Talking about Asian grooming gangs: some history and a few realities - Jo Phoenix

[IwantToRetire]

I'm not going to quote any part of this but thought some would find it interesting as Jo Phoenix describes the political context at the time different of different child sexual abuse scandals, that the media chose to report in different ways.

And looks at how feminist campaigning has had some sucess, over the decades, in terms of how exploited women and children are (meant) to be dealt with by authorities (police, social workers, etc.).

https://jophoenix.substack.com/p/talking-about-asian-grooming-gangs

Exactly, Americans don't use "Asian" in a less confusing way in my experience, they just use it about a different racial group.

Did you read the piece? As PPs note, Phoenix has direct lived experience (and it underpins her name).

She has extensive experience of interviewing girls and women in this area and direct involvement in policy-making.

Having worked with many trafficked girls and young women, over 40 years, I can confirm that "grooming gangs" have existed for a very long time, coming from many different ethnic backgrounds.
The police, social services etc have always either turned a blind eye, or individuals have held their hands out.
Trying to detail the thread into a discussion about nomenclature of different races seems in spectacular bad taste.

Phoenix writes: But we were scaling a mountain of sexism, entrenched attitudes and prejudice against young working-class girls.

From the Razzall thread (above):

Black and/or working class girls [are subject to] adultification. They are treated as if they

• [need] less nurturing
• need less protection
• need to be supported less
• are more independent
• know more about adult topics
• know more about sex

This drives a perception of less innocence and they are treated more punitively by authority figures even when they are victims (Rotherham).

And this is largely in line with what Phoenix writes in that thoughtful piece (particularly the section about the general failure to prosecute).

One of the interesting features of online discussions is how some people boldly and bravely display to the entire online world just how little they know about what they are pontificating about - not alternative opinions, mind, that's what discussions are all about, just a total absence of verifiable fact.
It never ceases to amaze me how people are so prepared to make themselves look like buck-eejits before a global audience.

For example, CrystalSea has just displayed their total ignorance of who Jo Phoenix is - thanks for perfectly illustrating my point, CrystalSea!

Maggie Oliver is indeed too be lauded for her work with the girls in Rotherham, however she fails to look at who historically, in south Yorkshire was involved in recruiting girls for prostitution. The Coalition for the Removal of Pimps was set up in south Yorkshire thirty years ago, Maggie oliver should have been aware, as should other south Yorkshire Police, much, much earlier and aware of a recurring pattern.

India and Pakistan are in Asia.
But historically there has been more immigration from South Asia than East Asia to the UK.

While it is true that sexual grooming etc is done by all categories of men it does not follow that secondary characteristics like age, race, sexuality, religion etc are irrelevant. In fact they're crucially important in comabatting the tsunami of violence girls face. Intelligence and analysis are essential in protecting girls and boys.

This has been highlighted in numerous reports, notably the
Overview Report of the serious case review of the Rochdale case49, which notes:
"What is absent is any evidence that practitioners attempted to understand why the fact that the men were ‘Asian’ might in fact have been relevant and legitimate for consideration…
The degree to which workers understood the communities they
worked in may also have contributed to the failure to recognise the unusual patterns of interaction between these two groups."

83. In her report on Rotherham, Professor Jay stresses the need for engagement with communities to be meaningful, and to reach into every part of the community, stating that there was ‘too much reliance by agencies on traditional community leaders as being the primary conduit of communication with the Pakistani-heritage community,' with several women from that community feeling ‘disenfranchised by this and thought it was a barrier to people coming forward to talk about CSE’.

It's terrible that youngsters who know more about adult topics and sex are seen as less in need of protection and support - it should be ringing instant 'minor at risk' bells.

The use of the term 'grooming gangs' is interesting - are the girls being recruited into gangs, or being abused by gang members? I know threatened and actual punitive rape is a mechanism gangs use against members, including younger males, to ensure compliance. In turn it becomes a driver of violent macho behavior in the male victims as they grow older. It's long been a thing in some of the Loyalist drug gangs in Northern Ireland.

'too much reliance by agencies on traditional community leaders as being the primary conduit of communication with the Pakistani-heritage community,'

This has been picked up time and again. That self appointed leaders of various communities are being used as intermediaries between various agencies including the police. These leaders are often men and often very conservative. They have a tendency to turn a blind eye to cultural issues and deny women a voice.

I didn’t know she was a rape survivor. So am I. Rape victims aren’t exclusively working class. It is a fact that Phoenix has worked in academia her whole life and also that she was entreating women to vote for Starmer on Twitter.

I am concerned by the way that the left wing media and academics seek to underplay the lived experience of white working class girls who were deliberately and ruthlessly targeted by men from communities where women’s lives are worth less. Culture is what is an issue.

There was an unwillingness to tackle it because of perceived sensitivities of being seen to target minority communities. We saw the same thing play out in the mass sexual assaults on New Year’s Eve in Cologne when the left wing media refused to believe women’s accounts of being sexually assaulted by immigrant men.

The colour of their skin is irrelevant and being used as a weapon to shut down debate.

I heard on a R4 programme a few years ago, that there were also a lot of Asian girls from their own community used by the grooming gangs. They are not allowed to report to police etc. Omerta.

deliberately and ruthlessly targeted by men from communities where women’s lives are worth less

Less so than other countries but in the UK we have a society that values women's lives less. That was part of the driver behind Counting Dead Women and the Observer's End Femicide campaign.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4185454-Observer-campaign-to-tackle-femicide?

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4185386-The-Observer-End-Femicide-campaign

I know it suits a certain mind set to view sexual exploitation as being race dependent, it really isn't. It is sex based, it is men abusing women for sex and to make money from other men. It is also often linked with drug selling and trafficking, which is linked with organised crime.

No. Almost ALL British people use Asian in this way.

The need to talk of all the people's of Asia is nearly non existent. If we need to specify a certain region that isn't south Asia, we'll say (example) east Asian. Or possibly Chinese/Korean/Japanese if the exact country is known.

Due to our shared cultural heritage (think Empire) and the migration trends, if one says Asian, then the conversational assumption will be south Asian.

I've had enough of people saying Asians - Sikhs and Hindus do not have these gangs. If you're too scared to state who is part of these gangs then don't start a thread.

There has been research that shows that men who exploit young women / girls aren't necessarily "gangs" but in fact have a shared area of work. So for instance mini cab drivers, who are more likely to be aware of who is out and about in cities. And sadly youth groups, were predators can find out who is more vulnerable, and so on.

The 2 / 3 better known instance in London where local boroughs (all Labour run) covered up abuse and exploitation of vulnerable girls were all white working class men who knew it other from their work for the council, or the housing estate they lived on.

I am not saying this article is perfect, and I think would have been better not focusing so much about the fact that in Rotheram the common factor, althought outwardly was race, there was other commonality.

And what she also tried to point out was / is that a the same time as the tabloids are screaming headlines about race, children were / are being pimped and exploited to rich white men, by other white men. Even the church has history of exploiting orphaned children in their care. And most of these are covered up by the establishment.

The common factor is, as said by previous posters, men of whatever class or race, who are happy to exploit young women who are somehow in a position of absolute vulnerability, even within familes. Not so long ago news papers reported about 2 young women in France. Both from supposedly educated arty type families, but were pimped out to leading literary figures. ie the famlies placed being part of a particular circle as of such important they prostituted their daughters.

So the primary problem is men and male culture in all sections of society.

But made worse that if there ever was a time that social services actually provided support to young women forced to live on the streets so that they aren't taken advantage of, there no longer seems to be a consistently well funded, well run, fully staffed service to do this.

And whilst feminist campaigning has had some impact, ie stating what it is, child abuse, overall society as a whole, governed as it is by men, has not changed that much.

Full support for this. I was just making it clear how prevalent this use of language is in our fair isles.

I wonder when that usage started? I left the UK in the early 70s, and at that stage people from India or Pakistan (and latterly Bangladesh) tended to all get referred to as 'Indians', whereas the people Idi Amin had just expelled from Uganda were 'Asians'.

In Ireland most of us seem to be trying to link people to their own countries - which of course can be problematic in itself if they're from Kashmir or other disputed territory. The racist protesters rant about all 'non-nationals' and get enraged when people like me with all Irish ancestry but an off-Ireland birthplace because our parents were economic migrants try to challenge their narrative,

The other thing I remember from the early 70s in England is some 14 and 15 yr-old girls in my rather posh direct-grant girls school already being in sexual relationships with 'boyfriends' in their early 20s. I think my mother heaved a massive sigh of relief when we moved out of that setting.

It was a really weird time - Gary Glitter, Jimmy Savile, PIE, Kincora, assorted police forces turning a blind eye, and the resultant vulnerability of young people who should have been protected, and the conditions that exist now, grew and were encouraged in the general culture. Blaming Asian gangs alone (not that I doubt them being part of the problem) without looking at the wider context will leave girls just as exposed.

The other thing I remember from the early 70s in England is some 14 and 15 yr-old girls in my rather posh direct-grant girls school already being in sexual relationships with 'boyfriends' in their early 20s. I think my mother heaved a massive sigh of relief when we moved out of that setting.

That wasn't just the 70s, that went on for quite a while. I remember a friend of my BIL who was 32, with a 16 year old 'girlfriend' and that was in the 90s. It wasn't as common by then but no one found it remarkable.

Russell Brand had a 16 year old 'girlfriend' and apparently her mum used to drop her off at his place. That was only a few years ago.

Exactly this. It's not fair to say Asian grooming gangs. The groomers were of Pakistani heritage.

But the ones before that were "West Indian", Eastern European, Irish, or insert whichever immigrant group it was at that time. The ones driving taxis, providing take away meals, running corner shops, or I believe at one point, in the very distant past, laundry collection.

Ha! Try the 70s and 80s...

Sorry maybe I wasn't clear, what I was trying to say is when referring to Rotherham in particular it's not Asian grooming, it's Pakistani.