Rotherham Child Rape Scandal

[Buzzer]

They are taking over from the Met as the most discredited police force in the country. Why aren't the British people as a populace angrier about the child abuse question in general? It seems that a significant section of the population don't want to hear about it and quite frankly that attitude is terrifying.

Oh I agree. We live in a country where people are angrier about fracking or fox-hunting than the incompetence of the authorities when dealing with child abuse.

 

[London Irish]

I disagree. The quotes are quite attacking specifically Asian misogyny and Asian contempt for British culture.

Only if you think British culture is a single unified thing. Do you really think Cara Delevingne and Jade Goody are the products of the same culture?

 

[User removed 4]

I will take time now to consider whether that is a good thing.

Hmmm , verging on going back down with that comment.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Child abuse revelations have been a tragic part of British history for as long as anyone can remember. Because no one gives a shit about the kids of the underclass - they're chavs, scum, trash, feral - you can do anything to them and no one cares

Oh I agree. We live in a country where people are angrier about fracking or fox-hunting than the incompetence of the authorities when dealing with child abuse.

Try targeting 1400 middle class kids in Surrey. Wouldn't happen and if it did happen to even a few - outcry. This is a class issue (amongst other things)

 

[Buzzer]

Child abuse revelations have been a tragic part of British history for as long as anyone can remember. Because no one gives a shit about the kids of the underclass - they're chavs, scum, trash, feral - you can do anything to them and no one cares

Child abuse is a tragic part of every nation's history, in recent years it was a cause of national shame in Belgium and the British are probably no better or worse than any other country and the abuse is certainly not restricted to the underclasses. You simply can't lump it all together under one banner and then conclude that all the problems have one root cause and one solution.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Hmmm , verging on going back down with that comment.

I was going to add a smiley. I was assuming your Friday afternoon bonhomie.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

This thread is predicatably depressing and mostly spectacularly missing the point.

How many more sections of society are going to be implicated in this type of behaviour before all of us as reasonable people actually stand together and put pressure on the major institutions of this country to take historical/ current institutionalised child absue by any creed, colour or social class seriously?

I just get a feeling that most of this thread is more concerned with vilifying Islam rather than protecting children. Yes, the perpatrators in this case were muslims but this is a tiny part of a UK wide jigsaw that is forming that at best our authorities turn a blind eye to child abuse and at worst are complicit in it. Google Kincora, Elm House, Hautte De La Varenne as well as considering Rochdale and Rotherham. This is far from a problem perpetrated predominantly by muslim fundamentalists, you'd be stupid to think otherwise.

This has been my reason for my posts the problem that exists is do we trust the institutions? I'm afraid I don't many of them themselves have been shown to harbour these evil people within their own institutions. Frankly what hope have we got?

 

[Buzzer]

Try targeting 1400 middle class kids in Surrey. Wouldn't happen and if it did happen to even a few - outcry. This is a class issue (amongst other things)

No it's not, it really isn't. There have been countless abuses on middle-class kids over the years - in after-school clubs at grammar schools, at public schools, Scouts, Guides, Boys Brigade...the list goes on. Child abuse is exclusively a working-class phenomenon? Very dngerous thinking.

Over 20 private schools being investigated for abuse: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/former-politicians-schools-involved-child-sex-abuse-investigation-1432092

I don't remember riots on the streets of Esher when this news broke.

 

[User removed 4]

I was going to add a smiley. I was assuming your Friday afternoon bonhomie.

You're words were like an arrow piercing my heart

 

[gregbrighton]

Try targeting 1400 middle class kids in Surrey. Wouldn't happen and if it did happen to even a few - outcry. This is a class issue (amongst other things)

Didn't Jimmy Saville target a private girls school? He parked his minivan outside it so he could abuse them in it.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

No it's not, it really isn't. There have been countless abuses on middle-class kids over the years - in after-school clubs at grammar schools, at public schools, Scouts, Guides, Boys Brigade...the list goes on. Child abuse is exclusively a working-class phenomenon? Very dngerous thinking.

Over 20 private schools being investigated for abuse: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/former-politicians-schools-involved-child-sex-abuse-investigation-1432092

I don't remember riots on the streets of Esher when this news broke.

Yes it is. You're the one who wants to be specific to Rotherham and that is what I'm being. ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED kids in one northern town with a population of 250k can happen only because they are from an underclass that no one there gave a shit about.

If child abuse class specific? Of course not.

But child abusers will exploit anything they can do achieve their goals and in this case they could exploit the police/council/Labour Party/whoever's total disregard for these kids.

 

[London Irish]

Try targeting 1400 middle class kids in Surrey. Wouldn't happen and if it did happen to even a few - outcry. This is a class issue (amongst other things)

Yep, most things are primarily class issues. A feminist would respond but it's the underclass girls that got raped, not the underclass boys - and that's true. But as you correctly say, it was ONLY girls of a certain socio-economic level in Rotherham that, crucially, we've all been taught to despise.

Race then enters as a third aggravating factor. My theory is this - and it could be wrong so don't shoot me.

We've heard over and over again that the reason why white girls got targeted instead of Pakistani girls was because of the deep moral principles of the scumbags involved of not hitting their own. Is really anyone buying this? The type of scumbag who rapes and exploits vulnerable kids doesn't have any principles, beyond not getting caught. To assign principles to them as bonehead BNP types do is almost to prettify their behaviour.

What happened in Rotherham was that the disenfranchised white underclass provided easier targets than girls in their own immigrant communities - why? As anyone familar with first, second and third generation immigrant assimilation in this country will know, first generation immigrants maintain far tighter family structures when they first arrive in their host country - far tighter reins on their kids, as a defence against what they perceive to be an unfamilar and at times very difficult new environment. The wave of Pakistani immigration we are talking about here is relatively recent - there will be relatively few third generationers born yet, so most Pakistani family units in Rotherham will remain under the control of the more strict first generationers rather than the more assimilated "English" second generation Pakistanis.

Contrast this with the battered white working class of Rotherham - battered by the mass unemployment of the 1970s/1980s, battered by the coal mine closures, generally battered by government policy towards the north. Here - family units have disintegrated under the impact of poverty, kids having kids, no family structure, no defence for vulnerable kids. If you were an opportunistic rapist in this midst of all this, would you target the generally more protected Pakistani kids or the so-called "feral" products of broken estates? Which would you think you could get away with? You can paint this as race all you like - but it would miss the key factor here. It is poverty and neglect that has created a generation of kids that the police, council bureaucrats and "polite" society don't give a shit about.

 

[Buzzer]

Only if you think British culture is a single unified thing. Do you really think Cara Delevingne and Jade Goody are the products of the same culture?

Y A-B refers to the West in the article as a 'single unified thing' Within some British Asian circles, the West is considered degenerate and immoral. So it’s OK to take their girls and ruin them further.

.. so in answer to your question: yes, for the purposes of that article and in reference to Rotherham.

 

[Buzzer]

Yes it is. You're the one who wants to be specific to Rotherham and that is what I'm being. ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED kids in one northern town with a population of 250k can happen only because they are from an underclass that no one there gave a shit about.

If child abuse class specific? Of course not.

But child abusers will exploit anything they can do achieve their goals and in this case they could exploit the police/council/Labour Party/whoever's total disregard for these kids.

Thanks for the capitalisation of 1400. That moves the argument along.

And once again were they targeted because they were working-class? no, they weren't. Because they were vulnerable. Of course in Rotherham only working-class kids were targeted because Rotherham is almost exclusively a working-class area. You were claiming there would be an outcry if large numbers of middle-class kids were abused so I linked to an article where over 20 exclusively middle-class environments were being investigated where equally vulnerable children reside and are preyed upon. Did anyone give a shit about them for years? Apparently not according to their victims.

 

[spring hall convert]

Yep, most things are primarily class issues. A feminist would respond but it's the underclass girls that got raped, not the underclass boys - and that's true. But as you correctly say, it was ONLY girls of a certain socio-economic level in Rotherham that, crucially, we've all been taught to despise.

Race then enters as a third aggravating factor. My theory is this - and it could be wrong so don't shoot me.

We've heard over and over again that the reason why white girls got targeted instead of Pakistani girls was because of the deep moral principles of the scumbags involved of not hitting their own. Is really anyone buying this? The type of scumbag who rapes and exploits vulnerable kids doesn't have any principles, beyond not getting caught. To assign principles to them as bonehead BNP types do is almost to prettify their behaviour.

What happened in Rotherham was that the disenfranchised white underclass provided easier targets than girls in their own immigrant communities - why? As anyone familar with first, second and third generation immigrant assimilation in this country will know, first generation immigrants maintain far tighter family structures when they first arrive in their host country - far tighter reins on their kids, as a defence against what they perceive to be an unfamilar and at times very difficult new environment. The wave of Pakistani immigration we are talking about here is relatively recent - there will be relatively few third generationers born yet, so most Pakistani family units in Rotherham will remain under the control of the more strict first generationers rather than the more assimilated "English" second generation Pakistanis.

Contrast this with the battered white working class of Rotherham - battered by the mass unemployment of the 1970s/1980s, battered by the coal mine closures, generally battered by government policy towards the north. Here - family units have disintegrated under the impact of poverty, kids having kids, no family structure, no defence for vulnerable kids. If you were an opportunistic rapist in this midst of all this, would you target the generally more protected Pakistani kids or the so-called "feral" products of broken estates? Which would you think you could get away with? You can paint this as race all you like - but it would miss the key factor here. It is poverty and neglect that has created a generation of kids that the police, council bureaucrats and "polite" society don't give a shit about.

I'm not sure why you think you'd get shot. An extremely sensible analysis if you ask me.

 

[London Irish]

Child abuse is a tragic part of every nation's history, in recent years it was a cause of national shame in Belgium and the British are probably no better or worse than any other country and the abuse is certainly not restricted to the underclasses. You simply can't lump it all together under one banner and then conclude that all the problems have one root cause and one solution.

I can assure you as a half-Irishman, I'm well aware of the child abuse atrocities in other countries. Plenty of national shame to go around everywhere

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Thanks for the capitalisation of 1400. That moves the argument along.

And once again were they targeted because they were working-class? no, they weren't. Because they were vulnerable. Of course in Rotherham only working-class kids were targeted because Rotherham is almost exclusively a working-class area. You were claiming there would be an outcry if large numbers of middle-class kids were abused so I linked to an article where over 20 exclusively middle-class environments were being investigated where equally vulnerable children reside and are preyed upon. Did anyone give a shit about them for years? Apparently not according to their victims.

The point of the capitalisation is to highlight the scale. Your article reveals some accusations in some schools over decades over a large geographical area. Small pockets if you like. Equally terrible but different.

 

[London Irish]

Y A-B refers to the West in the article as a 'single unified thing' Within some British Asian circles, the West is considered degenerate and immoral. So it’s OK to take their girls and ruin them further.

.. so in answer to your question: yes, for the purposes of that article and in reference to Rotherham.

Slightly going round in circles on a peripheral point here - all I can say is, if you are happy to be led in future by Y A-B's analysis, we won't be disagreeing that much

 

[carlzeiss]

There your are, all the way back to 2006, and its taken 8 years to get to this stage where people speak openly about it. Why did it take so long for the authorities to deal with it.

The court case was in 2006 however the allegations made by Mr Griffin were made a few years earlier . Starting in 2001 I believe .

 

[Buzzer]

Slightly going round in circles on a peripheral point here - all I can say is, if you are happy to be led in future by Y A-B's analysis, we won't be disagreeing that much

It wasn't so much me being led by her analysis as you. You were the one denying that race/culture was at the root of the problem in Rotherham and who thinks that the situation can best be described by Asian feminists so I responded to that with an article by a muslim feminist who does think that race/culture was a root cause. If I was going to be led by anyone in this case it would be Professor Alexis Jay who wrote the report and who also thinks race/culture was at the heart of the problem.