Because of course she probably did. Why can’t Conservative ministers go more than 5 minutes without antagonising another group?
>The central characters of the book, described by a Telegraph reviewer as “the worst novel I’ve read in 10 years”
Wow, if the Telegraph hated it must be utterly afwul.
Big difference between wanting to bum a man and diddle a kid, can’t believe this stupid bint is culture Secretary what a fucking embarrassment.
Of course she did.
Meanwhile in the States they’re doing the same thing WHILE legalising child marriage again and suppressing LGBT rights.
She’s just projecting
Are you people serious? *She wrote a character* who made the comparison.
Harper Lee wrote racist characters, does that make her a racist?
I despise Nadine Dorries just as much as the next person – but this is exactly what paedos tried in the 1979s – to hitch their bandwagon onto the gay rights movement. See: PIE, how Liberty et al, behaved. It took a lot of resistance from lesbians, gay men and bisexuals to tell everyone else no, fuck off, there’s no comparison at all between consensual adult relationships and raping children. Didn’t stop paedos from trying though. This isn’t disputed – the efforts of PIE to infiltrate the gay rights movements are well-documented.
The dialogue here, as terrible as it is, appears to be coming out of the mouths of the nonce characters. Which fits, as they were the ones making the comparisons and trying to ride on our coattails.
(Pink News is pretty useless when it comes to gay history so it’s no surprise they don’t know this.)
Last week she thought Channel 4 was supported by the TV Licence.
She seems a bit of a dumbass.
From reading the quote from the article it looks like these characters who are in a pedo ring are justifying their own behaviour by comparing it to homosexuality. A characters opinion of their own disgusting behaviour is of course is going to be justified within their minds. I am going to talk about this quote below.
Austin justified their behaviour by comparing it to homosexuality, but they’re an evil character so you really think they’re going to have good opinions on the crimes they are committing???
Stanley too was a paedophile, but didn’t know what the term was called. The quote used the word “supposed” which means he assumed he was homosexual but the key here is assuming doesn’t mean he knows for certain. This means he can be wrong, and potentially shows the writer doesn’t believe they are the same kind of thing.
If this is all they have to prove this woman is homophobic they have a pretty weak case. I wish they showed more quotes as right now I just can’t see it.
Do we have to do this shit?
She’s reading strait from Donald Trump playbook of politics – ignore policy, focus on culture war issues.
We do not want or need a culture war in the UK. Just look how poisonous it is in the US.
Dorries is a creep, but this is a really, really thin allegation.
It’s a fictional character. People should be allowed to write fictional characters who are baddies.
It’s not even a pattern of repeatedly using the same trope. It’s literally a single character in a single book.
Sadly I believe this is attributed to a functional character. As we all know, unfortunately, Dorries isn’t fictional, she fucking exists. Cannot post my true feelings here without getting banned by the Reddit gods.
If we accept homosexuality is no more of a choice than heterosexuality then surely attraction to children is outwith an individual’s control? Acting on it is different, of course, but I don’t agree it’s right to blame people for the way they are wired. I really don’t think paedophiles are just people who woke up one day and thought “hmmmm, it’d be a right laugh to fiddle kids today” out of nowhere.
So American. NHS workers as Pedro rings. No doubt some teachers are engaging in satanic ritual abuse. Maybe a social worker who poisons the village well?
She was pretty poor as equalities minister and I doubt her views on LGBT people are much better than those of the characters she writes about. Her own views may be less extreme, whoever her voting record suggests she does not exactly tolerate LGBT people herself.
Of course she did, she still thinks we’re living in 1986.
So if someone writes a book that has Nazis as the bad guys and the characters don’t believe they are the bad guys does that make the writer a nazi? People need to grow up seriously
What’s that? The things we warned you were a wedge issue for a return to open homophobia again actually were? Golly gosh who could have guessed?!
So all those pedos in parliament are closet gays too?
The excerpt reads: “‘There is nothing wrong with us,’ said Austin to Stanley, ‘we just like something different from others, that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.’
“They all felt the same… ‘Homos will be in the law soon,’ said Arthur, often. ‘We will be one day too.’
“Stanley supposed that, as he liked boys, he was a ‘homo’ too. The difference was, he liked them from the age of two to 12. Once they reached puberty, they were of no interest to him.”
21 comments
Because of course she probably did. Why can’t Conservative ministers go more than 5 minutes without antagonising another group?
>The central characters of the book, described by a Telegraph reviewer as “the worst novel I’ve read in 10 years”
Wow, if the Telegraph hated it must be utterly afwul.
Big difference between wanting to bum a man and diddle a kid, can’t believe this stupid bint is culture Secretary what a fucking embarrassment.
Of course she did.
Meanwhile in the States they’re doing the same thing WHILE legalising child marriage again and suppressing LGBT rights.
She’s just projecting
Are you people serious? *She wrote a character* who made the comparison.
Harper Lee wrote racist characters, does that make her a racist?
I despise Nadine Dorries just as much as the next person – but this is exactly what paedos tried in the 1979s – to hitch their bandwagon onto the gay rights movement. See: PIE, how Liberty et al, behaved. It took a lot of resistance from lesbians, gay men and bisexuals to tell everyone else no, fuck off, there’s no comparison at all between consensual adult relationships and raping children. Didn’t stop paedos from trying though. This isn’t disputed – the efforts of PIE to infiltrate the gay rights movements are well-documented.
The dialogue here, as terrible as it is, appears to be coming out of the mouths of the nonce characters. Which fits, as they were the ones making the comparisons and trying to ride on our coattails.
(Pink News is pretty useless when it comes to gay history so it’s no surprise they don’t know this.)
Last week she thought Channel 4 was supported by the TV Licence.
She seems a bit of a dumbass.
From reading the quote from the article it looks like these characters who are in a pedo ring are justifying their own behaviour by comparing it to homosexuality. A characters opinion of their own disgusting behaviour is of course is going to be justified within their minds. I am going to talk about this quote below.
Austin justified their behaviour by comparing it to homosexuality, but they’re an evil character so you really think they’re going to have good opinions on the crimes they are committing???
Stanley too was a paedophile, but didn’t know what the term was called. The quote used the word “supposed” which means he assumed he was homosexual but the key here is assuming doesn’t mean he knows for certain. This means he can be wrong, and potentially shows the writer doesn’t believe they are the same kind of thing.
If this is all they have to prove this woman is homophobic they have a pretty weak case. I wish they showed more quotes as right now I just can’t see it.
Do we have to do this shit?
She’s reading strait from Donald Trump playbook of politics – ignore policy, focus on culture war issues.
We do not want or need a culture war in the UK. Just look how poisonous it is in the US.
Dorries is a creep, but this is a really, really thin allegation.
It’s a fictional character. People should be allowed to write fictional characters who are baddies.
It’s not even a pattern of repeatedly using the same trope. It’s literally a single character in a single book.
Sadly I believe this is attributed to a functional character. As we all know, unfortunately, Dorries isn’t fictional, she fucking exists. Cannot post my true feelings here without getting banned by the Reddit gods.
If we accept homosexuality is no more of a choice than heterosexuality then surely attraction to children is outwith an individual’s control? Acting on it is different, of course, but I don’t agree it’s right to blame people for the way they are wired. I really don’t think paedophiles are just people who woke up one day and thought “hmmmm, it’d be a right laugh to fiddle kids today” out of nowhere.
So American. NHS workers as Pedro rings. No doubt some teachers are engaging in satanic ritual abuse. Maybe a social worker who poisons the village well?
>[Pinknews.co.uk](https://Pinknews.co.uk)
Here let me post this infowars article.
She was pretty poor as equalities minister and I doubt her views on LGBT people are much better than those of the characters she writes about. Her own views may be less extreme, whoever her voting record suggests she does not exactly tolerate LGBT people herself.
Of course she did, she still thinks we’re living in 1986.
So if someone writes a book that has Nazis as the bad guys and the characters don’t believe they are the bad guys does that make the writer a nazi? People need to grow up seriously
What’s that? The things we warned you were a wedge issue for a return to open homophobia again actually were? Golly gosh who could have guessed?!
So all those pedos in parliament are closet gays too?
The excerpt reads: “‘There is nothing wrong with us,’ said Austin to Stanley, ‘we just like something different from others, that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.’
“They all felt the same… ‘Homos will be in the law soon,’ said Arthur, often. ‘We will be one day too.’
“Stanley supposed that, as he liked boys, he was a ‘homo’ too. The difference was, he liked them from the age of two to 12. Once they reached puberty, they were of no interest to him.”
>> Dorries has a second job as a fiction writer.
I often wondered who wrote their manifesto.