"Sometimes, [the men] would phone and they would pick up around the corner, but sometimes they would just turn up and pick up at the children's home.... It depended on how brazen they were or how much heat they thought was on at the time. They did genuinely think who was on shift, who would be likely to go outside the children's unit. I used to make a deliberate attempt to let them know that I had clocked their car, that I was taking their registration plate. They would laugh it off with a good smirk.... They would sometimes say that they would have you stabbed or shot by one of their associates."Despite the criticism of the police, Mr. Anonymous is blaming the parents: Their failure to provide love created the vulnerability of their daughters to strangers posing as boyfriends. Reading between the lines, I'm seeing the police regarding the girls as wild and debauched, running off with boyfriends and then telling stories of rape. What can the "corporate parent" do if the real parents fail? Is that to be the government's explanation for its failure to intervene and save these children?
Police were called each time a girl went missing, but officers usually only arrived when the child got back to the home, sometimes "high on drugs" or "incredibly drunk", our source said.
"They led us very much on a merry dance and there wasn't much we could do apart from keep documenting. And we documented every single night, and we spoke to social workers. The social workers were passing that on. Everything we passed on, nothing seemed to go further in any way shape or form."...
He said he eventually left the home over his frustrations he was failing the children in his care and said he was not surprised at recent revelations of widespread and long-running abuse in the town.
"These young people have already been sexually abused, in many cases," he said, but children who have been abused do not blame their attacker simply because they "are struggling for love. [But] you cannot provide love in a children's unit.... It's one thing that you can't provide, and as a corporate parent it's where we fail. And if [the abusers] are providing that, plus drugs, and alcohol and freedoms, or perceived freedoms, then we're never going to be able to keep them safe."
There's much talk about the government workers fear of being seen as racist: The accusations were made against men of Pakistani descent. Reading between the lines again, I'm inclined to speculate that instead of seeing a group of predators acting together in a criminal scheme, the government authorities saw the girls as attracted to these men as handsome, exciting strangers. If the police are not otherwise intervening in the sexual activities of adolescents, they might have indeed thought it would be racial profiling to go after these men and not men who share the ethnicity of girls who leave their homes at night.
Posts
45 comments:
Because of the Christian/Mormon patriarchy.
The carer, who wished to remain anonymous, claimed staff were reluctant to intervene in some cases for fear of being classed as "racist".
Well, on the bright side, we know that they are not anti-Muslem racists! That would truly have been intolerable!
John Rocker would not approve of this culture. Are we agreeing with Rocker unless we freely accept it?
Only good things will happen when we end the patriarchy and all children are raised by the State (oh, I mean village).
Sounds like there were also a lot of absent fathers and teenage girls looking for a man who loved them...
I'm inclined to speculate that instead of seeing a group of predators acting together in a criminal scheme, the government authorities saw the girls as attracted to these men as handsome, exciting strangers.
Wow. Just. Wow.
Let's substitue "frat boys" for "Pakistani Muslims".
Still willing to give the authorities a pass?
Sounds like there were also a lot of absent fathers and teenage girls looking for a man who loved them...
Also a some naive girls from good homes: 'They like us naive': How teenage girls are groomed for a life of prostitution by UK gangs - Thirteen-year-old Emma was a happy child from a loving family when a gang of boys she met at a shopping centre introduced her to a charismatic older man. He plied her with gifts and drinks... then raped her and forced her into prostitution. Now aged 20 and in hiding from the gang, Emma talks candidly about how she was groomed – and how she is trying to help the growing number of others being picked out for a similar fate
There is a pattern that links males from India, Pakistan and Mexico who are abusers of females. One more flaw in the lax immigration policies in western countries allowing perverts savvy enough to realize that the only punishment they face for their crimes is revolving door deportation. This is one of the dirty secrets of "Rainbow" politics aka cultural diversity that is the real war on women.
A lot of these girls weren't even teens. An eleven year old was caught with a group of Pakistani men and she was the one arrested for being drunk. In the states we would say these kids were groomed by the pedophiles and not place the blame on them. But in Britian the girls are looking for love so it can't be stopped.
This is all so terribly sad. I, like you, was struck by the idea of a 'corporate parent' unable to provide love.
Although to be fair to at least some of the parents, there was a report that some fathers had gone to get their girls and been rebuffed by the police.
In the end, this shows the hierarchy of "morals" that the liberal PC crowd promotes - fear of being labeled a racist trumps stopping child rape.
"Wow. Just. Wow. Let's substitue "frat boys" for "Pakistani Muslims". Still willing to give the authorities a pass?"
You're misreading. I'm not giving them a pass. I'm trying to understand how they were thinking, how so many reports of crime, victimizing children could go without getting taken seriously.
I'm speculating that the police had given up on helping bad parents control their sexually active adolescents and these rapists figured out how to camouflage themselves within a city where sexual acting out had become rampant.
The "frat boy" situation you refer to doesn't include sex with underage girls, so shift to the high school and middle school setting. Should the police arrest everyone who has sex with an underage person? I look around and see that here in the U.S., we are accepting this sex now. I don't accept it myself. Do you? But once the people do accept it, how do the police choose whom to arrest?
An eleven year old was caught with a group of Pakistani men and she was the one arrested for being drunk.
Maddening.
'Cat is Out of the Bag, Man' Guy says:
The cat is out of the bag, man! Culturally Transmitted Diseases, it's all coming down! It's like we had a party, man, and everyone was mellow and groovin' but we left open the door, and when we left open the door these people with negative vibes all came in, negative vibes, man! These people, they drank our drinks and ate our Cheetos but they didn't want to party with us: party over, man, party over! The cat is out of the bag, man!
Ann Althouse said, "Should the police arrest everyone who has sex with an underage person? I look around and see that here in the U.S., we are accepting this sex now."
Really?
I don't mean to sound sarcastic. I'm curious. What are your sources?
Do you think America has gone soft on majors having sex with minors?
"The "frat boy" situation you refer to doesn't include sex with underage girls, so shift to the high school and middle school setting. Should the police arrest everyone who has sex with an underage person? I look around and see that here in the U.S., we are accepting this sex now. I don't accept it myself. Do you? But once the people do accept it, how do the police choose whom to arrest?"
I think the point is that the police chose NOT to use their police powers to prevent what they knew was evil, because of PC.
I don't know about the UK, but I suspect threy have some sort of laws regarding:
- underage drinking
- statutory rape
- contributing to the delinquency of a minor
- drug laws
- rape
- etc
good people looked at ongoing evil and turned away, because it was too difficult to confront, and the offenders were of the correct race, religion and political party.
Well, Revenant says it never happened, whole story is BS.
So I guess we can all go home.
But Ann you are very wrong about the police "trying to help 'bad' parents control their sexually active adolescents." To the contrary, both the British police, social workers and the courts have shown themselves to be actively hostile to the influence of nuclear families (as opposed that by state/govt secular agencies) and the Christian religion as forming a template for their child's development, e.g., the move by social workers to remove children from parents who supported the UKIP on the grounds that by such support the parents were impermissibly hostile to multiculturalism..
@ Bob
I don't see us making any serious attempt to stop teenagers and even 11 and 12 year olds from having sex. What action is taken when they show up at clinics seeking birth control or abortions?
Yes, there is disapproval when one party to the sexual activity is significantly older, but where's the outrage about teenage sex? Look at the pop culture our kids are consuming. Sex is considered the norm.
@virgil I said I suspected the police had given up trying to help parents. How are you disagreeing with me?
'Cat is Out of the Bag, Man' Guy says:
The cat is out of the bag, man! It's like having a sweet seventies van, powder blue with pinstripes and an eight-track rockin' some Steve Miller, and then someone comes in and disrespects the van: if you don't want to be a part of what the van represents then just leave the van, you understand what I'm saying? If George Washington had a van and someone disrespected it he'd put a bayonet in his Pompatus, that's how it's DONE, people! Shit-house Rat Time, you hear? The cat is out of the bag, man!
'Cat is Out of the Bag, Man' Guy says:
The cat is out of the bag, man! Chicks need to feel safe in the van: it is the Code of the Van, people! And that is what our country is: One Big American Van, rockin' from sea to shining sea!! And some f**kers, all they want to do is key the paint, man, they just want to key the paint and f**k it all up: assholes, man, assholes! Shit-house Rat Time, you hear? The cat is out of the bag, man!
There's a difference between having sex with a girl and grooming a girl to become a prostitute. There's a difference between tolerating a girl who is having sex and tolerating a man who forces a girl into prostitution........Part of the immensity of this scandal is that it's not a bigger scandal. Reverse the races and religions of the parties involved. This would be the cause of a holy war.......Also, my guess is that class played a huge part in this. White privilege doesn't extend to lower class whites.
'Cat is Out of the Bag, Man' Guy says:
The cat is out of the bag, man! I don't get it: it's like you get your Van all customized and cherry, and then you let people come in and shit in the back? Is that all the Van is to you -- you won't even protect the Sanctity of the Van and what it stands for? Paul Revere wouldn't stand for that shit, I tell you that! Shit-house Rat Time, you hear? The cat is out of the bag, man!
Professor, thanks for the response.
I agree that America's official response to underage sex has changed over the last, say, 30 years. Birth control, abortion, Miley Cyrus, etc.
However, the actual behavior-- underage sex all over the place-- probably hasn't changed much. It was ever thus.
'Cat is Out of the Bag, Man' Guy says:
The cat is out of the bag, man! Grand Funk Railroad said it best, people: 'We're an American Band'! That's US, people! US! We're an American Band, together, we're here to help everyone party down in their towns, and those that don't want to help in the party should get the Hell out of Omaha, you hear what I'm saying? Grand Funk Railroad and Thomas Jefferson, people, they knew what's going down! Shit-house Rat Time, you hear? The cat is out of the bag, man!
This article in the Daily Telegraph names more names and posts more pictures. The stunning thing to me is that the head of Rotherham's Director of Children’s Services pulled three children out of a foster home because the foster parents belong to a political party she disapproves of. Obviously belonging to the "wrong" political party is a worse sin in her eyes than raping underage girls.
In this country if you "walk the line" criminals leave you alone. If you signal a readiness for any sort of crime a whole class of people who you had no idea were anywhere near you are suddenly at your elbow making suggestions, making threats. That's what I found in my contacts with the counter culture and drug culture in the late Sixties. And I found the same thing when I was an abortion protester in the Nineties. In this country and probably in Britain too, you don't have to go along with these criminals and their suggestions. But it doesn't surprise me to hear that young girls don't realize the danger and don't understand that there is an "exit strategy" even after they get entrapped.
Life isn't easy. Even if you never play football, you will be subjected to terrible shocks and possibly to dangerous concussion-like injuries to your mind and damaging strains on your heart. Even if you do the right thing. So the best thing is to decide to go through it all on behalf of the right thing. To choose.
As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.
Another factor to consider: to the degree that cases made it to the courts, what was the result? I've heard police officers bemoaning how they ignore crimes in certain neighborhoods because they don't believe prosecutors will prosecute or that judges will judge. "If we arrest people and just release them the next day, they laugh at us on the way out. Catch-and-release is a joke, and the joke's on us. Unless it involves blood, don't even bother calling." (Something I heard a cop say about the Connecticut city he polices.)
Big Mike: "Obviously belonging to the "wrong" political party is a worse sin in her eyes than raping underage girls."
This is a standard, everyday, inevitable result of leftist social policies.
Inevitable.
The "crime" as we move forward will be if you, the citizen, happen to notice it and point it out.
That, my friends, will not be tolerated.
The British can be very weird. If you state in public that "The Paki's are a bunch of rapists" you might find a British Bobby later knocking on your door to arrest you for a "Hate Crime".
But statutory rape and serving alcohol to minors - no problem.
"As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse."
And this mindset, ladies and gentlemen, is why this shit is allowed to happen.
Whats the horrific rape of a couple thousand children compared to the nuanced glory of the church of"Multiculturalism".
Reading between the lines again, I'm inclined to speculate that instead of seeing a group of predators acting together in a criminal scheme, the government authorities saw the girls as attracted to these men as handsome, exciting strangers
Reading within the lines, I note that these ostensibly handsome, exciting strangers "would sometimes say that they would have you stabbed or shot by one of their associates".
Ann Althouse said...I look around and see that here in the U.S., we are accepting this sex now. I don't accept it myself. Do you?
Respectfully, ma'am, this is frustrating to read. I understand it's not your brand of feminism but the people who have pushed this cultural change align themselves on your "side" and I'm not sure you've done much to help their opposition. A pox on both their houses, maybe, but when feminists attack people making (what I consider) common sense criticisms of their sexually "liberated" values and worldview--by calling their opponents misogynists, anti-woman, afraid of sexuality, haters/jealous of sexual freedom, etc--is that an issue you push back on? Saying children and young adults shouldn't have sex or that sexual "freedom" at a young age has consequences is routinely labeled patriarchal and denounced as not sex-positive (or some such). For all intents that battle is over and the side you say you're on lost--outside of some marginalized communities (mostly religious) and the older cohort there is no opposition to the current cultural norm vis a vis sex. I believe you when you say you dont' accept it, but people using the same label(s) you use pushed and enforce the current norms. People who oppose it are (at best) mocked. As presumptuous as it sound, given your position and prestige it seems like you could to more to help.
These were clearly and unambigously cases of at least statutory, to say nothing of actual, rape. I can only think of one group in the US that routinely accepts (and abets) adults who have sex with underage girls. The rest of us, not so much.
I'm somewhat aware of your opinions on PUA culture, and your response to me indicates that you view the current SMP as one based on male predidation. If that were the case then, yes, policemen might assume that underage girls would be excited by sex with older men.
I happen to think there's a clear line between what was happening in Rotherham and what happens at college parties.
I can't help but notice that even now, the Brits appear to be more interested in finding a scapegoat than in arresting the gangsters.
Makes me think of how the British made sati (widows burning themselves to death) in India.
It was colonialism but fought against a cultural oppression.
That's the problem with a lot of postcolonial and liberation approaches, in seeking to push back against what was clearly wrong, they overlook the ways cultures themselves can be oppressive and people within can be oppressed. It's very simplistic, but results in looking the other way while kids are raped because of past forms of colonial oppression.
Sin trebles even as sin is confronted.
Did I misunderstand? I read it that these are "children's homes," aka group homes or what we would call an orphanage. If I read right, then the "corporate parents" are the employees of the government, not the children's own parents. So the state has presumably removed these children from their homes, only to provide such shoddy care that the children end up in a hellish situation. Did I mis-read?
"ribbonguy, chillblaine was making an ironic reference to this. "
Ahhh..My bad...and my apologies to chillblaine.
I admit I'm finding it getting harder to separate parody from reality. Though it would be more comforting reading that tripe on a comment thread, rather than from the ranking General of the U.S. Army.
Christopher B said...I can only think of one group in the US that routinely accepts (and abets) adults who have sex with underage girls. The rest of us, not so much.
Depends on how directly you mean "abets," though. I mean, is R. Kelly a respected personality? Was Hollywood not willing to defend Roman Polanski? I mean, the cultural elites are ok with sexualizing the young--more and more (and younger and younger) it seems. Intellectual elites (current-wave Feminists, most Progressives) largely support that trend both directly (by normalizing sexual behavior and activity for the young) and indirectly (mocking dissenters/disallowing contrary opinions). Their voiced opposition to an amorphous "rape culture" strangely acts as cover for their preferred culture wherein sexual activity once considered wrong are normalized (including sexual activity by the young). If "abets" includes that kind of influnce you're looking at a problem much larger than just one small, rightly despised organization.
Paddy O said...
Makes me think of how the British made sati (widows burning themselves to death) in India.
I highlighted that example on a similar thread yesterday, but used it to point out the difference in cultural confidence between Britian then and now. Then the British were not afraid to say their culture/values (not having widows immmolate themselves if their husbands died) was superior to the Indian culture/values--and furthermore to impose that British culture/values/custom on others. That requires a cultural confidence Great Britian (and to a large degree America) lacks now. The prevailing (or at least expressed) belief is that no culture is better than any other, that it's wrong to judge, much less impose your values on others, and that one's own national values aren't worth defending (much less imposing). Witness Pres. Obama's assertion that we beleive in American exceptionalism just as other nations believe in their exceptionalism--in other words that there is nothing exceptional or special about America (as such) and therefore we shouldn't lecture others about the proper way to live.
If all values are equally good and a culture has a history of sex with children, hey, who are you to say it's wrong? Sure it's techincally against your law but if it's their community and they're not complaining, you don't want to be called a racist now, do you? They have their way of living and you have yours. What do "right" and "wrong" even mean, man? Import a large population who don't think like you, don't particularly like you or your values, and don't have any intention of assimilating with your nation (while you largely pay for their every need through direct welfare), and make criticism of their actions taboo and/or dangerous...of course "bad" people will take advantage!
'The carer, who wished to remain anonymous, claimed staff were reluctant to intervene in some cases for fear of being classed as "racist"'
If that is the case then those girls were not only victims of racism by their abusers, but also the victims of racism by those who should have protected them.
Or in other words, this "carer" is a racist. The fact that s/he is a racist against someone from his/her own race doesn't change that.
Adolescents do stupid things. A normal society protects them against themselves.
Those girls should have been protected by a basic morality they themselves should have had, by a basic morality their school"mates" should have had, and a basic morality the grown-ups should have had.
It's quit clear to me that
- islamic culture simply doesn't contain that basic morality. Women are property, "lose" women are prey.
- the "liberated" society isn't interested in inculturating this basic morality.
- The only way a "multicultural" society of which islam is part is going to seem to work is by covering up crimes like these.
And last, but not least.
This scandal is an order of magnitude worse than the scandal in the CC (itself but part of the greater scandal of the abuse in "liberated" society).
When the authorities refuse to do their duty (and since their even seem to have been arrests of fathers who tried to protect their daughters) but turn against you than there is no place to go.
If those responsible in can get away with this, than they can do anything.
"Yes, there is disapproval when one party to the sexual activity is significantly older, but where's the outrage about teenage sex?
If one cannot differentiate between normal teen sex and organized, systematic rape by older men, then why even bring up the subject? This is a real, actual criminal situation - one abetted by uncaring government. Contrast this to the so-called "rape culture" on US campuses and tell us which requires action.
Post a Comment