The Rotherham 1,400 children plus – WHO is responsible?

[Isitmebut]

The Rotherham situation, where the authorities appear to have done NOTHING to protect children in care, goes back 16-years, as it appears there was a largely ethnic element involved and ‘the powers that CONTINUE to be’ in a job, were afraid in that political climate, to be seen as ‘racists’, but why?

I can remember posting when anyone even daring to mention the affects of immigration on housing, jobs and local services were called ‘racist’, sometimes whole posts/threads were deleted on media boards (even the Daily Mail) - while the government of the day, not held to account by the media on their side, were free to continue a ‘multicultural’ agenda they adopted in their first few years they never sought at the ballot box.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2354713/BBC-chief-admits-We-deep-liberal-bias-migrants--changed.html

But as this article points out, the fear of being accused a racist, affected even household conversations.
“Are we all racist now?”
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10860492/Are-we-all-racist-now.html

And the problem with secret sofa government policies, where local authorities and media compliance is key to continued electoral success, is that you can’t be SEEN to raise ethnic issues OR plan ahead for the numbers in homes, healthcare or schools – especially in a 2010 General Election manifesto, in electoral damage limitation mode.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

The 2000’s seem to be a time when our public sector/local government numbers increased enormously, but seemed to both have THEIR OWN POLITICAL agendas, and failed so many vulnerable people, especially children in and out of care.

For no one in Rotherham to take responsibility for what happened to the 1,400 children (we know about), is a national disgrace – that is not good enough.

I was just coming on here to say that i hope this issue doesnt get used as a political football but i can see that has happened already.

Im a Guardian reader Pistol Im left wing. I was brought up in a Catholic household. Half my family is Italian. I was brought up with parents (my DM especially) having VERY mysogynistic views. She victim blames rape and abuse victims. In both the Savile and Rolf Harris cases she does this and others too. We have had VERY MANY huge rows about this.

Oh and Pistol...........maybe some MNers havent come on these threads because it could be triggering for them if they or a relative or friend have been through something the same or similar......

Just a thought....yeah?

It's partly because there's more than one thread running.

I can't believe this thread has only garnered seven pages of interest from mumsnetters when banal threads full of bullshit can run to a thousand. Why? Why are mumsnetters keeping quiet about this evil?

I agree but there are loads of threads encompassing abuse at the moment.

It can only be because some MN-ers feel their left-wing, liberal, multiculturalism-loving ideologies would be severely challenged by examining the truths right before their very eyes. Let's not forget that MN is predominantly left-wing and that the founder's husband inhabits the upper echelons of The Guardian (or summat).

I don't know about the founders but there are some vicious posters on here who very quickly shut down any sort of debate by calling posters racist and so on. So I imagine many people are afraid, or bored of trying to post, as they come and strangle them.

In this situation the crimes committed were by Pakistani Muslims which indicates there is a problem with the way in which they view all women and particularly young, white women in this situation.

Anyone know the cultural framework in which Pakistani men view women?

Are women treated equally and respected generally in their culture?

Beyond and pistol I think people are scared of getting involved in this debate/discussion through fear of saying the wrong thing or not realising they are causing offence. Reading back what I had written I hope people do not think I am implying all Pakistani Muslim men have a low opinion of women. I am just saying that we cannot compare it to normal rape cases, all rape and abuse is different. In this case the overwhelming number of victims were young, white women and the abusers were Pakistani Muslim men. I do not know the age range or status of these men does any one know???

I cannot believe only 5 men have been arrested and 30 are under investigation. I really hope those poor girls will still come forward even though they were badly let down in the past.

I don't give a shit about being labelled racist. I am angry at the silence engulfing the truth about these men and their hatred for British white girls. I am angry that the feminists are trying to make this an issue about penises and nothing else.

Not all of the girls were white, though, right? And not all the perpetrators were of Asian descent. A PP has linked specific kinds of work to this specific way of grooming and trafficking, suggesting these men are using taxi networks etc.

To my mind, thinking about it in specifically racial terms is a way of specifically white people saying that rape culture is not something that they are responsible for. The police have no problem arresting non-whites for other kinds of crime. But our culture is the culture that devalued these children, failing to protect them, failing to prosecute perpetrators for having sex with children. It is our culture that colluded by failing to act, failing to protect, specifically because the police behaved as if no crime were taking place. This is not an assessment of the perpetrators but an assessment of the victims because the police believed the girls to have been able to consent, they believed them to have consented.

So we can talk about a load of Pakistani men holding young white women in contempt all we like but this very case demonstrates that those Pakistani men are simply reproducing the contempt that the wider society has for these girls, the treatment that they received from the police embodies this. So why is specifically Pakistani contempt under scrutiny? Because everyone treated the victims as contemptible and other similar gangs - of different ethnicities - continue to do so up and down the country. No one values poor young girls, and that is why they are targeted.

Because everyone treated the victims as contemptible and other similar gangs - of different ethnicities - continue to do so up and down the country. No one values poor young girls, and that is why they are targeted.

You've hit the nail on the head there. (The same applies to the boys in care homes who have also been victims.)

There have been lots of threads post-Savile expressing shock and wondering how abuse can be prevented.
Can we not put aside the things we disagree about and actually pull together?

unitarian i clocked this article in my twitter feed earlier . Its about the divisions being created between richer and poorer kids at school.

poorer kids are treated as "other" in some cases by some teachers. No one values poor children. These attitudes run DEEP and contribute to their lack of value in society. When these attitudes are reinforced in a school setting it is indicative of how much needs to change.

www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/31/inequality-schools-children-poverty-commission?CMP=twt_gu

Sorry I meant to address that last post to OutsSelf too

There is misogyny in British culture, and yes for years sexual abuse of children was something wider society preferred to turn its face away from. In fact, it probably still does to an extent, although I think a lot has been done in terms of campaigning, victims coming forward etc, for it to be taken more seriously.
However, that does not fully explain why these street grooming gangs (Rochdale, Derby, Oxford now Rotherham and others will come to light) are composed in great majority/ exclusively of muslim men, usually of Pakistani background. Their level of involvement in this kind of sexual abuse outstrips their representation in the general population. Therefore I am still inclined to think there is something about Pakistani culture which facilitates a certain kind of male in his exploiting of vulnerable white girls.
THe 2 (British society's attitude, and Pakistani attitudes to sex, virginity, female sexual conduct etc) are not mutually exclusive. I only hope that after Rotherham, statutory services will be scared not to act (rather than scared TO act), and it will become harder for these men to get away with it.

Great post Outsself, but I have to agree with Bob.

I am still inclined to think there is something about Pakistani culture which facilitates a certain kind of male in his exploiting of vulnerable white girls

It seems Lord Ahmed, our first muslim peer, would agree with you, though I've no doubt many will loathe his views:

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2738704/What-links-UK-jihadis-Rotherham-sex-abusers-Mosques-failing-moral-leadership-says-LORD-AHMED.html

Personally I'm still interested that, while most accept that the offenders' race/culture is an aspect of this but not the only one, there are still some who insist at every turn that it has absolutely nothing to do with what's happened, and that those who are usually most outspoken when anyone even mentions ethnicity are conspicuous by their absence

I wonder why that is?

Pistol, you repeatedly ask why they predominately targeted white girls. First of all I dont accept that as the following articles show these gangs are opportunistic and will target asian girls when the opportunity arises.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2564678/Teenage-girl-victim-grooming-gang-raped-30-men-just-six-hours-including-father-schoolboy-son.html

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sunday-people-investigation-two-sisters-2292067

The media disproportinally focuses on abuse of white victims (lets face it thats what most people in this country are concerned about) rather then abuse of ethnic minorities so many are left with the impression that it is only vulnerable underage white victims who are targeted by these gangs despite this not being the case.

www.theguardian.com/society/2013/sep/10/abuse-asian-girls-missed-white-victims

Also girls from ethnic minorities are less likely to report which skews the statistics and one could argue that because of the demographics of the uk on a whole you are more likely to find there are a greater number of white victims (and perpetrators) of sexual crimes then other races.

However we need to analyse these claims further. When people say they targeted white girls they are really speaking about a specific socioeconomic group of white girls. They didnt prey on middle class girls. As far as I know the majority of their victims were from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Why is that? Is it because of the area in which they lived or because for whatever reason it was easier for them to prey on white girls from a lower socioeconomic background? Furthermore, the majority of the victims were also known to social services or were in care so they came from quite chaotic backgrounds and for that reason were vulnerable. So when asking why didnt they target asian girls a simple answer could also be that there are less asian/pakistani girls in care. So unless they targeted asian girls within their own families or asian girls who they had close contact with then the opportunity for them to abuse girls from asian backgrounds would be much rarer.

Another factor which is a bit of a generalisation (well this thread is full of them so why not add another) is that asian parents of a similar socioeconomic background to the families of the girls who were targeted tend to be highly overprotective of their daughters to the extent that it can often verge in to controlling. They would have a lot less freedom then white girls of a similar background and so again would be less likely to be in situations where they could be preyed upon by these sorts of opportunistic child abusers. From what I have read on mumsnet and heard from people I know who work specifically with asian girls that are victims of grooming gangs they tend to first alienate their young victims from their families in some way either by the male abuser (usually a young man) who has gained the trust or affections of the victim encouraging her to split/run away from her family to be with him or asian girls who are more independent due to rejecting their families cultural practices and who are then also subsequently alienated from their families before they become their victms. The method of operation is very similar regardless of the ethnic group they are targeting it seems though they tend to manipulate asian girls through the use of shame (i.e. we will tell your family etc if you expose us) rather than drugs and alcohol as they did with white girls.

I just wanted to say I am not blaming the victims either asian or white but am just pointing out there was a method however distasteful to the crimes these men committed.

I use the term opportunistic repeatedly when talking about asian grooming gangs as I recently read a report that said that the grooming gangs of all ethnic groups fell in to certain categories. The first type was those that are made up of men who were not specifically sexually interested in children but targeted them because they had more opportunity to exploit them. The majority of asian grooming gangs fall in to this category. The second category is the opposite made up of men who have a specific sexual interest in young children and this group is predominately made up of white grooming gangs. The third category I cant remember and unfortunately I cant find the article again. Another reason why I use the term opportunistic is that the majority of the men involved in asian grooming gangs worked in night industries e.g. take aways, taxi drivers etc where they were more likely to come across vulnerable young women and girls. I remember there was a campaign a while ago on tv and on public transport warning women not to use unmarked taxis because of the number of men who would fool women in to thinking they were taxi drivers and then would rape them once they got in to their car. This campaign helped to reduce the cases of rape. Now imagine if a person is a sexual predator of vulnerable underage girls and because of their job or position are regularly in contact with them the potential for abuse is great. A lot of Pakistani men in the North work in these industries so those among them who are sexual predators are more likely to have regular contact with victims they can exploit.

I just wanted to say I am not blaming the victims either asian or white but am just pointing out there was a method however distasteful to the crimes these men committed.

By the way by this I mean that the grooming gangs tended to target girls from whatever background who were estranged from their families in some way or whose families were just generally not in the picture, though there are of course exceptions.

Thanks for that link, Darkesteyes.
It is deeply depressing that in the 40 years since I trained as a teacher all wide-eyed and bushy tailed, the prospects for poor kids have become worse not better.

Whether or not there is a racial element to the recent organised child abuse that has been exposed I feel strongly that it is not common to ALL child abuse and that focussing on race is a huge mistake if people really want to bring about change.

It is my impression that the Rotherham report did not high-light race as a -cause- of the abuse. Fear of appearing racist was cited as an excuse/ reason given by adults who didn't act to protect these children and this has been what some of the press has chosen to highlight.

I think that, if we really do want to bring about change - and I certainly do- then allowing the issue of child abuse to be obfuscated by race/immigration would be counter-productive.

It's ironic that some cultures safeguard their women in a manner which most of us find unacceptable yet this patriarchal approach has kept their daughters safe and so fewer girls from a muslim background have been victims of the gangs, or so it would appear.
In a way the recent scandal has vindicated the patriarchal approach to rearing daughters and thus made it less likely that muslim women can enjoy the freedom of choice that we now take for granted.

Because our grandmothers fought so hard we do all have the right to vote but any sustained campaign to force local and national politicians to take effective action against child abuse would be so much stronger if it was representative of the mothers of this country whatever their background and political stripe might be. We do owe it to these girls (and boys) to do whatever we can to make this stop.

The first type was those that are made up of men who were not specifically sexually interested in children but targeted them because they had more opportunity to exploit them. The majority of asian grooming gangs fall in to this category

Really? So every single Asian man who targeted the young girls was not doing it as they preferred young girls. I am not sure how any report can come to such an astonishing conclusion, esp when, there are hundreds of abusers still at large and never even come within a hair breath of the law? So how and where have these stats come from?

I think that, if we really do want to bring about change - and I certainly do- then allowing the issue of child abuse to be obfuscated by race/immigration would be counter-productive.

I agree with you and I feel there is a real danger of that at the moment.

In a way the recent scandal has vindicated the patriarchal approach to rearing daughters

I hope that my post did not give the impression that I think that. I only wanted to point out that having an attentive parent is invaluable in so much as that parent would be asking questions and noticing the abuse e.g. where were you last night, when did you get that new phone, why do you have these marks or bruises, how are you getting hold of alcohol etc. In one of the articles I read about an asian girl whose sister was abused by a gang. She mentioned that her sister became increasingly aggressive and hostile towards her and the rest of her family and she felt that it was deliberately orchestrated by her abuser (who happened to be her boyfriend) trying to drive a wedge between her and her family. The majority of these girls were in care and that made them more vulnerable as they didnt have a parent or someone to watch out for them and protect them.

There are the exceptions though as we have read about in the thread of the parents who went to the police to complain, the fathers who pursued their children's attackers and parents locking their children in the house to try and keep them safe from the grooming gangs. However these parents were ignored and their concerns were not listened to by the authorities. Again we have to ask if the parents were trying so hard to protect their children why didnt the police do the same. However, there are people on this thread who would rather not address the fact that the authorities turned a blind eye to these abusers for 16 years and effectively didnt do the job they were paid to do and instead want to focus on the race of the abusers.

Beyond - cant remember where I read it. Think it was on the channel 4 website or something. I didnt say every single asian man as your post should I said the majority of asian groomers were found to be of the type who were opportunistic sexual predators rather than long time pedophiles.

Having come from a repressive catholic home I was victim blamed when a 56 year old family "friend" asked me to kiss him when i was 16.

A partriarchial approach reinforces the "ownership" of women and girls and advocating this also puts the responsibility for the behaviour of abusers back on to the women/girls and their parents again.

There is still something i havent told my own parents (not something REALLY major but something that shouldnt have happened) because even at 10 years old i knew i would be blamed for it.

I was proved right when i was stupid enough to tell them the lesser thing when i was 16.

A patriarchial structure is not the answer It is part of the problem.

Some really interesting posts.

I'm extremely cynical about the people saying that race was a concern when tackling the crimes. These are people who are trying to justify, ex post facto, their potentially criminal levels of inaction in this case. Forgive me if I suspect they are clutching at straws. Also, why do crimes of this nature suddenly bring about a rash of cultural sensitivity in the police, who are otherwise known to be somewhat over zealous in their pursuit of ethnic minorities?

Pakistani men may well bring a particular nuance to their degradation of poor children. But it is the wider culture that facilitates and indeed models this.degradation, it's British culture that regards the sexual objectification of women as an accessory to masculine identity, it's British culture in which the superliberal notion of consent is twisted to mean that if you aren't held down and fighting, you've consented, it's British culture that fundamentally presents women as essentially coy, it's British culture that regards coercion as a reasonable tactic to ascertain consent. While these things are true, everyone who isn't a man can expect to be regarded as fair game for men, whom we tacitly assume can't control their sexual urges, and whom are expected to demonstrate their prowess and manliness through their prodigious sexual appetite and proclivity for.the young (jail-bait). If not all men are.like this, why do we expect, assume and fail to question why some men are?

My experience of confiding in my parents is exactly the same as you describe, Darkesteyes.

I can also sympathise with the parents in Rotherham ( tonight's Panorama) who did seek help and were failed. This is not the same thing at all but when DD came home from reception class with nasty wounds on her head I went to see the H. Teacher. She suggested that this must have happened at home and was therefore effectively accusing me or DH.
I'm a middle class articulate parent with extensive teaching experience but I was quite literally put on the ropes by that implication - until cold fury kicked in. I can fully understand how easily the Rotherham parents have been intimidated and left high and dry when they sought help for their children.

The police are clearly culpable if not complicit in the Rotherham case, and in other cases. Council officers and elected members have also failed in their duty of care in several towns and cities that we now know about.
Enquiry after enquiry takes place and the government can't even find someone to chair one whose brother didn't participate in covering up such scandals decades ago.

We have to tackle this from the grassroots because action will not come from the top.

There are a lot of passionate, emotional, intellectual and long responses. For me, it's straight forward:

1. Of course there was racism on the part of the Pakistani men. Seeing the girls as "other" makes it easier to dehumanise them and therefore treat them as less than human. Nothing new or unique about that.

1. Of course there was classism and sexism on the part of the authorities in Rotherham.

1. Of course the authorities in Rotherham are scrambling to cover their arses. I don't think the excuse: "I didn't want to appear racist," is going to protect anyone from criminal negligence.

...men, whom we tacitly assume can't control their sexual urges, and whom are expected to demonstrate their prowess and manliness through their prodigious sexual appetite and proclivity for.the young (jail-bait).

Very outdated feminist dogma.

government may send inspectors in which is all very well but what are they doing to protect girls NOW? The report author says this is not historic, it is happening today, and will be tomorrow...