Makes sense to examine culture and religion, these are things people choose (to some extent), influence their actions, can change, and can evolve. But ethnicity? What does that mean? Are they going to plot people’s Haplogroups against crime rates?
I reckon if you raised an Afghani kid in a Turkish culture, they’d be much more likely to behave in a similar way to the Turkish culture they grew up in than their ethnic group that they’ve never met.
Logical_Hare on
There have been countless white nonces throughout British society and elite institutions (the royals, the churches, the military, the police, etc.), but there hasn’t been (and will never be) an inquiry to look at the role of white British ethnicity, culture, or religion in these crimes. The fix is in.
I seem to recall that the Nazis had similar attitudes, really: crimes committed by Jews was a reflection of their supposedly evil culture, while crimes by Non-Jewish white Germans simply didn’t reflect on their culture at all. What a coincidence!
eldomtom2 on
I am extremely concerned by two parts of the terms of reference.
Firstly,
> The Chair and Panel must ensure that the Inquiry’s work focuses specifically on group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse committed by ‘grooming gangs’, as described in the National Audit.
Is worryingly vague. The Casey Audit did not produce a definition of “grooming gangs” but at the same time deemed its focus narrower than just “child sexual exploitation committed by multiple perpetrators working together”, deeming cases of sextortion not relevant due to their perpetrators’ “often financial motive”.
Secondly,
> The Inquiry must examine the factors that allowed or caused exploitation and abuse to happen and go unaddressed at a local and national level – including the role of ethnicity, religion and culture of perpetrators and victims.
Is worrying in that it only names the role of ethnicity and culture as a potential factor, which suggests a bias towards deeming it a major cause before the investigation has started. This is an area where it is vital that all the evidence is examined and all possible explanations considered. Previous inquiries like the Casey Audit have been concerningly blithe and seemingly ignorant of things like the academic discourse on the topic.
[deleted] on
[removed]
Lifeintheguo on
Why are we calling them grooming gangs and not “Rape gangs who specifically targeted white British children”?
5 Comments
Makes sense to examine culture and religion, these are things people choose (to some extent), influence their actions, can change, and can evolve. But ethnicity? What does that mean? Are they going to plot people’s Haplogroups against crime rates?
I reckon if you raised an Afghani kid in a Turkish culture, they’d be much more likely to behave in a similar way to the Turkish culture they grew up in than their ethnic group that they’ve never met.
There have been countless white nonces throughout British society and elite institutions (the royals, the churches, the military, the police, etc.), but there hasn’t been (and will never be) an inquiry to look at the role of white British ethnicity, culture, or religion in these crimes. The fix is in.
I seem to recall that the Nazis had similar attitudes, really: crimes committed by Jews was a reflection of their supposedly evil culture, while crimes by Non-Jewish white Germans simply didn’t reflect on their culture at all. What a coincidence!
I am extremely concerned by two parts of the terms of reference.
Firstly,
> The Chair and Panel must ensure that the Inquiry’s work focuses specifically on group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse committed by ‘grooming gangs’, as described in the National Audit.
Is worryingly vague. The Casey Audit did not produce a definition of “grooming gangs” but at the same time deemed its focus narrower than just “child sexual exploitation committed by multiple perpetrators working together”, deeming cases of sextortion not relevant due to their perpetrators’ “often financial motive”.
Secondly,
> The Inquiry must examine the factors that allowed or caused exploitation and abuse to happen and go unaddressed at a local and national level – including the role of ethnicity, religion and culture of perpetrators and victims.
Is worrying in that it only names the role of ethnicity and culture as a potential factor, which suggests a bias towards deeming it a major cause before the investigation has started. This is an area where it is vital that all the evidence is examined and all possible explanations considered. Previous inquiries like the Casey Audit have been concerningly blithe and seemingly ignorant of things like the academic discourse on the topic.
[removed]
Why are we calling them grooming gangs and not “Rape gangs who specifically targeted white British children”?