DrewMerson wrote:As a weird example of faulty memory, I would’ve sworn that was the summer of 1996 or 1997, because those two summers I was working for my uncle’s company as a van boy / delivery driver, and reading red-tops on a daily basis (which I didn’t do before and haven’t done since) and I would’ve sworn I was reading about that at the time. Maybe there was another child being exploited by then.
The Daddy wrote:Watched a bit of newsnight last night, they had some Sun journo on, who was predictably, and very forcefully, defensive of the rag.
Just seen this on Twitter, the fucking nonce:
https://twitter.com/adambienkov/status/1679253379720130563?s=46&t=656lqIhf-uLhou_gaUPCPQ
Diluted Dante wrote:Oh, have people not seen Liddle's articles about wanting to diddle kids before?
There is no causal link between viewing child porn and abusing children.
SpaceGazelle wrote:Wasn't it about not wanting to, but he couldn't trust himself to be surrounded by them?Diluted Dante wrote:Oh, have people not seen Liddle's articles about wanting to diddle kids before?
Diluted Dante wrote:SpaceGazelle wrote:Wasn't it about not wanting to, but he couldn't trust himself to be surrounded by them?Diluted Dante wrote:Oh, have people not seen Liddle's articles about wanting to diddle kids before?
I'm not really sure what distiction you're making there.
GooberTheHat wrote:I think he's making a joke about the fact Rod Liddle thought there was a distinction.Diluted Dante wrote:I'm not really sure what distiction you're making there.SpaceGazelle wrote:Wasn't it about not wanting to, but he couldn't trust himself to be surrounded by them?Diluted Dante wrote:Oh, have people not seen Liddle's articles about wanting to diddle kids before?
The Spectator though innit. The original edgelords.regmcfly wrote:One of the things that boggles me, given my first ever job was as a copy editor, was how many pairs of eyes that must have been absolutely green lit by.
The Daily Mail would shit a brick.equinox_code wrote:They run ads on TV over here for it- advising people to get help at their nearest clinic. I always thought that was a better attitude than the reductive good vs evil thing
equinox_code wrote:They run ads on TV over here for it- advising people to get help at their nearest clinic. I always thought that was a better attitude than the reductive good vs evil thing
SpaceGazelle wrote:Any stats for whether it works?equinox_code wrote:They run ads on TV over here for it- advising people to get help at their nearest clinic. I always thought that was a better attitude than the reductive good vs evil thing
equinox_code wrote:I think the climate is a bit different though? It's hard to tell, as i'm still something of an outsider looking in here, but the tv ads they run seem to market or present it as just another type of addiction. People were surprised when i was surprised to see such ads, as if it makes no sense not to run them. i'm inclined to think they have a point.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!