A prominent psychologist within the Gender Identity Clinic at Tavistock has called for normalizing ageplay, furry fetishes, and a variety of sadomasochistic sexual practices as “sexualities.” Dr. Christina Richards, the Lead Psychologist and Head of Psychology at the
These are the people who were trusted to make decisions about these poor girls who were dragged into the Tavistock for not playing with dolls or liking pink (or vice versa for boys). And this is the place where they joked that "soon there won't be any gay kids left" - and they have the gall to try to equate their fetishes with homosexuality?
They should be getting sued into bankruptcy, not having their sad, creepy fantasies validated.
Dear Genevieve, I wonder if you could clarify something please. You quote the Palgrave Handbook, co-edited by Richards, as arguing for the "complete removal of paraphilias from the DSM".
But I notice in the highlighted passage apparently from the Handbook (or possibly from the British Psychological Society?) that "others argue for complete removal of non-criminal paraphilias from the DSM".
Does this mean that Richards, as lead psychologist for GIDS and Chair of the British Psychological Society, with advisory roles in EPATH and WPATH, advocates for complete removal of all paraphilias, including pedophilia, from the DSM?
Or only for removal of the "non-criminal" paraphilias?
However Richards appears to treat pedophilia as an exception from the wide range of "further sexualities" which he considers could be normalised, given his defence of ageplay with "repeated assertions ... that ageplay is not related to pedophilic impulses" (contradicted by Kevin Hsu & J. Michael Bailey).
I only noticed the discrepancy between quoted (all) "paraphilias" and highlighted "non-criminal paraphilias" on re-reading the article: after having cited Richards, possibly wrongly, several times as favouring the former. And am now confused.
This is a depravity tunnel without a bottom. What’s next? Normalization of snuff in real life?
These are the people who were trusted to make decisions about these poor girls who were dragged into the Tavistock for not playing with dolls or liking pink (or vice versa for boys). And this is the place where they joked that "soon there won't be any gay kids left" - and they have the gall to try to equate their fetishes with homosexuality?
They should be getting sued into bankruptcy, not having their sad, creepy fantasies validated.
Beyond disgusting. In plain sight and STILL people pander to this 😢🤬
Scary shit. We are at war.
Dear Genevieve, I wonder if you could clarify something please. You quote the Palgrave Handbook, co-edited by Richards, as arguing for the "complete removal of paraphilias from the DSM".
But I notice in the highlighted passage apparently from the Handbook (or possibly from the British Psychological Society?) that "others argue for complete removal of non-criminal paraphilias from the DSM".
Does this mean that Richards, as lead psychologist for GIDS and Chair of the British Psychological Society, with advisory roles in EPATH and WPATH, advocates for complete removal of all paraphilias, including pedophilia, from the DSM?
Or only for removal of the "non-criminal" paraphilias?
However Richards appears to treat pedophilia as an exception from the wide range of "further sexualities" which he considers could be normalised, given his defence of ageplay with "repeated assertions ... that ageplay is not related to pedophilic impulses" (contradicted by Kevin Hsu & J. Michael Bailey).
I only noticed the discrepancy between quoted (all) "paraphilias" and highlighted "non-criminal paraphilias" on re-reading the article: after having cited Richards, possibly wrongly, several times as favouring the former. And am now confused.
Seems like biological males are mostly the ones with these messed up fetishes, doesn't it?