There will be a national enquiry into the grooming gangs

https://unherd.com/2025/06/labours-grooming-gang-shame/

Copied and pasted as you asked for evidence

” But though Cooper did her best to sound angry as she noted that we have “lost more than a decade” in addressing the crimes, in fact, we lost far more than that. The omerta was, and still is, stifling. Newspaper clippings hint at abuses dating all the way back to the Seventies; when far-Right groups raised the alarm in the early 2000s, they were mocked for their accents, accused of stirring up hatred, and censored. When Left-wingers and moderates noticed, they didn’t fare much better: Julie Bindel broke the first mainstream press account almost 20 years ago, only to be called racist for her efforts. The late Times journalist Andrew Norfolk paid a professional price for investigating; former Labour MPs Ann Cryer and Sarah Champion faced stonewalling and harassment. And all that time, our institutions went on grimly pretending everything was basically fine. Why?”

What additional factors that have to do with ethnicity?

We know they were part of the nighttime economy, taxi drivers and fast food operators. They groomed using the 'boyfriend' method. They plied the girls with drugs and alcohol. How is that different to any other paedophile grooming gang?

I haven't seen denial or gaslighting in many years. There have been reports and investigations going on for over 20 years which all said the same thing.

The problem with making the Rotherham case all about white WC girls is that it dismisses the same games meting out the same treatment to the Mipuri girls. The Mipuri girls, like the white girls were preyed on by the same grooming gangs because they were particularly vulnerable in some way. They were also treated as slags, slappers and otherwise of no value by both the professionals and the abusers.

Class is absolutely critical in this because whatever the race of the child victims, they are overwhelmingly seen as low status by public services and even at times their own communities.

The WC boys abused in similar scandals (not least in Rotherham) were also chosen for their vulnerability. In that case the abusers were mostly white MC professionals and businessmen, including in the public sector. The victims were a mix of white and mixed race on the whole, often in care. The council then wasn’t worried about racism - the men were too “important” to even question them.

Jess Philips on Newsnight

Safeguarding minister Jess Phillips appeared onNewsnight last night to discuss the Casey report to deny ever turning a “blind eye” to the rape gangs. She said those who wanted to speak out were “being told to keep it it quiet by people from within the Labour party and Maggie Oliver, herself a whistleblower, says Labour and the Tories have both turned a blind eye… not me – I have never turned a blind eye I never would shy away from calling a problem what it is.”

Well … ? That’s Jess Philips saying people were being told to keep it quiet in the Labour Party.
Maggie Oliver says both parties are guilty.
I trust Maggie Oliver in this

It’s short sighted to view all sexual predators as the same. They may all have misogyny in common but there will be additional factors that are equally important to consider.

The reason so many people are ‘fixated’ on ethnicity in this case is probably due to frustration at the denial and gaslighting that has gone on for years.

So it's a "suggestion" with no evidence?

I am suggesting the pattern of offending was not properly identified and I am explaining why that might be the case …

I also agree with your points about the “adultification” and sexualisation of young girls and the deep rooted misogynistic attitudes and treatment they experienced.

However this particular scandal has an added dimension-

1. authorities were afraid of being labelled racist and therefore were reluctant to see patterns in the offenders ethnic profile.
2. Political leaders were reluctant to speak out because it might have an impact on their electoral support .

Are you suggesting that the Labour party turned a blind eye to mass child sex abuse because they wanted the Pakistani/heritage vote?

Again I disagree. Are you suggesting that only grooming gangs made up of one particular ethnicity are misogynist? This is why I asked why ethnicity was important as people seemed fixated on it at the expense of everything else. It's important in the sense that people didn't act because of fear of racial tension. However, I view all sexual predators the same.

Misogyny is the root that impacts on culture and cultural norms and religious actions. It is what a lot of culture and religion is based on. The act of FGM is based on misogyny and wanting to control females and their sex life. Marriage culture is based on misogyny that women are objects to be owned and given to men by other men. Some cultures pay for the woman, some cultures 'give them away' - free to a good home. The culture of women submitting to men is based on misogyny. The notion of virginity and honor is based on misogyny. We have to look deep into how the root is misogyny which feeds into culture and religion which then enables perpetrators.

They are held in society as a whole. Victim blaming is a major issue which has its root in misogyny. Over 80% of females who report rape are told it was their fault by their friends and family. That is a huge issue.

Girls are taught it is their responsibility to change their behaviour so not to be a victim from a young age because our victim blaming society tells females they are responsible for male behaviour from about the age of 4. So it is widespread by authorities, perpetrators and society as a whole.

Yes - absolutely. The anger should not be directed at whole communities. The anger is for the perpetrators and the ( non Pakistani) people who covered up and turned a blind eye .

I absolutely agree with your point on how these girls were treated by the authorities and how they were silenced. It's imperative that there is a deep dive into the complete failure of 'safe guarding '. But these attitudes were not only held by authorities, but were widespread amongst the perpetrators too. I don't think you can look at one part without the other; that would serve no purpose.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jun/17/public-must-keep-calm-over-ethnicity-of-grooming-gang-offenders-says-louise-casey

Ah! Owen of the Chavs: the ‘demonisation of the working class’ -Jones.. Champion and spokesperson until the realisation there was little political currency to be had for sticking up for the focus of his first book.

He's much more progressive now, you see; there are worthier victims of the “culture wars” who are more deserving of his solidarity.

Most are in agreement with BC thankfully. One poster won’t alter what happens next.

Yes . This is the horrifying truth. People in power putting their political careers before the safety of vulnerable children.
This is why the ethnicities of the perpetrators is so relevant - it’s not about racism it’s about authorities prioritising protecting their electoral interests over and above vulnerable children with no voting power.
@MiloMinderbinder925 can you see that?

I agree that this is entirely valid. But I don’t see how you can argue that ethnicity was not an equal factor.

Oh well.

I don't agree that ethnicity is the main factor. I believe that the reason these girls weren't believed is because of misogyny ie seeing women and girls as less than.

In her report, Casey talks about adultification which has been a problem since time immemorial. Treating girls like they're much older than they are and not seeing them as children. She describes the victims being treated as though they consented, when children legally can't consent. One social worker described a 10 year old as a "prostitute" - that's not prostitution, that's child sexual abuse.

These girls were treated as "trash" by the people meant to be safeguarding them and many were prosecuted. This is a reflection of the misogyny deeply ingrained in society which has a rape conviction rate of 1%.

You want it not to be examined anymore? It will be by the looks of it.

Christ. That is a nightmare for the survivors. they have even put in a stipulation that the survivors can be "compelled" to testify. which is horrific: a sure way to take yet more choices out of these poor womens hands. People want to move on from this, not spend the next however many years getting it dragged about over, and over, and over again. And for what, yet more money wasted and zero consequences at the end

I'm not sure what you mean. Which of the ten or so reports were grossly untrustworthy?

I don't believe you have read the report. I don't believe you are posting in good faith. And, I'm out.

But agreeing that ethnicity IS a factor, means you ARE in agreement with everyone else posting on here! As for your belief that misogyny is the main factor - what do you mean exactly?