Grooming gangs being labelled as "Muslim grooming gangs"

[Olga009933]

Why is religious heritage of child sex offenders only mentioned in headlines when the offenders are of south Asian and predominantly Muslim heritage.
Why not just label them as "grooming gangs" or "Asian grooming gangs" (if wanting to be be specific).
Just thinking and wondering about the thousands of white British and presumably non-Muslim sex offenders who make the news. How many of them are labelled "Christian sex attacker" or "Jewish pervert" etc? Why is the religious heritage of a sex offender only mentioned why the offenders are of Muslim background?
If mentioning religion for one particular demographic then surely its only fair to mention the religious heritage of them all?

It seems to me you're angry at the wrong thing. What you should be angry at is the institutional ignoring by those in power of the systematic rape of young vulnerable girls. That’s what needs to be addressed first and foremost. The fact that the overwhelming majority of the rapists came from particular communities, as did the majority of the victims, cannot be ignored.
By focussing on some kind of protest about the nuances of who the rapists were, you're completely ignoring the victims.

These gangs are overwhelmingly Pakistani muslim heritage.
However, there have been men of other non Pakistani muslim heritage in some of the gangs.
I have seen mugshots of Somali, North and West African men amongst the Pakistani muslim mugshots and these other men have all been Muslim whilst their targets all have the commonality of being White, vulnerable, young and female.
If there were any non muslims amongst the perpetrators, this would have been concentrated on so as to "take the heat off" the narrative that Muslim cultures in our towns and cities do not generally subscribe to more visceral misogyny than most others.
The head in the sand authorities would have said so, too.
It would be a lie to say that these groups are South Asian as that would only be as specific as saying "male".
The specificity is muslim.
The mosques are probably the linking place as Islam is not an ethnic or race unique religion.
I am not sure why you are finding it so hard to accept and comprehend.
It's not like Honour Killings/attacks where the vast majority murdered are Muslim and murdered by Muslims, but a significant minority of victims are not from Muslim families, are Caucasian/Sikh/Hindu/Turkish/Indo European.
And if we are including FGM in Honour Attacks, FGM is a phenomena in Sub Saharan Africa outwith Islam.
Hence why Honour Attacks are not called Muslim Honour Attacks/South Asian Honour Attacks/Black Honor Attacks/White Honour Attacks.
The commonality/motive is female as property responsible for the image of a family.

Wonder what would happen if a western man went to a Muslim country and started flashing the women there, yet alone raping them? Or if he was openly critical of their culture? 🤔

This is a disingenuous claim.
One of the many difficulties the enquiry faced was the fact that the police often didn’t record the race of offenders ( because of concerns that would be seen as racist..)

I’m sure the vast majority of Pakistani Muslims are horrified by what’s happened to these girls. But I would hope they would agree that it all has to be addressed openly and honestly.

50 lashes.

I’ve just used three different corpora to search for use of “grooming gangs” and there are no examples of it being used pre-2000, so how are they finding accurate data for patterns of crime over 40 years when a) grooming gangs isn’t a crime and b) the term didn’t exist years ago?

It's kinda scary that our capital city is majority white demographic yet 2/3 of sex crimes are committed by foreign nationals.

I saw a Reddit thread on a board for Pakistanis. They were all discussing the scandal in the UK. They condemned it but openly acknowledge that this abuse emerged as a result of backwards Muslim men dehumanising women in general but non-Muslim women more specifically. The label Muslim is a VERY important detail.

Out of curiosity, I read up a bit about the Rotherham convictions.
Most had male Muslim rooted names but there were a few other names and two non Muslim female names (imprisonment and conspiracy to procure prostitutes)
There were Asian and Muslim girls targeted too but they were less likely to come forward.
It's all so sickening.

Catholic PRIESTS have committed to Catholicism, have studied it and are expected to follow and preach Catholic teachings. People trusted children in their care specifically because they were priests.
These vile groomers are being called Muslims because they're from a Muslim country. The UK is a Christian country - does every White British person get called Christian? No! Just because you're from a Christian Country, celebrate Christmas/Easter and have a Christian name, it does not mean you know anything about Christianity or represent the Christian faith. That is the point of the OP.

Epstein and Weinstein are Jewish, but that was not mentioned in any headline because their vile actions had nothing to do with Judaism.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/09/04/british-tourist-gang-raped-israelis-ayia-napa-cyprus/

Israel is a Jewish country yet the accused were not described as such because their nationality does not mean they subscribe to that faith.

All grooming/raping victims should be supported and justice should be served to their vile perpetrators, but focusing on one type of grooming gang leaves the victims of other grooming gangs unsupported and it makes it easier to accuse certain people of things they haven't done e.g. Ellie Williams! Even when one of the guys she accused was married to a White woman so he can't have thought white women were "lesser" or whatever.

Just apply Sharia law. Sex outside of marriage = Adultery = flogging.

Why were they mainly Pakistani and not say Indonesian, Malaysian, Arab, etc? Why is the Muslim part the most important?

The gangs are described as ‘Islamist’s’ who are of the Muslim faith. The crime cannot be considered cultural.

A Muslim is not necessarily an ‘ Islamist’ Most UK law abiding Muslims would not condone the acts of those ‘Islamist’ predators.

Sikh girls were initially targeted. I have a Sikh dad and an English mum. I was taken to a talk called “Kaur (Sikh female name) to Khan (Muslim surname)” at a Sikh temple. Here we were told that there were instances all across the UK where Muslim men had targeted Sikh girls - preying on those with low self esteem, getting them drunk, blackmailing them with pictures etc. The men would even pretend to be Sikh.

We were also told the police had been I informed and were doing NOTHING.

These men were paedophiles, it’s not just grooming, rape, etc- it is paedophilia of very young girls aged 11,12 & 13. Mohammed also liked very young girls, he consummated his marriage with a 9 year old at the age of 54. Some Muslims try hard to ignore this fact, while others attempt to state it was a different time and was acceptable. Their prophet had a desire for a child, and that’s a plain fact. The Quran and hadiths speak about marriage to those who are not yet menstruating, there is also mention of “yes you can rape women captured in battle”, jihad is a constant state of battle against unbelievers, so yes this would be permissible in Islam, despite your protestations, Islam is a religion created by a 7th century illiterate murdering paedophile, I’m not really sure what more you would expect.

A quote from one of the Rotherham gang:

“All white women are only good for one thing. For men like me to fuck and use like trash. That’s all women like you are worth.”

Unfortunately it is a widely held belief among some Muslim men that non-Muslims or kafir are fair game. White women are seen as slags. The label Muslim is extremely important in understanding the crimes.

Labour will stop you from saying these things, as soon we will have a law that prevents people from saying bad things about Islam.

It’s good that your temple were actively involved and passing on the information needed to protect their young girls.

These talks were being held in multiple temples.

You know who wasn’t taken to these talks? The poor girls in care without a single person in this world giving a damn about them.

Admittedly I have stopped reading news sites of late, but before that I can’t recall ever seeing them called Muslim grooming gangs. It was always grooming gangs or maybe “predominantly Asian grooming gangs”. I have read loads of books of personal accounts of the victims and they certainly never used the phrase Muslim grooming gangs. Not sure where you are getting this from tbh.

Some were muslim who targeted white girls. FACT.
Some were muslim who targeted non-white girls. FACT.
Some were not muslim who targeted girls. FACT
Some were muslim who targets boys. FACT.
Some were not muslim who targeted boys. FACT.
Some were not investigated because they were muslim. FACT.
All who were not investigated were because they were male. FACT.
People didn't do their jobs because they were muslim. FACT.
People didn't do their jobs because they were male. FACT.
People turned a blind eye because they were muslim. FACT.
People turned a blind eye because they were male. FACT
People turn a blind eye because these girls were considered 'prostitutes'. FACT.
People turned a blind eye because of misogyny. FACT.
The definition relates to child prostitution. FACT.
There is a quota on rape cases letting most rapists go. FACT.
Safeguarding agencies have this crime at lower than section 47. FACT.
ALL of these crimes and cover ups happened because of misogyny. FACT.

Precisely, the label Muslim is highly relevant in this. Muslims don’t have to follow Islam you know, it’s not a race or a culture, it’s a choice, even if they were raised in it. They have to believe mohammed was the best man that ever lived and an example to all mankind, because that is what is said about him. However they also have to understand what the hadiths that they follow share about who he was as a man. He had a sleeping nursing mother killed, while her baby was on her breast, because she insulted him. He was a paedophile. He had 800 Jews beheaded in one day. He was a warlord, a sexually perverse individual and it is boasted of him that he had sex with all his many wives in one night in the regular. He’s no example to anyone, apart from men like the ones in the Muslim grooming gangs. Please remember that remaining in, following, and converting to Islam are personal choices, even if being raised in it, is not. Therefore the facts of Islam should not be hidden, and we shouldn’t help those who profess it to suppress the truth of it, or defend them like they are innocent children, even if they themselves wouldn’t act the way their prophet did, or fulfil his commands, many which involve bloodshed and atrocities against those who are weaker. Why defend it? Would you defend other doctrines that contain such commands? If so, the problem lies with you- not those who speak out against it, or those who compare Islam to the actions of a number who follow it, because those comparisons are spot on, the prophet they follow was no better than these men named in the grooming gangs.

Sikhs have always integrated well into UK culture and I work with a lot of Sikhs in the construction sector. It's telling that they're generally well respected and don't face the same stigma that Muslim culture often does. I can see Sikhs standing shoulder to shoulder with white British people to tackle this as they have with various other community issues.