14 of those arrested during Ballymena riots have since been reported for domestic abuse

Loads of people on this board try saying this all the time. They’ve flocked here pretending to be GC (and even pretending that women’s rights mean anything to them at all) just to push the false narrative that VAWG is an immigration problem, rather than more obviously a MEN problem.

I'll repeat I have never seen anyone deny VAWG is a men problem. What I and others say is that the current chaos of uncontrolled illegal migration is allowing large numbers of men from culturally and politically misogynist contries into this country with no vetting etc. This presents an escalation of threats to women and must be treated seriously and specifically. I've seen plenty of so called feminists denying the reality of grooming gangs. Just as I remember feminists excusing FGM as a cultural practice.
We've already recognised this in honour killings, fgm, forced marriage.
I think some feminists are blinkered and believe (to quote Bertrand Russell.) 'The fallacy of the superior virtue of the oppressed'

I see you still haven't posted a link. I suspect you are quoting from:
https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/uk-attitudes-to-immigration-1018742pub01-115.pdf
The fieldwork was carried out in 2022, which is 4 years ago now.

You seem to have incorrectly quoted two statistics
78% agree immigration doesn’t cause an increase in crime.
The percentage is actually 31%. You seem to have added on the 46% who opted for 'hard to say'.
79% agree immigration doesn’t affect unemployment.
The percentage is actually 41%. Again, you seem to have added on the 37% who opted for 'hard to say'.

I note that you did not quote this data
For each of the following statements about the effects of immigration, please tell me whether you agree or disagree with it. Leads to social conflict
39% agree 19% disagree

Yes, I am aware you belong to that cohort @Imnobody4

Can the anti-immigration because we have been told they’re more likely to be violent rapists cohort please say
Nobody on this board belongs to that 'cohort'. Please stop using supercilious stereotyping as a substitute for rational discussion.

I’m here because I’m a feminist woman with an opinion.

I haven’t belittled anyone, I have belittled the view point being expressed as it is politically motivated propaganda based in misinformation that is weaponising the feminist issue of stopping VAWG into racist attitudes towards immigrants as well as causing civil unrest and riots in the streets.

Civil unrest doesn’t help women. It enables a chaotic lawless environment that leads to yet more VAWG.

It is concerning that you think criticism of a viewpoint is belittling women. If you think that, then surely your criticism of my viewpoint is also belittling women?

I suggest you not take political conversations so personally.

Loads of people on this board try saying this all the time. They’ve flocked here pretending to be GC (and even pretending that women’s rights mean anything to them at all) just to push the false narrative that VAWG is an immigration problem, rather than more obviously a MEN problem.

The problem is they think women are stupid and they are having trouble keeping up their concern as soon as we start taking about VAWG that isn’t committed by a racial minority. Then it’s all “no one is saying…” and “but we shouldn’t import MORE”, as though all immigrants are just like the worst scum we produce ourselves.

They are very obvious.

Saying my opinion aligns with the majority and having evidence as to why I think that is very different from others writing as if they speak for all women.

In addition, requesting that we not write as if we speak for all women is surely not a contentious request? It is a neutral request. I am sure you would have been applauding such a request if a poster of your own view had said it.

SummerFeverVenice You are coming onto a feminist board to ask women not to say certain things and accuse them of not thinking for themselves.

That post wasnt part in any discussion, just an attempt to belittle women who want to speak.

You really should give a link when quoting polling statistics. Ta

I’m not spokeswomen for the majority btw, I’m just saying the anti-immigrant men because they are rapey opinion is a minority opinion as shown in polls and studies, therefore it is only fair to not write as if this opinion is all for women and not sharing it means you are dismissing women. As if there were some consensus among most women that agrees with the most immigrant men are rapey because of ethnicity, nationality or religion (coded as culture) because these 3 are protected characteristics explicitly listed as types of racism.

Public Attitudes to Migration - Migration Watch UK https://share.google/pjcqZxrjA7yy1uagt

This shows a somewhat different result to the figures you have quoted.

Regardless neither of the polls directly show how Women's concerns are reported. The point I was making is that you claimed the majority of women think the same as you and were telling people off for speaking for all women!

Also, I worded my post as a polite request. ”please say”
Anyone who feels it applies to them can decline to acquiesce.
It is not an order.

I suppose it is unsurprising that my reasonable, polite request to not pretend to speak for all women is met with hostility given my target audience already has issues with misdirecting anger.

But yes, you can obviously ignore my request. You’re as free as I am.

Yes, there have been academic studies and polls in recent years that show the majority have a positive view of immigration contrary to the political rhetoric:

95% are ok having immigrants as neighbours.
79% agree immigration doesn’t affect unemployment.
78% agree immigration doesn’t cause an increase in crime.
70% agree immigration strengthens cultural diversity
63% agree immigrants fill important job vacancies
58% say let anyone come so long as jobs are available
10% say let anyone come who wants to

Women can say what they fuck they want, SummerFeverVenice.**

I am a woman too, so why the hostility & swearing at my speaking how I want to?

I don’t think it is unreasonable to request that some women not say they are speaking for women’s concerns on VAWG as that implies they are speaking for the majority of women? Including myself as a woman.

I am not saying other women can’t express their opinions, I am asking women to be better about expressing that it is their opinion and be honest about it being a minority opinion instead of writing like they speak for the majority of British women or all British women.

As for the use of dehumanising language when referring to immigrants, of course the women using such language can ignore my request. However, such language which objectifies human beings into imported things rips off the tissue paper thin mask their opinion is related to the safety of women as their racism is in plain view.

So it's do as I say not as I do with you @SummerFeverVenice ? What gives you the right to be the spokesperson for the majority of women? Has there been a national poll asking women this question? I must have missed it if it has.

Women can say what they fuck they want, SummerFeverVenice.

Women think for themselves, they can talk about their experiences, how they feel.

They can even comment on party politics and disagree with the government, if thats what they want to do.

It doesn't matter if women think the same way as 99% of the population, or they are a lone voice. Women have the right to speak about what they want to, how they want to.

Can the anti-immigration because we have been told they’re more likely to be violent rapists cohort please say “my concerns as a woman” or “some women’s concerns” rather than “women’s concerns” because the majority of British women do not believe the right wing propaganda that migrant men are of any higher risk than home grown men? And that the real issue is past 15 years of underfunding, leading to cutting police forces such that DV and sexual violence is just not being properly policed or prosecuted. And those aren’t the only crimes that are on the rise due to lack of proper policing. Knife crime, county lines & organised crime, human trafficking, online scams, etc

You’re in a vocal minority, you don’t speak for the majority of women or for women like me.

You also do not have a monopoly on concerns about VAWG. Those of us who have seen the propaganda for what it is, aren’t dismissing VAWG, we are dismissing the weaponisation of concerns about VAWG to fuel xenophobic, racist civil unrest.

One last request, please do not characterise our asylum system for refugees as “importing men” this is dehumanising as we are talking about human beings in desperate conditions, not chlorine washed US chicken or French wine. You import things, never humans. At least not since slavery.

You are arguing against a point few are making.

The argument against this type of migration isnt that all or most of the migrants are violent, its that the total effect of migrant violence on communities is bad.

If a percentage of the migrants are causing mayhem, everyone in the community is effected.

The asylum system and how it impacts on local populations is complex, but some want to over simplify it - why are women complaining about these immigrants, when their husbands are beating them already? What difference does a couple more rapist do to a community, really?

Some also belittling women's real concerns by assuming the risk isnt there, or want to imply seeing risk is racism. If a new housing estate is built and 100 local men move in with their families, some of those men will be a danger to women in the community. Are we really pretending that its the same risk when 100 asylum seekers are place in HMO in a street?

I agree.

Likewise if the police and riot officers there to serve and protect were looked into, what percentage of these men would have a history of DV?

No — it’s being used to discredit “anti-immigration sentiment”

Doesn't being arrested for rioting already discredit any claimed motivation?

'The fact that some violent men hold certain political views doesn’t mean the vast majority of non-violent people who share those views don’t care about women and girls'.

That sounds very reasonable, but isn't the corollary equally true,
that some male migrants don't care about women and girls, but that doesn’t mean the vast majority of male migrants hold certain views about women and girls?

How can you say
'most anti-migration men are grand although there's incontrovertible evidence that some of them are violent sexist thugs'
without also saying that
'most migrant men are grand although there's incontrovertible evidence that some of them are violent sexist thugs'.

Surely both statements about both groups of men are true?

That men arrested for public violence tend to have form for the domestic variety is no surprise - and fairly well researched. As is the fact that men involved in far right and racist violence tend to be drawn to the cause as an opportunity to be violent, rather than adopting violent ends in service of the cause.

What would be useful is more attention on the inverse question: is domestic violence a predictor of other violent crime?

If it's known to predict - and therefor offer chances to prevent - the public crimes, that could help investigating and prosecuting domestic violence and MVAWAG to be taken more seriously.

We need to be able to walk and chew gum on this.

That a significant proportion of the men protesting against immigrants are guilty of DV comes as no surprise - violent men are drawn to protests and riots. Any excuse to get involved in a punch up and vent their aggression.

At the same time, their involvement in these protests need to not blind us, or allow us to be deflected from, the very real problem of high numbers of undocumented young men arriving on our shores from places where women and girls are seen as lesser than. Where there are no or little consequences for rape. Where data from other countries suggest they pose a significantly higher risk to women and girls than men from this country.

BOTH are a problem. Both need to be scrutinised and dealt with.

I have no time whatsoever for anyone who seeks to hand-wave one side of this away, no matter which side they are biased towards or against.

Can’t stand these arguments. Aside from being logically flawed, they use women who are victims of domestic violence as a means to a political end.

Is the concern really that violent men are being released back into the community and going on to commit further offences? No — it’s being used to discredit “anti-immigration sentiment” and defend predominantly male migration.

The fact that some violent men hold certain political views doesn’t mean the vast majority of non-violent people who share those views don’t care about women and girls. Most people opposed to mass migration are neither violent nor domestic abusers.

They’re doing exactly what they claim to oppose: using victims to make a political point. And that’s particularly galling coming from someone whose job is supposed to be advocating for women but is actually using their experience to advocate for male migrants.

It is the way the concerns about importing cultures that are more misogynistic than the UK's just as we were beginning to gain ground in fighting home grown misogyny that has laid fertile ground for these violent men to create this narrative.

Women who are concerned about the way culture has been used as an excuse to not tackle misogyny and cries of racism have been used to shut down voices of concern are not saying that vawg from British men is fine or non existent.

Violent men will take advantage on every opportunity they can to be violent, and the liberal consensus that we need to shut down discussion on cultural differences is one of the things they have been able to jump on.