Org Mobile Site
Thread: The Elephant in the room.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
I umderstand your position, they got trialed and sentenced. Looks good but only on the surface, the attitude towards women is in need of a serious overhaul in some communities. Sexual harrasment is a horrible thing, and rape is the worst of humiliations. It happens way too much and it are way too often men from a certain background.
I am not out for the muslims, just not looking away either.
I am fully in favour of more feminism, and I know it's urgently needed among immigrants. We also need to be better at handling sexual crimes.I umderstand your position, they got trialed and sentenced. Looks good but only on the surface, the attitude towards women is in need of a serious overhaul in some communities. Sexual harrasment is a horrible thing, and rape is the worst of humiliations. It happens way too much and it are way too often men from a certain background.
I am not out for the muslims, just not looking away either.
What I have a problem with in this thread is the nonsensical, completely unfounded and ridiculous accusation being made.
Originally Posted by InsaneApache:
There have been reports of this sort of behaviour for years. Nothing was done about it and it was swept under the carpet. A Labour MP raised concerns about the lack of action five years or more ago in the House of Commons.?
And again: the only source for the accusation is Ann Cryer's words, and they were recently uttered apparently.There have been reports of this sort of behaviour for years. Nothing was done about it and it was swept under the carpet. A Labour MP raised concerns about the lack of action five years or more ago in the House of Commons.?
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
I am fully in favour of more feminism, and I know it's urgently needed among immigrants. We also need to be better at handling sexual crimes.
What I have a problem with in this thread is the nonsensical, completely unfounded and ridiculous accusation being made.
Not unfounded it is your own police saying it. That's the rape part but the sad part is that women got kinda used to getting harrased, women dye their hair, don't wear skirts anymore. It's just racism. White women aren't the only victims, pregnant Marrocan women was attacked last week by 5 screwups because she was walking with a black, kicked the lights of her baby out. I think you mean well but don't really know what you are talking about.I am fully in favour of more feminism, and I know it's urgently needed among immigrants. We also need to be better at handling sexual crimes.
What I have a problem with in this thread is the nonsensical, completely unfounded and ridiculous accusation being made.
26 march, actually.
Originally Posted by Kralizec:
26 march, actually.
Congratulations it's a fact. My bad it was reported last week26 march, actually.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Not unfounded it is your own police saying it. That's the rape part but the sad part is that women got kinda used to getting harrased, women dye their hair, don't wear skirts anymore. It's just racism. White women aren't the only victims, pregnant Marrocan women was attacked last week by 5 screwups because she was walking with a black, kicked the lights of her baby out. I think you mean well but don't really know what you are talking about.
The accusation I referred to was not your misunderstanding of statistics and failure to read statements, but rather the one in the thread title.Not unfounded it is your own police saying it. That's the rape part but the sad part is that women got kinda used to getting harrased, women dye their hair, don't wear skirts anymore. It's just racism. White women aren't the only victims, pregnant Marrocan women was attacked last week by 5 screwups because she was walking with a black, kicked the lights of her baby out. I think you mean well but don't really know what you are talking about.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
Sadly, that Plymouth incident you refer to is the exception.
Find the statistic for number of people convicted of rape. Then compare that to the estimated number of rapes per year. The stats are horrible.
The only unusual thing about this case, is that someone were actually convicted. The majority of rapes are simply not reported. The majority of the rapes who are reported, end up being dropped. The majority of those who do end up in court doesn't get a conviction. That's the state of sexual crime.
That's what should be discussed, not crackpot theories from fascists.
We are talking about under-age rape by an organised ring of abusers - a very distinct type of rape which is much easier to detect and prosecute than your communal-garden rape which tends to happen within relationships and involve both parties being intoxicated.Sadly, that Plymouth incident you refer to is the exception.
Find the statistic for number of people convicted of rape. Then compare that to the estimated number of rapes per year. The stats are horrible.
The only unusual thing about this case, is that someone were actually convicted. The majority of rapes are simply not reported. The majority of the rapes who are reported, end up being dropped. The majority of those who do end up in court doesn't get a conviction. That's the state of sexual crime.
That's what should be discussed, not crackpot theories from fascists.
I've seen the statistics - I don't entirely buy into the standard interpretattion because they ignore that A: a proportion of rape reports will be malicious, and afterwards retracted or fall apart, and B: a proportion will be simply impossible to prove one way or the other, likely because the act was not itself clear cut. Added to that, unreported rapes are just that - unreported. If 1 in 4 or 1 in 3 women are "survivors" then at least 1 in 6 men much be rapists, and I frankly don't buy that.
Originally Posted by :
Trevor Phillips, the chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said the fact that the men convicted were Asian and their victims white could not be ignored.
He expressed concern that the men came from closed communities which may have turned a blind eye to what was happening - either out of fear or because the girls concerned were from a different community.
And he said it would be a national scandal if it turned out the authorities had failed to intervene to protect the children because of fears that it would lead to the "demonisation" of the Asian community.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-relevant.htmlTrevor Phillips, the chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said the fact that the men convicted were Asian and their victims white could not be ignored.
He expressed concern that the men came from closed communities which may have turned a blind eye to what was happening - either out of fear or because the girls concerned were from a different community.
And he said it would be a national scandal if it turned out the authorities had failed to intervene to protect the children because of fears that it would lead to the "demonisation" of the Asian community.
Originally Posted by InsaneApache:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-relevant.html
he might be right, but i really don't care about the racial element.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-relevant.html
what matters to me is that we are continueing to import, and incubate, cultures which appear to have a vastly higher proclivity to violent and socially divisive crime.
first principles: is the welfare and wellbeing of her majesty's subjects being advanced by this activity?
Originally Posted by Fragony:
I umderstand your position, they got trialed and sentenced. Looks good but only on the surface, the attitude towards women is in need of a serious overhaul in some communities. Sexual harrasment is a horrible thing, and rape is the worst of humiliations. It happens way too much and it are way too often men from a certain background.
I am not out for the muslims, just not looking away either.
You would probably do better by not going for the Muslim angle at all. It's not because they Muslims, it's because they've got backward traditions. Christian minorities are about as bad if coming from the same area, and Muslims from other areas aren't a problem. I umderstand your position, they got trialed and sentenced. Looks good but only on the surface, the attitude towards women is in need of a serious overhaul in some communities. Sexual harrasment is a horrible thing, and rape is the worst of humiliations. It happens way too much and it are way too often men from a certain background.
I am not out for the muslims, just not looking away either.
It's way more accurate and is harder to make a counter argument about.
Originally Posted by Ironside:
You would probably do better by not going for the Muslim angle at all. It's not because they Muslims, it's because they've got backward traditions. Christian minorities are about as bad if coming from the same area, and Muslims from other areas aren't a problem.
It's way more accurate and is harder to make a counter argument about.
But... Backward tradition and religion, isn't that kind of the same thing?You would probably do better by not going for the Muslim angle at all. It's not because they Muslims, it's because they've got backward traditions. Christian minorities are about as bad if coming from the same area, and Muslims from other areas aren't a problem.
It's way more accurate and is harder to make a counter argument about.
The secular Iranians who came to Sweden during the cultural revolution has done well here, the muslim Iranians who has come lately - not so much.
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
But... Backward tradition and religion, isn't that kind of the same thing?
The secular Iranians who came to Sweden during the cultural revolution has done well here, the muslim Iranians who has come lately - not so much.
Well religion isn't inherently backward, at some points in history it could be seen as quite a progressive force (as much as I dislike the terms 'backward' and 'progressive', but you know what I mean).But... Backward tradition and religion, isn't that kind of the same thing?
The secular Iranians who came to Sweden during the cultural revolution has done well here, the muslim Iranians who has come lately - not so much.
It just so happens that Muslim immigrants happen to follow a religion (or at least an interpretation of it) that demands that they adhere to principles that we might find barbaric and repulsive.
Originally Posted by Rhyfhylwyr:
Well religion isn't inherently backward, at some points in history it could be seen as quite a progressive force (as much as I dislike the terms 'backward' and 'progressive', but you know what I mean).
It just so happens that Muslim immigrants happen to follow a religion (or at least an interpretation of it) that demands that they adhere to principles that we might find barbaric and repulsive.
My bad, "religion" was a poor choice of word. I should have been more specified. Well religion isn't inherently backward, at some points in history it could be seen as quite a progressive force (as much as I dislike the terms 'backward' and 'progressive', but you know what I mean).
It just so happens that Muslim immigrants happen to follow a religion (or at least an interpretation of it) that demands that they adhere to principles that we might find barbaric and repulsive.
Some religions are not.
However, you know that I have a hard time seeing a muslim or a christian and think they are not backwards. "Backwards" as in basing their lives around books written several hundred years ago.
You are of course right that both religions started out as progressive movements, but once they held a position of power the progression quickly died, no?
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
However, you know that I have a hard time seeing a muslim or a christian and think they are not backwards. "Backwards" as in basing their lives around books written several hundred years ago.
Works of Archimedes are thousands of years old, that does not make them backward.However, you know that I have a hard time seeing a muslim or a christian and think they are not backwards. "Backwards" as in basing their lives around books written several hundred years ago.
Originally Posted by rvg:
Works of Archimedes are thousands of years old, that does not make them backward.
Well, he was a scientist. He took his field of study further, and he could prove every step of his academical path. Scientists today still revise his work, and try to better it (as with PI).Works of Archimedes are thousands of years old, that does not make them backward.
So yes, of course he is not invalid just because he died several hundred years ago, as his work hold up to modern scrutiny. PI is still PI, and Archimedes himself would probably applaud the people who question his work and try to make it better.
That is not the same as a guy writing something about virgin birth, and then his followers being ready to go to extremes against anyone questioning it.
A slight difference, no?
Originally Posted by rvg:
Works of Archimedes are thousands of years old, that does not make them backward.
If you make Archimedes work alone the basis for everything you do in life, then yes, that would be backwards.Works of Archimedes are thousands of years old, that does not make them backward.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
If you make Archimedes work alone the basis for everything you do in life, then yes, that would be backwards.
Do Christians base their life solely on the Bible?If you make Archimedes work alone the basis for everything you do in life, then yes, that would be backwards.
Originally Posted by rvg:
Do Christians base their life solely on the Bible?
Some do, most don't.Do Christians base their life solely on the Bible?
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
Some do, most don't.
Which means that most aren't backward by this logic.Some do, most don't.
Originally Posted by rvg:
Which means that most aren't backward by this logic.
Never said they were.Which means that most aren't backward by this logic.
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
However, you know that I have a hard time seeing a muslim or a christian and think they are not backwards. "Backwards" as in basing their lives around books written several hundred years ago.
I understand that. I guess it just depends on what parts of the Bible you are talking about. Refusing to make clothing out of a mixture of wool and linen would seem a bit silly nowadays.However, you know that I have a hard time seeing a muslim or a christian and think they are not backwards. "Backwards" as in basing their lives around books written several hundred years ago.
On the other hand at least some of the ideas of marriage and things like that can surely still be relevant to contemporary life?
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
You are of course right that both religions started out as progressive movements, but once they held a position of power the progression quickly died, no?
But isn't this just a feature of any ideology or group that takes power? They can either try to hold onto power by maintaining the status quo, or they can try to stay relevant by adapting and going with the flow. Religious institutions have done both these things, even the Catholic Church adapted in response to the Reformation.You are of course right that both religions started out as progressive movements, but once they held a position of power the progression quickly died, no?
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
My bad, "religion" was a poor choice of word. I should have been more specified.
Some religions are not.
However, you know that I have a hard time seeing a muslim or a christian and think they are not backwards. "Backwards" as in basing their lives around books written several hundred years ago.
You are of course right that both religions started out as progressive movements, but once they held a position of power the progression quickly died, no?
I think that you can't really look at religions as "regressive" when much of what their founders were railing against is mirrored in modern society. Jesus was basically setting himself against a culture which valued money and material possesions and glorified sex and violence.My bad, "religion" was a poor choice of word. I should have been more specified.
Some religions are not.
However, you know that I have a hard time seeing a muslim or a christian and think they are not backwards. "Backwards" as in basing their lives around books written several hundred years ago.
You are of course right that both religions started out as progressive movements, but once they held a position of power the progression quickly died, no?
That could just as easily describe Western culture today.
As an athetic and moral and spritual teacher the figure of Jesus is just as relevent today as it was then, and the circumstances of his birth are no more or less credible.
The problem with the concept of "progression" is that it concieves of civilisation traveling a line from start to finsih, and the further along the line we are the better our society. That kind of view took hold in the Renaissance and in philosophy and history it has been fairly well ripped to shreds - but it persists in the popular imagination.
I think there is definately a debate to be had about how we deal with sex in the West, especially in the Anglo-Sphere, but also now in the Franco-Sphere after the Strass-Kahn scandals.
I have to say, as a student of intellectual history that much of what is touted as "revolutionary" today has been done to death before, and if these "philosophers" had actually read their predecessors they would not waste quite so much time trying to re-invent the wheel.
Having said all that, I don't think the problem here is that these men are Muslim, I think the problem is how they view non-Muslims in a non-Muslim country (the UK).
One thing you see with these immigrant communities is how incredibly touchy and insecure some parts of them can be. The London bombings, for example, were as much an expression of cultural angst as they were any kind of political statement.
Originally Posted by :
I think that you can't really look at religions as "regressive" when much of what their founders were railing against is mirrored in modern society. Jesus was basically setting himself against a culture which valued money and material possesions and glorified sex and violence.
That could just as easily describe Western culture today.
This might be one of the best Christian arguments I have seen in my life.I think that you can't really look at religions as "regressive" when much of what their founders were railing against is mirrored in modern society. Jesus was basically setting himself against a culture which valued money and material possesions and glorified sex and violence.
That could just as easily describe Western culture today.
Rhy, Philips, I will answer you as soon as I have the time to do it properly :)
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
This might be one of the best Christian arguments I have seen in my life.
Rhy, Philips, I will answer you as soon as I have the time to do it properly :)
I come here to practice, nice to know it's recognised.This might be one of the best Christian arguments I have seen in my life.
Rhy, Philips, I will answer you as soon as I have the time to do it properly :)
I should also say that you are fundamentally correct in that many religions, perhaps especially Christianity, do handle power well - a faith which originated with slaves and vagrant preachers doesn't sit well with Emperors.
...And was brought to prominence by Constantine, who then moved the religion to be centred in Rome. Who then picked the whole hierarchy.
Christianity can be about God, but the higher churches (a misnomer if ever there was one) are far more focused on money, power and control.
Christianity can be about God, but the higher churches (a misnomer if ever there was one) are far more focused on money, power and control.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
...And was brought to prominence by Constantine, who then moved the religion to be centred in Rome. Who then picked the whole hierarchy.
About 0% of that is statistically correct....And was brought to prominence by Constantine, who then moved the religion to be centred in Rome. Who then picked the whole hierarchy.
Constantine, if anything, "moved" it to Constantinople, he could not "bring it to prominence" because it was already so prominent he basiaclly needed to convert to secure the Empire and he had absolutely no way to choose the "whole hierarchy" because there wasn't one.
The only thing Constantine could, and did, do was evict Bishops from the cities containing their Sees - which was not really an effective tool for shutting them up, it didn't stop Athanasius, it didn't even stop Arrian.
I'll just say one thing and leave it at that: not everything Muslims do is Islamic. That'll be all.
Originally Posted by Hax:
I'll just say one thing and leave it at that: not everything Muslims do is Islamic. That'll be all.
Fair enough, but if their identity as Muslims causes them to set themselves apart from majority "Christians", is that Islamic?I'll just say one thing and leave it at that: not everything Muslims do is Islamic. That'll be all.
Wouldn't this whole absurd debate we all know the answer to come to a swift end were we able to produce some examples of muslim men raping uslim women in manners that do not include family honor/debt type incidents. Like, how many incidents in the UK are there where muslim men rape muslim women for the sake of jollies?
Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump:
Wouldn't this whole absurd debate we all know the answer to come to a swift end were we able to produce some examples of muslim men raping uslim women in manners that do not include family honor/debt type incidents. Like, how many incidents in the UK are there where muslim men rape muslim women for the sake of jollies?
None reported?Wouldn't this whole absurd debate we all know the answer to come to a swift end were we able to produce some examples of muslim men raping uslim women in manners that do not include family honor/debt type incidents. Like, how many incidents in the UK are there where muslim men rape muslim women for the sake of jollies?
One of the articles I linked to is a Muslim activist and one of the ings he said was, "Asian girls aren't available to them".
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO