I'm 60, you know.....

"Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton22 February 2018 at 04:28
I'm 60, I have a lot of life experience and I have never met a Satanist or anyone remotely interested in having sex with kids."

Well, that's just nonsense - and not just because you claimed very differently in your book.
People do not drop into conversation over the dinner table that they are sexually attracted to children, therefore your assumption that you have never met such a person and by extension the figure is ridiculous is the height of ignorance


"Ergo, the idea that there are 750,000 ACTIVE paedophiles in our midst IS ridiculous. That kind of figure is terrifying for parents and suggests they should suspect everyone, it spreads fear and paranoia."

I have never seen such bizarre rationale.

You dispute the figure - repeatedly - for the simple reason that you don't think you know any. You have completely ignored the data which has been posted, and I'm betting you haven't even bothered to look at the sources - am I right? 

"Finally, you accept that most kids are abused by someone they know. Therefore all the paedophile hunters and child protectors targeting random strangers online aren't in fact protecting anyone."

So there are no paedophiles because Ros says so. She doesn't know any so it must be true. But they are all at home anyway.
Can't you see how utterly at odds with each other your assertions are? 

"Looking at images and physical abuse are not the same thing. and those kids who are being abused are being let down by those chasing viewers of pictures. They have more concern for a cartoon image than a real child being battered."

Here we go again.

Being in possession of those images IS a crime, no matter how much you complain that it shouldn't be. Searching for the people consuming those images is the route to making those children safe; why can't you understand that? The children are not being 'let down' by those trying to free them from this, they are let down by all those involved in the abuse and that included the consumers of it. 

Once again you make reference to a child being 'battered'

This brings us to the heart of the matter, doesn't it?

You think the abuse you endured was worse than theirs and you don't see why they should be compensated when you weren't. That's it in a nutshell.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Witnesses

No answer was the stern reply

There ain't no way to hide your lying eyes