AIBU to think migrant sex crime data should be published? And to wonder why Labour are blocking the release of that data?

I’d love to know how many people fighting to the death on here to defend not releasing the stats have ever worked with immigrants? Because I have. The vast majority of the immigrants are great people. Really great people. But a significant minority are not. They think women are there to be used by men in whatever way they choose. It’s the way they have been brought up. Denying this and trying to brush it under the carpet is so dangerous.

Really - so why do we tell children to never talk to strangers? I know I've never been a risk to my friends' children or my nieces and nephews.

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16088525/Thursday-no-day-women-locals-migrants.html

I mean this is absolutely bonkers …

‘why do you need to know the number of men coming in to the country causing serious crimes?’

Vested interest or major head in the sand.

Its important this information is available for the safety of the women and girls in the U.K.

It’s important that ALL data relating to sexual violence is collected - even if it includes nationally as it helps us put safe guards in .

Currently out of 16 pages of replies 77% don’t think your unreasonable asking this question - there is clearly appetite to have the data released.

Those that call people racist for wanting to know either have a vested interest in keeping it quiet or have major head in the sand syndrome

that’s one screen shot from twitter from some bloke with an agenda. hardly conclusive proof of anything.

Yes, some countries have barbaric and misogynistic cultures. Do you deny this well-evidenced fact?

The environment that people are raised in has an extremely significant impact on their behaviour and propensity to violence. Do you deny this well-evidenced fact?

If not, you presumably accept the fact that people from certain countries which happen to have violent cultures are far more likely to be violent as a result of being raised in such environments.

This is not “prejudice” or “racism”. Nobody cares what colour their skin is or which country they come from. The issue that has been raised is that because they have been raised in violent cultures where women are frequently raped and cannot safely go outside alone for fear of being gang raped, children are abused and this is not illegal (with children under 10 being “married” to middle aged men so that they can rape them repeatedly, often in exchange for money), women and children can legally be beaten or raped by their husbands or other male relatives, people have seen appalling violence because of living in warzones of as a result of the cultures they have been raised in, they therefore pose a far higher risk of exhibiting violent behaviour themselves. This is a statistically proven fact, through decades of psychological research.

It would be exactly the same if that was happening in the UK or another European country: if people there were being exposed to such violence and “values” then they would pose a much higher risk when moving to a different and more peaceful society where such behaviour is not considered to be acceptable.

The fact that these increased risk factors happen to arise because of the environments in the countries that they have come from is not the reason that there is a problem: the fact that there IS an increased risk is the problem, which is because of their social conditioning and experiences, regardless of where that happened or why or what colour their skin happens to be, so your ludicrous accusations of racism are patent nonsense.

The issue is the risk, which is proven by all of the data gathered through decades of studies of psychology and the impact of such experiences on subsequent behaviour, alongside the fact (which you admit) that young men are the highest offending group demographically anyway. Therefore, admitting large numbers of young men (with their higher offending profile - not ageist or sexist to admit that evidenced fact, as you did, is it?) AND with a background of violent culture and experiences (which we also know results in a higher offending profile - not “racist” to admit that evidenced fact, either, is it?) means, obviously, that offending rates in our population for violent crimes will rise disproportionately per capita.

These are simply facts. Facts evidenced by science and large quantities of data.

Your disgusting attempts to portray people as racist for discussing scientific facts are reprehensible and you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.

Your have called me a racist repeatedly when nothing I have posted is remotely racist

It’s not just me btw. At some point you need to reconsider and think, if it’s not just Nulla saying my posts are problematic, then maybe I am coming across as having racist opinions.

I never said you posted any data. I said you were sharing data which you have been albeit without any sort of citations or links. I haven’t confused you with anyone. You seem to be confused over what I have or have not said as well as confused about what you have or have not said. You seem to be experiencing a form of amnesia.

To be clear, your opinions as to what raw, unanalysed, unverified data might mean are not themselves objective, scientific facts but rather speculation that has a clear racist bias.

I think you have talked far more personal attacks on me than I on you. After all, I have been mostly attacking your opinions as racist and the fragility of the conclusions you have drawn from the data you have referenced, interpreted and shared, even if the data was originally posted by another poster.

@LifetimesAgo

“I’ve made no comments about anybody’s country of origin”
You posted comments regarding countries of origin:

“men raised in violent, misogynistic countries”

”If we change the cultural norms of our society e.g. by importing many high risk individuals from countries….. from cultures where violence and rape of women and children is normalised and seldom punished will obviously make it far less safe for women to go about their daily lives.”

”The men who are UK citizens raised here will have a far, far lower offending rate than men raised in violent, misogynistic countries

“falsely claimed that I posted charts and data..”
I never said you posted charts and data. What I actually said “I’ve been trying to tell you, as have others, that the charts and data you are sharing are not real statistical analysis.”
You replied “I haven’t shared any charts or data. I told you to go and look up the official data published on the websites of the German, Swedish and Danish governments.”
I replied “That’s sharing data by reference without citation.”

“falsely claimed I was stereotyping people of particular nationalities”

You did indeed stereotype people of non British nationalities as a monolith:

“young men from these specific backgrounds obviously pose and even higher risk than those who have been raised in our own [British] society,”

“these particular young men have come from misogynistic [nonBritish] cultures where rape and violence is far more common and frequently normalised or not even considered to be illegal, so quite obviously on average they will pose a higher individual risk than men of the same age who have been raised in the UK”

“lived in barbaric [nonBritish] societies”

“if you take large numbers of young men from such cultures/ backgrounds and suddenly put them in the middle of a civilised [British] society”

“The issue isn’t about the proportion of rapes committed by people of each nationality as that would be meaningless unless you assess this data against the proportion of the population with that nationality. I.e. what matters is the relative risk, the likelihood of offending per person of that nationality, to reflect the risk that a specific individual is likely to pose and expose that these risks are far, far higher for people of some nationalities than others..”

falsely claimed that I was being racist and making comments about people from specific ethnic backgrounds,

While I did say you were being racist, you were the one that assumed it was about ethnicity. I clarified for you that the basis for my saying your comments were racist were due to national origin/nationality not ethnicity. That was when I posted the definition of racism. Your accusation I claimed you were making comments about people from specific ethnic backgrounds is false.

I think your hate speech is more of a talk guidelines violation than my pointing out hate speech. You really need to reflect on the impacts of what you are posting.

Part of the issue is that most British men aren't interested in having sex with twelve year olds. It's only really genuine paedophiles that are, and even they know it's wrong. However, it's legal to marry a nine year old in some middle eastern countries.

This means that many of these young male immigrants are a much greater risk to young girls because they by default regard them in the way a young British male might regard an attractive 21yo. The documented cases speak for themselves. Two sisters (10yo and 11yo) were gang raped.

Another guy grabbed a 13yo and called his friend to come and join in. He filmed the ordeal and was seen to be laughing. She was pleading that they not rape her. His excuse was that she had led him on. This speaks to the fact that he didn't see her age as an issue as any British man would know that having sex with a minor is illegal even if they 'consent' to it.

Personally I’d rather know how many serving police officers have previous convictions or who are suspects in current investigations or who have otherwise failed vetting but still have a job. Just how many bad apples are there?

I clearly defined race and racial discrimination for you upthread, it includes national origin.

I gave examples of many problematic statements you made regarding national origin/nationality that were racist. These were opinions, not facts.

I have never said data is racist, but that the data is being misrepresented in such as way as to imply racist conclusions, many of which you have unthinkingly lapped up and seem to enjoy repeating. Any challenge to the lack of proper data analysis is reacted to angrily by you and you reach for that report button. You don’t want ti discuss data or statistical analysis. Your mind is set.

There is no sense denying it. Your posts are all there for anyone to read.

exposed to environments where there is more violence which we know for a fact makes someone more likely to be violent. No, that’s not a fact either.

I think if anyone is doing any blathering it’s clearly you.

Yet more nonsense. I think having read many hundreds of psychological studies I don’t need to do a “mad google search”, because unlike you I actually know what I’m talking about.

Perhaps you should do a “mad google search” and inform yourself before embarrassing yourself further?

They won’t because the research shows that victims of violence are more likely to become repeat victims of violence. The research doesn’t show the kind of causal link they are implying. There was probably a bit of a mad google search followed by a decision to blather in the hopes they could divert the attention from the racist stereotyping of any non British nationality of man in the UK being “far more likely” to be a sex offender.

The article is from 2025

I know.
But take no notice.
The slinging round of the racist token is being increasingly thrown round by everyone who doesn’t understand the argument.
As you say science and facts aren’t racist.
They have nothing and I mean nothing to counter argue with any logic.

That’s sharing data by reference without citation.
You seem awfully angry to jump to saying I’m lying when I was actually being generous enough to acknowledge you had shared ( bad) data by passing reference to some forms of it,