How do you determine what is a racist crime? This is an issue of power, of men in positions of power abusing their power over vulnerable people for self gratification. There is no inherent "racial" element.
Yes we know authorities are poor at challenging abuse, we know this from the priesthood, saville and the Bbc, Thatchers pedo ring still to be exposed. Is there a problem with the white community? Catholics? Tories?

No it isnt. Please read it again and educate yourself.
What Seymour missed in the otherwise excellent piece is the fact that most abuse occurs within the family and transcends all national or cultural boundaries. Obv elrazor you think people are drawn to fatherhood for abuse opportunities?

Exactly, because those articles would never be written. " we need to have an honest debate here about the celebrity community", cue head scratching from neanderthal sun reader searching for the muslim angle. Doesnt really work does it.

This is really disingenuous firstly the next sentence is kind of important

Secondly as an example of Seymour's hand waving you are ignoring that The Guardian in that quote links out to an actual article where he takes the argument from, it's not his it's from the CEOP.

From the linked article

Why are they wrong?

Yeah, he captures the problem in a nutshell when he says that we should be discussing culture, not race or religion.

I had an almost identical falling out with a colleague after work last week, when he made the same lame point about Muslims.

I'm afraid the cultural argument is just too sophisticated for the average Brit, who are more easily swayed by visible 'signifiers' such as religion and race (of course terrorist acts by Islamic extremists here only serve to confuse people more).

If there were no racist element, then they would also be abusing vulnerable girls from their own community. However, that doesn't appear to be the case, for example:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/...ictim-princess

What is the specific "cultural element" that is the common factor?

It may not appear to be the case to you but you dont actually know this. Doubtless the girl is accurate, this doesnt necessarily apply to every case in oxford, or every case generally. To describe these as "racist crimes" serves no purpose except to intensify suspicion of Asian men. The issue is networks of men using their positions and resources to groom and abuse, and the failure of authorities to address these rings. There are ofc wider failures in lack of opportunities in education/employment/community support which lead to vulnerability.

Jimmy Saville was a white man who wanted little white girls. Please explain how this is in any way different to what you are implying here.

if we are talking about causation, then I agree its society's failure to address lack of opportunities in education/employment/community support in poor areas that planted the seed. However, that does not excuse the actions of these men.

My view roughly coincides with communities secretary Sajid Javid's:



There is a strong suspicion of racial motivation, which correctly or incorrectly the media is perpetuating - John Humphrys repeatedly pressed this point in an interview this morning.

Where's the evidence she was sacked?

oh come on now

No, a sacking and her resigning isn't the same thing irrespective of whether she expected to be sacked or not. If you want to use this as a stick to beat Corbyn fine but then you become like those you criticise for taking positions based on feels not facts.

I guess you're one of those who thinks it's Islam. It isn't.

There are some cultural (not racial or religious) problems in some communities in parts of the UK with regressive attitudes to females. The reasons are not all clear, but poor education and a lack of integration prevent them from being tackled.

If you think it's down to Islam, ask yourself why these events don't happen in London's sizeable Turkish community.

I'm not sure that I buy that these crimes weren't investigated because of the race of the perpetrators, I think they weren't investigated because of the social status of the victims. However giving the police the benefit of the doubt, no one asked them to do that even the most crazy liberal snowflake surely puts raped children above potentially offending groups of people. No one is going to be upset that you've arrested some child rapists who happen to be pakistani or if they are they can be easily ignored as insane.

backing of an opportunist politician doesnt give your views more credibility.

Not sure what this refers to. I dont think anybody anywhere has argued this. Sounds like "you cant even celebrate xmas now cos muslims " type weirdness.

I think yes social status, vulnerability, lack of family support, not being believed etc. There is nothing special about these cases except a toxic media and political bandwagon putting race at the centre. Sarah Champion and her ilk are giving this left cover which is shameful, she was right to resign/be removed, dont care which.

Btw it is the people defending black asian and muslim people now who are the most vocal in condemning child abuse from eg. BBC and saville. More needs exposing.

Finally I think the race diversion serves a purpose of deflecting attention away from the actual commn themes in all abuse cases: carried out by men against women, boys and girls, and carried out mostly by immediate family members. Lets have an open honest debate abput that instead.

It was my understand that was claimed by the police. If not then lol me obviously.

Perhaps not, but I'd give more weight to the views of a cabinet minister of Pakistani and Muslim heritage than a random blogger.

A random blogger with two published books.

In any case you could actually take the arguments, hint Javid doesn't actually make one other than to accuse Corbyn of sacking Champion for which there's no evidence feels not facts right, where Seymour makes claims you should be able to address, honestly this time though please.

Cut and paste to the identity politics thread as it was questioned what this meant and what is wrong with it. Theres your answer right there.
Richard Seymour is a recognised author and journalist, he put forward a compelling well researched argument. Your Tory minister used the populist thinly veiled racist slur, "we need an honest and open debate about (insert minority group)". No competition really.

Please don't assume, I asked you an open question. It's hard to claim that regressive attitudes to women and lack of integration are uncorrelated with race or religion though.

The Seymour position appears to be that the evidence shows no correlation to Pakistanis but that's only because the data does not record that level of detail for most of the men. The data does show a correlation to Asians and it's stated in the article he linked. He's ignored this completely.

This is wrong. The point he is making is that there is no evidence to support the assertion that offenders are predominantly Pakistani because we don't have heritage data on the vast majority of those reported. As for the ignoring the correlation with British Asians this is the point he explicitly addresses in the already posted passage. You may think this is wrong but it's clearly not ignoring it completely.

So Jalfrezi said where are the rings of Turkish child abusers, I'll also ask where are the rings of white taxi driver child abusers.

Correlation is not direct causation, but that doesn't mean the correlation is coincidence. I'd actually be more troubled if his explanation is true, it implies that lots of men are prone to child abuse, and its just lack of opportunity stopping them.

He drew a conclusion from data where the key statistic was absent in most of the data points. Where there was a correlation he came up with a really weak explanation for it.

I really don't think we should demonize any group and do agree that this is cultural and there are things that contribute such as lack of integration, lower probability of whistle blowing, attitudes to women etc. It's blind to claim that those cultural things are not more prevalent in some communities than others.