To wonder why so many male migrants have committed sexual assaults:even if they are evil people, wouldn't staying in the UK be an incentive to abide by the law?

[Jane379]

I KNOW that plenty of the men who come are not evil and don't want to commit sexual assault. But clearly a number who have come are, and there's strong evidence that male migrants are disproportionately lileky to do so.

This almost surely at least partly caused by misogynistic culture in various areas meaning back home they perceived uncovered women as permissible to assault. But surely they know it's different here? That they will likely be caught? They are at least more likely to be punished here for assault.

Or are they convinced our police system will let them off?

Or they're not aware our norms are different?

Or just don't care about the consequences?

I wonder also if criminals are in a sense selected for since they may have little to tie them to their home countries, or even be escaping punishment there.

I'm really sorry you had that experience 💐: that poster is being horribly insensitive.

May I ask which country you lived in? I understand fully if not.

I’m sorry. I agree it’s hard to see those posts on a female dominated forum.

Ah right, that's OK. I was thinking that if they were British born and worked in a company here such ignorance of cultural mores would be very odd. Maybe less so if they came from a different country originally?

Either way, as you say, it's a reminder that a lot of the time levels of integration can be overestimated..

The person doing the minimising is you @Samysungy . You are absolutely minimising what women in Afghanistan are facing if you are pretending its like the 'control and abuse' you think women face here. As someone who has read pleadings from Afghan women to western feminists, outlining what their lives are like now under the Taliban and how they are feeling, I find your post here quite revolting in your smug playing with their destroyed lives to make deeply ignorant ideologically led points.

And btw, you were asked where would you prefer to raise your daughter. The question doesn't give you the option to choose neither, as I think you know. Its a question to get you to really reflect on the difference between the two countries by forcing you to pick one or the other. So no, despite your laughter at a pp, they were right, you have not answered the question.

Seconded! I think this person is posting in bad faith.

Let's mass report and they'll have to be removed, surely?

Yes Jordanian monarchy etc effectively promote a Westernised image and they have kept the country stable amid turmoil all around. But misogyny in Jordan is still very strong.

This is an excellent program on that :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0f39w53

If slave women were muslim, whether by conversion or not, muslim men were strongly encouraged to educate, liberate or/and marry them (the latter may or may not have been a boon...)

The qu'ran does though make lawful for muslim men to have sex with their slave girls.

I don't think military history supports that view at all.

Countries and armies don't win or lose wars according to how many "decent men" they have. If they did, military collapses would never happen. In reality, outcomes depend on leadership, logistics, morale, training, intelligence, equipment, funding, political support, and whether people believe the government they're fighting for will survive.

The Afghan security forces numbered in the hundreds of thousands on paper and suffered enormous casualties over two decades. Tens of thousands of Afghan soldiers and police were killed fighting the Taliban. Whatever else you think of the Afghan government, it's hard to argue those men simply didn't care.

The problem is that once the state began collapsing, commanders surrendered, local deals were made, supply chains broke down, and international military support was withdrawn, individual courage couldn't compensate for systemic failure. History is full of armies that collapsed despite containing brave people.

Saying "if there were enough decent men they would manage" doesn't really explain anything. It's just taking a complex military and political collapse and reducing it to a moral judgement about millions of people.

You can criticise Afghan society, the government, corruption, or the way women have been treated without claiming that an entire nation's men were cowards. The evidence for that simply isn't there.

If "a country would be free if there were enough decent men" were true, then we'd have to conclude that Iranians (until recent protests), people who lived under the Soviet Union, modern Chinese citizens, North Koreans, and countless others are all cowards because they didn't successfully overthrow their governments.

That's obviously not how political power works. Authoritarian regimes survive through organisation, coercion, weapons, intelligence networks, patronage systems, and control of institutions. Ordinary people can oppose them and still be unable to defeat them.

The fact that a regime exists is not evidence that the population supports it, nor is it evidence that everyone who failed to overthrow it lacks courage.

I understand now, thank you.

While this is awful, that isn't quite the same as saying non Muslim women per se (rather than enslaved women) are given less rights in the Quran & Hadith?

It's terrible but it's worth remembering the Old Testament/Torah also allows for female captives of war to be forced to marry their captors. The major problem is that Islam has become more regressive while Christianity & Judaism have got less so (see also with apostasy death penalty for one: Judaism also has this but obviously modern Israel is not run along these lines!)

Non Muslims could also not inherit from Muslims which caused difficulties for Jewish or Christian women married to Muslim men ( Muslim women could only marry Muslim men but men could also marry Jews and Christians). Non muslim women would have to raise the children Muslim ( a friend divorced her Muslim husband when she realised this). Non Muslims did not have the same legal status as Muslims ( applicable to men and women) and had to pay a tax if they did not convert ( or be put to death as the third option). Some scholars only accept testimony of non Muslims in limited circumstances ( though testimony of a woman is worth less of a man anyway).

I have not heard of Judaism putting people to death for apostasy and I very much doubt that has happened unless it was in antiquity. It is still a crime in Muslim majority countries today. I have heard western conservative Muslims defending this, on the grounds that only Muslims who are public about leaving Islam are put to death ….

Free Muslim women were not supposed to be enslaved, but non Muslim women could be. That’s a biggie.

It’s worth remembering that Isis arseholes used the Qu’rans passages on slavery to justify them enslaving and raping Yazidi women ( who were also recently found enslaved in Gaza). Although obviously the vast majority of Muslims now condemn slavery ( as do Christians), the figures I have read on modern day slavery show that Muslim countries still have the biggest problem with this. Dubai is built on modern day slavery where immigrant workers have their passports removed and the official temperature in Dubai is kept beneath 50 degrees to avoid invoking the law which means the immigrant labourers have to stop working in 50+ degree temperatures

Thank you, this is really valuable information.

Re Judaism my point was that this was the original law as per the holy text, but Judaism has modernised. Likewise Christianity in many countries led to death penalties for heresy,,but all these countries have modernised. Islam must do the same.

See Deueteronomy : If your brother, the son of your mother, your son or your daughter, the wife [c]of your bosom, or your friend who is as your own soul, secretly entices you, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which you have not known, neither you nor your fathers, of the gods of the people which are all around you, near to you or far off from you, from one end of the earth to the other end of the earth, you shall not consent to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him or conceal him; but you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. And you shall stone him with stones until he dies, because he sought to entice you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.'

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2013&version=NKJV

Re this :' Non muslim women would have to raise the children Muslim ( a friend divorced her Muslim husband when she realised this)'

Muslim marriage rules overall seem very gender unequal. Some orher religions fotbid interfaith marriage traditionally but for both sexes. Can I ask if your friend's husband lied before the marriage? If wanting the children raised Muslim was a deal breaker, he should surely have made this clear beforehand.

I did ask her if they discussed this before marriage and she said they hadn’t. I did think that was ‘Duh!’ I didn’t know her then and I think they were both quite young as wasn’t that old when I knew her ( mid to late 30s).

Death for heresy/ blasphemy was outlawed in the 1600s in England for Christianity I believe. So quite a long time ago. And as Jews have had no homeland for most of the last two thousand years, they can’t have had a law to enforce death for apostasy for that long either, surely.

What do you think men are growing up learning here in the UK, think of the high-profile rape and murder cases we've seen in the last decade, violence against girls and women including sexual abuse and assault is endemic in the UK and the indoor sex industry, social media cultures, porn, sexualizing young girls images are all the thin end of a very very disturbing wedge. We normalise the culture daily, it's hidden in plain sight

For some reason these “save are women” people look away when it’s one of their own.

In Teesside, 44 / 107 “patriots” arrested for unrest following the Southport murders had previous for domestic violence.

I mean, talk about “per capita” now…

Again. Bad things happen here yes. But the data shows VAWG is miles apart here and the shit show that are the other countries mentioned.

Very small sample size......

There are issues here. You look at the wider picture things are incomprehensibly worse I'm Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan, Nigeria. Look at where FGM is the highest.

Like the 6,000 asylum seekers entering from Afghanistan into the UK every year, against a population of 70M ? Also a tiny sample.

Again. 6000 is a lot higher than 100. There are asylum seekers from nations other than Afghanistan. We see the devastation that happens here AND we have data from other parts of Europe.

And these nations rank so much higher in VAWG, yet no-one seems to think that it'd be an issue taking the men from these countries.

I’ve been on MN 15 years and genuinely this is the most mind-stunningly stupid post I have ever seen. To think that rioting male thugs are ‘one of feminists own’. Staggeringly stupid.

Yes, that’s right. Feminists are concerned with combatting male sexual violence, and will analyze the factors that cause it, including religious and cultural factors. If you turn away from male violence because it’s ’cultural’ Or you feel uncomfortable speaking out against it due to the colour of the perpetrator’s skin, you have no right to call yourself a feminist.

They claim they are saving women and girls.

There is no mystery why this is.

These men are from primitive, misogynistic cultures. Compared to the west they are 1000s of years behind.

Look at Afghanistan. The men dress young boys up as women and then rape them, because they think its wrong to have sex with the women. Most of them are inbred due to the common islamic practice of marrying your own family member = genetic issues. They follow a religion invented by a man who was a paedophile, a rapist, a slave owner and a mass murderer, which portrays both non-adherents and women as being inferior. They think God will reward them with sex for committing atrocities.

Or South Africa. A country where 25 - 40% of men will openly admit to rape in surveys. When you consider the "shy rapists", it will likely be big majority of them who are rapists. A country where superstitions abound, such as raping a virgin can cure of of HIV.

Low IQ predominates in both places. In SA its 77. Afghanistan its 88. Below 70 was traditionally considered the threshold for mental retardation. By way of comparison, a dolphin is estimated to have an IQ of between 70 - 100. Bottlenose dolphins have a typical IQ of 126. These are all facts, check them.

These men lack the emotional and intellectual sophistication to function in a liberal western society.

These are but two examples of the nations we accept small boat men from, every day.

It is absolutely no mystery whatsoever why the conduct of these men is a big problem and a great threat to women in particular.

It would be more of a surprise if their behaviour was not a problem.

More or Less should be required listening for all

I was looking at the SA surveys and I felt sick. Openly admitting to it