UK Drag Queen Charged for CSA materials

[burneruser]

And was involved in the publication of a calendar sold to raise money for mermaids.

I'm not sure if this was covered in other recent threads or not, apologies if I missed it then.

reduxx.info/uk-drag-queen-charged-on-three-counts-related-to-child-sexual-abuse-materials/

"A drag queen who performed under the name ‘Miss Rachel Rear’ has appeared in court on charges related to the possession and production of indecent and prohibited images of children.
Andrew Duncan, 24, is facing multiple counts related to 17 pieces of child sexual abuse materials he was found with. Some of the materials were media of real children, and others were illegal fantasy depictions of children engaged in obscene, pornographic acts.
Among the photographs found on Duncan’s devices were some classified as ‘Category A’ — the most serious type. Images and video in this categoryy_ can depict penetrative sexual activity, bestiality, and/or sexual sadism involving children.
Duncan is alleged to also have been in possession of and produced child sexual abuse materials via digital means, otherwise known as a “prohibited image.” In the United Kingdom, prohibited images are non-photographic media created by computer generation, cartoon, or drawing which feature pornographic and obscene depictions of children."
www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6577301/Drag-queens-pose-glamorous-calendar.html

<fakes shocked face>

Who'd have thought it

Tell me again why we need to 'normalise' drag queens entertaining children

@Hoardasurass

Being a drag Queen has nothing to do with being a sex offender. There's plenty of white straight men who are sex offenders, shall we demonise them too.

As someone who has worked with Paul O'Grady I find this tarring every drag artist with the same brush pretty offensive, he's a lovely man who made money dressing up in women's clothes.

No one is doing that. It's yet more links to the types of people who support and are attracted to mermaids.

Look at the calendar images and tell me that was an appropriate way to raise money for a children's charity?

Several bdsm set ups.

OGrady didn't do that.

Why are do many men want to wear lingerie around kids?

gogohmm
Being a drag queen doesn't make someone a sex offender. For all feminists will hold different views on drag, most accept it is an adult art form and most believe that safeguarding children is essential.

An adult male who wants to erode children's boundaries being convicted of this sort of offence is unsurprising. Predatory individuals seek to gain access to potential victims.

You're right that there's straight white men who are predators. That's why safeguarding is required and straight white men who do not pose a threat to children aren't crying about following safeguarding measures.

The Black and White Minstrels were lovely men who made money impersonating Black men. Just because someone is ‘lovely’ that doesn’t mean that what they choose to do to earn a living is always above criticism.

One page from the calendar (not including the offender.)

There should be anger about this shite as yes, it does mean some tar all with the same brush.

This thread is highlighting the depraved individual and yet again, inappropriate shite in the name of Mermaids.

If I became aware of group of straight, white men that wanted to hang around libraries to read to small children it would raise the same alarm bells.

Missed the image

No one else made this generalised association. I wonder why you found the OP so threatening that you felt you had to defend all drag queens? It suggests that you yourself have concerns about the behaviour of some who are so keen to be with children and 'normalise' a lot of things which are right there, in black and white, in the paedophile manifesto document on how to soften up the public and achieve decriminalization.

Paul O Grady's audience of interest is not face to face with small children.

I forgot about this calendar and its association with Mermaids.

Yep, a perfect idea for Mermaids, a charity for children, to have a group of people producing a sexist, misogynistic, sexual calendar to raise money for them.

Just perfect.

And now we find out one of the participants in the calendar has a penchant for child sex abuse images, well, well, well.

Also, why is drag - a sexist, misogynistic piss take of women - considered to be so wonderful for children?

What was the target audience of this calendar?

Normally you’d expect merch for a children’s charity to be targeted at parents and families. But hopefully people with children, trans-identified or otherwise, aren’t hanging this shit up in their living rooms.

Who exactly are the large group of weirdos who have a particular interest in this children’s charity and also want to buy drag BDSM calendars? And why does Mermaids appeal to this demographic? Did they ever ask themselves this stuff?

@gogohmm could you please point out where I said any of that in my post

Given the recent revelations about staff working for / with Mermaids & other organisations talking to children about sex and identity, is anyone surprised at this revelation? Suspect it's the tip of a very large iceberg.

Yes, wish I'd squeezed Mermaids in to the title.

The article doesn't say he was in the calendar. He has a photo on his Facebook page which he says was taken by the same photographer. So why the link to the calendar article in the Mail? Child abuse is horrible and vile but do you have the same attitude towards postmen, office workers or firemen when one is found guilty of it, or is just drag queens you tar with the same brush?

He wasn't involved in the calendar.

Why because the same photographer took pictures at two completely different times? Bit tenuous, I expect they've taken photos of all sorts of people, being you know a photographer. Demonize a paedophile by all means but don't drag drag queens and mermaids in for no reason.

Demonize a paedophile by all means but don't drag drag queens - he's a drag queen.

If he's not actually in the calendar then I retract that particular connection. He's in the same area.

At the same time, that calendar is inappropriate for mermaids.

They take photos of kids with drag queens posing in a set of a bedroom.

They ask for photo shoots of kids in bedrooms.

Enter <list of numerous other major safeguarding issues> so yes, I'll criticise them, as well as that particular calendar and those particular photos raising money for mermaids.

Why do people defend the inappropriateness of it?

If there are safeguarding issues, raise them, doesn't mean drag queens in and of themselves are paedophiles or a safeguarding issue. In the same way as I said before, if a postie, office worker or firemen was convicted we don't immediately say they are all a safeguarding risk. If as you say they are doing photo shoots in bedrooms with children that sounds a bit dodgy who is 'they' a particular drag queen or Mermaids? I'd also say lots of charity calendars are completely naked, the most famous first one being the women's institute. Firemen, horse riders and rowers being others I've seen. I don't think anyone is defending actual safeguarding risk.

Child abuse is horrible and vile but do you have the same attitude towards postmen, office workers or firemen when one is found guilty of it, or is just drag queens you tar with the same brush?

where is the demand to allow postmen office workers and firemen to read stories to children whilst dressed in lingerie? If allowing adult entertainers to read to children is so good for them, why do we not have strippers and lap dancers going in to libraries for stripper story hour?

I've also just done a quick google, as the Mail images were all fully clothed it seemed, as to where the BDSM image quoted further down came from. It wasn't a Mermaids calendar. It was a local drag artist club's calendar the proceeds going to support trans children (presumably the charity money could have gone to Mermaids). Not a BDSM Mermaids calendar. I've no idea if Mermaids is as bad as people say, but let's be accurate. And this thread isn't right from the start.