Reader comments · Analysis: A gay ‘witch-hunt’ · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Analysis: A gay ‘witch-hunt’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I think the Prime Minister’s concern is a very real one and does not just concern politicians. Certainly there is a story going about at the moment where a gay man is being vilified as a potential paedophile when, in fact, there seems to be no substance to the insinuation at all:

    [Even Pink News is helping to perpetuate this one:

    1. I’ve also experienced this due to an ex coach… Horrifying experience, but I’m coming through the other end, as I’m sure the aforementioned actor will.

    2. The hysteria around paedophilia causes a great deal of harm in itself.

      I encountered a situation when I was teaching where a particularly disturbed girl was known to routinely make spurious allegations of abuse against male staff. When she came to our school we were briefed to never allow ourselves to be in a situation where we were the sole adult in the room with her. She had already ruined the careers of several teachers at previous schools, since mud sticks, even when there is zero truth behind such allegations.

      “Witch hunting” is totally apt – all this hysteria is a defensive attempt to deflect any possibility of accusation. If you are a hunter you are not the hunted, ergo you must be innocent. The Church has shown us how well this works both for supernatural mumbo-jumbo as well as paedophilia.

      1. And is that why Cameron mentioned gay people, do you think?

        To deflect attention from the straight Tories fearing accusation?

        1. Midnighter 13 Nov 2012, 1:04pm

          Given the Tory’s track record (specifically with regards to dishonesty and hypocrisy relating to homophobia) in previous governments I can entirely understand why you might be cynical about his motives.

          The PM’s already stated his reasons …

          “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”.”

          Since you ask, in my view (on this occasion) the stated motive seems entirely consistent with the facts as many of us had concluded prior to the above explanation.

          1. I don’t think the PM’s comments were quite so ideologically rigorous. I think he was caught off guard by that vacuous little man (Phillip Schofield) pulling such a silly and ill-considered publicity stunt on live TV. The PM simply made a deft move, shifting the focus of the interview from the accusation that he was being negligent onto something which he is rightly concerned about – the use of accusations of paedophilia to trash LGBTs. It didn’t quite work because he didn’t fully explain that the disparaging of LGBTs in this way is a common bigot trick. If Schofield was a decent interviewer he should have brought this out so that the PMs point was clear but he isn’t so we were all left wondering. The moral of the tale? Phillip Schofield is crap at his job.

          2. Another Hannah 13 Nov 2012, 5:54pm

            I disagree I think Schofield is a brave and decent man, who said nothing about LGBT people. He saw the larger picture, that many victims have been witch hunted through their lives so that they have no had justice, with pedophiles able to continue through their lives. They are the real witch hunted victims. This ust has nothing to do with LGBTs.

        2. Spanner1960 13 Nov 2012, 2:13pm

          He is mentioning gay people because many uninformed, ignorant people immediately put two and two together and make six. ie: if you are gay, you have a problem with sex, therefore it is not a big leap to start fancying children.

          What Cameron said was the right and decent thing to do, and all lefty dickheads like you can do is attempt political point scoring. The man was trying to protect us for fcks sake.

          1. yea right, cameron new mother theresa, pathectic

      2. Another Hannah 13 Nov 2012, 5:57pm

        I knew a few people who made false allegations when I was a psychiatric nurse. One turned around and said it of me until I pointed out we were instructed to not be in a room alone, and that if she loked behind here….But this was a hetero girl, and I don’t see what any of it has to do with pedo abuse which is totally different.

        1. Another Hannah 13 Nov 2012, 6:00pm

          Lets be clear here as well the witch hunted victim can be abuser or abused, not one side has a monopoly on victimhood, it depends who is telling lies. I have encountered both, but the lives I’ve seen ruined have always been the abused not the abusers, and thats what stick in my throat with all this crxp about witch hunted abusers!

  2. I’m no fan of Cameron, but in this incident, his heart seems to have been in the right place. However, I am stunned by David Mellor’s disgusting attack on abuse victim Steve Messham. Dismissing abuse victims as “weirdos” is precisely the attitude that allows abusers to get away with their crimes.

    1. His heart may have been in the right place; but the reckless stupidity and negligence of his comments indicates that he is a) not very intelligent or b) a homophobe?

      1. Spanner1960 13 Nov 2012, 2:14pm

        No, it just indicates you are a fckwit.

        1. Another Hannah 13 Nov 2012, 5:50pm

          It’s pretty obvouis whi is the fckwit here. So clever to personally abuse anything you don’t personally like. the public will think really well of Gays with you behaving like that of course! I hope I never meet you, some of us admire those who say what they think is right David, even when falsely attacked for doing so.

          1. Spanner1960 13 Nov 2012, 5:57pm

            …and some of us loathe the petty attitude of people that take potshots at politicians simply because they happen to be on the other side of the fence, no matter how honourable their intentions may be.

            If anyone is shouting personal abuse because of their own political opinions, it is this prat.

  3. Schofield behaved in an appalling manner.

    That said David Cameron deserves loud condemnation for his recklessness; stupidity and negligence.

    – Schofield did not mention gay people.
    – Cameron did not look at the list Schofield handed him.
    – Cameron CHOSE to bring gay people into the discussion.

    Even if we take Cameron’s word for it that he had no homophobic intention by mentioning gay people; the damage was already done.

    And considering the fact that the Tory government has done nothing to enact marriage equality, despite Cameron’s seemingly empty promises to do so; then we have very good reason to doubt Cameron’s integrity here as well.

    1. Another Hannah 13 Nov 2012, 5:47pm

      I agree David. If we spend our time, because some LGBTs may have been falsely accused of abuse, only having sympathy with the abusers the public will start to dislike us. Especially given the that it is the abused who are very visibly suffering and ruined. McAlpine and Louise Walsh are both fine, wealthy leading good, happy lives. the victims of abuse are frightened of relationships, and so upset their entire lives are messed up. The difference is very visible, and so is who are the witch hunted!

      1. Spanner1960 13 Nov 2012, 6:01pm

        Maybe, but there are also those that are trying to grab a slice of the pie and get a chunk of money out of it.

        It’s amazing how many people crawl out of the woodwork when there is a big estate left behind. Some may call me a cynic, I call it gold-digging.

  4. Witch Hunt Hater 13 Nov 2012, 12:37pm

    It is not a rare thing to happen and as a teenager, I too was accused during the previous time of paedophilia witch hunts that occurred around the millenium, after some members of my family suspected I was gay. I cannot stress enough how this happens any time this issue comes to a head and how gay people are accused that they are harmful to children or painted with the same brush. One day the prejudice will end, and the linking of homosexuality and paedophilia will end, but we are not there yet. Since then, I myself feel like when I was a child I was abused by this accusation, and while although not in a physical manner, the mental repercussions have stayed with me ever since. It damages lives, as many as the abuse itself does, and the Prime Minister was right to point it out. Let us hope no further lives are ruined by such insinuations and false accusations.

    1. “One day the prejudice will end, and the linking of homosexuality and paedophilia will end,”


      And on that date the PM will no longer link the 2 on a TV interview despite not being prompted to do so.

      1. Spanner1960 13 Nov 2012, 2:17pm

        He simply pointed out what a lot of stupid and ignorant people think.
        And then even bigger idiots like you pick up the wrong end of the stick and run with it.

        For God’s sake man, put a fcking sock in it, you are boring the arse off everybody, and it is pretty obvious by your negative score that nobody agrees with you, even if you have to post the same bullsh|t ten times on the same forum.

        1. Joe Johnston 13 Nov 2012, 4:02pm

          Well said Spanner

          1. Joe Johnston 13 Nov 2012, 4:57pm

            I take it back. I have just read one of your pro-sc@t posts, you filthy perv.

          2. Spanner1960 13 Nov 2012, 6:05pm

            Fck off, Keith.

    2. Another Hannah 13 Nov 2012, 5:42pm

      More lives have been ruined by abuse which was not investigated, especially where powerful and famous are involved. Louise Walsh is fine, McAlpine pretty much unscathed, etc… the victims are falsely acused of not being genuine and so witch hunted. How are the victims of abuse doing? Have you actually looked at what has happend in their lives and relationships? You are not the ONLY victim inthe world.

  5. Well it’s a bit rubbish when the analysis gets it wrong. It says here that the Prime MInister did not see the list, but it was obvious that he took a look, and then when asked by Schofield, ‘You know the names on that piece of paper’, and Cameron answers ‘Yeah’. Any analysis that does not acknowledge this is biased as well, as it provides context for what Cameron then said.

    1. Another Hannah 13 Nov 2012, 5:38pm

      Well as they said the list is common knowledge anyway. Schofields point was to try to get it investigated and dealt with properly, unlike the usual “get out of jail free” card given to the wealthy and powerful in this country. Pure simple snobbery and deference. the victims are poor and so are witch hunted, presumed fake before they’ve even had a fair trial. Not as though we’ve scores of abusers in this country who got away with it for years! That tells you where the bias in the system really is.

  6. I told the police & they buried it 13 Nov 2012, 3:26pm

    David Cameron said: “I do think it’s very important that anyone who’s got any information about any paedophile, no matter how high up in the country or whether they are alive or dead, go to the police.”

    In 2010 I did & gave over 6hrs of video taped witness statement of multiple incidents of my experience as a 6/7 yr old abused by teacher, clergy & POLICE along with homophobic police misconduct to Devon & Cornwall police in 2010…which they buried. They even refused a freedom of information act request to acess the video.

    I don’t think David Cameron is quite clued up even after the Hillsbourgh Police lies, Birmingham Six police lies, N.O.W. Police bribes & lies, Charles de Menzes police lies, Ian Tomlinson, police lies, etc etc. just how corrupt the UK police are!

    1. I have voted Tory all my life but no longer. They claim to be helping the GGLBTQ community yet they cause nothing but harm. Anyway, I am off for a bit of sc@t play with my partner. I wonder when the conservatives will curtail my freedom on that one!

      1. Spanner1960 13 Nov 2012, 6:03pm

        I see the odious Keith is having a bit of sock-puppet play again.

    2. Another Hannah 13 Nov 2012, 5:35pm

      As I’ve said in my own detailed reply, are sure it isn’t the victims of abuse who are being slandered and witch hunted? It’s not as if paedophiles ahve been able to get away with abuse for many years, in fact all their lives in Britain is it! Who is the system really favouring? As usual in Britain apparently only those with mates in high places are witch hunted, and that really is th eproplem for those teachers subject to false abuse claims as well!

  7. Another Hannah 13 Nov 2012, 5:30pm

    Don’t let the facts get in the way here! After years of speculation with McAlpine’s activities mentioned all over, after proper action was finally taken after 6 years the victims declared him not the man. His name is now clear in a way it has not been for 20 years. Newsnight did not mention a name. There are people who make dishonest claim, but I have to say it hasn’t now changed my attitude personally to either Louise Walsh or the Policeman who did something like Mr World. The victims should also have a right to allegations being properly dealt with, which has not happened in Britain in the past (Saville, Glitter etc) so are you sur eit isn’t the victims of Paedophilia who are being witch hunted? Or is it that like the Con. party only people who are your persoanl friends are witch hunted?

  8. Make up as you go along…. or enact a previously thought out and rehearsed narrative? Oh such dilemma in the life of a PR executive under the spotlight. Let the psychologists and make-up artists wade in … The victims of sexual abuse must be very thankful to all those who once again have somehow contributed to hide their concerns behind a thick smokescreen …

  9. That’s the doom and gloom narrative being peddled since this lot usurped political power …

    Now ask yourself why are you peddling the same rhetoric about newsnight.

    Would you say the reputation and also future remit of the UK government (as an institution) is now uncertain, only because a few heads have rolled?

    Do you believe in unbiased rhetoric and journalism?

  10. cameron had no right to bring gay people into this, the fact that he did just shows poor judgment on his part.

    1. Spanner1960 13 Nov 2012, 11:19pm

      On the contrary, I think it shows very astute judgement.
      His intention is to nip this utterly wrong assumption in the bud before ignorant people try to connect gays and paedophiles together.

      Do not assume everybody is as both enlightened and as intelligent as yourself.
      Remember it was not so long ago that NOTW readers were trying to tear down a doctor’s front door because it had been reported a paediatrician lived there.

      1. Who do you think you are kidding? The ignorant will carry on making the connection, regardless of what anyone says. CaMoron’s sudden worried and alarmist persona, together with his “very astute judgement”, are nowhere to be seen when we are being vilified by extremist groups, which happen on a regular basis, even in his own party. Selective memory and convenient amnesia often go hand in hand, and the inconsistency of a behaviour and discourse totally shows the game. CaMoron has been put under a spotlight, and he was quick with his poker face to deflect the unwanted attention.

  11. If you google “Savile paedophile scandal”, as I did the other day, you will find a whole slew of websites claiming a list of MPs are prolific rapists who are part of a Westminster paedophile ring. The same names crop up and again and again and actually all the websites may have been produced by one individual or organisation. They include every single gay MP, every single male Jewish MP and several non-gay MPs who have nonetheless been strong supporters of gay rights. I am guessing that the individual(s) behind these sites has very far right sympathies and is trying to cash. In on the current media storm. Certainly when Cameron made his comments the other day, it was these websites that came immediately to mind for me.

  12. I think we all need to remind the community that the age of consent is now 16 and has been since 2000. A young man at 16 can consent in law. In the 1980’s the law was very different at 21. In all debate on this issue no-one makes reference to gay law reform.
    Society has accepted an equal age of consent 10 years ago plus now.

    Sometimes when relations between a younger man 16 -18 are discussed the impression is given that this is exploitation, yet if consent is given it is not. My uncle met my Auntie when he was 26 and she was 17 in the 1950’s. I can’t recall anyone suggesting he was taking advantage of her, oopss I forgot they are straight. I’m fed up of the ignorance on the law relating to consent, and also the ability of a gay man from October 1st to have an offense set aside by the Home Secretary where that offence involved consensual gay sex that was a criminal act at the time, and that is NO LONGER so.

    1. Stop whining

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.