"..And not just some men. Many men. So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman. Because the men who joined Pelicot in the dock were bakers, they were journalists, they were prison officers, they were accountants, they were young, they were old, they were single, they were married, they were fathers to daughters. But they all had one thing in common, a desire to dominate, to defile, to control, to penetrate, to humiliate. A love of rape.
Some of them knew Gisele Pelicot, some of them made small talk with her in the street, in the boulangerie, all the time knowing what she didn’t, that they had raped her as she lay unconscious in her bed and her husband had filmed them."
She specifically does not say All Men.
Oh come on. Aside from the fact that's utterly irrelevant, it's false. She states, baldly (including the phrase you handily omitted):
I’ve been thinking about this a lot over the course of the trial of Dominique Pelicot and his fellow accused: what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out? Because we know now what men would do. And not just some men. Many men. So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman.. Because the men who joined Pelicot in the dock were bakers, they were journalists, they were prison officers, they were accountants, they were young, they were old, they were single, they were married, they were fathers to daughters. But they all had one thing in common, a desire to dominate, to defile, to control, to penetrate, to humiliate. A love of rape.
I'm not insulted. It's just incorrect. They're called everyman because there is nothing at all distinguishing about them. Their acts are exceptional. So we don't know what men - many or otherwise - would do based upon this event.
Yes, it's just her rhetorical device, but it's clumsy and that's all I'm calling the article out on. I'm amazed that's enough to be associated with the buzz phrase 'not all men', with all the negative connotations that brings.
I have not tried to single you out or target you in any way, but I feel that you're still letting the point slip by you because of this.
It's about what women put up with and the fact that they have no way of knowing if that guy five steps behind and getting closer is one of the minority of guys who will harm her.
As Saoirse Ronan said, "That's what girls have to think about all the time"
As for Monsieur Tout Le Monde, a native French speaker may help me out here, but I think that means the person is indistinguishable from anyone else, it doesn't literally mean "every man" or All Men
Oh come on. Aside from the fact that's utterly irrelevant, it's false. She states, baldly (including the phrase you handily omitted):
I’ve been thinking about this a lot over the course of the trial of Dominique Pelicot and his fellow accused: what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out? Because we know now what men would do. And not just some men. Many men. So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman.. Because the men who joined Pelicot in the dock were bakers, they were journalists, they were prison officers, they were accountants, they were young, they were old, they were single, they were married, they were fathers to daughters. But they all had one thing in common, a desire to dominate, to defile, to control, to penetrate, to humiliate. A love of rape.
I'm not insulted. It's just incorrect. They're called everyman because there is nothing at all distinguishing about them. Their acts are exceptional. So we don't know what men - many or otherwise - would do based upon this event.
Yes, it's just her rhetorical device, but it's clumsy and that's all I'm calling the article out on. I'm amazed that's enough to be associated with the buzz phrase 'not all men', with all the negative connotations that brings.
I have not tried to single you out or target you in any way, but I feel that you're still letting the point slip by you because of this.
It's about what women put up with and the fact that they have no way of knowing if that guy five steps behind and getting closer is one of the minority of guys who will harm her.
As Saoirse Ronan said, "That's what girls have to think about all the time"
The point has not slipped me by - you've just agreed with me on it!
To be clear, there are two totally separate arguments:
Argument 1 - The article was clumsy in certain places, and it's right and proper to point this out.
Argument 2 - men continue to enable a culture where women are objectified, with all the attendant issues that brings. We all need to up our game to sort this, as it's hugely damaging and women have daily challenges because of it.
You might think argument 2 blends into argument 1. I don't.
As for Monsieur Tout Le Monde, a native French speaker may help me out here, but I think that means the person is indistinguishable from anyone else, it doesn't literally mean "every man" or All Men
I know - I even bolded that part for you .
They are not called mr everyman because they are every/all men, they're called everyman because there's outwardly nothing remarkable about them. So the argument 'So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman.' is wrong.
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2025 1:55 pm
by Tichtheid
Yes, that's all much more important than the violence against women.
Explain to the woman writer how she is wrong.
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2025 2:00 pm
by inactionman
Tichtheid wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 1:55 pm
Yes, that's all much more important than the violence against women.
Explain to the woman writer how she is wrong.
Again, aspersions cast simply because I disagree with something someone wrote.
Do you realise how idiotic you sound saying that, because the writer is female, she should be treated differently to a male?
She made an argument I disagreed with. It was called. Get over it, and stop insinuating shitty, shitty things. It's cowardly.
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2025 2:05 pm
by Uncle fester
Tichtheid wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 1:55 pm
Yes, that's all much more important than the violence against women.
Tichtheid wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 1:55 pm
Yes, that's all much more important than the violence against women.
Explain to the woman writer how she is wrong.
Again, aspersions cast simply because I disagree with something someone wrote.
Do you realise how idiotic you sound saying that, because the writer is female, she should be treated differently to a male?
She made an argument I disagreed with. It was called. Get over it, and stop insinuating shitty, shitty things. It's cowardly.
I think that perhaps you should stop being so defensive and listen to what she has to say instead of pointing out where you think she is wrong.
Your first comment was that most men would cover up an unconscious woman and let her sleep. Your second was
'Because we know now what men would do'
No, we don't really, not based on this. We know what rapists would do.
Both comments are saying "Not All Men".
Everyone knows it's not all men, but the point is that women don't know which men it is.
I can't keep saying the same thing.
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2025 2:12 pm
by Calculon
none of the, very valid, criticism of that article has to do with it being written by a woman.
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2025 2:28 pm
by tabascoboy
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2025 2:34 pm
by Calculon
Tichtheid wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 2:09 pm
Both comments are saying "Not All Men".
Everyone knows it's not all men, but the point is that women don't know which men it is.
I can't keep saying the same thing.
If the main point of the article is that rapist do not have "I am a rapist" tattooed on their forehead, and that they can be charming and are very often (if not in most cases) known to their victim – it is hardly revelatory. I can’t prescribe how women should behave knowing this - depends very much on their personality, environment and personal experiences, and that article also doesn’t give any insight into this
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2025 4:27 pm
by laurent
Monsieur tout le monde is used commonly in France to describe an inoffensive + dull + military medium+ normal man, as opposed to a flamboyant person or a misfit...
It's basically not all men but a very normal man, and this is where it rubs some to admit that they or someone they know could be amongst rapists bullies and assorted miscreants ...
I have accepted that yes it could be me or at least someone like me.
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2025 6:14 pm
by Niegs
Jackson changed the letters on the marquee to spell out: “Forever neighbours, never neighbors.” The message — highlighting the difference in the way Canadians and Americans spell certain words — was a swipe at U.S. president-elect Donald Trump’s repeated suggestion that Canada could become the 51st state.
Within hours, an image of the new sign posted to the strip club’s X account was flagged as potentially hateful content, resulting in the account, @ThePenthouse604, being suspended that night.
Here is a useful publication about the data on victims and perpetrators of Group Based Offending. Whilst there is a warning the dataset is probably incomplete this doesn't distract from the overall picture. Hopefully this helps clarify some of the discussion about the make up of those involved.
Jackson changed the letters on the marquee to spell out: “Forever neighbours, never neighbors.” The message — highlighting the difference in the way Canadians and Americans spell certain words — was a swipe at U.S. president-elect Donald Trump’s repeated suggestion that Canada could become the 51st state.
Within hours, an image of the new sign posted to the strip club’s X account was flagged as potentially hateful content, resulting in the account, @ThePenthouse604, being suspended that night.
Good to see that kind of "negative content" being tackler.
Now back to Starmer and stuff we made up about him.
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2025 8:34 pm
by robmatic
dpedin wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2025 7:20 pm
Here is a useful publication about the data on victims and perpetrators of Group Based Offending. Whilst there is a warning the dataset is probably incomplete this doesn't distract from the overall picture. Hopefully this helps clarify some of the discussion about the make up of those involved.
Only 1 in 3 suspects giving an ethnic identity is a huge caveat, although I would broadly expect the breakdown to be along demographic lines as shown.
That being said, the mismatch between the percentage of Asian victims and suspects jumps out, doesn't it?
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2025 9:01 am
by Hugo
Also, the identity of half the victims is unknown too.
Honestly, there seems to be no serious commitment to collate crime information pertaining to demographics. It's 2025 but the attention to details on crime recording seems to be stuck somewhere in the 20th century.
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2025 10:16 am
by Slick
dpedin wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2025 7:20 pm
Here is a useful publication about the data on victims and perpetrators of Group Based Offending. Whilst there is a warning the dataset is probably incomplete this doesn't distract from the overall picture. Hopefully this helps clarify some of the discussion about the make up of those involved.
dpedin wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2025 7:20 pm
Here is a useful publication about the data on victims and perpetrators of Group Based Offending. Whilst there is a warning the dataset is probably incomplete this doesn't distract from the overall picture. Hopefully this helps clarify some of the discussion about the make up of those involved.
You are seemingly quite desperate to push a narrative on this but I don’t think this really helps you
Just trying to ensure the facts, as best as they are known, are out there and are the basis for a proper discussion rather than the suppositions some seem happier to use. I am not sure what the problem is about distributing informed factual reports?
dpedin wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2025 7:20 pm
Here is a useful publication about the data on victims and perpetrators of Group Based Offending. Whilst there is a warning the dataset is probably incomplete this doesn't distract from the overall picture. Hopefully this helps clarify some of the discussion about the make up of those involved.
Only 1 in 3 suspects giving an ethnic identity is a huge caveat, although I would broadly expect the breakdown to be along demographic lines as shown.
That being said, the mismatch between the percentage of Asian victims and suspects jumps out, doesn't it?
A 35% sample size seems a very reasonable number on which to extrapolate unless there is a known and recognized issue in reporting within specific groups, the report doesn't indicate this is the case. 35% reporting for this sample size would give you a 99% confidence level. As I said this could be skewed if reporting of ethnicity is over or under reported for certain groups, but this isn't referenced in the report.
Numbers vary but between 7 and 9% of UK population is asian so the 7% of asian offenders is roughly in line with the general population breakdown.
dpedin wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2025 7:20 pm
Here is a useful publication about the data on victims and perpetrators of Group Based Offending. Whilst there is a warning the dataset is probably incomplete this doesn't distract from the overall picture. Hopefully this helps clarify some of the discussion about the make up of those involved.
You are seemingly quite desperate to push a narrative on this but I don’t think this really helps you
Just trying to ensure the facts, as best as they are known, are out there and are the basis for a proper discussion rather than the suppositions some seem happier to use. I am not sure what the problem is about distributing informed factual reports?
It’s not a very good report really though.
The whole situation around these child rape gangs is absolutely awful and we need to be clear headed to deal with it. It’s no surprise, given the population, that there are more white gangs but as far as I’m aware (and I fully accept I may be wrong), there isn’t a systematic issue with these white gangs being investigated and prosecuted. By contrast there seems to be plenty of issues, around race, culture etc, regarding investigation of some Asian gangs. This has been extremely well documented as we know.
It’s beyond frustrating that there are still folk who for some reason are desperate to challenge this very obvious and demonstrable fact which is what got us into the mess in the first place.
No one is saying that Asian child rape gangs are worse than white child rape gangs, they are all cunts, but as I say above, there has been a very obvious reluctance for the authorities to treat them in the same way and that is what we have to stop. Making lots of excuses or false equivalency’s isn’t helping that
You are seemingly quite desperate to push a narrative on this but I don’t think this really helps you
Just trying to ensure the facts, as best as they are known, are out there and are the basis for a proper discussion rather than the suppositions some seem happier to use. I am not sure what the problem is about distributing informed factual reports?
It’s not a very good report really though.
The whole situation around these child rape gangs is absolutely awful and we need to be clear headed to deal with it. It’s no surprise, given the population, that there are more white gangs but as far as I’m aware (and I fully accept I may be wrong), there isn’t a systematic issue with these white gangs being investigated and prosecuted. By contrast there seems to be plenty of issues, around race, culture etc, regarding investigation of some Asian gangs. This has been extremely well documented as we know.
It’s beyond frustrating that there are still folk who for some reason are desperate to challenge this very obvious and demonstrable fact which is what got us into the mess in the first place.
No one is saying that Asian child rape gangs are worse than white child rape gangs, they are all cunts, but as I say above, there has been a very obvious reluctance for the authorities to treat them in the same way and that is what we have to stop. Making lots of excuses or false equivalency’s isn’t helping that
I accept the data is poor and incomplete however all the reports I have referenced are the best we have. I am certainly not making 'lots of false excuses or false equivalences' - however I much rather prefer to deal with the facts and figures in order to assess the problem and formulate a response, call me old fashioned if you want!
The 2020 Group CSA report, prefaced by that well known liberal Priti Patel, stated that 'Based on the existing evidence, and our understanding of the flaws in the existing data, it seems most likely that the ethnicity of group-based CSE offenders is in line with CSA more generally and with the general population, with the majority of offenders being White.'
It is surely better to drive the local and national efforts to reduce CSA and group based CSA and protect victims on the existing evidence than it is on supposition and prejudices about specific groups of the population?
Here are a couple of reported group based CSA crimes from the news.
You rightly point out the cultural sensitivities of investigating certain groups of offenders in the past, no one is disputing that. Some police forces, social services etc responses around ethnic offenders were poor and ill informed, the Jay Report into Rotherham, 2014 and her National Report, 2022 made this clear. However I am less clear that Pakistani or Asian offenders are more leniently dealt with when they get to court. I have seen no evidence of this in terms of the sentencing they receive compared to white, British gangs - perhaps you could point me to this evidence?
Bottom line is CSA and group based CSA is a horrendous crime. All offenders need to be tracked down and punished. The vast majority of group based CSA crime is committed by White British folk, the evidence on this is irrefutable, and broadly in line with the % of the population. Yes the police and other authorities need to ensure their response is consistent across all ethnic groups within the UK - probably best to crack on with implementing the Jay Report recommendations then?
Bottom line is CSA and group based CSA is a horrendous crime. All offenders need to be tracked down and punished. The vast majority of group based CSA crime is committed by White British folk, the evidence on this is irrefutable, and broadly in line with the % of the population. Yes the police and other authorities need to ensure their response is consistent across all ethnic groups within the UK - probably best to crack on with implementing the Jay Report recommendations then?
You've made me remember why I posted that article earlier - I got lost in the "not all men" thing. Predatory men are the main problem, irrespective of race, culture or religion - see the Church of England, the notorious Catholic Church scandals and the Jehovah's Witnesses
I also think that was the main point of the article.
Just trying to ensure the facts, as best as they are known, are out there and are the basis for a proper discussion rather than the suppositions some seem happier to use. I am not sure what the problem is about distributing informed factual reports?
It’s not a very good report really though.
The whole situation around these child rape gangs is absolutely awful and we need to be clear headed to deal with it. It’s no surprise, given the population, that there are more white gangs but as far as I’m aware (and I fully accept I may be wrong), there isn’t a systematic issue with these white gangs being investigated and prosecuted. By contrast there seems to be plenty of issues, around race, culture etc, regarding investigation of some Asian gangs. This has been extremely well documented as we know.
It’s beyond frustrating that there are still folk who for some reason are desperate to challenge this very obvious and demonstrable fact which is what got us into the mess in the first place.
No one is saying that Asian child rape gangs are worse than white child rape gangs, they are all cunts, but as I say above, there has been a very obvious reluctance for the authorities to treat them in the same way and that is what we have to stop. Making lots of excuses or false equivalency’s isn’t helping that
I accept the data is poor and incomplete however all the reports I have referenced are the best we have. I am certainly not making 'lots of false excuses or false equivalences' - however I much rather prefer to deal with the facts and figures in order to assess the problem and formulate a response, call me old fashioned if you want!
The 2020 Group CSA report, prefaced by that well known liberal Priti Patel, stated that 'Based on the existing evidence, and our understanding of the flaws in the existing data, it seems most likely that the ethnicity of group-based CSE offenders is in line with CSA more generally and with the general population, with the majority of offenders being White.'
It is surely better to drive the local and national efforts to reduce CSA and group based CSA and protect victims on the existing evidence than it is on supposition and prejudices about specific groups of the population?
Here are a couple of reported group based CSA crimes from the news.
You rightly point out the cultural sensitivities of investigating certain groups of offenders in the past, no one is disputing that. Some police forces, social services etc responses around ethnic offenders were poor and ill informed, the Jay Report into Rotherham, 2014 and her National Report, 2022 made this clear. However I am less clear that Pakistani or Asian offenders are more leniently dealt with when they get to court. I have seen no evidence of this in terms of the sentencing they receive compared to white, British gangs - perhaps you could point me to this evidence?
Bottom line is CSA and group based CSA is a horrendous crime. All offenders need to be tracked down and punished. The vast majority of group based CSA crime is committed by White British folk, the evidence on this is irrefutable, and broadly in line with the % of the population. Yes the police and other authorities need to ensure their response is consistent across all ethnic groups within the UK - probably best to crack on with implementing the Jay Report recommendations then?
You are either ignoring the point of my post or I haven’t been clear, but I didn’t mention sentencing and I agreed that the vast majority of this is committed by white men
Just trying to ensure the facts, as best as they are known, are out there and are the basis for a proper discussion rather than the suppositions some seem happier to use. I am not sure what the problem is about distributing informed factual reports?
It’s not a very good report really though.
The whole situation around these child rape gangs is absolutely awful and we need to be clear headed to deal with it. It’s no surprise, given the population, that there are more white gangs but as far as I’m aware (and I fully accept I may be wrong), there isn’t a systematic issue with these white gangs being investigated and prosecuted. By contrast there seems to be plenty of issues, around race, culture etc, regarding investigation of some Asian gangs. This has been extremely well documented as we know.
It’s beyond frustrating that there are still folk who for some reason are desperate to challenge this very obvious and demonstrable fact which is what got us into the mess in the first place.
No one is saying that Asian child rape gangs are worse than white child rape gangs, they are all cunts, but as I say above, there has been a very obvious reluctance for the authorities to treat them in the same way and that is what we have to stop. Making lots of excuses or false equivalency’s isn’t helping that
I accept the data is poor and incomplete however all the reports I have referenced are the best we have. I am certainly not making 'lots of false excuses or false equivalences' - however I much rather prefer to deal with the facts and figures in order to assess the problem and formulate a response, call me old fashioned if you want!
The 2020 Group CSA report, prefaced by that well known liberal Priti Patel, stated that 'Based on the existing evidence, and our understanding of the flaws in the existing data, it seems most likely that the ethnicity of group-based CSE offenders is in line with CSA more generally and with the general population, with the majority of offenders being White.'
It is surely better to drive the local and national efforts to reduce CSA and group based CSA and protect victims on the existing evidence than it is on supposition and prejudices about specific groups of the population?
Here are a couple of reported group based CSA crimes from the news.
You rightly point out the cultural sensitivities of investigating certain groups of offenders in the past, no one is disputing that. Some police forces, social services etc responses around ethnic offenders were poor and ill informed, the Jay Report into Rotherham, 2014 and her National Report, 2022 made this clear. However I am less clear that Pakistani or Asian offenders are more leniently dealt with when they get to court. I have seen no evidence of this in terms of the sentencing they receive compared to white, British gangs - perhaps you could point me to this evidence?
Bottom line is CSA and group based CSA is a horrendous crime. All offenders need to be tracked down and punished. The vast majority of group based CSA crime is committed by White British folk, the evidence on this is irrefutable, and broadly in line with the % of the population. Yes the police and other authorities need to ensure their response is consistent across all ethnic groups within the UK - probably best to crack on with implementing the Jay Report recommendations then?
The thing you are not really grasping is that there is no reason to believe in any of the institutions who are entrusted with protecting children.
It's like believing someone who has lied to you dozens of times is now telling the truth.
Every institution in Britain has some previous with regards to paedophile behaviour - BBC, police, Prince Andrew, C of E, Labour party - and the common denominator is their concern for protecting the reputation of the institution over justice for the kids.
The opportunity for dealing with this in house has been and gone. There needs to be a forensic inquiry into this conducted by a neutral international body. Getting compromised bodies to conduct their own investigation is the classic fox guarding henhouse scenario. It is the Vatican model for dealing with child abuse.
Debate to be had re that but timing is the real point if interest here. The oligarchs smell blood in the water and it's the little guy who is going to suffer.
Debate to be had re that but timing is the real point if interest here. The oligarchs smell blood in the water and it's the little guy who is going to suffer.
Zuckerberg is asking Trump to put pressure on the EU to cancel the fines against Meta. Going all in punching down fits right in with Trump's entire life to date. Flatter the tyrant to shelter.under his wings.
Hellraiser, I asked you why you think Meta terminating their DEI policies is a good thing. I've then asked you to explain your assertion it's a grift.
While I'm a fan of the Jonathan Pie stuff, that clip has fucking NOTHING to do with Meta and its DEI policies. Do you have anything of substance to back up your opinions?
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2025 11:12 pm
by Hellraiser
Guy Smiley wrote: Sat Jan 11, 2025 8:54 pm
Hellraiser, I asked you why you think Meta terminating their DEI policies is a good thing. I've then asked you to explain your assertion it's a grift.
While I'm a fan of the Jonathan Pie stuff, that clip has fucking NOTHING to do with Meta and its DEI policies. Do you have anything of substance to back up your opinions?
That wasn't a response to your post. I didn't even see it. So wind your fucking neck in.
As for why DEI is a grift, Google is is your friend.
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2025 11:37 pm
by Guy Smiley
So, nothing then. Just another bag of human skin and hot air.
The whole situation around these child rape gangs is absolutely awful and we need to be clear headed to deal with it. It’s no surprise, given the population, that there are more white gangs but as far as I’m aware (and I fully accept I may be wrong), there isn’t a systematic issue with these white gangs being investigated and prosecuted. By contrast there seems to be plenty of issues, around race, culture etc, regarding investigation of some Asian gangs. This has been extremely well documented as we know.
It’s beyond frustrating that there are still folk who for some reason are desperate to challenge this very obvious and demonstrable fact which is what got us into the mess in the first place.
No one is saying that Asian child rape gangs are worse than white child rape gangs, they are all cunts, but as I say above, there has been a very obvious reluctance for the authorities to treat them in the same way and that is what we have to stop. Making lots of excuses or false equivalency’s isn’t helping that
I accept the data is poor and incomplete however all the reports I have referenced are the best we have. I am certainly not making 'lots of false excuses or false equivalences' - however I much rather prefer to deal with the facts and figures in order to assess the problem and formulate a response, call me old fashioned if you want!
The 2020 Group CSA report, prefaced by that well known liberal Priti Patel, stated that 'Based on the existing evidence, and our understanding of the flaws in the existing data, it seems most likely that the ethnicity of group-based CSE offenders is in line with CSA more generally and with the general population, with the majority of offenders being White.'
It is surely better to drive the local and national efforts to reduce CSA and group based CSA and protect victims on the existing evidence than it is on supposition and prejudices about specific groups of the population?
Here are a couple of reported group based CSA crimes from the news.
You rightly point out the cultural sensitivities of investigating certain groups of offenders in the past, no one is disputing that. Some police forces, social services etc responses around ethnic offenders were poor and ill informed, the Jay Report into Rotherham, 2014 and her National Report, 2022 made this clear. However I am less clear that Pakistani or Asian offenders are more leniently dealt with when they get to court. I have seen no evidence of this in terms of the sentencing they receive compared to white, British gangs - perhaps you could point me to this evidence?
Bottom line is CSA and group based CSA is a horrendous crime. All offenders need to be tracked down and punished. The vast majority of group based CSA crime is committed by White British folk, the evidence on this is irrefutable, and broadly in line with the % of the population. Yes the police and other authorities need to ensure their response is consistent across all ethnic groups within the UK - probably best to crack on with implementing the Jay Report recommendations then?
The thing you are not really grasping is that there is no reason to believe in any of the institutions who are entrusted with protecting children.
It's like believing someone who has lied to you dozens of times is now telling the truth.
Every institution in Britain has some previous with regards to paedophile behaviour - BBC, police, Prince Andrew, C of E, Labour party - and the common denominator is their concern for protecting the reputation of the institution over justice for the kids.
The opportunity for dealing with this in house has been and gone. There needs to be a forensic inquiry into this conducted by a neutral international body. Getting compromised bodies to conduct their own investigation is the classic fox guarding henhouse scenario. It is the Vatican model for dealing with child abuse.
Interesting you mention the Labour Party but not the Conservatives - home to Tractor Porn Parrish, Pincher by Nature, Groper Khan and a 15 yo boy, coked up sex pest Warburton, Wife Raper Griffiths, Sex Pest Elphicke, another Sex Pest Roberts, Fondler Fallon, Sextpest Crabb, Sugar Tits Garnier and Porno Green plus others which remain anonymous. Oh and dont forget the Blonde Bumbelcunt himself and his dodgy parties in Italy courtesy of Lebedev. Yes there are also Labour MPs and others who have stood down/been sacked for sex related behaviors but the Tories set a blistering pace in the race to the bottom.
So where is this International body going to be coming from? France home of the Pellicot case, Belgium with a track record of paedo rings at highest levels of Gov, US with an incoming sex offender President who boasts of sexually assaulting women and home to states who allow men to marry 14 year olds, Italy home of the Catholic Church possibly the single largest organization of paedophilies, Ireland - see Italy? You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the UK is any different to the rest of the world or that an international body drawn from other countries could investigate the UK when they all have their own issues on this topic and possibly are just as compromised.
I believe we had made steps forward with the various reviews of CSE and group based CSA in the last 10 years but failed to actually implement almost all of the recommendations. I wonder why the last Gov didnt want to implement them? It is ironic that the one person who is trusted by almost everyone of all political parties to speak out against women and children abuse and has done so for years, Jess Phillips, has been targeted for awful abuse by the right wing nutters such as Musk. Again I wonder why? Perhaps it is because he and his IT mates hate the idea of regulation of their social media platforms and see Phillips, and Starmer, along with the EU as a huge risk to their unfettered freedoms to peddle filth on their networks? Their current attacks by Musk and the changes by META are not about seeking to stop CSA it is the opposite, they want to stop the UK Gov and the EU introduce and implement stricter regulatory frameworks on social media and to hold their organizations accountable the easiest way of doing this is to try and take down the individuals and organizations pushing these through! Look at their attacks on Brazil and Australia.
Let's just get on and implement the Jay Report recommendations in full, they are not perfect but will make a big impact and build from there. We do have many others like Phillips who are trusted across our institutions who can and should be trusted to get on with the job and implement the various recommendations. It will take time and meet resistance along the way but the likes of Phillips, Jay, etc should be given everything they need to take this forward asap. Lets just feckin get on with it!!!
Re: Elon Musk bought Twitter.
Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2025 1:00 pm
by Kiwias
Mehdi Hasan on Zeteo has a fine interview with Nazir Afzal, a former Chief Crown Prosecutor in the UK, on this matter.
Debate to be had re that but timing is the real point if interest here. The oligarchs smell blood in the water and it's the little guy who is going to suffer.
Zuckerberg is asking Trump to put pressure on the EU to cancel the fines against Meta. Going all in punching down fits right in with Trump's entire life to date. Flatter the tyrant to shelter.under his wings.
I accept the data is poor and incomplete however all the reports I have referenced are the best we have. I am certainly not making 'lots of false excuses or false equivalences' - however I much rather prefer to deal with the facts and figures in order to assess the problem and formulate a response, call me old fashioned if you want!
The 2020 Group CSA report, prefaced by that well known liberal Priti Patel, stated that 'Based on the existing evidence, and our understanding of the flaws in the existing data, it seems most likely that the ethnicity of group-based CSE offenders is in line with CSA more generally and with the general population, with the majority of offenders being White.'
It is surely better to drive the local and national efforts to reduce CSA and group based CSA and protect victims on the existing evidence than it is on supposition and prejudices about specific groups of the population?
Here are a couple of reported group based CSA crimes from the news.
You rightly point out the cultural sensitivities of investigating certain groups of offenders in the past, no one is disputing that. Some police forces, social services etc responses around ethnic offenders were poor and ill informed, the Jay Report into Rotherham, 2014 and her National Report, 2022 made this clear. However I am less clear that Pakistani or Asian offenders are more leniently dealt with when they get to court. I have seen no evidence of this in terms of the sentencing they receive compared to white, British gangs - perhaps you could point me to this evidence?
Bottom line is CSA and group based CSA is a horrendous crime. All offenders need to be tracked down and punished. The vast majority of group based CSA crime is committed by White British folk, the evidence on this is irrefutable, and broadly in line with the % of the population. Yes the police and other authorities need to ensure their response is consistent across all ethnic groups within the UK - probably best to crack on with implementing the Jay Report recommendations then?
The thing you are not really grasping is that there is no reason to believe in any of the institutions who are entrusted with protecting children.
It's like believing someone who has lied to you dozens of times is now telling the truth.
Every institution in Britain has some previous with regards to paedophile behaviour - BBC, police, Prince Andrew, C of E, Labour party - and the common denominator is their concern for protecting the reputation of the institution over justice for the kids.
The opportunity for dealing with this in house has been and gone. There needs to be a forensic inquiry into this conducted by a neutral international body. Getting compromised bodies to conduct their own investigation is the classic fox guarding henhouse scenario. It is the Vatican model for dealing with child abuse.
Interesting you mention the Labour Party but not the Conservatives - home to Tractor Porn Parrish, Pincher by Nature, Groper Khan and a 15 yo boy, coked up sex pest Warburton, Wife Raper Griffiths, Sex Pest Elphicke, another Sex Pest Roberts, Fondler Fallon, Sextpest Crabb, Sugar Tits Garnier and Porno Green plus others which remain anonymous. Oh and dont forget the Blonde Bumbelcunt himself and his dodgy parties in Italy courtesy of Lebedev. Yes there are also Labour MPs and others who have stood down/been sacked for sex related behaviors but the Tories set a blistering pace in the race to the bottom.
So where is this International body going to be coming from? France home of the Pellicot case, Belgium with a track record of paedo rings at highest levels of Gov, US with an incoming sex offender President who boasts of sexually assaulting women and home to states who allow men to marry 14 year olds, Italy home of the Catholic Church possibly the single largest organization of paedophilies, Ireland - see Italy? You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the UK is any different to the rest of the world or that an international body drawn from other countries could investigate the UK when they all have their own issues on this topic and possibly are just as compromised.
I believe we had made steps forward with the various reviews of CSE and group based CSA in the last 10 years but failed to actually implement almost all of the recommendations. I wonder why the last Gov didnt want to implement them? It is ironic that the one person who is trusted by almost everyone of all political parties to speak out against women and children abuse and has done so for years, Jess Phillips, has been targeted for awful abuse by the right wing nutters such as Musk. Again I wonder why? Perhaps it is because he and his IT mates hate the idea of regulation of their social media platforms and see Phillips, and Starmer, along with the EU as a huge risk to their unfettered freedoms to peddle filth on their networks? Their current attacks by Musk and the changes by META are not about seeking to stop CSA it is the opposite, they want to stop the UK Gov and the EU introduce and implement stricter regulatory frameworks on social media and to hold their organizations accountable the easiest way of doing this is to try and take down the individuals and organizations pushing these through! Look at their attacks on Brazil and Australia.
Let's just get on and implement the Jay Report recommendations in full, they are not perfect but will make a big impact and build from there. We do have many others like Phillips who are trusted across our institutions who can and should be trusted to get on with the job and implement the various recommendations. It will take time and meet resistance along the way but the likes of Phillips, Jay, etc should be given everything they need to take this forward asap. Lets just feckin get on with it!!!
Rape has an exceptionally low conviction rate - less than 5% of alleged rapes end in a successful prosecution. So, in essence it is a low risk crime for a perpetrator. Therefore the goal has to be preventing rapes in the first place because once they happen the odds of the victim getting justice are slim. In the meantime they will have to live with that trauma for a very long time, maybe they will be scarred for life.
In order to bring the overall number of rapes down authorities have to be accurate in everything they do and cannot afford to be lackadaisical in their approach. That means in terms of communication, sentencing, investigations and so on and so forth. Providing cover to rapists is the polar opposite of that. Inaction can be construed as tacit permission granting, silence is complicity and all that.
So it is that from the time the Rotherham story first made headlines in The Times to when Musk began obsessively tweeting about this over 10 years has elapsed and during that time rapes and sexual assaults have risen to their highest levels since records were kept on the crime. 2022 was a record year and 2023 surpassed that.
Labour made a pre election promise to expedite the handling of rape cases so that backlogs could be addressed. They have since reneged on that promise because I don't think they have the resources to deliver on what they said they were going to do. They aren't willing to hold a national enquiry either and as you say the Tories are not blameless.
At a certain point if governments can't get a handle on this particular problem and start making inroads into it they will lose legitimacy and people will be willing to go to extreme lengths to do what the state either can't do or chooses not to. I believe the riots last summer after the Southport killings were an expression of that sentiment.
As fashionable as it is to say billionaires are a threat to democracy it is also true that ineffective or corrupt politicians also undermine democracy. Instead of always deflecting away from their responsibilities and pinning it on the likes of Musk or the far right they need to start owning their part in the mess and give people something to believe in. The Liverpool MP Dan Carden seems to have called for a full accounting of the status quo and I hope that others in Parliament follow suit.
