Must Our Children Pay the Costs of Pride?

In Surrey, a county in South East England, the co-founder of the local Pride group has just been found guilty of child rape. It’s a development that should shock no one, but there will be no shortage of people who pretend that this wasn’t entirely predictable.

In fact, those involved in Pride events seem to almost chronically get charged with sex crimes, as documented heavily by Post Millennial. This is especially true for those self-identifying as transgender. There was once a societal expectation of exaggerated sexual deviancy by such people, because it was accepted that homosexual behavior was disordered, and thus that such people were likely to engage in other disordered acts.

As a result of our voluntary societal blinders, Stephen Ireland was welcomed into schools to give talks. He was presented as an authority to children, and allowed to speak to them about sex and sexual desire. Who could question the wisdom of this, in a modern, British public school system? To do so would be to expose oneself to ridicule, the accusation of homophobia, and perhaps even criminal charges. And so, the predator was placed among his desired victims, because ironically, to prevent that circumstance would allegedly be to make him into a victim. But that is the lie that our non-culture is currently peddling. It is the assertion that victimhood is based not on real vulnerability, but on being denied one’s whims.

It is the distortion of freedom, such that modernity claims that any restriction on what an individual wants is authoritarian. Thus, under the auspices of a perverse “virtue”, people who are actually vulnerable are left to be victimized, while those who can still see reason are left to watch helplessly.

Stephen ultimately found a 12-year-old boy on Grindr (a gay dating app), lured him to his apartment, encouraged the boy to watch homosexual pornography with him, then raped him. It's natural to question why a 12-year-old was on such an app, but that is becoming more normal, because schools and our media are sexualizing children in a way that amounts to institutionalized grooming. Children who do not have healthy home lives are especially vulnerable to such predators, having no experience of normal, appropriate relationships with adults.

Stephen’s housemate, David Sutton, was also a Pride volunteer, and has since also been charged with the production and distribution of child pornography. The police investigation showed that Stephen and David had shared messages in which they talked about kidnapping and raping school children. Both men claim that this was “just a fantasy” and that the plans were not real — even as they surrounded themselves with school children. The pair tried to delete their shared messages after a police investigation became evident. Appallingly, they were not charged for this conspiracy.

Stephen, like so many who are active in the so-called Pride movement, spent lots of time online berating women, attacking so-called TERFs (Trans-exclusionary radical feminists), and arguing against separate spaces for women and girls. Of course, such protected spaces make it harder for predators to do what they do. And in regards to sports, the lack of sex separation allows trans-identifying men to dominate, overpower, and humiliate girls.

The case of Stephen Ireland and David Sutton is not an isolated one, but rather a predictable outcome of a culture that refuses to acknowledge reality. We have abandoned the moral and natural laws in favor of ideological whim, allowing predators to exploit our institutions under the guise of progress. The sacrifice of the most vulnerable is the price of our collective cowardice, and it is too high a cost for us to bear.

A rational and healthy culture would prioritize its children and prevent their exposure to sexual deviancies of all kinds. The problem is not merely the glorification of the LGBT in schools (though that is not minor), but an entire society that embraces the notion that one’s sense of grievance merits special privileges. It is not the case that offense or emotionality must give one status, but that our children, and innocence itself, ought to be protected from the hysterics of the depraved.