plausibly hands-tied or ignorance, or is actually deliberate, as fucking unthinkable as that would be.

Report me. No shits given. I know what you are, you know what you are. You have to look in the mirror with that knowledge, I shall just continue to do all the things I've been doing in my absence to fuck up your plans to dismantle the safeguarding of the vulnerable.

I think the issue here is people here attempting to link paedophilia to trans people which is harmful and incorrect and should not be allowed on this forum.

No it bloody well isn't!

The point being made is that if you open doors for yourself and don't close them behind you, you let in all the people that the door was there to keep out. Whether or not those people are or are not trans is by the bye.

MNHQ - what are you thinking? This is a parenting website. The safeguarding of children should be your paramount concern. Adult identities shouldn't come into it.

Here, in particular, the removing of safeguards around children who question their gender (as many of the extremist genderist lobby group materials do - eg confidential disclosures, parental alienation, etc - put the very children these groups are advocating for at most risk of infiltrating abusers.

It's shameful to see you deleting posts that point this out. SHAMEFUL.

And Justine thinks there's nothing to see here? WTF?

(And yes: I know I'm not allowed to be cross. But I am cross. Sorry not sorry.)

So, let me get this right.

On MN It's OK to say that this man is bad because he's a paedophile (asked a 9 year old to send him sexual images).

But if he is trans / a TRA activist we are NOT allowed to say that even though his actions are EXACTLY THE SAME?

So this thread is basically demonstrating to predators how to get a free pass and stop women discussing their abuse of children.

It's demonstrating that what we've been saying (TRA ideology weakens safeguarding) IS TRUE. Because safeguarding is partly about people talking about the predators. Calling out their actions - no matter who the fuck they are, or whatever protected characteristics they might have.

For fuck's sake.

Imagine what the trans activists would be saying if a well known writer of gender critical articles were to be arrested for this type of offence. Do you think they would be very careful not to paint us all with the same brush? Would their forums tell them not to talk about her beliefs and stick to the crime?

Back one day and I've had a deletion

Hey floral nice to see you back

@MNHQ can you not see this...can you not see that certain posters are being picked on...and picked off?

Oooh oooh womb womb i know this one!!

OF COURSE THEY FUCKING WOULDN’T

I merely pointed out that tactics/words used by Bad People in broad daylight has been seen before.

Imagine what the trans activists would be saying if a well known writer of gender critical articles were to be arrested for this type of offence. Do you think they would be very careful not to paint us all with the same brush? Would their forums tell them not to talk about her beliefs and stick to the crime?

More to the point, would MN mods? Because negative generalisations are posted on here about the regulars all the bloody time - and we haven't abused any children.

Floral should not have received a strike because vickyjo, or whoever reported Floral's post, lack reading comprehension and is reading into her posts things she didn't say. Do we need another massive thread about this? Because we can and will keep doing that if necessary.

Also, that point many of us made on my thread about the guidelines that prominent posters are being deliberately picked off one by one? One day Floral has been back and already she has a strike. We are not imagining this, so please stop trying to gaslight us into believing that we are.

I shouldn’t have for one either! I got told off for being general - general ffs