top of page

So sick I didn’t want to share…

Man's silhouette in the dark

Ok…Let me catch my breath…where do I start.

This blog is inspired by something that was raised and cussed by the amazing Jessica Eaton. I like reading all her work and find it all interesting. A few days ago, Jessica spoke out about Peter Tatchell. Jessica’s comments were on point and it really made me angry to read the article. I feel like I need to bring this to the attention of as many people as possible. And the subject matter is…

Pro-paedophilia. Let that word settle on your taste buds. Pro -Paedophilia.

Can you believe that a word like that even exists let alone people are out here preaching it? I have some very strong views on paedophiles. Not one of them are “Pro”. Because, lets be raw for a moment…. Who could be ok with children being rapped. Even advocate it? Well, these people exist and one of them has realised an article that will have you questioning humanity right now. You can read the full article here, but let me warn you, it is stomach turning. I’m 14 and I’m gay

I did consider not addressing this as I don’t think this article should get any air time but, as someone pointed out, EVERYONE needs to know that this man and others are finding exploited and abused children and then exploiting them further and putting information out there that could confuse and damage children. I am a little bit angry…. I don’t know if you can tell…

Peter Tatchell interviewed a 14-year-old child under the pretence that the interview was about a gay boy’s right to express himself. Unfortunately, that is not the truth. This interview is a blatant example of pro-paedophilia and a huge safeguarding concern.

How can we keep our children safe when people like this have direct access to them?

Lee, the child in question, who is 14, has been having sex with boys since he was 8 and with adult men since he was 12! Peter then goes on to say that Lee has a serious problem. Is this serious problem that Lee is clearly been rapped from a young age and his exploitation is continuing? No. Is his serious problem that Adult men want and do have sex with this child? NO. Peter reports that Lee’s serious problem is that “He wants a steady relationship and has been going out recently with a guy in his mid-twenties, who he met at the hairdressers. But in the eyes of the law, Lee’s partner is a paedophile and Lee is a victim of child abuse”

That’s because the man is a paedophile. Show me in what context that the man raping Lee is not a paedophile?

Anyway, there is worse to come. Peter describes what Lee looks like on the day of interviewing him and states that Lee “comes across as bright, articulate, sure of himself, and mature beyond his years. It’s hard to imagine anyone getting away with taking advantage of him.”

This is a child that has been sexual abused by countless men and is being further exploited by people such as Peter, who instead of safeguarding the child, is using language and behaviour which furthers Lee’s believe that all the things that happen to him are normal. Your taking advantage of him by having this interview with him!

Read this extract…  “Having a relationship with someone his own age would, paradoxically, put Lee in greater legal danger than sex with an older person. The law says that a homosexual act with a male under 16 is a serious crime, even if the person committing the act is himself below the age of 16. So, by having anal sex with another 14-year-old boy, Lee would be guilty of a major offence which can, at least in theory, be punished by jail for life.”

So a grown man, an adult who, for what ever reason I can not fathom, has been allowed to interview this highly vulnerable, exploited child, this man named Peter Atchell is saying that it is better for children to be rapped by adults so that the child , who if had sex with someone their own age and could, technically be held accountable, to avoid any criminal cost….that the children should be rapped by adults. That is what he is saying. This man is freely allowed to publish this pro-paedophilia view. Just like that. Is this my actual life!

“At the age of 11, Lee had a relationship with a 14-year-old named Andrew.”

That line is tame compared to some of the material in this article but just look at the language right here. At the age of 11, Lee has a relationship with a 14-year-old. A relationship? A sexual relationship? Is that how you refer to a child aged 11 who can’t not consent to any sexual contact of any kind? Imagine if a child that is being sexual abused read that. As if they have some kind of option at 11 to decide if they want to be in a sexual relationship or not.

Sadly… It would appear that Andrew has also not been protected by those around him as he is in care and “on the rent scene”. I am aware that “on the rent scene” are Lee’s own words, but there is nothing in this who article that shows Peter corrects Lee or even makes sure that the reader knows that it’s not ok to talk about a 14 year old boy being raped by adult men in exchange for money as “The rent Scene”. Jesus.

I could honestly just write and write about each and every segment of this article. But I won’t. I am asking you, the readers, to comment and tell me what you think of all this.

I will end on the extract made me feel the most sick.

“When you ran away from the children’s home, where did you go? “I used to stay with this paedophile that I met in the gardens”

This child’s mind is so conditioned and damaged, he had been abused so much that when he runs away from home, his safe place is a Paedophiles house. Lets just pause for a second. Lets, as humans, just think about what is happening in the world that a child will run to a paedophiles house and stay there. “There was no pressure for me to have sex, but I did. I had sex with him because I wanted to feel loved and respected”.

I had sex with him because I wanted to feel love and resected. A child says them words and at no point in this article does Peter indicate that he corrects Lee in what he is saying . Or that he tries to safeguard him in anyway. Peter may have safeguarded that child. Who knows. But he has not safeguarded the children who could access and read this article and think that all this shit is ok.

What chance do we have in protecting our children with people like this around?

Pro-paedophiles… The word in itself should be banned.

606 views0 comments


bottom of page