Rotherham child rape gangs: At least 1400 victims

[Buckaroo]

You appear to be eliding any role for coercion of those "friends, aquaintences [sic] and family members".

'Eliding'. I never heard or read that word ever. Cheers

 

[ViolentPanda]

No, it is one of the main reasons.

Then why aren't all male members of sexually-repressive religious sects being pulled for raping children?
Your "reason" and your reasoning is fatuous.

 

[andysays]

I understand what you're saying but even Child Protection services less hopeless than Rotherhams has been are operating in a situation of underfunding and of constantly choosing between impossible alternatives. They could have been designed fail hostile inspection and I don't see that the broader politics of this offers them any protection. Entirely the opposite in fact. But we shall see, or not.

Sorry, I've edited my post why you were responding.

I'm not talking about those "operating in a situation of underfunding and of constantly choosing between impossible alternatives", for whom I have every sympathy, I'm talking about the person who choose to take the position of Head of Child Protection Services.

You get paid to run it, you take full responsibility, including legal, if you fail to run it properly.

 

[andysays]

...

Are you aware that at least one of the people you're still responding to have since been struck off?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I understand what you're saying but even Child Protection services less hopeless than Rotherhams has been are operating in a situation of underfunding and of constantly choosing between impossible alternatives. They could have been designed to fail hostile inspection and I don't see that the broader politics of this offers them any protection. Entirely the opposite in fact. But we shall see, or not.

It's disastrous that a social service discipline that has, for at least the last 15 years, been measured by various metrics of "best practice", can have so continuously failed the clientele, and (ever-decreasing funding, staff demoralisation and ever-increasing workloads aside) stinks to me of the plague-stench of managerialism.

 

[Lurdan]

Entirely agree (I don't think we're disagreeing) - the head will roll (if it does) because of the failings and weaknesses of the department. Quite aside from what OFSTED says - and I don't believe they will be pulling punches - the publication of the report will be a public political event given the background and that may well produce it's own dynamic.
ETA - this was a response to andysays which lost it's quote.

 

[Lurdan]

It's disastrous that a social service discipline that has, for at least the last 15 years, been measured by various metrics of "best practice", can have so continuously failed the clientele, and (ever-decreasing funding, staff demoralisation and ever-increasing workloads aside) stinks to me of the plague-stench of managerialism.

Indeed - the references in the Jay report to a 'bullying culture' come to mind as well. Rotherham seems to have tried every bad way of dealing with difficulties that it can.

 

[Diamond]

Diamond, is that you?

Eh?

 

[bmd]

It's disastrous that a social service discipline that has, for at least the last 15 years, been measured by various metrics of "best practice", can have so continuously failed the clientele, and (ever-decreasing funding, staff demoralisation and ever-increasing workloads aside) stinks to me of the plague-stench of managerialism.

Completely agree.

1.14 A series of audits, reviews, assessments and inspections of the Council’s safeguarding and child protection services were conducted over this period. The Social Services Inspectorate (SSI) and later Ofsted conducted regular inspections, planned or unannounced, notably a full inspection in 2003, a follow-up in 2004, a full inspection in 2008, a ‘monitoring visit’ in 2009, an unannounced inspection in August 2009, a full inspection in 2010, an unannounced inspection in 2011, and an unannounced review of child protection services in August 2012. Following the inspection in 2009, the Minister of State for Young People and Families issued to the Council a Notice of Requirement to Improve its children’s services. The Notice was removed in January 2011.

Failed by OFSTED and the Minister of State for Young People and Families too. This whole sorry business really does make a mockery of Safeguarding and OFSTED.

 

[andysays]

Entirely agree (I don't think we're disagreeing) - the head will roll (if it does) because of the failings and weaknesses of the department. Quite aside from what OFSTED says - and I don't believe they will be pulling punches - the publication of the report will be a public political event given the background and that may well produce it's own dynamic.
ETA - this was a response to andysays which lost it's quote.

No, I think the only thing we perhaps disagree on is the likelihood of real change happening so that Child Protection services across the country are finally properly run and properly effective at, you know, protecting the children they're responsible for, after so many cases over recent years which appear to demonstrate the exact opposite. I'd happily be proved wrong on that one though...

And in case you're not aware, you can flag a poster by typing @poster'sname, which then comes up like this poster'sname and sends an alert to let them know you've mentioned them.

 

[Lurdan]

Cheers for that andysays. I had no idea.
No I'm entirely in agreement with you (I think) - I don't believe Rotherham can avoid change but real change would involve acknowledging that it's an issue of real resources and a real change in ethos. As things stand that doesn't seem likely.

 

[Combustible]

There is something here about the role of identity politics in enabling the abuse. It looks like a bit of an exaggeration to say that this in itself led to the prolonged abuse because there was obviously a whole host of other factors and failings but it seems to have been important.
http://leftfootforward.org/2014/08/...tivism-at-the-heart-of-the-rotherham-scandal/
http://leftfootforward.org/2014/08/...tivism-at-the-heart-of-the-rotherham-scandal/

 

[Citizen66]

i agree, but it still appears that the girls abused through these organised grooming networks are by and large white. the abuse of Pakistani girls almost undoubtedly occurs but hasn't been found through the uncovering of the circles in Rotherham or Rochdale.

I don't necessarily disagree with some of the points you are making. Presently, elements of the (far) right are framing this as attacks on young white girls by grown Pakistani men. I'm sure you understand why they'd be making hay out of this. This sort of offending is complex. There's patriarchy in the offenders' culture, there's patriarchy in the country where they live, there's class prejudices in the agencies who are supposed to be protecting these vulnerable girls and also sexism and victim blaming. There's also offending of this nature by powerful white men right down to proles.

All of those things need to be discussed. This situation isn't just the patriarchy and sexism of Pakistani men and the collusion of their communities. I know you probably feel you're going out on a limb to ask difficult questions but to keep the debate in that framework is to give the (far) right a goal.

 

[quiquaquo]

There is something here about the role of identity politics in enabling the abuse. It looks like a bit of an exaggeration to say that this in itself led to the prolonged abuse because there was obviously a whole host of other factors and failings but it seems to have been important.
http://leftfootforward.org/2014/08/...tivism-at-the-heart-of-the-rotherham-scandal/

I'd be a little wary of these "ex-Muslim Forum" types, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and that utter scumbag Magdi Allam spring to mind.

 

[andysays]

There is something here about the role of identity politics in enabling the abuse. It looks like a bit of an exaggeration to say that this in itself led to the prolonged abuse because there was obviously a whole host of other factors and failings but it seems to have been important.
http://leftfootforward.org/2014/08/...tivism-at-the-heart-of-the-rotherham-scandal/

Hmm, that's an interesting read, and while I agree with the author's position that the British Left should reject identity politics and multi-culturalism, I'm not convinced that he's made a coherent argument that what's happened here (the abuse or the failure by the authorities to deal with it) is in any way a result of multi-culturalism.

He goes from asking

if ideological multiculturalism as a political, social policy leads to a situation in which a cover up of uncomfortable issues becomes inevitable

to concluding

In this case, it led to 1400 girls being sexually abused for a prolonged period of time, because of a warped sensibility of identity politics and multiculturalism

simply on the basis of a general critcism of multiculturalism

Multiculturalism concerned exclusively with communal religious identity politics, pursued as a social policy, is deeply reactionary and leads to the oppression of women who feel its effect most acutely. It dehumanises us all, because it asserts that we are not individuals, but members of religious or ethnic groups who must be dealt with according to the mediated authority of ‘community leaders’. It creates inhibitions from confronting social attitudes that must be addressed urgently, and in doing so, it allows social problems to flourish

which I broadly agree with, but which doesn't have much to do with the specifics of this case.

It reads to me like an opportunistic attempt to push a (broadly correct) position into a specific situation without properly arguing how this case really demonstrates his wider argument, which is disappointing.

 

[Casually Red]

Hmm, that's an interesting read, and while I agree with the author's position that the British Left should reject identity politics and multi-culturalism, I'm not convinced that he's made a coherent argument that what's happened here (the abuse or the failure by the authorities to deal with it) is in any way a result of multi-culturalism.

He goes from asking


to concluding


simply on the basis of a general critcism of multiculturalism


which I broadly agree with, but which doesn't have much to do with the specifics of this case.

It reads to me like an opportunistic attempt to push a (broadly correct) position into a specific situation without properly arguing how this case really demonstrates his wider argument, which is disappointing.

watched an interview the other day were Afshin Rattansi discussed this with a Muslim journalist and commentator . According to him local Pakistani community leaders warned of a grave risk to community cohesion if the plod focussed on these serial predators who were a well known phenomenon . So they didnt.

As far as im aware its a serious criminal offence to withhold information regarding child abuse . There should be a lot more in jail than just the predators. This was well known to be happenng locally and the scale of the victims bears that out . Nothing was done because many blind eyes were turned by all sorts of people for all sorts of self serving reasons.

 

[Red Cat]

Hmm, that's an interesting read, and while I agree with the author's position that the British Left should reject identity politics and multi-culturalism, I'm not convinced that he's made a coherent argument that what's happened here (the abuse or the failure by the authorities to deal with it) is in any way a result of multi-culturalism.

He goes from asking


to concluding


simply on the basis of a general critcism of multiculturalism


which I broadly agree with, but which doesn't have much to do with the specifics of this case.

It reads to me like an opportunistic attempt to push a (broadly correct) position into a specific situation without properly arguing how this case really demonstrates his wider argument, which is disappointing.

I don't agree that it doesn't address the specifics as stated in the report. The report says this:

11.13 Both the Council and the Police used traditional channels of communication with the
Pakistani-heritage community for many years on general issues of child protection.
There seemed, from all accounts, to be very few, if any, specific discussions of CSE,
though this was difficult to verify. These contacts were almost exclusively with men.

And concludes:

11.17 With hindsight, it is clear that women and girls in the Pakistani community in
Rotherham should have been encouraged and empowered by the authorities to
speak out about perpetrators and their own experiences as victims of sexual
exploitation, so often hidden from sight. The Safeguarding Board has recently
received a presentation from a local Pakistani women's group about abuse within
their community. The Board should address as a priority the under-reporting of
exploitation and abuse in minority ethnic communities. We recommend that the
relevant agencies immediately initiate dialogue about CSE with minority ethnic
communities, and in particular with the Pakistani-heritage community. This should be
done in consultation with local women's groups, and should develop strategies that
support young women and girls from the community to participate without fear or
threat.

 

[Das Uberdog]

I don't necessarily disagree with some of the points you are making. Presently, elements of the (far) right are framing this as attacks on young white girls by grown Pakistani men. I'm sure you understand why they'd be making hay out of this. This sort of offending is complex. There's patriarchy in the offenders' culture, there's patriarchy in the country where they live, there's class prejudices in the agencies who are supposed to be protecting these vulnerable girls and also sexism and victim blaming. There's also offending of this nature by powerful white men right down to proles.

All of those things need to be discussed. This situation isn't just the patriarchy and sexism of Pakistani men and the collusion of their communities. I know you probably feel you're going out on a limb to ask difficult questions but to keep the debate in that framework is to give the (far) right a goal.

most certainly the far right are benefiting from this, but i think their gains are exaggerated by the fact that the left has driven itself into a strategical hole. it's the left which has pushed a general doctrine which associates race with culture, it's the left which has tied it's colours to an ideology in which it is impossible to disassociate the two things - and now, faced with a situation which demands a more complicated analysis the left is unable to do anything other than ignore very present, obvious features about this case and try and shut down the social discussion with accusations of racism. in short, i think we've shut ourselves out of the serious discussion with working class people from these communities altogether - both Pakistani and non.

what i think these cases highlight is that if backwards attitudes from migrant groups are not challenged from the left, they will be challenged from the right. we need to take off the kid gloves and forthrightly argue for our universal principles of how people should be treated, regardless of background, gender, race or ethnicity. sometimes that will run contrary to the views of some of the groups we defend - on other questions - from the right. that might be uncomfortable but unless we are consistent in our demands as to the universal worth of every individual then we just won't win.

 

[Citizen66]

Again, you're splitting this crime along racial lines. Why? Just fucking why?

 

[Citizen66]

we need to all have a serious think about the theft occuring by black youths. The black community needs to be more active and stop shielding these people.

This is what it all boils down to then?

 

[toggle]

Again, you're splitting this crime along racial lines. Why? Just fucking why?

blame the 'other'.

easier than engaging with the fact that society failed to protect some of ti's more vulnerable members, because they aren't valued and because no one listens to them

 

[littlebabyjesus]

we need to take off the kid gloves and forthrightly argue for our universal principles of how people should be treated, regardless of background, gender, race or ethnicity. sometimes that will run contrary to the views of some of the groups we defend - on other questions - from the right.

I wholeheartedly agree with this sentence. An example would be the niqab - you defend strenuously the right to wear it while at the same time not holding back from pointing out that a woman who wears one in public has literally no public face and so is handing over political and social power in public spaces to the men in her community.

However, how is this relevant here? You're implying that these crimes are at least in part a result of generally held views within British Pakistani communities. Can you back this up? Are not the majority of British Pakistanis fucking appalled by what these men did? If they are, then the sentiment in this sentence is irrelevant.

 

[Red Cat]

we need to all have a serious think about the theft occuring by black youths. The black community needs to be more active and stop shielding these people.

This is what it all boils down to then?

Is that aimed at my post? You should reply explicitly if so.

The article quoted criticises multiculturalism specifically in reference to the oppression of women and the way in which state bodies relate to religious leaders as representatives of 'communities'. That's not just a generalised criticism in my view because it relates to statements in the report, as I quoted, that refer to girls and women of Pakistani heritage being ignored by the authorities.

Not sure how you go from that to suggesting I am saying all the responsibility for cse in Rotherham lies with people of Pakistani heritage.

 

[Citizen66]

Is that aimed at my post? You should reply explicitly if so.

The article quoted criticises multiculturalism specifically in reference to the oppression of women and the way in which state bodies relate to religious leaders as representatives of 'communities'. That's not just a generalised criticism in my view because it relates to statements in the report, as I quoted, that refer to girls and women of Pakistani heritage being ignored by the authorities.

Not sure how you go from that to suggesting I am saying the responsibility for cse in Rotherham lies with people of Pakistani heritage.

It wasn't in response to anything you said. It was part of a discussion with das uberdog. I like your reply though (can't respond presently as about to go to sleep but don't think it warrants a response either).

Sometimes in threads if I'm busy I'll just pursue certain arguments I'm actively engaged in. It never crossed my mind that might be confusing for others (but seems obvious now).

 

[Das Uberdog]

Again, you're splitting this crime along racial lines. Why? Just fucking why?

... that's the opposite of what that post was doing. i was saying that cultural criticisms can be totally separated from race. i actually think we're almost on the same page from your previous post -

This sort of offending is complex. There's patriarchy in the offenders' culture, there's patriarchy in the country where they live, there's class prejudices in the agencies who are supposed to be protecting these vulnerable girls and also sexism and victim blaming. There's also offending of this nature by powerful white men right down to proles.

... that's exactly the conversation i think we need to be having, on that level of complexity and with all of the nuances associated with the various different strands. what i get from much of the left is a total unwillingness to engage on those issues and instead attempt - in particular - to push the issue of different cultures into the background (when in fact it makes up, from what all the stats show us, an integrally important aspect of the whole).

However, how is this relevant here? You're implying that these crimes are at least in part a result of generally held views within British Pakistani communities. Can you back this up? Are not the majority of British Pakistanis fucking appalled by what these men did? If they are, then the sentiment in this sentence is irrelevant.

i think both things are true - there are in part some commonly held views in the community which can lend themselves to a toleration of some abuses... at the same time, the majority of British Pakistanis are absolutely appalled by these events. in fact, many public faces in the Pakistani community thus far have been the first to step forward and say that the community as a whole needs to look within itself and self-criticise.

we just can't ignore it - that's the worst thing we can do.

 

[Citizen66]

I just don't know of any other community who are thrust into the spotlight when some of them have commited crime. The only other context I can think of where this happens is with travellers. But not on this level. It's bizarre and racist.

 

[DotCommunist]

and the usual parade of voices line up to tell 'the left' that 'the left' is unable to be on the right side of the argument here.

 

[Red Cat]

It wasn't in response to anything you said. It was part of a discussion with das uberdog. I like your reply though (can't respond presently as about to go to sleep but don't think it warrants a response either).

Sometimes in threads if I'm busy I'll just pursue certain arguments I'm actively engaged in. It never crossed my mind that might be confusing for others (but seems obvious now).

ok.

 

[seventh bullet]

and the usual parade of voices line up to tell 'the left' that 'the left' is unable to be on the right side of the argument here.

What 'left'?

 

[quiquaquo]

What 'left'?

Every single last person who works in Social Services for starters presumably.