Paedophiles are attempting to gain acceptance and we need to stop them
This week, Converse announced its collaboration with child drag queen Desmond Is Amazing, while Twitter Business announced their support for Grindr’s Kindr campaign, an effort aiming to include some of the “most excluded” communities. Sexual racism is one of issues the Kindr campaign aims to tackle, and though this is an admirable effort, given the push by the pro-paedophile community for greater acceptance, the wording of the initiative raises some important questions.
While Grindr, like the pornography industry, has long been a place where racism has been given a free pass in the name of sexual desire, there is now a growing community of self-identified “harmless paedophiles” that feel they should be included in the ever-expanding LGBTQ+ alphabet soup.
Some have pointed out that the choice of the word “Kindr” is a dubious one, due to its associations with children. Though this may seem like wild conspiracy theory, there is a kernel of truth in the concern, the word Kindr can be linked to the German, Kinder, which literally translates as children.
Several paedophiles have already rebranded themselves as MAPs (Minor Attracted Persons) or Kinds, to whitewash their negative image and gain acceptance within the LGBTQ+ movement. This type of rebranding has precedent, in the 1970’s the paedophile movement renamed themselves “Gentles” to attempt to gain acceptance from the public, the left, and the gay and lesbian movement.
It’s doubtful whether the executives heading up Grindr’s Kindr campaign knowingly opted for the Kindr label because of its connotations to children. However with statements such as “inclusion for the most excluded”, Kindr’s execs unknowingly mirror phraseology used by paedophiles who seek to gain acceptance.
There is a concerted push from paedophiles to gain support within mainstream culture. Many are now emboldened enough to declare themselves as MAPs on social media, and actively push for inclusion within both the left, and LGBTQ+ community.
In June 2018, Attitude, a leading UK gay publication, ran an article warning about the efforts of the MAP community to include themselves under the LGBTQ+ umbrella. They reported that the MAP activist movement had even designed their own version of the Pride Flag, which the article claimed they intended to use in the Gay Pride Parade of that year, though fact checking website Snopes claims the flag was a trolling exercise originating on Tumblr.
Yet it’s easy to see how paedophiles might see an opening, as our culture increasingly condones the sexualisation of children. Converse’s collaboration with Desmond Is Amazing, follows on from months of media enthusiasm for the 11 year-old-boy, who has been cruelly manipulated into giving sexualised performances to grown men for money, while Amazon openly retails child sex dolls.
The MAP community is pressing on, though there has been pushback. Twitter only just suspended the account @YourFaveIsaMap, which attempted to normalise acceptance of paedophilia by promoting the idea popular children’s characters such as Barney, are paedophiles. Hundreds of other MAP accounts on the platform still openly post pro-paedophile content, yet gender critical women and feminists are regularly banned for stating biological truth such as “lesbians don’t have penises”.
The Paedophile Manifesto, a sinister document leaked to the Chans last year has been dismissed by many as unverifiable, yet this document goes to a painstaking length to lay out a concise blueprint for normalising paedophilia and has subsequently been linked to by a number of pro-paedophile blogs.
Interestingly, the anonymous author highlights the importance of following the same strategy for acceptance as militant trans activists, using tactics like framing those opposed to their aims as “outdated reactionary bigots” and “dinosaurs”. The document identifies feminist women, as obvious obstacle to pro-paedophile acceptance, and suggests discrediting them by casting them in the same light as alt right fascists and homophobes.
Is the Manifesto real? Are paedophiles truly following its recommendations to gain acceptance? Was the author merely an internet troll or a conspiracy theorist with too much time on their hands?
While there is no way to ascertain whether this document was authored with the intent to normalise paedophilia or not, there is a worrying correlation between the strategy it suggested, and the actions of those who now advocate acceptance for paedophiles.
As well, there is an increasing tendency within mainstream media for child exploitation to be promoted as diversity and inclusion. Drag Queen Story Hour, which exposes children to a sexualised parody of femininity in the name of “acceptance” is still being held in schools up and down the country, as well as in America and Canada.
While it’s vitally important for children to learn gay, lesbian, and bisexual people are normal, those taking part in DQSH not only indulge in a grotesque mockery of femininity, which is enforced on women, but have often appeared in over-sexualised outfits, and in some cases, have a history of sexual offending or behaving inappropriately, with regards to children.
In Houston, two DQSH readers were exposed as child sex offenders, one of whom had multiple child sexual assaults to his name, as well as links to the sex trade, having worked as a transgender prostitute. William Travis Dees, who goes by the name Liza Lott on social media, was convicted in 2004 and jailed for sex crimes against four young children (ages 4, 5, 6, and 8), and is now listed as a “high risk sex offender.
There has also been a concerted effort from certain elements within academia to normalise paedophilia for years, and this effort has been somewhat promoted by mainstream media. In 2016, The Independent published a piece called, Paedophilia a Sexual Orientation — like being straight or gay, written by psychologist Ian Johnston.
Johnston wrote that “an individual with paedophilia has the same ingrained attraction that a heterosexual female may feel towards a male, or a homosexual feels towards their same gender.”
In May 2018, a TEDX event at the University of Würzburg in Germany hosted a presentation featuring Mirjam Heine, a medical student, entitled “Why our perception of paedophilia has to change.” Heine claimed, “a paedophile who doesn’t abuse children has done nothing wrong”, using the justification that the disorder is a natural sexual preference.
The talk was later withdrawn from the TEDX site at Heine’s request, due to fears for her own safety, but the website still hosts another talk advocating support for paedophiles, called Let’s be mature about paedophilia. This talk was given by Dr Madeleine van der Bruggen, who advises Dutch National Police on child abuse investigations and there have been several other attempts to normalise paedophilia in recent years, whether out of misguided good intention, or dubious intent.
Though paedophilia is still rightfully defined as a disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health, after it’s Fifth edition stating it was a sexual orientation was disputed by the American Psychiatric Society, Wikipedia now states it is a sexual preference.
Several articles in mainstream media publications like the New York Times, The Independent, The Guardian, Vice News, and the BBC, have appeared over the past few years, all taking the same pro-paedophile stance.
Meanwhile, paedophile organisations such as Virtuous Paedophiles, continue to advocate for greater acceptance, and enjoy not insignificant support from some medical “experts”.
The left’s tendency to identify all mores as valid, and therefore, excuse or accept harmful behaviours will leave us open to exploitation. Militant trans activists who have no wish to undergo the gruelling surgical regimes of their transsexual foremothers and fore brothers, now claim that they are “women because they say they are” and that “femininity is innate”, abusing long-time feminist activists daring to protect women’s sex based rights.
People with a history of promoting pro-paedophile arguments have often received a certain immunity via the cover of progressiveness. LGBTQ+ and Human Rights activist Peter Tatchell contributed to a book written by convicted paedophile Warren Middleton, aka John Parratt, the former Vice Chairman of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE).
The 1986 book included a chapter entitled How to Make Paedophilia Acceptable, while Tatchell’s chapter saw him ask, “What purpose does it (the age of consent) serve other than reinforcing a set of increasingly quaint, minority moral values left over from the Victorian era?”
The modern left’s tendency to claim that breaking any and all boundaries is progress is particularly worrying considering the pro-paedophile movement’s intention to enshrine paedophilia as a sexual orientation, and so gain protection from our LGBTQ+ community.
To attempt to condone, or praise paedophiles who don’t act on their impulses would be a mistake, diminishing the harms of paedophilia against victims, and suggesting that an attraction to minors is natural.
Grindr’s Kindr inclusion initiative is likely to be benign, an effort designed to help those who feel excluded from the platform, due to the high proliferation of users posting bios stating “no fats, no femmes, no blacks, no Asians”.
“Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Their type. Their tastes. But nobody is entitled to tear someone else down because of their race, size, gender, HIV status, age, or — quite simply — being who they are,” the Kindr campaign states.
Yet due to the increasing efforts of the paedophile activist movement to gain acceptance via the LGBTQ+ community, the organisers of the Kindr campaign would do well to make their aims clearer, and should assert that paedophiles will never be part of the “most excluded” groups they aim to include.
While attempting to “include all” in the name of progressiveness, the LGBTQ+ community and broader left must not fall prey to the deviousness of those seeking to abuse and harm children under the guise of progressiveness.
Whether or not an attraction to children is in fact unchangeable, it is always deeply wrong, and is a medical disorder, not a valid sexual orientation. Children can never consent to sex and sexualising them in any manner is physically and mentally abusive, severely traumatising, and grossly exploitative.
