“Heartfelt thanks” to Plummer, Pollard and West

Paedophile Information Exchange chairman Tom O’Carroll (later jailed for the distribution of 100,000 child abuse images and films including six-year old boys being raped and tortured) gives his “heartfelt thanks” to Nettie Pollard (NCCL, PIE member #70), Ken Plummer (University of Essex, PIE member #236) and Donald West (University of Cambridge).

p. 12, Paedophilia: The Radical Case by Tom O’Carroll (Peter Owen, 1980).

p12

Advertisements
11 comments
  1. Troyhand said:

    Lord Justice Fulford was campaigning to defend PIE with the Conspiracy Against Public Morals.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2576451/High-court-judge-child-sex-ring-Adviser-Queen-founder-paedophile-support-group-offenders-jail.html
    High Court judge and the child sex ring: Adviser to Queen was founder of paedophile support group to keep offenders out of jail
    •Lord Justice Fulford was named last year as an adviser to the Queen
    •He was a key backer of the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange
    •Police suspect the group of abusing children on an ‘industrial scale’
    •He is revealed as a founder member of campaign to defend PIE
    •At the time it was calling for the age of consent to be lowered to just four

    http://archives.lse.ac.uk/Record.aspx?src=CalmView.Catalog&id=HCA/EPHEMERA/373

    Brochure ‘Conspiracy charges against Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE)’ produced by Bradford Gay Men’s Caucus, August 1979;
    minutes of a meeting of the Conspiracy against Public Morals, 11 September 1979;
    Leaflet ‘Caged Anger: the prosecutions of paedophiles’ produced by London Gay Activists Alliance.

    [The day the CAPM held their meeting for PIE, two other groups released a report trying to get the Age of Consent law repealed, just like PIE wanted to]

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=VMFAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=46UMAAAAIBAJ&pg=1509%2C2245101
    The Glasgow Herald – Sep 12, 1979
    ‘Repeal law on age of consent’

    The age of consent law against sex under 16 should be repealed, states a report published yesterday.

    It claims there are more disadvantages than advantages to the law, which was designed to protect children.

    Dr James Hemming, an educational psychologist who helped prepare the report, said yesterday the law encouraged girls to hide pregnancy for fear of their boyfriends being prosecuted.

    Controversial

    The Report “Pregnant at School” adds: “The law is out of touch with current behaviour because it does not take account of consenting sexual relationships among the young.”

    Adequate protection was already given to young girls by the existing laws relating to criminal assault, sexual offences, and the welfare of young people.

    The controversial document, jointly prepared by the National Council for One-Parent Families and the Community Development Trust, also recommends:

    That schoolgirl mothers should be helped to continue their education either at school or at home.

    There should be more financial aid for them, and

    There should be better and earlier health and sex education in schools.

    Dropped

    The report, which took five years to compile, states that the number of pregnant schoolgirls under 16 rose by a third between 1971 and 1975.

    Although the figures have dropped slightly since, more than 3600 girls under 16 in England and Wales became pregnant in 1977. Two-thirds of them had legal abortions. Nearly 8500 single girls, aged 16, became pregnant in the same year.

    The report urges society to come to terms with the fact that school children are sexually active, and to do more to help when things go wrong.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gingerbread_(charity)

    1970-2007: The National Council for One Parent Families Working under a new name, the National Council for One Parent families continued to support and advocate on behalf of single parents. In 1974, the Finer Report on the needs of one parent families was published. Many of its 230 recommendations for improving the lives of single parent families were proposed by the National Council for One Parent Families.

    2007–present The National Council for One Parent Families and Gingerbread merged in 2007, and relaunched under the name Gingerbread in 2009. Head offices for Gingerbread are in Kentish Town, London, with satellite offices in Cardiff, Rhyl, Manchester and Accrington.

    J. K. Rowling – President of Gingerbread

  2. Troyhand said:

    Propaganda news article

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19790913&id=VcFAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=46UMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4771,2495684
    The Glasgow Herald – Sep 13, 1979
    Consent law: does it help or hinder?

    Should the age of sexual consent be abolished, or left at 16, or is the law simply irrelevant to the majority of teenage sexual relationships? Jane South examines reaction to this week’s official report which suggested that the law should be scrapped.

    Exactly 100 years ago the Salvation Army was largely responsible for raising the age of consent to 16 to stop child prostitution.

    The same law is now responsible for the 700 or so prosecutions every year against men and boys but it may also be largely responsible for nearly 3500 pregnancies in schoolgirls under 16 which occur in the same time in Britain.

    As the report, “Pregnant at School,” by the National Council of One-Parent Families and the Community Development Trust, a London-based youth advisory body, suggests, the law as it stands does stop young people from seeking advice from the relevant authorities.

    Although only 10% of the girls seen by the Brook Advisory Centre in Edinburgh in the first six months of this year were 16 or under, the organisation’s chairman, Jean Malcolm, is convinced that many more single girls would come for advice if they were not threatened by the law.

    “We have to face up to the fact that we have a generation of well-nourished, physically mature 14 and 15-year-olds who are going to engage in a certain amount of friendly sexual experiment. I know that adults find this difficult to take, but society in the next decade will have to cope with this new sexual maturity.

    “These children need to be free to ask for advice because often they are not emotionally or intellectually capable of coping with the situation. But the answer lies in education. They must feel free to be able to ask us for advice about their relationships. Too many of them feel that they can’t ask for advice until they are 16, and by then, sadly, it is often too late.”

    The Family Planning Association feels that whether the law is changed or preserved is irrelevant to the behaviour of young people. Its press officer said yesterday: “When the Department of Health took over the FPA clinics it was made quite clear that anyone under 16 could be given advice on contraception, with or without parental consent, if the teenager’s best interest was being taken care of. But there is no doubt that many under-16s are frightened to ask for advice because of the law although it won’t change the way they conduct their relationships.

    “Our main concern is to give young people the confidence and the knowledge to think about their relationships themselves without being pressurised to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to sex because of some outside influence. There is a constant pressure on young people to become sexually active and unfortunately many parents find it impossible to discuss these things with their sons and daughters.”

    Both the Church of Scotland and the Roman Catholic Church have declared themselves to be against any suggestion of lowering the age of consent.

    The Kirk has traditionally upheld the view that sex is “something for marriage” and the Roman Catholic Church says the suggestion is “illogical.” It adds: “Statistics prove that teenage marriages have a higher failure rate than those contracted by mature people. The proposal would create a multitude of problems.”

    At the same time, a report published recently by a group of religious organisations, “The National Survey on Religious Attitudes of Young People,” showed that 40% of 16-18-year-olds thought sex without marriage was “definitely right.” Thirteen per cent felt it was wrong, and 47% thought it was “OK for some but not for me.”

    Apart from the moral attitudes to sex before marriage, there has always been a feeling that the age of consent law protected young girls from the advances of older men. But according to James Hemming, an educational psychologist on the team who published this latest 71-page report, “the idea of middle-aged men pouncing on young girls is false.

    “Adequate safeguards already exist in the law to protect young girls who might be the victim of rape or assault. The effects of the law are anti-moral: the young male is encouraged to avoid all responsibility for what has happened.”

    Although the National Council for One-Parent Families helped to set up the working party who produced the report, it has not, as yet, accepted all the recommendations itself.

    The priorities from the report that most people would agree with are better and more easily attainable sex and health education in school; support for schoolgirl mothers who wish to continue their education, and financial and emotional support for both them and their children.

    Whether the Government will have the time or the inclination to deal with these matters is uncertain. What seems sure is that the law will not be changed.

  3. Troyhand said:
  4. Troyhand said:

    http://books.google.com/books?id=5A0jWSxnmW0C&pg=PA196&dq=%22Dr+Faith+Spicer%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=BA8cU_fjHsXb0wH-vYGgBA&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Dr%20Faith%20Spicer%22&f=false
    By Their Fruits: Eugenics, Population Control, and the Abortion Campaign
    By Ann Farmer

    [Page 196]

    Dr. Faith Spicer also echoed Neustatter, claiming that “promiscuity was no less” among unmarried girls who gave birth than among those who had abortions. Spicer was also involved with the Eugenics Society.

  5. Troyhand said:

    http://www.cal.myzen.co.uk/BuiltonLove/Built%20on%20Love%20Pt%201.pdf
    BUILT ON LOVE
    An Autobiography for Two
    By Valerie & Denis Riches

    [Pages 79-86]

    An obvious factor in the rapid social changes which were taking place had been the publication of the ‘Kinsey Reports’ in 1948 and 1953. Kinsey, a moral relativist, concluded that that there was no such thing as “right” or “wrong”, or “normality” or “abnormality” in sexual behaviour. Although the validity of his research methods was seriously challenged as soon as the first volume appeared, his revelations were quickly accepted as fact by a world which had uncritically accepted Freud’s theories, and were exploited by the media and vested interests before the truth could be established. The flaws were eventually exposed in ‘Kinsey, Sex & Fraud, the Indoctrination of a People’, by Dr Judith Reisman. Around one quarter of Kinsey’s male sample had comprised prisoners, including several hundred male prostitutes. Children as young as two months had been sexually stimulated to show that sexual activity could be enjoyed from infancy. Data collected from criminal sources was thus presented as serious scientific research. Too late, the serious flaws in the ‘Kinsey Reports’ were overwhelmingly exposed for what they were: fraud. But the damage had been done and the long-term effects on western societies are obvious.

    I was sent a booklet with the intriguing title, ‘The Men Behind Hitler: A German Warning to the World’. Its thesis was that the eugenics movement, popular in the early twentieth century, had gone underground following the holocaust in Nazi Germany but was still functioning through organisations involved in abortion, sterilisation and euthanasia. Readers were urged to look at their own countries and told that they would find that members of these bodies were associated to a remarkable degree. I subsequently came across papers from South America, Africa and France describing similar situations. In particular, I was impressed by ‘The SIECUS Circle’ (The Sex Information and Education Council of the United States). This remarkable book documented the policies and activities of the population control movement and its influence on national family planning associations. It set out the main aims of the pioneers of family planning which were to be achieved by means of sex education in schools: to merge or reverse the sexes or sex roles; to liberate children from their families; and to abolish the family as we know it. One of the alarming and damaging innovations emanating from this lobby in the UK was already being promoted, in the ongoing erosion of parents’ rights in favour of the “empowerment” (primarily sexual) of children.

    In the early seventies the Church of England became victim to the prevailing propaganda. The Christian view was that the life-giving process is sacred, involving the co-operation of God, and should therefore be free from interference. This had been held until the 1930 Lambeth Conference, when it declared with regard to artificial contraception that “other methods may be used provided that this is done in the light of Christian principles.” In effect, the bishops opened the door for a general contraceptive free-for-all, as we were soon to find out.

    I approached the bishops of the Church of England about the publication of the Department of Health’s Memorandum of Guidance, which introduced a mandate for a free contraceptive service for all, irrespective of marital status and age. Even earlier, I had become very concerned when a copy of this document was sent to me anonymously by a sympathiser in the Department of Health. I pointed out in my letter to the bishops that this policy, if implemented, would include girls under the age of consent, without their parents’ knowledge. I was astonished to receive a reply from Lambeth Palace, dated 12 April 1973, stating:

    “The Church has not weakened, and she will not weaken, in her belief that sexual intercourse should take place only within the stable and lasting relationship of marriage but since very many young people do not accept that view at all, the Board of Social Responsibility thought the most important thing (and indeed the most moral and Christian thing) was to do everything possible to inculcate in all young people a greater sense of responsibility for the possible consequences of intercourse. That was why they decided that a wholly free family planning service was to be preferred. Any level of charges will in practice deter a lot of people from even visiting family planning clinics.”

    I was dismayed that the Church of England could support a free-for-all policy so clearly doomed to failure, when even a doctor at the Brook Advisory Centres, (providers of contraception for the young), admitted, “Contrary to what one would expect, the availability of contraception leads to an increase in the abortion rate.”

    The DHSS Memorandum of Guidance on family planning services published in 1974 eventually led Victoria Gillick, a doughty mother of ten children, to take a case against the Department of Health, on the grounds of her right as a parent to be informed about the provision of contraceptives to her under-aged children. Taken at face value, the guidelines may have appeared to be an altruistic attempt by the State to create a safety net for the wayward, but they were effectively the ultimate attempt at total state control. As she said: “The independence of the family as a social institution is crucial in any free society, that is why tyrants have always set out first to break up the family.” This reminded me of the political motivation behind the push towards children’s rights in the sexual and political field, established in Sam Swerling’s paper, ‘Who’s getting at our kids?’ Wherever I looked it seemed that the odds were well and truly stacked against us. I said this to Professor Ian Donald, an eminent obstetrician and gynaecologist, to which he replied very seriously, “Valerie, when you die you must be able to say to yourself: I did all I could.”

    In the mid-seventies, I came upon an article in MIND, the magazine of the National Association for Mental Health which reported on a seminar it had held on sexual minorities. The Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) was given the platform to express its views on sexual relations between adults with children. The speaker took the opportunity to say that paedophiles were gentle, loving people, much misunderstood by parents, and that society had to change its views to accommodate their activities. A contact address was given. PIE was subsequently given the opportunity to put forward its case at the Campaign for Homosexual Equality’s Sheffield Conference in 1975. The audience of about one thousand was asked to say how many of those present had a sexual interest in children. Those who had no sexual interest in children were asked to stand. Two-thirds stood, one third remained seated. These two events were significant because they indicated that paedophiles were gaining confidence in the permissive climate of moral relativism, and were prepared to ‘come out’ in public. After all, in a society without absolute values and without any concept of right and wrong, paedophiles could argue that their ‘view’ had the same weight as that of anyone else; and they did.

    In evidence to the Policy Advisory Committee on the law relating to sexual offences involving children, PIE proposed that the law should no longer define ages below which consent to sexual activity could not be given. However, following public outrage at this proposal, ‘Magpie No 10’, the journal of PIE, subsequently warned against “the danger of pushing our age of consent policy too far too soon, as this may only estrange and antagonise public opinion still further… let us, meanwhile, support the lobby to lower the age of consent, but do so with discretion. Never, never should we be leading such calls … Who should take the initiative? … It must come from enlightened progressive, scientific research bodies and professional pressure groups.”

    Who were the ‘enlightened’ pressure groups upon whom PIE depended? There was the Sexual Law Reform Society, advocating a lowering of the age of consent. ‘Pregnant at School’, (2) a report funded by the Department of Education, prepared by the National Council for One-Parent Families and the Community Development Trust, recommended that the age of consent should be abolished.

    Another important player in the field was the Albany Trust, which published a special project, ‘Youth & Sexuality’, funded by the Department of Education. The Albany Trust regarded paedophilia as one shade of the spectrum of human sexuality which was worthy of public debate “before any final conclusions can be reached.” The Trust translated the Dutch ‘Speijer Report’, a draft law intended to abolish the existing provision concerning homosexual offences with minors. According to a letter from PIE, this “started the ball rolling in Europe and brought about a change of attitude in the Dutch government and in other Scandinavian governments, with the result that the north of Europe is leading the world in this particular area of reform.”

    I showed a journalist the documentation I had gathered about the activities of PIE, whereupon he returned to London to get some publicity to the subject. He was astonished to find that he was blocked at every level, from the Home Office downwards. Subsequently, I arranged to meet detectives from Scotland Yard to whom I gave all the information I had accumulated. I also met William Deedes, Editor of the Daily Telegraph, and presented him with the dossier I had built up. He ran the story and opened up a public debate which resulted in correspondence in other national papers, questions in Parliament and, finally in 1981, the prosecution of Tom O’Carroll, Chairman of PIE, who was committed for two years for conspiring to corrupt public morals. PIE then went underground.

    However it was not long before another group arose, ‘Minor Problems – Review for Free Intergenerational and Childhood Relations’, with a London Post Office Box address. Whatever still goes on in the murky world of paedophilia, at least any further attempt to gain public acceptance of their activities was stopped. There is inconsistency and confusion in this area. On the one hand the State wants paedophiles to be registered and monitored and the public wants them hounded out of society. On the other hand the State, through its clinics, facilitates child sex from the age of ten whilst it turns a blind eye to sex with minors, as evidenced in the decreasing numbers of prosecutions for sex with minors over the years. All this has taken place at a time when the protective role of parents has been undermined by legislation.

    (2) The Vice-President of the Community Development Trust was Dr Faith Spicer, past President of the Progressive League, and President of the London Youth Advisory Centre.

  6. Troyhand said:

    http://www.famyouth.org.uk/pdfs/Sex%20and%20Relationships%20Education%20Guidance.pdf
    Sex and Relationships Education Guidance
    Consultation Response Form
    The closing date for this consultation is: 19 April 2010

    Department for Children, Schools and Families

    [Pages 20-21]

    Dr Faith Spicer, the founder and director of the London Youth Advisory Centre (now the Brandon Centre) was among those who did not regard increasing levels of sexual activity among young people as an undesirable outcome. Addressing a conference on ‘The Consequences of Teenage Sexual Activity’ organised by Brook, she stated:

    “The main task of sex education in the past was to inform the uninformed. Now, I think the main task is to help young people find out what they feel, how they feel and take responsibility for themselves. But it is also doing another very good task. It is breaking away from the idea that sex is dirty, taboo-ridden, bad, into seeing it as something good, valuable and life-enhancing, and that’s why I think that sex education can, of course, increase sexual activity, but it isn’t necessarily harmful if it does that.” (26)

    (26) Faith Spicer, ‘The Consequences of Teenage Sexual Activity’ conference, 27 April 1981.

  7. Troyhand said:

    http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200203/ldselect/ldrelof/95/95w07.htm

    Submission from the British Board of Film Classification

    1989

    THE VIDEO APPEALS COMMITTEE
    President:
    Peter Barnes CB, former Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions

    Members:
    Nina Bawden FRSL JP, novelist, President, Society of Women Writers and Journalists
    Richard Hoggart FRSL, former Professor of English and Warden of Goldsmiths College, University of London
    Dr Neville March Hunnings, lawyer and author, editor Common Market Law Reports
    The Hon Mrs Sara Morrison, member of the Annan Committee, and former director, Channel Four Television Company Ltd
    Dr Faith Spicer OBE JP, psychotherapist and founder Director, London Youth Advisory Centre
    Laurie Taylor, Professor of Sociology, York University
    T J Taylor, Assistant Director, Department of the DPP
    Fay Weldon, novelist and playwright
    Sir Brian Young, former Director-General, Independent Broadcasting Authority

  8. Troyhand said:

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=VMFAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=46UMAAAAIBAJ&pg=1509%2C2245101
    The Glasgow Herald – Sep 12, 1979
    ‘Repeal law on age of consent’

    The age of consent law against sex under 16 should be repealed, states a report published yesterday.

    It claims there are more disadvantages than advantages to the law, which was designed to protect children.

    Dr James Hemming, an educational psychologist who helped prepare the report, said yesterday the law encouraged girls to hide pregnancy for fear of their boyfriends being prosecuted.

    Controversial

    The Report “Pregnant at School” adds: “The law is out of touch with current behaviour because it does not take account of consenting sexual relationships among the young.”

    Adequate protection was already given to young girls by the existing laws relating to criminal assault, sexual offences, and the welfare of young people.

    The controversial document, jointly prepared by the National Council for One-Parent Families and the Community Development Trust, also recommends:

    That schoolgirl mothers should be helped to continue their education either at school or at home.

    There should be more financial aid for them, and

    There should be better and earlier health and sex education in schools.

    Dropped

    The report, which took five years to compile, states that the number of pregnant schoolgirls under 16 rose by a third between 1971 and 1975.

    Although the figures have dropped slightly since, more than 3600 girls under 16 in England and Wales became pregnant in 1977. Two-thirds of them had legal abortions. Nearly 8500 single girls, aged 16, became pregnant in the same year.

    The report urges society to come to terms with the fact that school children are sexually active, and to do more to help when things go wrong.

%d bloggers like this: