Suella Braverman thread 2

[AdamRyan]

As we filled up thread one eith our battling over whether it's feminist or racist to support Suella Braverman's weekend statements, I thought another would be good.

Here's some of what she said:

"What's clear is what we've seen is a practice whereby vulnerable white English girls, sometimes who are in care, sometimes in challenging circumstances, being pursued and raped and drugged and harmed by gangs of British Pakistani men who've worked in child abuse rings or networks. We've seen institutions and state agencies, whether it's social workers, teachers, the police turn a blind eye to these signs of abuse out of political correctness, out of fear of being called racist, out of fear of being called bigoted. And as a result, thousands, we are not talking small numbers, we are talking large numbers, thousands of children have had their childhoods robbed and devastated. And there are many of these perpetrators still running wild, behaving in this way. And it's now down to the authorities to track these perpetrators down, without fear or favour, relentlessly and bring them to justice"

Sunak has since rowed back on this and the Home Offices own research suggests there is not enough quality research to say any particular ethnicity is disproportionately involved in "grooming gangs"

Hopefully conservatives are going to lose the next election. At that point, the members of the Conservative party are pretty likely to vote for a new leader. Potential runners are going to be trying to appeal to this core of voters. I think a lot of current Tory policies are best seen in the light of not trying to win over the general electorate, as that’s a battle that I think canny politicians are already factoring in as a probable loss. Instead, they’re aiming to win over Conservative party members. To do this, they need to be even more pro white English, anti Johnny Foreigner than the next Tory. It’s not a dog whistle, it’s an open competition.

Is grooming gangs getting away with it because the police don't want to seem racist an actual ongoing issue? It all looks to me suspiciously like something that was big news half a decade ago being dredged up by the home secretary for political reasons, rather than anything genuinely currently relevant.

There is currently an ongoing situation in Bradford - with many more yet to face trial.

Dozens of people charged over suspected widespread child sexual abuse in Bradford are still awaiting trial, a report has revealed.
Thirty-seven suspects have yet to face trial following investigations by West Yorkshire Police's Operation Dalesway into historic incidents of grooming across the district.

You may very well be right.
I thought it was interesting just how small the selectorate in Fareham was that Braverman was playing to last week.

Dozens of people charged are still awaiting trial.

Doesn't that say all we need to know about the government's priorities for the justice system?

Young girls were groomed and sexually abused by gangs and the crimes weren't investigated for various reasons inc the colour of the perpetrators' skin. Now I personally don't care what colour the victims or the criminals were, I just want the abusers locked up for a very long time. But even here on a supposedly feminist board many posters care more about being seen to be liberal than they do about the victims of sexual abuse - I'm reading about dogwhistles and racism which just creates another protected class of men. I bet the same wouldn't be said about trans or priests. It's sickening.

I'm reading about dogwhistles and racism which just creates another protected class of men

I think the patriarchy protects men....you don't need another class as men are already in the first one.

But sounds like you think there are other protected classes - so alongside British Pakistani men, who are they? Or which classes of men aren't protected?

@Alltheprettyseahorses so you will join me in condeming the massive underfunding that has occured for the Police, Criminal Justice system and social services under the current government all of which have a massive impact on the victims of sexual abuse and other crimes?

Back in 2012 Warsi said that a minority of Pakistani men view white girls as fair game for abuse.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/baroness-warsi-some-pakistani-men-think-young-white-girls-are-fair-game-for-sex-abuse-7766319.html

She has condemned Braverman. I really don't think Warsi can be accused of caring more about being seen to be liberal than about the victims of sexual abuse. But she does recognise Trump-esque tactics when she sees them.

twitter.com/GMB/status/1645666919914020864?s=20

Given the amount of time and money the police are able to waste on so-called hate incidents, painting their cars and dancing at parades, I'd argue they're over-funded and over-staffed.

Some classes of men are protected more than others. I gave 2 examples in my post.

So you are not really interested in the victims of crime then. Fair enough.

How did the police's fear of being seen as racist play out across other crimes? Did they fail to investigate robberies, drug offences, car crime etc if the suspects were of Pakistani origin?

I am pretty certain that the police's fear of being called racist meant that stop and search was used primarily against innocent white people...

Did you get confused and quote/replied to the wrong post? Seeing as I've made it clear my only concern here is for the victims of crime and I'm sure you wouldn't want to fabricate words in people's mouths that are beyond all relevance to what they actually say.

@Alltheprettyseahorses so you will join me in condeming the massive underfunding that has occured for the Police, Criminal Justice system and social services under the current government all of which have a massive impact on the victims of sexual abuse and other crimes?

You think trans sex offenders and priests aren't protected from allegations of abuse, or they are? Sorry, I'm finding your posts quite confusing....

I think men in general can abuse with impunity and no groups of abusive men have an easier/harder time. Apart from maybe policemen and celebrities. Celebs seem to just be able to say "I'm famous, she's a gold digger" and get away with anything.

Will you apologise for your egregious misrepresentation of what I said?

The cases that seem to prompt modified reactions are those which have the capacity to make people turn against a whole group. I think you have to see them in the context of the time they happen, so, if there has been a terrorist attack carried out by a group of Muslims, and anti Muslims feeling is running high, releasing a story about pakistani grooming gangs has the capacity to incite violence in the streets. If there are high tensions around immigration, then stories about organised groups of Middle Eastern refugees robbing and sexually assaulting women are thought likely to light the fuse on that anger. Violence against women is seen as a less important kind of violence, because it’s highly unlikely to create public disorder. Anything likely to cause rioting will have an actual cash cost to it, so its obviously more important to be cautious when dealing with it. Right now, we haven’t had any major terrorist attacks for a few years, so it’s fairly safe to whip up a bit of hatred without worrying it will spill over into costly damages.

I have no idea what you're confused about. Priests are a major example of a group of men protected from allegations of abuse. I don't think anyone could have missed the massive scandals that have hit the news over the last couple of decades or so. Again, with the grooming gangs we see men who didn't face punishment for various reasons.

Someone who cares about the victims of crime including sexual abuse would surely be appauled by the 25% reduction in the MoJ budget between 2010 and 2019 and therefore would condemn a government that had instigated those cuts.
I am sure readers of this thread will come to their own conclusions as to why you seem unable to do that.

Which brings us neatly back to the original question.

Why did Braverman pick "British Pakistani men" and not priests to talk about?

OK
Which groups of men aren't protected?

So you won't apologise for your disgusting smear but instead double down. Exactly WHAT conclusions would anyone come to in my logical and moral refusal to be force teamed into agreeing with you? I mean, they could always compare posting histories.

If that question was serious, there are quite a few. Young black men from all social groups and young working-class white men to name just two.