Telford Abuse Scandal

[Cookingutensil]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-61983584

Why can't the BBC say girls? It wasn't just children that were being abused, it was specifically girls - a crime against GIRLS. If we can't call it for what it is, how can we possibly stop it?

Heartbreaking and utterly feckin infuriating.

Yes, it wasn't boys having forced pregnancies and forced abortions.

Then complain. Please do.

The sheer numbers of girls caught up in this are unbelievable. Nobody should be negating their identity or experiences.

One of the abuse survivors, Samantha Smith, whom police previously lied about not being willing to testify, spoke up on GB news last week and had the police interrogate her for her troubles:

Nothing will ever change if we can't even name who the victims are. Obscuring the victims sex helps the abusers. Shame on the BBC.

Original Samantha Smith GB News item from last night. What an incredible young woman.

I also worry for young girls whose male relatives are perpetrators. No one, but no one, is going to listen to them, should they fail to be treated and respected as they should.

I agree, we have to recognize this happened to girls, in order to stop going forward.

The perpetrators were Asian Muslim men, too, which also should be reported on.

I live in Staffordshire and I recently reported my childhood rape and sexual abuse. I was put in a room where I felt like the perpetrator. It was nothing like I expected. I did feed back there and then about how uncomfortable felt. This was with the sex crime unit too. As a reaosnqly adjusted adult woman I cant imagine someone else less resilient actually coping with it that we'll and I feel the fall out alone from the reporting would be traumatic in itself. Minimal follow up care too.

The channel 4 report was quite clear about using the words girls and young women.

twitter.com/SamanthaTaghoy

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-43471241

I had never heard of this specific victim and her subsequent murder in 2000 along with her mum and older sister. Just horrific.

That young woman giving the interview is brilliant - so confident and articulate.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/1607307.stm

"Pregnant girlfriend"

I’m so sorry this happened to you. It’s inexcusable. I hope you’ve been able to get support elsewhere.

www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints/make-a-complaint/#/Complaint

I don’t read the language in the BBC article in the same way in this instance. I see the use of “children” through most of it to be about emphasising that the victims are not adults rather than as a way to obfuscate the sex of the victims. In the UK “girl” is still commonly used to refer to adult women, especially in relation to sex. And people often don’t see teen girls as being children when we talk about sexual relations, especially where they are groomed and appear to go along with the abusers of their own accord.

So I think the emphasis on the word children in this article is appropriate and more impactful. It is clear from early on that the victims are girls. there are references to them sprinkled throughout, and the photos make it clear. The focus on their age and making it clear to the general reader that they are children is more necessary than consistently ensuring they are clear they’re talking about female children.

Yes these men prey on girls that are related but also non related girls from the same community, they target them outside schools and they pick the girls who they know have dysfunction in their families so know full well they girls won’t be believed over the respectable men, they will be accused of asking for it, the girls can’t get away unless they runaway from home (many do) or when they stop giving the men what they want the girls are threatened with honour crimes. The male privilege is on another level. I wish there was help for girls from the community but unless we have the guts to speak out and family support we will carry on being silent . The trauma we carry is unreal.

I personally think the word ‘young girls’ should be used instead of children to show there were pregnancies and abortions whereas children is too neutral. I don’t know if that makes sense.

I agree with you, Tootired. I understand why they are saying children but it's one sex class of children.

of course, they were children and people need to know they were not able to consent. They need to mention young girls alongside children. It’s not difficult to do.

I saw a documentary on that article you posted upthread from the perspective of the daughter that survived the fire.

That original article you posted is infuriating.
Just gobsmacked the way they reported it and made it seem the relationship was normal.
Well finally the net is closing in on these bastards how could they let them get away with it, was it really because they didn’t want racial tensions or simply because they were girls and didn’t matter. Maybe both. Everyone had a duty of care towards those girls and they all failed them. It’s one thing if they couldn’t say anything but they asked for help and were ignored. Makes me sick.

1000 victims in one locality.

1000 people growing up with indescribable trauma.

I don't understand why this isn't being reported on and discussed more widely

Not sure I agree on this occasion. The headline refers to “child sex abuse”. This is a blanket term which is also used when referring to crimes committed against boys. The summary in bold at the top refers to “ more than 1000 girls being abused” . There is another para in bold referrig to Sunday Mirror reporting that “gangs had been abusing girls” and a photo caption referring to “ men in cars approaching girls”. There are further reference to both “children” and “girls” but I think this is a style point to avoid too many repetitions of the same word. Nobody reading this article could be in any doubt about the sex of the victims.

I think unfortunately it's important to reiterate that they were children. Culturally, we have all sorts of ideas about teenage girls which are not helpful in the context of speaking about abuse. Reminding people that these were child victims is important to get a clear message across.

I didn't see the article before today. Has it been rewritten from whatever posters were originally discussing?