Keir Starmer announces statutory inquiry into so called grooming gangs/organised child sexual abuse and exploitation

petra

TerryBull
I’m surprised the article didn’t highlight the horrendous cost to the national health ( and councils ) Re disabled children born to first cousin marriage.

www.theguardian.com/society/2001/mar/14/guardiansocietysupplement6

Yes, it causes problems, but the link with grooming gangs and sexual abuse is tenuous, to say the least.

petra

Norway banned the practice this year, Sweden will bring in a ban next year.

How can they stop cousins from marrying abroad? Even if the marriages aren't recognised officially in Norway and Sweden, there's nothing to stop the cousins living together and having children.

Makes it more difficult for them at least, anything that helps making a dent in the clan culture and infant disability is good.

GrannyGravy13

eazybee

The point of this inquiry is to expose the cover-ups in the care and social services, police and local council services, and hold people publicly to account for failing to intervene to protect these out-of-control but extremely vulnerable under-age girls.

👏👏👏

Yes, especially as they had been let down by authorities not wanting to be called racist.

Nobody walks on egg shells where white perpetrators are concerned, which is the whole point of an inquiry as so many did where the Asian gangs were concerned.

I read that the Born in Bradford study group concluded working in the community to highlight the health problems linked to cousin marriages was proving successful. Younger people who’d been given information in school seemed less likely to agree to cousin marriages. I’m not sure a ban would persuade and I don’t know how it could be enforced.

Oreo, people do walk on eggshells where white perpetrators are concerned. Posts in this forum highlight the sympathy so often directed at men accused with criticism of their accusers

If people didn’t walk on eggshells with white perpetrators surely there would have been calls for an inquiry long before now?

Nobody walks on egg shells where white perpetrators are concerned, which is the whole point of an inquiry as so many did where the Asian gangs were concerned

Exactly.
I can’t imagine a ‘predominantly’ white grooming gangs raping Asian children being ignored.

I can’t either Kandinsky.
That doesn’t change the reality that few alleged rapists or abusers of women and children are charged, never mind prosecuted

Oreo

Makes it more difficult for them at least, anything that helps making a dent in the clan culture and infant disability is good.

clan? Like the Royal Family?

Kandinsky

*Nobody walks on egg shells where white perpetrators are concerned, which is the whole point of an inquiry as so many did where the Asian gangs were concerned*

Exactly.
I can’t imagine a ‘predominantly’ white grooming gangs raping Asian children being ignored.

Because there would be no need to say the word " predominately" Possibly?

“Eyes blazing, a clearly furious Baroness Casey, sitting on the Newsnight sofa beside two grooming gang victims, reflected on what she'd learnt in the decade since her Rotherham report. “If good people don't grip difficult issues,” she said, “in my experience bad people do.”
She recalled reading a file on a child who had been raped to find in the perpetrator's description someone had Tippexed out the word “Pakistani”. As she picked this off with a paperclip, Casey wondered what had driven this person to literally whitewash the facts. Fear for their organisation's reputation or their own? Worry for “community tensions”? Meanwhile the English Defence League had parked up, intimidating every Muslim in town.
Definitions of “good” and “bad” may vary. But it is inarguable that the reason Baroness Casey will now head up a second, even more sweeping, inquiry into grooming gangs is agitation by Elon Musk, JD Vance, Tommy Robinson and his far- right associates. Their prime motive is not concern for thousands of abused, betrayed girls, but cynical opportunism. They want to leverage the gangs (and a perceived establishment cover-up) against all Muslims for wider political ends.
As Casey says, it's because the “good” people — or rather those who identify as such — refused to engage with the truth. Even after Casey reviewed the data and found British Pakistani men over-represented in grooming cases and even after numerous convictions, many “good” people still dispute this distinct abuse model even exists. “It's a racist fantasy…” you still hear, or “most abusers are white men…” Political Tippex.
In fact take any “problematic” issue where emotions are charged, rights compete, difficult choices and compromises must be made, where liberal shibboleths collide with unfortunate truths, and a “good” person who speaks out risks being cast out as “bad”. We've seen it most obviously in the gender wars, but also in immigration debates and this week when parliament rushed through the decriminalisation of self-induced abortion up to full term.
The trajectory is always the same. Moderates resile from the fight, allowing activists to take mad, maximalist positions far beyond public opinion and intimidate even those merely asking questions into silence. Difficult, often terrible, matters are tamped down for years, but the reality is still there for all to see. Those who speak out aren't just “bad” — in “good” people terms, they're the very worst. And the backlash, when it comes, sweeps away not just activist excesses but long-established rights.
In the US, on Joe Biden's very first day as president he issued an executive order that redefined “sex” in Title IX women's rights protections to incorporate gender identity. In doing so, entirely without debate, he permitted biological males to compete in (and inevitably dominate) female sports, and for any male-bodied prisoner, including rapists and murderers, unrestricted transfer into women's jails. Moreover Biden appointed the trans activist Rachel Levine, who opposed any lower age limit on cross-sex hormones or gender surgery for children, as an adviser.
This week the US Supreme Court upheld the right of Tennessee to ban such treatments for minors, which will strengthen existing bans in 25 other states. In Britain, thanks to the courage of whistleblowing medics and gender critical feminists, this was accomplished some years back via the Cass review. But in America, as the New York Times puts it, “the LGBTQ movement drove itself towards a cliff — and took the Democratic Party with it”. Since US liberals doubled down, championing mastectomies for 14-year-old girls and cheering on boys stealing female track medals, it was left to the Maga movement to grab the easy popular, political win. But, of course, Trump didn't stop at reversing extreme gender policies — he has also ripped up basic rights, such as cruelly banning trans people from serving in the military.
The decriminalisation of abortion, rushed through in just two hours, risks being a similar story. All legal guardrails to discourage women from highly dangerous self-abortion in late pregnancy are gone and — no amount of emotive, pseudofeminist flummery can conceal this — it allows viable babies to be killed without sanction. If even lifelong pro-choice advocates, such as me, are horrified and disgusted, imagine the new law's galvanising power for the US-funded Christian right, especially after a few vivid, real-life cases emerge. A Reform government will not just seek to reverse this but relitigate our very liberal, long-settled 24-week limit. Well done, “good” people: you traded an empty win for a culture war.
The only government ministers who understand Casey's words are Wes Streeting and the clear-eyed justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, who repelled previous bids to decriminalise abortion and has even shown herself prepared to confront that most difficult issue: migration. While the attorney general Lord Hermer compared those questioning the ECHR to Nazis, Mahmood is aghast that the convention is fraying public faith in democracy. Of Article 3 being used to block the deportation of serious foreign criminals, Mahmood wrote on X: “When people believe rights only protect the rule-breaker, not the rule-follower, those who would undermine universal human rights seize the space we leave behind.”
“Good” people need to grip harder, be braver, embrace complexity over slogans, stop Tippexing out the truth. Thoughtful Muslims, such as Baroness Warsi, should investigate the cultural and religious reasons towns such as Dewsbury, where she grew up, have produced rings of Pakistani men who pimp out poor white girls. Democrats could defend women's sports and oppose the baseless mutilation of minors. Because when they don't, as Baroness Casey says, the “bad” people can't wait to do it for them”
This was in yesterdays Times and I found it very thought provoking…

Why would anyone walk on eggshells or tippytoe around white grooming gangs? Answer, they wouldn’t, yet this has been the case for years and years with the mainly Pakistani gangs.
It’s been ingrained in the authorities and shoved under the carpet when it needed to be dragged out of it.

lafergar

Oreo

Makes it more difficult for them at least, anything that helps making a dent in the clan culture and infant disability is good.

clan? Like the Royal Family?

Don’t you like the RF?
There are no married cousins in it nowadays btw

Had to be someone who dragged the RF in.

The people who thought themselves 'good' in the gender wars were in fact grade a misogynists who sentenced children to interventions they will never recover from. I am now instantly wary of those who see themselves as good. They tend to be authoritarian and quite scary.

I neither like nor dislike the RF

Bringing first cousin marriage into the discussion seems like fanning the flames, along with Ban the Burqa.

Thankfully we have clear sighted people involved in the enquiry. Although, personally I don't see why the recommendations from the previous one weren't implemented.

Cousin marriage is a pertinent factor in this matter, quite aside from the fact of the greater propensity of genetic disorders those marriages produce, in the sexual grooming scandal, there is the fact that men who live in such enclaves are precluded from dating and interacting with the opposite sex that their British counterparts will have. The female cousin was often brought over from Pakistan, cut off from her own family, if unlucky with her husband's family could end up isolated and abused. MPs of certain gravitas who we can respect for their honesty, such as former Labour MP Ann Cryer have brought the matter up, not that it did her any good labelled a bigot and a racist by the very people who are the real deal in that respect and excel in their very own brand of bigotry and racism by their shocking cover ups and blame shifting in the matter. The whole issue has been such a nuanced and multi-faceted situation it's no good shying away from salient facts that fanned the flames of the ongoing abuse in the first place.

Maybe I thought that was a great article and yes how difficult it is to address such formidable challenges without crossing over to the extremes. What awful, awful Presidents, Trump and Biden have been. Where do voters go having been lumbered with those two. Is it any wonder there are great swathes of the population these days who are politically homeless.

growstuff, from yesterday, I was out pm, "just a bit curious about the reference to Arabic cultures" Agreed Pakistanis are not Arabic, Matthew Syed, being half Pakistani himself would know that they are two distinct peoples, but the practices in the article could well pertain to some more traditional cultures within the Middle East.

I would also add that the whole clan thing he was talking about in that article would be prevalent in many other demographics, for example Italian Mafia's "Omerta" a code of silence and honour where individuals are expected to remain silent when questioned by authorities or outsiders about criminal activity, would be one such example. Such practices have been riven through many countries and cultures throughout the centuries. Italy during the Middle Ages appeared to be ruled by a handful of powerful families.

Excellent post TerriBull

The whole issue has been such a nuanced and multi-faceted situation

Absolutely.

And there are victims from within " communities". Where is their voice?

”And there are victims from within " communities". Where is their voice?

That’s part of the problem. That victims or even non-victims within the communities aren’t allowed a voice.

Mollygo

^”And there are victims from within " communities". Where is their voice?^

That’s part of the problem. That victims or even non-victims within the communities aren’t allowed a voice.

This is correct. It would naive to think that in any community abuse of women and children does not go on in the home.

TerriBull I do accept that cousin marriages are a problem, but I still don't see the link between that and child grooming gangs.

Incidentally, as I've written before, my son-in-law is an Arab. I know his extended family quite well and I've chatted with them about family expectations. The first thing they'd say is that they know very little about Pakistanis, Bangladeshis or people from any other Muslim background. Their culture is quite different. Secondly, they'd say that they don't have a single culture even within their own family. They happen to be well-educated and are now all British citizens, including my son-in-law and some of his cousins, who were born in the UK.

I doubt very much whether Matthew Syed has experienced traditional Pakistani culture, given his education and the fact that his father converted to Christianity.

The point I'm making is that there is no such think as one stereotypical Muslim culture.

I agree there is no one stereotypical Muslim culture, or any other in truth. My experience is that many people in our community come from the same villages and families in Pakistan. So there are cultural and familial norms remaining powerful within some groups.