Article on the threat to UK women from Afghan immigrants

[SwirlyGates]

"The statistics clearly show that Afghan nationals pose a disproportionate threat when it comes to sex offences. Last year, Sky News’s data and forensics unit – using annual population survey data from 2021 and Met Police figures – found that, for Afghan nationals, there were 59.2 sexual offence charges per 10,000 across England and Wales. The corresponding figure for UK nationals was 2.7 offences per 10,000 people."

https://www.spiked-online.com/2026/08/17/we-need-to-talk-about-afghan-sex-offenders/

The Spiked article actually misrepresents the Sky article, which does a deeper dive into the data and concludes "Our estimates conclude that Afghans are closer to three times more likely to be convicted of a sexual offence than someone born in the UK". NB though age is mentioned, i.e. recent migrants are more likely to be young and criminally active, neither seem to analyse sex, though it is mentioned in Farage's figures - there must be more male immigrants than female; presumably this has been taken into account?

More and more I find the threat, especially to women, troublesome and worrying. To generalise, the Left view all immigration as all fine and dandy; the Right disagree and want it reduced or stopped. On the other hand, Burnham's proposal to place asylum seekers in middle-class areas implicitly shows that he knows that they are problematic: "We cannot have a situation where it's only the poorest communities in the country that receive all of the dispersal of refugees and asylum seekers." If the refugees and asylum seekers are beneficial to the UK, which is promoted as the Left-wing view, then he would be saying that the rich/middle class areas will benefit from his plans, rather than saying they need to share the burden. "Blackpool, and other communities ... have had to take more than their fair share of asylum seekers," she [immigration minister Anna Turley] added. "That's put a huge burden on local communities and created real civil unrest." www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c204d4z1gg8o

TL:DR Are male immigrants, especially illegal ones, a particular threat to women, and if so what can be done?

Don't forget that if their asylum claim is approved they can bring over their family. Only recently a palestinian was allowed to do that.
All 17 of them.

You can use that argument about anything anyone ever has a concern about to shut down the conversation. It doesn’t make the issue go away.

Yes it’s powerful. They rightly get it’s a battle for hegemony and power leaks away if they lose.

Everything will be deployed to stop people objecting.

There is an assumption the Afghan men who committed the crimes are asylum seekers in the sense that they came to the UK using irregular methods (small boats) or by applying for a tourist visa etc and then claiming asylum once here. But I haven't seen a breakdown which says that. Don't forget a LOT of Afghanistan refugees arrived following the Taliban takeover of the country and were either people who had a legitimate claim to asylum in the UK because they had assisted UK forces and this put them at risk of retaliation OR they had applied for resettlement and their names were then leaked which meant they were then at risk even if they weren't before

The UK had a huge resettlement scheme for those people, and the original reason for the size (the Home Office leaking names) was originally covered up. It doesn't make the attacks any better. But it is another possible "risk factor" since not only are the migrants young and male, they are also coming from a combat background. I say this as someone who has (UK citizen) relatives who fought in the British Army and are great people. But serving in the army and being in combat makes someone statistically more likely to commit certain offences as well. I don't think it's just about "the culture those men are from" although of course that's going to be worth discussing

I don't want to be misinterpreted. I don't think war trauma is an excuse for anyone to commit violent or sexual crime. But I would be interested in seeing a more detailed breakdown in how the men involved got here. Because there's an automatic assumption that they must all be small boats migrants, and this will feed into a wider discussion on the safety of small boats migrants. But if they include men who fought with the British army/as interpreters it raises more difficult conversations. How much responsibility do you have to soldiers who may be suffering war injuries if some (not all) are also violent/a threat to women. I agree the ones that have been violent should be punished. But do you view all the men in that group as more of a threat/treat them differently. Does this also apply to British citizens? Men with PTSD are statistically more likely to be involved in violence later. But that doesn't mean they are all a threat and I feel conflicted about discussing them as a threat

There are serious crimes from men outside Afghanistan. The Belfast perpetrator, the rapist of the elderly man, the Brighton rapist.

Don't forget a LOT of Afghanistan refugees arrived following the Taliban takeover of the country and were either people who had a legitimate claim to asylum in the UK because they had assisted UK forces and this put them at risk of retaliation

This is so overplayed. "Working for British troops" in many cases equated to providing translation for one afternoon or one hour. A lot of people did it for one day as that would be their passport to the UK, under the claim that they worked for the British. Basically another loophole.

Afghans are the far right.

It's a public sector equality duty to provide equal access to victims to the worlds rapists.

"British people" are everyone from everywhere on the planet.

That's quite a low bar!

Do you think violent regimes will simply let women toddle off over here?

But the UK Home Office damaged it's ability to make those distinctions by the spectacular self-own that was leaking the name and in many cases the family members of all applicants. I am not saying every single person was helping the UK armed forces out of heroic self sacrifice. But generally, if you ask people to put themselves at personal risk to help you and then leave them to the wolves it might affect your ability to ask for help from other people in the future. Doubly that if the risk to them is caused by your admin error. That is no excuse for violence against women or anyone. But the "loophole" in this place was caused by the Conservative run home office. Not the ECHR or "The Left".

Yes, but the article is on the threat to women by Afghans. It might be possible to extrapolate from the figures that other men outside Afghanistan also pose a threat to women. Or that other men from outside Afghanistan also pose a threat to people generally (the Belfast attack was a non swxual attack on a man). But it would be easier if we knew more about the stats.

The Belfast attack is interesting because the man who was attacked had previously been doused in lighter fluid and set on fire. This was done by a White Protestant man from Northern Ireland. Which might also be used to back up the idea that conflict breeds violence (also NI has the highest rates of DV in the country). But taken in isolation it isn't enough for me to claim that.

'The women refuse to even give them a chance'? I find this a very interesting opinion - could you expand on this, please?

Debbie is Titania McGrath, or certainly her older sister.

I’m not getting the connection between the victim being subject to other crimes.

It’s still a man from Sudan committing violence, plus the other attacks here and across the EU.

Yes, I don't know why people assume that immigrants will vote for the Greens or Labour. Many take an "I'm all right" attitude once they've got the right to live here, and want to keep others out.

I dont want the men or women toddling off over here. Im very happy for them to stay in their own countries.

Many of the people you are describing are British nationals who have worked bloody hard to build businesses and make sure their children are superbly educated, and high earning, tax paying citizens. I’m not surprised they aren’t keen on their chosen country being turned into a hellscape, I’m massively pissed off about it too.

It's established that immigrants who come over and make a success of their lives, especially running a business etc are by far likely to be Right voters.
Indian restaraunt owners in Leicester etc were en masse big supporters of Leave.
There seems to be some kind of confusion in soft-minded leftists minds that right of centre citizens in this country are massively anti-immigrant.
No, just against unvetted illegals and the societal damage this wreaks. Sure, escalating numbers of legal migration since late 00s was a concern, especially the Boriswave.
But that's far away from the refusal to accept illegals, HMO Britain, and all the negatives to women and societally from the cultural vandalism of open borders.

Because they were told (correctly) that a Leave vote would allow more immigrants from the commonwealth to come to the UK instead of EU immigrants and they, understandably, wanted the chance to have hardworking family members etc to come over. Completely fine except at the same time Leave were telling other people that a Leave vote would restrict non-white immigration. So someone was always being lied to.

I know this has been a meandering conversation.but I don't know how that preference to leave is connected to Afghans (or more accurately the Taliban) being right/far right. Unless your argument is people voted Leave because they were far right which I disagree with.

What was the conclusion?

Aren't they busy doing Dallas?

That’s tonight’s listening!

The culture of Afghanistan is far right.