Quote:
Originally Posted by Toy Soldier
I feel I need to add clarity to what I said before, as the counter I always run into is "this is nonsense, the LGBTQ community is absolutely not pushing to accept P"
I just want to clarify that I am absolutely aware of that, and it is NOT what I'm saying. I don't think there's any push or inclination from the community to accept paedophilia.
Rather, it's the "P" that's actively pushing to be included under the umbrella... and I personally don't think there's a strong or vocal enough opposition to this from people who consider themselves to be a part of the LGBTQ community. I see a lot of people who would rather convince themselves it's not happening. I think - and I understand this is for obvious reasons - there's an inherent inclination to be understanding and inclusive so while they don't accept, it's difficult to vocally and clearly reject.
And the issue then is... There isn't and never has been any real requirement for "established member agreement" in adding a group to the LGBTQ umbrella. "Kinks" and "Furries" successfully added themselves under the same banner as gay and trans people (I honestly will never understand why this isn't considered more offensive - although I know gay people who do find it offensive) so why wouldn't "Minor Attracted Persons" (urgh) believe they can plant a flag as a minority group under the same heading?
Frankly it needs to be nipped in the bud, hard, or it's going to happen. And then gay men minding their own business are going to find themselves lumped back in with paedophilia to the same extent they were decades ago.
|
Hear hear! The gay community should be absolutely raging at the damage all this "cause coat tailing" is doing to their reputation and all the great work they've put it in over many years