"Break the silence around rape and violence against women" but don't mention grooming gang rape and violence against girls

[ReleaseTheBats]

The Guardian is at it again.

"Why we need to break the silence around rape and violence against women"

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/11/break-silence-rape-violence-women-bosnia-srebrenica#comment-101890889

There is a lot in the article that I don't agree with. For example:

As in Bosnia, the root of these crimes is the dehumanisation of others – the belief that the perpetrator is superior by reason of sex, race or nationality, and has the right to control, humiliate or hurt their victims

It seems odd to leave religion of the list of reasons for perpetrators to believe they are superior and to dehumanise others, particularly in the Bosnian context.

But my issue is with the Guardian moderation of comments. Apparently, under an article about how we need to break the silence about rape and violence against women, posting a comment about breaking the silence in certain sections of the media about recent grooming gang cases (eg Oxford and Huddersfield) will get you deleted.

Could the Guardian get any more hypocritical?

Squishy when you look at Britain do you see a happy cohesive society ?

No.
Not as happy and cohesive as it should be.
More happy and cohesive than it was in Powell's time. And not the bloodbath he predicted.

"Not all cultures are equal."
"Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible."
Enoch Powell was not talking about culture in that speech he was talking about race and colour. Have you actually read it? Do you still think he was right?

If we had a culture where girls were believed when they said what was happening to them, where under age sex with much older men and sex work weren't accepted as something vulnerable girls do and a "lifestyle choice" Rochdale and Rotherham wouldn't have happened.
Men abuse children all the time. Organised child abuse rings (sports clubs, churches, children's homes, cub scours etc) are not uncommon. Rochdale/Rotherham were perpetrators from a particular culture but those girls were vulnerable to abuse by any man because of the way society viewed them.

I wasn't alive when Enoch made the speech so its hard to say whither society Is happier and more cohesive than it was in the late 60's. My gut feeling is its less so. Many of the things that made society cohesive, the church, the trade unions, the nuclear family are dying out and being replaced by individualism.
I have read the speech, I don't agree with every word of it especially the part about piccaninnies however I don't think he's just talking about race. However race is something that makes integration harder along with language and culture.
I do believe that all races are equal however all cultures are not.

Quentin I agree with everything that say about how those girls were viewed and treated by society. Its misogyny and class prejudice at its worst. However part of the problem Is also the culture the offenders came from. You could probably say that what happened was a result of the darkest parts of British culture and Pakistani culture combining to create something truly vile. You cant try and prevent cases like this from occurring again in the future without tackling both.

"My gut feeling is its less so. Many of the things that made society cohesive, the church, the trade unions, the nuclear family are dying out and being replaced by individualism."

I wasn't alive then either. But, although it is easy to see the past through rosy, nostalgia tinted glasses, my impression is that society is less divided now than it was then and that impression is based on what I know of recent British history and what I have been told by those who did live through it. It is a bit ironic that you talk about the positive contribution to social cohesiveness made by the church, when the church has its own horrific abuse scandals. I am a Christian myself, but think that the automatic deference towards institutions like the church, which was much more prevalent in the 60s helped those scandals to stay buried for as long as they did.

Likewise, a lot of terrible things happened within good old "nuclear families". The fact that single mothers and divorce etc are more acceptable now has, in my opinion, enabled more people to escape abuse, and resulted in fewer children removed from their mothers to be placed in care (where they were often abused).

Just because people didn't talk about sexual abuse, domestic violence and pedophilia in the golden past does not mean it wasn't happening within those much respected institutions.

Maybe but post fact people seem to find it a lot easier to put Rochdale down to the culture of the offenders than a misogynistic care system that failed vulnerable girls.

Idolising the nuclear family and not recognising alternatives does not protect women and children form misery:
www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2016/11/09/breaking-the-silence-britains-adoption-scandal-was-a-heartbreaki/

www.theguardian.com/society/2013/oct/27/forced-adoption-mother-and-child-reunited

"I was a perfectly healthy, capable adult. I'm still angry my child was taken away." The social, economic and religious pressures that existed at the time are easily forgotten now that the stigma of illegitimacy has been erased and sex without a wedding ring is the norm.

Yes, this is so so true. In a recent TV programme on grooming and rape, the person who set up a help place was dismissed time and again when she told the authorities. Various authorities said they knew but that she was being racist. No, she was alerting child rape, plying with alcohol and drugs and grooming, by a gang. The men have been since convicted.

I myself believe this because I saw instances of grooming and phoned the police. The much older man was with young girls who were changing into mini skirts, heels and etc (not the usual fashion statements, but sexualised look). Police said 'he is just their boyfriend; you cannot tell how young people can dress' so I repeated 'no that is not what I was saying' Then, I called a helpline on child grooming and they were very good, told me to complain to the police immediately. I did this and the reaction from another police officer was excellent 'police man should not have said that, you are right, you did the right thing, it is serious' etc. And this was only last month.

Less, this article is particularly distressing but really important in understanding the darker side of our recent history:

www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/27/britains-child-migrant-programme-why-130000-children-were-shipped-abroad
www.theguardian.com/society/2010/feb/24/child-migrant-programme-slavery

The reason we're talking about Enich Powell LessWorried is because your deleted post was quite similar. Not because it's relevant.

Walden, I too think that it can really depend on who you get, police-wise when you report. I rang up about a friend who had completely dropped off the radar, and whose parents had been trying to sort an arranged marriage for her, which she hadnt wanted. First police man's response was pretty much, "you're saying she's with her parents so she's not missing so we can't do anything." Arguing that it was her parents I was worried about got me nowhere. Reported it later to a police woman who said the first police officer was completely wrong (she was actually furious at what he'd said) and there was lots they could and should do, and immediately followed it up and actually managed to avert this trip to Pakistan where the marriage would have taken place.

There were many bad layers to the Rotherham situation: the men, the police, the care system, all of which should be blamed for what happened. However, the rapists themselves are the worst of the lot and should get the harshest punishment.