In a society whose concern for the welfare of children wasn't a complete and utter sham, Prime Minister David Cameron would be being grilled (preferably by detectives) on his extremely close relationship with Rebekah Brooks, the evil feminist who apparently ordered her journalists to hack into the phone of a missing school child (who was later found murdered). Instead, he was feeling the heat over unproven allegations against a senior member of his party 3 decades ago concerning the only type of abuse of children that sells newspapers and guarantees that middle-aged frumps read and watch in their millions - sex abuse, and the seedier and more sordid the better.
With the threat of libel action against them, the BBC's Newsnight backed out at the last moment of naming the 'senior Conservative politician from the Thatcher years' who has been accused of sexually abusing young boys at a children's home in North Wales sometime in the 70's or 80's.
Yesterday, David Cameron was presented live on breakfast TV with a list of the names that have been bandied about online - and I've seen the name of just about every senior Tory from the Thatcher years, although the known homosexual figures from that period are the ones most commonly mentioned.
Cameron was quite rightly outraged by being 'ambushed' in such a manner, but his articulation of it left a lot to be desired. He immediately chastised the presenter (Philip Schofield - a former BBC children's presenter..uh oh...) and stated that he feared a witch hunt against gay people.
Of course, this 'gay Tory witch hunt' is the latest episode in the intense bout of medieval paedohysteria that has gripped the UK since claims last month that the deceased Sir Jimmy Savile had fondled a number of underage groupies almsot half a century ago. Given the fact that 50 years ago you weren't considered a real rock star unless you fondled the odd wet pantied underage groupie, this 'exposure' promptly led to just about every British celebrity from the 60's and 70's and early 80's from being accused online (and in print, especially if they were dead) of being a 'paedophile', particularly if they worked for the BBC. David Cameron himself got in on the act by demanding an inquiry into the BBC and possible cover ups of Savile and other 'paedophiles'.
Witch Hunts against heterosexuals, of course, are just fine.
But what David Cameron's fears bring out is the realisation that paedohysteria was never supposed to be about persecuting homosexuals, but rather a war on male heterosexuality to serve the twin feminist aims of demonising ordinary males and restricting sexual competition from younger women and girls. Recruiting homosexuals in this war was essential both to secure the feminist take over of the Left, and to hide the savage puritanical war against heterosexuality under the facade of 'sexual tolerance' towards homosexuals and 'transgender' people.
When gay men do get caught up in sex abuse hysteria for having fun with a teenage lad decades ago, who might have been entirely willing at the time, they are merely unfortunate collateral damage.
We may see a lot of collateral damage over the next few months.
Back in the decades when homosexuality was in the process of being de-criminalized and emerging out of the shadows from its 2,500+ year existance as pederastry, it wasn't just heterosexual rock stars unable to keep their hands off of teenagers (in their case, the hordes of teenage girls throwing wet panties in their direction). Pederastry was still firmly part of homosexual culture at the time - and if you had money and power but little sex appeal (as a gay politician has, at least compared to the music world) then boys in care homes would be an acceptable substitute for frenzied willing groupies.
With the Jimmy Savile hysteria, it certainly is beginning to look like a conflagaration has been started that is going to be very difficult to put out before it consumes many unintended targets - from homosexual politicians to even femihag child 'advocates' such as Esther Rancid.
I wonder how the 'secular progressive' and paedohysteric atheist movement will react if an old man emerges to tell us that their martyr Alan Turing abused him when he was 'underage'? Perhaps he could sue the British state for 'causing him further trauma' for giving Turing an official pardon? We're somehow supposed to believe that Alan Turing was virtually the only homosexual genius in history, before sodomy was de-criminalized, to not be a pederast who had sex with young teenage boys - even though the offence he was finally caught with involved a 19 year old low IQ labourer.
I wonder why these pagan cultists believe that a man of Alan Turing's IQ would make the moral decision to stick firmly to the heterosexual age of consent when homosexuality was completely illegal, and illegal because of the same feminist puritan Victorian Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885 that raised the heterosexual age of consent from 13 to 16? He would hardly have been treated much worse, if at all, had he been caught with a 15 year old rather than a 19 year old. Moreover, the historical justification for the age of consent was that it protected unmarried young girls from being impregnated and left holding the baby (this was before feminists and men's rights activists had created the trauma myth). Something that hardly applied to men having sex with boys (and no longer applies to girls in an age of easy and avaialble contraception/abortion and a welfare state).
In this period of retrospective paedohysterical wtich burning, perhaps we should also look at finally arresting feminist icon Germaine Greer for her book 'The Boy', a book published in 2003 (when paedohysteria was already in full swing in the UK), and which set out to 'reclaim a woman's right to admire young boys' and which did so by featuring dozens of erotic semi-naked pictures of very young looking adolescent boys (taken by the author)? We should also arrest leading Third Wave feminist Natasha Walter, who lavishly praised the book, and who likely confessed to 'viewing child pornography' by simply admitting reading it. Natasha Walter, by the way, is famous for arguing that today's evil patriarchal society is sexualising young girls and women.
***Note to MRAs who think feminists criminalizing men over 'paedo' issues is not men's rights and will bring down the movement if raised in a couple of 'fringe' blogs - last time I checked, feminism was still going as strong as ever, as were Germaine Greer and Natasha Walter. Why don't you ask the paedocrite David Fraudtrelle for his views on Germaine Greer (I'm sure he has 'The Boy' on his coffee table - after all, this is a 'man' who described a homosexual's fantasy of sexually assaulting a boy in a bar as 'tender' and 'erotic')?