Good evening, another day, another day of SKS being utterly useless.
Mods I don't like calling for action and in fact I think this is the first time ever. This poster is either a former poster given the name similarity or someone masquerading as him
I think you really need to clarify because if this is not the original poster then its an attempt at vilifying him. If it is the original poster then this pretence is causing more harm than good
Of course you do.
If what you say is true, and this poster has another identity, so what? Why are you not calling out other posters who occasionally have a three way conversation with their alter egos?
I am specifically calling it for horse_b only for the following reasons
1) I am not sure if its an incarnation of CHB3 and if it is why is he posting the opposite of his usual
2) If its not an incarnation of CHB3 then a lot of people are assuming it is and thinking he has lost the plot. If I got banned and someone became pagan3 that was not me and started posting stuff that was the opposite I would hope someone would ask for clarity.
My problem is purely the name implies it is an incarnation of a banned poster and many are assuming it is. If the name was not implying so I would have no issue. If horse_b is indeed not CHB3 then he needs to be defended imo and this is coming from someone that doesn't really like him. Does that make it clear?
I agree. If this is CHB4 and he's had a pro-Tory epiphany, that's fine. But it sounds way more like someone is trolling with a Horse-shaped sock puppet. Which if true is not funny.
Agree. I am with you and @Pagan2 on this and credit to Pagan for bring this up. If it isn't CHB it is rather nasty.
Woke is collapsing in on itself. Simply delightful.
I honestly don't think it is, sadly. Perhaps the cause of woke is advancing less fast. But it's everywhere. I mean, I just looked up from writing this and saw this:
It's the start of a trend. These bullshit flags are everywhere but although people show them no-one really takes them seriously.
It just says, "Oh, look at me! I'm inclusive!"
Doesn't really mean anything.
Serious question. If it doesn't mean anything then why does it bother you? I am certainly no admirer of the current 'woke' debate when it has real world physical consequences in terms of removal of statues or changing books. But when it comes to people putting up flags to show their support for a particular issue - even if it is one I disagree with - then I really don't see why anyone should be hassled by that. Clearly the companies feel there is mileage in doing this and my attitude is good luck to them.
People really do need to stop being offended by stuff so much. And that applies equally to the 'woke' and the 'anti-woke'
People can signal their virtue by displaying a flag (or deliberately not displaying one) or what have, there's no point getting worked up about that. Actual law and policy changes which are harmful or nonsensical should be the focus.
Agreed, but “woke capitalism” is a case of “the louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons”.
Giving a few thousand to Stonewall is like buying indulgences.
My experience has been precisely this.
The worst leaders I've worked for in my career have been the most publicly "Wokey", which is one reason I have such contempt for it. I don't respect it.
People think that must mean I'm a secret bigot. Nothing could be further from the truth and then need to see through - and not be taken in - by such shallowness or my contempt will extend to them too.
You get banks with dirty reputations flying rainbow flags, companies that boast of their “ethical credentials” employing children in poor countries, turning a blind eye to sexual harassment, or routing their profits through tax havens..
The worst I know was a truly horrid law firm called MacMillan Williams, which has thankfully gone bankrupt. They were so woke that on their very extensive diversity monitoring forms, they were asking intrusive questions about peoples’ sexual practices.
There are still significant issues with sexism and racism in the NHS, and more to be done, but things are far, far better then they were 3 decades ago.
I agree, and the Wokery has precisely nothing to do with fixing that.
There are two problems:-
1. It’s performative.
2. Antnomianism. The belief that “to the pure all things are pure.” If your beliefs are pure, your conduct really does not matter. I don’t doubt that people like Weinstein or Polanski think they’re good people because they’ve always backed what they see as noble causes.
Of course, you can find it among their opponents. Some of the wickedest people that you’ll ever encounter are found among social conservatives who call themselves devoutly religious.
What I admire is the historic nonconformist (especially Quaker) belief that good work and good works are one and the same. You treat staff, customers, creditors fairly, and you don’t brag about it.
Exactly so. The Quakers got it right.
What gives Quakers their special characteristic: Everyone approves of them and admires them and thinks they ought to keep up the good work, but no-one wants to be one or join them?
Kind of interesting considering how even for a religiously febrile time many were really outraged by the early Quakers to the point that despite rapid early growth I'm almost surprised they managed to keep going.
Been to pay homage to George Fox's cell at Scarborough Castle. He was such a PITA they banged him up.
And as a bonus there were bee orchids in the grass outside!
Bee orchids? Excellent. I haven't seen one for years. Will look out for them when I'm in Scarborough. Presume it was early summer you saw them?
It was some years ago now. Probably indeed at that sort of time - before peak holidays but with plenty of fish and chips etc available. But as I recall the sward at that corner of the castle bailey was pretty long - flower meadow mode. The cell IIRC is in the corner where the curtain wall meets the hillside to the south, so look around in that area.
The Rotunda museum (a little to the south of the main drag and big hotels) is a little treasure BTW - spiral display of the local geological strata in the round building from 200 years and William Smith times, more or less. And other coastal heritage as they put it.
The coppers apparently knocked on the sturgeons door at 7.30am. So it really was pretty much a dawn raid. Nicola was there. She left at 8.30am
The optics are spectacularly bad
For who? I'm not sure. The whole CSI thing, with the forensic tents etc, seems to be a bit weird for a long running fraud case. I just wonder if it will be the police who end up looking stupid, not the SNP.
Lol no. This is very definitely BAD for the SNP
It's bad for everyone if there isn't a conclusion.
Woke is collapsing in on itself. Simply delightful.
I honestly don't think it is, sadly. Perhaps the cause of woke is advancing less fast. But it's everywhere. I mean, I just looked up from writing this and saw this:
It's the start of a trend. These bullshit flags are everywhere but although people show them no-one really takes them seriously.
It just says, "Oh, look at me! I'm inclusive!"
Doesn't really mean anything.
Serious question. If it doesn't mean anything then why does it bother you? I am certainly no admirer of the current 'woke' debate when it has real world physical consequences in terms of removal of statues or changing books. But when it comes to people putting up flags to show their support for a particular issue - even if it is one I disagree with - then I really don't see why anyone should be hassled by that. Clearly the companies feel there is mileage in doing this and my attitude is good luck to them.
People really do need to stop being offended by stuff so much. And that applies equally to the 'woke' and the 'anti-woke'
People can signal their virtue by displaying a flag (or deliberately not displaying one) or what have, there's no point getting worked up about that. Actual law and policy changes which are harmful or nonsensical should be the focus.
Agreed, but “woke capitalism” is a case of “the louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons”.
Giving a few thousand to Stonewall is like buying indulgences.
My experience has been precisely this.
The worst leaders I've worked for in my career have been the most publicly "Wokey", which is one reason I have such contempt for it. I don't respect it.
People think that must mean I'm a secret bigot. Nothing could be further from the truth and then need to see through - and not be taken in - by such shallowness or my contempt will extend to them too.
You get banks with dirty reputations flying rainbow flags, companies that boast of their “ethical credentials” employing children in poor countries, turning a blind eye to sexual harassment, or routing their profits through tax havens..
The worst I know was a truly horrid law firm called MacMillan Williams, which has thankfully gone bankrupt. They were so woke that on their very extensive diversity monitoring forms, they were asking intrusive questions about peoples’ sexual practices.
There are still significant issues with sexism and racism in the NHS, and more to be done, but things are far, far better then they were 3 decades ago.
I agree, and the Wokery has precisely nothing to do with fixing that.
There are two problems:-
1. It’s performative.
2. Antnomianism. The belief that “to the pure all things are pure.” If your beliefs are pure, your conduct really does not matter. I don’t doubt that people like Weinstein or Polanski think they’re good people because they’ve always backed what they see as noble causes.
Of course, you can find it among their opponents. Some of the wickedest people that you’ll ever encounter are found among social conservatives who call themselves devoutly religious.
What I admire is the historic nonconformist (especially Quaker) belief that good work and good works are one and the same. You treat staff, customers, creditors fairly, and you don’t brag about it.
Exactly so. The Quakers got it right.
What gives Quakers their special characteristic: Everyone approves of them and admires them and thinks they ought to keep up the good work, but no-one wants to be one or join them?
On the contrary. They are extremely annoying people. A particular pain in 1890-1920 or so, with their pacifism and their pointing out certain facts about British-built concentration camps* in South Africa and the Boer lands.
*The name used at the time. And the death rate, particularly for children, was hideous because of the conditions.
Good for the Society of Friends.
I don't suppose CR is a ban the bomber? But that is what many Quakers are. And when it comes to social justice ...
The coppers apparently knocked on the sturgeons door at 7.30am. So it really was pretty much a dawn raid. Nicola was there. She left at 8.30am
The optics are spectacularly bad
Without pre-judging, it's sobering to think that if the IndyRef had gone the other way we would have been governed ever since by a troika comprising Salmond, Sturgeon and Murrell.
Doubt it. Normal politicvs would have resumed, only with truly homegrown parties of all ilks. The SNP would not have survived [edit: without a split or two]. Bear in mind nobody in their right mind would have established FPTP.
Woke is collapsing in on itself. Simply delightful.
I honestly don't think it is, sadly. Perhaps the cause of woke is advancing less fast. But it's everywhere. I mean, I just looked up from writing this and saw this:
It's the start of a trend. These bullshit flags are everywhere but although people show them no-one really takes them seriously.
It just says, "Oh, look at me! I'm inclusive!"
Doesn't really mean anything.
Serious question. If it doesn't mean anything then why does it bother you? I am certainly no admirer of the current 'woke' debate when it has real world physical consequences in terms of removal of statues or changing books. But when it comes to people putting up flags to show their support for a particular issue - even if it is one I disagree with - then I really don't see why anyone should be hassled by that. Clearly the companies feel there is mileage in doing this and my attitude is good luck to them.
People really do need to stop being offended by stuff so much. And that applies equally to the 'woke' and the 'anti-woke'
People can signal their virtue by displaying a flag (or deliberately not displaying one) or what have, there's no point getting worked up about that. Actual law and policy changes which are harmful or nonsensical should be the focus.
Agreed, but “woke capitalism” is a case of “the louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons”.
Giving a few thousand to Stonewall is like buying indulgences.
My experience has been precisely this.
The worst leaders I've worked for in my career have been the most publicly "Wokey", which is one reason I have such contempt for it. I don't respect it.
People think that must mean I'm a secret bigot. Nothing could be further from the truth and then need to see through - and not be taken in - by such shallowness or my contempt will extend to them too.
You get banks with dirty reputations flying rainbow flags, companies that boast of their “ethical credentials” employing children in poor countries, turning a blind eye to sexual harassment, or routing their profits through tax havens..
The worst I know was a truly horrid law firm called MacMillan Williams, which has thankfully gone bankrupt. They were so woke that on their very extensive diversity monitoring forms, they were asking intrusive questions about peoples’ sexual practices.
There are still significant issues with sexism and racism in the NHS, and more to be done, but things are far, far better then they were 3 decades ago.
I agree, and the Wokery has precisely nothing to do with fixing that.
There are two problems:-
1. It’s performative.
2. Antnomianism. The belief that “to the pure all things are pure.” If your beliefs are pure, your conduct really does not matter. I don’t doubt that people like Weinstein or Polanski think they’re good people because they’ve always backed what they see as noble causes.
Of course, you can find it among their opponents. Some of the wickedest people that you’ll ever encounter are found among social conservatives who call themselves devoutly religious.
What I admire is the historic nonconformist (especially Quaker) belief that good work and good works are one and the same. You treat staff, customers, creditors fairly, and you don’t brag about it.
Exactly so. The Quakers got it right.
What gives Quakers their special characteristic: Everyone approves of them and admires them and thinks they ought to keep up the good work, but no-one wants to be one or join them?
Kind of interesting considering how even for a religiously febrile time many were really outraged by the early Quakers to the point that despite rapid early growth I'm almost surprised they managed to keep going.
Been to pay homage to George Fox's cell at Scarborough Castle. He was such a PITA they banged him up.
And as a bonus there were bee orchids in the grass outside!
Bee orchids? Excellent. I haven't seen one for years. Will look out for them when I'm in Scarborough. Presume it was early summer you saw them?
They are reasonably common in grasslands and waste ground (at least, in England) but often quite difficult to spot. We had some in the garden for a while and you wouldn't have noticed them at all at first glance.
As an antidote, there are kids who survive abuse and end up fine
An acquaintance of mine was abused by her grandfather for years. She is now happily married with her own kids and no apparent issues. It happens. People survive
Yes, some people are very resilient.
On the other hand, for a lot it ruins their life. When I was doing psychiatry I was told to ask every patient about sexual abuse. I was surprised by how often the answer came back that they had been abused, mostly by family members. Even depressed people in their sixties, and often it was the first time that anyone had asked them.
A friend of mine committed suicide in her 50s as a consequence. It haunted her, her whole life.
Good evening, another day, another day of SKS being utterly useless.
Mods I don't like calling for action and in fact I think this is the first time ever. This poster is either a former poster given the name similarity or someone masquerading as him
I think you really need to clarify because if this is not the original poster then its an attempt at vilifying him. If it is the original poster then this pretence is causing more harm than good
Of course you do.
If what you say is true, and this poster has another identity, so what? Why are you not calling out other posters who occasionally have a three way conversation with their alter egos?
I am specifically calling it for horse_b only for the following reasons
1) I am not sure if its an incarnation of CHB3 and if it is why is he posting the opposite of his usual
2) If its not an incarnation of CHB3 then a lot of people are assuming it is and thinking he has lost the plot. If I got banned and someone became pagan3 that was not me and started posting stuff that was the opposite I would hope someone would ask for clarity.
My problem is purely the name implies it is an incarnation of a banned poster and many are assuming it is. If the name was not implying so I would have no issue. If horse_b is indeed not CHB3 then he needs to be defended imo and this is coming from someone that doesn't really like him. Does that make it clear?
I agree. If this is CHB4 and he's had a pro-Tory epiphany, that's fine. But it sounds way more like someone is trolling with a Horse-shaped sock puppet. Which if true is not funny.
If it really is a sock puppet that isnt chb then yes it needs exposing because we all assume its him
In the first few posts I thought it was him, but him saying very little. Now? Doesn't sound remotely like Horse. Sounds like Sean...
Good evening, another day, another day of SKS being utterly useless.
Mods I don't like calling for action and in fact I think this is the first time ever. This poster is either a former poster given the name similarity or someone masquerading as him
I think you really need to clarify because if this is not the original poster then its an attempt at vilifying him. If it is the original poster then this pretence is causing more harm than good
Of course you do.
If what you say is true, and this poster has another identity, so what? Why are you not calling out other posters who occasionally have a three way conversation with their alter egos?
I am specifically calling it for horse_b only for the following reasons
1) I am not sure if its an incarnation of CHB3 and if it is why is he posting the opposite of his usual
2) If its not an incarnation of CHB3 then a lot of people are assuming it is and thinking he has lost the plot. If I got banned and someone became pagan3 that was not me and started posting stuff that was the opposite I would hope someone would ask for clarity.
My problem is purely the name implies it is an incarnation of a banned poster and many are assuming it is. If the name was not implying so I would have no issue. If horse_b is indeed not CHB3 then he needs to be defended imo and this is coming from someone that doesn't really like him. Does that make it clear?
I agree. If this is CHB4 and he's had a pro-Tory epiphany, that's fine. But it sounds way more like someone is trolling with a Horse-shaped sock puppet. Which if true is not funny.
Agree. I am with you and @Pagan2 on this and credit to Pagan for bring this up. If it isn't CHB it is rather nasty.
We all have our identies here and while we for various reasons dont have rl ones I think it important that what people thinks comes from us truly does come from us
Woke is collapsing in on itself. Simply delightful.
I honestly don't think it is, sadly. Perhaps the cause of woke is advancing less fast. But it's everywhere. I mean, I just looked up from writing this and saw this:
It's the start of a trend. These bullshit flags are everywhere but although people show them no-one really takes them seriously.
It just says, "Oh, look at me! I'm inclusive!"
Doesn't really mean anything.
Serious question. If it doesn't mean anything then why does it bother you? I am certainly no admirer of the current 'woke' debate when it has real world physical consequences in terms of removal of statues or changing books. But when it comes to people putting up flags to show their support for a particular issue - even if it is one I disagree with - then I really don't see why anyone should be hassled by that. Clearly the companies feel there is mileage in doing this and my attitude is good luck to them.
People really do need to stop being offended by stuff so much. And that applies equally to the 'woke' and the 'anti-woke'
People can signal their virtue by displaying a flag (or deliberately not displaying one) or what have, there's no point getting worked up about that. Actual law and policy changes which are harmful or nonsensical should be the focus.
Agreed, but “woke capitalism” is a case of “the louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons”.
Giving a few thousand to Stonewall is like buying indulgences.
My experience has been precisely this.
The worst leaders I've worked for in my career have been the most publicly "Wokey", which is one reason I have such contempt for it. I don't respect it.
People think that must mean I'm a secret bigot. Nothing could be further from the truth and then need to see through - and not be taken in - by such shallowness or my contempt will extend to them too.
You get banks with dirty reputations flying rainbow flags, companies that boast of their “ethical credentials” employing children in poor countries, turning a blind eye to sexual harassment, or routing their profits through tax havens..
The worst I know was a truly horrid law firm called MacMillan Williams, which has thankfully gone bankrupt. They were so woke that on their very extensive diversity monitoring forms, they were asking intrusive questions about peoples’ sexual practices.
There are still significant issues with sexism and racism in the NHS, and more to be done, but things are far, far better then they were 3 decades ago.
I agree, and the Wokery has precisely nothing to do with fixing that.
There are two problems:-
1. It’s performative.
2. Antnomianism. The belief that “to the pure all things are pure.” If your beliefs are pure, your conduct really does not matter. I don’t doubt that people like Weinstein or Polanski think they’re good people because they’ve always backed what they see as noble causes.
Of course, you can find it among their opponents. Some of the wickedest people that you’ll ever encounter are found among social conservatives who call themselves devoutly religious.
What I admire is the historic nonconformist (especially Quaker) belief that good work and good works are one and the same. You treat staff, customers, creditors fairly, and you don’t brag about it.
Exactly so. The Quakers got it right.
What gives Quakers their special characteristic: Everyone approves of them and admires them and thinks they ought to keep up the good work, but no-one wants to be one or join them?
On the contrary. They are extremely annoying people. A particular pain in 1890-1920 or so, with their pacifism and their pointing out certain facts about British-built concentration camps* in South Africa and the Boer lands.
*The name used at the time. And the death rate, particularly for children, was hideous because of the conditions.
Good for the Society of Friends.
I don't suppose CR is a ban the bomber? But that is what many Quakers are. And when it comes to social justice ...
Good evening, another day, another day of SKS being utterly useless.
Mods I don't like calling for action and in fact I think this is the first time ever. This poster is either a former poster given the name similarity or someone masquerading as him
I think you really need to clarify because if this is not the original poster then its an attempt at vilifying him. If it is the original poster then this pretence is causing more harm than good
Of course you do.
If what you say is true, and this poster has another identity, so what? Why are you not calling out other posters who occasionally have a three way conversation with their alter egos?
I am specifically calling it for horse_b only for the following reasons
1) I am not sure if its an incarnation of CHB3 and if it is why is he posting the opposite of his usual
2) If its not an incarnation of CHB3 then a lot of people are assuming it is and thinking he has lost the plot. If I got banned and someone became pagan3 that was not me and started posting stuff that was the opposite I would hope someone would ask for clarity.
My problem is purely the name implies it is an incarnation of a banned poster and many are assuming it is. If the name was not implying so I would have no issue. If horse_b is indeed not CHB3 then he needs to be defended imo and this is coming from someone that doesn't really like him. Does that make it clear?
I agree. If this is CHB4 and he's had a pro-Tory epiphany, that's fine. But it sounds way more like someone is trolling with a Horse-shaped sock puppet. Which if true is not funny.
If it really is a sock puppet that isnt chb then yes it needs exposing because we all assume its him
In the first few posts I thought it was him, but him saying very little. Now? Doesn't sound remotely like Horse. Sounds like Sean...
It may well be but no one should use and identity that close that people are unsure. That was my point
Woke is collapsing in on itself. Simply delightful.
I honestly don't think it is, sadly. Perhaps the cause of woke is advancing less fast. But it's everywhere. I mean, I just looked up from writing this and saw this:
It's the start of a trend. These bullshit flags are everywhere but although people show them no-one really takes them seriously.
It just says, "Oh, look at me! I'm inclusive!"
Doesn't really mean anything.
Serious question. If it doesn't mean anything then why does it bother you? I am certainly no admirer of the current 'woke' debate when it has real world physical consequences in terms of removal of statues or changing books. But when it comes to people putting up flags to show their support for a particular issue - even if it is one I disagree with - then I really don't see why anyone should be hassled by that. Clearly the companies feel there is mileage in doing this and my attitude is good luck to them.
People really do need to stop being offended by stuff so much. And that applies equally to the 'woke' and the 'anti-woke'
People can signal their virtue by displaying a flag (or deliberately not displaying one) or what have, there's no point getting worked up about that. Actual law and policy changes which are harmful or nonsensical should be the focus.
Agreed, but “woke capitalism” is a case of “the louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons”.
Giving a few thousand to Stonewall is like buying indulgences.
My experience has been precisely this.
The worst leaders I've worked for in my career have been the most publicly "Wokey", which is one reason I have such contempt for it. I don't respect it.
People think that must mean I'm a secret bigot. Nothing could be further from the truth and then need to see through - and not be taken in - by such shallowness or my contempt will extend to them too.
You get banks with dirty reputations flying rainbow flags, companies that boast of their “ethical credentials” employing children in poor countries, turning a blind eye to sexual harassment, or routing their profits through tax havens..
The worst I know was a truly horrid law firm called MacMillan Williams, which has thankfully gone bankrupt. They were so woke that on their very extensive diversity monitoring forms, they were asking intrusive questions about peoples’ sexual practices.
There are still significant issues with sexism and racism in the NHS, and more to be done, but things are far, far better then they were 3 decades ago.
I agree, and the Wokery has precisely nothing to do with fixing that.
There are two problems:-
1. It’s performative.
2. Antnomianism. The belief that “to the pure all things are pure.” If your beliefs are pure, your conduct really does not matter. I don’t doubt that people like Weinstein or Polanski think they’re good people because they’ve always backed what they see as noble causes.
Of course, you can find it among their opponents. Some of the wickedest people that you’ll ever encounter are found among social conservatives who call themselves devoutly religious.
What I admire is the historic nonconformist (especially Quaker) belief that good work and good works are one and the same. You treat staff, customers, creditors fairly, and you don’t brag about it.
Exactly so. The Quakers got it right.
What gives Quakers their special characteristic: Everyone approves of them and admires them and thinks they ought to keep up the good work, but no-one wants to be one or join them?
Kind of interesting considering how even for a religiously febrile time many were really outraged by the early Quakers to the point that despite rapid early growth I'm almost surprised they managed to keep going.
Been to pay homage to George Fox's cell at Scarborough Castle. He was such a PITA they banged him up.
And as a bonus there were bee orchids in the grass outside!
Bee orchids? Excellent. I haven't seen one for years. Will look out for them when I'm in Scarborough. Presume it was early summer you saw them?
They are reasonably common in grasslands and waste ground (at least, in England) but often quite difficult to spot. We had some in the garden for a while and you wouldn't have noticed them at all at first glance.
Woke is collapsing in on itself. Simply delightful.
I honestly don't think it is, sadly. Perhaps the cause of woke is advancing less fast. But it's everywhere. I mean, I just looked up from writing this and saw this:
It's the start of a trend. These bullshit flags are everywhere but although people show them no-one really takes them seriously.
It just says, "Oh, look at me! I'm inclusive!"
Doesn't really mean anything.
Serious question. If it doesn't mean anything then why does it bother you? I am certainly no admirer of the current 'woke' debate when it has real world physical consequences in terms of removal of statues or changing books. But when it comes to people putting up flags to show their support for a particular issue - even if it is one I disagree with - then I really don't see why anyone should be hassled by that. Clearly the companies feel there is mileage in doing this and my attitude is good luck to them.
People really do need to stop being offended by stuff so much. And that applies equally to the 'woke' and the 'anti-woke'
People can signal their virtue by displaying a flag (or deliberately not displaying one) or what have, there's no point getting worked up about that. Actual law and policy changes which are harmful or nonsensical should be the focus.
Agreed, but “woke capitalism” is a case of “the louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons”.
Giving a few thousand to Stonewall is like buying indulgences.
My experience has been precisely this.
The worst leaders I've worked for in my career have been the most publicly "Wokey", which is one reason I have such contempt for it. I don't respect it.
People think that must mean I'm a secret bigot. Nothing could be further from the truth and then need to see through - and not be taken in - by such shallowness or my contempt will extend to them too.
You get banks with dirty reputations flying rainbow flags, companies that boast of their “ethical credentials” employing children in poor countries, turning a blind eye to sexual harassment, or routing their profits through tax havens..
The worst I know was a truly horrid law firm called MacMillan Williams, which has thankfully gone bankrupt. They were so woke that on their very extensive diversity monitoring forms, they were asking intrusive questions about peoples’ sexual practices.
There are still significant issues with sexism and racism in the NHS, and more to be done, but things are far, far better then they were 3 decades ago.
I agree, and the Wokery has precisely nothing to do with fixing that.
There are two problems:-
1. It’s performative.
2. Antnomianism. The belief that “to the pure all things are pure.” If your beliefs are pure, your conduct really does not matter. I don’t doubt that people like Weinstein or Polanski think they’re good people because they’ve always backed what they see as noble causes.
Of course, you can find it among their opponents. Some of the wickedest people that you’ll ever encounter are found among social conservatives who call themselves devoutly religious.
What I admire is the historic nonconformist (especially Quaker) belief that good work and good works are one and the same. You treat staff, customers, creditors fairly, and you don’t brag about it.
Exactly so. The Quakers got it right.
What gives Quakers their special characteristic: Everyone approves of them and admires them and thinks they ought to keep up the good work, but no-one wants to be one or join them?
On the contrary. They are extremely annoying people. A particular pain in 1890-1920 or so, with their pacifism and their pointing out certain facts about British-built concentration camps* in South Africa and the Boer lands.
*The name used at the time. And the death rate, particularly for children, was hideous because of the conditions.
Good for the Society of Friends.
I don't suppose CR is a ban the bomber? But that is what many Quakers are. And when it comes to social justice ...
The coppers apparently knocked on the sturgeons door at 7.30am. So it really was pretty much a dawn raid. Nicola was there. She left at 8.30am
The optics are spectacularly bad
For who? I'm not sure. The whole CSI thing, with the forensic tents etc, seems to be a bit weird for a long running fraud case. I just wonder if it will be the police who end up looking stupid, not the SNP.
Lol no. This is very definitely BAD for the SNP
It's bad for everyone if there isn't a conclusion.
Sure. But there is no universe in which this is anything but bad for the Nats. They’re not ever going to come out as martyrs persecuted by evil police
The evidence is all there already in the public domain. Sturgeons sudden resignation. Murrell’s sudden resignation. All the many unanswered questions over years
I suppose it might end up bad for the coppers as well but this will always be a nightmare for the SNP
Good evening, another day, another day of SKS being utterly useless.
Mods I don't like calling for action and in fact I think this is the first time ever. This poster is either a former poster given the name similarity or someone masquerading as him
I think you really need to clarify because if this is not the original poster then its an attempt at vilifying him. If it is the original poster then this pretence is causing more harm than good
Of course you do.
If what you say is true, and this poster has another identity, so what? Why are you not calling out other posters who occasionally have a three way conversation with their alter egos?
I am specifically calling it for horse_b only for the following reasons
1) I am not sure if its an incarnation of CHB3 and if it is why is he posting the opposite of his usual
2) If its not an incarnation of CHB3 then a lot of people are assuming it is and thinking he has lost the plot. If I got banned and someone became pagan3 that was not me and started posting stuff that was the opposite I would hope someone would ask for clarity.
My problem is purely the name implies it is an incarnation of a banned poster and many are assuming it is. If the name was not implying so I would have no issue. If horse_b is indeed not CHB3 then he needs to be defended imo and this is coming from someone that doesn't really like him. Does that make it clear?
We all know it's him.
He's experimenting with a different method and trying to get as much attention as possible, as usual.
In transactional analysis terms we would say that he is seeking negative strokes (such as aggression) by attempting to provoke conflict, most likely because he is lacking in positive strokes (such as praise, or affirmation) and lacking the confidence that he will receive positive strokes if he looks for, or asks for, them.
He should phone his mother, or find a friend to talk to.
Good evening, another day, another day of SKS being utterly useless.
Mods I don't like calling for action and in fact I think this is the first time ever. This poster is either a former poster given the name similarity or someone masquerading as him
I think you really need to clarify because if this is not the original poster then its an attempt at vilifying him. If it is the original poster then this pretence is causing more harm than good
Of course you do.
If what you say is true, and this poster has another identity, so what? Why are you not calling out other posters who occasionally have a three way conversation with their alter egos?
I am specifically calling it for horse_b only for the following reasons
1) I am not sure if its an incarnation of CHB3 and if it is why is he posting the opposite of his usual
2) If its not an incarnation of CHB3 then a lot of people are assuming it is and thinking he has lost the plot. If I got banned and someone became pagan3 that was not me and started posting stuff that was the opposite I would hope someone would ask for clarity.
My problem is purely the name implies it is an incarnation of a banned poster and many are assuming it is. If the name was not implying so I would have no issue. If horse_b is indeed not CHB3 then he needs to be defended imo and this is coming from someone that doesn't really like him. Does that make it clear?
I agree. If this is CHB4 and he's had a pro-Tory epiphany, that's fine. But it sounds way more like someone is trolling with a Horse-shaped sock puppet. Which if true is not funny.
If it really is a sock puppet that isnt chb then yes it needs exposing because we all assume its him
In the first few posts I thought it was him, but him saying very little. Now? Doesn't sound remotely like Horse. Sounds like Sean...
It may well be but no one should use and identity that close that people are unsure. That was my point
if it is not chb3 then I would suggest mods have a quiet word just get him or her or it or they to create a new identity
On the grooming thing, what boggles me is that as with so many other things people are trying to excuse absolutism. It is a fact that some of these gangs have been Pakistani heritage men preying on white girls. I is a fact that they got away with it as long as they did because the authorities didn't want to know because it sounds like a racial witch hunt.
Saying there have been Pakistani grooming gangs is not racism, it is stating fact.
What is racism is what the Indian heritage home secretary is doing by trying to associate ALL of these gangs with Pakistani heritage men. By ONLY wanting to associate Pakistani heritage men with these crimes. And yet today we have had another gang jailed - all white, many female. Why did they get away with it for so long? Because the authorities didn't want to know.
Back when Rochdale kids were being terrorised by Cyril Smith and not by Pakistani heritage men, the same authorities did the exact same thing - disbelieve the victims, ignore the evidence, sweep it under the carpet.
We need to resource up and empower the police and social services to actually give a shit, to investigate not ignore, regardless of what the excuse is. Race, poverty, class - does it matter why they chose not to act? We just want them to act. By trying to pin this all one Pakistani heritage men - and thus the blame on lefty woke PC types, we open the door to more Savilles and Smiths and this gang just jailed.
The minciest of mince MPs. When he gets demolished at the next GE he will be aggrieved that he has had his seat stolen from him. As opposed to giving it away by being such a pratt.
Murrell released without charge. Wasn’t that a lot of excitement over nothing?
Pending investigations
The theatrical drama of erecting blue tents was quite probably unnecessary.
How can we know?
I read a highly plausible explanation that said this is standard when cops believe fraud has taken place - including the destruction of documents and evidence. The tent is a neutral place they can cleanly isolate what evidence they DO find
I just don’t believe Scottish police would put on a special theatre to punish the SNP. Why? What for? They will play it absolutely by the book knowing how politically explosive it is. They have to be seen as scrupulously neutral
Not masquerade as a Larry Grayson impersonation of Horse saying the exact opposite of what Horse says and thinks and believes.
I don't think so either which is why I suggested the mods get involved....to me at least impersonating another user should be verboten or as in this case making people think you are another user
Woke is collapsing in on itself. Simply delightful.
I honestly don't think it is, sadly. Perhaps the cause of woke is advancing less fast. But it's everywhere. I mean, I just looked up from writing this and saw this:
It's the start of a trend. These bullshit flags are everywhere but although people show them no-one really takes them seriously.
It just says, "Oh, look at me! I'm inclusive!"
Doesn't really mean anything.
Serious question. If it doesn't mean anything then why does it bother you? I am certainly no admirer of the current 'woke' debate when it has real world physical consequences in terms of removal of statues or changing books. But when it comes to people putting up flags to show their support for a particular issue - even if it is one I disagree with - then I really don't see why anyone should be hassled by that. Clearly the companies feel there is mileage in doing this and my attitude is good luck to them.
People really do need to stop being offended by stuff so much. And that applies equally to the 'woke' and the 'anti-woke'
People can signal their virtue by displaying a flag (or deliberately not displaying one) or what have, there's no point getting worked up about that. Actual law and policy changes which are harmful or nonsensical should be the focus.
Agreed, but “woke capitalism” is a case of “the louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons”.
Giving a few thousand to Stonewall is like buying indulgences.
My experience has been precisely this.
The worst leaders I've worked for in my career have been the most publicly "Wokey", which is one reason I have such contempt for it. I don't respect it.
People think that must mean I'm a secret bigot. Nothing could be further from the truth and then need to see through - and not be taken in - by such shallowness or my contempt will extend to them too.
You get banks with dirty reputations flying rainbow flags, companies that boast of their “ethical credentials” employing children in poor countries, turning a blind eye to sexual harassment, or routing their profits through tax havens..
The worst I know was a truly horrid law firm called MacMillan Williams, which has thankfully gone bankrupt. They were so woke that on their very extensive diversity monitoring forms, they were asking intrusive questions about peoples’ sexual practices.
There are still significant issues with sexism and racism in the NHS, and more to be done, but things are far, far better then they were 3 decades ago.
I agree, and the Wokery has precisely nothing to do with fixing that.
There are two problems:-
1. It’s performative.
2. Antnomianism. The belief that “to the pure all things are pure.” If your beliefs are pure, your conduct really does not matter. I don’t doubt that people like Weinstein or Polanski think they’re good people because they’ve always backed what they see as noble causes.
Of course, you can find it among their opponents. Some of the wickedest people that you’ll ever encounter are found among social conservatives who call themselves devoutly religious.
What I admire is the historic nonconformist (especially Quaker) belief that good work and good works are one and the same. You treat staff, customers, creditors fairly, and you don’t brag about it.
Exactly so. The Quakers got it right.
What gives Quakers their special characteristic: Everyone approves of them and admires them and thinks they ought to keep up the good work, but no-one wants to be one or join them?
Kind of interesting considering how even for a religiously febrile time many were really outraged by the early Quakers to the point that despite rapid early growth I'm almost surprised they managed to keep going.
Been to pay homage to George Fox's cell at Scarborough Castle. He was such a PITA they banged him up.
And as a bonus there were bee orchids in the grass outside!
Bee orchids? Excellent. I haven't seen one for years. Will look out for them when I'm in Scarborough. Presume it was early summer you saw them?
They are reasonably common in grasslands and waste ground (at least, in England) but often quite difficult to spot. We had some in the garden for a while and you wouldn't have noticed them at all at first glance.
One of those plants that looks dramatic in photos but actually tricky to spot in the field until you get your eye in. Scottish primrose and sundew are other examples.
On the subject of orchids I was quite surprised at how fragrant the Fragrant Orchid actually is. Worth checking out if you find some flower spikes though it does involve a certain amount of undignified crouching to get near enough.
You might want to edit your quote, too, while you have time. (As I have.) The site owners **really** don't like people using the word.
Good! So ban the Horse sock puppet. Its not like he doesn't have other profiles he can post with.
I do not like the idea you want me banned just because I don't agree with you politically. I haven't, to the best of my knowledge, said anything negative towards you.
I am Horse_B as Horse and Horse_A were both taken, I am sorry I don't have anything to do with CorrectHorseBattery beyond seeing him whilst I was lurking for some years. He was a good poster but clearly brainwashed by the left wing cult.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Does anyone seriously dispute that most child sex abuse in the U.K. is by whites? Simply by the majority population. But there has been a particular type of crime associated with groups of largely Pakistani origin men. I note that the current case is very different to those cases, being much more family based.
I don’t get why some people find it difficult to accept that there has been, and probably still is, an issue with a minority of Pakistani men. Saying doesn’t mean diminish in any way the horror of all other sexual abuse.
I don't believe anyone on this board is trying to diminish the wickedness of abusers who happen to be of a specific racial origin. I don't believe anyone on here is absolving Labour Councillors if they turned a blind eye to this abuse on the grounds of creed or race. You yourself have highlighted the people involved as a "minority" of the stated group.
On the other hand a particular politician is being called out for politicising the criminality by taxi drivers in Rochdale and Rotherham for her own ends. That is perhaps as worrying and as outrageous as those Labour Councillors who turned a blind eye in the first place.
We can certainly agree it shouldn't be politicized. However can I ask what you do when a particular community has an issue. To raise that is politicising it and it doesn't matter if that community is white, black asian or martian.
An example of this is for example knife crime....in london the main perpertrators were black, in scotland they were white from a certain demographic....stop and search in scotland wasn't an issue, in london it was. That was purely on the racial aspect.
Now do I think black people are inherently bad, no absolutely not. However if in an area 80% of white people are carrying and 10% of black people are and the mix of the area is 20% white and 80% black then I would fully expect that about 80% of white people in that area had been stop and searched for weapons
You could link your assertion to all sorts of other common denominators, for example, poverty, access to education, a whole range of issues, but you have chosen to focus on race. That is entirely your prerogative.
The Home Secretary on the other hand, who has up to the minute data available to her, has chosen to mischievously ignore issues other than the racial origin of a notorious group of criminals. She has followed this path because she believes it is politically expedient so to do.
It would be very odd in the case of Rotherham or Rochdale or Telford or Oxford to conclude that the main factor was poverty or access to education.
Fair enough, pick some other common denominator like taxi driver, evil sexual predator. or entitled male.
We don't have the stats but given the high profile nature of cases involving grooming gangs, we have an idea about those reported.
All child abusers are evil. However, the British-Pakistani groups deliberately targeted girls outside their group (it gets forgotten they also raped Sikh girls). So, for want of a better phrase, there was a hate crime element going on.
I don't think they've changed much. The ones that are missing are 'don't dox' and 'don't drop c-bombs' (which is a real challenge for me when I'm talking about the DfE, I might add).
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
Something between 5-10% of all the Pakistani Muslim men in Rotherham, aged 18-65, have been charged with rape, abuse, torture etc in the recent trials and arrests. These are the ones police have enough evidence to prosecute
Interesting point - this is good policy, as well as sneaky politics.
In @monthly, Will Norris reveals something the press missed about Biden’s big spending bills: they target far larger %s of funding to local government than any federal legislation in generations. The political and policy implications are enormous. /1 https://mobile.twitter.com/glastris/status/1643679989450121230
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
Something between 5-10% of all the Pakistani Muslim men in Rotherham, aged 18-65, have been charged with rape, abuse, torture etc in the recent trials and arrests. These are the ones police have enough evidence to prosecute
Does that not seem a striking statistic to you?
I think that stat is wrong
@CDP1882 18/ When it came to Pakistanis, rates of prosecution across England and Wales for this kind of abuse was 1 in 1,700.
In Rochdale, 1 in 280 Muslim males over 16 were prosecuted.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
I don't accept your assertion (other than the Home Secretary being a moron and completely unfit for her job, of course). I remember doing an analysis a year or two ago with one of the towns in northern England and something like 20% of the men in the town who identified as being of Pakistani origin in the census had been convicted. It was astounding. It is simply not true to say that it is "roughly in proportion" although it may be patchy.
It also suggested to me that this was a cultural thing. These men regard these girls as white trash. Where that mindset is predominant many can get swept along into things that they would never have conceived of and many more turn their heads and pretend not to see. We need to address this. And of course the non Asian gangs such as were convicted today.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
Something between 5-10% of all the Pakistani Muslim men in Rotherham, aged 18-65, have been charged with rape, abuse, torture etc in the recent trials and arrests. These are the ones police have enough evidence to prosecute
Does that not seem a striking statistic to you?
I think that stat is wrong
@CDP1882 18/ When it came to Pakistanis, rates of prosecution across England and Wales for this kind of abuse was 1 in 1,700.
In Rochdale, 1 in 280 Muslim males over 16 were prosecuted.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
I don't accept your assertion (other than the Home Secretary being a moron and completely unfit for her job, of course). I remember doing an analysis a year or two ago with one of the towns in northern England and something like 20% of the men in the town who identified as being of Pakistani origin in the census had been convicted. It was astounding. It is simply not true to say that it is "roughly in proportion" although it may be patchy.
It also suggested to me that this was a cultural thing. These men regard these girls as white trash. Where that mindset is predominant many can get swept along into things that they would never have conceived of and many more turn their heads and pretend not to see. We need to address this. And of course the non Asian gangs such as were convicted today.
Indeed. There was a New Statesman article in the noughties where a Pakistani writer admitted that this grooming and abuse was known and tolerated throughout his community. As long as the men left Muslim girls alone then it was ok. He wrote of it jokingly
At the time I thought the writer was on drugs. Or it was a parody. Now I realise he was stating the plain truth
It has since been vehemently scrubbed from the internet
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
I don't accept your assertion (other than the Home Secretary being a moron and completely unfit for her job, of course). I remember doing an analysis a year or two ago with one of the towns in northern England and something like 20% of the men in the town who identified as being of Pakistani origin in the census had been convicted. It was astounding. It is simply not true to say that it is "roughly in proportion" although it may be patchy.
It also suggested to me that this was a cultural thing. These men regard these girls as white trash. Where that mindset is predominant many can get swept along into things that they would never have conceived of and many more turn their heads and pretend not to see. We need to address this. And of course the non Asian gangs such as were convicted today.
Exactly, it's not either or. People act like recognising there has been a disproportion in some areas means there won't be focus on others. I should think we all agree that would be absurd.
I am sorry some people don't agree with me but I am here to stay.
Ironic, as a last post. Up there with the famous last words of John Sedgwick, 'Why, they couldn't hit an elephant at this distance.'
No no no. It was better than that
“They couldn’t hit an elephant at this dist-“
He finished the sentence and was shot two minutes later. It's not thought he said anything in the meanwhile though. His aide had just turned to him to say, 'General, they're using exploding bullets' when he was shot in the face.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
I don't accept your assertion (other than the Home Secretary being a moron and completely unfit for her job, of course).
Also, I'm not sure that counts as a mere assertion, it might a fundamental physical law.
I had it for lunch. The Elsinore one with red onions. Very nice, but sadly the end of the jar.
Any recommendations for easily available rollmops in the English suburbs?
I had my first ever rollmops at the Ceilidh Place, Ullapool, during the 1992 Olympics. They were superb. But the rollmops I've had since have been inconsistent. I'm sometimes tempted to buy supermarket rollmops and they're almost always almost unbearably sour. I'm still a fan in principle, but I'm disappointed far more often than not. If anyone is able to recommend any sources of good, sweet, not hopelessly acidic rollmops I'd be very interested.
As anyone who has ever mislaid the glasses they still have on their head, or misplaced the keys they set down seconds ago, could already attest.
The human brain seems to have an amazing ability to decide what should be the case, and forget or ignore evidence to the contrary and just make stuff up confidently instead.
In which case our nascent attempts at AI appear to be replicating the human condition pretty well.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Does anyone seriously dispute that most child sex abuse in the U.K. is by whites? Simply by the majority population. But there has been a particular type of crime associated with groups of largely Pakistani origin men. I note that the current case is very different to those cases, being much more family based.
I don’t get why some people find it difficult to accept that there has been, and probably still is, an issue with a minority of Pakistani men. Saying doesn’t mean diminish in any way the horror of all other sexual abuse.
I don't believe anyone on this board is trying to diminish the wickedness of abusers who happen to be of a specific racial origin. I don't believe anyone on here is absolving Labour Councillors if they turned a blind eye to this abuse on the grounds of creed or race. You yourself have highlighted the people involved as a "minority" of the stated group.
On the other hand a particular politician is being called out for politicising the criminality by taxi drivers in Rochdale and Rotherham for her own ends. That is perhaps as worrying and as outrageous as those Labour Councillors who turned a blind eye in the first place.
We can certainly agree it shouldn't be politicized. However can I ask what you do when a particular community has an issue. To raise that is politicising it and it doesn't matter if that community is white, black asian or martian.
An example of this is for example knife crime....in london the main perpertrators were black, in scotland they were white from a certain demographic....stop and search in scotland wasn't an issue, in london it was. That was purely on the racial aspect.
Now do I think black people are inherently bad, no absolutely not. However if in an area 80% of white people are carrying and 10% of black people are and the mix of the area is 20% white and 80% black then I would fully expect that about 80% of white people in that area had been stop and searched for weapons
You could link your assertion to all sorts of other common denominators, for example, poverty, access to education, a whole range of issues, but you have chosen to focus on race. That is entirely your prerogative.
The Home Secretary on the other hand, who has up to the minute data available to her, has chosen to mischievously ignore issues other than the racial origin of a notorious group of criminals. She has followed this path because she believes it is politically expedient so to do.
It would be very odd in the case of Rotherham or Rochdale or Telford or Oxford to conclude that the main factor was poverty or access to education.
Fair enough, pick some other common denominator like taxi driver, evil sexual predator. or entitled male.
We don't have the stats but given the high profile nature of cases involving grooming gangs, we have an idea about those reported.
All child abusers are evil. However, the British-Pakistani groups deliberately targeted girls outside their group (it gets forgotten they also raped Sikh girls). So, for want of a better phrase, there was a hate crime element going on.
Whereas you are not wrong, and Labour, yes exclusively Labour Councils and the police facilitated these people, it is nonetheless unwise for a highly politicised Home Secretary to stereotype an entire creed by implying that culturally the creed is uniformly potentially culpable.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
I don't accept your assertion (other than the Home Secretary being a moron and completely unfit for her job, of course). I remember doing an analysis a year or two ago with one of the towns in northern England and something like 20% of the men in the town who identified as being of Pakistani origin in the census had been convicted. It was astounding. It is simply not true to say that it is "roughly in proportion" although it may be patchy.
It also suggested to me that this was a cultural thing. These men regard these girls as white trash. Where that mindset is predominant many can get swept along into things that they would never have conceived of and many more turn their heads and pretend not to see. We need to address this. And of course the non Asian gangs such as were convicted today.
Exactly, it's not either or. People act like recognising there has been a disproportion in some areas means there won't be focus on others. I should think we all agree that would be absurd.
Agreed. Among many aspects of these cases, one which particularly rankles with many is not specifically the ethnicity of the perpetrators - but that the abuse was explicitly overlooked BECAUSE OF the ethnicity of the perpetrators, in order to not be racist.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
I don't accept your assertion (other than the Home Secretary being a moron and completely unfit for her job, of course). I remember doing an analysis a year or two ago with one of the towns in northern England and something like 20% of the men in the town who identified as being of Pakistani origin in the census had been convicted. It was astounding. It is simply not true to say that it is "roughly in proportion" although it may be patchy.
It also suggested to me that this was a cultural thing. These men regard these girls as white trash. Where that mindset is predominant many can get swept along into things that they would never have conceived of and many more turn their heads and pretend not to see. We need to address this. And of course the non Asian gangs such as were convicted today.
Indeed. There was a New Statesman article in the noughties where a Pakistani writer admitted that this grooming and abuse was known and tolerated throughout his community. As long as the men left Muslim girls alone then it was ok. He wrote of it jokingly
At the time I thought the writer was on drugs. Or it was a parody. Now I realise he was stating the plain truth
It has since been vehemently scrubbed from the internet
At least one of the Pakistani heritage gangs was explicitly targeting white girls. Specifically the kind of dirt poor girls who would both be easy prey for a bit of attention and who nobody would believe.
And the majority of child abuse - which isn't these gangs - gets away because nobody believes it. Braverman said what she said because the "predatory Pakistanis" line has been swallowed by some Tory voters, and she can package this with attacking leftie social workers ignoring it because of PC.
Which ensures that more children will be abused. Political point scoring where the victims - children - do not matter. The latest convicted gang was white and many female. Not Pakistani heritage men despite the shrieking of Braverman.
We need to have police who aren't under-resourced and riddled with out-dated approaches to the poor / women / minorities. And we need social services with actual staff which means funding them . Braverman is in the government partly responsible for the mess, so best to point the finger at this other group instead.
I had it for lunch. The Elsinore one with red onions. Very nice, but sadly the end of the jar.
Any recommendations for easily available rollmops in the English suburbs?
I had my first ever rollmops at the Ceilidh Place, Ullapool, during the 1992 Olympics. They were superb. But the rollmops I've had since have been inconsistent. I'm sometimes tempted to buy supermarket rollmops and they're almost always almost unbearably sour. I'm still a fan in principle, but I'm disappointed far more often than not. If anyone is able to recommend any sources of good, sweet, not hopelessly acidic rollmops I'd be very interested.
The Elsinore one was from Waitrose and deliciously sweet, but in 3cm sections, not a true roll mops. The one from Iea in mustard sauce is very good too, though the other one is rather bitter. Serve with Scandinavian crispbread.
Basically, Russia is running out of ammo. Ukraine is struggling too but the efforts of the west make this more a short term problem. Russia really cannot fight a war without overwhelming artillery. it's what they do.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
I don't accept your assertion (other than the Home Secretary being a moron and completely unfit for her job, of course). I remember doing an analysis a year or two ago with one of the towns in northern England and something like 20% of the men in the town who identified as being of Pakistani origin in the census had been convicted. It was astounding. It is simply not true to say that it is "roughly in proportion" although it may be patchy.
It also suggested to me that this was a cultural thing. These men regard these girls as white trash. Where that mindset is predominant many can get swept along into things that they would never have conceived of and many more turn their heads and pretend not to see. We need to address this. And of course the non Asian gangs such as were convicted today.
Exactly, it's not either or. People act like recognising there has been a disproportion in some areas means there won't be focus on others. I should think we all agree that would be absurd.
Agreed. Among many aspects of these cases, one which particularly rankles with many is not specifically the ethnicity of the perpetrators - but that the abuse was explicitly overlooked BECAUSE OF the ethnicity of the perpetrators, in order to not be racist.
Quite: and when a group (or individual for that matter) finds the can act with impunity, then their behaviour will inevitably worsen.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
Something between 5-10% of all the Pakistani Muslim men in Rotherham, aged 18-65, have been charged with rape, abuse, torture etc in the recent trials and arrests. These are the ones police have enough evidence to prosecute
Does that not seem a striking statistic to you?
I think that stat is wrong
@CDP1882 18/ When it came to Pakistanis, rates of prosecution across England and Wales for this kind of abuse was 1 in 1,700.
In Rochdale, 1 in 280 Muslim males over 16 were prosecuted.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Does anyone seriously dispute that most child sex abuse in the U.K. is by whites? Simply by the majority population. But there has been a particular type of crime associated with groups of largely Pakistani origin men. I note that the current case is very different to those cases, being much more family based.
I don’t get why some people find it difficult to accept that there has been, and probably still is, an issue with a minority of Pakistani men. Saying doesn’t mean diminish in any way the horror of all other sexual abuse.
Because if you link rape to Pakistani men the 99.9% of Pakistani men who would never commit a rape are offended. It tars the innocent with the same brush and it is therefore grossly offensive.
I heard something on the radio about a fraudster in Ireland who was called 'Israel' and it was assumed he was Jewish. They had the head of the Jewish community in Ireland saying how offensive such a trope was. And that was a single fraudster. Well the villification of Pakistani Muslim men goes way beyond that
What are you talking about. So far as I am aware people having merely being pointing out a fact, that various grooming gangs have been exclusively (or almost) made up of Pakistani men. Is it wrong to say that?
I ignore Roger on anything to do with rape, he has defended polanksi and tried to imply Lpeople are judging after the rape in scotland got only a 7 week community service penalty. Roger thinks women get what they deserve from what I can see
He’s also said that young women working in the film industry should accept being sexually abused as it’s part of paying their dues.
As anyone who has ever mislaid the glasses they still have on their head, or misplaced the keys they set down seconds ago, could already attest.
The human brain seems to have an amazing ability to decide what should be the case, and forget or ignore evidence to the contrary and just make stuff up confidently instead.
In which case our nascent attempts at AI appear to be replicating the human condition pretty well.
I spend around 20% of my free time these days looking for my glasses.
Actually, that's no longer true, because my wife has instigated THE GLASSES BOWL where any glasses not being used are to be kept, and any glasses found not in THE GLASSES BOWL are kept. And lo, the forgetful and longsighted members of our family (self and middle daughter) always have a first place to look. It doesn't always work. But I reckon it's saved me over an hour a week in looking for glasses. It is also a good use for an attractive fruit bowl which we were given but which has never found a use because we already had a fruit bowl. (Not that the actual fruit bowl contains fruit; it contains *pauses to inspect* a bunch of wires, chargers, headphones, batteries, an unused remote control, a pencil and a small squeezy bear. But there is a melon sitting next to it.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
Something between 5-10% of all the Pakistani Muslim men in Rotherham, aged 18-65, have been charged with rape, abuse, torture etc in the recent trials and arrests. These are the ones police have enough evidence to prosecute
Does that not seem a striking statistic to you?
I think that stat is wrong
@CDP1882 18/ When it came to Pakistanis, rates of prosecution across England and Wales for this kind of abuse was 1 in 1,700.
In Rochdale, 1 in 280 Muslim males over 16 were prosecuted.
The Walsall child sex abuse case is grotesque. It sounds like abuse within families over multiple generations. Like something from darkest Appalachia
It shows the crassness of trying to link rape cases to ethnicity as Sunak and Braverman did yesterday backed up today by a really vile article by Alison Pearson in the Telegraph
Doesn't it show the precise opposite? In a country which is 85% white you'd expect most criminals to also be white.
No one is trying to pretend that all grooming gangs are of Pakistani origin. That would be ridiculous. What they are saying is that they are grossly disproportionate to their share of the population. Which they very clearly are. Particularly in certain towns where there has clearly been a deeply poisonous culture which somehow made this ok.
Suella Braverman does pretend precisely this and she's the Home Secretary.
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
I don't accept your assertion (other than the Home Secretary being a moron and completely unfit for her job, of course). I remember doing an analysis a year or two ago with one of the towns in northern England and something like 20% of the men in the town who identified as being of Pakistani origin in the census had been convicted. It was astounding. It is simply not true to say that it is "roughly in proportion" although it may be patchy.
It also suggested to me that this was a cultural thing. These men regard these girls as white trash. Where that mindset is predominant many can get swept along into things that they would never have conceived of and many more turn their heads and pretend not to see. We need to address this. And of course the non Asian gangs such as were convicted today.
We contacted the CPS who provided us with the information they publish on defendants in child sex abuse cases. 98% of defendants were male in 2015/16, but no information about the ethnicity of the defendants was published. We then submitted a freedom of information request to the CPS asking for information on the ethnicity of defendants prosecuted in child sex abuse cases.
It provided us with data on the number of defendants prosecuted for sex offences in cases flagged as relating to child abuse in 2015/16. It also included the ethnicity of those defendants.
Of the 6,200 or so defendants in these prosecutions, 67% were white, 4% were Asian, 3% were black, 1% were mixed race and 1% were other. For 24% of defendant’s there was no information on their ethnicity. Of all these prosecutions, around three quarters resulted in a conviction.
It then explained the data has errors, and it is also a bit old but at least it's collected in a systematic way unlike data for grooming, which is extremely partial.
I had it for lunch. The Elsinore one with red onions. Very nice, but sadly the end of the jar.
Any recommendations for easily available rollmops in the English suburbs?
I had my first ever rollmops at the Ceilidh Place, Ullapool, during the 1992 Olympics. They were superb. But the rollmops I've had since have been inconsistent. I'm sometimes tempted to buy supermarket rollmops and they're almost always almost unbearably sour. I'm still a fan in principle, but I'm disappointed far more often than not. If anyone is able to recommend any sources of good, sweet, not hopelessly acidic rollmops I'd be very interested.
Sainsbury's stock Silver Sea herrings, the green label ones have dill and a sweeter cure than others from a blue labelled container.
I don't think they've changed much. The ones that are missing are 'don't dox' and 'don't drop c-bombs' (which is a real challenge for me when I'm talking about the DfE, I might add).
Well that’s me officially retired then. Toodlepip.
Scott Benton Andrew Bridgen Nicholas Brown Jeremy Corbyn Neil Coyle Jonathan Edwards Margaret Ferrier Matt Hancock Julian Knight Conor McGinn Christopher Pincher Christina Rees Bob Roberts David Warburton Claudia Webb
Couldn't even remember why most of this troupe of worthies ended up that way.
We've got those suspected of assault or sexual harrassment, those convicted or found guilty of harrassment and covid breaches, the terminally stubborn, the terminally stupid or racist, and those provisionally suspended just in case whilst being investigated.
Hacock's reason for suspension is tame by comparison.
Got as high as 31 Indies in the 2017 parliament due to the Boris suspensions, otherwise 16 was its height. Never got past 5 in the previous one. Worse MPs, or better detection?
I still remember being introduced to Cyril Smith when I was aged 10ish. Although it was a meeting in public (on the market) he gave me the absolute creeps and I remember stepping back behind my nan.
The authorities did nothing about him because he had mates in high places. They do nothing about most reports of abuse because so often the victims are institutionally not trusted and make poor witnesses. And with a few of these gangs we add in the "1 in 73 makes us look racist" angle
We can't dismiss that some gangs got away with it because of racism worries. But we can't dismiss all abusers as this one ethnic group or that abusers get away with it because do-gooder leftie officials let them. Well we can if we're happy to let the abuse scandals keep happening.
Comments
The Rotunda museum (a little to the south of the main drag and big hotels) is a little treasure BTW - spiral display of the local geological strata in the round building from 200 years and William Smith times, more or less. And other coastal heritage as they put it.
https://scarboroughmuseumsandgalleries.org.uk/visit/rotunda-museum/
Herbert Hoover too.
As this was published recently, I might as well link to it:
https://plantatlas2020.org/atlas/2cd4p9h.5fd
Nixon was primarily a shit.
The evidence is all there already in the public domain. Sturgeons sudden resignation. Murrell’s sudden resignation. All the many unanswered questions over years
I suppose it might end up bad for the coppers as well but this will always be a nightmare for the SNP
He should phone his mother, or find a friend to talk to.
Bonus marks for the tyre rebound.
Witnessed and recorded the most INSANE car crash yesterday, you can see Autopilot also swerve and avoid the rogue tire for me..
https://mobile.twitter.com/Anoop_Khatra/status/1639460487166586881
Saying there have been Pakistani grooming gangs is not racism, it is stating fact.
What is racism is what the Indian heritage home secretary is doing by trying to associate ALL of these gangs with Pakistani heritage men. By ONLY wanting to associate Pakistani heritage men with these crimes. And yet today we have had another gang jailed - all white, many female. Why did they get away with it for so long? Because the authorities didn't want to know.
Back when Rochdale kids were being terrorised by Cyril Smith and not by Pakistani heritage men, the same authorities did the exact same thing - disbelieve the victims, ignore the evidence, sweep it under the carpet.
We need to resource up and empower the police and social services to actually give a shit, to investigate not ignore, regardless of what the excuse is. Race, poverty, class - does it matter why they chose not to act? We just want them to act. By trying to pin this all one Pakistani heritage men - and thus the blame on lefty woke PC types, we open the door to more Savilles and Smiths and this gang just jailed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65193097
Why did you sign up with a very similar username?
Very odd.
"Rejoin on his own terms" would be to create @CorrectHorseBattery4.
Not masquerade as a Larry Grayson impersonation of Horse saying the exact opposite of what Horse says and thinks and believes.
I read a highly plausible explanation that said this is standard when cops believe fraud has taken place - including the destruction of documents and evidence. The tent is a neutral place they can cleanly isolate what evidence they DO find
I just don’t believe Scottish police would put on a special theatre to punish the SNP. Why? What for? They will play it absolutely by the book knowing how politically explosive it is. They have to be seen as scrupulously neutral
We can hopefully look forward to the revival of CHB, CHB2 or CHB3 or a regeneration to CHB4.
: "Dominion can force Fox Corporation executives Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch to testify on the witness stand at this month’s scheduled defamation trial, a Delaware judge said Wednesday."
https://mobile.twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1643684771044663296
The worldwide popcorn industry having a bumper year so far.
On the subject of orchids I was quite surprised at how fragrant the Fragrant Orchid actually is. Worth checking out if you find some flower spikes though it does involve a certain amount of undignified crouching to get near enough.
And it was so small.
The sock puppet too...
The site owners **really** don't like people using the word.
That is all.
I am Horse_B as Horse and Horse_A were both taken, I am sorry I don't have anything to do with CorrectHorseBattery beyond seeing him whilst I was lurking for some years. He was a good poster but clearly brainwashed by the left wing cult.
https://twitter.com/ballotboxscot/status/1643711813811331073?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
All child abusers are evil. However, the British-Pakistani groups deliberately targeted girls outside their group (it gets forgotten they also raped Sikh girls). So, for want of a better phrase, there was a hate crime element going on.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/1895932#Comment_1895932
I don't think they've changed much. The ones that are missing are 'don't dox' and 'don't drop c-bombs' (which is a real challenge for me when I'm talking about the DfE, I might add).
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11928629/SUELLA-BRAVERMAN-mission-ensure-really-no-hiding-place-gangs-grooming-young-girls.html
In terms of sexual crimes against children generally, Asian perpetrators seem to be roughly in proportion to their population. There could be a particular propensity to grooming but the data isn't very good.
Does that not seem a striking statistic to you?
In @monthly, Will Norris reveals something the press missed about Biden’s big spending bills: they target far larger %s of funding to local government than any federal legislation in generations. The political and policy implications are enormous. /1
https://mobile.twitter.com/glastris/status/1643679989450121230
Night all.
@CDP1882
18/ When it came to Pakistanis, rates of prosecution across England and Wales for this kind of abuse was 1 in 1,700.
In Rochdale, 1 in 280 Muslim males over 16 were prosecuted.
In Telford, it was 1 in 126.
In Rotherham, 1 in 73.
https://twitter.com/CDP1882/status/1642900355682820097
It also suggested to me that this was a cultural thing. These men regard these girls as white trash. Where that mindset is predominant many can get swept along into things that they would never have conceived of and many more turn their heads and pretend not to see. We need to address this. And of course the non Asian gangs such as were convicted today.
I saw that stat in an unherd article. I’ll try and unearth the unherd
But you know what? - even 1 in 73 is deeply disturbing
“They couldn’t hit an elephant at this dist-“
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/apr/05/short-term-memory-illusions-study
At the time I thought the writer was on drugs. Or it was a parody. Now I realise he was stating the plain truth
It has since been vehemently scrubbed from the internet
I had my first ever rollmops at the Ceilidh Place, Ullapool, during the 1992 Olympics. They were superb. But the rollmops I've had since have been inconsistent. I'm sometimes tempted to buy supermarket rollmops and they're almost always almost unbearably sour. I'm still a fan in principle, but I'm disappointed far more often than not.
If anyone is able to recommend any sources of good, sweet, not hopelessly acidic rollmops I'd be very interested.
The human brain seems to have an amazing ability to decide what should be the case, and forget or ignore evidence to the contrary and just make stuff up confidently instead.
In which case our nascent attempts at AI appear to be replicating the human condition pretty well.
Among many aspects of these cases, one which particularly rankles with many is not specifically the ethnicity of the perpetrators - but that the abuse was explicitly overlooked BECAUSE OF the ethnicity of the perpetrators, in order to not be racist.
Benton whip less.
And the majority of child abuse - which isn't these gangs - gets away because nobody believes it. Braverman said what she said because the "predatory Pakistanis" line has been swallowed by some Tory voters, and she can package this with attacking leftie social workers ignoring it because of PC.
Which ensures that more children will be abused. Political point scoring where the victims - children - do not matter. The latest convicted gang was white and many female. Not Pakistani heritage men despite the shrieking of Braverman.
We need to have police who aren't under-resourced and riddled with out-dated approaches to the poor / women / minorities. And we need social services with actual staff which means funding them . Braverman is in the government partly responsible for the mess, so best to point the finger at this other group instead.
Basically, Russia is running out of ammo. Ukraine is struggling too but the efforts of the west make this more a short term problem. Russia really cannot fight a war without overwhelming artillery. it's what they do.
Actually, that's no longer true, because my wife has instigated THE GLASSES BOWL where any glasses not being used are to be kept, and any glasses found not in THE GLASSES BOWL are kept. And lo, the forgetful and longsighted members of our family (self and middle daughter) always have a first place to look.
It doesn't always work. But I reckon it's saved me over an hour a week in looking for glasses.
It is also a good use for an attractive fruit bowl which we were given but which has never found a use because we already had a fruit bowl. (Not that the actual fruit bowl contains fruit; it contains *pauses to inspect* a bunch of wires, chargers, headphones, batteries, an unused remote control, a pencil and a small squeezy bear. But there is a melon sitting next to it.
Just written a cheque for the milkman. Proof that both cheques and milkmen are still around in some parts.
It provided us with data on the number of defendants prosecuted for sex offences in cases flagged as relating to child abuse in 2015/16. It also included the ethnicity of those defendants.
Of the 6,200 or so defendants in these prosecutions, 67% were white, 4% were Asian, 3% were black, 1% were mixed race and 1% were other. For 24% of defendant’s there was no information on their ethnicity. Of all these prosecutions, around three quarters resulted in a conviction.
It then explained the data has errors, and it is also a bit old but at least it's collected in a systematic way unlike data for grooming, which is extremely partial.
https://fullfact.org/crime/what-do-we-know-about-ethnicity-people-involved-sexual-offences-against-children/
Scott Benton
Andrew Bridgen
Nicholas Brown
Jeremy Corbyn
Neil Coyle
Jonathan Edwards
Margaret Ferrier
Matt Hancock
Julian Knight
Conor McGinn
Christopher Pincher
Christina Rees
Bob Roberts
David Warburton
Claudia Webb
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MPs_elected_in_the_2019_United_Kingdom_general_election
Couldn't even remember why most of this troupe of worthies ended up that way.
We've got those suspected of assault or sexual harrassment, those convicted or found guilty of harrassment and covid breaches, the terminally stubborn, the terminally stupid or racist, and those provisionally suspended just in case whilst being investigated.
Hacock's reason for suspension is tame by comparison.
Got as high as 31 Indies in the 2017 parliament due to the Boris suspensions, otherwise 16 was its height. Never got past 5 in the previous one. Worse MPs, or better detection?
The authorities did nothing about him because he had mates in high places. They do nothing about most reports of abuse because so often the victims are institutionally not trusted and make poor witnesses. And with a few of these gangs we add in the "1 in 73 makes us look racist" angle
We can't dismiss that some gangs got away with it because of racism worries. But we can't dismiss all abusers as this one ethnic group or that abusers get away with it because do-gooder leftie officials let them. Well we can if we're happy to let the abuse scandals keep happening.