Dear God above: Srsly? Beatrix Campbell?July 15, 2014 Tim WorstallNewspaper Watch18 CommentsSomeone, anyone, is still publishing Beatrix Campbell on the subject of child abuse? Has the world gone mad? previousRitchie gets angrynextDear Murphmonster: A patent and a trademark are different things 18 thoughts on “Dear God above: Srsly? Beatrix Campbell?” David Moore July 15, 2014 at 10:02 am “Has the world gone mad?” Yes, yes it has. Frederick July 15, 2014 at 10:14 am It would help if you explained why. Hamish McCallum July 15, 2014 at 10:15 am And lest you remain in any doubt on the matter, Paul Ehrlich is a Foreign Member of the Royal Society. ken July 15, 2014 at 10:22 am This is the satanic thingy? Wow. I find the vilification of Lady Butler-Sloss quite incomprehensible. She was an excellent jurist and would have made an excellent first female Law Lord – unlike the one who made it, Lady Hale – a hack. Andrew M July 15, 2014 at 10:23 am Following yesterday’s post about how barely half of teenagers live with their fathers, could this be part of the reason why Britain seems particularly afflicted with paedophiles? It must be easier to get your hands on a child who has only one guardian, not two. David Moore July 15, 2014 at 10:48 am Frederick Some background reading for you; http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/13119#.U8T4bvmSzGA Frederick July 15, 2014 at 10:53 am Apparently there was a lot of abuse going on at Nigel Kennedy’s school for musical prodigies. Nowadays I believe that there is much less kiddy fiddling http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10042622/Pupils-sexually-abused-at-an-elite-music-school-claims-Nigel-Kennedy.html Steve July 15, 2014 at 11:10 am “Instead of liberating children’s stories her report bequeathed a new regime for disclosure: children’s evidence was to be shared with strangers, in a strange room, with a video, for under an hour. It was about patrolling, not releasing, what children might say.” Hmmm. What if one of those stories was about a radical feminist lesbian (but I repeat myself) who dressed up as a pagan High Priestess and ritually molested children? Should we, uh, “liberate” that story if there isn’t any evidence or common sense to suggest it’s true? Fire up a witch hunt against lesbian feminists? Take their child relatives into care? Of course not. That wouldn’t be right. But in the crazy mind of radfems, it’s OK to encourage hatred, fear, and literal witch hunts against men, because radfems are mentally ill women who hate and fear men. This is what tends to happen when you view relations between men and women as a class struggle. Ms Campbell is not well. The Guardian giving her a platform to share her conspiracy theories is no different from giving David Icke a platform to discuss his views on Space Reptiles, or Elliot Rodger a slot to share his wisdom on women. Steve July 15, 2014 at 11:23 am Andrew M – children of single mothers are considerably more likely to be neglected, beaten, or sexually abused than children who live with their fathers. The reason for this is that single mothers are often bad mothers, and they tend to shack up with a series of boyfriends. Without the father around to protect his children, they’re at the mercy of whichever exciting bad boy is giving mummy the tingles this month. Fathers are the best defence against child abuse. Dave July 15, 2014 at 11:54 am Steve> “Fathers are the best defence against child abuse.” That’s a non sequitur. Plainly, from what you’ve said, good mothers are the important part. Bloke with a Boat July 15, 2014 at 11:54 am Andrew M July 15, 2014 at 10:23 am Following yesterday’s post about how barely half of teenagers live with their fathers, could this be part of the reason why Britain seems particularly afflicted with paedophiles? It must be easier to get your hands on a child who has only one guardian, not two. And also safer as they’re less likely to have the father coming round and taking the law in to his own hands after finding out someone’s been been fiddling with his “little princess”. Steve July 15, 2014 at 12:05 pm Dave – I’ll share my working: children from fatherless homes are much more likely to be abused, become drug addicts, or end up in jail. Therefore, children need their dads. Good mothers are generally in a long term stable relationship with the father of their children, and don’t have kids by multiple men. So the two aren’t mutually exclusive. Steve July 15, 2014 at 12:08 pm Bloke with a Boat – the Humbert Humbert types go after single mums for exactly that reason. dearieme July 15, 2014 at 12:41 pm Just be grateful that’s she’s not popped up in Cameron’s cabinet. Yet. JuliaM July 15, 2014 at 12:56 pm Day ain’t over yet, dearieme… Jim July 15, 2014 at 2:13 pm “Fathers are the best defence against child abuse.” Indeed. The most likely scenario for child abuse/neglect/murder is one of a child living in a household with its mother and an unrelated male. The genetic father is usually not involved. Rob July 15, 2014 at 2:34 pm Like Erlich, they keep on being welcomed back to the wicket. No failure or past humiliation is enough to shake their standing with the Left. Everything is forgotten. David Moore July 16, 2014 at 1:56 am Rob, “Everything is forgotten.” It’s never forgotten, they are still true believers just waiting for validation. http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/370439/Jimmy-Savile-was-part-of-satanic-ring Valerie Sinason is not short of form on this….. http://tomocarroll.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/compared-to-sinason-savile-was-a-saint/ Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.