When the crimes perpetrated by a small number of men in the churches against innocent children were rightfully exposed and punished, the left in particular were almost gleeful in their self-righteous condemnation. The condemnation against church leaders who weren’t paedophiles, but covered up and passively enabled child-molesting monsters, was just as vociferous.
Less conspicuous, though, has been any mention, let alone similarly public censoriousness from the left, when it comes to the child-sex crimes of its own. The self-righteously ‘progressive’ BBC in the UK, for instance, has never had its feet similarly held to the fire, even though it actively enabled decades of abuse by possibly Britain’s worst child-sex criminals. Nor are overwhelmingly left-wing public-school teachers similarly held to the same vituperative scorn as priests, despite shocking decades of ongoing abuse and cover ups in public schools: abuse which likely far exceeds the scale of priestly abuse.
Is it just a particularly grotesque instance of my-side bias? Or something much darker? Is there a persistent paedophile underbelly to the contemporary left?
Asking such questions invariably prompts the left-wing media to sneer about ‘right-wing fantasies’ and ‘QAnon conspiracy theories’. To some extent, they might have a point: the Pizzagate and QAnon conspiracists were too often nutty and unhinged. A vocal segment of the right is prone to seeing paedos under the bed right next to the commies.
Like Joseph McCarthy, though: just because they’re paranoid, doesn’t make them wrong. McCarthy was, after all, right about a strong pro-communist movement in Hollywood. He was right, if a little late to the party, that communist agents had infiltrated the US state bureaucracy (by the time of the House Un-American Activities hearings, most of the communist moles had already been caught).
That there is a persistent – and increasingly vocal once more – paedophile underbelly on the left is likewise undeniable. There may not be a bizarro conspiracy of Satanic child molesters operating at the highest levels of government, but there is a determined, organised, paedophilic underground. As journalist Róisín Michaux has uncovered, paedophiles are surreptitiously weaponising social media to not just trade their sick material, but hammer at the cellar doors of acceptability.
And they’ve got sympathisers in high places.
There is a slew of (largely unreported) revelations of a seedy paedophilic underbelly to the modern left. A growing movement is trying to normalise paedophilia as a ‘sexual orientation’ under the ‘LGBTQ+’ umbrella.
Leftist bible Salon ran a notorious piece trying to paint a sympathetic picture of paedophiles. A recent TEDx talk tried to frame paedophilia as ‘a normal sexual orientation’. Now reports are emerging of a movement to rebrand paedophiles and build acceptance as part of the LGBTQI-whatever community.
Worse is the alarming push by state authorities to normalise the sexualisation of children at the behest of creepy activists. The most noxious aspects of the notorious ‘Safe Schools’ programme – an Australian programme very similar to New Zealand’s ‘Mates and Dates’ – germinated in a radical ‘Queer’ think-tank. One of its directors, Gary Dowsett, wrote a series of glowing articles in the 1980s attempting to group paedophilia with the gay-rights movement.
Indeed, much of what we are seeing today in the push to normalise paedophilia is merely a resurgence of a movement that proliferated in the 1970s to the early 1980s, then quietly slunk into the shadows to bide its time.
It’s difficult to explain or recall just how mainstream the pro-paedophile movement was, at the time. The 1978 film, Pretty Baby, featured an under-aged Brooke Shields in nude scenes – but, before that, she’d posed nude for Playboy at 10 years old. That was just the tip of the sleazy iceberg sailing through the foetid waters of the Sexual Revolution.
Normalising paedophilia was just another part of the long-term agenda of the Cultural Marxist left. Marxist “Queer Theory” claims that every element of bourgeois morality must be systematically swept away in order to finally destroy capitalist society. This was an open argument by many left-wing theorists, some of whom are demigods of the left today.
French philosopher Michel Foucault, a founding theorist of contemporary left-wing ideologies such as critical theory, was a notorious paedophile who was shielded from criticism for decades by the French media and academies. The founder of modern gender theory, New Zealand psychologist John Money, was likewise a paedophile who filmed his child patients performing sex acts on each other. Foundational ‘queer theorist’, Gayle Rubin, argued that the only way to break down the capitalist state is to overturn all of its bourgeois institutions and ideas of ‘normality’.
“The most despised sexual castes,” Rubin argued, were at the bottom of Capitalism’s power/value pyramid. These were the “transsexuals, transvestites, fetishists, sadomasochists, sex workers such as prostitutes and porn models, and the lowliest of all, those whose eroticism transgresses generational boundaries”. Rubin’s key text, Thinking Sex, openly denounced laws against child pornography and paedophilia. Rubin argued that paedophiles are not deviants but victims: “like communists and homosexuals in the 1950s”.
It’s no coincidence, either, that the resurgence of pro-paedophilia activism is concurrent with – and often involved with – the sudden normalisation of drag queens. The goal of the elevation of drag, its own theorists argue, is to obliterate stable conceptions of gender through performativity and to rehabilitate the bottom of the sexual hierarchy through the elevation of the marginal. Including child molesters.
In the words of queer theorist Sarah Hankins, drag “foregrounds tropes of primitivism and degeneracy as tools of protest and liberation” and “seeks to subvert taboos”. Those taboos include not just homosexuality, but every idea that “bourgeois morality” regards as degenerate: “pedophilia, necrophilia, erotic object fetishism, and human-animal sex,” Hankins writes.
The paedophiles were right there at the birth of the gay rights movement, too. NAMBLA – the ‘North American Man-Boy Love Association’ – was an open and initially welcomed participant in early gay rights and ‘Pride’ marches. Including Sydney’s Mardi Gras. Leftist icon Richard Neville hosted a crawling panel of pederasts on Australia’s national broadcaster in 1975. ABC management airily dismissed criticism, saying that, “in general, men will sleep with young boys”.
In the UK, high-profile Labour politician Harriet Harman – former deputy leader of the Labour Party and chair of the Labour Party, leader of the House of Commons and Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal from 2007 to 2010, and now House of Lords Life Peer, was a member of a circle of left-wing organisers in the 1970s. Along with groups like the Child Poverty Action Group, the National Council for One Parent Families, the Legal Action Group and the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL), there was also the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE).
The NCCL, of which Hartman was a long-time stalwart, so welcomed the paedos that in May 1978 the council’s annual meeting passed a motion in support of PIE. The AGM “condemn[ed] the physical and other attacks on those who have discussed or attempted to discuss paedophilia”, and reaffirms “the NCCL’s condemnation of harassment and unlawful attacks on such persons”.
That motion was passed two years after Hartman now claims that she and others had driven the group out of the NCCL. Other members of the NCCL, who all went on to high-profile political and legal careers, are also furiously backtracking.
Yet, even in 1983, when then home secretary Leon Brittan, described PIE’s views as “utterly repugnant”, the NCCL’s legal secretary, Marie Staunton, went into bat for the kiddy-fiddlers, noting that the NCCL was actively campaigning to lower the UK Age of Consent to 14. Now, Staunton says that she is, “sorry if anything I ever said may have sounded as though I was defending PIE”.
By this time, though, a backlash was setting in. Movies like Pretty Baby vanished from Hollywood’s production roster. Gay rights groups made it clear to the paedophiles that they weren’t welcome at Pride any more.
For the time being, anyway.
The re-emergence of leftist paedophilia in the past few years is an inevitable consequence of the rise of Cultural Marxism, Queer Theory and especially the same-sex marriage debate.
This is not to argue against gay marriage. But some of the arguments made by advocates are dangerously irresponsible. Not that they care: gay marriage was never anything other than a cat’s paw: a tool for the far-left to bludgeon ‘bourgeois society’. But like teenagers playing with a Ouija board in a cheap horror movie, the left opened the door to dark forces with their banner slogan, ‘love is love’. If ‘love’ is the only metric, what barriers could there possibly be?
Conservative columnist David Robertson predicted that, “after SSM, it would be transgender and then the removal of gender altogether (this is all classic Queer Theory) and that this would then be followed by polyamory, polygamy, incest and then paedophilia. People think the latter especially is unlikely. I don’t agree. The way it will happen is for paedophilia first of all to be defined as an illness and a sexuality. Then in popular culture we will gradually get ‘Lolita’ stories seeking to make a sympathetic ‘non-judgemental’ case.”
It would be too easy to dismiss Robertson as a conservative Christian paranoid, were it not that precisely what he predicted is coming to pass with dizzying speed. Polygamists and incestuals were campaigning for legitimisation even before the dust of SSM had settled. An Australian Greens candidate wrote a student essay supporting bestiality and necrophilia. Mainstream left-wing publications are publishing stories angled toward sympathy for paedophiles. The Australian taxpayer-funded broadcaster briefly issued a directive to journalists not to refer to convicted child molesters as ‘paedophiles’. Because it was too ‘stigmatising’.
To their credit, some gay activists and publications are alarmed at attempts by paedophiles to get in on the rainbow action. Popular Facebook page LGBT News has published several articles warning of the trend. Blogger RagingGayConservative is scathing: “The pedophilia flag should immediately be ripped up, and the movement should be disinvited from every #PrideMarch across the globe.”
But while the principled left and some gay activists are baulking at the slide into degeneracy, most are turning a blind eye. More in their ranks are not just sympathisers, but active paedophiles. A slew of leaders in the anti-Trump ‘resistance’ have been exposed as convicted or self-confessed child molesters. Liberal Hollywood is bursting at the seams with rockspiders.
Embarrassingly for the ABC, the gay couple it championed as the poster boys for same-sex marriage were convicted for pimping out their adopted son. US teacher Alden Bunag, who vociferously denounced ‘right-wingers’ for linking the rainbow movement to paedophilia, was convicted of child sex offences. When the San Francisco Gay Men’s Choir released the creepy “We’re Coming for Your Kids” song, it quickly emerged that several were convicted child sex offenders.
Could it really all just be a coincidence? Is it that, like many revolutions, the sexual revolution didn’t know when to stop?
Or is it all exactly what it looks like?
