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?

The Act explicitly allows discrimination in some circumstances.

Again, I haven’t disputed that there is a difference between work visas and asylum. I was directly addressing your concept of ‘encouragement, and why encouragement is neither needed nor desirable (outside some very narrow parameters).

We could do this but would have to opt out of international law / ECHR or use a system that stops the current arrivals.

Moving on from the word encouragement. Perhaps it should be allow. Why, given the index you posted, is allowing it a good idea?

I know that... but I'd be amazed if we got away with barring all male asylum seekers in favour of female ones. Just not gonna happen, ever.

Our whole society would have to reframe perceptions around risk, the higher risk that men present vs women.

As a society we are moving in the opposite direction, with a successful political movement denying any material difference in the sexes at all.

You can have single sex policies where it's a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim.

The legitimate aim is protecting women and girls from VAWG. Given the many, many examples of women murdered or raped by small boat male arrivals, this should be easy to prove. Women only would be a proportionate means to achieve this. I am 100% certain there are more women Afghans who'd like to come here (get an education and work) than male small boat arrivals. So we could take the same numbers - except more vulnerable and in need actually - and also protect people already living here - legal immigrants as well as citizens.

In fact I bet we could take MORE women than single men. They'd be less trouble, probably eat less. More likely to actually do the jobs that need filling rather than just disappearing into the criminal economy.

Agree with PP too. I'm married to a legal immigrant. Only the dimwitted or deliberately manipulative pretend not to understand the difference between men who pay thousands to arrive illegally on small boats, ditching their papers en route, and legal immigrants.

Legal immigrants aren't that keen on illegal immigrants in my experience either. It's like saying people who bought a car have some kind of common identity with someone who steals the same make of car and gets away with it. Um, no, they're much more likely to be pissed off in my experience.

It’s probably not the EA that would be the issue, it’s the 1951 convention and ECHR.

Allowing what?

So sorry for the loss of your brother. (& his friend too.) xx

You can read the same sentence swapping the word out.

But ok here it is again, given your quote re the index why do you wish to allow asylum to men who are not vetted at all?

I don’t particularly. I’d just want to investigate the viability of applying it to all men rather than cherrypicking some countries.

I don't think Back is in favour of allowing that, she says she's in favour of tightening controls.

There’s no doubt that there is higher crime rates among certain immigrants at a population level (I don’t want to imply that every immigrant from that country is a criminal) but it can be partly explained by the fact it takes a lot of effort to get half way round the world evading the various challenges that confronts them, you have to be pretty strong and driven, this unfortunately can in a venn diagram overlap with criminality, enough to skew statistics. Add into that that they come from highly misogynistic cultures told from young that behaviour that we know is criminal is ok, YouTube videos from the west also promoting that women shouldn’t be respected and it’s a toxic mix. I know a couple of Afghan men who are lovely, gentle, respectful men who wouldn’t hurt a fly but they gained asylum a different way, and quite frankly came from affluent families.

im not excusing behaviour, prosecution and expelling from the country is important, but its a reason for elevation in crime it’s cultural

On this subject, I have seen very left-wing women advocating for illegal immigrants to be given jobs in adult social care, and claiming that it's racism to exclude illegal immigrants from the sector of working with vulnerable adults just because they can't provide a full background history.

And they weren't trolling.

There is a definite attitude out there amongst some people on the left that women, elderly people and disabled people are a resource that illegal immigrants should have access to... Good old-fashioned misogyny, agism and ablism, eh?

Ok let’s see what that looks like. Maybe there’s an idea that vets dangerous men. I’m not sure how.

So DBS checks for everyone to safeguard the vulnerable unless you've ditched your papers in the sea, in which case have at it? That couldn't go horrifically wrong, oh no.

Doctors and engineers is a common euphemism.

I live in an area that's recently had a large influx of asylum seekers and a relative who works at a local bus station says there's always gangs of them in there sexually harassing girls.

They do get trouble from boys/men of different backgrounds but not so much sexual harassment.

I personally grew up in an area with a large population of men from a similar culture to the ones a lot of these men are likely from and I was sexually harassed multiple times a week from the age of 12. It basically stopped overnight once I moved away with only the odd incident here and there since.

It is definitely a risk (And I'm not white myself)

Yes, I agree.
I have done some support work with the wives of those men who were given the right to come here under the Afghan Relocation Programme (because they had helped the British army over there) with their family. One of the men had a restraining order put upon him (to keep him away from his wife) since moving here, due to his domestic violence.
However, most of the other men I met seemed nice.
They had all worked as housekeepers in the British embassy (or some building like that) or as interpreters over there, assisting the British Army in that way.

The Government is fairly apathetic on the existing level of VAWG, I don't really see them doing much to counter a threat from another direction, especially a contentious one. I would be thrilled to be told I'm wrong on this.

I’ve no idea what your point is.

I believe the numbers of Afghans helping the British Army was way smaller than we've been led to believe. Multiples more conned their way into the relocation policy over here. People lied to get here, and we're to believe the vast majority were ever going to be good citizens.

The satire is so strong in these kinds of posts we almost need a new word for it.
Experts are white supremacists, and 80s Kendal that was 95% white only had white perps.

I know people with ptsd from being in a civil war, never raped anyone. Falling over yourself to excuse rape is foul. No-one is responsible for a rapists behaviour other than the rapist. Many people have had awful experiences and then don’t harm anyone.

This is frankly grotesque.

I don't quite understand this in relation to asylum and Afghanistan.

Surely asylum prioritises according to risk? Eg an opponent of a coercive regime would need asylum but someone from the same country who supports the regime would not. A country might target members of one religion but not those of another, and so on, and so only the first religion would be a risk factor.

Afghan women don't need asylum because they are women per se, but because women are a group that the regime has decided to persecute. It's not quite the same thing. A particular Afghan man may or may not be at risk from the Taliban, but unless they are running a two tier system where some women get to break the rules, any Afghan woman is already suffering human rights abuses under the law.