Why it matters that VIP abusers be outed

This campaign to root out VIP abusers is not some kind of paedo-hysteria (of the kind led to "paedo" graffiti on the door of a paediatrician in 2000 due to paediatrician and paedophile confusion).
Child sexual abuse puts the child at risk of having very difficult lives. Many episodes of abuse have damaging emotional and social impacts. There is a high incidence of suicide among survivors.

See Keith Gregory's evidence.

Child sex abuse involves serious crime. Some of the cases run into murder.

Beyond the human pain caused, to have abusers at the heart of Government is not good.
VIPs who permit child sex lay themselves open to blackmail.

VIP child sexual abuse creates a criminal underworld at the heart of the State. This works against democratic values, because if decision makers are hiding secrets in one are, this will work against transparency in other areas.

There is no excuse, no sense in trying to minimise child abuse. All abusers must be identified and rooted out of the UK establishment.

There are a vast number of paedophiles out there. Between 1% and 5% of the male population have that predilection. They are prone to rationalise their activities, and deny that it is harmful or wrong. If they see major, important political figures escaping censure, their rationalisations will be strengthened. If they see those figures being punished for it, their rationalisations will be challenged.

Those are the basic issues, but as with so many other social and environmental problems, there are those who disagree.

A small body of influential journalists is saying "Well yes, there is a bit of a problem here, but look, it's not really that bad. We mustn't get hysterical, must we? Let's keep a sense of proportion".

One line of argument they use is that the Satanic Abuse allegations at Orkney and Cleveland were overdone, and therefore there is nothing much in any allegation of child sexual abuse. This is a form of the Straw Man fallacy.

Here is a list of them just out of interest.

  1. David Mellor verbally attacked Steve Messham in 2012.
  2. Matthew Parris Vid here debating with the excellent Liz Davies
  3. David Aaronovitch writes behind a Murdoch paywall, but peedeezee has pasted him here.
  4. Charles Moore
  5. Rod Liddle. An exercise in missing the point.

It is maybe interesting that they are all of the right wing persuasion.

See also this page on professional discounters of the testimony of abused children.

The minimisers are tragically wrong. Just look at the impacts of abuse on the children's subsequent lives.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License