14 of those arrested during Ballymena riots have since been reported for domestic abuse

[IwantToRetire]

Police data from the past three years has consistently shown that a significant number of those arrested for their involvement in racist violence across the UK also had a history of domestic violence.

Megan McClure, from the Women’s Resource and Development Agency, said that "the attempt to frame racist violence and anti-immigration sentiment as a response to concerns about violence against women and girls is both deeply harmful and fundamentally dishonest.

“Violence against women and girls (VAWG) is overwhelmingly perpetrated by men known to victims, within families and communities, yet far-right actors repeatedly seek to redirect attention towards migrant and minority communities. In doing so, they exploit genuine public concern about women's safety to advance racist and divisive agendas.

“The events in Ballymena demonstrated how adroit the Far-Right have become at hijacking the ending VAWG narrative to promote hostility towards migrant communities. Not only does this cause direct harm to those targeted, it also distracts from the real work required to prevent male violence and support victims and survivors.”

Extracts from a much longer article at https://www.thedetail.tv/articles/14-of-those-arrested-during-ballymena-riots-have-since-been-reported-for-domestic-abuse

I dont think this is unique to NI as there was an earlier thread about similar statistics following a riot in another part of the UK. (I did try to find the thread to add to the existing one, but nothing came up.)

Being born here is no excuse for being violent to women.
Being an immigrant is no excuse for being violent to women.
Anyone who points at either cohort to distract attention from the activities of the other is not a friend to women. They have other agendas.
We need to reach a point where we can be confident that VAWG will be prosecuted without fear or favour, regardless of who is perpetrator and who is victim.

No surprises there @IwantToRetire, most of the men in the race riots are just looking for an excuse for a physical fight, they're the same people who were the worst football thugs years ago, the same men who try to start a fight in the pub, the same men who see nothing wrong in hitting their wives to get their own way

Generally speaking, people who get involved in violence are violent people. They likely also have a history of cruelty to animals and other violence that are nothing to do with racism or misogyny.

I suspect that if the Guardian (or someone else) could get the arrest histories of everyone arrested for violence at progressive marches and demonstrations you would see something similar, ditto if you did similar for football violence.

My desire is for V to be prosecuted, full stop.

My infant nephew is no less deserving of protection than my toddler niece. Ditto my elderly father than my elderly mother. None of them should suffer it.

This.

If you arrest people who are out rioting and being violent, they will be violent people.
There will be people who are not aggressive and violent who share the concern about boats, migration etc who don’t have a history of domestic violence. They won’t have been arrested for violent behaviour on the street and rioting.

It’s such a pointless observation, this one.

I think part of the point in articles like this and statement from women's groups working to end violence against women is to counter the narrative that implies it is only immigrants or asylum seekers who are committing acts of violence against women.

So part of the point of FWR linking to newspaper articles is to be aware of the public discussion as well as what we are saying to each other on FWR.

As I said, I tried to find the earlier thread, as it helps to have links that show the narrative.

And also, though strangely not posted on FWR as much is that for probably the last 2 years or so, women's support services have been putting out messages similar to the one in the article.

So maybe sadly, all this indicates that whether a news paper or a service provider, many in the British public dont pay any attention and continue with their belief set.

We need to reach a point where we can be confident that VAWG will be prosecuted without fear or favour, regardless of who is perpetrator and who is victim.

Exactly.

But also need to stop the false narrative about both who the perpetrators are and who the victims are.

I recommend 'Home Grown' by Joan Smith on the links between dv and terrorism.

This seems to be one of those "because we have homegrown domestic abusers, we should import more" arguments.

If services are stretched with dealing with VAWG why add more to it?

I think as a woman and a feminist it’s hard to be unaware of the pandemic of violence against women and girls. While I agree @PollyNomial, all categories of crime are falling except violence against women and girls. Also unlike men, women and girls are at higher risk at home than in public.

None the less, welcoming men who will be violent towards women and girls in the street as well as at home seems u wise and unnecessary. Of course barring them doesn’t reduce the risk from our home grown misogynists but at least it avoids adding another category of predators for women to evade while navigating their daily lives.

That isn't the issue, this notion of importing.

But the fact that home grown abusers are trying to argue that men like them aren't the problem it is only imported men who are the problem.

And everybody who falls for this false narrative is putting the vast majority of women at risk.

So it is not only excusing men who are violent because they are "one of us" but also saying to women who suffer their violence, sorry you aren't important.

Just more whataboutery. Concern about importing men from deeply misogynist cultures is not racism. If you want to neutralise the far right start facing up to grooming gangs and other vawg by men of other cultures.

But the fact that home grown abusers are trying to argue that men like them aren't the problem it is only imported men who are the problem.

And everybody who falls for this false narrative is putting the vast majority of women at risk.

Seriously? no one on this board has ever said that. This is a double bluff - ignoring the violence of imported men is the best way to prevent vawg in general.

It is the way the concerns about importing cultures that are more misogynistic than the UK's just as we were beginning to gain ground in fighting home grown misogyny that has laid fertile ground for these violent men to create this narrative.

Women who are concerned about the way culture has been used as an excuse to not tackle misogyny and cries of racism have been used to shut down voices of concern are not saying that vawg from British men is fine or non existent.

Violent men will take advantage on every opportunity they can to be violent, and the liberal consensus that we need to shut down discussion on cultural differences is one of the things they have been able to jump on.

Can’t stand these arguments. Aside from being logically flawed, they use women who are victims of domestic violence as a means to a political end.

Is the concern really that violent men are being released back into the community and going on to commit further offences? No — it’s being used to discredit “anti-immigration sentiment” and defend predominantly male migration.

The fact that some violent men hold certain political views doesn’t mean the vast majority of non-violent people who share those views don’t care about women and girls. Most people opposed to mass migration are neither violent nor domestic abusers.

They’re doing exactly what they claim to oppose: using victims to make a political point. And that’s particularly galling coming from someone whose job is supposed to be advocating for women but is actually using their experience to advocate for male migrants.

We need to be able to walk and chew gum on this.

That a significant proportion of the men protesting against immigrants are guilty of DV comes as no surprise - violent men are drawn to protests and riots. Any excuse to get involved in a punch up and vent their aggression.

At the same time, their involvement in these protests need to not blind us, or allow us to be deflected from, the very real problem of high numbers of undocumented young men arriving on our shores from places where women and girls are seen as lesser than. Where there are no or little consequences for rape. Where data from other countries suggest they pose a significantly higher risk to women and girls than men from this country.

BOTH are a problem. Both need to be scrutinised and dealt with.

I have no time whatsoever for anyone who seeks to hand-wave one side of this away, no matter which side they are biased towards or against.

That men arrested for public violence tend to have form for the domestic variety is no surprise - and fairly well researched. As is the fact that men involved in far right and racist violence tend to be drawn to the cause as an opportunity to be violent, rather than adopting violent ends in service of the cause.

What would be useful is more attention on the inverse question: is domestic violence a predictor of other violent crime?

If it's known to predict - and therefor offer chances to prevent - the public crimes, that could help investigating and prosecuting domestic violence and MVAWAG to be taken more seriously.

'The fact that some violent men hold certain political views doesn’t mean the vast majority of non-violent people who share those views don’t care about women and girls'.

That sounds very reasonable, but isn't the corollary equally true,
that some male migrants don't care about women and girls, but that doesn’t mean the vast majority of male migrants hold certain views about women and girls?

How can you say
'most anti-migration men are grand although there's incontrovertible evidence that some of them are violent sexist thugs'
without also saying that
'most migrant men are grand although there's incontrovertible evidence that some of them are violent sexist thugs'.

Surely both statements about both groups of men are true?

No — it’s being used to discredit “anti-immigration sentiment”

Doesn't being arrested for rioting already discredit any claimed motivation?

I agree.

Likewise if the police and riot officers there to serve and protect were looked into, what percentage of these men would have a history of DV?

You are arguing against a point few are making.

The argument against this type of migration isnt that all or most of the migrants are violent, its that the total effect of migrant violence on communities is bad.

If a percentage of the migrants are causing mayhem, everyone in the community is effected.

The asylum system and how it impacts on local populations is complex, but some want to over simplify it - why are women complaining about these immigrants, when their husbands are beating them already? What difference does a couple more rapist do to a community, really?

Some also belittling women's real concerns by assuming the risk isnt there, or want to imply seeing risk is racism. If a new housing estate is built and 100 local men move in with their families, some of those men will be a danger to women in the community. Are we really pretending that its the same risk when 100 asylum seekers are place in HMO in a street?

Can the anti-immigration because we have been told they’re more likely to be violent rapists cohort please say “my concerns as a woman” or “some women’s concerns” rather than “women’s concerns” because the majority of British women do not believe the right wing propaganda that migrant men are of any higher risk than home grown men? And that the real issue is past 15 years of underfunding, leading to cutting police forces such that DV and sexual violence is just not being properly policed or prosecuted. And those aren’t the only crimes that are on the rise due to lack of proper policing. Knife crime, county lines & organised crime, human trafficking, online scams, etc

You’re in a vocal minority, you don’t speak for the majority of women or for women like me.

You also do not have a monopoly on concerns about VAWG. Those of us who have seen the propaganda for what it is, aren’t dismissing VAWG, we are dismissing the weaponisation of concerns about VAWG to fuel xenophobic, racist civil unrest.

One last request, please do not characterise our asylum system for refugees as “importing men” this is dehumanising as we are talking about human beings in desperate conditions, not chlorine washed US chicken or French wine. You import things, never humans. At least not since slavery.

Women can say what they fuck they want, SummerFeverVenice.

Women think for themselves, they can talk about their experiences, how they feel.

They can even comment on party politics and disagree with the government, if thats what they want to do.

It doesn't matter if women think the same way as 99% of the population, or they are a lone voice. Women have the right to speak about what they want to, how they want to.

So it's do as I say not as I do with you @SummerFeverVenice ? What gives you the right to be the spokesperson for the majority of women? Has there been a national poll asking women this question? I must have missed it if it has.

Women can say what they fuck they want, SummerFeverVenice.**

I am a woman too, so why the hostility & swearing at my speaking how I want to?

I don’t think it is unreasonable to request that some women not say they are speaking for women’s concerns on VAWG as that implies they are speaking for the majority of women? Including myself as a woman.

I am not saying other women can’t express their opinions, I am asking women to be better about expressing that it is their opinion and be honest about it being a minority opinion instead of writing like they speak for the majority of British women or all British women.

As for the use of dehumanising language when referring to immigrants, of course the women using such language can ignore my request. However, such language which objectifies human beings into imported things rips off the tissue paper thin mask their opinion is related to the safety of women as their racism is in plain view.