Southwest of Salem.
Remember the days, not so long ago, when to suggest that there existed such a thing as a ‘false sexual allegation’ saw you under siege on Twitter for days on end? It was a ‘vile’ suggestion which could only come from someone who was a ‘paedo-supporter’ and who must be hounded into ignominy?
Remember the days, not so long ago, when every allegation, however bizarre, was carried proudly on the front page of the newspapers – and the comments columns underneath were filled with sweet sounding people called ‘Sylvie,Walsall’ volunteering to nail the accused to the front door of the local church and save everyone the expense of having a trial; or demanding chemical castration on arrest, because why wait until they had ‘wriggled their way out of court’?
My, the tide has turned. Across the country, ordinary families have lived through the agony of a false allegation, made in the heat of a divorce battle, or after a failed relationship. They have mortgaged their homes, spent sleepless nights, lost friends, as they battled to clear their name. We must be close to the point where every family in the land knows someone or is related to someone who was swept up in the hysteria.
It is starting to dawn on folk that the millions that have been spent creating headline news, and massaging police investigation figures, would have been better spent protecting the children of today rather than feathering the nest for a raft of lawyers.
The media, sensing the iceberg ahead, has ordered ‘hard-a-starboard’ and with their mighty engines full astern, is filling those column inches with a daily diet of demands to know why ‘x’ case was ever brought to court, or detailing the devastation caused to ‘y’s career.
The film industry has put a cautious toe in the water and made a documentary showing how four defendants were ‘legally railroaded’ into prison courtesy of spurious allegations. Their trials are described as ‘Kafkaesque’; emotionally harrowing; decimating their families, relationships, reputations and careers.
Eventually, the ‘Innocence Project’ took up their case, and a court overturned their convictions. But they have not been declared innocent, and face a lifetime of being branded as sex offenders unless they can be exonerated.
Hence the determination of the journalist behind this film to show just how ‘broken’ the justice system is; how near impossible it is to actually clear your name once an allegation has been made – regardless of whether you have been through the court system, or merely been ‘NFA’d as it is known – told that there is ‘insufficient evidence’ to charge you.
I do wonder if the filmmakers would have had the courage to make such an emotive and sympathetic film had these four defendants not been homosexual. It has allowed them to portray the trial and incarceration as being ‘homophobic’, and to explore the all too common myth that every homosexual is a latent paedophile – something the court case dwelt on at length.
I am quite, quite certain, that the film would never have been made at all had the defendants not all been women…
It’s one of the film’s great strengths, humanizing and giving voice to women who have been silenced, denigrated and marginalized.
It is a beautiful portrait of four women whose strength carries them through the injustice forced upon them. Blending a true crime aesthetic with intimate access to the daily lives of the women and their families, Esquenazi tells their story with compassion, grace and a palpable anger at a justice system in ruins.
We must be grateful for small mercies – if it takes the unfair incarceration of four gay women to give documentary makers the courage to show that the atavistic hysteria which has swept across our land has left more victims in its wake than it set out to ‘protect’, so be it. That the money which could never be found to provide proper protection for the small and the vulnerable in hospitals, care homes and children’s homes can flow like water over Niagara Falls when demanded by lawyers and Chief Constables.
The film is due for release on September 16th in the US.
‘Southwest of Salem’ provides poignant testimony to the consequences of wrongful persecution and incarceration—as well as the ultimate strength and, indeed, triumph of human spirit. Engrossing, timely and heartbreaking, the unwavering perseverance of the San Antonio Four has resulted in their release from prison – and fans the flames of hope for their exoneration.’
I look forward to the day when similar documentaries fill our screens in the UK – showing the consequences of false allegations, not just for chosen elite groups, but for all the ordinary folk trying to defend themselves against the pernicious behaviour of the police and judiciary.
Just as I look forward to the day when those in charge of looking after children are once more kind hearted but firm men and women acting in loco parentis, not robotic ideologues who think that a 14 year old girl staying out all night with her ‘boyfriend’ is merely exercising a lifestyle choice.
- Moor Larkin
August 11, 2016 at 10:38 am -
The Mail giveth and the Mail taketh away. Time to stop imagining that the mass media represents public opinion. The whole thing is an Extablishment Bubble-world. The people have been abandoned. Time for the people to burst the bubble.
- Tommy K
August 11, 2016 at 11:07 am -
I look forward to seeing the film.
With any luck a British documentary maker might find the stomach to similarly analyse the pernicious effect of the censorship laws that are hidden away in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. Clearly the authors were too devious to call it the Censorship Act, and the prevailing hysteria prevented sensible scrutiny. We are thus left with ludicrous anomolies such as a husband committing a crime if he possesses a photo of his 17 year old wife that somebody deems to be “suggestive”. The Act has criminalised thousands of otherwise exemplary citizens, many of whom are subjected to the extrajudicial punishment of public humiliation even if not convicted.
What are the chances of our new Justice Secretary daring to reform this particularly nasty legal mess?
- TheyFearTheHare
August 11, 2016 at 2:59 pm -
IIRC I was informed by a fairly reliable source that there had been amendments to legislation in order to specifically deal with the 17 year old husband / wife photograph fiasco. A little bit of common sense by the old bill might have eliminated the need for this. Even more ridiculous of course is that although suggestive photographs were problematic, video was perfectly OK
- tdf
August 11, 2016 at 3:25 pm -
What about the Audiovisual Media Services Regulations 2014?
An absurd piece of legislation for which there was, as far as I can see, no public demand for.
And yet very very few politicians or public figures objected to it, presumably fearing the risk of being accused of being sexually weird and having the likes of the Sun rummage around in their drawers.
- Tommy K
August 11, 2016 at 5:24 pm -
Thanks for the link. That was a new one for me. I do fear that we are seeing the thin end of an authoritarian, puritan wedge and we will have ever more censorship, with draconian punishment. I would like to know who is driving it. And why.
- tdf
August 11, 2016 at 5:28 pm -
Inclined to agree, Tommy K.
“I would like to know who is driving it. And why.”
Would like to know too. A number of factors are involved, I’d guess. I would be interested in others’ views.
- tdf
- Tommy K
- tdf
- TheyFearTheHare
- Alexander Baron
August 11, 2016 at 11:16 am -
I never think of lesbians as homosexuals; I’ve always found it difficult to take lesbianism seriously, but this has nothing to do with so-called homophobia. I’ve just added some more videos to the FALSE RAPE TIMELINE from the Lorandos website. In one of them they give an insight into how the American CPS – child protection services – treated all allegations of child sexual abuse as true. Try asking a kid a dozen times what it tasted like when Daddy put his penis in her mouth, and you will eventually get the answer you want.
These people are disgusting.
On a similar note, is anyone keeping track of payouts from the Savile estate to “survivors” ?
- Bandini
August 11, 2016 at 11:48 am -
“…but this has nothing to do with so-called homophobia…”
Does it have something to do with you rather enjoying watching lesbians in action (as do many hetrosexual men), AB?!?
- Bandini
- Bandini
August 11, 2016 at 11:43 am -
“As lesbian low income women of color, these women hold intersecting identities that make them the most vulnerable to incarceration and juror bias.”
Aye, I think the white hetrosexual men will have to wait a little longer.
The producer of the documentary is a member of the ´Queer Producers Collective´ as well as being a ‘they’ (rather than a ‘he’ or ‘she’), so that’s a fair number of boxes ticked. It sounds interesting but think I’ll wait and see before joining in with the campaign to “Tweet/Facebook the district attorney’s office to take a stand!”- windsock
August 11, 2016 at 12:06 pm -
Well, if marginalised people won’t show interest in the plight(s) affecting other marginalised people, who will?
One wonders why white heterosexual males don’t show any interest in making a film about the plight(s) affecting white heterosexual males?
- Moor Larkin
August 11, 2016 at 12:12 pm -
that would be promoting hate crime…
- Bandini
August 11, 2016 at 12:14 pm -
Because the ‘theys’, Ls, Gs, Bs, Ts, Zs, feminists, etc., would accuse them of male white privilege, heteronormative bias & a load of other bullshit?
- windsock
August 11, 2016 at 12:31 pm -
Really? This “G” wouldn’t.
Any film about any injustice to anybody surely transcends the race/sexual orientation/gender of both the subjects and the directors/producers.
“It’s the story, stupid.”
Another point: to release this on to the film circuit suggests that some of its backers might think it commercially viable – why would not a film about white heterosexual males be more of a commercially enticing project?
- Bandini
August 11, 2016 at 12:56 pm -
I’m not sure it’ll ever be a blockbuster, Windsock, but it could have been tailor-made to win awards at festivals. The benefit of focusing on a ‘repressed’ minority group is that other members of these groups are often organized & extremely vocal (and there’s nothing wrong with that). But I wonder how many of the groups & collectives who are encouraged to ‘spread the word’ and ‘tweet for victory’ will even bother paying much attention to the underlying allegations (child abuse), instead focusing on their certain belief that an injustice has taken place (because they were lesbians, or ‘people of colour’, etc.). From the press-pack:
“After being wrongfully convicted of gang-raping two little girls during the Satanic
Panic witch-hunt era of the 80s and 90s, four Latina lesbians fight against mythology,
homophobia, and prosecutorial fervor in their struggle for exoneration in this riveting ‘True
Crime’ tale.”They bang on at some length about the ‘Latina lesbians’ to the point where I lose interest, which is a shame. I imagine I’d be fidgeting in my seat and feeling as though I was being battered over the head with a copy of a tedious pamphlet:
“The reality of LGBTQAI life, and LGBTQAI rights, are now central to key debates in national politics, raising the
question of whether increased consciousness about these issues will help the women’s chances for exoneration.”- Bandini
August 11, 2016 at 2:15 pm -
I just had my curiosity piqued by the Momentum group I’ve been hearing so much about so had a glance at their site and saw how certain groups have ‘guaranteed representation’. One group new-joiners can particpate in is ‘Latino/Latinx’ which led me to wonder what the hell THAT is all about. (There has been a creeping tendency here in Spain for politicians to suck up to the moaners by addressing them as ‘amigos y amigas’ instead of the grammatically correct ‘amigos’, kow-towing to the warriors…)
“In Spanish, the masculinized version of words is considered as gender-neutral. I don’t think its appropriate to assign masculinity as neutral when it isn’t,” explains queer, non-binary femme writer Jack Qu’emi Gutiérrez. “The x [in Latinx], is a way of rejecting the gendering of words to begin with, especially since Spanish is such a gendered language.”
[Jack also “among other terms identifies as Afro-Latinx.” I’m not making this up!]
So I’m wondering if the makers of ‘Southwest of Salem’ haven’t inadvertently offended someone/somethey/missed a trick: ‘Latinx lesbians’, perhaps? It’s enough to drive a man to drink – with this heat make mine what will soon likely be labelled a ‘cervezo’.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-people-are-using-the-term-latinx_us_57753328e4b0cc0fa136a159
- Bandini
- Moor Larkin
August 11, 2016 at 1:05 pm -
It almost worked last century, but then there was a backlash. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD5ofrSNDFA
- Bandini
- windsock
- Moor Larkin
- windsock
- Sylvie, Walsall
August 11, 2016 at 12:22 pm -
I find this highly offensive. I would never want someone nailed on to a church door without trial. My lawyers will be in touch shortly.
- Wigner’s Friend
August 11, 2016 at 2:41 pm -
Applause.
- Wigner’s Friend
- Bandini
August 11, 2016 at 4:11 pm -
An interesting read (the comments too):
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/what-happened-when-i-was-charged-with-a-hate-crime/- tdf
August 11, 2016 at 4:25 pm -
Crazy. And they wonder why people vote UKIP.
- Tommy K
August 11, 2016 at 5:44 pm -
” I was plunged into a world where common sense withered and died.”
That seems a fair description of the British criminal justice industry. A lot of people depend for their livelihoods on keeping the machine running in a world where real crime is falling and they will do whatever it takes to make themselves indispensable. Justice and a sense of proportion are well down their list of priorities.
- tdf
August 11, 2016 at 5:57 pm -
^ In a way, it’s always been thus (read Dickens’ ‘Bleak House’, for example).
- tdf
- tdf
- The Blocked Dwarf
August 11, 2016 at 5:07 pm -
*waiting for the Landlady to give us her insights on Prof AJ*
- tdf
August 11, 2016 at 5:19 pm -
Well, why don’t you give us yours in the meantime?
- The Blocked Dwarf
August 11, 2016 at 6:40 pm -
Well, why don’t you give us yours in the meantime?
I have none to give, beyond the rather worrying gushing endorsement of her on Radio 4 by the spokesperson from the National Assoc. of VICTIMS, Allegators and witchhunters inc. or whatever they have on their name badges. He seemed a bit too cock-a-hoop about it and was at great pains to stress the appointment was after much consultation . All too often these days ‘consultation’ means ‘Kowtowing’ to the demands of whichever lobby…
Worrying too because the woman has no legal training. If I were a victim/survivor I would want the inquiry, ANY inquiry, headed by the finest legal mind around or at least by some old dear who’d got a double first in Law at an age when most think reading the latest SAGA brochure an effort.
- The Blocked Dwarf
- suffolkgirl
August 11, 2016 at 6:11 pm -
Any consideration of Alexis Jay’s suitability to conduct a quasi judicial function fairly should stop to consider her report into the ‘satanic abuse’ in the western isles several decades ago. It was criticised at the time for failures of fact and a more fundamental failure to respond to the issue of false accusations, as well as that of abuse which did take place. AJ gave a Guardian interview last year where she referred to this case as a feather in her cap. Not all would agree. There the accused seem to have been marginal types who were easy to ignore. The Janner clan, not so much….
It’s also noteworthy that despite every encouragement there have only been a trickle of complaints arising from her Rotherham enquiry. Given that she guesstimated 1400 cases at least in the fairly recent past this seems surprising. Could it be that although the grooming and abuse she found was very serious, she had exaggerated its volume? Of course anyone who said that at the time got the chop.- tdf
August 11, 2016 at 6:18 pm -
“It’s also noteworthy that despite every encouragement there have only been a trickle of complaints arising from her Rotherham enquiry. Given that she guesstimated 1400 cases at least in the fairly recent past this seems surprising. Could it be that although the grooming and abuse she found was very serious, she had exaggerated its volume? Of course anyone who said that at the time got the chop.”
It’s interesting. Just off the top of my head, I felt that SOME of the media reportage on the Jay report fed into or even possibly encouraged a degree of Islamophobia or possibly xenophobia. That isn’t, of course, Jay’s fault (I’m 100% sure she is not a racist on a personal level. I am speaking merely of some of the media commentary, including social media commentary), but one always needs to be careful of stirring such pots.
I have not read her report into the allegations of ‘satanic abuse’ in the Western Isles – will check it out.
- Mrs Grimble
August 12, 2016 at 10:10 am -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1466107/Parents-cleared-of-child-abuse-to-sue-police.html
There was genuine abuse and neglect within one family, but most of the allegations came from a known fantasist. Jay’s report “didn’t have the remit to deal with that part.- Sean Coleman
August 12, 2016 at 12:34 pm -
By coincidence I read that Telegraph article two days ago via Webster, Shieldfield, Jervis, Cleveland, Orkney, Wikipedia. Margaret Jervis’s article about the ideological background of key figures in the Shieldfield case, including a local parents group, was disturbing as I had thought up until then that the scare had just appeared out of nowhere. It seems that prominent figures in the Cleveland case, removed from their roles as far as children were concerned, didn’t accept that large-scale abuse hadn’t happened and organized themselves to spread the word among the Sisterhood.
- Sean Coleman
- Mrs Grimble
- Mudplugger
August 11, 2016 at 8:38 pm -
It is interesting that the ‘1,400’ figure applied to Rotherham is generally being reported as a fact, rather than statistical speculation, informed or otherwise.
The degree of rigour could be demonstrated by simply providing a list of the 1,400 names, but of course, that would compromise the precious anonymity factor, so the mythical ‘Rotherham 1,400’ develops as an unchallenged ‘fact’ by the frequency of its unqualified presentation.
It may be correct, but there’s no proof either way, so its reporting should always be prefixed with ‘estimated’ at least.
- tdf
- suffolkgirl
August 11, 2016 at 10:13 pm -
Yes, I think that is exactly how the figure should be treated. Another point is that the cases of historical abuse she considered in forming her estimate seem to have been all cases where Rotherham thought sexual abuse had occurred, not just the high profile cases of abuse by rings of Pakistani men. This would presumably include the sadly banal incidents of abuse within the family or social group. However I think that the guesstimate has now passed into the public consciousness as a fact that 1400 English girls were abused by Pakistani origin men. Personally I doubt that this is the correct conclusion, and one possible reason why victims aren’t coming forward in large numbers is because their abusers are closely connected to them, and to do so is too painful.
Btw, don’t get me wrong, I have a couple of friends who worked in education in West Yorkshire and they have their own, obviously anecdotal, evidence, that the form of exploitation carried out by some groups of Pakistani origin men was a very real problem, and we know from the criminal cases that the nature of this abuse was particularly shocking.
Just a last thought. It’s generally assumed in reporting on this that AJ was in Rotherham at the head of a government hit squad. In fact, it was the evil, abuse concealimg, Council itself which commissioned and paid for her report.
- A Potted Plant
August 12, 2016 at 4:48 am -
Hmmm.
Nope. Injustice is injustice, period – and true justice seeking doesn’t see color, gender, or social-political groupings.
I’m quite certain The Innocence Project doesn’t really see the world the way you imagine they do.
I never have, and I’ve been working both ends of the stick for…30+ years – both justice for unheard victims & justice for the falsely accused.
When I came across the pond, electronically, some years back now there were two issues of interest to me. One was the issue of justice for persons who suffered abuse in UK institutions and the possibility of some kind of cross-over or linkage to historic North American Cases. The other issue was potential injustice in the prosecutions of adult persons for alleged historic CSA crimes. Their skin color, sexuality of social-political position was irrelevant to me. I wasn’t blinded to the fact that some people were literally attempting to frame Leon Brittan, for example, by the fact of his being white, male, heterosexual or a VIP.- Sean Coleman
August 12, 2016 at 12:42 pm -
‘Historic North American cases’: Do you include Boston here? Have you watched Spotlight? I know very little about the scandal beyond the information gathered by Rory Connor in Ireland but I suspect it may be comparable to the BBC drama ‘Care 2000. http://www.richardwebster.net/care.htm
- Sean Coleman
August 12, 2016 at 12:48 pm -
When I replied just then I’d quite forgotten what I had meant to say, about Leon Brittan. My own guess is that he was fingered, not so much because he was a white Tory politician, but because of his repulsive Spitting Image puppet.
- A Potted Plant
August 12, 2016 at 5:30 pm -
Which Boston case? There have been so many. From the 1950s, ’70s, ’80s, ’90s?
There was a Better Life offshoot in Boston in the ’70s, that was the real thing.
I haven’t seen “Spotlight”. I’ve never had cause to doubt cases involving the Christian Brothers (Congregation of…), other Roman Catholic cases I’d want to look into the particulars of each case.
There are some stupid conspiranoid fantasies about secret satanic RC priest cults in Boston, take them for what they are – crapola.- Sean Coleman
August 12, 2016 at 10:44 pm -
This is the case I had in mind and a quick look at Wiki shows that this is what Spotlight is about, as I had expected:
My favourite lines are: “Busa and Ford were joined in their allegations by Anthony Driscoll, another childhood friend and classmate, also 27. He asserted that while flying to Las Vegas to gamble he experienced ‘severe flashbacks’ of rape and other indecencies by the priest.’
Compensation payments were reportedly huge. I am surely not alone here in having cause to doubt all and every case of the kind without first getting evidence backing it up, and then evidence that that evidence is reliable, and so on.
Webster’s article on Care 2000 is excellent, as usual. It is, he says, obviously based on Bryn Estyn but ignores the evidence gathered to vindicate the falsely accused instead relying on the accounts of the fantasists and their unreconstructed supporters. (There’s a word, ‘unreconstructed’, that was all the rage a few years ago, although I never really learnt what it meant.)
His article or review of Flat Earth News is an absorbing account of what investigative journalism is.
Back to Bryn Estyn while I’m at it, Webster somewhere paints the scene. The editor of a Sunday newspaper, it’s 5pm and the deadline for publication is 5.30. The proofs for the front page are brought it, the story is shocking and libellous, freelance journalist, police cover-up too. He is concerned. Do they have evidence? He is reassured: loads of evidence, cleared with the lawyers. He takes the risk, the story is printed and immediately he receives a solicitor’s letter. “It was then he discovered the disturbing truth. There was none.”
That’s what really interests me, how people can be so sure of something that they lose touch of reality. And that is why your line “And true justice seeking doesn’t see color, gender or social-political groupings” does not convince me.
- A Potted Plant
August 13, 2016 at 12:59 am -
@Sean – some will see what they wish to, regardless.
But, the insinuation in some comments here – that members of social minorities only perceive injustice that involves a social minority, is unfair and unjust-ified.- Bandini
August 13, 2016 at 12:18 pm -
APP, can you honestly imagine a film being made & promoted by the same team as made ‘SOS’ about, say, a group of middle-class white hetrosexual men accused/convicted of raping children? Come on!
It’s not to say that ALL members of minority groups only perceive injustice directed towards their own group (or other minority groups), but SOME members will certainly FOCUS on those perceived injustices (sometimes to the exclusion of other injustices). It’ll work the other around too – as seen in the UK when the media started to criticise the allegations made against the ‘powerful’ figures from the ‘Establishment’, but cared far less when they were being made against ‘degenerate DJs’ and the like. We can still be friends!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDTSUwIZdMk- A Potted Plant
August 13, 2016 at 11:40 pm -
@Bandini – yes, “SOME members will…”, goes without saying. And of course, we will still be friends.
But now you are forewarned, that I have a PhD in whining & sniveling. I’m not supposed to use these powers against un-armed opponents – i.e., persons who don’t possess such specialized training in these Arts. However, should there ever be a need…
In other words, please try to bear in mind that I am “in the room”. I am not a lamp or some such piece of furniture
- A Potted Plant
- Bandini
- A Potted Plant
- tdf
August 13, 2016 at 1:39 am -
“There are some stupid conspiranoid fantasies about secret satanic RC priest cults in Boston, take them for what they are – crapola”
I’m not familiar with those particular ‘conspiranoid fantasies’, but it’s fairly obvious that the Roman Catholic seminaries in many countries are disproportionately gay, and have a ‘gay culture’ – perhaps something akin to an adult version of the same sex public schools in the UK.
(Of course, we should be wary of any speculations or theories that gays are more likely to be paedos – that is a bigoted theory, until and unless proven otherwise.)
The first time I was told of seminaries in Ireland being, essentially, hotbeds of buggery, was back in the early 1990s’. At that time, as a still believing and more-or-less observant Roman Catholic, I was sceptical. I subsequently discovered, not only that some seminaries were indeed more or less what I was told, but that quite a few of that priesthood were also involved in illegal abuses of young boys (or, less frequently, young girls).
Personally, as a secularist and an atheist, I couldn’t give a tuppeny ha’penny damn about what the gays get up to in their seminaries (or the nuns in their convents, for that matter). Obviously, if they are jumping into bed together, then they are in breach of their ‘regulations’, but that’s not my affair. They can have their fun, and then assuage their guilt by, I don’t know, flagellating themselves with their crucifixes afterwards, once it’s only involving consenting adults. It doesn’t matter to me.
However, once they are involved in illegal abuses, THEN it becomes my problem, as a tax-payer and citizen – not least because these weird religious cults still to this day, continue to receive funds from the taxpayer in my country (*) , and in many others.
(* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland )
- A Potted Plant
August 14, 2016 at 12:18 am -
@tdf – you said: “…perhaps something akin to an adult version of the same sex public schools in the UK”.
I would say, exactly akin to. In my opinion your perception is precisely correct, that culture is exactly the same culture you might have found in Public Schools throughout the UK – because that’s where it comes from. Seminaries aren’t always, or haven’t always been, just for young men you know. In the past, many accepted boys as young as ANY OTHER “same sex school” in the UK. Have you read Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy?
Would you do me a favor? I’d like you to do a quick little exercise, but to actually do it and not simply visualize it.
Take a sheet of paper and draw a big circle on it. Draw a line that bisects the circle into three parts, like the old peace symbol. Got that? Now, inside one of the thirds draw another circle near the bottom that takes up about one half of that third. Near the top of that third, draw another smaller circle taking up about 10% of that third.
The circle represents all male persons. The one third with the circles in it represents all male persons who have willingly & intentionally engaged in some form of homosexual activity, including juvenile and adolescent explorations. The larger circle represents Gay youth and men. We (Gay males) are a SUBSET of “the set of all males who engage in homosexual acts”. The smaller circle represents males who have engaged in pederasty, or boy-love. THEY are also a subset of “the set of all males who engage in homosexual acts”, but pederasts are NOT a subset of Gay males.Here’s what makes Gay males unique from the rest of “the set of all males who engage in homosexual acts”;
1) Gay males know that they are Gay – even if they have never acted on such feelings of attraction, and even if they very much don’t want to be a Gay male person. Gay males experience a sense of being “a different kind of person” from their heterosexual brothers.
2) Gay men LOVE other men. Gay males experience the same feelings of romantic love, for other males, that heterosexual males feel for their female partners and spouses.This seminary culture you are talking about is more a pederastic culture than a Gay culture. But note that true pedophiles will again be a subset of “the set of all males who have enagaged in pederasty”.
- A Potted Plant
- Sean Coleman
- A Potted Plant
- Sean Coleman
- A Potted Plant
August 12, 2016 at 12:35 pm -
The Kellers aren’t latino lesbians…
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/05/texas-couple-kellers-released-prison-satanic-abuse
- suffolkgirl
August 12, 2016 at 11:00 pm -
To Mrs Grumble. I think one criticism of Jay in relation to her investigation was that she did in fact make a finding that the children in question had been abused outside their extended family, but left at large which of the suspects were responsible. This seems to be the worst of all possible outcomes. The second was that she dealt at length with the failures in interviewing the main allegator without referring unambiguously to her previous history of false accusations.
Interestingly, the reports I’ve found about those who claimed to have been falsely accused all seem to dry up in 2005. Being cynical I’ve assumed that they did in fact get some form of compensation.
{ 52 comments… read them below or add one }