Nettie Pollard - Revision history

Prue at 00:15, 11 May 2026

2026-05-11T00:15:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:15, 11 May 2026
Line 98:		Line 98:
	The British art curator and gay activist [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-barry-prothero-1313047.html Barry Prothero] - Nettie's colleague and fellow NCCL Gay Rights Officer - attended some of the PIE trial proceedings. He wrote to gay rights campaigners in Canada such as [[Gerald Hannon]] of the ''Body Politic'', and in correspondence named British diplomat [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hayman_(diplomat) Sir Peter Hayman] as the reason for a 'cover-up' by the British authorities. "It is clear that most of the evidence that was not used was dropped because Hayman [...] was the central figure in its production," he wrote, adding that "although assisting in a “cover-up” may be distasteful, not only the defendants but the entire gay movement in this country would be delighted if this one [i.e. cover-up] succeeded in order to keep the case out of court."<ref>See Moores (2017), Op. Cit. Pages 199-200.</ref>		The British art curator and gay activist [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-barry-prothero-1313047.html Barry Prothero] - Nettie's colleague and fellow NCCL Gay Rights Officer - attended some of the PIE trial proceedings. He wrote to gay rights campaigners in Canada such as [[Gerald Hannon]] of the ''Body Politic'', and in correspondence named British diplomat [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hayman_(diplomat) Sir Peter Hayman] as the reason for a 'cover-up' by the British authorities. "It is clear that most of the evidence that was not used was dropped because Hayman [...] was the central figure in its production," he wrote, adding that "although assisting in a “cover-up” may be distasteful, not only the defendants but the entire gay movement in this country would be delighted if this one [i.e. cover-up] succeeded in order to keep the case out of court."<ref>See Moores (2017), Op. Cit. Pages 199-200.</ref>

	During this period, two lawyers associated with the NCCL, Sir [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thornton_(judge) Peter Thornton]<ref>See his [https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/sir-peter-thornton-1 KCL University profile] which describes his extensive work and writings on civil liberties issues, noting that "As Chair of the National Council for Liberties and the Civil Liberties Trust, he lobbied Parliament over the ‘sus’ law, identification evidence, confessions and the right to public protest." For discussion, see [https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/mar/25/who-judges-the-judges ''Guardian'' article].</ref> and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Fulford Adrian Fulford] (later Lord Justice Fulford), the latter a member of the NCCL's Gay Rights Sub-Committee, defended members of PIE in court in the late 1970s and early 1980s ~~- though~~ not under NCCL auspices. According to Moores,		During this period, two lawyers associated with the NCCL, Sir [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thornton_(judge) Peter Thornton]<ref>See his [https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/sir-peter-thornton-1 KCL University profile] which describes his extensive work and writings on civil liberties issues, noting that "As Chair of the National Council for Liberties and the Civil Liberties Trust, he lobbied Parliament over the ‘sus’ law, identification evidence, confessions and the right to public protest." For discussion, see [https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/mar/25/who-judges-the-judges ''Guardian'' article].</ref> and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Fulford Adrian Fulford] (later Lord Justice Fulford), the latter a member of the NCCL's Gay Rights Sub-Committee, defended members of PIE in court.<ref>Note: These individuals defended PIE members in court during the late 1970s and early 1980s, but not under NCCL auspices.</ref> According to Moores,

	<blockquote>''The NCCL was also concerned about issues of employment and privacy for individuals who had not committed any crimes. The ‘exposure’ of paedophiles in the media was, to its Gay Rights Sub Committee, very worrying. In particular, it expressed concern about the way in which a group of men, who had not been convicted or charged for offences, were described in the Sunday People exposure of PAL as the ‘Vilest Men in Britain’. The Gay Rights Sub-Committee supported [[Tom O'Carroll]] when he was sacked from his post as Press Officer at the Open University (over which he was also defended by the National Union of Journalists and the Association of University Teachers, who feared that the case might set precedents for dismissing those with [[Communism\|‘Marxist views’]])". [...] Pollard and those on her sub-committee closely monitored attempts to prosecute PIE leaders [... and were] especially anxious about the charge of ‘conspiracy to corrupt public morals’. PIE members were charged on conspiracy, obscenity and postal offences; it is worth remembering that at the time no offences against children were raised and no evidence was produced that demonstrated that an adult met a child through PIE.'' (p. 198).</blockquote>		<blockquote>''The NCCL was also concerned about issues of employment and privacy for individuals who had not committed any crimes. The ‘exposure’ of paedophiles in the media was, to its Gay Rights Sub Committee, very worrying. In particular, it expressed concern about the way in which a group of men, who had not been convicted or charged for offences, were described in the Sunday People exposure of PAL as the ‘Vilest Men in Britain’. The Gay Rights Sub-Committee supported [[Tom O'Carroll]] when he was sacked from his post as Press Officer at the Open University (over which he was also defended by the National Union of Journalists and the Association of University Teachers, who feared that the case might set precedents for dismissing those with [[Communism\|‘Marxist views’]])". [...] Pollard and those on her sub-committee closely monitored attempts to prosecute PIE leaders [... and were] especially anxious about the charge of ‘conspiracy to corrupt public morals’. PIE members were charged on conspiracy, obscenity and postal offences; it is worth remembering that at the time no offences against children were raised and no evidence was produced that demonstrated that an adult met a child through PIE.'' (p. 198).</blockquote>

Prue at 00:12, 11 May 2026

2026-05-11T00:12:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:12, 11 May 2026
Line 98:		Line 98:
	The British art curator and gay activist [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-barry-prothero-1313047.html Barry Prothero] - Nettie's colleague and fellow NCCL Gay Rights Officer - attended some of the PIE trial proceedings. He wrote to gay rights campaigners in Canada such as [[Gerald Hannon]] of the ''Body Politic'', and in correspondence named British diplomat [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hayman_(diplomat) Sir Peter Hayman] as the reason for a 'cover-up' by the British authorities. "It is clear that most of the evidence that was not used was dropped because Hayman [...] was the central figure in its production," he wrote, adding that "although assisting in a “cover-up” may be distasteful, not only the defendants but the entire gay movement in this country would be delighted if this one [i.e. cover-up] succeeded in order to keep the case out of court."<ref>See Moores (2017), Op. Cit. Pages 199-200.</ref>		The British art curator and gay activist [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-barry-prothero-1313047.html Barry Prothero] - Nettie's colleague and fellow NCCL Gay Rights Officer - attended some of the PIE trial proceedings. He wrote to gay rights campaigners in Canada such as [[Gerald Hannon]] of the ''Body Politic'', and in correspondence named British diplomat [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hayman_(diplomat) Sir Peter Hayman] as the reason for a 'cover-up' by the British authorities. "It is clear that most of the evidence that was not used was dropped because Hayman [...] was the central figure in its production," he wrote, adding that "although assisting in a “cover-up” may be distasteful, not only the defendants but the entire gay movement in this country would be delighted if this one [i.e. cover-up] succeeded in order to keep the case out of court."<ref>See Moores (2017), Op. Cit. Pages 199-200.</ref>

	During this period, two lawyers associated with the NCCL, Sir Peter Thornton<ref>See his [https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/sir-peter-thornton-1 KCL University profile] which describes his extensive work and writings on civil liberties issues, noting that "As Chair of the National Council for Liberties and the Civil Liberties Trust, he lobbied Parliament over the ‘sus’ law, identification evidence, confessions and the right to public protest." For discussion, see [https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/mar/25/who-judges-the-judges ''Guardian'' article].</ref> and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Fulford Adrian Fulford] (later Lord Justice Fulford), the latter a member of the NCCL's Gay Rights Sub-Committee, defended members of PIE in court in the late 1970s and early 1980s - though not under NCCL auspices. According to Moores,		During this period, two lawyers associated with the NCCL, Sir [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thornton_(judge) Peter Thornton]<ref>See his [https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/sir-peter-thornton-1 KCL University profile] which describes his extensive work and writings on civil liberties issues, noting that "As Chair of the National Council for Liberties and the Civil Liberties Trust, he lobbied Parliament over the ‘sus’ law, identification evidence, confessions and the right to public protest." For discussion, see [https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/mar/25/who-judges-the-judges ''Guardian'' article].</ref> and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Fulford Adrian Fulford] (later Lord Justice Fulford), the latter a member of the NCCL's Gay Rights Sub-Committee, defended members of PIE in court in the late 1970s and early 1980s - though not under NCCL auspices. According to Moores,

	<blockquote>''The NCCL was also concerned about issues of employment and privacy for individuals who had not committed any crimes. The ‘exposure’ of paedophiles in the media was, to its Gay Rights Sub Committee, very worrying. In particular, it expressed concern about the way in which a group of men, who had not been convicted or charged for offences, were described in the Sunday People exposure of PAL as the ‘Vilest Men in Britain’. The Gay Rights Sub-Committee supported [[Tom O'Carroll]] when he was sacked from his post as Press Officer at the Open University (over which he was also defended by the National Union of Journalists and the Association of University Teachers, who feared that the case might set precedents for dismissing those with [[Communism\|‘Marxist views’]])". [...] Pollard and those on her sub-committee closely monitored attempts to prosecute PIE leaders [... and were] especially anxious about the charge of ‘conspiracy to corrupt public morals’. PIE members were charged on conspiracy, obscenity and postal offences; it is worth remembering that at the time no offences against children were raised and no evidence was produced that demonstrated that an adult met a child through PIE.'' (p. 198).</blockquote>		<blockquote>''The NCCL was also concerned about issues of employment and privacy for individuals who had not committed any crimes. The ‘exposure’ of paedophiles in the media was, to its Gay Rights Sub Committee, very worrying. In particular, it expressed concern about the way in which a group of men, who had not been convicted or charged for offences, were described in the Sunday People exposure of PAL as the ‘Vilest Men in Britain’. The Gay Rights Sub-Committee supported [[Tom O'Carroll]] when he was sacked from his post as Press Officer at the Open University (over which he was also defended by the National Union of Journalists and the Association of University Teachers, who feared that the case might set precedents for dismissing those with [[Communism\|‘Marxist views’]])". [...] Pollard and those on her sub-committee closely monitored attempts to prosecute PIE leaders [... and were] especially anxious about the charge of ‘conspiracy to corrupt public morals’. PIE members were charged on conspiracy, obscenity and postal offences; it is worth remembering that at the time no offences against children were raised and no evidence was produced that demonstrated that an adult met a child through PIE.'' (p. 198).</blockquote>

Prue: /* Feminists Against Censorship and Later Years */

2026-05-11T00:10:55Z

Feminists Against Censorship and Later Years

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:10, 11 May 2026
Line 122:		Line 122:
	She also joined the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_Homosexual_Equality Campaign for Homosexual Equality]'s executive committee in 2009, and campaigned for LGBT+ migrants and asylum seekers, including personally organizing finance and defense for several people whose chances of asylum were written off by others.		She also joined the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_Homosexual_Equality Campaign for Homosexual Equality]'s executive committee in 2009, and campaigned for LGBT+ migrants and asylum seekers, including personally organizing finance and defense for several people whose chances of asylum were written off by others.

	Nettie published her most overt perspective on [[MAP]] related issues, in a book chapter titled "The Small Matter of Children." Published in ''Bad Girls and Dirty Pictures: The Challenge to Reclaim Feminism'' (1993), edited by Alison Assiter and Avedon Carol<ref>Avedon Carol being Nettie's friend, the founder of Feminists Against Censorship, and co-author of "Changing Perceptions of the Feminist Debate" with Nettie in the same volume. See also, [https://grokipedia.com/page/avedon_carol Avedon Carol] - Grokpedia.</ref>, the book included contributions from [[Gayle Rubin]] and Tuppy Owens among others. For her part, Nettie argued that "The British [[Feminism\|feminist movement]] has never really addressed the issue of children's liberation."<ref>Nettie Pollard, 'The Small Matter of Children,' in ''Bad Girls and Dirty Pictures: The Challenge to Reclaim Feminism'', ed. by Alison Assiter and Avedon Carol (Boulder, Colorado: Pluto Press, 1993), pp. 105-111. [[https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.38401871.21 Jstor] link]. [[https://annas-archive.gl/md5/38138de0c0ef229d5cd9075b1661275a Annas Archive PDF] link].</ref> She criticized how the women's movement "would sometimes even cooperate with the most vicious arms of the patriarchal state." Raising the case of anti-'snuff film' campaigns, she wrote that:		Nettie published her most overt perspective on [[MAP]] related issues, in a book chapter titled "The Small Matter of Children." Published in ''Bad Girls and Dirty Pictures: The Challenge to Reclaim Feminism'' (1993), edited by Alison Assiter and Avedon Carol,<ref>Avedon Carol being Nettie's friend, the founder of Feminists Against Censorship, and co-author of "Changing Perceptions of the Feminist Debate" with Nettie in the same volume. See also, [https://grokipedia.com/page/avedon_carol Avedon Carol] - Grokpedia.</ref> the book included contributions from [[Gayle Rubin]] and Tuppy Owens among others. For her part, Nettie argued that "The British [[Feminism\|feminist movement]] has never really addressed the issue of children's liberation."<ref>Nettie Pollard, 'The Small Matter of Children,' in ''Bad Girls and Dirty Pictures: The Challenge to Reclaim Feminism'', ed. by Alison Assiter and Avedon Carol (Boulder, Colorado: Pluto Press, 1993), pp. 105-111. [[https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.38401871.21 Jstor] link]. [[https://annas-archive.gl/md5/38138de0c0ef229d5cd9075b1661275a Annas Archive PDF] link].</ref> She criticized how the women's movement "would sometimes even cooperate with the most vicious arms of the patriarchal state." Raising the case of anti-'snuff film' campaigns, she wrote that:

	<blockquote>''To date, no ‘snuff’ movie, (i.e. where actors are actually killed), has been discovered by police anywhere in the world. No bodies have ever been discovered, and ‘Operation Orchid’ seems to have disappeared, but fear and loathing have been implanted in women's minds.''</blockquote>		<blockquote>''To date, no ‘snuff’ movie, (i.e. where actors are actually killed), has been discovered by police anywhere in the world. No bodies have ever been discovered, and ‘Operation Orchid’ seems to have disappeared, but fear and loathing have been implanted in women's minds.''</blockquote>

Prue: /* PIE, CHE, and Youth Rights */

2026-05-11T00:09:01Z

PIE, CHE, and Youth Rights

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:09, 11 May 2026
Line 107:		Line 107:
	==PIE, CHE, and Youth Rights==		==PIE, CHE, and Youth Rights==

	Nettie Pollard played a leading role in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_Homosexual_Equality Campaign for Homosexual Equality], who voted to support PIE at their 1975 conference, and defended PIE's "right to speak and organize freely" at their 1983 conference. Earlier in 1974, the CHE made statements of solidarity with PIE at its annual conference, and included adverts for the group in its ''Bulletin''.		Nettie Pollard played a leading role in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_Homosexual_Equality Campaign for Homosexual Equality], who voted to support PIE at their 1975 conference, and defended PIE's right to speak and organize freely at their 1983 conference. Earlier in 1974, the CHE made statements of solidarity with PIE at its annual conference, and included adverts for the group in its ''Bulletin''.

	In May 1974, CHE's Working Party on Law Reform proposed lowering the age of consent to 16, or 12 in some legal cases. At the time 200-300 youth, mostly young men between 16-20 years old, were being prosecuted for consensual homosexual acts every year. After internal review, in 1973, the idea of twelve for age of consent was dropped. In 1977, CHE passed a resolution at its conference, "supported by the vast majority of delegates", which condemned press harassment of the [[Paedophile Information Exchange]].<ref>Source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_Homosexual_Equality Wikipedia].</ref>		In May 1974, CHE's Working Party on Law Reform proposed lowering the age of consent to 16, or 12 in some legal cases. At the time 200-300 youth, mostly young men between 16-20 years old, were being prosecuted for consensual homosexual acts every year. After internal review, in 1973, the idea of twelve for age of consent was dropped. In 1977, CHE passed a resolution at its conference, "supported by the vast majority of delegates", which condemned press harassment of the [[Paedophile Information Exchange]].<ref>Source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_Homosexual_Equality Wikipedia].</ref>

	CHE "urged caution in responding to PIE, noting ‘as victims of prejudice ourselves’ it was important to think about how wrong information and misconceptions ‘might prevent understanding’." (Moores, 2017, p. 207). ~~As late as~~ 1984, when PIE was in the process of winding up, the CHE continued to recognize that pedophiles still had rights and that it would not ‘disown’ the organization. (''Ibid''.).		CHE "urged caution in responding to PIE, noting ‘as victims of prejudice ourselves’ it was important to think about how wrong information and misconceptions ‘might prevent understanding’." (Moores, 2017, p. 207). In 1984, when PIE was in the process of winding up, the CHE continued to recognize that pedophiles still had rights and that it would not ‘disown’ the organization. (''Ibid''.).

	In 2010/2011, CHE's annual report shows they had two PIE members on their Executive Commitee – [[Barry Cutler]] & Nettie Pollard. The links between gay rights groups, PIE, and gay activists such as Nettie, have been explored in historian Lucy Robinson's book ''Gay Men and the Left in Post-War Britain: How the Personal Got Political'' (Manchester University Press, 2007).<ref>Robinson, L. (2007). [http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt155jf8t ''Gay men and the Left in post-war Britain: How the personal got political''] (Manchester University Press).</ref>		In 2010/2011, CHE's annual report shows they had two PIE members on their Executive Commitee – [[Barry Cutler]] & Nettie Pollard. The links between gay rights groups, PIE, and gay activists such as Nettie, have been explored in historian Lucy Robinson's book ''Gay Men and the Left in Post-War Britain: How the Personal Got Political'' (Manchester University Press, 2007).<ref>Robinson, L. (2007). [http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt155jf8t ''Gay men and the Left in post-war Britain: How the personal got political''] (Manchester University Press).</ref>

Prue at 00:06, 11 May 2026

2026-05-11T00:06:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:06, 11 May 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<div style="margin-right: 25px; float: left;">__TOC__</div>[[File:Nettie 01.clean.jpeg\|200px\|thumb\|Nettie Pollard in her later years, wearing her GLF badge.]]'''Janet (Nettie) Marian Mackenzie Pollard''' (6th September 1949 - 25th December 2025), known in life as '''Nettie Pollard''', was a pioneering British lesbian activist and civil rights campaigner. She is known primarily for her early involvement with the UK branch of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_Liberation_Front# Gay Liberation Front] (GLF, founded in 1970), her work with the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL, later [[wikipedia:Liberty_(advocacy_group)\|Liberty]]), and her involvement with the group [[wikipedia:Feminists_Against_Censorship\|Feminists Against Censorship]]. Nettie attended and helped to organize the UK's first Gay Pride March, which took place in London on the 1st of July, 1972.<ref>Alastair James, [https://www.attitude.co.uk/uncategorised/worlds-first-ever-pride-march-in-1972-remembered-by-gay-liberation-front-veterans-403931/ World's first-ever Pride march in 1972 remembered by Gay Liberation Front veterans] (''Attitude Magazine'', 24 July 2022); cf. Peter Scott-Presland's obituary for Nettie (cited below), which describes Nettie as a "planner" of the march.</ref>		<div style="margin-right: 25px; float: left;">__TOC__</div>[[File:Nettie 01.clean.jpeg\|200px\|thumb\|Nettie Pollard in her later years, wearing her GLF badge.]]'''Janet (Nettie) Marian Mackenzie Pollard''' (6th September 1949 - 25th December 2025), known in life as '''Nettie Pollard''', was a pioneering British lesbian activist and civil rights campaigner. She is known primarily for her early involvement with the UK branch of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_Liberation_Front# Gay Liberation Front] (GLF, founded in 1970), her work with the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL, later [[wikipedia:Liberty_(advocacy_group)\|Liberty]]), and her involvement with the group [[wikipedia:Feminists_Against_Censorship\|Feminists Against Censorship]]. Nettie attended and helped to organize the UK's first Gay Pride March, which took place in London on the 1st of July, 1972.<ref>Alastair James, [https://www.attitude.co.uk/uncategorised/worlds-first-ever-pride-march-in-1972-remembered-by-gay-liberation-front-veterans-403931/ World's first-ever Pride march in 1972 remembered by Gay Liberation Front veterans] (''Attitude Magazine'', 24 July 2022); cf. Peter Scott-Presland's obituary for Nettie (cited below), which describes Nettie as a "planner" of the march.</ref>

	[[Historical_examples_of_LGBT-MAP_unity\|Similar to many early gay and sexual liberation activists]] who had lived through a time where homosexuality was a "stigma symbol" - as Nettie's friend [[Ken Plummer]] (1973) put it - where to "be publicly known as a homosexual [was] to invite your employer to sack you, your parents to reject you, the law to imprison you, the doctor to cure you, the moralist to denounce you, [...] and the queer basher to kill you" (''Ibid''.).<ref>See [[Ken Plummer]], [https://kenplummer.com/2013/01/30/early-research-awareness-of-homosexuality/ "Awareness of Homosexuality"] (1973).</ref>, Nettie was sympathetic towards other sexual minorities including [[MAP]]s and transgender people.		[[Historical_examples_of_LGBT-MAP_unity\|Similar to many early gay and sexual liberation activists]] who had lived through a time where homosexuality was a "stigma symbol" - as Nettie's friend [[Ken Plummer]] (1973) put it - where to "be publicly known as a homosexual [was] to invite your employer to sack you, your parents to reject you, the law to imprison you, the doctor to cure you, the moralist to denounce you, [...] and the queer basher to kill you" (''Ibid''.),<ref>See [[Ken Plummer]], [https://kenplummer.com/2013/01/30/early-research-awareness-of-homosexuality/ "Awareness of Homosexuality"] (1973).</ref> Nettie was sympathetic towards other sexual minorities including [[MAP]]s and transgender people.

	==Early Life==		==Early Life==

Prue at 17:40, 30 April 2026

2026-04-30T17:40:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:40, 30 April 2026
Line 89:		Line 89:
	Nettie commented that NCCL's part in "the battle for gay rights is a long and often boring one." (''Ibid.'', p. 194).<ref>According to Moores (p. 194): "The Sub-Committees tasks included lobbying for copies of Gay News to be delivered to prisons, encouraging provincial newspapers to publish adverts for gay switchboards and offering legal advice on prosecutions of gay men. It advised those seeking to ‘come out’, and individuals experiencing everyday challenges of publicly identifying and being identified as homosexual. Advice aside, most attention was given to issues around homosexuality and employment; monitoring individual cases and employment tribunals of those who felt they had been dismissed because of their sexual preferences. [...] If the association with PIE was problematic, it is crucial to mention that the volume and tone of the majority of correspondence on gay rights that came into the NCCL’s office, many of which are moving accounts of those who felt they did not belong, are reminders about the profound and varied inequalities in place for homosexuals in contemporary Britain."</ref> Unlike the Women's Rights Sub-Committee, the Gay Rights Sub-Committee was more independent and sometimes detached from the rest of the organization.<ref>''Ibid''., p. 195. Quote: "The post of a gay rights officer was created following a targeted grant offered by a single wealthy individual to support the post. Those donating to the Sub-Committee often specified that money should be spent on gay rights work and not on the rest of the NCCL’s programme; it recruited its own volunteers, granting it a degree of autonomy.250 Nettie Pollard’s salary as gay rights organizer was covered by specific grants to be directed towards gay rights work. In fact, the Sub Committee was considered an ‘unofficial body’, further reducing the oversight of the NCCL Executive and leadership."</ref> Whilst Nettie's job description covered ‘receptionist duties’, she also ran the organization's switchboard, generated most of		Nettie commented that NCCL's part in "the battle for gay rights is a long and often boring one." (''Ibid.'', p. 194).<ref>According to Moores (p. 194): "The Sub-Committees tasks included lobbying for copies of Gay News to be delivered to prisons, encouraging provincial newspapers to publish adverts for gay switchboards and offering legal advice on prosecutions of gay men. It advised those seeking to ‘come out’, and individuals experiencing everyday challenges of publicly identifying and being identified as homosexual. Advice aside, most attention was given to issues around homosexuality and employment; monitoring individual cases and employment tribunals of those who felt they had been dismissed because of their sexual preferences. [...] If the association with PIE was problematic, it is crucial to mention that the volume and tone of the majority of correspondence on gay rights that came into the NCCL’s office, many of which are moving accounts of those who felt they did not belong, are reminders about the profound and varied inequalities in place for homosexuals in contemporary Britain."</ref> Unlike the Women's Rights Sub-Committee, the Gay Rights Sub-Committee was more independent and sometimes detached from the rest of the organization.<ref>''Ibid''., p. 195. Quote: "The post of a gay rights officer was created following a targeted grant offered by a single wealthy individual to support the post. Those donating to the Sub-Committee often specified that money should be spent on gay rights work and not on the rest of the NCCL’s programme; it recruited its own volunteers, granting it a degree of autonomy.250 Nettie Pollard’s salary as gay rights organizer was covered by specific grants to be directed towards gay rights work. In fact, the Sub Committee was considered an ‘unofficial body’, further reducing the oversight of the NCCL Executive and leadership."</ref> Whilst Nettie's job description covered ‘receptionist duties’, she also ran the organization's switchboard, generated most of
	the Sub-Committee's paperwork, and was well-versed in legal issues relating to homosexuality (''Ibid.'').<ref>As Moores put it, "She connected her own politics and career choice with a wide and long-standing interest in civil rights. Seeing the world from such a perspective meant that Pollard was able to find continuities between less controversial issues typical of the NCCL's work, such as [...] supporting those discriminated against at work, and helping transsexuals forced into guilty pleas for soliciting, with the type of legal challenge raised by PAL and [[PIE]]." p. 195.</ref>		the Sub-Committee's paperwork, and was well-versed in legal issues relating to homosexuality (''Ibid.'').<ref>As Moores put it, "She connected her own politics and career choice with a wide and long-standing interest in civil rights. Seeing the world from such a perspective meant that Pollard was able to find continuities between less controversial issues typical of the NCCL's work, such as [...] supporting those discriminated against at work, and helping transsexuals forced into guilty pleas for soliciting, with the type of legal challenge raised by PAL and [[PIE]]." p. 195.</ref>
			[[File:559396947-460578928-Nettie 05.jpg\|300px\|thumb\|right\|Nettie at the 50th anniversary of the GLF, London UK.]]
	Since the [[age of consent]] for male sexual intercourse was 21 at the time but 16 for heterosexuals, it was widely argued that the age should be reduced to 16 for both sexes.<ref>Moores, p. 196: "With the age of consent for male homosexuality in England and Wales so markedly out of sync with that for heterosexual intercourse, the GLF was particularly interested in the subject which was typically used to demonstrate the continuing patterns of inequality and discrimination in the sexual sphere. As conservative moral crusaders focussed on paedophilia in their efforts to preserve the unequal age of consent, certain groups saw the issue as the ‘next front’ in a longer-term battle against prejudice and in support of sexual liberation."</ref> This legal disparity, in addition to homosexuality still being highly stigmatized as "sinful," "unnatural," or a symptom of disease / mental illness, meant that teiliophilic homosexuals were more likely to criticize age of consent laws and support other non-normative sexual attractions and practices. Historians such as [[Rachel Hope Cleves]] have explained this phenomenon with reference to [[Gayle Rubin]]'s theory of the "Charmed Circle," where the boundaries of accepted sexual expression were once "so narrow that those who were cast outside its limits shared common ground."<ref>Rachel Hope Cleves, ''Unspeakable: A Life Beyond Sexual Morality'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2020), p. 13.</ref> "Identity categories that are distant from each other today — like loose women, lesbians, and [[Pederasty\|pederasts]] — were more proximate when they were all outside the charmed circle."<ref>"[[Pederasty]]," Cleves wrote, "was less taboo before the 1950s, in effect, because so many other behaviors were disreputable as well. Pederasty was less distinct from other types of sexual non-conformity." (''Ibid.'').</ref> Because teiliophilic homosexuality was so taboo during Nettie's era, gay rights campaigners had what Moores (2017) calls "shared interests" in criticizing the [[age of consent]] and defending the civil liberties of other sexual minorities; i.e., "Pollard became sympathetic to PIE's endeavors." (p. 196)...		Since the [[age of consent]] for male sexual intercourse was 21 at the time but 16 for heterosexuals, it was widely argued that the age should be reduced to 16 for both sexes.<ref>Moores, p. 196: "With the age of consent for male homosexuality in England and Wales so markedly out of sync with that for heterosexual intercourse, the GLF was particularly interested in the subject which was typically used to demonstrate the continuing patterns of inequality and discrimination in the sexual sphere. As conservative moral crusaders focussed on paedophilia in their efforts to preserve the unequal age of consent, certain groups saw the issue as the ‘next front’ in a longer-term battle against prejudice and in support of sexual liberation."</ref> This legal disparity, in addition to homosexuality still being highly stigmatized as "sinful," "unnatural," or a symptom of disease / mental illness, meant that teiliophilic homosexuals were more likely to criticize age of consent laws and support other non-normative sexual attractions and practices. Historians such as [[Rachel Hope Cleves]] have explained this phenomenon with reference to [[Gayle Rubin]]'s theory of the "Charmed Circle," where the boundaries of accepted sexual expression were once "so narrow that those who were cast outside its limits shared common ground."<ref>Rachel Hope Cleves, ''Unspeakable: A Life Beyond Sexual Morality'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2020), p. 13.</ref> "Identity categories that are distant from each other today — like loose women, lesbians, and [[Pederasty\|pederasts]] — were more proximate when they were all outside the charmed circle."<ref>"[[Pederasty]]," Cleves wrote, "was less taboo before the 1950s, in effect, because so many other behaviors were disreputable as well. Pederasty was less distinct from other types of sexual non-conformity." (''Ibid.'').</ref> Because teiliophilic homosexuality was so taboo during Nettie's era, gay rights campaigners had what Moores (2017) calls "shared interests" in criticizing the [[age of consent]] and defending the civil liberties of other sexual minorities; i.e., "Pollard became sympathetic to PIE's endeavors." (p. 196)...
	[[File:Gayle Rubin's charmed circle.png\|200px\|thumb\|left\|Gayle Rubin's "Charmed Circle"]]		[[File:Gayle Rubin's charmed circle.png\|200px\|thumb\|left\|Gayle Rubin's "Charmed Circle"]]

Prue: /* Civil Liberties Activism, the NCCL and PIE */

2026-04-30T13:01:48Z

Civil Liberties Activism, the NCCL and PIE

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:01, 30 April 2026
Line 77:		Line 77:
	Presland wrote that, "In the wake of partial decriminalization of sex between men, there was much discussion about the anomalies which remained. In April 1976, NCCL adopted proposals for an age of consent of 14, which it submitted to the Criminal Law Revision Commission. When NCCL disavowed this several years later, Nettie became something of a scapegoat and was doorstepped viciously as an alleged "paedophile apologist" at home by the News of the World while her partner was dying of cancer upstairs."<ref>Presland obituary. Op. cit. Scare quotes on "paedophile apologist" added by Newgon editors.</ref>		Presland wrote that, "In the wake of partial decriminalization of sex between men, there was much discussion about the anomalies which remained. In April 1976, NCCL adopted proposals for an age of consent of 14, which it submitted to the Criminal Law Revision Commission. When NCCL disavowed this several years later, Nettie became something of a scapegoat and was doorstepped viciously as an alleged "paedophile apologist" at home by the News of the World while her partner was dying of cancer upstairs."<ref>Presland obituary. Op. cit. Scare quotes on "paedophile apologist" added by Newgon editors.</ref>
	[[File:1975Guardian.png\|thumb\|26th August 1975: Child-lovers win fight for role in Gay Lib (The Guardian)]]		[[File:1975Guardian.png\|thumb\|26th August 1975: Child-lovers win fight for role in Gay Lib (The Guardian)]]
	Prior to the 1970s, "paedophilia" had been an obscure category originating from psychiatry. The historian Nicholas Basannavar has argued that the term only began to enter mass consciousness after intense media coverage around Paedophile Action for Liberation (PAL), and its successor the Paedophile Information Exchange ([[PIE]]).<ref>See [https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/40384/1/FINAL%20SUBMISSION%20-%20Nick%20Basannavar.pdf Basannavar, Nicholas Ranjan Gadsby. (2019). Speaking about speaking about child sexual abuse in Britain, 1965-1991. [Thesis<nowiki>]</nowiki>]</ref> In the late 1970s and early 80s, gay groups consolidated to present a more 'respectable' image in the wake of the AIDS crisis and a conservative backlash to the past decade.<ref>See [[Steven Angelides]], ''The Fear of Child Sexuality'' (2019); See also, the work of [[Gert Hekma]] and [[Philip Jenkins]].</ref> Before the 1980s, critical thinking around [[pedophilia]] and age-gap sex had been more common and socially acceptable to express. In 1976, for example, in a submission to the Criminal Law Revision Committee of the British Parliament, the NCCL argued that "Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult [[Research:_Prevalence_of_Harm_and_Negative_Outcomes\|result in no identifiable damage]]... The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage". The NCCL argued that the "onus of proof [was] on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed," rather than having a blanket ban on [[child pornography]], and advocated the decriminalization of [[Research:_Double-Taboo_CSA\|incest]].<ref>Mason, Rowena. [https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/24/harriet-harman-daily-mail-paedophile-campaign-allegations "Harriet Harman rejects allegations of 1970s link to paedophile campaign"]. ''The Guardian'', Feb 2014.</ref>		Prior to the 1970s, "paedophilia" had been an obscure category originating from psychiatry. The historian Nicholas Basannavar has argued that the term only began to enter mass consciousness after intense media coverage around Paedophile Action for Liberation (PAL), and its successor the [[Paedophile Information Exchange]] (PIE).<ref>See [https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/40384/1/FINAL%20SUBMISSION%20-%20Nick%20Basannavar.pdf Basannavar, Nicholas Ranjan Gadsby. (2019). Speaking about speaking about child sexual abuse in Britain, 1965-1991. [Thesis<nowiki>]</nowiki>]</ref> In the late 1970s and early 80s, gay groups consolidated to present a more 'respectable' image in the wake of the AIDS crisis and a conservative backlash to the past decade.<ref>See [[Steven Angelides]], ''The Fear of Child Sexuality'' (2019); See also, the work of [[Gert Hekma]] and [[Philip Jenkins]].</ref> Before the 1980s, critical thinking around [[pedophilia]] and age-gap sex had been more common and socially acceptable to express. In 1976, for example, in a submission to the Criminal Law Revision Committee of the British Parliament, the NCCL argued that "Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult [[Research:_Prevalence_of_Harm_and_Negative_Outcomes\|result in no identifiable damage]]... The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage". The NCCL argued that the "onus of proof [was] on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed," rather than having a blanket ban on [[child pornography]], and advocated the decriminalization of [[Research:_Double-Taboo_CSA\|incest]].<ref>Mason, Rowena. [https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/24/harriet-harman-daily-mail-paedophile-campaign-allegations "Harriet Harman rejects allegations of 1970s link to paedophile campaign"]. ''The Guardian'', Feb 2014.</ref>

	According to British academic Christopher Moores (2017), "Pollard provided the main link between the NCCL and PIE."<ref>Christopher Moores, ''Civil liberties and Human Rights in Twentieth-Century Britain'' (Cambridge University Press, 2017), p. 195. [[https://annas-archive.gl/md5/22436a9783116d53bf7ab8527bea913f Annas Archive PDF link]].</ref> "She aligned paedophile rights with a broader politics of sexual liberation," wrote Moores, "picking up on developing arguments that sexual values and ages of consent [...] were culturally and socially constructed, rather than biologically determined." (''Ibid''., pp. 195-196).		According to British academic Christopher Moores (2017), "Pollard provided the main link between the NCCL and PIE."<ref>Christopher Moores, ''Civil liberties and Human Rights in Twentieth-Century Britain'' (Cambridge University Press, 2017), p. 195. [[https://annas-archive.gl/md5/22436a9783116d53bf7ab8527bea913f Annas Archive PDF link]].</ref> "She aligned paedophile rights with a broader politics of sexual liberation," wrote Moores, "picking up on developing arguments that sexual values and ages of consent [...] were culturally and socially constructed, rather than biologically determined." (''Ibid''., pp. 195-196).

Prue at 12:47, 30 April 2026

2026-04-30T12:47:56Z

Show changes

Prue: /* Feminists Against Censorship and Later Years */

2026-04-30T00:45:43Z

Feminists Against Censorship and Later Years

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:45, 30 April 2026
Line 132:		Line 132:
	She concludes:		She concludes:
	<blockquote>		<blockquote>
	''Creating an atmosphere in which sex is understood to be so acceptable in a non-violent, non-coercive, mutual environment does not teach children to accept brutal assaults; ignorance supported by scare tactics does not arm children against exploitative adults. Yet, in this over-protective and paternalistic time, scare tactics have become our sole means of ‘protecting’ children. We accept attacks on gays or on the porn industry because we have been conned into believing that somehow suppressing sexual adventure and deviance will automatically — illogically — provide some safety for children. It won't.''		''Creating an atmosphere in which sex is understood to be acceptable in a non-violent, non-coercive, mutual environment does not teach children to accept brutal assaults; ignorance supported by scare tactics does not arm children against exploitative adults. Yet, in this over-protective and paternalistic time, scare tactics have become our sole means of ‘protecting’ children. We accept attacks on gays or on the porn industry because we have been conned into believing that somehow suppressing sexual adventure and deviance will automatically — illogically — provide some safety for children. It won't.''

	''Yet merely eliminating harmful age of consent laws will not be sufficient to make children safe and free. To achieve this, children need social and economic power, as well as respect, in every sphere of life, for their needs and desires. Children must be taught as early as possible that their opinions matter, that their experience is valid, and that their bodies are their own possessions, that they can defend themselves against psychological, economic and physical abuses. Just as women couldn’t be autonomous while they were virtually owned by their husbands – we couldn’t own our own money, and it was entirely legal for husbands to beat and rape us – so children are left dependent and victimized by the present situation. Until children have economic power and the right to make their own decisions about choices ranging from schools, clothes and food to friendships and sexuality, children, like women, will not have sexual autonomy.''		''Yet merely eliminating harmful age of consent laws will not be sufficient to make children safe and free. To achieve this, children need social and economic power, as well as respect, in every sphere of life, for their needs and desires. Children must be taught as early as possible that their opinions matter, that their experience is valid, and that their bodies are their own possessions, that they can defend themselves against psychological, economic and physical abuses. Just as women couldn’t be autonomous while they were virtually owned by their husbands – we couldn’t own our own money, and it was entirely legal for husbands to beat and rape us – so children are left dependent and victimized by the present situation. Until children have economic power and the right to make their own decisions about choices ranging from schools, clothes and food to friendships and sexuality, children, like women, will not have sexual autonomy.''

Prue: /* Feminists Against Censorship and Later Years */

2026-04-30T00:45:08Z

Feminists Against Censorship and Later Years

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:45, 30 April 2026
Line 122:		Line 122:
	She also joined the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_Homosexual_Equality Campaign for Homosexual Equality]'s executive committee in 2009, and campaigned for LGBT+ migrants and asylum seekers, including personally organizing finance and defense for several people whose chances of asylum were written off by others.		She also joined the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_Homosexual_Equality Campaign for Homosexual Equality]'s executive committee in 2009, and campaigned for LGBT+ migrants and asylum seekers, including personally organizing finance and defense for several people whose chances of asylum were written off by others.

	Nettie published her most overt perspective on [[MAP]] related issues, in a book chapter titled "The Small Matter of Children." Published in ''Bad Girls and Dirty Pictures: The Challenge to Reclaim Feminism'' (1993), edited by Alison Assiter and Avedon Carol<ref>Avedon Carol being Nettie's friend, the founder of Feminists Against Censorship, and co-author of "Changing Perceptions of the Feminist Debate" with Nettie in the same volume. See also, [https://grokipedia.com/page/avedon_carol Avedon Carol] - Grokpedia.</ref> with contributions from [[Gayle Rubin]] and Tuppy Owens, Nettie argued that "The British [[Feminism\|feminist movement]] has never really addressed the issue of children’s liberation."<ref>Nettie Pollard, 'The Small Matter of Children,' in ''Bad Girls and Dirty Pictures: The Challenge to Reclaim Feminism'', ed. by Alison Assiter and Avedon Carol (Boulder, Colorado: Pluto Press, 1993), pp. 105-111. [[https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.38401871.21 Jstor] link]. [[https://annas-archive.gl/md5/38138de0c0ef229d5cd9075b1661275a Annas Archive PDF] link].</ref> Nettie criticized how the women's movement "would sometimes even cooperate with the most vicious arms of the patriarchal state"~~; raising~~ the case of anti-'snuff film' campaigns, she argued that:		Nettie published her most overt perspective on [[MAP]] related issues, in a book chapter titled "The Small Matter of Children." Published in ''Bad Girls and Dirty Pictures: The Challenge to Reclaim Feminism'' (1993), edited by Alison Assiter and Avedon Carol<ref>Avedon Carol being Nettie's friend, the founder of Feminists Against Censorship, and co-author of "Changing Perceptions of the Feminist Debate" with Nettie in the same volume. See also, [https://grokipedia.com/page/avedon_carol Avedon Carol] - Grokpedia.</ref> with contributions from [[Gayle Rubin]] and Tuppy Owens, Nettie argued that "The British [[Feminism\|feminist movement]] has never really addressed the issue of children’s liberation."<ref>Nettie Pollard, 'The Small Matter of Children,' in ''Bad Girls and Dirty Pictures: The Challenge to Reclaim Feminism'', ed. by Alison Assiter and Avedon Carol (Boulder, Colorado: Pluto Press, 1993), pp. 105-111. [[https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.38401871.21 Jstor] link]. [[https://annas-archive.gl/md5/38138de0c0ef229d5cd9075b1661275a Annas Archive PDF] link].</ref> Nettie criticized how the women's movement "would sometimes even cooperate with the most vicious arms of the patriarchal state." Raising the case of anti-'snuff film' campaigns, she argued that:

	<blockquote>''To date, no ‘snuff’ movie, (i.e. where actors are actually killed), has been discovered by police anywhere in the world. No bodies have ever been discovered, and ‘Operation Orchid’ seems to have disappeared, but fear and loathing have been implanted in women's minds.''</blockquote>		<blockquote>''To date, no ‘snuff’ movie, (i.e. where actors are actually killed), has been discovered by police anywhere in the world. No bodies have ever been discovered, and ‘Operation Orchid’ seems to have disappeared, but fear and loathing have been implanted in women's minds.''</blockquote>