Thread to discuss the reality of parts of the UK absorbing large numbers of men from other cultures

[BernardBlacksMolluscs]

This thread is to replace the one that got deleted earlier today, and the TAATs that came after it.

As per MNHQ in site stuff, we're OK to have this conversatrion

www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/4687254-how-do-we-discuss-the-reality-of-parts-of-the-uk-absorbing-large-numbers-of-men-from-other-cultures?reply=121883255

Professor Mona Siddiqui said on Radio 4 that she hated christmas?

Link please.

There has been some excellent discussion on this thread, thank you, @BernardBlacksMolluscs for starting it.

It seems to be drifting from the main subject now so I am out.

This is a quote from Victoria Smith on another subject, but it works in the context of this thread, too.

So a woman who's been raped by the wrong type of male doesn't get to be part of the conversation on ending male violence, let alone invited to gatherings to speak to others. The victims who had the "right" perpetrators don't want to be associated with her.

Professor Mona Siddiqui said on Radio 4 that she hated christmas?

Link please.

I too am extremely sceptical @macj1 that she said “she hated Xmas because all the Xmas trees and carols reminded her that she was no longer in a Muslim country.”

I didn’t know who she was, so I have just listened to quite a few of her contributions to Thought for the Day and it would be inconsistent with everything she says. She supports free speech and free expression, because she knows that without it you can’t have freedom of religion, and her specialism is inter-faith studies. She also doesn’t use personal anecdotes unless she is trying to illustrate a broader point.

I lived abroad for a couple of decades, and although I spoke the language(s), had local friends and avoided the expat “ghettos”, I never felt fully assimilated.

it can be the little things, like here I know I need to go to the DVLA for a variety of things. I know my car needs an MOT, tax and insurance.

we knew economic migrants abroad who thought such things were optional extras (or were ignorant of them) - there are so many layers to genuine integration and - perhaps it will incur the wrath of many - I don’t want an open doors policy - and I don’t think we can take everyone from everywhere in unlimited numbers.

I can’t emigrate to Canada because I don’t fulfil criteria, same as NZ, Oz, Switzerland et al. Yes, we want skilled migrants, but I’m not convinced we need multiples of men (illiterate in their own languages) with vastly different ideas of social conduct bringing different values and I’m not convinced it does any of us any favours.

There’s a difference between economic migrants and refugees though

I feel it’s fine to be picky about what economic migrants can do for us

the criteria are different for refugees though. It’s more about what we can do for the people in greatest need

I agree with this, but difficult though it is, we have to limit the number of refugees we accept too, because I also agree with:
I’m not convinced we need multiples of men (illiterate in their own languages) with vastly different ideas of social conduct bringing different values and I’m not convinced it does any of us any favours.
These men need massive amounts of support in order to get up on their feet, for their own good as much as society as a whole. It takes a lot of time and money and planning, and much better programs of integration need to be developed than what we have already. In fact, I don't see we really have much of a plan for them at all. I also agree with what this poster says about the difficulties of integration proper, even in a similar culture, and as someone with skills, a job, the language, an education etc. I know this first hand too, and for someone from such a radically different culture and with a low level of education, illiteracy, no job experience, having never lived away from home independently (in a culture where women do all the domestic work and there is far less life admin in terms of bank accounts, bills, bureaucracy etc), no or low level language skills etc etc, the difficulties of integration are amplified x1000. It's not impossible and I've known what you could call success stories in terms of these men getting jobs or an education, but it takes a lot of work that cannot be underestimated.

I can’t emigrate to Canada because I don’t fulfil criteria, same as NZ, Oz, Switzerland et al. Yes, we want skilled migrants, but I’m not convinced we need multiples of men (illiterate in their own languages) with vastly different ideas of social conduct bringing different values and I’m not convinced it does any of us any favours.

Yes, this is more and more the view I'm taking. I think there is a general resistance to anyone saying that we should consider immigration controls and a sense that it's racist to want anything other than open borders. But reading through this thread, I don't see how it's possible to defend women's rights when the influx of immigrants and asylum seekers are overwhelmingly young males from Muslim countries. Yes, we can look at education programmes and spreading asylum seekers out rather than putting them all in one place, and other things that have been suggested on this thread. But I don't see that making a decisive difference. If we don't want women and girls to have to cover up, get male chaperones etc, then it's going to take more.

I think there are two things “controlling immigration” and “managing immigration”. The former gets talked about a lot, and I think the reason I personally keep focusing on managing immigration once people are here, is because there seems to be non-existent efforts to think about it or talk how to manage immigration, even after limits are set. All I ever hear about politically is border control. Only thinking about the first step.

In reality, once here, people are moved from being the concern of one department, then the next. There seems to be an absence of an overview or a bigger plan. This lack of thought and planning is a dangerous brew.

Also, although this thread is about large groups of men, new to this country, probably through the asylum-seeking process (whether legally or illegally), loitering and harassing local women and girls, I think the parallel discussion of integrating different cultures together through immigration generally is necessarily part of it.

It's not just the impact on white British girls to be considered either. I went to an all girls school in Birmingham with a large South Asian population. Recent immigrant men outside school grounds used to harass Muslims girls who were talking to white girls and god forbid they were seen with a Hindu.

We had a large group of Somali refugees join a few years in. They reported to their parents that other girls from the mosque were socialising with non Muslims at school, their parents then decided to intervene with the other girls parents. It was awful. Some parents gave in for an easy life and pretended their daughters had never been allowed to socialise with us. Others pushed back and were told that were raising apostates which is a very scary accusation as ex-Muslims will testify.

Our school atmosphere changed horribly because we were all being judged by these new stricter interpretations of Islam and we were all either apostates or infidels.

Goods points (and also I don't agree that raising what Denmark has done it not relevant. it is arguably one of the most relevant points on the thread. Denmark is addressing similar issues to those we have in the Uk in very useful ways which we could also use in the UK to the benefit of all).

In Norway they also have classes for new immigrants in how women must be treated even if that is against the culture of the immigrant.

Sorry after that long thread I didnt make my point, which was that the way these men treated us as white British girls was horrible but it was also very visible. The girls from a similar background didn't get left alone, there was just a different more insidious way they were badly treated.

Yes I see. I have also heard people originally from India/Pakistan, complaining about the impact of Somalis on their local area. It has made quite an impression on me, how poorly managed immigration affects everyone resident. Although I could see they were freer talking about it than white people, because they didn’t have to worry about coming across as racist, I definitely got the sense that those complaining were being cautious about having their own status as immigrants thrown back at them. They are expecting to be accused of hypocrisy- immigrants complaining about immigration. So there’s a bit of squirming circumlocution going on too.

I remember when I first saw the full black sheet with the grill over the eyes being worn being worn by a lot of women in an area of London, I was really shocked and found it very oppressive. These were recent asylum seekers who set up home where an existing Muslim population live, and a few years later you had second generation young women sporting the things, saying it was a feminist choice and getting radicalised like Shamima Begam.

I honestly think what Muslim women are wearing is pretty low priority in terms of what we are talking about here. I've worked with female clients who wear a full face veil and I enjoyed the experience, it made no difference to me. Yes, I think women having to cover-up because of the idea that men can't control themselves is rooted in sexism and victim-blaming, that women are 'temptresses' responsible for men not being able to control themselves, and the idea that men are these walking pricks with no capacity to control themselves is offensive to decent men too . But I also see there could be a lot of other reasons for a woman wishing to completely cover up, not least to do with her own personal relationship with god. I don't think it's a 'feminist' choice any more than wearing a mini skirt is, I think both practices are rooted in cultures by and for men that we are raised in. Because of the male gaze you're kind of damned if you do, damned if you don't really, so the best you can do is try to be as comfortable as possible in how you dress for the situations you are going to be in, but we're probably going on a detour now in terms of the topic of conversation.

I do believe that something needs to be done to improve integration and to reinforce the notion that women have the right not to be harassed, groped, discriminated against etc, but I'm not sure how useful these classes are. I remember watching this clip a while back from the Guardian. The people in the video are well-educated, certainly more so than the average single immigrant man I was often working with, but they attend the class and nod their head, but their attitudes don't change at all. These things are so deeply rooted, not only in terms of how they see women, but their own sense of self and superiority over women. I really don't know what the answer is, tbh.

...not sure if that link worked:

I said I enjoyed it because they were pleasant women. I'm not trying to deny your experience of another type of woman who might dress this way for militant reasons - the women I dealt with weren't from the UK and so their reasoning may have been different. I've of course seen the kind of women you talk about on TV, and would say they're another kettle of fish to those I was dealing with.

Yes, I have found women wearing it to be pleasant enough, first generation, but I absolutely detest not being able to see their face.

I agree, in that respect I feel it dehumanises them. I always enjoyed when we were one-on-one and they took it off so I got to see the full personality in their face.

Yes. That’s the difference. And I think it is disturbing how easy it is to dehumanise people when you can’t see their face. It’s like a mental reflex. As humans our faces and facial expressions are so important for our connections and relationships. It disturbs me to think of all these women are scurrying around are not being viewed as real people.

I found that the men who harass you in the street in that area, even if they are second generation, do it with a contempt, as though you don’t have the right to be walking around uncovered, without a chaperone. So it is relevant.

I found that the men who harass you in the street in that area, even if they are second generation, do it with a contempt, as though you don’t have the right to be walking around uncovered, without a chaperone. So it is relevant.

I think you're right and what you're saying is relevant, but I guess I feel a bit uncomfortable bringing the focus back to women and criticising what they're wearing. I think it can unfortunately drive a wedge between women of different cultures, where the focus should be the men harassing, groping, raping.

Yes. It’s annoying, but it is the women who tend to display the outside signs of belonging to a strict religion. I suppose it’s different with Sikhs - the men wear the turban, but that isn’t a sign of modesty, it is a sign that he is like a lion with long hair.

i saw this documentary about a Christian sect somewhere in the West Country, and the blokes all wear normal clothes, but the women all wear these handmade blouses and long skirts that make them look like they belong in a different century.

As a rule of thumb, what the women are wearing suggests what the men are expecting.

That to me is utterly mad.

The sheer control that is expected to be held over women and girls. Why do they think so many are unhappy and try to run away?

As the mother of a teenage lesbian, I can't imagine that they would ever feel they couldn't exercise their right to be who they wish because DH or I would try and control every part of their life.

We've taught her and her younger brother to be themselves, always. Be kind to others, dont break the law, try and be positive, but most of all, choose your path.

Ive only ever once voiced concern over a friendship. And actually, it got DD thinking and they realised that actually, it wasn't a mutually beneficial friendship at all and the kid they had made friends with was a fun sponge and kind of knocked the spark out of them. It was ultimately their choice to move away again from that kid and their boyfriend back to their proper friend group. If they'd have decided to pursue it I would have let them.

I cannot get how you can live somewhere but yet still try and take yourself off into an individual community. You can't send your child to school and expect what? The school to keep them separate too? Teachers have enough to do as it is.

Surely, if any other group was isolating their child from others for no real reason, it would raise huge red flags. But then that gets us back to the issue of authority not stepping in to protect women, girls, everyone really.

It's not just about controlling the girls, it's keeping everyone in line. The families who stood up for their daughters were essentially excommunicated (sorry don't know what the equivalent word would be). They were completely cut off in the community, their children no longer allowed to associate with the other Muslim children.

Imagine seeing that as one of the girls whose parents had complied with these new expectations. Would you have the strength to go against everyone you knew because you'd been friends with some non-Muslims?