A Brief History of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE)

Does History Repeat Itself? A Brief History of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE)

What do you know about Paedophile Information Exchange P.I.E? – A very brief History:

Introduction

What do you know about P.I.E? Does history repeat itself…..? Let’s go back in time! The Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) remains one of the most controversial organisations in modern British history, emblematic of the turbulent sexual politics of the 1970s. Founded amid the broader sexual revolution and movements for gay equality, PIE openly advocated for the normalization of sexual relationships between adults and children, framing it as a matter of “children’s sexuality” and “children’s sexual rights.” This group, which operated legally for a decade, sought to lower or abolish the age of consent, arguing that children could consent to and benefit from such interactions. While PIE’s views were met with widespread hostility, its existence highlights a period of radical social experimentation following post-war liberation, where boundaries around sexuality were being fiercely debated. This article expands on the video’s archival interview clip; featuring a discussion on paedophilia, maturity, and consent, involving Keith Hose, a former chairman of PIE, while incorporating additional historical details from provided text, including attitudes to consent, key players in the sexual revolution, and modern echoes.

Post-War Liberation and the Sexual Revolution

Image

Some of the Players: The revolution included works by Dr John Money, Dr Alfred Kinsey & colleagues, the creator of WPATH Dr Harry Benjamin and philosopher Michel Foucault. The point? Some key elements of these ideologies was to blur, change and remove boundaries, previously established between adults and children. To assert we are all born as sexualised creatures.

The Left had it all! “It was an extraordinarily liberal period,” said Harry Fletcher, a criminal justice expert who at the time was a senior social worker. “The abortion laws had come in and capital punishment had been abolished.” People were pushing at every boundary, sexual, moral, legal.

Image

Post World War II more “liberating” movements took a foothold. Many socialist movements or movements borne from re-shaping society began a “sexual revolution.” The 1950s and 1960s saw a push for personal freedoms, including the decriminalisation of homosexuality in England and Wales via the Sexual Offences Act of 1967. This era of “sexual revolution” challenged traditional norms, with movements advocating for women’s rights, gay equality, and broader sexual liberation. The abolition of the death penalty in 1965 symbolised a shift toward more humane societal attitudes, even as horrific crimes like the Moors murders (1963–1965), in which Ian Brady and Myra Hindley killed five children, underscored public fears about child safety and perpetuated mistrust and prejudice.

Image

In this climate, discussions around consent and age became politicised. The age of consent for heterosexual acts was 16, but for homosexual acts, it remained 21 until 1994, fuelling campaigns for parity. PIE exploited this momentum, presenting itself as an extension of these liberation efforts rather than a group promoting child exploitation. As one contemporary observer noted, the 1970s were marked by a “loose trendiness” where groups with “liberation” in their name often received uncritical support from progressive circles. There was still prejudice and inequality. The age of consent was 16 for heterosexuals but 21 for homosexual men. It wasn’t until In 1994, the age of consent was reduced to 18. It was reduced to 16 in 2001 in the UK and 2008 in Northern Ireland. Bad timing for legalising homosexuality! “There were those who claimed that sexual relationships between adults and children could be harmless.” Homosexuality had only been decriminalised in 1967. This was only two years after “The Moors Murders”. Horrifying Murders! The Moors murders were carried out by Ian Brady and Myra Hindley between July 1963 and October 1965. This shocked the nation as a woman had conspired with a man to murder children, including boys. Perpetuating mistrust and prejudice. No Death Penalty! In terms of timing – and public outrage at the time Brady & Hindley escaped the death penalty. In 1965 Parliament passed a law suspending the death penalty across Great Britain.

Attitudes to Consent

Attitudes to consent! The age of consent was changed in 1875, raising the age from 10 to 12. It was in 1885, however, that the most significant change took place. Public interest in child protection drove the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act, raising the age to 16 and criminal acts of a higher severity for those 13 and under.

Periodically, the age of sexual consent comes under scrutiny from policy makers, though the sensitive nature of this topic makes it extremely controversial. In 2013 a cited Home Office report recommended lowering the age of consent in line with lower ages of puberty. The report suggested that ‘sexual behaviour with a girl over the age of 13 (the average age of puberty) is not criminal, provided that she was clearly as aware of what she was doing.’ The report was written in 1979, and is bound up with numerous concerns about the influence of Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE).

Image

The Prime Minister at the time, David Cameron thankfully rejected calls to lower the age of sexual consent with no public debate, claiming that the age of 16 was in place to protect children. This was despite calls from Human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell. Peter Tatchell argued that: “the existing age of consent at 16 law was introduced over 100 years ago in a puritanical Victorian era. Since then, society has moved on to more informed and enlightened attitudes about sex. Most importantly, the average age of puberty and sexual arousal has fallen dramatically to around 10 to 11. In the light of new evidence, the issue should be revisited and re-examined.”

The Creation of PIE

PIE was formed in 1974. It campaigned for “children’s sexuality”. It wanted the government to axe or lower the age of consent. It offered support to adults “in legal difficulties concerning sexual acts with consenting ‘under age’ partners”. PIE was founded in October 1974 in Edinburgh as a special interest group within the Scottish Minorities Group (later the Scottish Homosexual Rights Group) by Michael Hanson, a gay student, and co-founder Ian Dunn. Its inaugural meeting occurred in March 1975. Due to most inquiries coming from England, the group relocated to London that year, with 23-year-old Keith Hose becoming chairman. PIE’s membership peaked at around 200, and it published a newsletter called MagPIE, which included articles, contact ads, and advocacy pieces.

The group’s core aim was to “alleviate the suffering” of paedophiles and children by abolishing age-of-consent laws, proposing reductions as low as four years old or none at all. They argued that children were capable of consent and that societal repression harmed both parties. In a 1970s interview excerpted in the video (a short clip: John Tusa interviews two members of the Paedophile Information Exchange on Newsnight in 1983), a PIE representative (Hose) articulated this view:

“I feel that PIE is not a procurement agency for children, never has been and never will be. Our political objectives include developing a society where children are given a much higher status than today, where they are recognised as individuals in their own right and this includes recognising their right to certain sexual freedoms whilst protecting them from the kind of criminal assaults…”

This rhetoric framed paedophilia as a mutual, reciprocal relationship rather than exploitation, rejecting concepts of maturity as adult-imposed barriers. The interviewee further claimed: “Paedophiles do not exploit children… It’s an entirely reciprocal relationship,” emphasising that children could recognise pleasure and consent.

The brazenness could be shocking. Keith Hose, one of PIE’s leaders during the 1970s, was quoted by a newspaper saying: “I am a paedophile. I am attracted to boys from about 10, 11, and 12 years of age. I may have had sexual relations with children, but it would be unwise to say.”

Links to MPs and Support from the Left

The Paedophile Information Exchange was affiliated to the National Council for Civil Liberties; now Liberty, in the late 1970s and early 1980s. PIE strategically aligned itself with several left-wing and civil liberties organisations. In 1975, it affiliated with the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL, now Liberty), paying a £15 subscription fee. This connection allowed PIE to gain legitimacy, with NCCL’s annual meeting in 1978 passing a motion supporting PIE’s right to speak. Labour politicians Harriet Harman (legal officer), Jack Dromey and Patricia Hewitt (NCCL general secretary) have come under fire for the NCCL’s links to PIE, later described this affiliation as naïve, stemming from a broader push against outdated laws on homosexuality and other issues.

Image

PIE also collaborated with the Albany Trust, a sexual counselling charity, on a proposed pamphlet to educate the public about paedophilia and dispel myths. Meetings in 1976 involved psychiatrists and PIE members, but the project was abandoned in 1977 due to controversy. The Campaign for Homosexual Equality (CHE) passed motions condemning media “harassment” of PIE, though many members opposed the link. PIE’s manipulation of audiences, presenting itself as a counselling group rather than an advocacy for adult-child sex, helped it infiltrate these spaces. Meetings in 1976 involved psychiatrists and PIE members, but the project was abandoned in 1977 due to controversy.

Many on the left thought that criminalising sexual behaviour between consenting teenagers was misguided and wanted it lowered to 14. A proposal was endorsed by the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL)’s executive committee.

The True Aim! The real aim was to normalise sex with children!

Excuses from the Left! Some have suggested that the nature of the debate was different then. “In this free-for-all anything and everything was open for discussion,” said Canon Angela Tilby on Radio 4’s Thought for the Day. The Left didn’t back down: But the NCCL continued to defend having PIE as a member. As late as September 1983, an NCCL officer was quoted in the Daily Mail saying the group was campaigning to lower the age of consent to 14.

How They Took Off: Tactics and Infiltration

With backing from the left and the recent decriminalisation of homosexuality. A gay rights conference backed a motion in favour of paedophilia. The story is written up by a national newspaper as “Child-lovers win fight for role in Gay Lib”. Sheffield 1975: It sounds like a nightmarish plotline from dystopian fiction. But this happened in the UK. The conference took place in Sheffield and the newspaper was the Guardian. The year was 1975.

Journalist Christian Wolmar remembers their tactics. “They didn’t emphasise that this was 50-year-old men wanting to have sex with five-year-olds. They presented it as the sexual liberation of children, that children should have the right to sex,” he says. In 1976 he began working for Release, an agency helping people with drug and legal problems. Its office in London was a mailing address for PIE. Nobody knew much about them. Wolmar raised questions about PIE, it was decided to bring them in for a meeting. Wolmar’s colleagues pressed the man from PIE on the age of consent. Wolmar says that the man said there should be no age of consent. Shocked at the idea of a group advocating sex with babies, he and his colleagues unanimously decided to “boot them out”.

The use of Universities to Push the Agenda: Chilling, but PIE managed to gain support from some professional bodies and progressive groups. It received invitations from student unions, won sympathetic media coverage and found academics willing to push its message. Sound familiar?

Struggling to push their message! In a 1978 issue of Magpie, PIE’s in-house newspaper, records that O’Carroll had been invited to address students at Liverpool and Oxford University, but that the visits were cancelled after local opposition.

“Forced Teaming”: One of PIE’s key tactics was to try to conflate its cause with gay rights. On at least two occasions the Campaign for Homosexual Equality conference passed motions in PIE’s favour. Hmmm…another familiar tactic!

Nothing to do with us! The majority of gay people were horrified by any conflation of homosexuality and a sexual interest in children! But PIE used the idea of “sexual liberation” to win over some of the more radical elements.

Not wanting to appear “uncool”! “If there was anything with the word ‘liberation’ in the name you were automatically in favour of it if you were young and cool in the 1970s. It seemed like PIE had slipped through the net.

It was easy to join PIE: According to a Times legal report on a blackmail case from February 1977, there was no need for subterfuge, just an application and a cheque for £4. In the report, the prosecutor in the case stated: “He said on the form that he was a paedophile, male, married, 29 years old and attracted to girls between the ages of seven and 13 years.” The judge proclaimed himself “horrified” at the existence of PIE.

Pushback and Opposition

Pushback! PIE wasn’t tolerated by everyone during the 1970s. There was a lot of indignation about PIE, especially from women’s groups. Specifically mothers, who considered it to be outrageous!

Image

Opposition! The group’s visits to universities were often opposed. In 1977 PIE’s chairman Tom O’Carroll was ejected from a conference on “love and attraction” at University College, Swansea after lecturers “threatened not to deliver their papers if ‘Mr O’Carroll stayed’, the Times reported.

Image

When Peter Hain, then president of the Young Liberals, described paedophilia as “a wholly undesirable abnormality”, a fellow activist hit back. “It is sad that Peter has joined the hang ’em and flog ’em brigade. His views are not the views of most Young Liberals.” And when a columnist supported Hain in the Guardian he was inundated with mail from people, many willing to give their name, who defended sex with children. A Guardian article in 1977 noted with dismay how the group was growing. By its second birthday in October 1976, it had 200 members.

“Free Speech”: There was a battle raging over free speech. Some, such as philosopher Roger Scruton, felt that freedom of speech had to be sacrificed when it came to groups like PIE. In a Times piece in September 1983 he wrote: “Paedophiles must be prevented from ‘coming out’.”

A Times letter writer, Peter Cadogan, took a different line, defending PIE from the National Front despite loathing them. “the way to cover nasty people with nasty ideas is to give them all the rope they want and then hang them with it every time they practice what they preach”.

Public Backlash, Prosecutions, and Fall

Despite its efforts, PIE faced growing opposition. In 1977, founder Tom O’Carroll published Paedophilia: The Radical Case, which argued for acceptance but drew criticism. Prosecutions began in 1978, with members charged for obscenity related to MagPIE and contact ads. High-profile exposures, such as diplomat Sir Peter Hayman’s links to PIE in 1981, intensified scrutiny.

1980s, PIE came a cropper: Its notoriety grew in 1982 with the trial of Geoffrey Prime, who was both a KGB spy and a member of PIE. He was jailed for 32 years for passing on secrets from his job at GCHQ to the Soviet Union, and for a series of sex attacks on young girls.

Image

PIE critics Head teacher Charles Oxley, who infiltrated PIE, Mary Whitehouse and Geoffrey Dickens MP: In August 1983 a Scottish headmaster, Charles Oxley, handed over a dossier about PIE to Scotland Yard after infiltrating the group, the Glasgow Herald wrote. He said the group had about 1,000 members.

Image

The End of PIE: The authorities debated ways of shutting PIE down. O’Carroll was sentenced to two years in jail for “conspiracy to corrupt public morals” and PIE was disbanded in 1984. but did they really go away?

By 1983, further arrests for child pornography and incitement led to PIE’s diminishment. The group participated in the 1983 London Gay Pride march but was shut down by its leadership in July 1984. At least seven members were convicted of child-related offenses during or after its existence.

Legacy and Modern Reflections

PIE’s brief existence reflects a unique historical moment when radical ideas about sexuality briefly entered mainstream discourse, only to be rejected as awareness of child sexual abuse grew. Inquiries like the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) have examined PIE’s links to institutions, highlighting how it operated openly for so long.

NO – It Wasn’t The End of PIE: In 2020 LGBT-style slogans such as ‘#MAPPride’ and ‘#Mappositivity’, are seen as an attempt to cast paedophilia as part of society’s wider move towards sexual liberation. Material found online includes memes proclaiming ‘Gay MAPs are amazing’ and cartoon characters saying: ‘Repost if you think maps should be able to date minors.’

They Won’t Stop! Former chairman of PIE, Tom O’Carroll, Britain’s most notorious paedophile campaigner, continues to use online forums to argue for the legalisation of paedophilia. In one ‘interview’ which YouTube had refused to take down, O’Carroll, 75, argued that a sexual relationship between an adult and child is as natural as a mother’s relationship with her baby. Today, attempts to rebrand paedophilia (e.g., as “minor-attracted persons”) echo PIE’s tactics but face far greater condemnation. This history serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked radicalism in the name of liberation.

Image

Further information! Now this is a brief look at the history at the age of consent and how there have been attempts for decades to “normalise” paedophilia, in the name of liberation, with a focus on PIE. I have included in the description a few links with more information if you want to know more….. one thing is clear, We can’t stop preventing them – Ever, BUT WE CAN STAND AGAINST THEM!

References