Refugees

[Rinatinabina]

Do you think people generally would be more open to receiving refugees if they were primarily women and children?

For example if there were mainly women in tents in Calais do you think Britain generally would be happier accepting them than they are men?

YABU: it wouldn’t make a difference
YANBU: people would be more welcoming to women

@ThinWomansBrain

From another recent thread on here about offering refuge in your own home, there were quite a few "women and children only" responses. Quite why posters assume that refugee males are more likely to be paedophiles that their own husbands or sons, not quite sure.

What a bizarre take. People's husbands and sons are their family. Strangers are strangers.

It's entirely understandable that people would prefer to offer safety to women and children.

I think the issue people have is the disconnect between the narrative of 'desperate, vulnerable people fleeing war' and the reality of fit, healthy young men who are prepared to cross through multiple safe countries to cherry pick where they end up. The gangs of Muslim men who have been convicted in recent years of sexually abusing and sometimes murdering women in western countries also doesn't help. Large number of young men without their families may be best placed to find work and put down roots, but they are also a threat to the safety and security of their destination countries.

I'd never thought of it like that. Certainly parents and children should be treated more sympathetically but I have no problem with welcoming refugees at all. If I had a place where they could stay whilst getting on their feet, I'd offer it.

Johnson's government talks up helping Ukrainean refugees but erects all sorts of barriers to their actually reaching the UK - lots of forms to fill in, documents to produce, translations required, visa centres far from Calais, etc. Pritti Patel is one the worst Home Secretaries we have ever had, the Home Office has a terrible history with refugees (just think of Windrush) and there needs to be a clear out.

if they were pale christians that would fit in with the culture maybe. coming from a country with a passport and biometrics so you can ascertain who they are, very very helpful and then there is recognizable education.

Not to forget bank accounts and jobs.

@AlexaShutUp

I used to work with unaccompanied minors, ie children. They were treated like shit by the asylum system, and they faced a huge amount of racism in the local community. I found it hard to believe that people could be so cold about kids who had been through the most unimaginable trauma. I guess their faces didn't fit.

So no, I don't think it would make a huge amount of difference.

^ That is awful poor kids.

Women don't have the same capability as men in war/fighting/physicality.

And they would be in even greater danger than men. History has shown what invading forces do to women. Its actually used as a type of warfare.

That being said, I dont think men should be made to fight if they don't want to.

montysma1, if the UK was invaded I assume you wouldnt expect anyone to fight for you then.