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

Oh yes,that innocent paper he wrote where he claimed ejeculating on or in a child is equivalent to ejeculatinh on or in a shoe? That one? Totally innocent. That’s what you’re defending @YelenaBlackWidow funny you seem to have missed that detail.

Yes we agree.

I work with people who do literacy searches, although wiki isn't used as a referenced site it's often the first place they look when they know nothing of the material as it references other sources they can work from so a good starting point. No source is completely neutral because of opinion, bias and who funds the research.

I happen to remember it because it was in the news. It's not rocket science.

Yelena is also sealioning on the thread about a paedophile in a women’s shelter, arguing that male people should be in the women’s shelter, but separate, but prevaricating over why men should be there.

Faux innocence is right.

Yes between the sea looming and the squirrels we’ve got a whole zoo going on. I just wonder why some people are so keen to blur boundaries and defend the indefensible. If they are posting in good faith I would worry about any women and girls they are associated with as they don’t seem very keen on promoting their safety or well being

I've already stated last night I wouldn't be responding to chicken again, after giving her several chances, as they refused to stop completely bullshitting. And I see they are still talking to themselves still bullshitting. Anyone can see what I've written and read it for themselves.

And as for you, anyone can read the other thread and see what I've actually written. If you're going to join in with the bullshitting saying I've said things when everyone can read what I've actually said I don't know what more I can say.

I believe in protecting women and girls from the actual risk which includes trans women as both threads show. It's a shame you're so tied up in making untruths you're blind to it. What do you think lurkers think when they read all the lies and inaccuracies you are spouting? It's almost like you are doing it on purpose. Why would that be?

Anyone can see what I've written and read it for themselves.

Yes.

Yes, they can.

Sorry you misinterpreted my comment as patronising - It was a genuine question, asking which definition of 'gay' you are using.
Same sex, or same-gender-identity? If not clarified, it can cause huge confusion when discussing it particularly with regards to policy and law.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you wouldn't extend to me, and assume that you didn't actually realise that there were different usages according to queer theory or English language definitions. Ironically it's addressed in some detail in the book you dismiss.

Are we still being scolded or are we allowed to carry on with the thread now?

it is very concerning the number of persons related to mermaids and DQSH etc who turn out to be the very people you would not want to be around children. It’s almost as if the rainbow sparkles are used to disguise the true nature of the predators, just as cassocks and being on childrens tv were used in the past.

Ah yes! I need reminding too

Indeed, projection now too. Abusive men do take pleasure in abusing women.