What is really going on?

Watching the current slew of ‘paedo’ celebrity shock-horror-yawn stories coming out if the UK, my nasty suspicious mind is wondering things like “Why now?” and “Where have all these accusers been for the past forty years?” Also, why do the media report ‘Paedophile‘ when they really mean ‘Ephebophile‘ which is more of a grey area. In a few cases the answer to the ‘where have they been’ question has been ‘There all along’ and fair do’s to any real victims for sticking it out for all these years. In others, my sympathy is mitigated. Why has this scandal taken so long to get this far? Surely all those politicians who famously spout about ‘Social justice’ should have taken notice of the complainants and brought these accusations to light when some of the alleged perpetrators were still alive? As for the victims, what do all these people who must now be in their fifties and sixties have to gain after so long? What changed?

To anybody who can even claim the vaguest worldliness, the knowledge that showbiz has had its camp followers below the legal age of consent comes as no surprise. When I was in High School, there were certain girls and boys who might be called ‘sexually precocious’. Hitting puberty was their cue to shed all inhibitions and gain experience in matters sexual a.s.a.p. regardless of the legalities. The joke about not being able to find a virgin over the age of thirteen was why the Druids had packed up and left was common currency. During my senior High School years I recall three girls from our year alone disappearing from school specifically due to unplanned pregnancy. About sixty percent of the rest were known not just to have lost their virginity, but gleefully discarded it at the first opportunity. This sort of thing was commonplace. Girls and boys of fourteen and fifteen onwards were, and probably still are becoming sexually active at that age. Some openly bragged about their conquests. Even if it was only the lead singer (or even the drummer or roadie) in one of the local bands. So long as they were willing, it wasn’t a problem. No injury, no foul, right? That was common thinking at the time. So why the outcry now? Forty years on.

As an aside, I’m willing to let slip a 100% true personal anecdote here. During my time walking the streets as a UK parking enforcer, I was having a sniff around a black Range Rover parked on double yellows outside a local venue. The usual. Checking for disabled badges and the like before booking. Can’t recall exact dates, but I could tell you the places to an inch, even after over seven years. Saw the ‘Police’ sign on the front dash, and noted the non civilian issue radio, and decided to let well alone. Everything about that vehicle said ‘plain clothes Police’, and I was already walking away when this harrassed young guy, mid 20′s, dark grey two piece suit, comes rushing out of the building by the double yellows, warrant card in hand. I stopped, noting the flash of concealed holster as his open suit jacket drifted up in a passing breeze. He explained slightly breathlessly that I shouldn’t give his Ranger a parking ticket as he was an on duty Police Officer, working personal protection for a specific senior Labour Politician, currently visiting a theatrical event performed by some young girls. I replied, saying I’d already twigged the dashboard sign and the radio, and had thus decided to walk away. I recall making a flip but scathing remark about the politician in question and lost pension funds, laughed, and resumed my foot patrol. At the time, the young officer had the grace to look vaguely embarrassed. End of incident.

In light of the current scandal, one suspicion flags up in the back of my mind. Given the then status of the politician in question, I was surprised we weren’t given the ‘hands off’ signal from control and told walk on by. Why was he making unannounced visits to see some obscure junior troup perform? If a Cabinet minister had passed though the small town I used to patrol, I would expect to be given at least some idea of where not to go at the morning briefing or over the cellphone or old radios we used to lug around. Yet this very senior politician was in our town, ‘flying under the radar’ as it were. Now I’m sure that everything was completely above board and innocent, but every now and then I catch the whiff of a deceased Rattus Norvegicus. Sometimes I’m right, sometimes not, but it doesn’t stop me wondering. Why the secrecy? Unless he was afraid of being lynched.

Yet I can’t believe real victims have been keeping silent until now. Or as Anna Raccoon has documented about the alleged scandal at Duncroft, in her several autobiographical posts about ‘past lives and present misgivings‘. All of which seem to highlight certain allegations as being at best factually flawed. Which begs the question; what is the rolling ‘showbiz paedo’ scandal really covering up? More pertinently, how much more oppressive legislation is it going to be used as an apologia for?

Update: Ta ever so to Anna and team for the link and extra traffic. Although I don’t really think there’s any plot, just normal human greed and stupidity. Which many UK and European politicians seem to suffer from more than anyone else. Indeed, if events are any guide it seems to be prerequisite for the job.

As an additional comment on the issue of a pair of lame Australian DJ’s doing crap impersonations to humiliate people they’re never likely to meet (That’s them off the New Years honours list). Every single dingbatted action by idiots seems to be adopted by various jackbooted cheerleaders as cause célèbre for state control of everything in everybody’s lives. Even when it’s nothing to do with the Interweb. Because you could bet your last ten cents some tabloid would have broken the story, and the lame DJ’s would have made the call anyway. What’s the matter with those thinking that Government is going to be any good at regulating everyone’s opinions? Why do these morons think Civil Servants would be the go-to guys for sorting everyone else’s problems out? Especially when you look at such people get their advice from in their sacred little bubble existences.

When it comes down to it, there are times when even the cleverest people on Gods green Earth can’t summon up the mental wherewithal to wipe their own arses properly. Indeed, academia is rife with individuals who may be able to solve Fermats last theorem, but couldn’t find their own underpants if they were honked over their heads. People whose major life ambition is a protected life with pots of taxpayer dosh and nice holidays (I’ve met some of them). Yet these are the unworldly sources the statists claim know all the answers? I don’t think so.

2 thoughts on “What is really going on?”

  1. I’ve been intirgued by how “hands-off” the present UK government has been. To me, taking all this Savile stuff quite seriously, there does seem a need for some proper legal clarification about the differences between “child molestation” and the legal requirements that could be said to apply to maturing teenagers (not to mention grown adults); but the present legislators seem very content with the way this whole matter is being reported, and “apparently” understood by many in the UK.

    It’s almost as if they see the folly but have deemed it best to simply allow it to burn itself out as it seems to be of no harm to them – post the Newsnight II fiasco. I sense the Cameron leadership wants to define itself as the calmer party of government, rather than the type of knee-jerk legislators that the Labour side are already showing themselves to be, with their over-eager reactions to Leveson.

    There might be a disconnect between the media and their readers just now that the Tories have detected, and that is that the readers are enjoying all the fun and spectacle of the Witch-hunters charging about the place, but actually believe almost none of it. That old “silent majority” schtick. Time will tell I suppose.

Comments are closed.