I interviewed Ireland over the phone in December 2022, asking why Pride in Surrey continued to endorse and promote Mermaids, despite everything that was beginning to come out about them. He started off as friendly and helpful (and clearly did no research beforehand as to who I was or he would have seen my position on trans ideology on Twitter) but the more I asked about vulnerable young people being pushed straight down the medical/surgery route, the more defensive he became, without actually being able to offer any substantial reasons for why the organisation was prioritising this approach.
Also not surprising. It's like a substitute religion. Unfortunately it's not just the pedophiles who respond that way. Many deliberately naive people want to endorse the "philosophy" that it's oppressive to block young people who want to transition
Deliberately naive is a good description and I've hurt my brain trying to understand why so many choose to go along with criminals flying freak flags given free rein to go after children and women.
These things should no longer surprise us, and one might compile a list of how many such people charged in this way are also connected to antifa. Andy Gno has a surprising amount of documentation. Boundary issues come to mind
I’d always keep in mind that such men operate in two mental frameworks.
First, merely speaking to children about sex is its own world of fetishism, which is not well understood. I cannot grasp that people don’t understand that merely showing the desire to publish a book for tots or speak to a group of children about sexual practices is a shrieking red alarm. Model rockets, terrariums, rabbits, ponds are unremarkable. Sex organs isn’t.
Second, these people don’t groom children - a child believes anything. They groom adults to ever expand their access to and manipulation of the child.
Sharing information about sexual practices with a pre-pubertal child is abuse, a variant of exhibitionistic fetishism, akin to speaking to someone sexually on a phone - a child cannot consent to being involved in a sexual conversation.
Sharing information about adult affection - yes Lisa has two moms; it’s ok to fall in love with your coach; Uncle Henry is getting married to his friend Bob - is unremarkable. Boys and girls fall in love with each other, and teachers, and modern parenting has many permutations. Nothing in these would leads to pernicious unconsenting sexual exhibitionism.
This the book at the creep. And ask the police to understand what they have systematically enabled - not this particular man, but men whose sexual exhibitionism involves discussing sex with children.
I interviewed Ireland over the phone in December 2022, asking why Pride in Surrey continued to endorse and promote Mermaids, despite everything that was beginning to come out about them. He started off as friendly and helpful (and clearly did no research beforehand as to who I was or he would have seen my position on trans ideology on Twitter) but the more I asked about vulnerable young people being pushed straight down the medical/surgery route, the more defensive he became, without actually being able to offer any substantial reasons for why the organisation was prioritising this approach.
Did you record the call?
Yes - I should still have the recording, and possibly the transcript.
Also not surprising. It's like a substitute religion. Unfortunately it's not just the pedophiles who respond that way. Many deliberately naive people want to endorse the "philosophy" that it's oppressive to block young people who want to transition
Deliberately naive is a good description and I've hurt my brain trying to understand why so many choose to go along with criminals flying freak flags given free rein to go after children and women.
Of course, of course, someone who wants to talk to little children about sex and gender is going to be a complete creep.
Put that freak in the prison’s general population and justice will be served with impunity.
These things should no longer surprise us, and one might compile a list of how many such people charged in this way are also connected to antifa. Andy Gno has a surprising amount of documentation. Boundary issues come to mind
Atrocious. Very nice summary.
I’d always keep in mind that such men operate in two mental frameworks.
First, merely speaking to children about sex is its own world of fetishism, which is not well understood. I cannot grasp that people don’t understand that merely showing the desire to publish a book for tots or speak to a group of children about sexual practices is a shrieking red alarm. Model rockets, terrariums, rabbits, ponds are unremarkable. Sex organs isn’t.
Second, these people don’t groom children - a child believes anything. They groom adults to ever expand their access to and manipulation of the child.
Sharing information about sexual practices with a pre-pubertal child is abuse, a variant of exhibitionistic fetishism, akin to speaking to someone sexually on a phone - a child cannot consent to being involved in a sexual conversation.
Sharing information about adult affection - yes Lisa has two moms; it’s ok to fall in love with your coach; Uncle Henry is getting married to his friend Bob - is unremarkable. Boys and girls fall in love with each other, and teachers, and modern parenting has many permutations. Nothing in these would leads to pernicious unconsenting sexual exhibitionism.
This the book at the creep. And ask the police to understand what they have systematically enabled - not this particular man, but men whose sexual exhibitionism involves discussing sex with children.
The jail will be too full of Facebook posters to hold him, probably.
I wonder how keen they are to be a woman in Afghanistan or Iran.
Stories like this make me pine for the days of public executions.