Women Against the Far Right - Open Letter

[ThisChicPinkRaven]

A collection of prominent women have signed an open letter regarding the far right's consistent, and increasing, 'justification' for their vile behaviour that immigrants represent a sexual threat to women.

It's true that there are some instances of sexual violence committed by migrants, the overwhelming majority - to the surprise of absolutely nobody - is committed by men who are UK nationals and born here.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this subject, specifically whether your personal politics regarding migrants are coloured by the degree of threat you feel.
I am aware that there are some people on this board who hold views not wholly compatible with the rest of us, so please remember to be kind, patient, and thoughtful in your responses.

Source Links
Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/sep/02/women-stop-linking-asylum-seekers-sexual-abuse
Independent: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/womens-safety-far-right-vawg-government-b2811674.html

Sorry, this is still not correct. You are confusing residency and citizenship. There is no such thing as English Citizenship.

Eh? All British and okay let's say it, white cultures, share those values? No they do not. What nonsense is this?

We have had nonwhite English, Scots, Welsh and Irish since before the Romans arrived. Cheddar man- a 10,000yr old skeleton was a Black Englishman with blue eyes.

It doesn’t matter that some indigenous people had a bit more melanin in their skin than the average, they were and are still ethnically and culturally of the British Isles. They didn’t disappear after the Romans left either, now we have DNA testing we have found multiple races over the entire 2,000 years of history.

It is a far right myth that we were all white as snow until the 1950s. Total poppycock straight from the Hitlerian aryan race playbook.

Its like saying the ginger population didn’t exist until Henry VII and his army took the throne and they’re ‘not indigenous’ or that people with green eyes (rarest eye colour) are ‘not indigenous’ because we all had blue eyes and blond hair until those brown Romans from Italy showed up.

Nonsense. Ethnic groups can be diverse genetically, and often are on islands that always had ships & people coming and going for millennium.

All British cultures also share a Christian heritage

I think my local Druid would disagree with this comment.

Druid? You mean the guys who run the Eisteddfod?

Cheddar man- a 10,000yr old skeleton was a Black Englishman with blue eyes.

This was woke nonsense, there was nothing to suggest he was black.

It’s like suggesting certain Papuan New Guineans are European because they’ve got blonde hair. Darker skin by itself does not denote subsaharan ancestry.

Sadly, we don’t know exactly what they would have looked like, because they no longer exist as a coherent group and their unique appearance has been totally wiped from existence.

I agree.

Around 1,000 people came together for the online launch of the Women Against the Far Right campaign on Thursday evening. The event was organised by Stand Up To Racism (SUTR).

https://socialistworker.co.uk/anti-racism/mass-meeting-launches-women-against-the-far-right/

So women cant be trusted to launch a women's campaign. They need supervising by "people".

Sabby Dhalu spoke about SUTR’s investigations that have revealed the true face of the far right, explaining that “many men on the far right have convictions for violence against women.”
She said their “racism undermines the struggle for liberation of all women, and undermines the eradication of these horrific crimes.”

I vividly remember a female SWP member who suffered violence from her partner so severe that two party members called the cops because they were afraid he might kill her.

The SWP leadership's response to this was to expel the two members who called the cops, smear them far and wide as informers, and loudly tell anyone who would listen that the proper response to DV cases in the party was to rely on the party's famously effective disciplinary system.

Sabby has been an SWP member for a long time. She is up to her neck in their institutional misogyny.

I am happy to tell stories of similar cases to Diane Abbott, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Apsana Begum, Grace Blakely, Leanne Wood, Charlotte Church or any other of the famous lefty women they've got to endorse their initiative.

And I predict none of them will give a fuck.

Just google "Comrade Delta"

I don't need to google him, I've met him.

And he never really went away, though he keeps a low profile these days.

It wasn't aimed at you (I would have quoted you) but those who aren't aware of the long history of contempt for women by the SWP and various othe "left" groups.

Wow.

I am aware that there are some people on this board who hold views not wholly compatible with the rest of us, so please remember to be kind, patient, and thoughtful in your responses.

My assumption is [PP]’s reading age isn't quite on par with ours, so I think we can safely treat their post accordingly.

Patronising much? OPs like this, and in fact the whole ‘Far Right threat’ nonsense and all the luvvies in their comfy suburbs telling us not to be nasty — gives me an unexpected surge of sympathy for rioters.

Modern "druids" are not the same as the historical druids. They are very much a product of a Christian culture.

the men who arrive here illegally are from countries where abuse towards women is not only common but is sanctioned by society and the government. Therefore it would be naive to not want to examine this association, but getting these stats would be incredibly difficult (I don’t think these stats exist). VAWG exists in many forms from unwanted behaviours through to abhorrent acts. Men from countries where attitudes towards women are diabolically, where men think they have a right to female bodies, where attitudes towards what we know as paedophilia are different - common sense would acknowledge these don’t disappear as soon as they reach uk soil. Of course some uk men also commit vawg, but they are two distinct groups and tackling them would require very different solutions. The government has committed to reduce vawg - if it is serious about doing this then it needs to do so whilst being honest about the realities of the situation. We have entered a very dangerous time, where reality is being twisted into a moral failing - where people with justifiable concerns are treated as extremists and dangerous. If the government were serious about tackling vawg in the uk, those men who come here illegally would be detained and sent back. But instead we find ourselves in the situation where hundreds of thousands of men are here and little is being done about it.

There are stats on this, and it is part of this pattern of inferring migrant men are somehow the sole perpetrators of violence against women that these never get mentioned. And the stats that show that migrant women are far more likely to be victims.

Responding to tabloid bias in reporting is what is influencing people, many of whom are only too happy to have a "legitimate" reason to justify their racism, to somehow make out that these men are the sole cause of sexual violence against women.

In terms of asylum seekers the main problem is that no UK Government has found an efficient way of dealing with them.

As over 70% are accepted as legally entitled to stay in the UK, the best solution would be to have a quick and efficient system of assessing them.

And in the meantime if they have to be housed, putting them somewhere with support systems, and services such as learning English and socially accepted behaviour.

I wonder if you compared the number of women assualted in the UK by migrants to the number of women in any number of countries assaulted by drunked UK male tourists, how the figures would compared.

Let alone UK armed forces stationed in other countries.

If a country said, too many British soldiers are raping local women, you’d support their removal, would you not?

Or would you argue that, ‘they are providing your security, shut up, local men are probably worse!!!’

Or you would you respect their wishes and leave?

R4 at 9am on Wednesday 10th September More or Less programme looked closely at the statistics being mentioned on this thread. Well worth listening to.

If they were legitimately stationed there I would expect that they would first of all be sentenced by whatever legal system the country had, but also expect the British Armed forces to ensure that all their soldiers were told how to behave.

And as we know from cases still going on years after the crime, the Armed Forces are covering up.

And of course if the UK armed forces weren't able to get their men to stop sexually assaulting local women then they should not be stationed there.

So would you respect their wishes, knowing rape is never properly prosecuted and knowing there will be rapes and other sexual assaults going unreported?

Sorry, I am obvioulsy going to have to spell it out to you.

Unfortunately when groups of men live or work or are housed together, they are more likely to behave in a way that they wouldn't when part of society.

So whether they are tourists, armed forces (including "Peace Keepers" who have a terrible record) or aid workers, women are more at risk.

So I am not excusing any asylum seeker who has committed sexual violence against a woman.

I am just saying it is sadly a pattern of male behaviour.

We have seen in the past weeks that the UK legal system is able to deal with this as a criminal offence.

But the nonsense of the idea of the slogan of keep out daughters safe is that the greatest risk is many seaking asylum is just dumb.

And in fact doesn't address the main threat to women and girls. Which is the men and boys in their own families, their neighbours and fellow workers.

I was really only responding to the histrionics about "what the people really want".

So you know that groups of young men are high risk. But you still think young men should be prioritized over the safety of local women and girls.

I thought you were just naive. This … is not a good look.

Unfortunately when groups of men live or work or are housed together, they are more likely to behave in a way that they wouldn't when part of society.
So whether they are tourists, armed forces (including "Peace Keepers" who have a terrible record) or aid workers, women are more at risk.

This is true, and a very important point.

There's also intense pressure on us to believe that, if you stick 80 young Afghan men in a hotel together, they don't pose a risk to women in the surrounding area.

Now you are just being silly.

Where do you get the word priority.

I am saying those in authority need to have systems in place, whether for groups of men in an area, or individual men in the UK that makes sure the law is applied.

Groups of young men from schools are a menace in the area they are in, ditto groups of young men in colleges.

I would be more than happy to have a society where there is a curfew on men.

What I dislike is women who go out of their way to pretend that the real threat to women are not strangers, but those they know.

If you cared about women so would you be.

But you are just exploiting the issue of sexual violence to show you hostility to "outsiders".