NSPCC - Revision history

Jim Burton: /* Corporate/state-model */

2026-01-05T12:03:30Z

Corporate/state-model

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:03, 5 January 2026
Line 9:		Line 9:
	<blockquote>''The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...''		<blockquote>''The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...''

	''[The NSPCC] was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...''		[The NSPCC] ''was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...''

	''Alan Gilmour had become director in 1979 in the middle of a crisis: “Its Inspectors...were diminishing in number and in some areas losing credibility because they were too few and too scattered to provide a coherent service; and this service was too vaguely defined” (Gilmour 1988:133-134). Gilmour's directorship produced a near revolution, focused especially on the society's centenary in 1984. This offered abundant opportunities for fund-raising and publicity... Gilmour launched an aggressive and more proactive effort at child protection, in intimate alliance with public agencies.... By 1989, the society was drawing about 11 percent of its £36 million ($45 million) budget from central and local government, the balance being raised from fund-raising and investments. The society's budget had increased over the decade by 1000%.''</blockquote>		''Alan Gilmour had become director in 1979 in the middle of a crisis: “Its Inspectors...were diminishing in number and in some areas losing credibility because they were too few and too scattered to provide a coherent service; and this service was too vaguely defined” (Gilmour 1988:133-134). Gilmour's directorship produced a near revolution, focused especially on the society's centenary in 1984. This offered abundant opportunities for fund-raising and publicity... Gilmour launched an aggressive and more proactive effort at child protection, in intimate alliance with public agencies.... By 1989, the society was drawing about 11 percent of its £36 million ($45 million) budget from central and local government, the balance being raised from fund-raising and investments. The society's budget had increased over the decade by 1000%.''</blockquote>

Jim Burton: /* Corporate/state-model */

2026-01-05T12:03:07Z

Corporate/state-model

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:03, 5 January 2026
Line 7:		Line 7:
	The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. [[Philip Jenkins]], 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992)<ref>[https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1705803M/Intimate_enemies Intimate Enemies: Moral Panics in Contemporary Great Britain]</ref>, pp. 104-113, explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:		The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. [[Philip Jenkins]], 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992)<ref>[https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1705803M/Intimate_enemies Intimate Enemies: Moral Panics in Contemporary Great Britain]</ref>, pp. 104-113, explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:

	<blockquote''>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...''		<blockquote>''The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...''

	''[The NSPCC] was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...''		''[The NSPCC] was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...''

Jim Burton at 12:02, 5 January 2026

2026-01-05T12:02:24Z

Xtjvimds16dovrfc at 23:19, 26 January 2025

2025-01-26T23:19:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:19, 26 January 2025
Line 9:		Line 9:
	[The NSPCC] was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...		[The NSPCC] was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...

	Alan Gilmour had become director in 1979 in the middle of a crisis: “Its Inspectors...were diminishing in number and in some areas losing credibility because they were too few and too scattered to provide a coherent service; and this service was too vaguely defined” (Gilmour 1988:133-134). Gilmour's directorship produced a near revolution, focused especially on the society's centenary in 1984. This offered abundant opportunities for fund-raising and publicity... Gilmour launched an aggressive and more proactive effort at child protection, in intimate alliance with public agencies.... By 1989, the society was drawing about 11 percent of its £36 million ($45 million) budget from central and local government, the balance being raised from fund-raising and investments. The society's budget had increased over the decade by 1000%. ~~<p>—Philip Jenkins, <cite>Intimate Enemies</cite></p>~~</blockquote>		Alan Gilmour had become director in 1979 in the middle of a crisis: “Its Inspectors...were diminishing in number and in some areas losing credibility because they were too few and too scattered to provide a coherent service; and this service was too vaguely defined” (Gilmour 1988:133-134). Gilmour's directorship produced a near revolution, focused especially on the society's centenary in 1984. This offered abundant opportunities for fund-raising and publicity... Gilmour launched an aggressive and more proactive effort at child protection, in intimate alliance with public agencies.... By 1989, the society was drawing about 11 percent of its £36 million ($45 million) budget from central and local government, the balance being raised from fund-raising and investments. The society's budget had increased over the decade by 1000%.</blockquote>
	[[File:Screenshot 20210918-064641 DuckDuckGo.jpg\|thumb\|Bizarre and implausible messaging]]		[[File:Screenshot 20210918-064641 DuckDuckGo.jpg\|thumb\|Bizarre and implausible messaging]]
	==Dishonesty==		==Dishonesty==
Line 19:		Line 19:
	NSPCC campaigns have been criticised<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/aug/01/childrensservices.comment Guardian: Criticism]</ref> for their ineffectuality by organisations such as NPC:		NSPCC campaigns have been criticised<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/aug/01/childrensservices.comment Guardian: Criticism]</ref> for their ineffectuality by organisations such as NPC:

	<blockquote>The answer, suggests the report by New Philanthropy Capital (NPC), is not a lot. Campaigning to change public attitudes and keep abuse on the radar, as NSPCC does with some success, has its place, but there is zero evidence that this leads to fewer beatings. The logic behind Full Stop, it argues, is flawed and naive: "Improved attitudes to abuse can certainly facilitate the identification and reporting of abuse that is already occurring, but they seem to have very little bearing on whether a substance-abusing parent neglects their child behind closed doors, or whether a sexual offender chooses to abuse a child when they have the opportunity to do so in secret." ~~<p>—Patrick Butler, <cite>Full stop missing on child abuse</cite></p>~~</blockquote>		<blockquote>The answer, suggests the report by New Philanthropy Capital (NPC), is not a lot. Campaigning to change public attitudes and keep abuse on the radar, as NSPCC does with some success, has its place, but there is zero evidence that this leads to fewer beatings. The logic behind Full Stop, it argues, is flawed and naive: "Improved attitudes to abuse can certainly facilitate the identification and reporting of abuse that is already occurring, but they seem to have very little bearing on whether a substance-abusing parent neglects their child behind closed doors, or whether a sexual offender chooses to abuse a child when they have the opportunity to do so in secret."</blockquote>

	The charity has also faced criticism for its obsession with publicity and advertising, for fearmongering<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,3890641,00.html Guardian: Criticism of fearmongering]</ref><ref>[http://www.sirc.org/media/mediaaugust1399.html SIRC - Advertising criticism]</ref> and fabricating or exaggerating facts and figures in its research. In an article in Spiked Magazine, [[Frank Furedi]] professor of sociology at the University of Kent, branded it a <ref>[https://www.spiked-online.com/2004/01/19/a-danger-to-the-nations-children/ Frank Furedi]</ref> ''"lobby group devoted to publicising its peculiar brand of anti-parent propaganda and promoting itself."'' NSPCC wages are most certainly excessive for a charity - matching those of civil servants in most cases. For example, in 2008 (Guardian), a Campaigns Development Adviser could expect to earn up to £40k pa and graduates entered at £16-18k pa (Hobsons, 2008).		The charity has also faced criticism for its obsession with publicity and advertising, for fearmongering<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,3890641,00.html Guardian: Criticism of fearmongering]</ref><ref>[http://www.sirc.org/media/mediaaugust1399.html SIRC - Advertising criticism]</ref> and fabricating or exaggerating facts and figures in its research. In an article in Spiked Magazine, [[Frank Furedi]] professor of sociology at the University of Kent, branded it a <ref>[https://www.spiked-online.com/2004/01/19/a-danger-to-the-nations-children/ Frank Furedi]</ref> ''"lobby group devoted to publicising its peculiar brand of anti-parent propaganda and promoting itself."'' NSPCC wages are most certainly excessive for a charity - matching those of civil servants in most cases. For example, in 2008 (Guardian), a Campaigns Development Adviser could expect to earn up to £40k pa and graduates entered at £16-18k pa (Hobsons, 2008).
Line 36:		Line 36:
	Further assimilation of NSPCC incentives on Child Pornography into UK law would lead to an expansion of the current ''thought crime'' agenda. For example, a NSPCC Policy Advisor, Zoe Hilton supported the closure of role-play websites in which it is possible for adults to play out adult-child sex fantasies (age-regression) without involving any actual minors:		Further assimilation of NSPCC incentives on Child Pornography into UK law would lead to an expansion of the current ''thought crime'' agenda. For example, a NSPCC Policy Advisor, Zoe Hilton supported the closure of role-play websites in which it is possible for adults to play out adult-child sex fantasies (age-regression) without involving any actual minors:

	<blockquote>It is not OK to fantasise about this stuff. These kind of interactions need to be shut down.~~<p>—Zoe Hilton, <cite>Paedophiles Target Virtual World~~<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100512042538/http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/20080641290719 Zoe Hilton - Age regression bigotry]</ref~~></cite></p~~></blockquote>		<blockquote>It is not OK to fantasise about this stuff. These kind of interactions need to be shut down.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100512042538/http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/20080641290719 Zoe Hilton - Age regression bigotry]</ref></blockquote>

	[[Prostasia Foundation]] are one example of a "sex positive" child protectionist charity who have pled for donors to reconsider leaving large amounts of money in their will to the NSPCC, because of such positions.		[[Prostasia Foundation]] are one example of a "sex positive" child protectionist charity who have pled for donors to reconsider leaving large amounts of money in their will to the NSPCC, because of such positions.

Xtjvimds16dovrfc at 23:01, 26 January 2025

2025-01-26T23:01:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:01, 26 January 2025
Line 3:		Line 3:
	==Corporate/state-model==		==Corporate/state-model==

	The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. Philip Jenkins, 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992)<ref>[https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1705803M/Intimate_enemies Intimate Enemies: Moral Panics in Contemporary Great Britain]</ref>, pp. 104-113, explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:		The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. [[Philip Jenkins]], 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992)<ref>[https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1705803M/Intimate_enemies Intimate Enemies: Moral Panics in Contemporary Great Britain]</ref>, pp. 104-113, explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:

	<blockquote>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...		<blockquote>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...

Xtjvimds16dovrfc at 22:58, 26 January 2025

2025-01-26T22:58:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:58, 26 January 2025
Line 3:		Line 3:
	==Corporate/state-model==		==Corporate/state-model==

	The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. Philip Jenkins, 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992), pp. 104-113, explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:		The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. Philip Jenkins, 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992)<ref>[https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1705803M/Intimate_enemies Intimate Enemies: Moral Panics in Contemporary Great Britain]</ref>, pp. 104-113, explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:

	<blockquote>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...		<blockquote>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...

Xtjvimds16dovrfc at 22:49, 26 January 2025

2025-01-26T22:49:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:49, 26 January 2025
Line 3:		Line 3:
	==Corporate/state-model==		==Corporate/state-model==

	The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. Philip Jenkins, 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992) pp 104-113 explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:		The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. Philip Jenkins, 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992), pp. 104-113, explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:

	<blockquote>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...		<blockquote>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...

Xtjvimds16dovrfc at 22:32, 26 January 2025

2025-01-26T22:32:46Z

The Admins: /* Angry Harry's articles */

2024-07-07T19:40:36Z

Angry Harry's articles

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:40, 7 July 2024
Line 63:		Line 63:
	===Angry Harry's articles===		===Angry Harry's articles===

	Archived opinion pieces from a [[Masculism\|Men's Rights]] Activist who bitterly opposed the children's charity.		Archived opinion pieces from a [[Masculism\|Men's Rights]] Activist who [https://angryharry.mra-archive.com/ bitterly opposed] the children's charity.
	<div style="column-count:2;-moz-column-count:2;-webkit-column-count:2">		<div style="column-count:2;-moz-column-count:2;-webkit-column-count:2">
	*[https://web.archive.org/web/20101115113011/http://www.angryharry.com/reNSPCCSHATTERSCHILDABUSEMYTHS.htm?note NSPCC Shatters Child Abuse Myths] - 2000.		*[https://web.archive.org/web/20101115113011/http://www.angryharry.com/reNSPCCSHATTERSCHILDABUSEMYTHS.htm?note NSPCC Shatters Child Abuse Myths] - 2000.

The Admins at 12:35, 27 May 2024

2024-05-27T12:35:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:35, 27 May 2024
Line 13:		Line 13:
	==Dishonesty==		==Dishonesty==

	Various examples of the NSPCC's dishonesty and disregard for young people include sensationalized advertising<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/1999/aug/08/foodanddrink.childprotection The Guardian - NSPCC]</ref>, the contrivance of questionable social networking identities for what they claim to be abused children (see gallery)<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080423050030/http://www.donthideit.com/profiles/hubpage.html Questionable social media Profiles]</ref>, and the use of falsified examples of child abuse to solicit donations in their mass mailings.<ref>[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-481243/How-NSPCC-faked-child-abuse-stories-generate-cash.html Daily Mail: Fake Abuse]</ref> Children have been encouraged to expand the range of behaviors they deem to be abusive<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/5047120.stm BBC - Schools 'not advising on abuse']</ref>, strongly supporting the hypothesis of the NSPCC as a [[Research: Secondary Harm\|secondary victimizer]] (see section on victimologists).		Various examples of the NSPCC's dishonesty and disregard for young people include sensationalized advertising,<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/1999/aug/08/foodanddrink.childprotection The Guardian - NSPCC]</ref> the contrivance of questionable social networking identities for what they claim to be abused children (see gallery),<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080423050030/http://www.donthideit.com/profiles/hubpage.html Questionable social media Profiles]</ref> and the use of falsified examples of child abuse to solicit donations in their mass mailings.<ref>[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-481243/How-NSPCC-faked-child-abuse-stories-generate-cash.html Daily Mail: Fake Abuse]</ref> Children have been encouraged to expand the range of behaviors they deem to be abusive,<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/5047120.stm BBC - Schools 'not advising on abuse']</ref> strongly supporting the hypothesis of the NSPCC as a [[Research: Secondary Harm\|secondary victimizer]] (see section on victimologists).

	It has been pointed out that the NSPCC's 2009 findings that a quarter of 18 to 24 year olds had experienced "severe physical violence, sexual abuse or neglect in childhood" and that one in five had been "physically attacked by an adult, raped or sexually assaulted or severely neglected during their lives" are tainted by their inclusivity. Those categories included "serious emotional neglect or lack of physical care or supervision", which were defined as including "parents never or hardly ever asking their child who they were going out with or where or what they were doing".<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/news/education-12449643 Million children 'severely maltreated', says NSPCC]</ref>		It has been pointed out that the NSPCC's 2009 findings that a quarter of 18 to 24 year olds had experienced "severe physical violence, sexual abuse or neglect in childhood" and that one in five had been "physically attacked by an adult, raped or sexually assaulted or severely neglected during their lives" are tainted by their inclusivity. Those categories included "serious emotional neglect or lack of physical care or supervision", which were defined as including "parents never or hardly ever asking their child who they were going out with or where or what they were doing".<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/news/education-12449643 Million children 'severely maltreated', says NSPCC]</ref>

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:02, 5 January 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<div style="margin-right: 25px; float: left;">__TOC__</div>[[Image:Pcc.JPG\|thumb\|NSPCC HQ, Curtain Road, London.]]'''The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children''' (NSPCC, f. 1884) is a UK-based children's charity with statutory powers, and a history of circulating questionable fundraising literature. Television commercials have sometimes portrayed a demonic/oversexed image of males with children in their custody - or sought to play on common fears - putting the charity at odds with Mens Rights Activists among others. Between the 00s and the 10s, its size has been estimated at roughly 2,500 employees, with revenues of £118 Million. During this period, they were also a recipient of EU funding.		<div style="margin-right: 25px; float: left;">__TOC__</div>[[Image:Pcc.JPG\|thumb\|NSPCC HQ, Curtain Road, London.]]'''The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children''' (NSPCC, f. 1884) is a UK-based children's charity with statutory powers, and a history of circulating questionable fundraising literature. Between the 00s and the 10s, its size has been estimated at roughly 2,500 employees, with revenues of £118 Million. During this period, they were also a recipient of EU funding.

			The charity are known for their emotive TV commercials, and have sometimes portrayed a demonic/oversexed image of males with children in their custody - or sought to play on common fears - putting them at odds with Mens Rights Activists among others.

	==Corporate/state-model==		==Corporate/state-model==
Line 5:		Line 7:
	The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. [[Philip Jenkins]], 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992)<ref>[https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1705803M/Intimate_enemies Intimate Enemies: Moral Panics in Contemporary Great Britain]</ref>, pp. 104-113, explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:		The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. [[Philip Jenkins]], 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992)<ref>[https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1705803M/Intimate_enemies Intimate Enemies: Moral Panics in Contemporary Great Britain]</ref>, pp. 104-113, explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:

	<blockquote>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...		<blockquote''>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...''

	[The NSPCC] was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...		''[The NSPCC] was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...''

	Alan Gilmour had become director in 1979 in the middle of a crisis: “Its Inspectors...were diminishing in number and in some areas losing credibility because they were too few and too scattered to provide a coherent service; and this service was too vaguely defined” (Gilmour 1988:133-134). Gilmour's directorship produced a near revolution, focused especially on the society's centenary in 1984. This offered abundant opportunities for fund-raising and publicity... Gilmour launched an aggressive and more proactive effort at child protection, in intimate alliance with public agencies.... By 1989, the society was drawing about 11 percent of its £36 million ($45 million) budget from central and local government, the balance being raised from fund-raising and investments. The society's budget had increased over the decade by 1000%.</blockquote>		''Alan Gilmour had become director in 1979 in the middle of a crisis: “Its Inspectors...were diminishing in number and in some areas losing credibility because they were too few and too scattered to provide a coherent service; and this service was too vaguely defined” (Gilmour 1988:133-134). Gilmour's directorship produced a near revolution, focused especially on the society's centenary in 1984. This offered abundant opportunities for fund-raising and publicity... Gilmour launched an aggressive and more proactive effort at child protection, in intimate alliance with public agencies.... By 1989, the society was drawing about 11 percent of its £36 million ($45 million) budget from central and local government, the balance being raised from fund-raising and investments. The society's budget had increased over the decade by 1000%.''</blockquote>
	[[File:Screenshot 20210918-064641 DuckDuckGo.jpg\|thumb\|Bizarre and implausible messaging]]		[[File:Screenshot 20210918-064641 DuckDuckGo.jpg\|thumb\|Bizarre and implausible messaging]]

	==Dishonesty==		==Dishonesty==

Line 19:		Line 22:
	NSPCC campaigns have been criticised<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/aug/01/childrensservices.comment Guardian: Criticism]</ref> for their ineffectuality by organisations such as NPC:		NSPCC campaigns have been criticised<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/aug/01/childrensservices.comment Guardian: Criticism]</ref> for their ineffectuality by organisations such as NPC:

	<blockquote>The answer, suggests the report by New Philanthropy Capital (NPC), is not a lot. Campaigning to change public attitudes and keep abuse on the radar, as NSPCC does with some success, has its place, but there is zero evidence that this leads to fewer beatings. The logic behind Full Stop, it argues, is flawed and naive: "Improved attitudes to abuse can certainly facilitate the identification and reporting of abuse that is already occurring, but they seem to have very little bearing on whether a substance-abusing parent neglects their child behind closed doors, or whether a sexual offender chooses to abuse a child when they have the opportunity to do so in secret."</blockquote>		<blockquote>''The answer, suggests the report by New Philanthropy Capital (NPC), is not a lot. Campaigning to change public attitudes and keep abuse on the radar, as NSPCC does with some success, has its place, but there is zero evidence that this leads to fewer beatings. The logic behind Full Stop, it argues, is flawed and naive: "Improved attitudes to abuse can certainly facilitate the identification and reporting of abuse that is already occurring, but they seem to have very little bearing on whether a substance-abusing parent neglects their child behind closed doors, or whether a sexual offender chooses to abuse a child when they have the opportunity to do so in secret."''</blockquote>

	The charity has also faced criticism for its obsession with publicity and advertising, for fearmongering<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,3890641,00.html Guardian: Criticism of fearmongering]</ref><ref>[http://www.sirc.org/media/mediaaugust1399.html SIRC - Advertising criticism]</ref> and fabricating or exaggerating facts and figures in its research. In an article in Spiked Magazine, [[Frank Furedi]] professor of sociology at the University of Kent, branded it a <ref>[https://www.spiked-online.com/2004/01/19/a-danger-to-the-nations-children/ Frank Furedi]</ref> ''"lobby group devoted to publicising its peculiar brand of anti-parent propaganda and promoting itself."'' NSPCC wages are most certainly excessive for a charity - matching those of civil servants in most cases. For example, in 2008 (Guardian), a Campaigns Development Adviser could expect to earn up to £40k pa and graduates entered at £16-18k pa (Hobsons, 2008).		The charity has also faced criticism for its obsession with publicity and advertising, for fearmongering<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,3890641,00.html Guardian: Criticism of fearmongering]</ref><ref>[http://www.sirc.org/media/mediaaugust1399.html SIRC - Advertising criticism]</ref> and fabricating or exaggerating facts and figures in its research. In an article in Spiked Magazine, [[Frank Furedi]] professor of sociology at the University of Kent, branded it a <ref>[https://www.spiked-online.com/2004/01/19/a-danger-to-the-nations-children/ Frank Furedi]</ref> ''"lobby group devoted to publicising its peculiar brand of anti-parent propaganda and promoting itself."'' NSPCC wages are most certainly excessive for a charity - matching those of civil servants in most cases. For example, in 2008 (Guardian), a Campaigns Development Adviser could expect to earn up to £40k pa and graduates entered at £16-18k pa (Hobsons, 2008).
Line 36:		Line 39:
	Further assimilation of NSPCC incentives on Child Pornography into UK law would lead to an expansion of the current ''thought crime'' agenda. For example, a NSPCC Policy Advisor, Zoe Hilton supported the closure of role-play websites in which it is possible for adults to play out adult-child sex fantasies (age-regression) without involving any actual minors:		Further assimilation of NSPCC incentives on Child Pornography into UK law would lead to an expansion of the current ''thought crime'' agenda. For example, a NSPCC Policy Advisor, Zoe Hilton supported the closure of role-play websites in which it is possible for adults to play out adult-child sex fantasies (age-regression) without involving any actual minors:

	<blockquote>It is not OK to fantasise about this stuff. These kind of interactions need to be shut down.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100512042538/http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/20080641290719 Zoe Hilton - Age regression bigotry]</ref></blockquote>		<blockquote>''It is not OK to fantasise about this stuff. These kind of interactions need to be shut down.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100512042538/http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/20080641290719 Zoe Hilton - Age regression bigotry]''</ref></blockquote>

	[[Prostasia Foundation]] are one example of a "sex positive" child protectionist charity who have pled for donors to reconsider leaving large amounts of money in their will to the NSPCC, because of such positions.		[[Prostasia Foundation]] are one example of a "sex positive" child protectionist charity who have pled for donors to reconsider leaving large amounts of money in their will to the NSPCC, because of such positions.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:32, 26 January 2025
Line 3:		Line 3:
	==Corporate/state-model==		==Corporate/state-model==

	The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. Jenkins, 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992) pp 104-113 explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:		The NSPCC's success led to it effectively becoming an arm of the British state, receiving funding to carry out training programmes and other services. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1989/ukpga_19890041_en_6 Children Act 1989]</ref> statutory powers (under the [[Children Act 1989]]), allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for "children at risk". It is also the only charity with the statutory power to undertake child abuse investigations and can be called upon by the police and local authorities to assist them. State-employed care-givers and web-administrators have been known to frequently refer cases of child abuse to the NSPCC or encourage the use of this organisation as a contact point. Philip Jenkins, 'Intimate Enemies' (Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1992) pp 104-113 explains how this close relationship was vital to the success of the charity and its ideas:

	<blockquote>''The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...''		<blockquote>The NSPCC acted as the conduit by which American perceptions of a problem (and soon a crisis) were introduced to Britain. NSPCC director Arthur Morton first visited the United States in 1964 and spent time with Dr C Henry Kempe, who would long be a major influence on British child protection policy.... Researchers and other officials began making frequent visits to the United States to study changing perceptions of child maltreatment. The various researchers published extensively on the topic, and there was interchange of ideas and personnel between the NSPCC and the child welfare section of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), the department of central government with overall charge of the welfare system. Joan Court of the NSPCC Research Unit actually moved to head the relevant section of the SHSS. From 1970, DHSS circulars began to adopt NSPCC ideas...

	~~'' ''~~[The NSPCC]'' was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...''		[The NSPCC] was vital to the establishment of new ideas about sexual abuse...

	''Alan Gilmour had become director in 1979 in the middle of a crisis: “Its Inspectors...were diminishing in number and in some areas losing credibility because they were too few and too scattered to provide a coherent service; and this service was too vaguely defined” (Gilmour 1988:133-134). Gilmour's directorship produced a near revolution, focused especially on the society's centenary in 1984. This offered abundant opportunities for fund-raising and publicity... Gilmour launched an aggressive and more proactive effort at child protection, in intimate alliance with public agencies.... By 1989, the society was drawing about 11 percent of its £36 million ($45 million) budget from central and local government, the balance being raised from fund-raising and investments. The society's budget had increased over the decade by 1000%.''</blockquote>		Alan Gilmour had become director in 1979 in the middle of a crisis: “Its Inspectors...were diminishing in number and in some areas losing credibility because they were too few and too scattered to provide a coherent service; and this service was too vaguely defined” (Gilmour 1988:133-134). Gilmour's directorship produced a near revolution, focused especially on the society's centenary in 1984. This offered abundant opportunities for fund-raising and publicity... Gilmour launched an aggressive and more proactive effort at child protection, in intimate alliance with public agencies.... By 1989, the society was drawing about 11 percent of its £36 million ($45 million) budget from central and local government, the balance being raised from fund-raising and investments. The society's budget had increased over the decade by 1000%. <p>—Philip Jenkins, <cite>Intimate Enemies</cite></p></blockquote>
	[[File:Screenshot 20210918-064641 DuckDuckGo.jpg\|thumb\|Bizarre and implausible messaging]]		[[File:Screenshot 20210918-064641 DuckDuckGo.jpg\|thumb\|Bizarre and implausible messaging]]
	==Dishonesty==		==Dishonesty==
Line 19:		Line 19:
	NSPCC campaigns have been criticised<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/aug/01/childrensservices.comment Guardian: Criticism]</ref> for their ineffectuality by organisations such as NPC:		NSPCC campaigns have been criticised<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/aug/01/childrensservices.comment Guardian: Criticism]</ref> for their ineffectuality by organisations such as NPC:

	<blockquote>''The answer, suggests the report by New Philanthropy Capital (NPC), is not a lot. Campaigning to change public attitudes and keep abuse on the radar, as NSPCC does with some success, has its place, but there is zero evidence that this leads to fewer beatings. The logic behind Full Stop, it argues, is flawed and naive: "Improved attitudes to abuse can certainly facilitate the identification and reporting of abuse that is already occurring, but they seem to have very little bearing on whether a substance-abusing parent neglects their child behind closed doors, or whether a sexual offender chooses to abuse a child when they have the opportunity to do so in secret."''</blockquote>		<blockquote>The answer, suggests the report by New Philanthropy Capital (NPC), is not a lot. Campaigning to change public attitudes and keep abuse on the radar, as NSPCC does with some success, has its place, but there is zero evidence that this leads to fewer beatings. The logic behind Full Stop, it argues, is flawed and naive: "Improved attitudes to abuse can certainly facilitate the identification and reporting of abuse that is already occurring, but they seem to have very little bearing on whether a substance-abusing parent neglects their child behind closed doors, or whether a sexual offender chooses to abuse a child when they have the opportunity to do so in secret." <p>—Patrick Butler, <cite>Full stop missing on child abuse</cite></p></blockquote>

	The charity has also faced criticism for its obsession with publicity and advertising, for fearmongering<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,3890641,00.html Guardian: Criticism of fearmongering]</ref><ref>[http://www.sirc.org/media/mediaaugust1399.html SIRC - Advertising criticism]</ref> and fabricating or exaggerating facts and figures in its research. In an article in Spiked Magazine, [[Frank Furedi]] professor of sociology at the University of Kent, branded it a <ref>[https://www.spiked-online.com/2004/01/19/a-danger-to-the-nations-children/ Frank Furedi]</ref> ''"lobby group devoted to publicising its peculiar brand of anti-parent propaganda and promoting itself."'' NSPCC wages are most certainly excessive for a charity - matching those of civil servants in most cases. For example, in 2008 (Guardian), a Campaigns Development Adviser could expect to earn up to £40k pa and graduates entered at £16-18k pa (Hobsons, 2008).		The charity has also faced criticism for its obsession with publicity and advertising, for fearmongering<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,3890641,00.html Guardian: Criticism of fearmongering]</ref><ref>[http://www.sirc.org/media/mediaaugust1399.html SIRC - Advertising criticism]</ref> and fabricating or exaggerating facts and figures in its research. In an article in Spiked Magazine, [[Frank Furedi]] professor of sociology at the University of Kent, branded it a <ref>[https://www.spiked-online.com/2004/01/19/a-danger-to-the-nations-children/ Frank Furedi]</ref> ''"lobby group devoted to publicising its peculiar brand of anti-parent propaganda and promoting itself."'' NSPCC wages are most certainly excessive for a charity - matching those of civil servants in most cases. For example, in 2008 (Guardian), a Campaigns Development Adviser could expect to earn up to £40k pa and graduates entered at £16-18k pa (Hobsons, 2008).
Line 36:		Line 36:
	Further assimilation of NSPCC incentives on Child Pornography into UK law would lead to an expansion of the current ''thought crime'' agenda. For example, a NSPCC Policy Advisor, Zoe Hilton supported the closure of role-play websites in which it is possible for adults to play out adult-child sex fantasies (age-regression) without involving any actual minors:		Further assimilation of NSPCC incentives on Child Pornography into UK law would lead to an expansion of the current ''thought crime'' agenda. For example, a NSPCC Policy Advisor, Zoe Hilton supported the closure of role-play websites in which it is possible for adults to play out adult-child sex fantasies (age-regression) without involving any actual minors:

	<blockquote>''It is not OK to fantasise about this stuff. These kind of interactions need to be shut down.''<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100512042538/http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/20080641290719 Zoe Hilton - Age regression bigotry]</ref></blockquote>		<blockquote>It is not OK to fantasise about this stuff. These kind of interactions need to be shut down.<p>—Zoe Hilton, <cite>Paedophiles Target Virtual World<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100512042538/http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/20080641290719 Zoe Hilton - Age regression bigotry]</ref></cite></p></blockquote>

	[[Prostasia Foundation]] are one example of a "sex positive" child protectionist charity who have pled for donors to reconsider leaving large amounts of money in their will to the NSPCC, because of such positions.		[[Prostasia Foundation]] are one example of a "sex positive" child protectionist charity who have pled for donors to reconsider leaving large amounts of money in their will to the NSPCC, because of such positions.