Why are governments putting women and girls at higher risk of sex crimes?

[Absentmindedsmile]

Fact: Hundreds of thousands of men are entering Europe (as in the continent), from countries where women and girls are second class citizens.
**
Fact: The sex crime rate statistics associated with different nationalities living in the UK have been published. An example is provided below.
**
**Facts:
….the [sex crime] rates, based on convictions per 10,000 of the population put Afghans, with 77 convictions, at the top with a rate of 59 per 10,000 – 22.3 times that of Britons.
**
They were followed by Eritreans, who accounted for 59 convictions at a rate of 53.6 per 10,000 of their population.
**
Britons accounted for 12,619 sex offence convictions, representing a rate of 2.66 per per 10,000 of their population in England and Wales.
**
https://archive.md/6AXAy Archive version
**
Fact: This example data blows up any erroneous claims from people suggesting that British men commit more sex crimes when numbers in the population are accounted for / are more likely to commit a sex crime.
**
There’s above is factual data. It is not racist to provide it. To claim this, is quite simply, wrong. Perhaps it’s projection, the mind boggles.

To want ‘no debate’ and bleet on with incorrectly placed accusations of racism, is to shut down people’s valid concerns.

Tin hat on for the people who want no debate on this issue, and instead of protecting women and girls, insist on protecting men from countries where women and girls are treated as second class citizens.

More data has been promised.
**
**

😂 yes indeed - utterly bizarre posts 😂😂

Climate change isn’t the reason. It’s poverty. Or the lure of easy money. A rich country with poor environmental conditions will be fine—you won’t see so many Gulf Arabs or Singaporeans as refugees.

Honestly the global south needs cheap energy, as much as possible, to fuel development. That’s the only way to stop them coming: it’s a win-win.

Amnesty International

WHY DO PEOPLE LEAVE THEIR COUNTries

There are many reasons why it might be too difficult or dangerous for people to stay in their own countries. For example, children, woman and men flee from violence, war, hunger, extreme poverty, because of their sexual or gender orientation, or from the consequences of climate change or other natural disasters.
Often people will face a combination of these difficult circumstances.

People who leave their countries are not always fleeing danger. They might believe they have a better chance of finding work in another country because they have the education or capital to seek opportunities elsewhere. Others might want to join relatives or friends who are already living abroad. Or they might seek to start or finish their education in another country. There are lots of different reasons for people to start a journey to build a life in a new country.

Because the "circumstances of the individual" are assessed in the most part by oratory evidence. Very few asylum seekers have anything solid to demonstrate their persecution. Think about it for a moment. Is it likely that they would have a copy of an arrest warrant, police reports or court documents for example? I can tell you that the majority do not. At present the case officer is generally only able to judge a claim on their perception of that individual (in other words whether they think that person is being honest). Their story also has to correlate with known areas of persecution in the country from which they say they have fled. So for example, if they say they are gay and come from Libya then that's a box ticked. No backgrounds checks into their lives, families, alleged persecution, criminal records or even existence are made by the Home Office. Would you like to explain to me how you think the asylum process works?

the country from which they say they have fled. So for example, if they say they are gay and come from Libya then that's a box ticked. No backgrounds checks into their lives, families, alleged persecution, criminal records or even existence are made by the Home Office.
Precisely.
And they have endless coaching available on TikTok etc to give them the script.

Amnesty at least admits it. None of the conditions of the final paragraph are a basis for asylum, but Amnesty doesn’t care.

There was a hilarious case iirc in Ireland where an asylum seeker said he was gay so was allowed to stay. Later on he had a wife so was asked about it—and he said oh, actually I’m bisexual.

And they accepted it!

You conveniently miss that climate change is one of the reasons.

If people don't meet the conditions, they wont get granted asylum.

It’s not recognized as a basis of an asylum application.

I've already said that that the process depends on the individual. There is no one size fits all way of assessing asylum cases.

The asylum process isn't public so it's highly unlikely that you know anything about it. It can take several years because evidence needs to be collected.

So when the facts and stats completely destroy any pro mass migration argument lefties have, the only option left is that these stats must be false

The delusion is off the scale 😂

Do you guys have any idea what’s happened in Sweden due to mass migration? Educate yourselves, and maybe use your “critical thinking skills” you apparently have in abundance

Huge thanks to @sleepwouldbenice for posting this analysis from Sky News.

The short version: it shows that Afghan males are actually about three times as likely as British males to commit VAWG. It uses excellent data from ONS and points out why even this may be an over-estimate.

Sure, this is still a problem. As much as I believe in the concept of refuge, I have no problem dealing harshly with refugees who are soundly convicted of grossly abusing the humanity of others. But this must be done very, very carefully. Nigel Farage and Reform are absolutely the wrong people for that.

According to gov.uk and the web sites of several law firms who represent asylum seekers, it is rare for an asylum claim to be granted solely on the basis of verbal evidence.

Only about 50% of claims decided in the last year were successful. Insufficient evidence is a key reason for tejection.

There is often physical evidence when men practise gay sex, you know.

What is your source for believing that sylum claims are assessed mostly on the basis of oral evidence? The websites of gov.uk and a number of law firms working with asylum seekers emphatically say otherwise.

If you're remotely suggesting that asylum seekers are intimately examined for this or any other purpose then you are you are very, very wrong indeed. Below is just one paragraph on the subject from the "Home Office Policy Instruction on Sexual Orientation in Asylum Claims":

“Detailed questioning in regard to sexual practices must not be asked. Sexually explicit evidence, even if it is provided voluntarily by the claimant, must not in any circumstances be accepted: such evidence does not necessarily have probative value and would of its nature, infringe human dignity, the respect of which is guaranteed by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights”

Thanks, @ginasevern . Now what about that source, contradicting HMG and the expert solicitors?

The stats have done nothing of the sort. All they've done is show that data can be manipulated. Have you read the fact check link posted several times on this thread? Or do you not like facts?

What 'pro mass immigration argument' do 'lefties' have?

Talking about delusional, immigration went through the roof under the Tories. Bet you kept voting for them though.

Pro mass migration
Educate yourself
Loony lefties

Are all phrases I hear from the person I know who fell down the MAGA far right rabbit hole and turned from a rational empathetic human being who liked to learn into a rabid, closed minded, immigrant hating, irrational one with a lack of critical thinking skills and a pair of blinkers.

Interesting seeing it here by people claiming not be far right.

Ahhh it is the debunked data.

Hilarious. Bless you 😂

news.sky.com/story/fact-checking-farage-are-foreigners-more-likely-than-britons-to-commit-sexual-offences-13407029

Absolutely this. The second post in by @genpopwas staggeringly asinine.

Thank you for the calm and rational explanation.

I am interested in these statistics and facts but if this data is incorrect/unfair then it needs looking at again.

So shocking. There are a lot of people trying to minimise the impact of men living in the uk, from countries where women and girls are treated like shit.

The Sky article ties itself in knots. Anyone jumping gleefully on their analysis which purports to show look they’re bad but not as bad as people were told, should be ashamed for refusing to accept that foreign nationals are disproportionately convicted for certain crimes.

The data in the OP has not been debunked - it’s been manipulated by people who can’t / don’t want to accept the truth. As the article itself repeats - Sky News has never once reported on Ministry of Justice data which shows a quarter of sexual assault and rape convictions last year were of foreign nationals.

I’ve said it three times now but I’ll emphasise it again - many Western feminists will prioritise men of an ethnic minority over the women of their own country. Hirsi Ali talks about this in her book Prey.

Ali is a feminist , ex Muslim, who was subjected to FGM in Somalia age 3. She asks Why so few people are talking about the eruption of sexual violence and harassment in Europe’s cities.

She states that No-one in a position of power wants to admit that the problem is linked to the arrival of several million migrants—most of them young men—from Muslim-majority countries.

Ali ‘presents startling statistics, criminal cases and personal testimony.

Among these facts: In 2014, sexual violence in Western Europe surged following a period of stability. In 2018 Germany, “offences against sexual self-determination” rose 36 percent from their 2014 rate; nearly two-fifths of the suspects were non-German.

In Austria in 2017, asylum-seekers were suspects in 11 percent of all reported rapes and sexual harassment cases, despite making up less than 1 percent of the total population.

This violence isn’t a figment of alt-right propaganda, Hirsi Ali says, even if neo-Nazis exaggerate it.

She explains why so many young Muslim men who arrive in Europe engage in sexual harassment and violence, tracing the roots of sexual violence in the Muslim world from institutionalized polygamy to the lack of legal and religious protections for women’.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/40153681-prey

many Western feminists will prioritise men of an ethnic minority over the women of their own country

This cannot be repeated enough. One starts to think that they reserve their empathy for whoever is lowest on the ‘victim hierarchy’. So they care about gender confused men and third-world migrants over first-world women and girls

Repeating it doesn’t make it true