Looks like we've found the cause for this phenomenon.
Time to pat ourselves on the back and move along.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1CTMejy7J
the message board for Dubai English speaking community
Jack Straw’s scaremongeringby Rumbold
9th January, 2011 at 10:23 am
Following the conviction of a mainly Asian group of Jack Straw spoke of a culture which sees Pakistani men view white women/girls as ‘easy meat’, and that this is a specific problem in parts of his area. Mr. Straw did not mention any other ethnicity, so one would expect to see evidence that Pakistani men in Lancashire were far more likely to be convicted on sexual offences then non-Pakistanis. Chris Dillow has the statistics:
http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2011/01/straw-statistics-bias.htmlTable 5.4b of this pdf shows that, in the latest year for which we have data, Lancashire police arrested 627 people for sexual offences. 0.3% of these were Pakistanis. That’s two people. 85.5% were white British. In Lancashire, there are 1,296,900 white Brits and 45,000 Pakistanis. This means that 4.163 per 10,000 white Brits were arrested for a sex crime, compared to 0.44 Pakistanis. If you’re a journalist, you might say that the chances of being arrested for a sex crime are nine times greater if you’re white than Pakistani.
http://www.justice.gov.uk/stats-race-criminal-justice-system-07-08-revised.pdf
Most (if not all) sex offenders have contempt for their victims, and it might well be that some Pakistani sex offenders draw their contempt from their culture/background. But, on a statistical basis, given the far higher prevalence, as a percentage, of white people who commit sex crimes, Mr. Straw might well ask what it is about white Western culture that allows sex offenders to see their victims as ‘easy meat’. Asian gangs who go round grooming women/girls for sex need to be crushed and locked up. As do white gangs and any other combination of gangs. Based on available evidence, it is unclear why focusing on the racial element will benefit anyone, and given the statistics we have at present, is likely to reduce the chances of stopping such crime in the future (as resources will shift anyway from where they are most needed).
Update: Platinum786 makes some excellent points in the comments below:
(Reposted from the comments):
Straw mentioning race wasn’t helpful as he did it in a generic manner, Pakistani men don’t see white women as easy meat, British Pakistani sex offenders do, but if he had said British Pakistani sex offenders see white women as easy meat, it wouldn’t have been such a great headline, for the below reasons;
– The word British would have been used, giving these guys a British identity and background, which they do have, meaning they’re part of our society, not outsiders raping our women.
– It would have included the term sex offender, and frankly most sex offenders see their victims as easy meat.
Rather he generalised, and got the desired headlines.
There is a culture within the chav equivalent of the British Pakistani community to have relationships with underage white girls (which in itself is abuse), and obviously in the cases mentioned a greater level of actual abuse. The first tendency is no more abusive and racist, than the fathers of the hordes of teenage mums we face in Britain from other ethnic groups.
They target white girls, because the underage girls are naive, they are easier to access, no risk of honour killings, no risk of them being old enough to not be impressed by fake designer clothes and 20 year old Beemers, etc. These people are scum, but they’re not all race motivated sexual predators, they’re quite equal opportunities with it all, it’s just easier for them to get access to white girls.
There is no doubt in my mind these men have no value for women, but we are dealing with different levels of perverts. These guys locked up (not for long enough might I add) are the worst level, but there is a larger number of people in our community, young men, men in their late teens early 20?s, who don’t see bedding a 14-15 year old white girl as a problem.
As a community we don’t do anything about this. Part of it is because the people who know about it are their peers, not their elders, secondly, very few people know facts, we Pakistani’s live in Ghetto’s i know in our city anyway, these guys pick up girls from the City centre or the white ghettos.
Part of it is, the kind of lads who do this, come from families who don’t give a damn, these are the kind of lads who at school profess ambitions to become Taxi drivers of work in takeaways, they come from backgrounds where nobody cares. As long as their lads don’t marry a white girl, they don’t care who they spend the night with.
These remarks by Jack Straw irritate me:There is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men... who target vulnerable young white girls.
We need to get the Pakistani community to think much more clearly about why this is going on and to be more open about the problems that are leading to a number of Pakistani heritage men thinking it is OK to target white girls in this way
My problem is that this sort of claim bundles up trivially true statements with contentious ones. It’s trivially true that sex crimes, however rare, are a problem. And it’s trivially true that some Pakistani men are sex criminals, just as some whites are. The question is: why bring ethnicity into it? Are men of Pakistani heritage more likely to commit sex crime than others?
There is a reasonable motive for asking this question. Maybe Islam’s different attitudes towards sexuality and women create a different predisposition among Pakistani men towards sex crimes. This is a reasonable hypothesis, to be tested against the facts. But there’s also an unreasonable motive - the outgroup homogeneity bias generates an unreasonable double standard: if a white man commits a rape, he’s just a rapist but if a Pakistani does so, he’s a Pakistani rapist. You wouldn’t ask the “white community” to look into itself if a white guy commits a sex crime, so why ask the “Pakistani community” to do so if a Pakistani does so?
And herein lies my irritation. Straw gives us no statistics to justify his claim.
Those that do exist seem to undermine his claim.
Table 5.4b of this pdf shows that, in the latest year for which we have data, Lancashire police arrested 627 people for sexual offences. 0.3% of these were Pakistanis. That’s two people. 85.5% were white British. In Lancashire, there are 1,296,900 white Brits and 45,000 Pakistanis. This means that 4.163 per 10,000 white Brits were arrested for a sex crime, compared to 0.44 Pakistanis. If you’re a journalist, you might say that the chances of being arrested for a sex crime are nine times greater if you’re white than Pakistani. If you’re a statistician, you might say they are 0.037 percentage points greater.
Now, you can quibble with these figures. Arrests could be a biased measure of the ethnic prevalence of crime: upwardly so if the police are racist, downwardly so if political correctness leads the police to soft-pedal investigations into Pakistanis’ crimes. But if Mr Straw thinks the police are failing to investigate crime properly, he should say so.
I don’t say this to make any point about ethnicity. I do so more to ask for better standards of political discourse. If you think there’s a problem of crime amongst a particular ethnic group, give us hard evidence of this; feel free to offer me some different figures than those I‘ve cited.
This matters because when we are discussing low-probability events - crime, risk, whatever - we are prone to all sorts of cognitive biases. The way to correct such biases is to use statistics. In not doing this, Mr Straw is inviting his audience to draw some inferences which might not be warranted.
zubber wrote:White parents, Wisen up !!!
zubber wrote:White parents, Wisen up !!!
Barnardo's chief executive Martin Narey said street grooming was "probably happening in most towns and cities" and that victims were Asian as well as white. "I certainly don't think this is a Pakistani thing. My staff would say that there is an over-representation of people from minority ethnic groups - Afghans, people from Arabic nations - but it's not just one nation," he said. "I don't think this is so much about targeting white girls - because black girls are also victims. It's about targeting vulnerable, isolated girls."
shafique wrote:Ah, I was wondering when the next allegation would be thrown out. It didn't take long
Shame that it's not backed up with any substance though. 'manipulate stats' indeed.
Two anonymous vice officers of the Beurstraat police station who have worked in this area revealed in October 2005 that there are two main groups of human traffickers on de Wallen, the "loverboys" and a group known as "the Turks". The group of loverboys consist mostly of young Moroccan males who use romantic techniques to persuade young women to work for them as prostitutes. The Turkish group concentrates mainly on the trafficking in Eastern European prostitutes. An investigation into this group in early 2003 failed miserably: only a few arrests were made and the defendants were quickly released due to lack of evidence.
zubber wrote:"Trouble Doesn't come looking for a person, It is the person who seeks trouble"
zubber wrote:Argue as much as you want , Society/Family are the root cause of all this b.s
zubber wrote: if they willingly put themselves in a vulnerable position, Something is going to happen.
Flying Dutchman wrote:zubber wrote: if they willingly put themselves in a vulnerable position, Something is going to happen.
Blaming the victims of statutory rape is very ing!
Flying Dutchman wrote:The targets are vunerable white girls. Within the Finnish community this is excused with "she asked for it". It is not the fault of the Finnish boys or their upbringing. Again, there is apparently nothing wrong with you if you rob and harass women, its society's fault.
Berrin wrote:Who is a vunerable girl FD?
Berrin wrote:Do you think men can also be vulnerable as well?
"Flying Dutchman"]Berrin wrote:Who is a vunerable girl FD?
Girls who are desperate for love and attention.
Berrin wrote:Do you think men can also be vulnerable as well?
Yes. Interesting question though. I havent seen the argument yet that "he asked for it", when a guy in shorts is gay gang raped.
Berrin wrote:OK why do you think girls are desperate for love and attention?
Berrin wrote:So just can you pls tell me how a man (who happens to be a heterosexual) can be vulnerable?
"Flying Dutchman"]OK why do you think girls are desperate for love and attention
A lot have daddy issues I assume.
"Berrin"]So just can you pls tell me how a man (who happens to be a heterosexual) can be vulnerable
Sexual frustation, and desparation for female attention.
Berrin wrote:Why is that? an educated, well groomed, high flyer, unreachable or else, say, a sincere pious men raised on high moral grounds don't have that frustration and desperation... So what's this sexual frustration and desperation of you about?
[quote="Flying Dutchman By sexual frustation I mean people who cannot deal with their sexuality. Men who get aroused (or can understand that somebody gets aroused) by a naked toe or the sight of female hair are sexually frustated imo.
Typically sexually frustated men use the argument "she asked for it", they cannot fantom by the lives of them that a woman who is proud of herself isnot asking not to be raped.
The only way they can do that is viewing women as a commodity, not as a person with her own will and desires.
Berrin wrote:Hohh hoo You chicken you know you're gonna be trashed.. now your description of vulnerable girls changed course to be those with naked toes and hair.
Berrin wrote:LOL. But hey I wonder what you name those vulnerable girls who are hunted by the well groomed, high flyer men with social status...LOL..
Berrin wrote:But hey it was you talking about animalist side of humans unable to resist fornication...
Berrin wrote:If a girl agrees to an indefinite friendship(relationship)before a marriage that comes with s.ex in it , you cannot call it a rape, can you?
Berrin wrote: you could somehow reduce the numbers of men who's intentions aren't sincere and comitted...
Flying Dutchman"]quote="Berrin"]Hohh hoo You chicken you know you're gonna be trashed.. now your description of vulnerable girls changed course to be those with naked toes and hair.
The vunerability of a girl and the reason for sexual arousal by sexual frustated men are two completely different things.
Flying Dutchman"]OK why do you think girls are desperate for love and attention
A lot have daddy issues I assume.
Daddy issues what? All daddies love their daughters more so than sons I'd say..
Berrin wrote:LOL. But hey I wonder what you name those vulnerable girls who are hunted by the well groomed, high flyer men with social status...LOL..
I call them vunerable.
Berrin wrote:But hey it was you talking about animalist side of humans unable to resist fornication...
Huh?
Berrin wrote:If a girl agrees to an indefinite friendship(relationship)before a marriage that comes with s.ex in it , you cannot call it a rape, can you?
If it consensual between two adults, no. Keywords are consensual and adult!
Berrin wrote: you could somehow reduce the numbers of men who's intentions aren't sincere and comitted...
This thread is about groomers/loverboys, by definition their intentions are not sincere! And it appears that those loverboys come from a certain cultural background.
Flying Dutchman wrote:
The targets are vunerable white girls. Within the Finnish community this is excused with "she asked for it". It is not the fault of the Finnish boys or their upbringing. Again, there is apparently nothing wrong with you if you rob and harass women, its society's fault.
Berrin wrote:They simply get it becouse they all want it!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Berrin wrote:How can you say that the relationship of a vulnerable girl is not a consensual one? What proof do you have when it's starting?
Flying Dutchman wrote:zubber wrote: if they willingly put themselves in a vulnerable position, Something is going to happen.
Blaming the victims of statutory rape is very ing!