Sunday, 22 November 2015

International Men's Day and awareness of "privilege"

The University of York cancelled recognition of International Men's Day (IMD) on its campus, after women's rights campaigners lobbied against the university doing so on the basis of IMD failing to recognize the "structural inequalities" that women, rather than men, are affected by. In the UK, women are the most predominant victims of domestic and sexual violence, are being adversely impacted by austerity such as cuts to benefits and public services, and have marginalized representation in the media, politics and employment. All of us committed to advocating for social justice and inequality can and should acknowledge these facts. We should also bear in mind the appropriation of the cause of "Men's Rights" by trolls and misogynists who tend to care little about the legitimate issues highlighted by IMD anyway.

However, modern feminism frequently makes reference to the concepts of of "privilege" and "intersectionality", which in practice are supposed to identify that social discrimination and inequality varies throughout social groups according to various factors, including gender, race and sexuality. But it does not appear that those who lobbied against respect for IMD at York are willing to apply these ideas to their own standing in life and society.

During International Men's Day I noticed many commentators, not limited to women, making a mockery of IMD on the apparent basis of it being an absurdity for there to be a day commemorating the gender that socioeconomically, or perhaps patriarchally, dominates society. Which is distasteful given that one of the prime issues affecting men and boys that IMD focuses on is male mental health and suicide.

Men in middle age from disadvantaged backgrounds are the social group in the UK most at risk of dying from suicide. Interrelating with this statistic is that white boys from poor households suffer the most in terms of low attainment of employment and academic success later in life. Austerity, as well as deepening poverty and inequality as a whole, has had a disproportionate, arguably systemically racist impact on black and ethnic minority communities, with men from BME communities working in part-time jobs more prevalently than their white counterparts. Cuts to disability benefits and mental health services are worsening rates of mental illness and suicide in all groups.

So there is a certain ironic cruelty women at a Russell Group university, socially privileged in contrast to these men and boys, belittling the annual event that intends to raise awareness of such inequality.

In the criminal justice system men are less likely than women to report already underreported crimes such as rape and child sexual abuse, with sexual and domestic violence against men and boys being among the prime issues that IMD focuses on. In terms of discrimination, in 2014-2015 police forces in the UK registered a 22% increase in homophobic hate crimes and a 9% increase in transphobic hate crimes, with the victims presumably including gay, bisexual and trans men. Trans and gender nonconforming men are also face deprivation in NHS treatment for their mental health and gender identity, a problem being worsened by cuts to these services.

It clearly a disservice to the cause of equality for feminists to trivialize awareness of these forms of inequality, violence and discrimination that intersect with the same that also harm women and girls in the UK and internationally. Feminism does not need to degrade this awareness to advance its own cause.

Friday, 6 November 2015

On the ontology of the pig

Note: please don't take this too seriously

Whether David Cameron actually fucked a pig while at Oxford University or not has not prevented this modern day folktale from rapidly evolving into an anti-establishment meme. Within this satirical narrative we imagine the pig-fucking practice as a ritualistic shibboleth of the elite, vitally important symbolically. At the climax of Animal Farm (no pun intended), George Orwell described the traitorous pigs, agents of the landowning farmers and industrialists reclaiming the domain from its farmyard revolutionaries, as being indistinguishable from each other as their celebration of crushing the revolt devolved into a rabble of mutually horrid squealing. Perhaps in a lost epilogue, Orwell detailed an orgy of the pig-men and men-pigs? An incestuous gratification representing the mutual self-serving that the elite relies on to facilitate the oligarchy, corruption and nepotism it uses to rule over society.

Even if the story was just one absurd component of Lord Ashcroft's hit piece against David Cameron, it is an appropriately absurd reflection of the establishment's ceremonial self-congratulatory practices within its institutions, which themselves are a triumphalist statement of being at the apex of a massively stratified society. Thus pigfucker is a perfectly apt description for them as they fuck each other and us, their animals for exploitation within their abode, as well as referring to those who submit to it.

Thursday, 1 October 2015

Comrade Corbyn or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

As the mushroom clouds of existential annihilation bloomed over the horizons of Great Britain, Len McCluskey was jubilant. Staring at the wall of the official Labour Party fallout shelter, a wry smile spread across his face. "Unite won the internal party debate", he nodded to himself. Dan Hodges, at the other side of the room, concurred, scribbling his newest opinion piece onto an scraggy piece of piece of paper with his last remaining pencil: "What does the nuclear holocaust mean for Jeremy Corbyn?", satisfied that it would be published in the Telegraph once most of the radiation had cleared. 

Dan was certain that Labour was now a "credible, pragmatic and progressive force" following the deposition of the former anti-Trident leader, who was replaced by none other than nuclear weapon enthusiast Luke Akehurst. Akehurst had won the by-election forced by Liz Kendall, who voluntarily stood down so he could take her place and mount a leadership challenge against Corbyn. Akehurst was coronated when the majority of Labour MPs decided to reform the party's election rules to make themselves the sole deciders of the party leadership. A grassroots that obstructed the pressing of the nuclear button, and thus "British Values", was too much to bear, and the trade unions, in a rare alliance with the Blairites and Labour's establishment, agreed that a hesitancy to retain the technology used to mount a nuclear holocaust compromised its members' job security. Labour won the 2020 election when they pledged to consider using the "nuclear deterrent option" against refugees in Europe, winning back Tory and UKIP supporters in the process.

The hippie tendencies of Corbyn's Labour contrasted to the "strong", "moral" and - most importantly - middle England focus group friendly approach of Prime Minister Akehurst, who triumphantly instructed the Royal Navy to fire Trident's nuclear missiles at Moscow when Vladimir Putin threatened to take "disciplinary diplomatic action" against Great Britain while shirtless and riding a horse. The PM could simply not tolerate the level of Putin's machismo, so Attack Warning Red it was.

As the Russian IBMs rained down on the UK, obliterating tens of millions of lives in minutes and resulting in the nuclear Third World War that would ensure the extinction of humanity and make Earth inhospitable for all life, Labour's election strategists wept with despair in the far corner of the fallout shelter. "All the communication networks are down!", one wailed. "How can we see what the opinion pollsters say about this?"

Sunday, 13 September 2015

Why I joined Labour

Jeremy Corbyn's win was presumed, but it was even more colossal than expected. With nearly 60% of the vote, he won the overwhelming support of every category of participant in the election: from registered supporters, to trade union affiliates, and full members alike; categorically refuting the idea that Corbyn's popularity is built only on entryism and the influence of trade unions in the Labour Party.

His win confirms that there is a broad consensus in favour of the policy platforms that he advocates, with belief in housing and healthcare and freedom from poverty as human rights, free education, public ownership of transport and utilities, restructuring of the financial and economic systems to address the gross inequality and systemic corruption that plagues the UK, a holistic approach to mental health and social care, foreign policy including the abolition of nuclear weapons and a welcoming and compassionate attitude to refugees, and the recognition of climate change as a pressing international crisis. This also exhibits a categorical rejection of the aping and conceding to the ideological Tory austerity narrative that Labour Party leadership has adhered to before now.

Though I remain supportive of the values and purpose of the Green Party I was previously a member of - a party that should cooperate with a Corbyn-led Labour Party wholeheartedly thanks to a mutual commitment to these values - the Labour movement is now one I am proud to be loyal to.

Friday, 7 August 2015

Edward Heath, paedophilia and homophobia

In response to multiple police investigations being opened into reports of child sexual abuse by the former prime minister Edward Heath, the Spectator magazine has published a column (which in the name of moral decency and prevention of them profiting from it I will not link to) in defence of Heath by the convicted paedophile Johnathan King, titled: "Edward Heath wasn't gay. Trust me, I tried – and failed – to seduce him".

The magazine does not state that King was imprisoned in 2001 for sexually abusing numerous underage teenage boys between the 1960s and 1980s. The police investigations into his crimes found that he had attempted to groom and sexually abuse literally thousands of boys and, when successful, used his professional position and status in the music industry to do so in order to sexually assault and rape them. (King's rapes were prosecuted as "buggery" due to the laws in the time they were committed defining them as such, so he was given a sentence more lenient than he would likely have been given if prosecuted under current criminal laws for sex offences).

Despite his convictions and the overwhelming evidence against him, King has never apologised for his crimes, and following the common practice of sexual abusers and predators shamelessly attacks his victims as liars and fantasists. King, a predatory paedophile who targeted boys for rape and sexual abuse, also happens to be gay. In his claim to have unsuccessfully attempted to seduce Ted Heath, rumored to have been gay, he implies within the context of the reports of child sexual abuse and rape by Heath that they are equatable to speculation about Heath's possible homosexuality, thus deeming them invalid. This would logically be the ulterior motive of a dangerous and remorseless paedophile like King, unashamedly attempting to justify and legitimise his own rape and sexual abuse of children while denying it at face value, in order to foster a cultural environment that assists paedophiles to cover-up their crimes while shaming and disbelieving victims into silence.

In Ted Heath's lifetime, sexual activity between men was a criminal offence in the UK, which necessitated secrecy and covert sexual practices like cruising in public places among gay men, which Heath was allegedly cautioned by the police for involvement in (presumably treated more leniently because of his position as an MP and Cabinet minister). Male homosexuality, between consenting partners, was criminalised because it was deemed salacious and "grossly indecent" by the prevailing prejudices at the time; to frame child sexual abuse within the same narrative portrays in a positive light in the present, rather than as a violent criminal act against children it is. Which is a pro-paedophile agenda unsubtly advocated by Johnathan King that the Spectator has chosen to give a platform to as a form of damage control to Heath.

The accusation of paedophilia is an age old homophobic slur that has been historically commonly used to undermine and repress social movements to advance the rights of gay men and other LGBT+ people alike. A prime example is the Thatcher's government's homophobic Section 28, many of the proponents of which supported its aim to prevent issues surrounding gay rights being taught in schools on the basis of the normalisation of paedophilia being linked to educating children and young people on sexual and gender identity topics, in reaction the AIDS crisis and advancements in anti-discrimination and age of consent laws.

It is factual that paedophiles, who were marginalised by gay rights groups at the time and are completely now, attempted to appropriate the causes of gay rights and social liberation in effort to socially normalise the sexual abuse of children. Among them was the Paedophile Information Exchange whose major figures were linked to the UK's establishment paedophile rings, involved the rape and murder of children and the organised cover-up of these crimes, that Ted Heath was reportedly involved in. In 1984, the Metropolitan Police seized a dossier from the journalist Don Hale, who attempted to provide it to the Home Office at the time, that named Heath as involved in PIE. PIE is an organisation that, in response to the equalisation of the age of consent for gay sex, advocated that the age of consent be abolished entirely, therefore legalising adults engaging in sexual activity with children of all ages. PIE was disbanded in 1984 and its core members have been convicted and imprisoned for child sexual abuse and child pornography offences since.

It is the mutual vested interest of paedophiles and homophobes to equate male homosexuality to child sexual abuse. The latter rely on it an effort to excuse their behaviour and the latter manipulate it to promote hatred and discrimination. The Spectator has managed to condense both of these agendas into a column by a child raping paedophile motivated by the former agenda while playing into the bigotry of the latter. And for this reason it has no moral or intellectual credibility as a publication whatsoever.

Monday, 3 August 2015

Wiltshire Police's child abuse cover-up

The national story broke today that Wiltshire Police is under Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation for failing to investigate child sexual abuse claims against the former prime minister Edward Heath. A retired officer from the force relayed them to his superiors in the 1990s but no action was taken. But those of us who have been paying attention to Wiltshire Police's dealings with such cases know that it was already under IPCC investigation for mishandling and misconduct in regards to historical child abuse.

Wiltshire Police's former chief constable, Patrick Geenty, has been under an investigation into his alleged gross misconduct since 2014. Geenty and other senior officers in the force are reported to have misled and withheld information from police complainants who came forward about historical child abuse. (I previously wrote about Geenty's connection to criminally convicted Chief Superintendent Colin Andrews when he worked at Humberside Police).

Edward Heath as an establishment paedophile is also old news to those who have heard of corroborating descriptions from UK establishment and intelligence insiders who for over years have described his sexual abuse and murder of children. Most infamous are the stories of Heath's participation in establishment paedophile rings in Jersey, who raped, tortured and murdered children from the Haut de la Garenne children's home, and then incinerated the children's bodies to destroy the evidence; a crime which, if true, thus can only be described as a Holocaust. Major establishment paedophile Jimmy Savile was said to have supplied Heath with children to sexually abuse and murder aboard his yacht. So, on another note, why is the Jersey child abuse and its cover-up, like the same perpetrated at Kincora Boys' home in Northern Ireland that was similarly covered up by government and military intelligentsia, not included in the recently opened Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse establishment by the UK government, despite it including establishment paedophiles also involved in child abuse crimes on the mainland, including at Westminster, where children were also abused and murdered by them?

Graham Power led the Jersey Police investigation into the Haut de la Garenne child abuse, but was suspended when he ordered forensic investigations to potentially uncover the remains of murdered children, following the documenting of witness accounts of children at the home being taken from their beds in the night and then disappearing forever. For doing so Power was accused of mishandling the investigation, and the investigation into him was conducted by none other than Wiltshire Police. Power was later fully exonerated of any misconduct and remains convinced that his deposing from the Jersey investigation was his challenging of the cover-up of the crimes by top level establishment figures.

The vanishing of children is common theme in historical establishment child abuse cases and is not reserved to Jersey. Tom Watson MP recounted survivors of child abuse in North Wales describing the same, and the Metropolitan Police is investigating child murder cases that are said to have involved Westminster paedophiles at Dolphin Square. The 1981 murder of eight-year-old Vishambar Mehrotra and 1979 disappearance 15-year-old Martin Allen are suspected to be among the murder cases of the covered up Westminster paedophile rings.

So in light of the paedophile prime minister Heath's offending not being investigated by Wiltshire Police, and Heath's documented involvement in paedophile rings that murdered abused children in Jersey, it is sobering to consider that the former national Association of Chief Police Officers lead into missing persons cases was none other than Patrick Geenty. Geenty forced the change in missing persons policy which means that police no longer have to investigate all missing persons cases, instead classifying children missing without a "specific" reason for concern for their welfare, as decided by child protection authorities, being deemed "absent" instead. This is despite child abuse charities including the NSPCC warning that this policy change increases the risk children to of trafficking and sexual exploitation. Fundamental to establishment paedophilia has been the procuring and trafficking of children from within the care system; so how useful to the disappearances if those victims are deemed to be mere "absences" rather than emergencies.

All of this seems too coincidental to indicate anything other than Wiltshire Police's systemic and corrupt historical role in organised establishment child abuse, which the police have played a role in nationally covering up in the UK.