Rainbow, You Have a Paedo Problem

No one disputes that the Catholic church had a grotesque problem with paedophiles lurking in its ranks. Even though the vast majority of priests are and were not paedophiles, the almost reflexive sneer is that ‘all priests are paedos’.

Funny how no one says the same thing about public school teachers, who are far more likely to be paedophiles than priests are, or about gay men. Quite the reverse: they’ll indignantly huff that ‘not all teachers/gay men are paedos’.

Which is true. But that doesn’t mean that no gay men (or any other members of the so-called ‘LGBTQI+ movement) are paedos. Nor does it mean that paedophiles aren’t using the ‘rainbow’ movement as a cover to get at child victims, just as some teachers, priests, childcare workers and scout leaders did and still do.

The question of whether predators are hiding in plain sight, in a movement graced by an unexplained plus sign, has always struck me as clinically naive. Who do you think the plus sign represents? Stamp collectors? People who own show poodles?

More to the point, why do the same people who react with a triumphant, ‘told you so!’ every time a priest is convicted of child sex offences, simply turn a blind eye every time a rainbow representative is similarly caught out.

This question seems especially silly after Stephen Ireland, a major LGBTQ+ activist, founder of Surrey Pride and former head of the UK Pride Network was convicted of numerous counts of child abuse, including the rape of a 12 year old boy. He also exchanged hundreds of messages fantasising about, amongst other things, abducting boys from playgrounds, snipping their vocal cords and castrating them.

We can add Ireland, then, to the founder of Sydney ‘LGBTQIA+ youth charity’, Minus 18, Colin Billing. If the name of the ‘charity’ isn’t a red flag bright enough, Billing was charged with sexually assaulting three boys, but died before the case concluded. Then there were the gay couple valorised as a poster-couple for gay marriage and adoption, Mark Newton and Peter Truong, who were jailed for 30 years for assiduously pimping out their adopted son. Or the prominent ‘rainbow’ couple, including a teacher, who were convicted of child sexual abuse in Victoria.

Or… well, I could go on. And on, and on. Suffice to say that denying a predator problem in the ‘rainbow’ movement requires the same spectacular ostrich-attitude as NZ media looking at a creepy left-wing politician’s social media account.

Stephen Ireland is far from the first abuser to be hiding in plain sight on planet LGBTQ+. In 2009, it took the FBI to help Police Scotland track down a baby rapist who was posting online images of his abuse. He turned out to be the CEO of LGBT Youth Scotland, who just happened to be running Scotland’s biggest child abuse ring from the offices of the charity. Was an external investigation ever launched into LGBT Youth Scotland to ensure it was safe for its young users?

No surprises: it’s not.

It still does – even though last year, Andrew Easton, who authored the charity’s “Trans Youth Guide to Coming Out”, was convicted of distributing horrific child abuse images including of baby rape. Nobody’s perfect.

And who can forget the time Mermaids appointed an apologist for paedophiles as a trustee?

As it happens, there are striking parallels between the decades-long church’s cover up of abusers in its ranks and the LGBTQ+ doing the same. Both groups see themselves as unique forces for good, locked in an existential struggle with evil. The Catholic Church, with the devil and sin, the church of LGBTQ+ with ‘the far-right’, ‘homophobes’ and ‘transphobes’. Using the rainbow halo of social justice activism as a shield, the LGBTQ+ movement demonises any criticism as an almost demonic assault on its own assumed saintliness and steadfastly resists scrutiny of its behaviour by its perceived ‘enemies’.

The big difference, though, is that abuse in the Catholic Church was a direct contradiction of its own moral laws.

The Church never openly advocated policies that placed children at danger of sexual abuse. The LGBTQ+ lobby does. At the highest levels of political power, it promotes child-harming policies such as the prescribing of puberty blockers – drugs that keep children’s bodies from maturing. And it even gets praised by saucer-eyed liberals for doing so.

It’s more disgusting representatives openly sexualise children, with the full protection of the political and media establishment and resolute covering up that puts the desperate enabling of even some Catholic bishops to shame.

Incredibly, if you search the leading LGBTQ+ news sites such as Pink News or Attitude Magazine for stories about the Stephen Ireland case, you’ll find absolutely nothing. Zero. Not one mention. It’s as if he never existed. How does that encourage robust safeguarding? How does it signal to predators that we are on their case? It doesn’t […]

Everyone who supported Pride in Surrey behaved as if nothing much had happened. In September 2024, only a month after Ireland and his partner were charged with child abuse, its annual Surrey Pride went ahead as planned. Everyone from the Women’s Institute to the Royal Horticultural Society rocked up to join the fun. Guildford Borough Council took to social media to publicly thank Pride in Surrey for choosing the city for the event.

As if to rub it in just how untouchable rainbow paedophiles really are, on the same day that lawyers summed up their case in Stephen Ireland’s child-rape case, Runnymede Council awarded Pride in Surrey, the organisation founded by a known paedophile and his adult sexual partners, one of its civic awards.

Of course, the tilty-headed supporters of the LGBTQ+ lobby will wax furious that it’s just a homophobic slur that all gay men lust after little boys. Which is true – but ‘not all’ is very far from ‘none’. As we see, far too many do lust after little boys. And they do so with impunity from the same people who tear down statues of anyone who, centuries ago, was even remotely connected with the slave trade.

So, why does NZ’s John Money’s name still grace multiple libraries and galleries? Why are multiple figures in the gay rights movement, who were either paedophiles or openly defended paedophilia, still valorised?

Diehard apologists for the LGBTQ+ lobby claim all this is in the past. Unfortunately, it isn’t. I recently subscribed to the last highbrow gay magazine in existence, The Gay and Lesbian Review. In the latest edition, anthropologist Will Roscoe lavishes praise on Harry Hay who founded the American gay rights movement in the early 1950s.

Hay also had a habit of carrying placards in support of NAMBLA (the North American Man Boy Love Association). In Australia, gay rights activist Gary Dowsett published articles defending paedophilia in the 1980s: the queer thinktank he worked at for decades designed Australia’s ‘sex and relationships’ curriculum.

To their credit, a great many gay and lesbian people are sick of the paedophiles lurking in their midst getting a free pass – and tarring them all with the same brush. Which is why they’ve formed groups like ‘Gays Against Groomers’. For their pains, they’ve been viciously attacked by the rainbow movement and the mainstream media.

To damn them with faint praise, the disgusting paedophiles in the church hid their crimes: the paedophiles of the LGBTQ+ movement hide in plain sight. Because they know the media-left will defend them, no matter what.