To think the roots of the grooming gangs go back to failures from the 1950s on?

[Carla786]

I was reading Hina Husain's excellent article here and it made me think

https://unherd.com/2025/06/mirpuris-and-the-problem-of-integration/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

that discussion of the roots of the grooming gangs tends to focus on Blair's failed multiculturalism policies, local council/police etc failings.

But what rarely gets talked about is why and how large parts of the northern Mirpuri Pakistani communities were allowed to get to such a self-segregated and dysfunctional state to begin with.
Why was there no research in the 1950s-60s on the clan systems, misogynistic practices prevalent in rural Mirpuri villages when they were encouraged to immigrate? Why PMs from Wilson, Heath, Thatcher etc never appear to make integration of such communities a priority to some extent?

Most stuff just seems to blame PC culture & Tony Blair, who do share a huge amount of blame, but less is asked about why this situation, clearly full of potential issues, was never addressed much from the 60s to 1997...

Yes I agree, if you're right about only being certain groups, Im astounded there isnt some formal social academic study about that, there normally is on groups of criminals.

The Indian sub-continent- consisting of India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan- is not a monolith, even though everyone in it is lumped in the category of "Asian".

There are huge differences in culture and the treatment of women across it. Not that I am claiming that any part of the sub-continent treats women brilliantly. But there are still parts that are way more advanced than others, and it's not a good idea to have a one-size-fits-all approach. Both men and women from Southern India, for instance, are often very highly educated, usually in medicine, engineering, law.. the high-earning professions. Cousin marriage, to take another controversial issue, is not common among Hindu Indians generally, because many follow the traditional system of "gotras", which means you don't marry anyone from the same family.

The Casey report is worth reading on this, though it did mostly conclude that there is not enough good data on grooming gangs. But it urged more investigation, more data collection and less tiptoeing around sensibilities. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-audit-on-group-based-child-sexual-exploitation-and-abuse

I agree with the report. I think women and children should always come first, above any considerations of race, religion, custom, tradition... This especially goes for the vulnerable children- because children is what they were- in Rotherham. They should have been believed and protected. I hope it never happens again.

Yes that is true. Rhe divide between the urban, educated Indian Sikhs & Hindus who migrated here & the rural fundamentalist Mirpuri Pakistanis does seem to explain it at least partially, surely?

Re this : 'Pakistan or Pakistani heritage (Muslim), not Indian (Hindu) as such'. I don't want to derail but I think it's better not to use Pakistani interchangeably with Muslim, and Indian with Hindu. I get why, but both countries do have religious minorities,,and Britain has many Sikhs as well as Hindus, so it gets possibly confusing to do that in this context, I think.
Maybe clearer to say 'Pakistani Muslim' and 'Indian Hindu'/'Indian Sikh' if wanting to specify both religion & nationality...

I know its not a monolith but without writing every single country's name im using Indian sub continent for short hand

The differences in culture dont really explain this, other wise urbane, educated, middle and upper class men all over the world would not abuse women and children, but we know they do.

Its not possible that other groups also do not systemically abuse children or is it? As I write that is something else going on that we cant work out

Thats why it needs examination and study.

It does.

Of course all groups of men contain child abusers, but just as some cultures are more conducive to & tolerant of domestic violence, some cultures are more conducive to nurturing and turning blind eye to child abuse.

Bit like GB news being the only national media outlet to give Siobhan Whyte a voice. The others wernt interested. See? Works both ways.

That case was horrifying. Why on earth did he do it??

This 100%. Honestly the OP’s comments and some of the comments on this thread are quite hard to fathom.

And there are reports that police officers also abused the same girls. Easy prey, nobody would believe the girls, some would believe that no police officer would go near them as they'd chosen non white boyfriends (the idea they'd been groomed wasn't a thing), the police if caught out would say they were making it up - and later when trying to find out why they did nothing, rather than ever admit 'well, it was because we were also raping them/didn't want to destroy my promotion chances/just thought they deserved it for going with them in the first place', the easy option is to say 'Couldn't say a thing because we'd have been called racist'.

Yes, this is also true. These girls- like the Epstein girls- seem to have been fair game for everybody.

Cultures who don't marry outside their very close family circles are less trusting of other cultures. More likely to resist changing anything about them.

Yes the British are fabulous integrators🙄

Hear, hear you got it one.

The Labour Government has supported these people for years and still do.

Because as you say these groups will vote for them.

And this the real evil of politics

Politicians will do anything to keep votes and stay in power

So they can keep their nice jobs and serve their monstrous egos.

And of course their Masters. Their Elite friends

Yes, I'd forgotten that. Some policemen so abused them...

Exactly. My point was that the UK governments from the mid-50s on showed virtually no awareness of these issues.

May I ask which of my comments are hard to fathom?

Jesus.

Men taking advantage of young girls is a tale as old as time.
Not sure it’s deeper than the existence of piece of shit men

UK governments from the mid-50s on showed virtually no awareness of these issues.

Well, it wasn't even on the radar then, was it?

Certainly not in the news.

Europe was just rebuilding from WW2.

The Casey report does not agree with you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y0lrk2dqyo

My point is that the mid to late 1950s are when the Kasmir Mirpuri community were brought over who would cause (not all but many) these problems later.

There was very little thought apparently taken as to how well they would integrate : why?

By mid 1950s Britain was doing better, recovery from WW2 had progressed.

Yes, I agree that a lot of people simply used the race/culture issue as an excuse to hide behind. However that means it’s a problem in and of itself, that they thought they could do that.

Exactly

As bringemout says, the level of violence, coercion and sexual abuse we are talking about is extreme. Not just “having girlfriends who are underage”.

Not suggesting you are saying that OP but other people obviously think that’s what it’s about.

I do think the 'Asian' term is a red herring, in the sense that in the North of England (where a lot of this abuse happened) we know it doesn't include Sri Lankans, Indians etc. It's the term used to describe people of Pakistani/Bangladeshi heritage. Not Chinese, Japanese, etc.

So, no, we are not tarring them all with the same brush, if you like.

Another example of cultural appropration!