Reader comments · David Cameron criticised over gay ‘witch-hunt’ remarks · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


David Cameron criticised over gay ‘witch-hunt’ remarks

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. If you’re going to go by what the crazies on the internet say, like Philip Schofield did, trying to route out gays by use of gossip as your main tool, then you will likely find that the hunt turns into a hunt for gays…

    That’s the point the Prime Minister was making..

    The only thing people like Peter Tatchell don’t like here is that gay people were mentioned in the same conversation. Regardless of what was actually being said..

    1. Oops, the first mention of ‘gays’ in my comment above was supposed to read ‘paedophiles’..

      What a mistake to make haha~ Sorry.

    2. When you say ‘people like Peter Tatchell’, do you mean people who have spent their lives fighting for equality?

      1. No, I meant people who are complaining about the comment made today by David Cameron.

    3. Agreed completely. I have a strong suspicion Tatchell was planning on criticising David Cameron no matter what he did just to get in the news

    4. Peter, if you have a reasonable look at a range of Internet threads discussing this extraordinary story you will be amazed, I suspect, by the large numbers of people who are saying that it was cheap of Cameron to bat the question away by associating paedophilia with homosexuals rather than heterosexuals and claiming that he wishes to protect gay people.

      Even if, unfortunately, all the names on that list are the names of senior figures known to be gay, he should still have said he is wary of a witch-hunt and trial-by-Internet.

      There was absolutely no need for Cameron to speak of either sexuality, i.e. to link the paedophile list with either heterosexuals or homosexuals.

      None of us can judge his motives, but I think that caught “on the hop” as he was, he may have been embarrassed and in the moment what he said was a quick way out of the situation.

    5. Sister Mary Clarence 9 Nov 2012, 3:47pm

      Interestingly it looks like the BBC aren’t playing ball on with the Schofield line of thought in that today they reference the exchange as follows:

      “On Thursday, the prime minister said he feared a “witch-hunt” by those commenting online about child abuse allegations.”

      So I doesn’t appear that they are seizing on any gay-paedo links that Mr Tatchell fears

  2. Peter Tatchell is right. I think Cameron should explain what he meant to say if it was a clumsy remark. And he should apologise if he thinks there is a link between being gay and being a pedophile. Why mention the word gay? – no one else did.

    1. It seems obvious to us here that pedophilia and homosexuality are two different things. But not everybody thinks that, you just have to look at some of the remarks put out by the C4M bunch.

    2. barriejohn 8 Nov 2012, 11:05pm

      It looks as if he mentioned the word gay because Schofield’s list consisted mainly of gay people. This is because internet numbskulls are conflating homosexuality with paedophilia. This is something which has been going on for generations. I know gay men whose families were horrified when they came out because they thought it meant that they fancied young boys! Cameron is right in fact – a witchhunt is already under way.

    3. ‘Why mention the word gay – no one else did’. Sadly, you are very wrong about that. There has been speculation all over the internet, particularly in comments on news stories about the current child abuse scandal, that the ‘mystery men’ who are accused of being child abusers were in fact likely to be ‘closeted’ gay public figures and politicians, because, and I quote one despicable comment, ‘most poofs like the young ones anyway.’ People are rabidly speculating that a former Conservative Prime Minister was a child abuser just because he was unmarried, so must have been secretly gay, so was probably a child abuser too. If Cameron had been the first person to mention the word ‘gay’ in connection with the child sex abuse scandal it would have been a homophobic conflation of the two; saying there shouldn’t be an anti-gay witchhunt in the context of this sort of vile speculation should surely be welcomed.

  3. Oh for God’s sake. (Not that I believe in God) Yes Peter, the words to use were ‘regrettable’, and also ‘inadvertently’, and ‘I am sure this was not his intention’. Keep to that, but no point then going further to have to criticise him even more. To say that he had no reason to link the two is rubbish as well. It seems clear that he was responding to the list that Peter Schofield gave to him, which had names of gay Tories, and so that was why Cameron linked the two together. You are absolutely right that the linking of ‘gay’ and paedophilia is the problem, but we sould be going to the root cause of that, and sounding out bigots, and not attacking someone when they were on our side, even if they did say something that could be easily misconstrued by others.

    1. Exactly, exactly.

      We don’t want to attack the people who are actually on our side..

      That’s a terrible thing to do, and doesn’t exactly do us any favours either…

    2. barriejohn 8 Nov 2012, 11:11pm

      Peter Tatchell has been selectively quoted here. This is what he says elsewhere:

      1. Harlequin 9 Nov 2012, 6:26pm

        So this is just another case of tabloid reporting by Pink News? Thank you for the link.

        For those who haven’t read it, Tatchell did not write, “There is no reason why he should link the current scandals with gay people or warn of an anti-gay witch-hunt.” His actual quote, making the same point as Cameron, was, “At this stage, based on known evidence, there is no reason why *anyone* should link the current paedophile scandals with gay people. [End of sentence]”

  4. ...Paddyswurds 8 Nov 2012, 6:31pm

    Ah, so Cameron finally shows his true colours and what he really thinks of Gay people. We are all evil paedophiles. Anyone who thought for one second that the Law and Justice Tories had changed from the Nasty party, was and is sorely deluded. This is David Cameron playing to the gallery and showing the true nature of the Tory party to the bigoted blue rinse brigade in the Home Counties. Well he should have a care and remember at what happened to his counterpart, Romney, in the US on Tuesday. Romney has the same attitude to American Gays and see where it got him. If Dave wants to be a one trick pony and end up on the scrap heap come 2015 then carry on with his current direction. If he is truly what he says he is he needs to back pedal rapidly and APOLOGISE for this slur and table an Equal Marriage bill at the same time. Otherwise Goodbye Bigot Dave……

    1. Foolish words, one and all~

      1. ...Paddyswurds 9 Nov 2012, 11:33am

        @Peter S …
        …..yea,yea, and like you’d know…

    2. Paddy, Cameron will never satisfy you. If Cameron rimmed Clegg on the Downing Street doorstep you’d still find away spin it into a homophobic slur on gay people. Unfortunately you views are infected with party politics.

      1. That’ll never happen, has to be behind closed doors!!
        But surely it would be the other way round?

    3. I’m no fan of Cameron myself, but your comments astound me with the manner in which you have completely and utterly misinterpreted what the Prime Minister actually said….

      The fact that your profile image is a rose makes me suggest that you might well be a proud supporter or member of the Labour Party. If this is the case then I really hope that you get over such partisan party views and actually look at the evidence, which is that Cameron has actually adopted a pro-LGBT rights stance since taking power and doesn’t deserve to be lambasted as a homophobe.

      1. ...Paddyswurds 8 Nov 2012, 10:21pm

        Time will tell and has told. Why is he dragging his feet on Marriage Equality. If he were to do it now the bigots and homophobes will have gotten used to the Idea by 2015 and will not hold it against the Tories. if he waits til 2015 the furore will be fresh and more likely to have an effect on his re-election chances. I don’t think he intends to table the motion at all. A step too far for the Homophobic Tory Party.

        1. ...Paddyswurds 8 Nov 2012, 10:26pm

          ..btw. don’t forget that clause 28 was enacted by the vile Maggie Thatcher because the Tories were of the opinion that Gay people went around schools and stood at school gates “recruiting” young children!

        2. Sister Mary Clarence 9 Nov 2012, 10:49am

          Time has told, and time has told us you are an idiot

          1. ...Paddyswurds 9 Nov 2012, 11:36am

            Says the spit and run Tory troll…

  5. If you watch th video, Cameron does a very slight “bunny caught in the headlights” expression.

    He clearly meant no harm, just that his annoyance (justified) with the sofa-bound vigilanties at This Morning caused him to utter a small, inadvertent and unfortunate combination of words.

    Sometimes bad things happen to good sentences. That’s life.

    1. Yes. And to those who doubt that Cameron got given names of Tories on that list, the thing is that it seems almost certain that Schofiled gave such names to Cameron, and this is the reason why: during the interview after he gives the list to Cameron, he quite clearly says ‘Are you going to talk to them?’. I do not believe that unless Cameron was directly surrounded by those people whose names were written on that list, would Schofield ask such a question. Why would Schofield say such a thing if the names on that list were Gary Glitter, Freddie Star and Jimmy Saville, as it would be not only political suicide but also almost impossible in the latter case, unless the Prime Minister believed in spiritualism, to contact the latter.

  6. Peter Tatchell who still to this day calls for the age of consent to be reduced (Questionable). This man makes a living out of victims of homophobia and attacking views different from his own, get’s arrested a few times in the process. Give it a rest Peter, Cameron was right to make the point, admittedly perhaps better but you’re wrong, you’re playing politics with the issue.

    1. barriejohn 8 Nov 2012, 7:37pm

      Whether he’s right or wrong about David Cameron (who, giving him the benefit of the doubt, has possibly worded his remarks wrongly), I doubt that you are worthy to tie Peter Tatchell’s shoelaces!

      1. Iv accomplished more in three years military training than he has making phoney arrests and outrageous remarks about lowering the age of consent through his little plastic microphone. What a shame you defend that sort of view (disgusting)…

        1. ...Paddyswurds 9 Nov 2012, 11:45am

          ……”Iv accomplished more in three years military training ” …..and that is no surprise and hardly something to be proud of. how are you any better than the killers locked up in Broadmoor, except that you are a trained killer and get a uniform to prove it.
          Peter Tatchell has worked all his life for Gay and Human rights even to the detriment of his own health.
          You on the other hand could do no better than become a trained killer.Shame on you, Bet your parents are sooo proud.

  7. I wonder if Schofield ever thought of scouring the internet and seeing what is being said about him.

    1. I’m sure i have read accusations of Schofield being a peadophile on the internet too…

  8. Craig Denney 8 Nov 2012, 6:53pm

    He has a habit of bungling when he is put on the spot over issues relating to gay people:

    I think he is trying to shift the blame onto gay people to help save the Tory (Paedophile) scum on the back benches.

    1. Yes and said words that he links automatically without rehearsal . Cameron is a sneak, you would have to be a fool to fall for his grotesque insincerity.

  9. Have any of David Cameron’s LibDem colleagues had anything to say on this? Why not a peep?

  10. If someone who doesn’t think Cameron has done anything wrong here could explain to me why he chose to say ‘a gay witch hunt’ when discussing a child abuse scandal on national TV, I’d much appreciate it.

    1. David Cameron was handed a list containing the names SOLELY of gay Tories who have had claims of paedophilia made against them. He is (unusually wisely) suggesting that it is feasible that these people have been implicated spuriously on the net simply because of their homosexuality rather than any wrong doing. Because that’s what happens in a witch hunt.

      1. Not everybody seems to be aware of this, but over the last couple of weeks, the comments sections of many Huff Post news stories about the child abuse scandal have been flooded with comments listing public figures and politicians in the past who were gay but never came out, and suggesting that because they led that ‘secret life’, they were probably the child abusers in question too. A witch-hunt against gay people under the cover of protesting the child abuse scandal has already started. If you haven’t seen this crap, Cameron’s comments seem to be bringing gay people into the child abuse issue out of nowhere. If you have, it suggests that he is himself aware of this vile activity, and wants to bring a stop to it. And trust me, I am no Cameron supporter.

        1. exactomundo Daniel

        2. Midnighter 9 Nov 2012, 4:12pm


          “Mr Cameron told BBC Radio Cumbria the point he was making was there were a “lot of fingers being pointed and aspersions being cast” on the internet and social media, some of which were against people “just because they happen to be gay”.”

  11. I don’t think it really was percieved as witch hunt against gay people until David Cameron mentioned it on the programme.

    The quickest way to start a witch hunt is to say shouldn’t have a witch hunt! The homophobic trolls on YouTube and elsewhere are already verbally attacking gay people and calling gay people paedophiles –
    That’s just one example.

    1. Expect the hate crimes mobs to be getting ready, feeding off Camerons words.

  12. Are you all so blind as to not see, that a politician who is gay and is found to be a paedophile will bring out all those who wish to suppress us and use it as a weapon. We see it everyday in the press. This is what is meant, he can see that this will become a witch hunt to all gays. So even tho it will only be 1 person who comes through as gay out of the 6-7 who are straight we will still be the bad people. BUT we will have to weather it, as we shouldn’t protect them.

  13. Craig Denney 8 Nov 2012, 7:31pm

    This is all his fault for not starting a full independent enquiry.

    He knows the real “witch-hunt” is for his Party and he’s trying to shift blame onto gay’s. Is his bungling so bad that we are casting it aside or did he know exactly what he was saying?

    He should make a ‘full apology’ from the link that gays are paedophiles and if he doesn’t make a full apology then he really is linking gays to paedophiles to save his nasty Party.

  14. As much as I loathe the prime minister, I think in this instance it was an innocent mistake. I interpreted his comment as referring to gay people on the list. However, as innocent as his mistake may have been, it did give the impression that he was linking gay people with paedophillia, and by doing that he is ironically helping to create a witch hunt against gay people rather than avoiding one.

    1. barriejohn 8 Nov 2012, 7:41pm

      I think you have summed it up there. I was incensed at his remarks initially, but I don’t think now that he was making the connection that he appears to be (at least, I hope not!).

  15. If we (the UK) are to have a public enquiry in to paedophilia then don’t stop at Savile or the N Wales childrens’ homes We MUST include the Catholic Church too for it is that organisation (with all its secrecy, power and wealth) that has abused more children in this world than any other group!

  16. Good to PinkNews can only see Peter Tatchell as the face of the community speaking on this issue! What about all the personnel comments not good enough?

    1. “People On Internet Write Comments On Web Site” is not news. If readers are interested in our opinions they can do so by clicking the buttons next to the headlines marked ‘x Comments’.

  17. 8 Nov 2012, 8:00pm

    What has gay got to do with it?

  18. There are also allegations against Labour people too including someone who is still an MP!

  19. David Cameron should clarify his comments as a matter of urgency

    1. I think that might require mentioning the people who were on the list… which would be a little bit of an issue…

    2. Midnighter 9 Nov 2012, 4:13pm

      He has.

      Mr Cameron told BBC Radio Cumbria the point he was making was there were a “lot of fingers being pointed and aspersions being cast” on the internet and social media, some of which were against people “just because they happen to be gay”.


  21. Homophobes think their is a connection between paedophilia and homosexuality. David Cameron has mentioned that there will be ‘a witch hunt against gays’ because of the actions of paedophiles. It doesn’t take a genius to work out that he thinks there is a connection.

    1. barriejohn 8 Nov 2012, 8:37pm

      Apparently, the names on the list were largely of gay people. Much as I dislike and distrust Cameron, I think that Scofield is the real villain here, and ambushing the Prime Minister in this way was ridiculous!

  22. I went to Eton, and have mixed in the same circles as Mr Cameron. What most of you do not know is that this is how we, including Mr Cameron, are taught to speak. Dropping subtle innuendos and shifts in perspective and focus, causing the real issues to disappear for our own agendas. Why else do you think my parents would pay so much money to educate me. To be the same as you? Or to be part of an elite group who can manipulate reality for our own ends. Anyone who thinks Mr Cameron had not already thought about using these carefully chosen words for this topic is…. not part of the elite. We laugh at you, as you defend us.

    1. ...Paddyswurds 9 Nov 2012, 11:48am

      Hear hear…

  23. Patrick Mc Crossan 8 Nov 2012, 8:26pm

    Clearly many views on here are infected with party politics.Peter Tachell is like Marmite and I don’t like him.I respect some of his work, but I feel he is too often like a Bull In A China Shop.The Prime Minister has gay friends, and is clearly despite opposition speaking up for marriage rights for us.He was saying what is true the internet is full of gossip going back years and many gay people just for being gay are falsely
    accused.Even non high political tories are mentioned.So I feel after being ambushed the Prime Minister said what he thought and his concern was about a gay witch hunt.To now try to twist what he said as being against gay people is a very lame and pathetic opportunity.There are times when politics should be kept out of arguments.This is one of them.The gossip on the internet largely makes accusations against gay people, not straight people. and the involvement of Savile etc is not relevant.
    I say give Mr Cameron a break as for heavens sake heis speaking up for us

    1. No, Patrick. Cameron could very simply have said he is wary of witch-hunt and trial-by-Internet regarding possible paedophiles.

      There was absolutely no need for him to speak of either sexuality, i.e. to link the paedophile list with either heteros or homos.

      He was embarrassed and in the moment it was a quick way out of the situation.

    2. He’s got gay friends! Everything all right then! (What a howler that line has become) The fav of all homophobes and their apologists, as in this case.

    3. I’ve felt the same about Tatchell but I feel that he has mellowed in recent years. These days, he seems to thinking first before reacting and speaking from a position of considered reason instead of just creating political stirs.

  24. I think it’s a political conspiracy. I think the Catholic Church is out to get gay people because they don’t want equal marriage. I believe that Jimmy Savile was a paedophile but the Tory MP scandal has been exagerrated/made up and people paid by certain homphobic newspapers to slur the name of gays. We must SPEAK OUT!

  25. The incident is a real shame, any abuse is appalling and needs investigation but Schofield’s manner was abusive given the setting and Cameron’s associating paedophilia and gays revealed barely buried resentments. Whatever the cause, the interview has gone global and is currently front webpage in the USA and Europe and probably other places. So how much abuse will now be perpetrated against gays following this resurrected association. Shame !

  26. Cameron has heard of these names many times I suspect and I suspect they are all gay or rumoured to be gay. Imagine what people like the Christian institute would imply? Cameron is clearly sticking up for us, he may have done it in a careless way but he was definitely trying to protect us.


  28. Well said, Peter. I was hoping you would release such a statement. I hope Gandalf will too! (I’m sure you could give Sir Ian a nudge. He gave NZ’s John Key a good ticking off the other day.)

  29. barriejohn 8 Nov 2012, 8:55pm

    Peter Tatchell defends David Cameron here. It would appear that the “gay witch-hunt” was already taking place, and Schofield’s actions have only added fuel to the fire!

  30. Peter’s not happy unless he’s in the news on a weekly basis…

  31. I agree with Truth. It’s a conspiracy of some sort and the Catholic Church and
    Homophobic newspapers are all in on it. The idea is to make the ‘dumb’ population believe homosexuals are paedopihiles. The Gay MPs have been targeted because the Tories support equal marriage.

  32. The anti-gay Catholics who spend millions of dollars all the time now to stop gay marriage and LGBT people from getting equal and civil rights need to be gone after, they are the ones who are Catholic and have Witch Hunts, for real, check it out in the history books or google wich hunts. These same Catholics hide their pedophile priest who have been raping and abusing children since the Catholic Church began long ago. Somebody needs to investigate them for real.

  33. What Schofield (well, really ITV producers, I suppose) did was bizarre and unacceptable. “Prime minister, some guy on the internet said all these people are child molesters. What are you going to do about it?”

    However, I can’t understand why anyone is defending Cameron. After pausing, explaining the need to be cautious, and making it obvious he didn’t want to go into any specifics about people on the list, he really felt the need to point out that some or all of them are gay? Why not “we need to be careful there isn’t a witch hunt against 41-year-old Chancellors with names rhyming with corn”? It feels like a clumsy attempt to stop criticism of politicians that he is presumably close to by linking it with homophobia. And I don’t for one moment believe that a man who said that repealing section 28 would be “anti-family”, and who refuses to deal with anti-LGBT bullying by religious schools, is really concerned about homophobia.

  34. Has anyone noticed how the news is just saying what the prime minister said, but not condemning it?

    1. Do you mean in editorial columns? Aside from there not being anything to condemn, I think columnists have enough real news stories to write about.

  35. It always surprises me how many people associate homosexuality with peadophillia. It just shows the extent of ignorance that is out there.

    My (old) best friend was told me she wouldn’t leave her chrildren with a gay man, in case they were molested. I was shocked.

    Though I don’t think Cameron intended to make the association. People are over reacting.

    1. Samantha Harvey 8 Nov 2012, 9:08pm

      I am not a fan of Cameron and like to get self-righteous about lazy Tory homophobia as much as the next person. But, I simply can’t get excited about this remark. Unfortunate that in the minds if the very stupid, DC might have drawn a link between pedophiles and gay people? Yes. But he was actually just pointing out the reality of the revolting nature of many of the unfounded rumours that are all over Twitter and then Internet. Most accusations are thinly veiled homophobic statements coupled with randomly naming a series of out and closeted gay politicians. The link is already being made by dimwitted Internet trolls and those too weak minded to think for themselves and I won’t be blaming him for referring to that reality. To ask Cameron to explain his
      comment when it us abundantly clear what he is getting at just seems mean spirited. For once he was actually trying to do the right thing. There are other things to be getting upset about.

      1. barriejohn 8 Nov 2012, 11:08pm

        I think his intentions were honourable, but the headlines that he generated are appalling!

  36. D.Hendrick 8 Nov 2012, 9:18pm

    Was it really clumsy or a well aimed remark to keep the more right wing party members of the conservative party sweet so they can keep up with their bigotry safe in the knowledge that their leader secretly agrees with them…same old same old still can never trust a tory when their lips are moving….shameful!!

  37. 8 Nov 2012, 9:28pm

    Actually I agree with the comments made by David Cameron. Very professional given the circumstances.

    Until you’ve experienced real homophobia. Homophobes can indeed attack a homosexual with the paedo card to ruin your career and ultimately your life.

  38. ‘inadvertently’, ‘regrettable’ ‘I am sure this was not his intention’? How mealy mouthed you’ve become Peter! Of COURSE he intended it. You out for a knighthood or something?

  39. According to the BBC, Downing Street officials
    later explained that Mr Cameron’s fears about a
    homophobic “witch-hunt” were prompted by his
    objection to online gossip that associated
    homosexuality with paedophilia and that made
    unproven claims of paedophilia against
    prominent gay public figures.
    Number 10 added: “It is wrong to smear gay
    people with unfounded allegations”.

  40. Join the facebook page to demand clarification and an apology. It smacks of the catholic church deflecting it’s problems on to the gay population as a whole. Did anyone think of the a straight witch hunt or an asian witch hunt during the rochdale case?>

    1. Midnighter 9 Nov 2012, 4:15pm

      Or just check your facts per the poster right above you, instead of starting your own hysterical half-cocked witch hunt.

  41. “Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.

    While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful” –

    Q.Who wrote this ? – Gary Glitter,Jimmy Saville or Peter Tatchell?
    A.Peter Tatchell
    .Did you give the names of the adults to the Police ? Was there a cover up ? Did the editor of the Guardian resign?Are you the same Peter Tatchell who whipped up an anti-catholic witch hunt when the Pope came to visit ?

    1. GingerlyColors 9 Nov 2012, 12:54pm

      The age of consent for sex in the England, Wale and Scotland is 16 in and in Northern Ireland it is 17 (as it is in Eire). The age of consent is there for a reason and sexual activity involving underage people is illegal, and when it involves a person over the age of consent having sex with an underaged person then it can count as rape as the underaged person is not able to consent to sex in the eyes of the law. Here in the UK we no longer have a disparity between the age of consent for gay and straight sex, a far cry from 1967 when the age for gay sex was set at 21 – the voting age at the time.

    2. I know that, in my own case, I sought out adult sexual partners when I was ten years old (post-pubescent). I do not feel damaged by my youthful, mostly “joyful” experiences in any way and my adult desires have always been for ‘real men’ with men’s bodies and men’s smells. I do, however, understand that large age gaps between sexual partners, particularly where one has not reached a certain degree of emotional maturity, can be extremely harmful even in situations of complete mutual consent.

  42. “Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.

    While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful” –

    Q.Who wrote this ? – Gary Glitter,Jimmy Saville or Peter Tatchell?
    A.Peter Tatchell

  43. Bear in mind that this was specifically to do with the abuse of boys, not all children, in a Welsh children’s home by MPs in the 70s. Other than Thatcher, there weren’t many (if any) female MPs at the time. So it’s safe to assume that taking these limitations into account, the alleged abuse was in fact same-sex.

    But the point is that it is easy to take his comments the wrong way, so for that reason it was still a poor choice of wording.

  44. So the Church and the scandalous Homophobic Press have joined up to make out all the Tory ‘GAY’ MPs are Paedophiles.

  45. Jason Wakefield 8 Nov 2012, 11:11pm

    It is clear Cameron did not equate homosexuals to paedophiles. He was suggesting that this is precisely what OTHER people do, and he worries about a witch-hunt where people seek to use a person’s sexuality against them when making accusations of paedophilia. People do this all the time, so he is not unreasonable to point out the ugliness of it.

    But of course people will overlook this because they hear “gay people” and “paedophiles” in the same sentence and automatically presume to be listening to a bigot, even though that is precisely the kind of bigot he was condemning. He was defending gay people from prejudice, and you are not justified to castigate him for it.

    Philip Schofield, on the other hand, risked ruining the reputations and careers of possibly innocent people. Apparently a quick browse of on-line rumours justifies accusations of paedophilia on live television in front of millions of people. It was heinously irresponsible.

  46. Let’s all remind ourselves of Cameron’s homophobic voting record shall we?

    Or are we expected to believe he’s evolved.

    He says he’s in favour of marriage equality.

    Yet almost 3 years later, nothing is happening.

    Is Cameron the same homophobic pig his voting record suggests?

    1. ...Paddyswurds 9 Nov 2012, 12:02pm

      …without any doubt. CallmeeDave has been caught out and the Tory trolls on this thread are spitting fire. The Homophobic Tories are still with the Law and Justice polish party in the European grouping withe the Law and Justice party and other far right parties. They are still the nasty party the vile Maggie Thatcher so loved and nurtured and we all know what she thought of Gay people. They have NOT changed their attitude, just got better at hiding it and lying about it. Camerons response to the idiot Schofield was genuine and he has been unmasked. The foot dragging on Marriage Equality is proof if proof were needed after the insulting debacle of “the Consultation”…

    2. @dAVID. You’re still harking on about this aren’t you! Even though you always posit your remarks as questions which you wish to be answered, despite the fact that there have many people who have answered your questions, you never respond to them with a reasonable argument. Just because you keep bleating with the same partisan posturing, does not mean that your argument has any more validity. Please stop writing threads which are merely a series of rhetorical questions, which you never wish people to answer, for even if they do, you are not willing to engage them. All you are contributing to is rhetoric and empty rhetoric at that. Not everything is a conspiracy, and if you start thinking of Cameron as human who was responding to a list of gay people’s names rather than an evil Tory Humanoid bent on world destruction, you might understand what happened here and begin to answer your own questions. Please do so for all our sakes as your vacuous specious arguments are becoming tiresome.

  47. People read too much into everything. The assumption of what people “mean” is pathetic and self serving and lazy. Get interested in the wider world and step out of the tiny blame transference world. The people that matter don’t mind and the people that mind don’t matter. Leave David Cameron out of it! He is a man caught in other people’s crossfire.

    1. Why did he mention gay peoplea at all?

      He chose to bring gay people into this debate.

      1. Oh, and here is another rhetorical question. dAVID. I must say. I have to give you some points for form and consistency. Shame you get less marks on content.

      2. barriejohn 10 Nov 2012, 3:19pm


        I am not a Tory supporter, but we need to stick to the facts here. It is Schofield and the internet trolls whom we should be angry with. I am willing to accept that David Cameron was caught off guard (he wasn’t on the programme to discuss this matter at all) and expressed himself clumsily. The “gay witch hunt” was already in progress.

  48. A disproportionate number of the names being suggested as suspects on the internet happen to be gay people – I would offer names to illustrate this, but I fear that would be in poor taste. Most are presumably innocent but once rumours start it’s tough to stop them.

    Obviously the names at the centre of the rumours have already been brought to Cameron’s attention, and (as innocent until proven guilty) he’s done his best to prevent a ‘trial by media’, and attempted to prevent it escalating into vilification of gays as a whole. Obviously because the stereotype may set the homophobes off. However, he didn’t explain himself very well (his subtlety I assume was to not give any hints as to the people involved) and it’s backfired and now he himself is in the firing line. Like or loathe Cameron, he’s done nothing wrong on this and his intention was only to protect the gay community. Traditionally, allies in the Tory party have been hard to come by, so it would be a shame to push one away.

    1. I was unaware that a “disproportionate” number of names were those of gay people.

      As was most of the country.

      David Cameron made sure that the entire country knew.

      What is he playing at.

      It is so in

      1. ...Paddyswurds 9 Nov 2012, 12:04pm

        I’ve seen the list and there is only one Gay name on it that I know for sure is gay. The rest are straight married men…..

        1. Suddenly Last Bummer 9 Nov 2012, 3:19pm

          A few of those married men in one online list have long been rumoured to be in sham marriages prior to this.

  49. Come on Tachell get real the reason he said it shouldn’t be turned into a gay witch hunt is because the man suspected of the child abuse in this case Politician X has allegedly been having sex with boys not Girls grow up and think about the children

  50. Kim Berlin 9 Nov 2012, 8:10am

    Child abuse, whether sexual, physical or psychological, has no place in modern society. It is a hideous act that causes long lasting devastation.

    The sexual orientation of the vile human to commits such act is irrelevant. It is a very sad distraction that the sexual orientation of the vile perpetrator is so interesting for the modern media.

    I suspect that the Catholic Church is very happy that the media has a trend of associating sexual abuse of children to the gay community. It naturally provides them with the ability to continue their own abuse of children whilst demonizing the entire gay community and thereby justifying their existence.

  51. Having looked back at the comment in question, I can see what the PM was trying to allude to, in other words, not linking peadophilia to being gay, therefore causing a witch hunt of gay people. He could and should have chosen his words better and made himself clearer on what he meant.

    On the other hand Peter Tatchell claims, and I quote from the article “Gay people are not peadophiles” is not true. Peadophiles do come from from all backgrounds, and what Tatchell should have said is that gay people are a lot less likely to be peadophiles.

  52. Phillip Schofield made NO allusion to homosexuality at all. It was clumsy journalism, but, in all fairness, he did not link child abuse with being gay.
    Cameron was caught ‘on the hop’ as it were and I think his true feelings towards homosexuality came out i,.e. putting it into the same camp as child abuse.

  53. Terry Stewart 9 Nov 2012, 9:47am

    Well said David Cameron!

    Well I have surprised myself and am on the side of David Cameron on this one.
    David Cameron’s response was a response I may have given, having been handed a list of gay men and told that this is a list of possible Paedophiles. Schofield was rather silly not too have considered this matter and the impact such an allegation might have on the whole Gay community.

    If Nick Griffin had presented this list, what would your thoughts have been to such a response by David Cameron? The out pouring of support for Cameron would have deafened even the hard of hearing.

    I don’t agree with Witch hunts by whoever leads them because of the real danger they have on people’s lives. Cameron rightfully stated “We live in a country which has in place procedures to deal with such matters”. It’s a bit of “you’re dammed if you do and dammed if you don’t”.

    1. Schofield did not mention that the names were gay.

      Cameron made damned sure the country knew that the names on the list were gay.


      1. Oh brother….. and here we have it. another rhetorical question for something we already know the answer. dAVID. Please please get out from that cave you share with Oliver Stone, 9/11 conspiracy theorists, moon landing doubters and African politicians who dont believe in HIV or whothat Europe brought it over to spite their continent. You are the same breed of conspiracy theorist and only add dangerous pulp to our discussions. Enter the light and breathe some optimism into those cynical lungs of yours. It’ll do you some good.

  54. Terry Stewart 9 Nov 2012, 9:48am

    I remember the Witch Hunts in the 70s and early 80s on the Gay community and we really don’t need to revisit that place again. For the Prime Minister to state his constructive comments shows us how far we have come and how many gains we have made.

    Some people are willing to play dirty politics with our lives, which we should avoid at all times. Listen to what Cameron said and ask yourself, what was wrong with his comment. I welcomed it and opposed to the rule of the mob.

    1. Malcolm Lidbury 9 Nov 2012, 10:14am

      anti -gay witchunts have been carried on in Cornwall by police since 2004

    2. “Some people are willing to play dirty politics with our lives”

      Why did the PM bring gay people into the equation.

      Schofield did not mention gay people; and all the highest profile cases (Savile; Glitter; Starr) involve straight people.

      is Cameron playing dirty politics with our lives to avoid having to introduce equal civil rights?

      1. @dAVID. You’re still harking on about this aren’t you! Even though you always posit your remarks as questions which you wish to be answered, despite the fact that there have many people who have answered your questions, you never respond to them with a reasonable argument. Just because you keep bleating with the same partisan posturing, does not mean that your argument has any more validity. Please stop writing threads which are merely a series of rhetorical questions, which you never wish people to answer, for even if they do, you are not willing to engage them. All you are contributing to is rhetoric and empty rhetoric at that. Not everything is a conspiracy, and if you start thinking of Cameron as human who was responding to a list of gay people’s names rather than an evil Tory Humanoid bent on world destruction, you might understand what happened here and begin to answer your own questions. Please do so for all our sakes as your vacuous specious arguments are becoming tiresome.

  55. I can defend his comments insofar as if he was handed names of people alleged to have been involved in abuse at that Welsh children’s home, then it’s likely the names would have been those who he knew were gay, as the abuse took place against boys. I think what Cameron was trying to say was that we should be careful not to just throw up random names of people who were/are or we suspect to be gay and ask ‘is it him?’ and effectively causing a gay witch-hunt where every former member of the government who is/was/suspected to be gay is accused and put in the frame solely based on their sexuality.

  56. Malcolm Lidbury 9 Nov 2012, 10:08am

    (Search ST Pearce Accountant St Austell for press article)
    Case goes to trial Truro Crown Court 13th Feb

    I’m pasting this here as there seems to be obstruction from some to this information getting out. There has been a gay witch-hunt in Cornwall for years, but by police trying to cover up for police officers & others identified by gay whistleblowers. It is gay whistleblowers who have been targeted by police in order to cover up police & some associated with them of misconduct & criminality.

  57. Peter….. you are a bit of a tit sometimes.

  58. Malcolm Lidbury 9 Nov 2012, 10:23am

    In the 1960’s I was in a peadophile ring when aged 6/7 to age 10-ish. It involved a teacher, clergy & POLICE. It has been reported to Devon & Cornwall police numerous times over the years but buried & ignored. Police even suppressed a 6hr video tape of my witness statemment evidence in Feb/Mch 2010 about multiple police misconduct & criinality. The homophobic gay witch hunt by Cornwall police was AGAINST me as a gay whistleblower and continues to this day!

  59. Paul in Brighton 9 Nov 2012, 10:31am

    The blame for this should be firmly placed at Phillip Schofield’s dyed hair door.

    This botox-like character who I recall sucessfully sued a media outlet who suggested or implied he was and Jason Donovan were gay, should be taken off the air for such irresponsible presenting.

    In the late 1980s, I recall an incident in Harlesden, North West London were two gay guys were living together as we do, and a rumour was started in the local area that the two were guilty of interfering with children.

    Their property was fire bombed and they both were lucky to have lived, but it left them with terrible emotional difficulties and the police having to deal with a lynch-mob mentality, similar to what Schofield has achieved.

  60. If you watch the video it is clearly an offensive comment.
    The part that upset me was when he used the phrase
    “No matter how higher up in british Society that individual is…”
    Honey, you’s scum just like the rest of us. You ain’t high unless yous gown got high off somethin you shouldn’t be doin.
    We is all equal and you ain’t my model of success sweetheart. Uh uh no way.

    1. then you must have watched a very different video!

      1. Or ‘High’ had something…..

  61. Over the last fortnight, there has been a deeply worrying phenomenon on the comments sections of several online news stories about the child abuse scandal. While it’s clear they are trying to moderate comments, they seem to have been facing an uphill struggle. These comments have represented nothing short of, as Cameron worded it, an attempt to turn the inquiry into child sex abuse into ‘a witch-hunt against gay people.’ They have listed, often by name, public figures and politicians as potential child abusers, and the ‘evidence’ for these accusations has been simply evidence that they were ‘closeted’ gay men. To quote one remark, ‘if he was capable of leading this sort of double life, imagine what else he could have got up to and kept secret. Most gays prefer the younger type anyway.’ As a result, I have myself said repeatedly precisely what Cameron has said, that I was afraid the campaign against child abusers was turning into a witch-hunt against gay people.

  62. Paedophlia isn’t a ‘sexual attraction’ at all, and saying that gives it legitimacy. It is a relationship of power and abuse and has nothing to do with sexual preference or sex. It is based on exploitation – and without a consenting adult it is rape – not sex.

    1. Let’s try to factual.

      The word paedophilia is composed of paedo (children) and philia (love).

      Paedophiles are simply people who have a love of, a deep attraction to, children.

      Paedophilia is a problem because, obviously, on the one hand is an adult with the attraction, and on the other hand there is a child, naive, usually innocent, unaware of the all of the ways of the world. It’s an unequal relationship.

      I had a colleague once who eventually confided to me that he had this extraordinary attraction to young boys. However, he fully understood how unequal it was, and how it could lead him to initiate a relationship which would be unfair on the child. He dealt with his “paedophilia” by working in a boys’ school where he could devote himself to the education of boys. He also imposed strict limits on himself, for example, making sure that not only did he never allow a relationship with any student to become improper, but making sure that no boy was ever alone in his presence.

    2. Sorry, I wrote the above so rapidly, there’s a typo in the first line. (Sorry if there are others as well!)

    3. We appear to be dealing with at least three, for the most part entirely separate, definitions of ‘paedophilia’. The first, strict, sense is a sexual attraction to prepubescent children, as Eddy points out; the third is the abusive power trip, akin to rape, described by MB; the third is the breaking of local contemporary laws across the age of consent barrier, which most of the media seem to employ just to get the word into more headlines.

  63. Not everybody seems to be aware of this, but over the last couple of weeks, the comments sections of many Huff Post news stories about the child abuse scandal have been flooded with comments listing public figures and politicians in the past who were gay but never came out, and suggesting that because they led that ‘secret life’, they were probably the child abusers in question too. A witch-hunt against gay people under the cover of protesting the child abuse scandal has already started. If you haven’t seen this crap, Cameron’s comments seem to be bringing gay people into the child abuse issue out of nowhere. If you have, it suggests that he is himself aware of this vile activity, and wants to bring a stop to it. And trust me, I am no Cameron supporter.

    1. Well, the “vile activity” you are talking about has been going on for a long loooong time? In fact, most of CaMoron’s voters and supporters have been indulging in this activity since way before his first breath on this planet. They are the same people who have been spreading false accusations against gay people for time immemorial. What CaMoron is NOT doing is taking responsibility, and deflecting the attention from himself amplifies the “gays equals pedophiles” message and is making the news around the Globe, and is delighting his electorate. Peter T. is taking the safe approach and giving him the benefit of the doubt, saying he has “inadvertently reinforced the prejudice”, but CaMoron’s behaviour is at least a classic Freudian slip.

  64. GingerlyColors 9 Nov 2012, 12:43pm

    With the Jimmy Savile affair ongoing and the likes of Gary Glitter and Freddie Starr (the latter currently innocent until found otherwise) getting caught up in all this we must avoid the same hysteria that has occurred in other cases such as Cleveland and the Orkney Islands where a lot of innocent people had their reputations tarnished. Any suggestion that the LGBT community is anyway linked to all this can be severely damaging and language such as ‘gay witch hunt’ can be dangerous. We in the LGBT community condemn child abuse which seems to happen on an industrial scale, especially in organisations that are critical of same-sex relationships.

  65. Jock S. Trap 9 Nov 2012, 1:01pm

    Comes to something when we attack the very people that support us, just because, I suspect, of which polilitcal party they belong to.

    Had this come from Ed Miliband what’s the betting a few comments on here would be very different.

    I support David Cameron on this. He speaks sense but then I would have supported whoever said this, supporting us. then I am Not politically bias.

    1. Suddenly Last Bummer 9 Nov 2012, 3:13pm

      You said it. We still have some “Margaret on the Guillotine” types frothing at the mouth simply cause a Tory was on the receiving end of Schofield’s stunt.

  66. Another Hannah, BA, RMN. 9 Nov 2012, 1:55pm

    It sounds like Cameron is trying to turn this into a thing against Gays rather than against the Paedophiles where it belongs.

  67. Leaving aside party allegiances, David Cameron was ambushed by the twerp Schofield and his reaction was well intentioned and supportive of Gays. To see his remarks as offensive in light of Schofeild’s shenanigans is bewildering.

    1. No ambush, but simple journalistic inquiry, to which CaMoron could have just refused to answer, without having to deflect the attention to “teh gays”. Schofield hasn’t said anything about gays.

    2. Now, if you think CaMoron is “well intentioned and supportive” of gays, how do explain his coziness with his homophobic colleagues? How do you explain his denials, his silence? Who is really holding the whip? Clearly not the plebs…. Oh I know… he is just a poor hostage victim of the system… and after his his ordeal he’ll be able to tell the World: “They forced me to do it”.

      1. Suddenly Last Bummer 9 Nov 2012, 3:10pm

        ‘journalistic inquiry’? Are you for frickin’ real? This Morning is for plebs and stay at home mothers. A few weeks ago they had some guest on apparently selling celebrity sperm which turned out to be a hoax the producers were unaware of. ‘journalistic inquiry’ my royal blue tory @$$.

        1. Don’t you think he knows about the audience of that program? Tell us why he has deflected the attention from himself to teh gays. That’s what you will struggle to explain, simply because there’s no plausible explanation.

  68. Suddenly Last Bummer 9 Nov 2012, 3:08pm

    Has Peter been mentioned in the same breath as the others yet in any of these online forums? I would not be surprised.

  69. Suddenly Last Bummer 9 Nov 2012, 3:14pm

    Names please.

  70. GingerlyColors 9 Nov 2012, 7:12pm

    Remember the Blair Witch Project? It looks like we’ve got the Cameron Witch Project now!

  71. Yawn.

  72. Another yawn.

  73. I complained via the Number 10 website and to my local MP.
    By his comments the Prime Minister shows how ignorant and uninformed he is .
    Considering the allegations were against Tory MPs, he would have been better off saying there might be a witch-hunt against MPS.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.