A new book by Ayaan Hirsi Ali on sexual violence in Europe

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has a new book, her fifth, and the fourth to have a one-word title (the others are The Caged Virgin, Nomad, Infidel, and Heretic, and I’ve read all but the first). The last one, Heretic, was subtitled Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now, and was her manifesto not to destroy Islam (which many think is her agenda), but to reform it from within. I wrote about it previously, and thought that while the motivation was good, Muslims would never accept Hirsi Ali’s five suggestions for reforming the faith (example: “Muslims must not take the Qur’an literally”).

If Islam is to be defanged, making the extremist and violence-prone segments go away, it not only has to be from within, but there’s no good program for doing it—even from Hirsi Ali, who spent much of her life as an ardent believer.

And if the last book diminished Hirsi Ali’s reputation as an “Islamophobic” (it didn’t—the SPLC pronounced her, along with Maajid Nawaz, “an anti-Muslim activist” and then withdrew that characterization when sued by Nawaz), this book will restore it. For it’s about those immigrants—many of them Muslim—who commit sexual violence on and harassment of women in Europe. Click on the screenshot to go to the Amazon site, or see the HarperCollins publisher’s description here.

The sexual violence committed by immigrants to Europe, and its higher frequency among male Muslim immigrants, is an issue that, it seems, most European countries would rather keep under wraps, because it looks “Islamophobic” to both highlight it and, especially, to connect it with the misogyny endemic in much of Islam.  “Grooming gangs” of young Muslims are reported on in the British press, but the ethnic/religious connection has stalled both investigations of the crimes as well as their highlighting by journalists. Of course there are many rapists and harassers who aren’t Muslims, or are non-Muslims from East Asia, but it’s ridiculous to avoid discussing how religion (which is largely equivalent to “culture” for many Muslims) might feed into sexual violence. How can you deal with such crimes without understanding their source? But then, of course, there’s the hard problem of “what do we do with this understanding?”  That’s above my pay grade.

These are the issues that Hirsi Ali apparently deals with in Prey. Here’s HarperCollins‘s summary of the book, which I’ve excerpted (their emphasis):

Why are so few people talking about the eruption of sexual violence and harassment in Europe’s cities? Because almost no one in a position of power wants to admit that the problem is linked to the arrival of several million migrants—most of them young men—from Muslim-majority countries.

In Prey, the best-selling author of Infidel, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, presents startling statistics, criminal cases and personal testimony. She shows that, after a period when sexual violence in western Europe barely increased, after 2014 it surged. In Germany “offences against sexual self-determination” in 2018 were 36% above their 2014 level. Nearly two-fifths of the suspects were non-German. Asylum seekers were suspects in 11% of all reported rapes and sexual harassment cases in Austria in 2017, despite making up less than 1% of the total population.

This violence isn’t a figment of alt-right propaganda, Hirsi Ali insists, even if neo-Nazis exaggerate it. It’s a real problem that Europe—and the world—cannot continue to ignore.

Hirsi Ali explains why so many young Muslim men who arrive in Europe engage in sexual harassment and violence. She traces the roots of sexual violence in the Muslim world, from institutionalized polygamy to the lack of legal and religious protections for women.

A refugee herself, Hirsi Ali is not against immigration. . . Deeply researched and featuring fresh and often shocking revelations, Prey uncovers a sexual assault and harassment crisis in Europe which is turning the clock on women’s rights much further back than #MeToo has advanced it.

I’ll read it, as I’ve read most of her books, but be aware that this book is going to be excoriated for simply highlighting the problem, which everyone recognizes is a problem.  It’s ironic that the publisher mentions #MeToo here, for that underscores the double standards of liberal societies when dealing with feminism and Islam. Islamic doctrine is explicitly anti-feminist, and, in the thesis of this book, has devalued women to the extent that it leads to both sexual harassment and rape, just as it leads to the oppression of women in most Muslim counties. So we have a clash of underdogs—underdogs whose defense is a classic virtue of liberalism. In this case it’s Islam versus feminism. In America, the UK, and the rest of Europe, the Left seems to have decided that, as “people of color”, Muslims are more oppressed than women, and so, as Hirsi Ali insists, this has exacerbated the oppression of women in the West.

I’ll report on the book after I’ve read it.

h/t Enrico

52 Comments

  1. Posted April 4, 2020 at 10:59 am | Permalink

    It seems to me that the problem of Muslim sexual violence towards women tracks back to ourselves in a most curious way. I am old enough to remember the years of condescension and sexual pressure put upon women sixty and seventy years ago. But then an astonishing change starting in the Sixties, where men in The West developed a new-found respect for women. It has accelerated through the last decade or two. It is we, in the West, who have changed, leaving the world of Islam far behind.
    My former television studio had a project of getting women into television. At one time I had twenty six women (half of them gay-gals) working in my studios as trainees or interns. I had the privilege of becoming quite modern (for an older guy), full of admiration of the obvious intellect and determination of young women thirty years younger than myself, and I still thrill to see their faces on mainstream television.

    • Michael Waterhouse
      Posted April 4, 2020 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

      So how does the problem of sexual violence track back to us?

      There was no time in Australia that compared to Islams treatment of women.

      I was there as a young guy as feminism swept Australia and was part of seeing women, in a way, come into their own.

      I lucky enough was part of a large dynamic group of young people, many being University students, who congregated at a particular household we a wonderful older women held council.

      I became acutely aware of the issues feminism was raising, as this women embraced and promoted feminism. I saw many women come there as consciousnesses raising groups of women would gather at different houses.

      I became a proud feminist, until the betrayal of the absurdities of current feminism happened.

      But, the point is, I saw and participated in active feminism in Australia and I do not remember the oppression and grievances being discussed had any resemblance to Islamic oppression and especially sexual violence.

      There were many issues. I even remember a short story in a feminist publication about raising boys and girls as X, to try break the bounds of conditioning, which was a big topic.
      That was early seventies and it turns out conditioning isn’t the big bogie it was thought to be, but X is coming into its own now.

      Islam is its own unique problem. It needs to be addressed in terms of that understanding.

  2. Posted April 4, 2020 at 11:07 am | Permalink

    “it’s ridiculous to stifle discussion of how religion (which is largely equivalent to “culture” for many Muslims) might feed into sexual violence.”

    In Woke ideology it is utter heresy to suggest that the culture of a non-white person might be in any way sub-optimal.

    (It is of course fine to denigrate and deride white culture.)

    • Deodand
      Posted April 4, 2020 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

      It’s actually worse than that, the woke believe that ‘Whitey and the Jew’ have no culture, but that they stole from the ‘peoples of color’…

      After all as ‘everyone knows’ Beethoven was a negro…

      So was Queen Victoria!

    • Posted April 7, 2020 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

      Has woke people spoken about feminism vs FGM (female circumcision)?

  3. GBJames
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    sub

  4. Debra Coplan
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 11:42 am | Permalink

    I’m very happy to see this post and happy you are promoting this book.
    The confusion from people on the left can be astounding. I had one woman tell me how wonderful it was to see women wearing hijabs at the women’s march. When I expressed my utter outrage, her response was, “There’s all kinds of feminism.”
    Since when do feminists accept the idea to bear the responsibility of dressing modestly so as to not excite men?

    • Michael Waterhouse
      Posted April 4, 2020 at 9:44 pm | Permalink

      I wrote a little bit up top here where I mention my involvement with feminism int 70’s in Australia.

      My recollection is that it it was up to men, via consciousness raising if necessary to step up and do the right thing.

      The exact opposite of that kind of feminism.

      It is ridiculous and absurd and a betrayal.

  5. Eric Grobler
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 11:56 am | Permalink

    “The sexual violence committed by immigrants to Europe, and its higher frequency among male Muslim immigrants, is an issue that most European countries would rather keep under wraps”

    Depressing.

    Also depressing is that sexual violence by black men in South Africa (nominally Christian) seems to be as high as anywhere in the Muslim World.

  6. rickflick
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    I know I should read it. I want to read it. But, I think it would be too depressing.
    The question is, what can be done about such violence. Lot’s of counseling? Deconvert them all?

    • Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

      The only solution I see is to replace oppressive and theistic values with liberal humanistic values. But I have no idea how this could be done.

      • rickflick
        Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

        Probably it won’t happen in the short term.

      • Eric Grobler
        Posted April 4, 2020 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

        “But I have no idea how this could be done.”

        Humanist values are for sissies, no traction with the deplorables.

        We need to create a new oppressive religion:
        * harm animals –> hell
        * harm women or children –> hell
        * procreate –> hell

        • JezGrove
          Posted April 4, 2020 at 7:04 pm | Permalink

          I’m the first to admit that my own attempts at humour very frequently fail, but I’m not knowingly unappreciative of others’ efforts. That said, I genuinely don’t know what you’re trying to say here.

          • Eric Grobler
            Posted April 4, 2020 at 8:49 pm | Permalink

            “I genuinely don’t know what you’re trying to say here.”

            Apologies, I was trying to hide my pessimism of humanity.

            Many years ago Dawkins was interviewed on Radio, and a caller asked him:
            “If there is no God, what stops me from raping my neighbors wife?”
            Dawkins understandably was shocked by the caller’s mindset.

            After the call I kept on thinking: What if some people’s violent impulses are moderated by their fear of God.

            I think there are a significant number of individuals who are inherently violent (many with a low IQ), I am not sure humanist philosophy is as effective as the fear of God.

            • chrism
              Posted April 5, 2020 at 6:33 am | Permalink

              I thought you were re-creating The Shakers with that last clause. Not a long-lived creed.

              • Eric Grobler
                Posted April 5, 2020 at 10:13 am | Permalink

                “The Shakers …”

                Yes, arguing that religion is an evolutionary adaption using the Shakers as an example is a challenge!

            • JezGrove
              Posted April 5, 2020 at 6:06 pm | Permalink

              Thanks, Eric – I see what you meant now. And some religionists really don’t get the idea of ethical behaviour without the threat of divine punishment. In An Atheist’s Values, Richard Robinson recalls a conversation with a Catholic priest who said something like “I don’t understand you atheists. If I didn’t believe in God I’d be having a high old time!” (I just tried looking up the book on Amazon to see if I could peek inside to check my recollection of that quote. Apparently, a new paperback edition costs £1,599.97 and a used copy £40! Good grief!)

    • sted24
      Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

      Rather remarkably (for the Guardian) back in 2016 it produced a short video:

      “NORWAY MUSLIM IMMIGRANTS ATTEND CLASSES ON WESTERN ATTITUDES TO WOMEN
      Every asylum seeker in Norway must attend classes on female rights and respect for women. The lessons were made compulsory after a string of sex attacks by immigrants in the western city of Stavanger.”

      ‘Remarkable’ in a couple of ways:
      1. The Instructor insists the classes are absolutely necssary.
      2. Doubts are expressed as to whether they will make any difference.

      It is well worth a watch (11 min).

      http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2016/aug/01/norway-muslim-immigrants-classes-western-attitudes-women-video

      • rickflick
        Posted April 4, 2020 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

        Looks like it might take another generation for a good level of assimilation. I would not be surprised if some of these immigrants, 10 or 20 years from now might return to a stabilized homeland, while their children and grandchildren remain in Norway.

    • Eric Grobler
      Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

      Stopping the influx of refugees while also stealing all the qualified people from the third world would be a good start.

      The focus should be to improve the economies of the Third World by intelligent policies like Microfinancing, putting birth control back on the agenda, fair trade deals etc.

      I think globalization did far more harm than good.

      • rickflick
        Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

        Good points.

      • EdwardM
        Posted April 4, 2020 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

        Those are all tactical approaches to the problem, of dubious value it must be said. But the problem of the oppression of women in the Muslim world is far more complex than a handful of economic policies can address. Strategically, there needs to be an underlying shift in the way people think. Like Dr PCC, I have no clue how to do it but George Rumen’s most excellent comment (#1 above) shows that it can be done. We in the West have successfully overcome the thinking that for millennia have oppressed women. The real world effects are not complete and it hasn’t been a smooth ride, but it is ludicrous to deny that the way we think in the West hasn’t changed for the better. As Mr Rumen said above, it only recently happened here; we are not so far removed from the Muslim world. There is, as has been pointed out at WEIT many time, a direct connection between the West’s growing secularism and the change in the way we think about women, race, and the environment.

        How something similar in the Muslim world is achieved on the ground (so to speak), I simply don’t know but it is my opinion that before it can, first adherence to Koranic morality must be abandoned. Without that I think it will be a hard and very long road.

        • rickflick
          Posted April 4, 2020 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

          It may have taken 100 years for the West to become more egalitarian, but for the immigrants, I don’t think they can be given that much time. Tough problem.

        • Eric Grobler
          Posted April 4, 2020 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

          “But the problem of the oppression of women in the Muslim world is far more complex than a handful of economic policies can address.”

          Valid point, however I think the plight of women in many non-muslim parts of Africa is as bad or even worse.

        • Michael Waterhouse
          Posted April 4, 2020 at 9:48 pm | Permalink

          I think Mr Rumen is wrong.

      • Curtis
        Posted April 4, 2020 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

        Globalization has been wonderful for the people in the poorest countries.
        “The World Bank has just released its latest numbers, and according to them, the proportion of the world population in extreme poverty, i.e. who consume less than $1.90 a day, adjusted for local prices, declined from 36 percent in 1990 to 10 percent in 2015”
        https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/408546-globalizations-greatest-triumph-the-death-of-extreme-poverty

        I could make a strong argument for it hurting western countries but that is a different story.

        • Eric Grobler
          Posted April 4, 2020 at 9:47 pm | Permalink

          That is a good counter argument, but I am a bit skeptical about how one measures poverty.

          I think over population, social violence, pollution is not taken into account, as well as the fact that hunter gatherers survived for thousands of years on 0 dollars a day 🙂

          It is true that countries especially in the East like China, S Korea, Vietnam, India etc have lifted millions out of poverty.
          However, I am not sure how sustainable these gains are and many countries in Africa, Central and South America, Balkans in Europe appear to be struggling.

          The population in Africa is exploding, just browse Lagos in Google Streetview to see how unsustainable the situation in Nigeria is.

          This is a very complicated subject and god knows what the effect of COVID-19 will be.

  7. Peter
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    How are Muslims underdogs? Okay, there’s the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, and there Palestinians are in a position of weakness (and the religious right in Israel does not seem to want a 2-state solution. Yes, I realize Hamas are bad guys too.). Then there are the sanctions against Iran. Why does Iran need nuclear weapons? Beats me.
    Where else are Muslims underdogs. Don’t Muslim oppress non-Muslims about as often as the other way around? Muslims have a hard time in India these days, seemingly, and in China. But how do religious minorities fare in Pakistan? How in Indonesia?
    I get it that Muslims often face discrimination in countries like US, France, Germany, etc. But what about ethnic minorities in Muslim countries?

  8. Roger Lambert
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

    Ok, I’m going to say it.

    Do you think the minimization of grooming gang rape because of fear of disturbing delicate religious sensibilities might, in some small way, be related to the minimization of rape because of fear of disturbing the delicate religious sensibilities of Catholics?

    • Eric Grobler
      Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

      “disturbing the delicate religious sensibilities of Catholics?”

      I do not follow you;
      the media often report on sexual abuse in the Catholic Church while doing their best to avoid the topic of Muslim grooming gangs.
      Who cares about Catholic sensibilities?

      • Saul Sorrell-Till
        Posted April 4, 2020 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

        They report on Catholic sexual abuse now. But the media spent decades not reporting on it.

  9. Posted April 4, 2020 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    I did not get it at first, but I think what Roger is bringing up is the relative silence and downplaying of Catholic priest sexual abuses from the more conservative half. Easy to find open reportage from mainstream media and from the left. But not from the right.

  10. Charles A Sawicki
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

    Most Muslims don’t go around raping women, but the idea that true believers in Islam aren’t told (in their holy books) that raping non-Muslim women is ok is a total joke.
    Both in the Quran (Allah) and the sahih hadith (Mohammad) approves the raping of captured nonbelieving women. At least the imaginary Jesus didn’t push this kind of crap.
    Possessions of the right hand are captured unbelieving women kept as sex slaves. Allah Oks raping them in Quran 33:50 and other passages.
    The trusted or sahih hadith contain many nasty passages related to women. The worst of course, apply to unbelievers. The must trusted hadith are Bukhari and Muslim. For example: In this verse Mohammad advise his followers how to rape captured women.
    Sahih hadith Bukhari 46:718 Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: We went with Allah’s Apostle, in the Ghazwa of Barli Al-Mustaliq and we captured some of the ‘Arabs as captives, and the long separation from our wives was pressing us hard and we wanted to practice coitus interruptus. We asked Allah’s Apostle (whether it was permissible). He said, “It is better for you not to do so. No soul, (that which Allah has) destined to exist, up to the Day of Resurrection, but will definitely come, into existence.”
    Another example: Sahih hadith Bukhari 93:506 Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: That during the battle with Bani Al-Mustaliq they (Muslims) captured some females and intended to have sexual relation with them without impregnating them. So they asked the Prophet about coitus interruptus. The Prophet said, “It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection.”

  11. Posted April 4, 2020 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    I have traveled and made film in Muslim countries, and have often been treated with great courtesy. But I think it is a mistake to think that the worlds’ billion Muslims are getting away with the abuse of women. They feel our disapproval most keenly, and swing back and forth from shame to bravado. Even the most remote Afghan farmer has heard that his daughters may become doctors.
    We may feel that we cannot wait for Islam to find the social behaviours of the twenty first century, but our condemnation of Muslim misogeny is the flail on their backs.

    • sted24
      Posted April 4, 2020 at 4:19 pm | Permalink

      I was much intrigued by your earlier post:

      “At one time I had twenty six women (half of them gay-gals) working in my studios as trainees or interns.”

      What recruitment policy, I wondered, produced such a skewed ratio, lesbians generally being considered to constitute less than 5% of the population?

      I visited your linked-to website where I couldn’t immediately find an answer. Indeed (forgive me if I am wrong) it seems to consist of a single post from 2013 where you announce that there is now a:

      “credible theory that enabled us to explain and understand much of human behaviour and belief…It is called Human Sub-Set Theory.”

      This you don’t explain nor does Google appear to have any knowledge of it.

      • Posted April 5, 2020 at 1:08 am | Permalink

        In answer to your query, I retired in 1994, before the Internet really got going. As to the high ratio of gay-gals, it is to be observed in the British media that about half the women who are attracted to it are gay or bi. The British Broadcasting Corporation is famously a home for so many able and intellectual gay women. It is no good playing the detective with me; having worked in Iraq, Bosnia, and other wars, I have taken pains to distance myself.My presnter was murdered in Croatia. In other news, Human Sub-Set Theory is an observation that the fundamental operating principle of all human activity is based, not on the individual, but upon Groups. (A complex subject) The various Groups are individuated by their fundamental asumptions upon the nature of reality… For example, religious people are united in the belief that we live in an Intentional world, and from that mistake, all the gods flow. By a study of the fundamental beliefs of each group you are able better to understand human belief and behaviour.

        • rickflick
          Posted April 5, 2020 at 11:41 am | Permalink

          “…human activity is based, not on the individual, but upon Groups.”

          That has to be true as humans organize themselves in groups quite naturally. There are so many dimensions to this – I just read about how history and geography determine much of how individuals in different societies think of themselves in relation to others. Whether individualism or collectivism prevails. Jared Diamond contributed to these notions.

  12. Jon Gallant
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

    As others have pointed out, changed attitudes toward women, and toward non-believers, toward minorities, and toward the modern world in general, will depend on cultural reform in the Muslim world. Nobody knows how this might happen, but we do have relevant data from the Roman Catholic world.

    Before the 1960s, both Quebec and Ireland were dominated by a priest-ridden, anti-enlightenment, and generally intolerant culture. Then, the Quebec regime of the aptly named Liberal Jean Lesage mostly removed public education from the grasp of the Church—and in a single generation everything changed in what they call la revolution tranquille. In the Irish
    Republic, state-supported second level
    education was announced in 1967 and
    then instituted. Somewhat more slowly, a
    similar quiet revolution has occurred there.
    The puzzling question is how an equivalent
    change might come about in the societies dominated by Islam.

  13. Joe
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think she “spent much of her life as an ardent believer”. She was a teenager in Nairobi when Saudi Arabia started sending Wahabist “missionaries” about, and she was much influenced by one of them, and started wearing the hijab over her school uniform.

    After high school and a year of secretarial school, she was married off to a Canadian (she says she did not attend the “ceremony”), sent to Germany (where an uncle was to supervise her), doffed the hijab (with great trepidation) and soon escaped to the Netherlands and sought asylum; she may have been 23. Seems like 7-10 years an ardent believer.

    It’s been awhile since I read her books, but I think this timeline is pretty accurate.

  14. Steve Pollard
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 4:13 pm | Permalink

    We will have to read her book to see how she deals with the UK, but in the main the ‘grooming gangs’ that Jerry refers to in his preamble are not recent immigrants but second- or even third-generation Brits.

    For years we have paid too little attention to the sources of the money that has gone into UK mosques, and to where their leaders come from. We have had an influx of hard-over Deobandi imams from Pakistan, funded by our ‘allies’ in Saudi Arabia, and we are now enjoying the results of their preaching. It has taken a couple of generations to create this disaffected sub-culture, and it will probably take another couple to re-educate it.

  15. JezGrove
    Posted April 4, 2020 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

    In the late 1980s I visited Sehwan Sharif in Pakistan. As a relatively rare Western tourist, I attracted attention and was guided around the local shrine [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrine_of_Lal_Shahbaz_Qalandar] by a clearly wealthy and well-connected young man. Afterwards, he insisted on introducing me to his former headmaster (whose supposed mastery of English proved somewhat embarrassing) and then on entertaining me at his house. He invited some friends, and illegal “whisky” was provided – the “Chinese rocket fuel” nickname back then for such drinks smuggled into supposedly alcohol-free Pakistan was definitely not a misnomer! My host then consulted his friends and said that it was too late to obtain the services of a young girl, but that a young boy could be available. As the tabloid journalists’ phrase in such circumstances goes, “I made my excuses and left”. But in later years, and especially in light of the scandals here in the UK involving men from that region of the world, I have wondered about the cultural values that I encountered that day and how widespread they might be. [For clarity, the very vast majority of people I met in Pakistan were generous to a fault. Funnily enough, in more than two months of travelling in the country I can’t actually recall meeting any women at all.]

  16. chrism
    Posted April 5, 2020 at 7:10 am | Permalink

    Since it hasn’t been mentioned, I’ll be brave. The last Home Secretary in the UK, Sajid Javid, started an enquiry into grooming gangs and promised the results would be released to the public. Now the Home Office has stated that ‘it is not in the public interest’ to publish the report, and the current Home Secretary, Priti Patel, is reported to have been trying to get her civil servants to release it while they do a complete ‘Yes, Minister’ on her , up to and including starting official complaints against her for ‘bullying’. The UK government has a site for petitions, and any petition with more than 10,000 signatures gets a government response. 31 days and no response. Any petition with over 100,000 signatures is considered for debate. This petition got over that withing 48 hours. I appreciate the UK government has other things on their mind, and that a delicate debate on such a matter would be ill-timed right now.
    The problem with not trusting the people to have the results is that it makes everyone imagine the worst. Is the report so explosive that it must be swept under the carpet? We already have publicly available figures, obtained from the number of convictions in Rotherham and in similar cases since that 84% of those convicted were what the press euphemistically calls ‘south Asian’ (in fact they are Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslim men). So if 84% of that cat is out of the bag, is the report going to say something so much worse that we cannot be allowed to hear it? Combine it with the climate that made social workers and police, fully aware of what was happening, decide to turn a blind eye (even an officially ordered blind eye in some cases) for fear of the R-word, and it rather makes one wonder. It’s a strange old world, where we watch idly as 19,000 young girls (some only 12) are raped, drugged and pimped – and we do nothing. Where we know these crimes are almost exclusively committed by a particular section of society – and we do nothing. Even if it is too hard to understand or correct the Pakistani Muslim connection, we could at least instruct police forces to investigate every hint of such abuse, “without fear or favour” as the Police Oath used to say, and to bloody well arrest and prosecute those caught – and yet, we still do nothing. The way this has been handled so far is disgraceful and police forces and government ministers should be ashamed at letting down those girls so badly, all in the name of avoiding discomfiting facts.

    • JezGrove
      Posted April 5, 2020 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

      I haven’t seen the Priti Patel bullying allegations linked to this issue before, nor heard the “19,000 young girls” figure. I’m by no means contradicting them, just wondering where you saw them.

      Alexis Jay’s findings on the Rotherham abuse scandal were hard-hitting, and painted a series of shocking failures by the local authority and the police over many years, including a reluctance on their part to acknowledge the heritage of the abusers for fear of being accused of racism. Jay’s findings were published in full (as have those from similar reports into grooming gangs in Oxford, Manchester, and other cities) and she has since been appointed as chair of the very wide-ranging Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA). I appreciate that the IICSA has been accused of being slow and overly bureaucratic, and that some survivor groups have withdrawn, but it has Statutory Inquiry powers (e.g. to call witnesses) and its reports will be published eventually.

      I don’t think that there is any doubt about the patterns of abuse and the prevalence of predominantly Pakistani, Bangladeshi, and Afghan men in the grooming gangs. (Other strands of the IICSA, such as into the Anglican and Roman Catholic churches, residential schools, and other institutional settings will doubtless point the finger at other groups of abusers.)

      So yes, we definitely need to see the report that Javid commissioned when he was Home Secretary (and doesn’t that seem a lifetime ago?), but I don’t think it will tell is anything that we don’t already know from other already published official reports.

      Meanwhile, we still haven’t seen the dossier on Russian interference in UK politics and elections, despite it having been cleared for publication by the intelligence agencies before the December UK election, so perhaps there is a more general problem with government transparency right now?

  17. Torbjörn Larsson
    Posted April 5, 2020 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

    Statistics on sexual crimes and violence is too weak to make any firm conclusions what I know of, IIRC it is believed that at most 1 % of crimes are reported.

    But research suggest most rape are within relationships, so Ali’s suggestions seems out of the blue. I’ve never heard of a statistic on “grooming gangs”, sounds like conspiracy theory.

    Not that there isn’t ethnically correlated crimes reported such as under-age marriages and genital mutilation. At low frequencies (but see above), but something we know to work on.

    • JezGrove
      Posted April 5, 2020 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

      In the UK, there have been several trials concerning grooming gangs which have resulted in convictions. Rotherham is perhaps the best known example, but there have been others e.g. in Oxford: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_child_sex_abuse_ring

    • chrism
      Posted April 5, 2020 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

      “I’ve never heard of a statistic on “grooming gangs”, sounds like conspiracy theory.”

      And yet we have the unassailable fact that 84% of grooming gang convictions are of Pakistani and Bangladeshi men (with a few Afghanis and Somalis).
      https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/child-groomer-study-by-quilliam-think-tank-finds-84-are-asian-0r3csrbmb

      Sadly, we have enough knowledge to classify child sexual exploitation of this kind into two subcategories:
      https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/what-do-we-know-about-the-ethnicity-of-sexual-abuse-gangs
      Type 1 – vulnerable girls, are the typical targets of grooming gangs, whilst type 2 – choosing girls because the offender prefers the young, is old-fashioned pædophilia. The former seems to be the kind of thing Ayaan Hirsi Ali refers to and quite disroportionate to the expected rate of offending (4.4% of the population, as of the 2011 census, commit 84% of these offenses), whilst the latter is mainly a white male problem, in line with their majority representation in the population.

      And as for the 19,000 number:
      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grooming-child-sex-abuse-exploitation-rotherham-rochdale-police-a9215261.html

      I hope the Sunday Times and the Independent are reputable enough. One expects some pushback on mentioning such unpalatable facts, even accusations of being racist. But facts are facts, and wishing it were not so doesn’t make them go away. It doesn’t even seem to be a fluke of the statistics, as the convicted men have indicated that their victims were fair game as they were not modestly dressed respectable Muslim girls. I don’t even begin to have an answer as to how one would address that attitude, but only ask that the police and the Crown Prosecution Service do their job regardless of the origin and faith of the suspects.

      • JezGrove
        Posted April 5, 2020 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

        Thanks for the source of the 19,000 figure, as per my comment below your original post at #16 above, chrism.

        The link to the Wikipedia article on the Oxford child sex abuse ring that I posted above in reply to comment #17 includes an Oxford imam’s explanation (and unequivocal denunciation) of why some Muslim men erroneously see non-Muslim girls as acceptable targets for sexual abuse.

      • Torbjörn Larsson
        Posted May 3, 2020 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

        There is nothing of statistics of “grooming gangs” there, just statistics on sexual abuse in a lump.

        But you make it sound racist.

    • JezGrove
      Posted April 5, 2020 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

      To address your more general point, yes cases involving grooming gangs attract a lot of attention because of the number of victims, their ages, and the organised and systematic nature of the abuse. But these incidents are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to rape more generally, which predominantly takes place either within relationships or in situations where the victim already knows the attacker.

      • Torbjörn Larsson
        Posted May 3, 2020 at 1:36 pm | Permalink

        If “grooming gangs” attract attention, there should be a definition and statistics. I can’t find either!


%d bloggers like this: