Abuse of hundreds of girls as young as ten covered up by police and social services

[edam]

today's Times - sadly behind a paywall but you can see the first par here - has a major investigation into appalling, widespread organised rape and abuse of girls in South Yorkshire.

Not only did police and social services fail to help the girls, let alone prosecute the offenders, they actually charged victims and their parents - one girl was charged with using drugs, while the men in the room with her went free, while one father who tried to get his daughter back was charged with racial harassment, ffs. AND his poor daughter, who had been drugged, was charged with assault. Another parent was charged with breach of the peace, another girl - only 13 - was arrested for a public order offence and convicted, while the men went free.

It beggars belief. The Times has seen more than 200 confidential documents from Rotherham detailing the crimes which were often not investigated - even though police and social services knew full well who the perpetrators were. But they were more concerned with hushing up the heritage of the offenders - Pakistani, Kurdish, Iranian and Kosovan gangs and families - than investigating hideous crimes.

In one case, police in Bristol rescued two girls who had been kidnapped but South Yorkshire police (where they lived) didn't even question them.

Neither the police nor the council apologised, btw. Oh no, the council just says ofsted think they are great and 'some work with individuals did not lead to court cases for a variety of reasons'. S Yorks Police say now they have eight officers looking into child sexual exploitation and they are 'a leading force in safeguarding vulnerable children'.

Oh- and suggesting that improved sexual morality ( strictly relative to the consensual sex act, once again) might help to promote less sex-centric views of Western women and teenagers among some Muslim men doesn't make those women responsible.

Or why are feminists concerned about sexualisation? "Rape is rape and is solely the responsibility of the rapist, never the victim" is an excellent platform to base discourse on. But if nothing anyone else in the world does or how external events may have an effect on the male psyche is relevant, because that's somehow "putting all the responsibility squarely on them", what's the point of analysing it at all?

Do you not accept that women who fall into bed with men from a misogynist religious background are a part of the pornified society? That although they are neither the necessary nor sufficient cause nor the root of this problem- as proven by male Muslim zealots' conduct in repressive societies and against their coreligionists of the inferior opposite sex- they are validating perceptions which their sexual integrity (while adamantly not conforming to Islamic law or expectations) would help diminish? Is it not letting women down in its own right to let a man who hates women based on religious dogma use you for his loveless sexual gratification?

I see a parallel to rich porn stars and "high class" prostitutes, usually white bourgeois women, always legal adults working in safe legal or tolerated environments, defending their "empowering choice". Their presence on the misogynists' side is then cited to justify the unhindered existence of the sex trade, overwhelmingly in female and/or minor flesh. They are not responsible for the exploitation of women- traffickers, pimps, madams, johns, porn subscribers, usually-male politicians who hurt women economically and lead them into their clutches, legal systems who victim blame habitually as in the very case this thread was set up to discuss, and others are- but they certainly aren't helping their vulnerable sisters out; those who have a genuine choice and choose the sex industry are collaborating in something that is used to justify the continued oppression of others less fortunate and blessed with choices.

Extro -

You are completely derailing a SERIOUS news item!!

This thread is about CHILDREN being abused by gangs of Asian men - now in Rotherham!!

This is not the place for your rant.

Animation he's not "derailing" anything. She's expanding and explaining things from a wider point of view.

SHE'S ...not he's.

Big - well it sounds like a rant to me - and getting well off the subject of why the girls and families weren't supported in Rotherham and the offenders prosecuted. And what's going to be done about it.

This thread has been as much about people trying to understand WHY this has happened as why they were not supported.

NOW we're derailing it.

Okay then - as long as we don't lose the point of the thread.

Carry on ...

Oh so you want to shut down a contextualising discussion about the patriarchy's efforts to lock down women as their property, sex education to stop boys growing up into sex-mad men or worse rapists, effectively challenging misogyny and the history of it in both "conservative" and "progressive" sexual ethics, how to ensure males are centered as the agent instead of blaming victims, and the intersections of race, gender and religion in this sort of abuse?

Sounds like derailing to me. Sexual abuse and rape of children or adult women does not occur outwith a social context. That's what is being discussed.

X post animation I understand. There's discussion about why it was not prosecuted and the failings of professionals covering the first four pages.

This is going on all over the country.

I recently worked in a home for teenage girls and the staff called the girls sluts and whores rather than believing that they been raped.

It was awful and I complained but no one wanted to hear it.

You're telling me there are professionals working with adolescent girls who think they have a right to mock rape survivors with gendered slurs and victim blaming, and top brass think that's not serious?

And generally reasonable people tell me we can be post-feminist now...

Good article by Esther Ranzen on the BBC news homepage today. Sorry can't do links.

Yeah lots of 'professionals' on the minimum wage, short term contracts and scant training.

Plenty of professionals with the same attitude, but really these children aren't cared about or invested in.

I think white women should have consensual sex outside marriage and still be respected.

I coukdn't care less whether I have 'the respect' of Muslim men, I don't respect a culture which condones the oppression and exploitation of women. Frankly their view of women is not my problem -these men behaved without any decency or compassion towards vulnerable young women and should be punished for it.

I want my DDs taught about sex in the context of a loving relationship and to see men as friends and equals first. I want them to be independent enough to choose whether they want to be in a sexual relationship with someone and secure enough to set boundaries.

Extro- most staff working in these places are unqualified//low qualified (level 2/3 nvq social care type quals) low paid staff who are often stuck in a 1950s mindset of angel/whore women. They believe in 'personal responsibility' for actions not structural causes. They take these jobs not because they care but because the jobcentre pushes people into any job they can apply for. The whole system needs overhauling.

Yes, I think Iskam is a great method for protecting a community of people but woe betide you, if you should challenge those veiws from inside the community, that would lead to censure and rejection. And it does bugger all to protect people outside of those communities because people who do not follow the rules are therefore deemed unworthy.of the respect that should be accorded to all, regardless of whether they follow rules that a group of society have decided should apply to themselves.

Islam!

South Yorkshire Police.... again?

that bans sex until one is ready for marriage,

Isn't that 14 in Iran?

Yeah, South Yorkshire police AGAIN. But I bet it's happened elsewhere. Rochdale for starters.

crescent is right that it doesn't matter, but not because we are talking about the UK.

She's right because a lot of Muslims will do a religious marriage at whatever age they consider appropriate, frequently below 16 and because the abuse here didn't have squat to do with child brides or marital rape.

A family member once had a Turkish partner who he went to live with; she was from Istanbul where they generally kept to much more westernised standards: she said it was okay for adults to have sex with 15 year olds when it came up, which is a fairly common position to take overall in Europe (yet the age of consent there is 18, with 15-17 year olds allowed to have sex with someone of similar age). They knew of people in the poor, much less developed eastern where 9-10 was being accepted (for the female, of course.) This is illegal- the law is same throughout the Turkish Republic, it's not as if they have some sort of tribal exception or Kurd exception, but they do it anyway. They do the same regularly in France and Germany, according to reports from there.

As math said and you picked me up on before, edam, what makes this a problem is certain Muslims' belief they have the right to be on the "fun" side of a double standard no matter how much harm they cause to girls and women in the process. These people do not care about the age of consent any more than they obey other laws that stand in the way of their anti-woman hate campaign: they rape women (illegal), beat their wives (illegal), use physical violence against anyone who disobeys their unforgiving community standards (illegal), kick out their under-16 daughters with no further concern for their wellbeing if they hear a rumour they have kissed a white boy (illegal), give their grooming victims hard drugs to get them compliant or addicted (illegal) and so on.

As for British-Muslim grooming gangs: It's happened in Oxford, Blackpool, London, Birmingham, Derby, Bradford, Luton, Brighton, Blackburn, and other places. It happens in every city where there are misogynistic Asian men whose cultural influencers (imams, sex education in school, parents, youth organisations) fail to challenge or even reinforce the ancient belief in their supremacy and ownership over women, and there are vulnerable girls or women waiting to be led into their traps. It happens all the more in places where misguided levels of cultural sensitivity or outright victim blaming and disbelief characterise the official safeguarding response.

margerykemp that's interesting about the moral viewpoint of the workers in the care homes. Very good point. Have you had first hand contact with these places?

Like South Yorkshire Police, the moral culture of the establishment or institution seems to have pervaded the service and made it ineffective. South Yorkshire Police and Rochdale SS need a big kick up the backside and to be brought into the 21st century. A sense of accountability would also be helpful.