KjK "insane rant" thread 2

[AdamRyan]

First thread filled up just as it was getting interesting

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5036512-kjks-insane-rant

So let's keep it going. My characterisation if the two basic positions are:

1)KJK is a stone cold legend, haters gonna hate but many women will give her cash to bathe in champagne

2. KJK is taking right wing positions for clicks and cash, most recently criticising a doctors conference to stay relevant.

Happy to discuss further. There are some particular posts I want to respond to which I will c&p below

By focusing on "Pakistani grooming gangs" people can look like they are "doing something" but actually have minimal impact.

For the umpteenth bloody time, the only person focusing on Pakistani / Muslim grooming gangs in this thread is YOU. Nobody else has said what you allege about grooming gangs being predominantly Pakistani / Muslim.

You claimed that was said and it was refuted. But you've persistently wanged on and on about it. It's baffling.

Ignoring one form of sexual abuse of girls does nothing to prevent harm to women and girls. That did indeed happen in Oldham and Rotherham, it did nothing to prevent harm to those girls and I fail to see how it helped to prevent harm to children being abused by family members.

When someone starts going on about Rochdale then it's pretty obvious what ethnic group they are referring to.
When they start talking about "the girl who was put in a kebab" it's pretty obvious what ethnic group they are referring to.

And when people wilfully misunderstand my point about Muslims not being disproportionately involved in grooming, so they can jump on me to say "but you believe Muslim grooming gangs don't exist, tell that to my friend who was abused by one" and post loads of links it's pretty obvious what they are doing.

You also seem to be discounting the woman who joined the thread just to talk about her experiences growing up in care.

I'm sorry to say this but I can't believe you are actually that naive. It's almost as bad as "KJK was just making a list of unconnected facts and you don't understand youtube".

I didn't say anyone should ignore it

What I want is for people to stop ignoring the much larger number of women and girls being harmed every day, because they find it easier to focus on "those other men" (brown men, immigrants and trans women). It is totally exasperating.

Then my understanding of what you have said is at fault, as you appeared to be saying that no one should mention the abuse of white working class girls, in Northern England, as it drew attention to the religion of the perpetrators. Having worked extensively, in the past, with adult survivors of organised sexual abuse, I can confirm that the police have little interest in pursuing the groups of abusers, regardless of the race or religion.

I hope it's not misunderstood

I was of the age when immigration fed into who the men were

We got more, and there are ways groups operate that are different between cultures- it's not fair to suggest that there's no such thing... not meaning to suggest that at all...

so many survivors have experienced it and we all have different views, it's not like we all share the same... for some the people I hate seeing held up as heroes might genuinely be a hero to them or their families... bc they actually may have made a difference or provided support to them, I don't read OPs posts as trying to say that they aren't A problem (just not a problem we didn't already have) which I personally hold as a strong view myself

some of us have anger and justification for that anger when people will pick up the baton and shout from the rooftops and be hailed as heroes for it, and thanked for discussing it on podcasts likely with lovely financial benefits to their speaking engagements... When we were not listened to prior and we were who held the blame... not just with police, or social services, but through to your own parents, teachers, school friends... culture in general accepted it - you weren't a reliable witness etc

So no fucking wonder other cunts found it easy here when we began getting more diverse

It's really just wanting to say to folk who buy it ... history is being rewritten... as if we have a new problem imported that this country wasn't already totally cool with happening to certain children,

and it's not a thing of hey you can't say that about certain groups, but an anger at it being blamed so strongly on immigration and not a country that was just fine with it - No they didn't stop it for fear of racism, it wasn't being stopped anyway!!!

That triggers a few people above 30/35 I think (does me!)

it's frustrating that people really don't go back and acknowledge it honestly (not everyone now old enough affected would have even been alive then but some folk are old enough and still feed themselves with this lovely lie that it was not simply just completely accepted by most folk once and THAT allowed many more to suffer

Attitudes changing throughout everyone - makes a difference, but watch the media - they want you angry over certain groups more than others. One is just a "well everyone has bad apples amongst them" and another is "it's their culture, they don't respect our children" how information is spread

The finding it acceptable is a blame that should not lie with any particular group but every fucker from the top to the bottom - FOR DECADES upon decades!

And language matters. Big time.

Having worked extensively, in the past, with adult survivors of organised sexual abuse, I can confirm that the police have little interest in pursuing the groups of abusers, regardless of the race or religion.

This.
I get fed up with cries of 'why isn't anyone talking about this problem.'
Blaming victims for not shouting more shows how little you understand the problem. If you think you can go to the police or the press and disclose, and they will hear you, and deal with it then you have unrealistic beliefs. When I first tried to give evidence to the CSA inquiry they didn't even accept submissions about many organisations.

One person can't change a system. Its not that people find abuse acceptable; when you are disregarded you can only stay angry about a problem for so long, and you realise you should stop exhausting yourself and get on with living.

So many good points @missin.
Nobody should be insisting that this or that group isn't discussed in relation to safeguarding - either as survivors or perpetrators. Sex, race, class, age and other categories are all relevant at times and if we're forbidden to discuss them, then collectively we yet again fail to safeguard children.
Safeguarding is having to consider the unthinkable. That parents can abuse children. That both men and women can be abusers. That child abuse happens in all ethnic groups, religious groups, classes, wealthy and not wealthy families.

That's why it's important to be allowed to speak, to ask questions, to consider the unthinkable. And to follow that up by looking at what the evidence and the data tell us and let that inform practice.
No more insisting that this group does or doesn't do this - that allows predators to go unchallenged. Be prepared to consider the unthinkable while understanding that the actions of one person or a smaller group don't represent a whole community.

Interesting comments on Twitter/X on the CPAC funding of some of KJK's tours and suggesting beyond? Very interesting people. Although I am sure she has acknowledged this and said she will take anyone's support on the overall cause.

Still - sits uneasy.

https://twitter.com/FireyRoxy/status/1763851682746642794

and it's not a thing of hey you can't say that about certain groups, but an anger at it being blamed so strongly on immigration and not a country that was just fine with it - No they didn't stop it for fear of racism, it wasn't being stopped anyway!!!

That triggers a few people above 30/35 I think (does me!)

YES 💯 well said. You nailed it.

@missin thank you for your posts- I apologise if I added confusion with the Bigly excitement- I’ve been wondering how people do it and never been on a thread in real-time to ask! Sometimes I think cake, cheese and Bigly diffuse the tension and create a pause for people to breathe, calm down and re engage in a better frame of mind.

Re the abuse rings not being new, and the failure to act quickly enough in the Pakistani grooming rings- I wonder whether we’d just started to get a handle on the abuse rings based in children’s homes, classic white men, often in positions of influence. We’d been at long last addressing all that, having ignored it for years, and that was where attention was focused. When the Rochdale et al started, it wasn’t new it was the same old , BUT- it looked different. It was a different set of men, working in a different way. Do you think that perhaps delayed reaction, when people were first trying to draw attention to what was happening?

Anyway, probably not relevant, I just started thinking aunt it as a response to your posts.

I’m so sorry you weren’t listened to. 💐

edited for autocarrot.

Great thread, thanks for linking. Very neatly summarises some of my concerns since I found out about the CPAC stuff from the previous thread.

No doubt that tweeter will be a "leftie wrongun" in some way. But she has just posted facts.

Sorry puzzled I don't think that's it at all.

I think society wilfully turns a blind eye to a lot of abuse of women and children.

E.g. modern slavery that is largely about trafficking women to be raped by p*nters
Ongoing filmed CSA that the police know about but can't prosecute because they don't have resources.
Ongoing detection and arrests of abuse rings.
And ongoing hints that vulnerable girls continue to be exploited but there is not the resource to deal with it.

I also don't think these men were "working in a different way". Plying vulnerable girls with drink/drugs and grooming them, then pimping them to others is a known abuser MO.

The difference is the ethnicity and that comforts people because it allows them to "other" the offenders, rather than facing up to the fact that it's potentially any man one encounters. Could be ones dad. Or ones partner. Or ones colleague.

I understand it but its a comfort blanket and meanwhile the women and children who continue to be abused by "home grown" men are still ignored.

I agree with most of what you say, but think the networking looked different- takeaways and taxis rather than rotary club.

But I am not police, just done an awful lot of safeguarding in my various corners.

As you say, people need very few excuses to look past the abuse of girls.

As you say, people trafficking is a big one.
A friend’s daughter was being groomed and trafficked and she had no way of intervening. Multi generational trauma- my friend was caught up in the 80s in the children’s homes abuse.
And when I was 16 my own other blamed me and said ‘what will people think?’,!

Same old same old.

Thanks for engaging with what I actually said.

You seem to be saying here that the press refusing to cover this and the police not taking any action had no effect on the racists because "Racist thugs will be racist thugs". That's a perfectly reasonable opinion to hold and to a large extent I agree.

But you also said this:
KJK was not balanced in what she said. My view is it is harmful because it resonates with the far right and gives them a sense that their nasty activities are legitimate.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here (but happy to be corrected if I've misunderstood you).

Either what KJK says and the action (or inaction) of the police and the media feed into the actions of the far right, or they don't.

You can't possibly believe that KJK has an impact on them by "[giving] them a sense that their nasty activities are legitimate", but that the much more powerful press and police have no effect at all. Or do you?

I've said this before and I'll say it again. I hate bullies.

Yes, me too.

And me. Which is why I post in defence of KJK when people start negative threads about her.

I don't agree with all of this. I think the difference is that it was gangs, irrespective of ethnicity. People's usual understanding of abusers wasn't that it was organised gangs to the extent of those uncovered in - relatively - recent years, but mainly individuals, often known to the person / people they abused.

Also, just because a conversation is taking place about gangs, it doesn't mean that all other types of CSA are being forgotten. You can have conversations about one element of CSA without having forgotten the others.

I see this often on here: oh well, you haven't condemned x, y or z in your post, therefore you must agree with it. Or being harangued for an opinion on x and y when the thread is about z.

It's akin to being annoyed that a thread about brain tumours doesn't discuss other cancers; or about autism, which doesn't mention other neurodiversities. You don't have to mention all types of everything similar when discussing one type (or give a disclaimer to say you know that x and y also exist when talking about y).

You can't possibly believe that KJK has an impact on them by "[giving] them a sense that their nasty activities are legitimate", but that the much more powerful press and police have no effect at all. Or do you?

I'm not sure I follow. I think you are still making the point that the police and the press "ignored it because they were scared of being racist". I still don't think that's proven to be true; I think that's people's opinions.

The police and the press were worrying about running the story because they didn't want to give the "far right" an excuse by legitimising what they already believed. Meanwhile JB could see there was an issue locally with grooming gangs and was caught in a cleft stick of whether and how to report it: how to report it so the girls were protected, without feeding far right narratives.

KJK by voicing the narrative is legitimising what they already believe, and also amplifying it by implying there is a bigger conspiracy happening where "groomers are being protected by powerful people who also rape children". That's really dangerous in my opinion.

I think different media sources will feed in in different ways becauseof their confirmation bias.

The police and other sources saying there is no evidence of links to particular ethnicity will be at best ignored or at worst used as evidence of lies and a coverup to suit their conspiracy .

What KJK says will be taken as evidence they were right and there is a conspiracy that only they can deal with, hence why they like her so much.

But the root cause is they already believe these people to be harmful, a threat and not welcome here. And they are on a hair trigger looking for justification from any source.

Sure.
The problem (for me) is the disproportionate amount of conversation about the Rochdale, Rotherham and Telford grooming gangs. Everyone knows what happened there, if you say "grooming gang" that's what people think of.

Meanwhile the Birmingham gang is largely unmentioned. And as PP rightly said, it's called a "child sex abuse ring" not a "grooming gang".

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/paedophiles-behind-biggest-ever-child-26640341

And again here (never heard of this one before I googled):
https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/seven-members-of-paedophile-gang-guilty-of-running-monstrous-child-sex-abuse-ring-13008082

That's before you even start on the UK men running CSA groups on the dark Web etc.

The media coverage skews how people view the problem.

This thread is about KJK. Specifically because at the end of the last thread people wanted to know what I was referring to regarding "far right links". That's where the gangs stuff came up - because of what she said about TR. In this thread it continued because of the video @Serenea posted.

So I'm not doing a "oh well, you haven't condemned x, y or z in your post, therefore you must agree with it. Or being harangued for an opinion on x and y when the thread is about z." I specifically asked if posters agreed with the exact words she used in her video. A couple said they did - I did not say anything more to them.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/men-rochdale-grooming-tariq-jail-13035428

Starting threads about public figures/politicians on an Internet forum is not "bullying".
There's one about Joe Lycett running right now that I've not yet fully read. Is that "bullying"? If not, why not?

Not forgetting the work of this brave woman.
https://www.themaggieoliverfoundation.com/

Don't forget the threads ripping apart the appearance of those like Sam Smith and Eddie Izzard...

What point are you trying to make please? Is it to do with KJK?