The Henry Jackson Society (here) is an admirable Atlanticist think tank based in London that among other things gives home to the redoubtable Douglas Murray (here). But yesterday, for a robust and independently-minded organisation, HJS got it badly wrong.
Their bias was on the tin. They held a meeting in Parliament called ‘LGBT Rights In Russia, Sochi 2014 and Beyond’. The only speaker was Peter Tatchell and the event was chaired by sponsoring gay MP Chris Bryant.
The director of HJS’s Russia Studies Centre, Andrew Foxall, tried to persuade us that the event was also about corruption and security issues at Sochi 2014, Russia’s current Winter Olympic Games, but Peter Tatchell put paid to that; “LGBT rights is our main focus” he stated firmly at the beginning.
There is nothing wrong with discussing the issue of course. Russia’s abuse of human rights is a matter of real concern. But there was no discussion. The audience were allowed only to listen and ask questions. It was a one-way platform for the promotion of international gay rights under the guise of attacking the fairly easy target of Vladimir Putin and his regime – with the added bonus of Bryant and Tatchell recounting juicy stories about their own experiences as gay men in Russia. The former apparently had to wait 20 minutes at the reception desk of the Moscow Marriot hotel while he patiently explained that, yes, he planned to share both his room and his bed with his male partner.
Interestingly the MP also objected strongly if briefly to the “obscene” amounts of money that have been spent on Sochi 2014, with no reference at all to the many billions spent just down the road at London 2012. It’s not difficult to see why Putin is gaining global traction with his claims about ‘Western hypocrisy’.
The rest of the world listens to the Russian President but, despite him being named The Times’ International Person of the Year last year (here) partly for his brilliant out-manoeuvring of Obama and Cameron in order to stop their military adventurism in Syria, we don’t. So when Putin claims that his prime concerns are the protection of children and Russia’s traditional family structure (here), we are so deafened by the West’s gay rights discourse that we cannot or will not hear.
But he does have a point and ironically, as a prime anti-Putin protagonist, Tatchell’s sexual ideology also makes Putin’s point for him. It is foully anti-children and, as I told the HJS meeting, the ideology renders Tatchell utterly disqualified from addressing the issue:
From the 80′s when Tatchell was part of a team of contributors to a depraved pro-paedophilia book Beyond Youth edited by former vice chair of the Paedophile Information Exchange (here) Warren Middleton (Tatchell wrote a chapter about reducing the age of sexual consent), to the views on his website today that school children should be taught anal sex and sadomasochism (here), he has demonstrated that Putin is right. Our children do indeed need protecting from this sort of sexual propaganda.
The HJS meeting was set up to promote Tatchell’s LGBT line and my interventions – “What about children?” I asked loudly a number of times – were not welcomed by the chair. I was faced with being ejected or leaving. I chose the latter.
Before I did so I distributed my contact details and a flyer with the following text:
Fathers Against Child Sexualisation
Putin is a fascist brute but maybe he also wants to protect his children from this Tatchell-promoted sexualisation:
1. Tatchell advocates teaching anal sex and sadomasochism to school children:
“Sex education has an obligation to give all the facts and tell the whole truth about every kind of sex and relationship. This includes… anal intercourse and sadomasochism… Nothing must be off limits.” (www.petertatchell.net/sex_education/schoolsex.htm)
2. Tatchell bewails robust punishment of pederasts:
“…any man who has sex with Lee (a 14 year old boy) could face a maximum sentence of 10 years for kissing, touching, sucking or wanking, and life imprisonment for anal sex.” (www.petertatchell.net/lgbt_rights/age_of_consent/14-gay-boyfriend.htm)
3. Tatchell quotes sex abuse of 9-year-olds as “great joy”:
“Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of 9 to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy… It is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.” (The Guardian: 26th June, 1997)
4. Tatchell contributes chapter on reducing age of sexual consent to 1980′s paedophilia book about (inter alia) ‘Incest’, ‘Child Pornography and Erotica’, ‘Child Prostitution’ and ‘How to Make Paedophilia Acceptable’, edited by paedophilia advocate and former vice-chair of Paedophile Information Exchange, Warren Middleton:
“(I)n the realm of sexual ages of consent, we need to ask whether the law has any legitimate role to play in criminalising consenting, victimless sexual activity.” (The Betrayal of Youth, p 118)
So who offers the greater threat to our children’s welfare?
It’s a relevant question especially if you’re a parent. Putin or Tatchell: whose views do offer the greater threat to your children’s wellbeing?