Tuesday, January 13, 2009

Ahhh...Lookee Here....."Yvette Doll" Exposed

Turns out that our "all sex pozzies are pedophiliacs" troll isn't quite what "she" says she is.

Actually, "she's" more like a "he".

An anonymous poster to Renegade Evolution's blog commented that she had done some research on the style of "Yvette Doll's" mass posts, and found it to be particularly similar to a male antiprostitiution activist out of Ireland named Gregory Carlin.

Well...I decided to do some Googling of my own; and oh, look what I found.

This is from a thread from a UK legal message board called Legal Banter, from October of last year. The subject line was "CEOP make a claim".

On 2 Oct, 01:59, Robbie wrote:
Blah wrote:
wrote:


CEOP claimed to me on the telephone that they campaigned against the
use of the term 'child pornography' on legal advice ( they actually
said that) and that it was not a legislatively defined or enacted or
ratified (UN) term.


http://www.opsi.gov.uk/


That has a search engine.


Ishtar 4?


He certainly sounds like as fruit loop...

--
Robbie




I'm a reformed cult musician. I'm the fruit loop formerly known as
Yvette Doll.

http://www.abalis.co.uk/sudetencreche/archive2_5.htm


Who is Ishtar 4?

Gregory
Hmmm....formerly known???

Now, following the link above goes to an article about an 80's British pop group that "Yvette Doll" was cited as a former member of (which also included two other members who broke off later and became part of the successful US pop group The Thompson Twins. Whether Mr. Carlin really was "Yvette Doll" back then and simply reverted to his original name for his latest activism, or whether he just borrowed that pseudonym for jerking people off, is not mentioned anywhere.

Nevertheless, the style that Carlin uses in his own rants posted in his own name match perfectly with those done of late by "Yvette Doll" in his recent troll farts. Meaning: We have a WINNER!!!

Gee, Mr. Carlin....why not use your real name??? Afraid that the radfem womyn will see through your nonsense?? (Certainly Cath Elliot has; she has now publically repudiated and exposed him, and basically told him to fuck off.)

On the other hand, some of the more wingnuttier abolitionists aren't so willing to repudiate him.

Take, for instance, this woman named GreenConsciousness, who is your typical GenderBorg radfem activist; she recently re-posted some of the F-Word thread over at her place...and added one particular comment that might give you some notice:

"Where on our website does it say anything about having sex?" asked
Douglas, one half of Newcastle's premier executive escort agency"

So no sex, and therefore no sex worker credentials!

I targeted Jerome Brennn for years, and eventually he went to prison
for trying to procure children for a le chic enterprise in Spain.

I target all the pedophiles and pimps using Jobcentre.

"Douglas's attitude to the cover story seemed to be one of weary
exasperation. Of course they're going to have sex, his expression
said, but if we talked honestly about it I might be busted for
immoral earnings and the police would have to waste time pushing
working girls back on to the street. John's denial, though, was much
more interesting: an odd hybrid of legalistic game-playing and
genuine psychological resistance to the notion that he was selling
sex. It wasn't that he didn't know perfectly well what was going on
(otherwise why squirm so uncomfortably about the headmaster who rang
up requesting the youngest escort on the books to dress up as a schoolgirl?"

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_/ai_n16657627

I congratulate the radical feminists on this blog who are following
in the footsteps of Andrea Dworkin

A pimp has to be lucky always, we only have to be lucky once.

In solidarity

Gregory Carlin
Irish Anti-Traficking Coalition
Notice...no "Yvette Doll" histrionics here, just his own real identity.

Gee....projecting much, Mr. Carlin??

And what does that say about the GenderBorg and their attitudes about men...I guess that some men are less evil than others....especially when they march in perfect goosestep with their ideology???

Typical. So damn typical.

-----------------------------------------------------

UPDATE:

Here's another example of how so far off the batshit Gregory Carlin is regarding his obsession with pedophilia.

This is from an education listserv in Great Britain called SafteyNet. The respondent, a John Hackett, is attempting to debunk some of the more classic claims of Carlin regarding pedophilia and the Internet.


I have read Mr Carlin's last five messages with interest and a growing sense that
he has a very anti-European stance where everything in the US is good and we are
obstructive and perhaps a little simpleminded. This may be from the best of motives
but it does little to advance his case. I will not go though all the messages in
detail but there are some points that i think worth putting forward for debate.

All forms of child pornography and exploitation are to be deplored. That said,
Mr Carlin's seeming anti-British and anti-European rhetoric will do little to
protect the children he clearly feels passionately about.

Of course most abuse is by adults on children and no one would say otherwise - but
the original post could have been read as saying that most abuse was taking place
in schools. If that is not what was meant (as you have clarified) then just say so.

Serious offending via the internet as it relates to British educational
establishments is almost exclusively connected to adult employees.

Just so. And clearly (potential) offenders will gravitate to the type of activity
(employment, hobby, etc) where they are in contact with children - this is
obvious and needs no explanation. But the next sentence -

The British have problems, and they are apparently not
getting any better.

- is to both to state the obvious (we ALL have problems) and to imply that this is
something particularly British. What evidence is there for this? I do not have any
evidence for or against but I would be very surprised if it were so. And I would
also be surprised if many - if not - most pornographic sites are just as "popular"
in the US as they are elsewhere. What proportion, for example, of sites are hosted
and/or mainly funded from US sources and customers?

It was obvious to some of us that the pornography industry ( US & Europe)
and pro-pedophiles ( Europe) were trying to damage Senator Shelby's career,
it was a trick.

So the US does not have any pro-pedophiles?

So, don't discuss it. To return to the point, to complain of children doing
X, Y or Z, on the internet, and to apply funding, public relations, and a
raft of measures to address that particular problem is one thing.

To what "raft of measures" are you referring? The ones that try to educate them about
the dangers of the internet? Or cyber-bullying? Would you NOT fund such project to
help PREVENT child on child bullying?

In relation to the criminal use of the internet as it relates to the
educational establishment, then for every schoolchild arrested for child
pornography etc, there will be quite a few teachers. To put it as mildly as
possible.

'Luton Crown Court heard Graham Conridge, 59, admitted posing as a teenage
boy to contact 261 girls aged 11 to 15 through MSN and
chatrooms.'<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/6552437.stm>

Mr Carlin implies here that Conridge was doing this in an educational institution.
However, as the article cites makes clear, he was actually banned from teaching
five years previously by Beds CC "following serious allegations of misconduct." and
is described in the first paragraph as a "former music teacher". So to imply that
this shocking case is related to the eduction system is simply wrong. While I do not
know the full facts of the case it may be that although there was not enough evidence
for a criminal prosecution five years ago he was prevented from teaching. And he was
finally brought to justice by CEOP who Mr Carlin seems to deride.

'Fred Brown, incoming president of the NASUWT teachers' union, claimed it
would not be long before a teacher was "raped, filmed and on the internet",
and he called for all mobile phones to be banned from schools across
Northern Ireland.
'<http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/article2356788.ece>

As the president of the NASUWT one of his concerns is rightly the protection of his
members from physical abuse whether it is filmed or not. Whatever you feel about the
internet and/or banning of mobiles this is a legitimate stand for him to take. This
does not mean he does not care about child abuse any more than your concern with it
implies (I hope) that you are unconcerned about teachers being attacked by pupils.

This type or argument is both fallacious and damaging to your case.

Japan is awash with images from British schools. I can leave you with that
thought.

What is you evidence for this? And what, exactly, do you mean by "from British
Schools"? Saved on their servers? Photographed there? British students or teachers
taking part? And what about the demand for "asian" pornography? As someone involved
in web-filtering I know that there are lot of sites featuring Japanese models.

Lets just face up to the problem - it is international. International co-operation
is required. The problem will never be "solved" - all forms of abuse have been going
on for hundreds of years as a superficial study of history and literature will
confirm. Child abuse was not invented by the internet - it is just one more
communication channel.

I do not know Bill Henson's work but I did go to the link - perhaps Mr Carlin would
like to read this posting on the thread:

i think bill henson's work is fabulous. my school went to the national art
gallery in sydney along with other schools and he answered all our questions
and he is really nice and had interesting answers. his main answer was that
his artworks were how the individual saw it. so therefore, the indiviadual
could decide whether the art is porn or art. i love his works because they
are so raw and naturl.[sic] his other works captivate me as well because
they leave me wondering about the story behind them.

This is just one of the positive comments - in fact reading all the comments the
one Mr Carlin quoted was BY FAR the most negative. Most of the comments (many from
yr11/yr12 students) were thoughtful and positive about his work. Perhaps more
thoughtful tha Mr Carlin's knee jerk reaction. I wonder if he has seen them? As I
haven't I am not in a position to say much about them as works of art/porn but the
reactions certainly lead me toward the latter view.

--
Regards,

John Hackett

Consider yourself outed, Mr. Carlin.

[Now crossposted to the WordPress SmackChron]

Monday, January 12, 2009

The "NAMBLA'izing" of Douglas Fox, ISUW, and Opponents of Jacqui Smith

It's a tactic that most reactionary propagandists simply can't help themselves to avoid.

When you are losing the argument intellectually, paint your opponent as beyond the pale.

Such is exactly what is happening with the most recent debate on sex work coming out of Great Britain.

It all started with the brave and yeoman work of Caroline Shepherd, who has dedicated plenty of sweat, time, and bandwidth to her belief that proposed changes in sex work legislation proposed by the likes of Jacqui Smith are simply wrongheaded, counterproductive, and even dangerous to the women whom this legislation pretends to want to protect.

Well, that didn't sit very well with certain radical anti-sex work abolitionists, who have been all over the Internet countering Caroline's obvious facts with nothing more than the usual claptrap about "pimp enabling".

But baiting Caroline as an "enabler of pimps" is a softball as compared to the radioactivity that is thrown at any MAN who dares to challenge abolitionist ideology....and woe to him if he happens to be a sex worker himself.

Such is what is happening to Douglas Fox, who happens to be the spoken representative of a group known as the International Union of Sex Workers (IUSW), a group dedicated to protecting the rights and safety of existing sex workers, and who have been active in opposing Ms. Smith's legislation from the start.

He also happens to a gay man whose partner happens to run an English escort agency.

A fact, of course, that is now being exploited by a few abolitionist radicals to smear and demonize him as a "pimp"...and that's just the beginning.

One such article comes from Cath Elliott, who used the pages of the Liberal Conspiracy blog to all but call out D Fox as a pimp profiting off the suffering of sex workers and claim that he cannot represent all sex workers due to his position (or simply because he happens to be a man, I figure).

According to Elliot, the very existence of D Fox's escort agency using clients to protest the laws (funny, isn't that just like consumers defending legal agencies who do them no harm to resist legislation that would wipe them out for no reason??) should disqualify him and justifies the legislation sought after:

And it gets worse. In another recent discussion forum, this time over at Punterlink International, a contributor named Elrond posted this suggestion when discussing threats to the sex industry:

I would again suggest all write and complain to your MP. You all should either donate and join the IUSW as an escort or a friend if you are a punter.

And it’s as simple as that.

"Punters", BTW, are the English slang for clients and others who patronize sex workers.

Indeed, according to Elliot, the mere inclusion of agency owners, "punters", and "pimps" in advocating against her favored legislation should disqualify their attempts, since apparently only sex workers themselves (at least, only those who favor Elliot's ideology" should be allowed to represent "sex workers" overall:

If you look at the GMB IUSW membership application form it’s easy to see how anyone claiming to be an escort or claiming to work in any area of the sex industry can take up membership. Confidentiality is obviously at a premium when signing workers up from such a sensitive industry, but as the comment on Punterlink shows, this also means that membership of IUSW branch is open to abuse: anyone can join.

If the the IUSW is populated with pimps, agency owners, and punters, then it shouldn’t have any credibility in the prostitution debate.

Yeah. Right. So, the people most affected by this legislation should have no right, according to Ms. Elliot, to even have a voice or to protest in this debate. But, this isn't really about censorship, isn't it??

But even Cath Elliot is dwarfed in the myopia department by one Yvette Doll, whom has made it her personal trolling campaign to taint anyone who dares to challenge the Smith legislation with charges of "pedophilia". Basically, she has used the pages of almost every blog debating this topic to go off on tangents that would make even the "9/11/01 Truthers" take notice. Some examples of her Tin-Foil Hattery:

[from the thread at Shriaz Socialist]

January 12, 2009 at 9:19 am

“From reading this and other threads, it seems clear to me that if sex workers are going to make any gains in terms of rights and safety, it’ll be done without the help of radical feminists.”

With all those creepy and pervy web-sites and people pretending to be schoolgirls,

or other doing child age role playing, I think the IPCE, PNVD or NAMBLA may be more reliable allies.

I’ve never met a pimp who wasn’t a pedophile, if we are talking personal experience.

“I really like the plain grey skirt,white blose, small chest in a training bra, black tights and M&S white knickers look. Anyone any suggestions?”

I think that is far too sick for feminist acceptance.

Yvette Doll

---------------------------------

Yup...that was a NAMBLA reference she brought in....and in case you don't get the point:

January 12, 2009 at 11:41 am

In the USA, pro-sex feminism is in (open) alliance with pedophiles, it is the same in Britain and it was certainly the same in Holland. The most vile & violent pornographers are supported by Douglas Fox’s union.

------------------------------------------------------

And then, she breaks out the Max Hardcore case in the US as proof of complicity of porn with pedophilia. Never mind that Hardcore was convicted not of pedophilia but of classic obscenity on the basis of scenes performed by consenting adults (not one of them underage or illegal), and that some of the members of the jury openly stated that their guilty verdict was forced on them by the prosecution (and that the case is currently under appeal).

January 12, 2009 at 11:49 am

“Although the actresses in Little’s movies sometimes appear to be under the age of consent and even as young adolescents, it has never been proven that any of them actually were. In his film Max Extreme 4, an actress stated during one verbal exchange that she was 12 years-old, according to Adult Video News magazine.”

School uniform territory - that is were the money is. He lost his web-site to our friends.

Ahhhhh.....yeah. Right. And Brooke Shields played a 17 year old prostitute in the movie Pretty Baby. Which means....nothing to you and me. Acting out a scene is probably not the same as actually having sex with an underage performer, which is already a crime....but why let truth and honesty get in the way of a good rant??

And..."our friends"??? I thought that radicalfeminists didn't want anything to do with the Bush Justice Department and the Religious Right??? Except, of course, when it suits their agenda.

Oh. but there's more...when Renegade Evolution decided to chime in that not all (or even most, or damn few if any) "sex-positive" writers think of Max Hardcore as anything more than an asshole with a cracked view of women and sex who nevertheless was wronged as a means of sexual censorship, Yvette responded with this crap:

January 12, 2009 at 12:57 pm

His endorsement is via a lobby, iincluding pro-sex feminism

As it happens, in the USA, UK and Holland, pro-sex feminism is in cahoots with pro-pedophiles. They go out together.

But the pornography industry ( in the USA) was using children for years and 2257 is after 1990 if I recall.

In Europe using kids was completely normal.


Even Larry Flynt and Hustler is brought into Yvette's conspiracy theory (what?? No "Chester the Molestor" toons??)

January 12, 2009 at 1:03 pm

Do you think that happened?

Recurrent cartoon and composite photo themes picturing blood-soaked castration are seen in the reality of child rape and mutilation. In October 26, 1990 a nine-year-old boy in Norman, Oklahoma was raped, his penis cut off and eye gouged out causing Hustler to be removed from local stores — where a current Hustler depicted a young boy similarly tortured.


And, in response again to Ren, she makes the point as explicit as you can get:

January 12, 2009 at 12:24 pm

“Oh look, the nazi comparision again. You know, as a Jew and a Sex Worker, I find that damn odious” [Response by Ren Ev]

I meant it, pro-sex feminism is in cahoots with pedophila, there are tens of millions of child porngraphy transactions in Britain and that scale of abuse is an unfixable atrocity against the children of the world.

So they’re as bad as Nazis, pedophiles and their supporters. And ( anyways) sex workers are always calling the Pope a Nazi

A pro sex feminist is a Jew the Nazis allow to live to trap other Jews. I mean look at the sex worker web-sites, they’re degrading, a crime against women.

So I really meant that, absolutely and for sure.

So special that it justifies bolded emphasis.

That just about says it all, doesn't it??

Well....not quite.

There is this bit about US child porn prosecutorial history, regarding the infamous Traci Lords case (again, in response to Ren Ev):

January 12, 2009 at 1:24 pm

Traci Lords.

That’s a dime a dozen in Europe, the Brits just leave it on the shelves. If you ask the Brits to take U18 child porn out of retail, they just can’t see the point.

The customs work OK, the age-checking is three years behind. The other thing is, Brits, well nobody wants to do it.

You have a heap of agencies, none o them will do it, it stays in retail or whatever.

It is not the USA, the Brits also have areas of immunity. It can take a decde to get one child pornographer and the FBI will probably have to do that for them.

A teacher for example, will have a long run. So 261 schoolgirls proxy child porn or whatever, is not going to zilch too many myspce accounts.

The USA does more teachers in a day, than the UK wants to do in a year.

The feminists (of all shades) allow the teeachers [sic] to get on with it. It is their culture & history.

And she quotes in that same comment a case of a 61-year old man using MySpace to generate a fake ID/profile to befriend 15- and 16-year olds....as if that proves that "child porn" is so pervasive in "their culture".

And so on, ad nauseum. And pretty damn nauseating, too.

I'll just let Yvette close it out, since she does more damage to herself and her cause than any reasoned arguments to the contrary could ever do.

January 12, 2009 at 12:46 pm

So pro-sex feminists, who like Max Hardcore, and that is seemingly most of them, are not really feminists. They use the tag ‘feminism’ but really they’re just in the pimping junior league.

January 12, 2009 at 12:49 pm

I’m giving you a lesson anyway, I think you need it.

Lesson duly noted.....asshole.

OK....I'll just post here until Bluehost gets its act together...

It seems that Bluehost, who is the host for my regular SmackChron blog, is having some issues; I can't even log into my control panel there or post anything.

So, for the time being, I will use this Blogger space to post what I need until things clear out over there.

So nice to have a backup plan.