Childline, the NSPCC & the Gender Stasi

By JL

Childline is a counselling and helpline service founded in 1986 to provide an urgently-needed resource for victims of child abuse.

Now, almost 35 years later, the charity and its remit have expanded considerably and it continues to provide a vital service to vulnerable children.

Sadly, however, its ideological capture by the Gender Stasi seems complete.

The “Information and Advice” page on the Childline website offers guidance on a range of different issues, one of which is “Sexual and Gender Identity”. In the “Coming Out” section of this page, children are told what to do if their family are homophobic or transphobic.

Of course, LGB and gender non-conforming children may need support and guidance, especially if their families are hostile.

However, in the advice given by Childline, there is no separation made between being gay and being trans. In both cases, a family expressing concern about a child’s future or believing that a child is too young to be making such a decision is deemed to be reacting badly. However, the context of a child wanting to make irreparable changes to their body is a very different case from that of a child who is gay or lesbian.

Children are told that “It’s important to talk to someone you trust if your family isn’t supporting you”. But with trans kids “supporting” usually has to mean nothing but complete affirmation. The parents of children with gender dysphoria are being set up as the enemy from the outset.

Parents reticent of fully embracing their child’s new gender identity are to be pointed towards Stonewall where they’ll be guided to “advice” from Gendered Intelligence (“They specialise in supporting young trans people aged 8 to 25”) and the Mermaids Munchausen mavens.

Elsewhere on the Childline website, children can join “Message Boards”, ie discussion forums, dedicated to specific topics. (Presumably, these are moderated by Childline to censor inappropriate content etc?) One of these message boards is specifically about “Gender identity” and has a variety of sections in which children can post comments, start discussions and chat with each other.

There are discussions about being non-binary and gender queer and demi-sexual etc in which kids and young teens validate, even encourage, each other’s various identities and pronouns and agree on how awful and bigoted their parents are.

Teenage girls discuss how they might be transboys because they don’t like girl things or wearing dresses. Or because the thought of being female ‘disgusts’ them.

And if an entire discussion site dedicated to gender identity wasn’t enough, there is also a “Trans & Non-Binary” section on the message board about Puberty. Here kids can discuss taking hormone blockers and breast binding.

Just as worrying as the children swapping inaccurate and damaging advice with each other, are the people on the site who may not be children.

In a message board called “Crossdressing” a male user, who doesn’t specify his age, makes comments about women’s underwear and how he only likes to wear a thong. One wonders just how old Temporary29510633 really is. And what else he might be telling kids on the Childline message boards.

Childline is now part of the NSPCC and has been since 2006. @STILLTish has written extensively about “The queering of the NSPCC” on her blog.

About the charity’s endorsement of Mermaids

About the close association between the NSPCC and Stonewall…

And about the NSPCC’s involvement in a nude family swim event.

You may remember a story from last year involving a transgender model, a rubberwear fetishist and a quick one off the wrist in an NSPCC staff toilet.

This tale began when James Makings, then the NSPCC's Celebrity & Talent Manager, employed trans-identified male and underwear model, Munroe Bergdorf, as the charity's first LGBTQ+ campaigner.

There was a great deal of concern about Bergdorf’s suitability for this role, mainly due to his encouraging vulnerable children to contact him in private and without their parents’ knowledge.

Although stuff like this probably didn’t help either.

It then transpired that James Makings, the man who thought Munroe Bergdorf would be a suitable influencer for a children's charity, is a rubber fetishist and has posted photographs and videos of himself engaged in fetishistic sexual activity online. Most seriously, he uploaded a video in which he was wearing his rubber fetish gear and masturbating in a toilet while at work. At the NSPCC.

Those trying to point out the hugely problematic safeguarding issues involved were, of course, accused of homophobia and transphobia. The NSPCC was far more interested in reporting the “bullies” drawing attention to this issue than with Makings' behaviour itself. Most people who dared to voice their concern (including our very own Glinner) were blocked.

Even though Makings was ‘let go’ very quietly soon afterwards, the NSPCC has never apologised to those people it smeared for raising perfectly legitimate concerns.

But it wasn’t always like this. Back in 2016 the charity was set to host a discussion about the treatment of children with a gender dysphoria. It was called “Dare to Debate”. As it turned out, the NSPCC didn’t dare to debate and, after protests from trans rights activists, it cancelled the event.

Things seem to have gone downhill since then and, between the rubber wankers, the naked swimmers, the virtually naked trans-identified male underwear models and the organisations determined to medicalise perfectly healthy kids, the NSPCC does seem to have been entirely engulfed by gender identity culture.

What a pity the charity didn’t maintain the integrity of which it demonstrated a glimmer back in 2016. If only it had stood up to the TRA bullies then and realised that their vociferous attempt to stifle a debate about dysphoric kids was the exact reason to hold one. Because if anyone should be fighting to protect our vulnerable children from these ideologues, it’s the NSPCC.

Share