AIBU to think if we need to politely ask men not to rape women (or men), then we don't want such people in the UK? PART 2

[CoventryCity]

'Don't rape, sexually assault or make kissing noises' at people, asylum seekers warned in guidance about living in UK

UK arrivals have been told to treat women equally, not sexually assault partners or have sex with children in a new Home Office pamphlet. As well as the guidebook, a series of posters have also been designed by the government.'

https://news.sky.com/story/asylum-seekers-warned-not-to-make-kissing-sounds-at-people-in-new-guidance-about-living-in-uk-13574744

Previous thread here:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5568695-aibu-to-think-if-we-need-to-politely-ask-men-not-to-rape-women-or-men-then-we-dont-want-such-people-in-the-uk?page=40&reply=154338993&utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

‘Records are searched for’ - they won’t exist in a conflict zone and other privacy from a hostile state reasons

That last line is not true anyway, because not all of it is evidenced.

Thank you for your input with which I respectfully disagree in regards to multi-culturalism being destabilising.

I’d like @NancyThompson to reply to my question ´what is obvious?’ please as it was she who made the comment ‘It is quite funny though the sheer contortions, just anything at all to refuse to admit the obvious.´to me.

Records do exist in conflict zones. They’re just harder to secure and the possibility of destruction is higher.

Prove it’s not true.
Prove that refugee status is granted to asylum seekers by the home office with zero evidence.

The UK Government process has no exemption for zero evidence.
https://www.gov.uk/claim-asylum/documents

https://righttoremain.org.uk/toolkit/evidence/

@NancyThompson
But it's individuals who are just out of a war zone, so that's their mindset.

Follow-up question on this. By your logic of it being an individual mindset rather than exposure to the chaos of a war zone shouldn’t we bar all British forces deployed to war zones from returning? After all, wouldn’t they too have this ‘individual mindset’ that makes them incompatible with a peace time society?

Perhaps they should go from UK to war zone and then go some British overseas island in the middle of nowhere do they and their mindset doesn’t put women and children at risk.

We are already destabilised.

You're not answering the question. Let me make it simple. Population data - general population. Sample data - those with an immigrant background of whatever generation. Which confounding factors?

In my view, a nation state needs to find concensus on cultural values to be stable, (the nation state being a functional subdivision of global humanity). All across Europe my friends and colleagues tell me of countries divided in similar proportions to the 2016 referendum. Cui bono.

I'm sure you're aware of the mental health issues that combat veterans face. Their country owes them a great debt.

Here you go, taken from Al Jazeera, Amnesty International and global conflict sources

Why Every Crime is Not Recorded

• Intentional Communications Blackouts: The paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) frequently sever internet and cellular networks. This cuts off victims from reporting crimes in real time. 1, 2]
• Extreme Danger to Monitors: Local human rights defenders and citizen journalists operate in secret. Discovered documentation—such as smartphones containing photos or videos of abuses—often results in immediate execution. 1]
• Famine and Displacement: With millions forced to flee to remote areas or cross-border refugee camps (such as in Chad), many individual atrocities—like daily instances of pillaging, localized executions, and sexual violence—go entirely unlogged because survival takes precedence over reporting. 1, 3, 4]

@NullaEffugium
Records do exist in conflict zones. They’re just harder to secure and the possibility of destruction is higher.

If these migrants have nothing to hide, why do they destroy their documents?

Anyway...

And many are not supported with their mental health and can be homeless !
It's awful.

Yes, we have to have an army, airforce and navy to defend us from hostile states.

We don't have to accept military aged males into our country, especially from countries with incompatible cultures. The people of this country get to decide who we want to accept. We can decide that the risk to our women and children and men is too great.

Yes, and with so many of our services under strain the very LAST thing this country needs is thousands of military aged males who we know nothing about, who come from troubled areas, who will need a huge amount of resources directed at them and who may or may not be rapists, murderers and criminals.

It's madness and more and more people are waking up to the harm that is being inflicted on this country.

Agreed

I believe we could help people much more effectively through our foreign aid budget rather than enabling gangsters to bring into our country the sharpest elbowed young males who may or may not be a risk.

I do have concerns about that as well - why are we beholden to giving our tax money to support other countries? How is the money being used - for sustainable growth, or is it being swallowed by corruption? Is it in fact fueling conflicts?

I'm thinking of say Africa, which has had approximately 2 trillion dollars in the last 50 years, and it's still largely desperately poor, with a lot of conflicts and instability. So one could argue that the 2 trillion has done absolutely no good at all, and still the immigrants keep coming.

I do totally agree with you that the answer to less well-off or more conflicted countries is not their populations fleeing for the West, ultiimately there's not enough space. But as to how that's achieved, I'm really not sure in all honesty. I'm just super-cynical about the whole international aid industry.

I suppose countries like Rwanda give a bit of hope, given that they had a genocide thirty years ago, but even Rwanda is a bit of a qualified success.

Yeah. We gave millions to rebuild Palestine, and the US gave billions. Straight into the pockets of Hamas. Tunnels and that, you know.

I have answered the question multiple times. As examples, I have described the two most basic, common confounding factors of age and sex when comparing two populations. I have detailed why these are confounding factors and how they can skew the data such that direct comparisons between populations are not statistically valid.

You had the idea that combining immigrants with descendants of immigrants might address these confounding factors which only demonstrates your lack of understanding of basic statistical analysis.

I am not saying this to be mean or condescending, but I really don’t know how else to explain these concepts to you. I’m not a teacher.

Ok if you agree with the links you posted, then we are in complete agreement. When you said there are ‘Records are searched for’ - they won’t exist in a conflict zone so asylum seekers are approved with no evidence and I said records do exist they are just harder to secure and the risk of destruction is higher and no asylum claim is approved without some evidence even if it ûs physical/medical.

Seems you have had a look and realised that in war zones some records do exist. Not every crime is reported. Not every record that should be written gets written, but records do exist.

Ahh @NullaEffugium . We had this discussion i think. I told you I didn't give a sht about your 2 'confounding factors', in this case. Rape is rape. Morality is objective. Rape is wrong. Everyone knows it.

You can twitter on about stats, patronisingly to other posters and me to your hearts content. If it makes you feel better about rape occurrence.

I did a lot of statistical analysis in one of my degrees. I understand it quite well. But as I said, I don't give a sht about your 2 'confounding factors', in this case. Rape is rape. Morality is objective. Rape is wrong. Everyone knows it.

yes I am aware but fail to understand why we can’t do the same for refugees?

Which migrants are these?

There is no evidence of this harm though. This is all speculation driven by misinformation campaigns that are creating a divisive and hostile society within the UK. I’d go so far as to say it’s the racist activism of Reform and others that are destabilising the UK, not immigration.

You know fine well I understand perfectly well, and that this is a perfectly valid comparison data set given that it consists largely of a settled population with a spread of ages and sexes.
Certainly looking at 2nd generation migrants only would take care of the residual data anomolies you're so hung up on - although indications are that they actually offend at a higher rate than first-gen.