Here I go again, saying 'In fairness to...' when I know it's unpopular, and may be misinterpreted as me supporting the people in question, which I don't:
'In fairness' to HH, she was never a PIE [Paedophile Information Exchange] supporter.
She was an official of the NCCL in the 1970s, and during that time the PIE became some kind of 'affiliate member'.
It's beyond question that they should never have been tolerated in any way by the NCCL at all, and Harman should have acted to get rid of them, when they somehow managed to get rubber-stamped as affiliates.
But I do not believe she was ever a 'PIE supporter'.
I think the facts are damning enough: She will always have to carry the guilt of not having prevented PIE from become an affiliate, or getting rid of them ASAP when she realised they were.
It was the 1970s, and she has apologised deeply, but I think it still casts doubt on her suitability in the specific area of women and children's rights, and along with being TWAW, makes her unsuitable for being an advisor on women and girls.