Rotherham abuse enquiry

pblakeney

mamba80 wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Is that in any way different from any other religion and/or culture.
"sew your wild oats then settle down" was certainly what I did.

I don't think Christianity preaches this in any shape what so ever.

its irrelevant, trafficking kids for sex is a heinous crime, but it would seem that the Police/CPS and Government don't view it as such.

You have me at a loss. Christianity doesn't preach that I have to ride a bike either, but I do. The religious part is irrelevant.

I totally agree with the last sentence though from links provided earlier.

tangled_metal

PBlakeney wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Is that in any way different from any other religion and/or culture.
"sew your wild oats then settle down" was certainly what I did.

The difference is the bit left out and that is sew your oats with someone outside your religion. You never despoil one of your own but everyone else is fair game!!! I guess with other religions they don't have restrictions or imply the worst excesses are acceptable.

But you never said that in your earlier post. I certainly dabbled with women of many religions as I am not interested in any religion.
Are "everyone else is fair game!!!" and "imply the worst excesses are acceptable" expressed in the terms as you have written by Imans or is this conjecture?
It would be interesting to know what is meant by "fair game" and imply is not the same as instruct.

As I said it was a long time ago I had this conversation but the gist of what he said was being told to him and others among his friends (muslim friends) was that white women are worth less than muslim women and as such anything you do to them was not considered bad.

That is obviously more vague impression of the conversation due to time taking away the exact phrases used from my memory. I only remember it sounded really bad like white women were not human but a class of lower animals with less rights.

My use of the phrase fair game is just a colloquial way of saying (in a Catholic or Christian sense) that mistreatment of white women is not a sin to stain your conscience or soul. I do not know, now, how my Muslim friend, or rather his imam and elders of his mosque, said it but I think if you don't take my words literally but the meaning behind them it should be clear to most the kind of disdain that my friend got "taught".

BTW he did go out drinking and was a right good laugh at times but he also held his religion dear and I really appreciated his strength of religion. I think he was a real Muslim who actually followed the religion not cultural mores and beliefs that result in these evil practices,

tangled_metal

If you tell someone to "go out and sew your wild oats" to sleep with many white women for example that is instruct and was the kind of things being said. The implication that the worst excesses are acceptable would have come from comments about non-muslims being worth less than Muslims when used in conjunction with the other comments.
However, I was not there with the Imams back then and got it second hand. Time has altered my memory in that words used are no longer exactly remembered only sentiment, meaning and attitude of the imams (indeed I use Imams to also mean the senior members of the Mosque community, those with authority and influence). I also remember how sure of that message from them my friend was. Believe that or not I do not care.

chrisaonabike

Here's a thought: if someone writes down a load of weird stuff now, and claims that it's divine revelation, we quite likely suspect mental illness.

Why is it likely to be any different if the weird stuff, the so-called 'divine revelation' was written down hundreds or even thousands of years ago?

It's about time that respect for people's religion didn't have to be the lowest common denominator.

I respect people's right to believe any damn fool thing they like, because it's still a relatively free country, but I don't respect their beliefs, because they're all unprovable garbage, and often cause a hell of a lot of damage.

I especially don't respect those beliefs if they result in the demeaning of women.

Mikey23

And of course the right to spout any old tripe without having the slightest idea what you are talking about

pblakeney

Tangled Metal wrote:

An explanation

I am not doubting your version of events.
I am simply questioning whether sowing your wild oats is such a dangerous piece of advice. It is certainly something that I would advocate.
If that is done at the other person's expense or ridicule though, then that is another matter.
I am just trying to ascertain whether it is a religious thing, or purely cultural. I suspect the latter.

As I do not know any Muslims I cannot get their version so I rely on others.

chrisaonabike

Mikey23 wrote:

And of course the right to spout any old tripe without having the slightest idea what you are talking about

Er, just so I'm clear, is that agreeing with me, or is it aimed at me?

mr_goo

On Radio this morning an ex-Labour party activist from South Yorkshire stated that the local party hierarchy are fully aware of the 'Asian' community problem of child grooming and other sex offences with minors. But they instructed fellow party members to ignore it and not to report it. This is due to the 'Asian' vote which favours Labour.
Whether true or not. I would like to see an investigation into this.

tangled_metal

PBlakeney wrote:

[I am just trying to ascertain whether it is a religious thing, or purely cultural. I suspect the latter.

Who knows? My view is all religions are a part of culture and influenced by culture. By that I mean you cannot separate religion and the culture of those in the religion. It's what has created such a variety in each religion. Culture affects religion and vice versa. You suspect this is part of the culture of Pakistani men in Rotherham not Muslim religion in Rotherham. I would contend that this is part of the religious culture of the Muslim men in Rotherham of Pakistani origin. If you like it's a particular sect or variety of it. The interpretation of the religion is coloured by their cultural views. I also suspect there is integration problems too. They are in but not of the country they live in such that they feel different, differentiate themselves from other communities and perhaps this has developed into a feeling of separation. Separation on many levels. I don't know, it's just a possibility.

I do know that an expert sociologist would have a good theory on this. I've met a few sociologists and they have the techniques to investigate these sorts of culture/religion boundaries. Indeed I've had race/religion conversations with a group of sociologists. Whilst this was not their field of expertise their insights on culture and religion really was interesting. My views are just a lay person's rather basic attempts at understanding and re-expressing their rather subtle arguments based on techniques and social theories. I guess I view culture and religion as a heavily overlapping Venn diagram, more shared area than separate.

tangled_metal

Sorry if this is too political but Labour does have serious issues among their Asian vote. There has been a few issues of electoral fraud by Labour activists. Simply put in some wards it's a block vote. Those areas have higher than normal levels of postal votes. Incidents of constituents with poor grasp of English leaving it to labour activists in their community to fill the postal votes. There was even representatives of the community saying these postal votes are often filled in for whole families by one person rather than one person one vote. These may or may not be true but there's been convictions and even in recent elections the returning officer(s) in one London borough with a high ethnic population asking for police on every polling station door to safeguard the integrity of the vote. Or was that just a daily wail story to stir up political/cultural partisan ship tendencies?

rick_chasey

Mr Goo wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

I'd like to see prosecutions of those council ******s who didn't do anything about it through fear of being called "racist".

Couldn't agree more. Too much fear

.

:roll:

rick_chasey

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Pross - this is a Muslim issue. Of course not all Muslims engage in this kind of thing and not all people that engage in child grooming are Muslim - but in this particular type of grooming Muslim men are massively overrepresented.

This is the problem with serious chat on the internet. Spurious claims like this. Bring up a 'fact' (which it patently isn't. It's just a statement they've made up) to justify otherwise (rightly) unpalatable and discriminatory opinions.

If there's anymore chat like this the thread will be locked.

finchy

Rick Chasey wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Pross - this is a Muslim issue. Of course not all Muslims engage in this kind of thing and not all people that engage in child grooming are Muslim - but in this particular type of grooming Muslim men are massively overrepresented.

This is the problem with serious chat on the internet. Spurious claims like this. Bring up a 'fact' (which it patently isn't. It's just a statement they've made up) to justify otherwise (rightly) unpalatable and discriminatory opinions.

If there's anymore chat like this the thread will be locked.

What about if people care to back up claims with evidence?

NB: If you want to read the source, please read it fully as problems with the data are discussed towards the end.

This one might be more reliable (see p.34). Asians and blacks are over-represented amongst convicted sex offenders compared to the general population, so given these two links, it isn't really a spurious claim.

rick_chasey

It's quite simple. If you're going to be racist, the thread will be locked.

Ultimately, as the chap with the red name, i'm the arbiter of what is and isn't racist.

I don't have time to read the article, but it's seems a fairly grey conclusion:

However while just under 82 per cent of inmates incarcerated for sex offences in 2007 were classified as white, this was actually lower than the overall proportion of the population that were similarly classed, which stands at 87.5 per cent (for England). At six per cent, the proportion of sex offenders in custody that were classed as Asian almost exactly matches the proportion of the population classed similarly.

Looking at grooming offences collected by the CEOP, while the white ethnic group makes up the largest proprotion of all offenders, it is far below the proportion of white people in the general population. Meanwhile, those of Asian origin are indeed disproportionately represented here.

Doesn't say how much, but we've got this:
.


Either way, if you use any data to support racist ideas, i'll have it gone from the thread, however 'justified' you think it is.

It could be that Asians are generally in a lower socio-economic strata which is why they're over represented or any other reasons... correlation doesn't equal causation, and there are too many factors at play to draw any conclusion.

I'll make it crystal clear. If anyone says that someone's ethnicity has a bearing on their propensity for criminal behaviour, or indeed any other negative behaviour, you'll be gone.


Understood?

DeVlaeminck

Rick Chasey wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Pross - this is a Muslim issue. Of course not all Muslims engage in this kind of thing and not all people that engage in child grooming are Muslim - but in this particular type of grooming Muslim men are massively overrepresented.

This is the problem with serious chat on the internet. Spurious claims like this. Bring up a 'fact' (which it patently isn't. It's just a statement they've made up) to justify otherwise (rightly) unpalatable and discriminatory opinions.

If there's anymore chat like this the thread will be locked.

You are wrong Rick. It is a fact that this kind of street grooming Muslim males are massively over represented. 1,400 victims in one town says that this is a very relevant topic for discussion. If people are racist then fine ban them - however being scared to discuss the issue of culture/religion and grooming of vulnerable girls is what is being criticised in this report - shutting down debate is exactly why this has been allowed to go on. I don't think any decent person including the majority of muslims in the UK would want that.

DeVlaeminck

And if you think that is a racist statement it is no more than the likes of Jack Straw have said.

Edit - stats here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18004153

pblakeney

Rick Chasey wrote:

I don't have time to read the article, but it's seems a fairly grey conclusion:

I am curious. How can you decide that it is a grey area without reading the article?

I have not read the article either but then I am not drawing a conclusion.