Why is it mostly men on the boats?

[LinedOverLatte]

Inspired by a different thread relating to yesterday’s march.

Many of the comments on the thread about the march are rude about men, suggesting these ‘gammons’ are violent thugs who’ve told their women to stay at home.

They are men looking for a fight apparently.

One quote - “the fact that it’s only men should raise questions...”

So, my question is “it is mostly men coming in on the boats - shouldn’t that ALSO raise questions…?”

This was like it was like here before the NHS, people were hungry and dirt poor.

they need to improve their own countries

Oh don't be so naive. These men don't care about women and children, they're out to look after themselves. I posted this on another thread about a news item I had seen. There was a boat crammed with young men and a woman was trying to get on but was shoved off by some of the men. Not one of those males tried to help her on there. The same with a man and his two young children, one of them he had on his shoulders, his wife was with him and they couldn't get on the boat either. The children looked really distressed.

These crossings need to stop.

There’s a wonderful Stewart Lee piece, about people staying in their own countries and making them prosperous places to be.

You should watch it, it’s a laugh!

Did you go up to them and ask which countries they were from? Unless you did, how could you possibly know whether they were from ‘war torn’ countries ?!

It’s become quite the narrative, on mumsnet, that all these brave men are pushing ahead to make a safe home for the ladies they left behind them.

This BBC report suggests they come more for the gig economy. Many come to deal drugs tpo, and drug dealers already here tend to be predominantly men, don’t know why - possibly something to do with the ‘gangsta’ image and male aggression. Women are more likely to be made victims of the sex industry. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy9xyn30yj0o

In the past it was suggested that men from misogynistic cultures came lured by the hope of gaining relations with the loose women of the West, to put it politely. This works with the sexual harassment too often associated with them.

The article doesn’t really suggest any of that, it interrogates the claim by others that these things are pull factors. It cites a study that found the informal economy in the UK was slightly smaller than elsewhere.

I have already explained I live near a beach where the dingy arrive, I have seen them,my friends and I have been on the receiving end of nastiness from them.. jeering. My friend is now frightened to walk her dog in the evening..

So they get off their dinghies and immediately start being nasty to local dog walkers?

You’d think they had other priorities!

No,they are put up in our seafront hotels, follow you, making signs gesticulating, how about a f*. We in our 70s. Our gds don't go there anymore. One has moved. You might think its funny ,it's not when there's a large amount,can be 20.

They can apply for a work visa from the first safe country they reach. It’s indicated that many of the migrants are economic; they are coming here for a better life and want to work. Why pay thousands to criminals if you can pay to come legally?

Did you actually read the article? None of it shows positive or sensible reasons for these men to come here.

It clearly shows that these men know they have little chance of gaining asylum in France because France has stricter processing and, despite receiving a similar or larger number of applications, it accepts far fewer so either the men don’t try, or those rejected as having no reason for asylum to be granted end up in Calais on a boat to England.

In France there is less ability for them to work illegally, they have to present regularly in order to receive their support, they are processed quickly but unfortunately not removed when rejected. They can work legally while their claims are being processed, and some are required to pay for their own housing as, like the UK, their asylum accommodation is overwhelmed with the numbers applying, but unlike the UK, taxpayers aren’t funding hotels for them when they are able to provide for themselves.

If the negative reception they receive in France makes them want to come to the UK instead, why isn’t the negative reception they receive here any kind of deterrent? The negative reception they receive in France is because they are illegal immigrants, with no right to be there - they have not claimed asylum, and if they did they would be treated differently, but they choose instead to stay illegally in France because they want a perceived easier life in the UK.

The reality for coming to the UK for “family connections” is that any distant relative is seen as a connection, although with culturally large families, this could mean that one person living here could attract dozens more family members.

The idea that those asylum seekers who lack close relatives or good friends in the UK can travel to the country in the knowledge that they will be able to rely on some support from the very large diaspora and ethnic minority communities that are to be found in London and other large British cities is laughable, given that we’re constantly told that France and Germany accept far more refugees than the UK does - they would have more “community support” if they applied in one of those countries.

“Cultural and historical factors also play an important part in the decision of some asylum seekers to leave France and to move to the UK. They may speak good English while having no or a much more limited knowledge of French. They often come from countries that were previously British colonies or under the UK sphere of influence.” Given we’re frequently told that citizens in former British colonies hate the British, why would we want to extend our welcome to those who actively hate us?

“Due to a comparative absence of government regulation, the UK’s ‘shadow economy’ is much larger than that which exists on the other side of the Channel.” Is this really seen as a positive reason to welcome people who we know are likely to become criminals as soon as they land here? They are provided with all the basic essentials - shelter, food, water, clothing, entertainment, and free spending money, yet they still want more and are willing and happy to become criminals for it

Did you actually read my comment?

I said this article shows some of the reasons WHY they don’t stay in France. I made no comment on whether they were sensible or positive reasons to make the crossing.

There are NOT any safe routes. You cannot apply for asylum from a refugee camp.

I can understand and sympathise with why people would leave war zones or even just really impoverished countries or places where freedom is restricted. But I'm afraid that understanding and empathy starts to wane when you apparently need to escape France.

Why the obsession with visas. People seeking asylum don’t have visas. They’re not immigrants, they’re asylum seekers.

I’ve asked this before, if you want all arrivals to have a visa already in place, is your preference that we completely close the asylum system?

They’re not reasons, they are excuses to justify their criminality.

There are plenty of safe routes; the majority of asylum seekers do not come on small boats. Applying in France is now a safe route.

A large number of “asylum seekers” are economic migrants who are told they can get in to the UK by claiming asylum. Many come from awful places, and when their claim for asylum is rejected they are given humanitarian protection because we cannot bear to send them back to a safe but poor place, so we can all just stump up and support them indefinitely. The reason they don't apply for a work visa is because they know they wont get one; asylum is just a loophole which needs to be closed.

Do you have much experience of these men?

Because it’s one of the only human trafficking routes available to men. Women and children are trafficking via household/commercial labour and sex trafficking. Men are not as appealing from a trafficking perspective, so the only routes open to them are these more dangerous ones via boat. The money is paid directly to the traffickers for passage, unlike for women and children who are more likely to end up in servitude type situations (nail bars, sex work, house staff).

You cannot apply from France:

"you cannot apply for asylum from outside the UK; you must be physically present in the UK to submit an asylum claim. There is no asylum visa to allow you to travel to the UK legally for the purpose of claiming asylum. To apply, you must enter the UK and then register your claim with the UK Home Office by informing a border force officer or calling the Home Office directly."

Yes. I employ many former asylum seekers who are now on a variety of visas and contributing productively.

Thank you for confirming you’d like to close the asylum process entirely.

It's almost impossible to get a tourist/student visa from a warzone.
And if you can afford to study abroad and pay university fees, you are unlikely in need of asylum as you can go virtually anywhere in the world with enough money.

They aren’t “left behind” they make their way to closer “safe” zones. Which is usually a refugee camp in the next country over. These already take 85% of refugees and are overwhelmed so are not good, particularly for families. Sometimes they move to be with family who can put them up temporarily.

Half of people granted asylum in the U.K. are women so the idea that only men make the journey is absolutely false. Only men make the most difficult journeys.

Name them.

You can’t apply in France. So that’s not one. Name any of the safe, legal routes to claim asylum in the U.K.

I’ll wait….

You cannot apply for asylum in the UK while residing in France through the usual process; however, you may be eligible for the UK/European Applicant Transfer Scheme if you are currently in France and meet specific criteria. This scheme allows eligible asylum seekers in France to submit an "expression of interest" online, which the Home Office reviews to make an entry clearance application on their behalf. If successful, you'll be given an appointment in France to provide biometrics at a visa application centre.

Sounds pretty safe and legal to me. Obviously wont work if you don't actually have a good case for seeking asylum.