Mark Salling – co-stars and fans mourn the death of a paedophile

Yes, you’ve read that headline correctly, cast members and fans alike are mourning the death of known paedophile and former Glee star, Mark Salling.

I’ll say that again: People are mourning the death of a KNOWN PAEDOPHILE.

Salling, who died from a suspected suicide, (though as of the time of writing, this could not be confirmed) was charged in 2015 with possessing and downloading over 50,000 indecent images of children. Pleading guilty to the charges, and facing up to seven years in jail, Salling was due to be sentenced in March of this year after having signed the sex offenders register and entering a “treatment program”.

Because as we all know, being a raging paedophile can be cured…

To me, Mark Salling’s family should be the only ones mourning his death, and even then; the mourning should be primarily about the fact that he died a monster. The fact that former cast members, and fans galore have been mourning his loss is absolutely perplexing to me.

Take this tweet by Matthew Morrison, Salling’s former cast-mate:

Mark Salling, Matthew Morrison

Morrison, who has since deleted the “moving” tribute to his late co-star, certainly isn’t the only person mourning the loss of a convicted paedophile. Scores of fans have been posting their own moving tributes to Salling; all while fully aware of the sick star’s horrific crimes, yet showing no sign of caring.

While I won’t post links or pictures of the tributes in here (due to the ages of the  majority of the posters) I can assure you they are there. Just type in “Mark Salling tributes” in the search bar of Twitter, and you’ll see plenty of posts showing “compassion” and “sadness”.

Thankfully, you’ll also see plenty of condemnation.

Another of Salling’s co-stars – Jane Lynch, was interviewed regarding his death, and while not as fawning as Morrison’s tribute, her response was that of someone remembering the life of an old friend; one who has died from natural causes after living a fulfilling and honourable life. In fact, the closest that Lynch comes to calling out Salling for his heinous crimes is this quote:

“It’s been tough. He was a troubled, troubled guy, and he always was..”

Hardly a damning condemnation eh?

The link to the article in E! News is here: http://www.eonline.com/news/910943/jane-lynch-says-mark-salling-lived-a-troubled-life

We all know someone who – “can get you things at a bargain price, so long as you don’t ask where it came from!”

We all know someone who was a “bit of a rogue” in their younger days.

These are the kind of people you can learn to forgive; people who have made mistakes, simply out of desperation or foolhardiness, but who have managed to changed their ways and move on as a person. While they may have caused harm to people, it hasn’t been the kind of lasting harm that effects people for the rest of their lives.

A convicted paedophile however, isn’t someone who can be forgiven.

There are just some lines that can’t be crossed, and along with murdering a child, paedophilia is at the top of the list.

Hollywood has an unsavoury history of ignoring the horrific crimes of some of it’s stars, and it’s always in order to pay tribute to the perpetrators “artistic merit” (see post Roman Polanski won’t be charged with molesting a ten year old)

It’s high time that people; particularly those in Hollywood, stopped paying tribute to monsters like Mark Salling, and remembered him for what he really was:

A paedophile who helped to permanently destroy the lives of innocent children.

If there’s any tributes to be made, make them to the 50,000 victims of Mark Salling’s sick fantasies.

RANT OVER

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

The Presidents Club – Why Great Ormond Street are WRONG to return their donations

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/presidents-club-dorchester-hotel-men-only-charity-groping-sexual-harassment-what-happened-london-a8175256.html

The Presidents Club Charity Dinner, (see link above for report) is one of the hottest talking points this week; and the fallout from it is only going to get worse as the week goes on, as the names of Celebrity attendees will undoubtedly be released.

David Mellor, who is the Chair of the Presidents Club, is already stepping down from the Department of Educations board, and I would expect several more high-level resignations and “apologies” very soon.

Since the news broke of the charity-grope-fest, a number of charities have decided to return donations received in order to disassociate themselves from the Presidents Club, including Great Ormond Street Hospital.

The charity, who have received £530,000 from the Presidents Club between 2009-2016, have stated:

“due to the wholly unacceptable nature of the event we are returning previous donations and will no longer accept gifts from the Presidents Club Charitable Trust.”

I have to say I’m utterly perplexed at the sheer amount of virtue-signalling on display.

Are they really saying, that the reason they won’t accept money raised to help dying children, is all down to ethics?

Who gives a damn where the money comes from?

By not accepting it, they are simply gambling with the lives of sick children, all for the fear of offending a handful of the public who might call them out for accepting donations from a “less-than-reputable” source.

Let me tell you something Great Ormond Street:

Children’s health is not something to be politicised or used as a tool with which to appear virtuous.

Ask any parent, this question:

“Would you accept something which could, or would, help ensure your child did not die, from anyone; regardless of their prior actions?”

You would get a resounding YES every single time.

Hell, I’d accept the help of the Devil himself, if it meant that one of my children didn’t die.

To Great Ormond Street I say this:

You’ve done amazing work over the years. You’ve helped save countless lives of children and ensured that the lives of the children who couldn’t be saved, were at least made a bit more comfortable and dignified.

Don’t fall into the trap of pandering to fashionable trends of disassociation and what some elements of society deems to be virtuous.

By all means, call out the Presidents Club for what happened at the Dorchester Dinner.

By all means, call out their behaviour.

But take the money they have raised, and put it to good use. You are a charity set up to save the lives of children, so please continue to do so.

By ALL means.

I have left a link to Great Ormond Street Hospitals Charity page here, so please donate anything that you can.

RANT OVER

 

 

 

 

Man avoids jail for sending indecent images of a child “as a joke.”

I like a joke as much as the next person.

I personally think you can make a joke out of pretty much any situation, no matter how harrowing it might be to someone. Comedy allows us to make light of tough situations in order to help people move on from them. It also allows us to ridicule the more extreme and harmful aspects of society, such as Terrorism, in order to stop it from gaining traction and spreading fear. (Charlie Hebdo were good at this before they became “cucked”).

There’s only one subject that I can’t find funny.

I’ll let YOU decide which one of these two situations I just find myself laughing about.

Let’s start with Count Dankula.

He is being charged with a hate-crime. An anti-semitic hate-crime at that. And “what did he do?” I hear you say.

“As a joke”, he decided to prank his girlfriend by teaching her pet Pug to salute whenever it heard the phrase “zieg heil”, and also taught it to act excited whenever it heard the phrase “Gas the Jews?”. The point, he says, was to turn the dog from what his girlfriend calls “the cutest thing ever” into “the least cutest thing ever” which, as he claims (and all non-Nazis would also claim) is a Nazi. After posting the results on YouTube, the Count recieved a HUGE amount of backlash from people acusing him of “normalising Nazi-ism” and “hating Jews”, something he vehemently denies.

Check out this video from Gavin McInnes who interviews Count Dankula about the whole thing, and pay close attention to what he says about how he has been treated since the video was released.

It’s extreme treatment for such a ridiculous reason if you ask me.

For his “crimes” Count Dankula is facing a year in Prison. A year in prison for a victimless act which was plainly a joke and only be seen to be a joke.

Nobody was hurt or traumatised by his video; in fact you could argue that the only people hurt were The Count and his partner, who had to put up with a tonne of abuse from the online community and neighbours alike, all the while being dragged through the mud by the Police and the Justice system.

Hate-Crime my arse.

And now:

Sahil Sharif.

www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/sahil-sharif-indecent-images-child-14142252

This guy’s idea of “a joke” is somewhat different to Count Dankula’s.

According to Chronicle Live Mr.Sharif thought it would be funny to post an indecent video of a child to his friend.

Har-dee har-har.

When caught, he was also found to have another video and an indecent image on his I-pad. When interviewed by the police, Sharif’s reply was:

“I’m not a paedo. They’re just jokey images.”

Peter Doherty, who was defending Sharif, said:

“Mr Sharif doesn’t have an interest in children – there’s no sexual gratification whatsoever.
“He thought they were jokey images. He knows that’s not the case now.”

“Jokey images” of children being sexually assaulted and degraded. Forgive me for saying, but I smell bullshit.

Sahil Sharif ended up getting a 26 week prison term which was suspended for 24 months and ordered to sign the Sex Offenders Register for 10 years.

Whoopty-doo.

 

So, two totally different jokes, two totally different crimes, and potentially, two totally different punishments.

Firstly, ask yourself this:

If one of these two guys deserve to see the inside of a prison cell, which should it be?

If your answer isn’t Sahil Sharif then you have some serious issues.

Who were the victims of Sharif’s “joke”?

That would be the children. The kids who were abused and assaulted in order for peados to get their rocks-off. The physical and psychological damage will be forever; there’s just no way for these poor kids to forget and move on.

The damage is permanent.

Sure, he didn’t make the videos, but he sure as hell shared them with someone. THAT is a crime.

Some might disagree, but for me, the line gets drawn at joking about videos of sexually abused children.

I mean, what was the joke anyway?

“Look at these kids getting sexually abused! LOL”

I just don’t see it.

 

The fact that Count Dankula is being charged with any sort of a crime is a joke in-itself, never mind a Hate crime. However, if he ends up going to prison or receiving anything short of a full pardon and apology, then it will be nothing short of a joke.

An extremely unfunny one.

Oh, and for those of you who say: “You can’t make jokes involving Nazi-ism!”

Take a look at this and tell me you can’t.

RANT OVER

 

 

 

 

 

Leave the Kids out of it

Ok, I’m going to be the one who says it.

This is just plain wrong.

Go for it.

Call me intolerant. Call me a bigot. Call me a sexist, homophobic, transphobic, gender-bashing, hate-mongering piece of shit.

I’m not any of those things. But this is going too far.

I can tell you until I’m blue in the face that I’m all for people living their lives the way that they see fit. As long as someone isn’t hurting somebody else, I don’t care. I’ll stand up and defend anyone who is being bullied because of their Race, Religion, Gender, Sexual preferences, how they want to dress or what they want to look like.

That’s every adults choice to make and I’ll defend them from persecution every time.

But this?

A 10 year old boy who likes to dress as a Drag Queen decides to start a club for other like-minded children?

This is a child.

A 10 YEAR OLD CHILD

The “Child” in question (I highlight the word Child as I honestly believe this boy has been forcefully pushed beyond the realms of childhood) is named Desmond Napoles, a 10 year old from New York (who’d have thought eh?) who is known on the internet as “Desmond is amazing”.

This is quoted from Desmond’s website:

“At age six, Desmond expressed boundless joy when he received an Elsa costume from Disney’s movie “Frozen” for Halloween. After that, he often asked for princess costumes or dresses while out shopping. Soon, he often wanted to wear his dresses outside of the home. Initially uncertain if they were making the right decision for allowing him to do so, Desmond’s parents quickly and fortunately realized that the source of their uneasiness came not from Desmond’s personal choices, but from their own misgivings about how the outside world would react. It was as simple as defeating those feelings, accepting Desmond as he is, and respecting Desmond’s own tastes and preferences.”

The part of the quote in red is where I’d like to focus my attention.

When you have children, you have to make decisions for your child; choices that children are unfit to make due to their age, life experience and understanding of complex situations and societal norms. Leave it to a child to make decisions regarding their safety and up-bringing and you’ll generally find that they eat nothing but sweets and soda, test to see if a fire really is hot and cross a busy road without paying heed to the truck barrelling towards them.

The fact that Desmond’s parents had doubts about allowing him to dress up in dresses not just inside the house but outside as well, tells me everything I need to know about the whole situation. As a parent you generally go with your gut instinct on situations you’ve never come across before; your first instinct is almost always the correct one. You can’t gamble with your child’s future, particularly if it means putting said child in the firing line of all sorts of people and scenarios that a 10 year old is not capable of fully understanding or dealing with.

Desmond’s parents have gambled and allowed their child to behave as a fully responsible adult when he clearly is not. If he wants to dress up in women’s clothes when he is old enough to understand the impact of his choices, then fine. All power to him. But he is being allowed and actively encouraged to make decisions about his life that even a teenager or an adult would struggle with, all in the hope that his parents portray to people that they are “doing the right thing” and “promoting a sense of inclusion and progressivism”.

There are easier and less harmful ways of teaching a child about inclusivity and tolerance, without the need to throw them into the pool of life and see if they swim or drown.

Children should be protected, not exploited.

The whole situation reminds me of the young child actors in the ilk of Macauley Culkin and Lindsay Lohan; pushed and encouraged into acting by their parents at incredibly young ages; unaware of the dangers and pitfalls of the life they were being pushed into, all in the name of making their parents rich.

Everybody knows what happened to these two young actors, and the dozens of child stars who were unable to cope with being prematurely promoted to adult status. I hope beyond hope that the same doesn’t happen to Desmond.

Let him be a child.

He’s 10 years old, and at 10 years old he should be worrying about nothing more than what sandwiches he has in his lunchbox, and not having to deal with the amount of ridicule and abuse that he will surely be receiving now, and in his teens from intolerant assholes in the world. It’s bad enough dealing with that as an adult, never mind as a child.

Like I said earlier: live your life the way you see fit. As long as you’re not hurting anyone else with your life choices I don’t care.

Desmond’s parents are hurting their child with their choices.

So I DO care.

 

RANT OVER