The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Ross, Rape, Rotherham
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In the NYT, Ross Douthat writes:

Rape and Rotherham
SEPT. 6, 2014
Ross Douthat

THERE are enough grim tidings from around the world that the news from Rotherham, a faded English industrial town where about 1,400 girls, mostly white and working class, were raped by gangs of Pakistani men while the local authorities basically shrugged and did nothing, is already slipping out of American headlines.

But we should remain with Rotherham for a moment, and give its story a suitable place of dishonor in the waking nightmare that is late summer 2014.

… But bearing witness is insufficient; lessons must be learned as well. This is more than just a horror story. It’s a case study in how exploitation can flourish in different cultural contexts, and how insufficient any set of pieties can be to its restraint.

Interpreted crudely, what happened in Rotherham looks like an ideological mirror image of Roman Catholicism’s sex abuse scandal. The Catholic crisis seemed to vindicate a progressive critique of traditionalism: Here were the wages of blind faith and sexual repression; here was a case study in how a culture of hierarchy and obedience gave criminals free rein.

The crimes in Rotherham, by contrast, seem scripted to vindicate a reactionary critique of liberal multiculturalism: Here are immigrant gangs exploiting a foolish Western tolerance; here are authorities too committed to “diversity” to react appropriately; here is a liberal society so open-minded that both its brain and conscience have fallen out.

Other distinctions could be drawn as well:

– homosexual versus heterosexual

– the actual physical acts in most of the Catholic Church scandals were not as brutal as many people imagine (the reason you don’t hear Sandusky-style graphic descriptions of most of the priest and altar boy scandals is because there wasn’t much Sandusky-style sodomy, whereas having to pull a train for a bunch of men is pretty bad, much less the usual pimp-beatdowns)

– the root cause of the Catholic Church scandals — priestly celibacy — was radically critiqued almost 500 years ago by Martin Luther, who usually doesn’t get good press these days

– the needlessness of the Rotherham-style outrages in Britain, while priestly celibacy in the Roman Catholic Church is a 1,000-year-old tradition and is intertwined with the budgetary structure of the Church (celibate priests are cheaper than Protestant preachers with families, which is why Protestantism is heading toward a superstar megachurch structure). In contrast, England got along fine before it had gangs of Pakistani pimps and it could no doubt get along fine without them in the future.

– the media gave much coverage to the Catholic Church scandals, while it covered up the Pakistani pimps stories.

A more subtle reading, though, reveals commonalities between the two scandals. The rate of priestly abuse was often at its worst in places and eras (the 1970s, above all) where traditional attitudes overlapped with a sudden wave of liberation — where deference to church authority by parents and police coexisted with a sense of moral upheaval around sexuality and sexual ethics, both within seminaries and in society at large. (John Patrick Shanley’s famous play “Doubt,” in which a hip, with-it, Kennedy-era priest relies on clericalism to evade accusations of abuse, remains the best dramatization of this tangle.)

Shanley’s play and movie (which I reviewed for The American Conservative) is even more than interesting than that. He somewhat defends gay priests as kind gentlemen who took an interest in boys, sometimes too much of an interest. Viola Davis has a stunning five minute scene as the gay black boy’s mother who explains to a shocked Mother Meryl Streep that she knows Father Philip Seymour Hoffman is a little too personally interested in her son’s development, but he’s still a huge improvement over the boy getting beaten up all the time back at his old public school.

This is the same point Chris Brand made in defending Britain’s long tradition of pederast schoolmasters: the system encourages celibacy and taking a personal interest in boys. Not surprisingly, some lonely, gentle men take too much interest in their boys.

In a somewhat similar way, what happened in Rotherham was rooted both in left-wing multiculturalism and in much more old-fashioned prejudices about race and sex and class. The local bureaucracy was, indeed, too fearful of being labeled “racist,” too unwilling, as a former member of Parliament put it, to “rock the multicultural community boat.” But the rapes also went unpunished because of racially inflected misogyny among police officers, who seemed to think that white girls exploited by immigrant men were “tarts” who deserved roughly what they got.

You know how Senator Moynihan gave us the useful phrases Defining Deviancy Down and Dumbing Down? We need something like Defining Discrimination Down to describe this common urge to say, When you stop and think about it, it’s really the racism of the White Male Power Structure that is to blame in the Pakistani Pimps cases.

The crucial issue in both scandals isn’t some problem that’s exclusive to traditionalism or progressivism. Rather, it’s the protean nature of power and exploitation, and the way that very different forms of willful blindness can combine to frustrate justice.

So instead of looking for ideological vindication in these stories, it’s better to draw a general lesson. Show me what a culture values, prizes, puts on a pedestal, and I’ll tell you who is likely to get away with rape.

In Catholic Boston or Catholic Ireland, that meant men robed in the vestments of the church.

In Joe Paterno’s pigskin-mad Happy Valley, it meant a beloved football coach.

The Sandusky case is so overwhelmingly notorious because it’s a man bites dog story. In the years since the story broke, every reporter in America would love to follow it up with a similar case. But, basically, there have been crickets chirping in the press. Why? Because football coaches — and there are a lot of football coaches in America — generally aren’t gay pedophiles. That the linebacker coach at Linebacker U. liked little boys seemed statistically improbable, which it it was.

In contrast, the Catholic Church scandals were statistically inevitable: when heterosexual priests and nuns left in large numbers from the 1960s onward, often to marry each other, the priesthood became increasingly gay dominated and gay protective: thus, the endless gay scandals.

And the Rotherham story is the opposite of the Sandusky case: it’s just one of many towns across England afflicted by Pakistani pimps and the politicians and media who covered up for them in the interest of making Labour’s massive immigration policy look better. Those tens of thousands of girls all across England were the victims of today’s War on Stereotypes. Is it a stereotype that Muslims abuse females? Well, then, hush up about it.

In status-conscious, education-obsessed Manhattan, it meant charismatic teachers at an elite private school.

More gay scandals.

Our society is generally set up pretty well to keep adult men in positions of authority away from too much time alone with underage girls. So, a wildly disproportionate fraction of these kinds of abuse cases are gay.

In Hollywood and the wider culture industry — still the great undiscovered country of sexual exploitation, I suspect — it has often meant the famous and talented, from Roman Polanski to the BBC’s Jimmy Savile, robed in the authority of their celebrity and art.

And in Rotherham, it meant men whose ethnic and religious background made them seem politically untouchable, and whose victims belonged to a class that both liberal and conservative elements in British society regard with condescension or contempt.

Rotherham, like most of these towns plagued by Pakistani pimps, is dominated politically by the Labour Party. That the Labour Party puts the welfare of working class adolescent girls lower in its priorities than keeping Pakistani pimps out of the news is a Big Story, you might think.

The point is that as a society changes, as what’s held sacred and who’s empowered shifts, so do the paths through which evil enters in, the prejudices and blind spots it exploits.

So don’t expect tomorrow’s predators to look like yesterday’s. Don’t expect them to look like the figures your ideology or philosophy or faith would lead you to associate with exploitation.

Expect them, instead, to look like the people whom you yourself would be most likely to respect, most afraid to challenge publicly, or least eager to vilify and hate.

Because your assumptions and pieties are evil’s best opportunity, and your conventional wisdom is what’s most likely to condemn victims to their fate.

Well said.

Ross’s conclusion applies as well to a host of predatory economic abuses justified in the name of the great sacrament of Diversity: cheap labor immigration, zero down payment mortgages in the name of fighting racist redlining, and so on and so forth. As you will recall, but few other do, we all got financially raped by guys spouting sacralized diversity rhetoric about mortgages like Angelo Mozilo, George W. Bush, Jim Johnson, Henry Cisneros, and Barney Frank.

 
Hide 110 CommentsLeave a Comment
110 Comments to "Ross, Rape, Rotherham"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. The Bryan Singer/DEN ring is pretty horrible, too. At *best* kids on the make pimped themselves out for small parts. And enough kids are saying worse than that. Yet Singer got away with this for years.

  2. So, why are we being allowed to hear about Rotherham from mainstream outlets now?

  3. So why are we being allowed to hear about Rotherham from mainstream outlets now?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Because there is an official report.

    The wind has been changing direction for several years as the evidence of a massive scandal across England has grown. Now, there is an official report.

    , @Anonym
    The problem had reached a critical mass... and attitudes towards PC and non-British have changed a lot in 10 years.
  4. The situation in Rotherham, from what I’ve read, is about denigrating women, not about liberals giving foreigners benefit of the doubt. It’s incredibly troubling and nightmarish that the police would refer to the girls as tramps and the men as their “boyfriends”. The girls’ stories were summarily dismissed. This has nothing to do with being nice to foreigners. It’s all about callous sexism and dereliction of duty by a scandalous, corrupt police force who allowed gangs of men to prey on children.

  5. To a Catholic like Douthat, abuse by priests is arguably far worse than even that perpetrated by a close family member. That being said, there is no evidence that Catholic clergy abuse children more so than clergy of other denominations or that Catholic bishops have been any more derelict than other bureaucrats in “passing the trash” or covering up abuse, though of course there’s more money and notoriety to be obtained in filing lawsuits against Catholics.

    In particular, finding out a man happens to also be a Catholic priest says little about the statistical likelihood that he is a child-molester and is no evidence that he is soft on sexual subjugation of minors. Given the sexual habits of a certain prophet regarding a certain 9-year-old girl, can the same be said for devout Muslims? I suppose all the cases of acid being thrown in the faces of wayward Muslim teenage girls, and honor killings thereof, is evidence of something, but that is a side issue.

  6. “The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils.” – Enoch Powell

    • Replies: @dearieme
    “The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils.” – Enoch Powell

    So good we should say it twice.
  7. Education Realist says that the boys in the Singer scandal “pimped themselves out for small parts”. Yes, exactly. It was precisely the boys’ “small parts” that Singer was interested in.
    Sorry.

  8. I heard about this column a few days ago (I think at Rod Dreher’s site), and I immediately thought of the meta issue.

    Notice that when the Catholic Church had its problems, the journalistic response was not to say ‘yeah, but its similar to rape in sports/minorities/Hollywood.’ In fact, Catholic priests made suggestions of such an argument (that the rate of Catholic abuse is no greater than the general population, or among boy scouts leaders, or among Protestants, and so on). Such suggestions by the Catholic priests were seen as attempts at changing the subject, or absolving the Catholic hierarchy of unusual rates of crime-they were seen as criminal avoidance of the issue.

    Yet, in this case, Doughat manages to write an acceptable column not addressing the Rotherham scandal, but, well, changing the subject, or absolving the Rotherham hierarchy of unusual rates of crime-and its not seen as criminal avoidance of the issue.

    In essence, Doughat himself doesn’t take the Rotherham scandal seriously. If he did, he wouldn’t compare it to Sandusky or the Catholic Church (to repeat: just as the Catholic Church didn’t take its scandal seriously as long as it attempted to compare its crimes to those of unidentified boyscout troop leaderes or Protestant pastors).

    I don’t think its childrape fatigue: “after the Church and Sandusky, the Rotherham scandal is just more of the same thing.” Its Doughat’s either lack of genuine caring about the scandal, or his unwillingness to face it. If he was genuinely outraged, he would be calling for the Rotherham hierarchy’s head (as the genuinely outraged Catholics did twelve years ago), or demanding real change-whining about Sandusky could wait.

    What it means is that, even among conservatives (here in the States), Rotherham is just not that big of a deal.

    joeyjoejoe

  9. Given the brutality of sexual practices of SW Asians with their own kind (the daily gang/honor/retribution-rapings/killings) is it any surprise any of this happened to the White girls? The fox in the hen coop, fish in a barrel, and blah, blah. The scale speaks volumes about the underlying culture and attitudes of SW Asians. And I don’t buy for a second Douthat’s nonsense that White racism in reverse was a factor here–if a White girl is stupid enough to get entangled with a Paki, more the worse for her. I think the cops were simply too cowed to intervene.

    Fundamentally of course a primary goal in inter-tribal warfare (which, of course is what’s going on, what’s always going on) is control over fertile females. I’m sure it’s happened before where a tribe (here, Whites) is so infused with internal doubts, weaknesses and mistaken believes, it doesn’t even defend itself, and that makes it all the more infuriating. It’s one thing for the Russian Armies to rape millions of German women as they marched and established themselves West–spoils of war, etc.–but on what battlefield have the Pakis bested the British (or Blacks, Asians and Hispanics bested Whites here in the US) to enjoy the spoils of White females? Just insane.

  10. @sonny cui bono
    So why are we being allowed to hear about Rotherham from mainstream outlets now?

    Because there is an official report.

    The wind has been changing direction for several years as the evidence of a massive scandal across England has grown. Now, there is an official report.

    • Replies: @OsRazor
    "Now, there is an official report."

    That's exactly right. The needed cover for anyone with half a brain or not blind to protect himself against accusations. "Well, it was in the Jay Report, you see." Simply pathetic.

    Obviously, Labour is beyond reprehensible, but where are the other parties? Why isn't this the central issue in the UK right now, not Scottish Independence, or the new royal baby on the way--why are the Tories and UKIP not saying--"This is the fruit of Labour's plan to inundate this country with non-White immigration."

    What's keeping the other parties from destroying Labour once and for all? Working class White British are the backbone of Labour. What am I missing?

    It's the answer to Frank's question "What's the Matter with Kansas?", a liberal's wonderment that working class Whites don't vote for the economic interests--Democrats. Sure, a few dollars is fine, but my 12 year-old daughter is even more important.

    , @JimBoob
    Once upon a time newspapers did a little thing called investigative journalism. They used to take pride in getting to the truth before the government.
  11. Doughat himself doesn’t take the Rotherham scandal seriously. If he did, he wouldn’t compare it to Sandusky or the Catholic Church

    You don’t appreciate the fact that Douhat is writing in the NYT for an audience of liberals and leftists. The tack he chose to take, that his readers should take the Rotherham scandal just as seriously as they do other child abuse scandals, is the only one he can take if he wants to change any minds.

    Of course in reality the Catholic Church sex scandal was wildly overblown by people with an axe to grind, and Rotherham is a much more serious indictment of modern liberalism and Islam than the Catholic scandals were of Catholicism. But to say THAT to the readers of the NYT would be like marching into the Vatican and claiming that Jesus was a historical fiction. If you want the donkeys to swallow any truth you have to put it in a cube of sugar.

  12. Ross draws parallels, but the essential features of the cases are quite different. Priests were not assumed to be up to no good. And the parents of victims were not arrested for trying to make a fuss about the sexual abuse.

    Asian men in a Bentley with personalised number plates waiting outside school for a 13 year old white girl were exactly what they seemed to be. The majority of the sexual abuse was not by the gangs themselves, it was by a much larger number of men from the wider Asian community. There were Muslim riots in the area in 2001, blamed on lack of integration. White schoolgirls going with Muslims is thought to be a good thing, a sign of integration.

    Everyone knew what was going on, the police threatened and arrested victims’ fathers who tried to rescue their daughters.. It may still be going on in a more discreet fashion; there is more money in that business than in dealing heroin and Pakistani schoolboys (employed by the gangs) can’t be stopped from going out with naive white girls.

  13. @Steve Sailer
    Because there is an official report.

    The wind has been changing direction for several years as the evidence of a massive scandal across England has grown. Now, there is an official report.

    “Now, there is an official report.”

    That’s exactly right. The needed cover for anyone with half a brain or not blind to protect himself against accusations. “Well, it was in the Jay Report, you see.” Simply pathetic.

    Obviously, Labour is beyond reprehensible, but where are the other parties? Why isn’t this the central issue in the UK right now, not Scottish Independence, or the new royal baby on the way–why are the Tories and UKIP not saying–“This is the fruit of Labour’s plan to inundate this country with non-White immigration.”

    What’s keeping the other parties from destroying Labour once and for all? Working class White British are the backbone of Labour. What am I missing?

    It’s the answer to Frank’s question “What’s the Matter with Kansas?”, a liberal’s wonderment that working class Whites don’t vote for the economic interests–Democrats. Sure, a few dollars is fine, but my 12 year-old daughter is even more important.

    • Replies: @Lot
    Scottish independence would have the following effect on UK Parliament

    Conservatives 303 to 302 (-1)
    Labour 257 to 216 (-41)
    LibDems 56 tgo 45 (-11)

    Seats needed for the majority 325 to 293.

    So conservatives become an absolute majority, no need to join with the pro-immigration LibDems to hold onto power. And the biggest threat to that majority is UKIP, so Conservatives will have to move to the right on national issues. Notice the biggest percentage blow is to LibDems, already facing rapid decline. This could be their death blow, allowing UKIP to become a real party in Parliament (they are still stuck at 0 in the Commons.)

    The Scotch electorate may also change its tune post-independence when it realizes that its immigration policy effects mainly Scotland, not mainly England with minor effects on Scotland.

    Going back to history, part of the deal for Union was that King James of Scotland also became king of England. But when the English dumped the Stuarts, the deal was broken. Scottish voters, your ancestors fought and many died for their freedom from perfidious Albion. You owe them your vote at least!
  14. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Haha, reading the Readers Picks on the NYT is priceless.

    Not even on the most fundamentalist catholic website following the priest scandals would you have seen the top 20 most up-voted comments uniformly and vehemently reject the call for ideological soul-searching. Nope, no soul searching! The police, social workers, and govt. report authors who all claim that PC was a factor are just wrong.

    No soul searching required = upvote, upvote, upvote

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Latin-Mass traditionalists had no investment in the hierarchy as it was in 2001 and were often critical of the Holy See as well; for those authors, it was just another chapter in the post-Vatican II ruin of the Church. As to more mainstream orthodox Catholics, there was considerable upset and no attempt to defend the hierarchy in general (although particular bishops were occasionally defended). The Catholic League largely begged off, as did the publications of Ignatius Press and Crisis, then the leading Catholic magazine in the country. By 2004, the mentality among lay Catholics who participated in fora was so jaundiced that even the most implausible accusations were sometimes accepted (e.g. against Bp. Hubbard in Albany).
    , @Dahlia
    I noticed that, too, but not on the British and Irish side where it is happening or they're now wondering if it is happening.

    On another aspect, that class is at fault, doesn't seem satisfactory. Australia, Netherlands, and Scotland are places I can name off the top of my head that have had at least one arrest over sex slavery of minors but they don't have England's reputation for being class-ridden.
    , @anon
    Orwell wrote that if there is hope, it lies in the proles. To paraphrase him, if there is hope, it lies in the comment sections.
  15. I don’t think it’s correct to say that Viola Davis’ son in “Doubt” was gay.

  16. @Auntie Analogue
    "The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils." - Enoch Powell

    “The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils.” – Enoch Powell

    So good we should say it twice.

  17. Viola Davis has a stunning five minute scene as the gay black boy’s mother who explains to a shocked Mother Meryl Streep that she knows Father Philip Seymour Hoffman is a little too personally interested in her son’s development

    This is probably often the case: nearly “harmless,” or even welcome touching targeted to obviously gay boys 14 and up, when most of their straight cohorts are at least trying to have sex with girls, to varying degrees of success.

    The problem is that, per multiple surveys, including a huge one I linked to a few days ago, about 10% of teenage boys report same sex attraction, but only 3% become exclusive homosexuals, and maybe another 2% become self ID’d adult bisexuals, with a final 5% becoming exclusive or almost exclusive heterosexuals.

    For that group, early same sex contact could interfere with their sexual development. These boys who feel attraction to both sexes should be able to make their own decisions about how to live their life, in particular free of flashbacks to formative sexual experiences involving adults. At least half of them choose to live straight lives.

    Perhaps the English boarding school pederasty is the least bad since it is so old and subject to unstated customs. Come onto the wrong pupil, and face the wrath of an angry nobleman, like the Marquess of Queensberry.

  18. The Diocese of Syracuse 10 years ago published some statistics which are instructive here (when viewed in the light of national statistics):

    1. The point of origin for the pederast phenomenon appears to have been ca. 1930. Almost none of the accused priests were ordained prior to that date, though many such priests were working in the diocese as late as 1980.

    2. Frequency of instances derived from retrospective reports was on an upward trajectory up until about 1980, with a more rapid rate of increase during the period running from 1950-65 than after. Then it hit a plateau and dropped like a stone after 1990. There appears to have been very few instances after 1990 and very few priests (3) ordained after 1979 have ever been accused of anything (and one who was was subject to a full dress petit jury trial and exonerated).

    3. Nationally, the ratio of male to female accusers grew larger and larger by cohort, going from 1.8 to 1 ca. 1955 to about 6 to 1 ca. 1985.

    4. The most problematic cohorts in the clergy were those ordained around 1970 (in Syracuse, the peak was reached with the 1965 cohort).

    Pederasty is not an abiding feature of clerical life and celibacy is neither necessary nor sufficient to produce it (as seen above). Also, about 20% of the priest corps departed between 1965 and 1979. That certainly acted to make the remainder a more homosexually-inclined crew, but only in degree rather than kind. Richard Sipe and others have put the share of the clergy who were abnormal to a greater or lesser degree at about a third. The mass dismissals from the clerical state after 1965 likely had less of an effect on proportions therein that the changing composition of the intake pipe.

    For the most part, prior to about 1980, bishops would not have figured they had a systematic problem with pederasty among their clergy. The propensity to lodge accusations was quite low. Of the 130 accusations against John Geoghan, only two or three were reported to Church authorities prior to 1980. In Syracuse, about 95% of all accusations against priests were lodged after 1979. In Cincinnati, about 85% were.

    Some bishops were in later years protective of accused priests (The Boston chancery concluded by 1980 that Geoghan was perverted, but he was put back in the parish four additional times in 12 years before finally being put on ice for good). Mostly, they were contemplating uncorroborated accusations lodged years after the fact, with a 15 year lapse of time between incident and accusation being about normal. The splashiest case in Syracuse concerned a series of incidents which supposedly occurred between 1962 and 1971. The accusation hit the bishop’s desk in 2003. I asked an assistant state AG of my acquaintance how one evaluates that sort of thing: he tells me there’s really no way to come to a satisfying resolution of many of these cases because of the information deficit.

  19. @sonny cui bono
    So why are we being allowed to hear about Rotherham from mainstream outlets now?

    The problem had reached a critical mass… and attitudes towards PC and non-British have changed a lot in 10 years.

  20. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Steve, the situation is far more nuanced than that.
    For starters, Rotherham was a former mining town, in fact the main center of mining in the huge south Yorkshire coalfield, and was rock solid behind Arthur Scargill, (communist), in the climactic and ultimately futile strike of 1983-4, in which Maggie essentially gutted the British mining industry. Whatever lies and excuses you here about the reason why Pakistanis were massively imported into Britain, it was most certainly NOT to man heavy industry. I can confidently tell you that not one single Pakistani man ever hewed coal at the face of a Rotherham pit. The Pakistanis came, in the overwhelming number of cases, by abusing marriage visas and other crooked means.
    This leads to a further point. The way that voting trends/demographics are developing in the UK mean that the Labour Party is locked into a true symbiotic relationship with third world immigrants and Pakistanis in particular. They both depend on each to survive, and as the highest law of any organisation is self preservation, the Labour Party increasingly panders to Pakistanis to the extent that it really has become little more than the vector by which sharia law will eventually be established in Britain, a hard fact of life, but a fact nevertheless, in the sense that he who pays the piper calls the tune.Fortunately, working class Brits have noticed what is going on and bare drifting to UKIP.
    Another point is the clash of the tectonic plates between the father and holy ghost of the lefty trinity is non-whites and women. In this clash, the father (race) will always beat the holy ghost (women).A crucial issue in thge Rotherham scandal is the acquiescence of the girls to the sexual abuse, the girls being below the age of consent and thus sex being illegal despite agreement. It’s an unfortunate fact if the scandal, but it’s true, the girls gave their consent to the Pakistani abusers. In thge recent slate of ‘celebrity nonce’ she abuse cases that have rocked Britain eg Jimmy Savile, Savile was widely and massively vilified despite the fact that most of his ‘victims’, many were over 16, were explicitly paid by him for sexual favors, but as I said, in the religion of the lefties, women are the holy ghost and thus can never but never do anything wrong, except where there is a clash between women and non-whites. In that instance, the Almighty, of course, wins all the time.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    About 2.5% of the population of Britain is Pakistani or Bengali. There might be an additional small increment of Muslims from India. The social work industry in Rotherham without a doubt was running on sentiment and ideology, not on calculations of electoral advantage for the Labour Party.
  21. @Anonymous
    Haha, reading the Readers Picks on the NYT is priceless.

    Not even on the most fundamentalist catholic website following the priest scandals would you have seen the top 20 most up-voted comments uniformly and vehemently reject the call for ideological soul-searching. Nope, no soul searching! The police, social workers, and govt. report authors who all claim that PC was a factor are just wrong.

    No soul searching required = upvote, upvote, upvote

    Latin-Mass traditionalists had no investment in the hierarchy as it was in 2001 and were often critical of the Holy See as well; for those authors, it was just another chapter in the post-Vatican II ruin of the Church. As to more mainstream orthodox Catholics, there was considerable upset and no attempt to defend the hierarchy in general (although particular bishops were occasionally defended). The Catholic League largely begged off, as did the publications of Ignatius Press and Crisis, then the leading Catholic magazine in the country. By 2004, the mentality among lay Catholics who participated in fora was so jaundiced that even the most implausible accusations were sometimes accepted (e.g. against Bp. Hubbard in Albany).

  22. @OsRazor
    "Now, there is an official report."

    That's exactly right. The needed cover for anyone with half a brain or not blind to protect himself against accusations. "Well, it was in the Jay Report, you see." Simply pathetic.

    Obviously, Labour is beyond reprehensible, but where are the other parties? Why isn't this the central issue in the UK right now, not Scottish Independence, or the new royal baby on the way--why are the Tories and UKIP not saying--"This is the fruit of Labour's plan to inundate this country with non-White immigration."

    What's keeping the other parties from destroying Labour once and for all? Working class White British are the backbone of Labour. What am I missing?

    It's the answer to Frank's question "What's the Matter with Kansas?", a liberal's wonderment that working class Whites don't vote for the economic interests--Democrats. Sure, a few dollars is fine, but my 12 year-old daughter is even more important.

    Scottish independence would have the following effect on UK Parliament

    Conservatives 303 to 302 (-1)
    Labour 257 to 216 (-41)
    LibDems 56 tgo 45 (-11)

    Seats needed for the majority 325 to 293.

    So conservatives become an absolute majority, no need to join with the pro-immigration LibDems to hold onto power. And the biggest threat to that majority is UKIP, so Conservatives will have to move to the right on national issues. Notice the biggest percentage blow is to LibDems, already facing rapid decline. This could be their death blow, allowing UKIP to become a real party in Parliament (they are still stuck at 0 in the Commons.)

    The Scotch electorate may also change its tune post-independence when it realizes that its immigration policy effects mainly Scotland, not mainly England with minor effects on Scotland.

    Going back to history, part of the deal for Union was that King James of Scotland also became king of England. But when the English dumped the Stuarts, the deal was broken. Scottish voters, your ancestors fought and many died for their freedom from perfidious Albion. You owe them your vote at least!

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The Stuarts were monarchs of England and Scotland jointly beginning with James I (England)/James VI (Scotland), but the kingdoms were not united until 1707, if I'm not mistaken. Also, when the Hanoverians took over the monarchy after the last Stuart (Queen Anne), the new king, George I, was a descendant of James I (James's great grandson, I think), and therefore his claim to either throne would have been equally strong (or weak) had the thrones not already been merged.
    , @Wilkey
    MP Carswell defected to UKIP just a week or two ago. Tories have 302, and would have 301 after Scottish independence, which will actually happen after the next elections, if it happens.
  23. when heterosexual priests and nuns left in large numbers from the 1960s onward, often to marry each other, the priesthood became increasingly gay dominated and gay protective: thus, the endless gay scandals.

    I don’t know. Gay priests abusing boys have been around for a very long time. Late 19th century/early 20th century German and Czech popular culture was often anti-Catholic and often full of references and jokes about priests buggering boys. For some reason, much like English headmasters buggering boys, people tolerated it to a surprising extent. I assume the priests and headmasters knew which boys were least likely to cause trouble or have important parents. I think the gay priest scandals of recent decades were driven by gay activists. They realized that a lot of straight people associate gays with pedophilia, and making pedophilia seem like something peculiar to the priesthood and/or white authority figures has the dual benefit of making regular gay men seem less threatening while simultaneously undermining an unfriendly cultural institution.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    I don’t know. Gay priests abusing boys have been around for a very long time.

    You can find medieval penitentials with references to this sin, so it was known. That it was known is different from saying it was a systematic problem in the clergy (and, per Patrick Henry Reardon and others who were in minor seminary ca. 1962, it was very foreign to anyone's thinking at that time and did not appear in the manuals of moral theology from which they were taught). By way of example, there are laws against kidnapping for ransom and blowing up buildings, but these are rare crimes.
  24. while priestly celibacy in the Roman Catholic Church is a 1,000-year-old tradition and is intertwined with the budgetary structure of the Church

    The preference for celibates dates from apostolic times, and there is scant evidence that the Church ever permitted priests to marry subsequent to their ordination (though married men were ordained). The eastern Churches came to be more congenial to a married parish clergy after the 6th century (not to married bishops), the western Church less so.

    • Replies: @TGGP
    There may have been a "preference" for celibacy, but the 11th century rule forbidding priests to marry was in response to the common problem of priests (yes, ordained ones) marrying into local political families, thus dividing their loyalty between state & church. An excellent account of the changes in that period is Harold Berman's "Law & Revolution".
  25. For basically the same reason, I support independence for Quebec. They are left of center, but post independence would be a small community setting its own immigration policy. And they’d shift the center of power rightward for the rest of Canada.

    Notice that people in places like Marin County support open boarders for the USA as a whole, but not for their own county. The smaller the country, the more people care about who comes to live there.

    Canada would also need to overhaul its own immigration system to deal with Quebec citizen immigration, and may find this a good time to improve a system that is pretty broken.

    While Canada’s system has better skills-based policies than that USA, their sheer numbers are far too high, their welfare system makes each welfare-case immigrant more harmful, and they’ve managed to attract an increasing stream of Afro-Caribbean immigrants. Canada also manages to attract a lot of Muslims and low-IQ south asians, while we skim the high-IQ south Asian cream.

  26. @Anonymous
    Steve, the situation is far more nuanced than that.
    For starters, Rotherham was a former mining town, in fact the main center of mining in the huge south Yorkshire coalfield, and was rock solid behind Arthur Scargill, (communist), in the climactic and ultimately futile strike of 1983-4, in which Maggie essentially gutted the British mining industry. Whatever lies and excuses you here about the reason why Pakistanis were massively imported into Britain, it was most certainly NOT to man heavy industry. I can confidently tell you that not one single Pakistani man ever hewed coal at the face of a Rotherham pit. The Pakistanis came, in the overwhelming number of cases, by abusing marriage visas and other crooked means.
    This leads to a further point. The way that voting trends/demographics are developing in the UK mean that the Labour Party is locked into a true symbiotic relationship with third world immigrants and Pakistanis in particular. They both depend on each to survive, and as the highest law of any organisation is self preservation, the Labour Party increasingly panders to Pakistanis to the extent that it really has become little more than the vector by which sharia law will eventually be established in Britain, a hard fact of life, but a fact nevertheless, in the sense that he who pays the piper calls the tune.Fortunately, working class Brits have noticed what is going on and bare drifting to UKIP.
    Another point is the clash of the tectonic plates between the father and holy ghost of the lefty trinity is non-whites and women. In this clash, the father (race) will always beat the holy ghost (women).A crucial issue in thge Rotherham scandal is the acquiescence of the girls to the sexual abuse, the girls being below the age of consent and thus sex being illegal despite agreement. It's an unfortunate fact if the scandal, but it's true, the girls gave their consent to the Pakistani abusers. In thge recent slate of 'celebrity nonce' she abuse cases that have rocked Britain eg Jimmy Savile, Savile was widely and massively vilified despite the fact that most of his 'victims', many were over 16, were explicitly paid by him for sexual favors, but as I said, in the religion of the lefties, women are the holy ghost and thus can never but never do anything wrong, except where there is a clash between women and non-whites. In that instance, the Almighty, of course, wins all the time.

    About 2.5% of the population of Britain is Pakistani or Bengali. There might be an additional small increment of Muslims from India. The social work industry in Rotherham without a doubt was running on sentiment and ideology, not on calculations of electoral advantage for the Labour Party.

    • Replies: @Sean
    Labour as a white working class party, which does not benefit from Muslim support. That is laughable. Here is an example of what Labour's Muslim councillors in Rotherham are like: Baron Ahmed
    , @Laban
    "The social work industry in Rotherham without a doubt was running on sentiment and ideology, not on calculations of electoral advantage for the Labour Party."

    Most social workers in the UK would consider the Labour Party too right-wing, but given the lack of credible left wing alternatives would not wish to give ammunition to the "Right" or to "racists".
  27. @Peter Akuleyev

    when heterosexual priests and nuns left in large numbers from the 1960s onward, often to marry each other, the priesthood became increasingly gay dominated and gay protective: thus, the endless gay scandals.
     
    I don't know. Gay priests abusing boys have been around for a very long time. Late 19th century/early 20th century German and Czech popular culture was often anti-Catholic and often full of references and jokes about priests buggering boys. For some reason, much like English headmasters buggering boys, people tolerated it to a surprising extent. I assume the priests and headmasters knew which boys were least likely to cause trouble or have important parents. I think the gay priest scandals of recent decades were driven by gay activists. They realized that a lot of straight people associate gays with pedophilia, and making pedophilia seem like something peculiar to the priesthood and/or white authority figures has the dual benefit of making regular gay men seem less threatening while simultaneously undermining an unfriendly cultural institution.

    I don’t know. Gay priests abusing boys have been around for a very long time.

    You can find medieval penitentials with references to this sin, so it was known. That it was known is different from saying it was a systematic problem in the clergy (and, per Patrick Henry Reardon and others who were in minor seminary ca. 1962, it was very foreign to anyone’s thinking at that time and did not appear in the manuals of moral theology from which they were taught). By way of example, there are laws against kidnapping for ransom and blowing up buildings, but these are rare crimes.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Kidnapping seems to be way down over the course of my lifetime. Or the media doesn't pay attention to it. It's way up in Mexico over my lifetime, however.
  28. I think the gay priest scandals of recent decades were driven by gay activists.

    No, mostly ambulance chasing lawyers (John Aretekis, Jeffrey Anderson) and victims-on-salary (David Clohessy). There has been a severe problem, but also a certain amount of grift-and-graft (esp. re the residential schools scandals in Canada).

  29. @Art Deco
    I don’t know. Gay priests abusing boys have been around for a very long time.

    You can find medieval penitentials with references to this sin, so it was known. That it was known is different from saying it was a systematic problem in the clergy (and, per Patrick Henry Reardon and others who were in minor seminary ca. 1962, it was very foreign to anyone's thinking at that time and did not appear in the manuals of moral theology from which they were taught). By way of example, there are laws against kidnapping for ransom and blowing up buildings, but these are rare crimes.

    Kidnapping seems to be way down over the course of my lifetime. Or the media doesn’t pay attention to it. It’s way up in Mexico over my lifetime, however.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    The omnipresence of security cameras has made it too risky in the populated areas of the United States, among other things.
  30. ; actually I suspect Anonymous is more correct. It was the Labour party covering up.

    As Steve would point out, after all, it has largely been Democrats persecuting the black man since 1965.

    As I said yesterday, if Ray rice beats up a woman, that is horrible. If Michael Brown beats up an arab, he is an angel.

  31. On the topic of teenage black gays, I knew one in 8th grade. He had a very gay voice, lisp, long s, articulating long words too carefully, the whole nine yards, and obvious but not extreme gay mannerisms, but was protected from abuse by his female friends.

    I don’t think he had any male friends at all, but was never once physically bullied. It would have been a bit like hitting a girl. The closest thing to bullied was that he was often asked he was gay, and it was amusing to hear him deny it in an extremely gay voice.

    He also was the only boy in school I knew who took church seriously. I would not be surprised if he ended up married to a woman given the black sex ratio and his extreme religiosity. He wasn’t very smart, but studied hard and stayed out of trouble, perhaps leading to someone at his church getting him a secure local government job and an unattractive wife who was OK with such a husband provided that he did his husbandly duty a few times for a kid and otherwise did not embarrass her.

  32. I read Lawrence (Looming Towers) Wright on the “Missing 28 Pages” in RCP and was reminded yet again that our policy of granting visas to aliens from terrorist states was key to the 9/11 attacks. No muslims on visa, no 9/11. Outrage all over again. Revoke all middle east visas now.

  33. Japan is so much better at this stuff.

    Japan needed extra labour for some dirty work in the ’90s. This was just after the Iran-Iraq War and Iran had a labour surplus because of decommissioned soldiers. A deal was struck and thousand of Iranians went to Japan.

    The predictable happened- rapes , assaults, drug and gun violence………..
    The Japanese simply corrected their mistake . They cancelled the program and deported them. End of problem.

    Japan has a huge advantage in that its SWPLs gain status mainly through drinking expensive bottled water and going on overseas vacations Importing millions of Third World savages would not even occur to them.

  34. I still believe the reaction or non-reaction in the UK is the sign of a sick society. Most parents would sacrifice their lives if necessary to save their children. So much so that when a parent callously abuses or neglects their child, others find it abhorrent and step in to intervene. With 1400 girls or more being abused, I cannot believe that not one of their parents or relatives has taken matters into their own hands. I also cannot believe the community at large is not up in arms.

    Look at what happened in Ferguson when a non-black killed a black. Despite the narrative unraveling with the release of new evidence, the black community was upset that a white cop had killed one of their own, evidence be damned.

    Why haven’t the locals in Rotherham done the same? Leaving vigilantism aside, shouldn’t the locals march in the streets right up to both mosques and government offices and in effect shout that classic line by Howard Beale, “we’re mad as hell, and we are not going to take this anymore.”

    The fact that nothing like this is happening worries me more than the actual crimes. If there were a Ferguson-type reaction, I might be confident that this won’t happen again. But with no reaction, I am sure it won’t be long before the next batch of girls are abused.

  35. The white working class is broken. For so many centuries the enemy of non-whites. Why God would want it so is not really a mystery. Fun time’s been LONG over in the white world.

  36. “the rapes also went unpunished because of racially inflected misogyny among police officers, who seemed to think that white girls exploited by immigrant men were “tarts” who deserved roughly what they got”

    I don’t think it’s as simple as that. At the front-line of policing, there’s no doubt that the sex lives of the white underclass (from which more than a few of these girls come) are viewed as a pain in the ****, Shayne accusing Wayne of harassing her because she’s now with Dwayne etc, cases which take up a lot of time only to be marked NFA (no further action) . But front line police have daughters too. They also have careers, and senior officers who really, really don’t want accusations of racism to blight their careers. It’s from the head that the fish rots.

    They’ll also find that, at least in the early stages, the girls will throw racism charges around – kryptonite to a public servant of any sort. From a Julie Bindel piece in the Times :

    http://ukcommentators.blogspot.com/2008/03/grooming-on-sunday-afternoon.html

    “The pimps are adept at trading on teenage rebellion and use similar methods… of convincing the girls all white people are racist. This is part of the controlling process, to instil guilt in the girls. “Like most teenagers, I was going through a phase of arguing with my mum,” says Gemma. “Amir told me they didn’t understand me and were racist and ignorant. I believed him.” Gemma was given an Asian name by Amir, and told she had to read the Koran, a story support workers tell me is not uncommon. “They erode the girls’ identities,” says Kosaraju, “to make them more compliant and needy.”

    Few of the girls know, or are willing to acknowledge, they are being pimped. Because they claim to love the men, and think of them as their boyfriends, police often see that as an admission from the girls of consent. “As far as I was concerned, Amir was my boyfriend,” says Gemma. “When he told me I had to sleep with his friends, I had no idea he was being paid for it. I was on a lot of drugs and he said I had to pay for them.””

    Here’s a post on an (anonymised) case from anonymous police blogger Nightjack – since outed by the Times in a disgraceful episode. Most of the UK police blogs are now defunct. He tells it like it is and no misogny there.

    http://nightjackarchive.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03/24-hours-to-crack-case-part-two-230308.html

  37. Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:

    Whoopity-doopity-doo…

    Do you suppose diversity restored moral advantage to the upper classes in Britain?

    Before UK got diverse, the moral dynamic was about classes.

    In the old days, the upper classes felt morally superior in the UK since virtues were so closely associated with good manners, fine breeding, erudition, wit, elegance, and all that hoity-toity stuff.
    So, the English gentleman felt superior in every way, even in morality, to the dirty lower classes who spoke cockney and such. And the lower classes understood this. So, lower middle class aspired to be like middle class, middle class aspired to be like upper middle class, and upper middle class aspired to be like the rich, and etc.
    Even the lower class slobs filled with resentment felt some of this, which is why they tipped their hats and said ‘aye guvnor’ to rich folks on horseback passing by.

    But then came the rise of labor movement in the late 19th century and 20th century. There was also the rise of popular culture and youth rebellion after WWII.
    The upper classes were no longer looked up to but seen an pretentious, arrogant, shallow, privileged, snobby, preening, and a big pain in the ass. Even upper class children listened to rock music and began to act more common, especially at soccer games.

    So, the morality was on the side of the lower classes, the working class, even the grubby class, as during the punk era.

    As long as UK was mostly white, the conflict was rich vs poor, and the rich were on the moral defensive.

    But then came diversity. The rich could use the diversity card to accuse the have-nots of ‘racism’. This card was played by both rich right and rich left.

    Thatcher used to remark how the immigrants were working so hard and trying to make the social climb. They didn’t ask for handouts but believed in business. They aspired to climb like the ladder like Britons of old. They were so much better than all those white louts who were complaining all the times, always calling for strikes, always calling for more social spending.

    But Blair and New Labour used this card much more effectively. As neo-Thatcherites who embraced the culture of New Wealth and New Privilege–especially as the new crop of successful businessmen tended to be ‘progressive’ (at least as a form of vanity) than ‘conservative’, Blair in UK(and Clinton in US) made peace with the rich class.
    Paradoxically, they found the most effective means to batter down the ‘egalitarianism’ of white class warriors by shaming the white working class with ‘racism’ against non-whites.
    So, if white working class said to the rich, ‘you exploit us’, the rich said to the white working class, ‘you’re racist against blacks and Pakistanis’. And since the elites spread multi-culti diversity worshi p as the MAIN MORAL ISSUE via mass education and mass media, most white working class folks fell for this bait. They were too busy defending themselves from charges of ‘racism’ from the elites to charge the elites of waging class war on the working class.

    Today, the British elites are so full of confidence and full of themselves as they go around preening and sneering at the working class and white have-nots as ‘racist scum’. Their attitudes are hardly distinguishable from the attitudes of the traditional British elites toward the poor.

    One reason for the lack of sympathy for white victims in Rotherham was they were lower class whites. Upper class whites didn’t care about them as their own newfound moral superiority was based on guilt-baiting working class/poor whites of ‘racism’.
    As for many poor whites, they mostly remained silent since, if they complained to authorities, their social superiors would look down on them and sneer, ‘are you racist?’

    Of course, white elites in UK don’t need to worry so much about diversity themselves since they get to rub shoulders with only the better elements of the immigrant/non-white community and they get to send their kids to good schools. But for the masses of white Britons who suffer the brunt of immigration and diversity, why they better shut their mouths because if they complained, they would be ‘racist’ and should be flogged or caned.

  38. I think a better explanation than political correctness for the police not doing anything about the abuse is just plain laziness. They did not do anything because they did not have to do anything and did not want to do anything.

    It is possible that one tool used to control pederasts, bouncing them against a wall a few times, was unavailable to the whites policing South Asians.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    I think a better explanation than political correctness for the police not doing anything about the abuse is just plain laziness.

    The local social work authorities are implicated in this, so you'll have to frag one of your client groups if you want to use that excuse.
  39. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Art Deco, you are absolutely and totally wrong – and I bet you don’t even live here or have even been here.
    Firstly, the UK is something like 15% non white at this present moment. Reliably, the number of non whites doubles every 15 years, and will continue to do so in the future. This trend cannot and will not plateau. Sometime around 2050 the UK will be majority non white. Count on it. It is an absolute racing certainty. A report in the Daily Mail recently said that white British school age kids declined by something like 12% in numbers in the past decade, whilst non white school kids doubled in numbers. According to the Mail, by 2037, non white kids will be the majority of English school students.
    Now, non whites in the UK and Pakistanis in particular vote for Labour at a rate of around 90%. Traditionally in UK General Elections the winning margin between the Tories and Labour has been rather small, in the order of less than 10% and more like 5%. There’s no doubt where this is heading.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Chum, the perpetrators here are not 'non-whites'. They are Pakistani. Muslims from the subcontinent do not constitute 15% of Britain's population. They are a shade north of 2.5%, and disproportionately resident aliens. Not too difficult to check this.
  40. @Art Deco
    About 2.5% of the population of Britain is Pakistani or Bengali. There might be an additional small increment of Muslims from India. The social work industry in Rotherham without a doubt was running on sentiment and ideology, not on calculations of electoral advantage for the Labour Party.

    Labour as a white working class party, which does not benefit from Muslim support. That is laughable. Here is an example of what Labour’s Muslim councillors in Rotherham are like: Baron Ahmed

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Chum, they're not twisting themselves in knots for a marginal (and speculative) increment of electoral benefit to be had from some subset of 2.5% of the population (disproportionately composed of resident aliens). Also, the social workers are not running for office.
  41. @Steve Sailer
    Kidnapping seems to be way down over the course of my lifetime. Or the media doesn't pay attention to it. It's way up in Mexico over my lifetime, however.

    The omnipresence of security cameras has made it too risky in the populated areas of the United States, among other things.

  42. @Sean
    Labour as a white working class party, which does not benefit from Muslim support. That is laughable. Here is an example of what Labour's Muslim councillors in Rotherham are like: Baron Ahmed

    Chum, they’re not twisting themselves in knots for a marginal (and speculative) increment of electoral benefit to be had from some subset of 2.5% of the population (disproportionately composed of resident aliens). Also, the social workers are not running for office.

  43. – the media gave much coverage to the Catholic Church scandals, while it covered up the Pakistani pimps stories.

    Is that really true, Steve? I thought the media only just got wind of this story, and it’s been given prominent coverage. The cover ups were perpetrated by the officialdom.

    Or maybe I am wrong. Were there any news outlets that heard of these stories but refused to print them?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "I thought the media only just got wind of this story, and it’s been given prominent coverage."

    Yeah, the police had a TV network spike a documentary about Pakistani pimps grooming white girls until after the election in 2004.

    Read my Taki's piece from 2013:

    http://takimag.com/article/the_real_threat_to_british_elites_steve_sailer/print#axzz3Cn9Z7sxS

    My commenters were prompting me to write it for several years before I finally got around to it.

  44. @Anonymous
    Art Deco, you are absolutely and totally wrong - and I bet you don't even live here or have even been here.
    Firstly, the UK is something like 15% non white at this present moment. Reliably, the number of non whites doubles every 15 years, and will continue to do so in the future. This trend cannot and will not plateau. Sometime around 2050 the UK will be majority non white. Count on it. It is an absolute racing certainty. A report in the Daily Mail recently said that white British school age kids declined by something like 12% in numbers in the past decade, whilst non white school kids doubled in numbers. According to the Mail, by 2037, non white kids will be the majority of English school students.
    Now, non whites in the UK and Pakistanis in particular vote for Labour at a rate of around 90%. Traditionally in UK General Elections the winning margin between the Tories and Labour has been rather small, in the order of less than 10% and more like 5%. There's no doubt where this is heading.

    Chum, the perpetrators here are not ‘non-whites’. They are Pakistani. Muslims from the subcontinent do not constitute 15% of Britain’s population. They are a shade north of 2.5%, and disproportionately resident aliens. Not too difficult to check this.

  45. @george
    I think a better explanation than political correctness for the police not doing anything about the abuse is just plain laziness. They did not do anything because they did not have to do anything and did not want to do anything.

    It is possible that one tool used to control pederasts, bouncing them against a wall a few times, was unavailable to the whites policing South Asians.

    I think a better explanation than political correctness for the police not doing anything about the abuse is just plain laziness.

    The local social work authorities are implicated in this, so you’ll have to frag one of your client groups if you want to use that excuse.

  46. I think it’s interesting that East Asian (Oriental) females have much lower rates of violent crime victimization in the West than white, black, and Hispanic females. Any idea what accounts for this? Parents instilling helpful prejudices? Native intelligence and quick learning? Less socializing from youth to post-college adulthood?

    • Replies: @FWIW
    Perhaps East Asian women simply aren't as attractive to Western rapists.

    Although they are getting popular as second wives.
  47. @Numinous

    - the media gave much coverage to the Catholic Church scandals, while it covered up the Pakistani pimps stories.
     
    Is that really true, Steve? I thought the media only just got wind of this story, and it's been given prominent coverage. The cover ups were perpetrated by the officialdom.

    Or maybe I am wrong. Were there any news outlets that heard of these stories but refused to print them?

    “I thought the media only just got wind of this story, and it’s been given prominent coverage.”

    Yeah, the police had a TV network spike a documentary about Pakistani pimps grooming white girls until after the election in 2004.

    Read my Taki’s piece from 2013:

    http://takimag.com/article/the_real_threat_to_british_elites_steve_sailer/print#axzz3Cn9Z7sxS

    My commenters were prompting me to write it for several years before I finally got around to it.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Yeah, the police had a TV network spike a documentary about Pakistani pimps grooming white girls until after the election in 2004.

    I think it is characteristic of the media that they would be responsive to this request.
  48. @Art Deco
    About 2.5% of the population of Britain is Pakistani or Bengali. There might be an additional small increment of Muslims from India. The social work industry in Rotherham without a doubt was running on sentiment and ideology, not on calculations of electoral advantage for the Labour Party.

    “The social work industry in Rotherham without a doubt was running on sentiment and ideology, not on calculations of electoral advantage for the Labour Party.”

    Most social workers in the UK would consider the Labour Party too right-wing, but given the lack of credible left wing alternatives would not wish to give ammunition to the “Right” or to “racists”.

  49. Our society is generally set up pretty well to keep adult men in positions of authority away from too much time alone with underage girls. So, a wildly disproportionate fraction of these kinds of abuse cases are gay..

    For the safety of both boys and girls, I’d ban male teachers from kindergarten through junior high.

    • Replies: @David R. Merridale
    For the safety of both boys and girls, I’d ban male teachers from kindergarten through junior high.

    But let them loose just when the girls (or boys, if you're that way inclined) become most alluring.

    Makes sense.

    Seriously, there are very few men in K-8 schools, but, arguably, having more would be a good thing, given how many kids don't have an adult male figure in their lives.
  50. @Steve Sailer
    "I thought the media only just got wind of this story, and it’s been given prominent coverage."

    Yeah, the police had a TV network spike a documentary about Pakistani pimps grooming white girls until after the election in 2004.

    Read my Taki's piece from 2013:

    http://takimag.com/article/the_real_threat_to_british_elites_steve_sailer/print#axzz3Cn9Z7sxS

    My commenters were prompting me to write it for several years before I finally got around to it.

    Yeah, the police had a TV network spike a documentary about Pakistani pimps grooming white girls until after the election in 2004.

    I think it is characteristic of the media that they would be responsive to this request.

    • Replies: @Sean
    The documentary was not about Muslim gangs, it was about the work of the social work department. Anyone who thinks British television would commission a documentary about Pakistani pimps grooming white girls is living in a fantasy world.
  51. Ross is failing to comparing like with like.. The comparison for sexual abuse within the Catholic community is sex abuse in Muslim communities or Jewish ones .That kind of thing is often unreported (being by fathers and other relatives) but there seems to be agreement there is not a little of it, all over.

    People get preferment in social work departments run by local Labour councils unless they play a political game. The social workers are Labour people, and some are themselves Asian. Here is proof from 10 years ago:- Edge of the City, a documentary on Bradford’s social services, has been screened by Channel 4 after being dropped in May after police warned it could inflame racial tensions at local election time.

    It was about social services but here is how it was perceived Campaign to stop race documentary. Police feared the show would spark riots, as seen in Bradford in 2001.

    2010 article‘Colin Cramphorn, the then Chief Constable of West Yorkshire, joined groups such as Unite against Fascism in calling for the documentary to be withdrawn. Channel 4 complied, saying that the issue was not censorship but timing because of the proximity with the local and European elections. But many argued at the time that the delay in transmission had strengthened the case of the BNP.

    After the film was withdrawn, one of the mothers sent Annie Hall a text message: “It’s a real shame when votes come before young girls’ lives.”‘

  52. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Art Deco. British General Elections are decided in what are called ‘key marginals’ is constituencies which the difference between labour and the Tories is small and variable. In many of these constituencies – enough to swing the results of a general election, the subcon population of the constituency is the crucial factor.
    Look stop all your blather about 2.5%. Obviously you know very very little about the reality of the UK political scene and all you are doing is annoying me and embarrassing yourself.
    If my words are not good enough for you, I suggest you go over to Lord Ashcroft’s blog and read his conclusions. Lord Ashcroft is a very very rich Tory supporter and donor with a passionate interest in UK politics who has commissioned expensive and extensive research on this subject, but I suppose you know better than he does.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Look stop all your blather about 2.5%.

    What are you going to do, sue me?

    You start with 2.5%. With scant doubt, that's disproportionately composed of non-citizens. Then you subtract the portion whose electoral behavior is unaffected by this sort of thing, and then you have diddly/squat left, and diddly/squat of interest to the worst sort of Machiavellian in electoral politics, not a county civil servant.


    Obviously you know very very little about the reality of the UK political scene and all you are doing is annoying me and embarrassing yourself.

    One of us is innumerate. The other one isn't.
  53. Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:

    This Rotherham stuff isn’t only about race. Suppose these rapes had been done to rich white girls. No way this could have gone on.
    It was because the victims were ‘poor white trash’ that this was overlooked.
    It’s like Jews in media made a fuss about Knockout game when victims were Jewish but don’t give a crap when the victims are poor whites.

    That said, what has happened to white culture in UK? Putting aside the malfeasance of the cops and authorities… why did so many British people raise kids like this?

    How did they get so shupid? Consider the cult worship if Princess Diana among the Brit masses. And why? She was some tabloid bimbo who was into junk pop culture and globetrotting with the playboys of the world.

    • Replies: @Sean
    That is what the Rothernam gang called them: 'white trash’. It is an American expression.
  54. That scene in Doubt is weird because the mother tells the principal nun that the kids just don’t like him, but doesn’t imply it is about race. So that suggests that it might be because he is homosexual, but I’m not sure that’s what was intended.

    What I don’t understand is how Doubt got produced first as a play and later as a movie. Was it an attempt to critique the church that wildly misfired, or was it actually a play constructed to advance the most reactionary interpretation of the Church scandal, that left-wing priests over the objections of the forbidding but orthodox priests and nuns where the most likely predators?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Pretty much your last interpretation. Shanley is an alpha playwright and had a huge hit with the movie Moonstruck so he pretty much gets to do what he likes in New York theater. My review quotes some interviews with him where he pretty much spells out what "Doubt" is about. Like I often say, the top dog guys in the creative arts aren't as PC as the lower layer, but a lot of people just don't notice.
    , @Art Deco
    The reviews I read suggested it was as ambiguous as these situations often are. On a historical note, it has been difficult to discern much of a relationship between the degree of orthodoxy and decorum in a diocese and the extent of these problems. Wouldn't blame modern priests, however annoying they are in other circumstances. Two thoughts:

    1. It is difficult to code dioceses correctly because the regime tends to change when the bishop changes and problem priests often went through formation under one bishop, worked under the disciplines of his successor, and then faced inquiries under a third.

    2. Another is that that simply was not an influential factor in determining the frequency of these problems. The Second Vatican Council was hideously damaging, but these problems were burgeoning when the Church was experiencing robust health in the United States and the perpetrators were generally priests formed under the ancien regime. Of course, the liturgical disasters have been perpetrated by those same priests.
  55. @Sam Haysom
    That scene in Doubt is weird because the mother tells the principal nun that the kids just don't like him, but doesn't imply it is about race. So that suggests that it might be because he is homosexual, but I'm not sure that's what was intended.

    What I don't understand is how Doubt got produced first as a play and later as a movie. Was it an attempt to critique the church that wildly misfired, or was it actually a play constructed to advance the most reactionary interpretation of the Church scandal, that left-wing priests over the objections of the forbidding but orthodox priests and nuns where the most likely predators?

    Pretty much your last interpretation. Shanley is an alpha playwright and had a huge hit with the movie Moonstruck so he pretty much gets to do what he likes in New York theater. My review quotes some interviews with him where he pretty much spells out what “Doubt” is about. Like I often say, the top dog guys in the creative arts aren’t as PC as the lower layer, but a lot of people just don’t notice.

  56. @Art Deco
    Yeah, the police had a TV network spike a documentary about Pakistani pimps grooming white girls until after the election in 2004.

    I think it is characteristic of the media that they would be responsive to this request.

    The documentary was not about Muslim gangs, it was about the work of the social work department. Anyone who thinks British television would commission a documentary about Pakistani pimps grooming white girls is living in a fantasy world.

  57. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Lot
    Scottish independence would have the following effect on UK Parliament

    Conservatives 303 to 302 (-1)
    Labour 257 to 216 (-41)
    LibDems 56 tgo 45 (-11)

    Seats needed for the majority 325 to 293.

    So conservatives become an absolute majority, no need to join with the pro-immigration LibDems to hold onto power. And the biggest threat to that majority is UKIP, so Conservatives will have to move to the right on national issues. Notice the biggest percentage blow is to LibDems, already facing rapid decline. This could be their death blow, allowing UKIP to become a real party in Parliament (they are still stuck at 0 in the Commons.)

    The Scotch electorate may also change its tune post-independence when it realizes that its immigration policy effects mainly Scotland, not mainly England with minor effects on Scotland.

    Going back to history, part of the deal for Union was that King James of Scotland also became king of England. But when the English dumped the Stuarts, the deal was broken. Scottish voters, your ancestors fought and many died for their freedom from perfidious Albion. You owe them your vote at least!

    The Stuarts were monarchs of England and Scotland jointly beginning with James I (England)/James VI (Scotland), but the kingdoms were not united until 1707, if I’m not mistaken. Also, when the Hanoverians took over the monarchy after the last Stuart (Queen Anne), the new king, George I, was a descendant of James I (James’s great grandson, I think), and therefore his claim to either throne would have been equally strong (or weak) had the thrones not already been merged.

  58. @Priss Factor
    This Rotherham stuff isn't only about race. Suppose these rapes had been done to rich white girls. No way this could have gone on.
    It was because the victims were 'poor white trash' that this was overlooked.
    It's like Jews in media made a fuss about Knockout game when victims were Jewish but don't give a crap when the victims are poor whites.

    That said, what has happened to white culture in UK? Putting aside the malfeasance of the cops and authorities... why did so many British people raise kids like this?

    How did they get so shupid? Consider the cult worship if Princess Diana among the Brit masses. And why? She was some tabloid bimbo who was into junk pop culture and globetrotting with the playboys of the world.

    That is what the Rothernam gang called them: ‘white trash’. It is an American expression.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "That is what the Rothernam gang called them: ‘white trash’. It is an American expression."

    Bloody white trash?
  59. “Chum, the perpetrators here are not ‘non-whites’. They are Pakistani.”

    Pakistanis are Nonwhites.

  60. “I still believe the reaction or non-reaction in the UK is the sign of a sick society. Most parents would sacrifice their lives if necessary to save their children. So much so that when a parent callously abuses or neglects their child, others find it abhorrent and step in to intervene. With 1400 girls or more being abused, I cannot believe that not one of their parents or relatives has taken matters into their own hands. I also cannot believe the community at large is not up in arms.

    Look at what happened in Ferguson when a non-black killed a black. Despite the narrative unraveling with the release of new evidence, the black community was upset that a white cop had killed one of their own, evidence be damned.

    Why haven’t the locals in Rotherham done the same? Leaving vigilantism aside, shouldn’t the locals march in the streets right up to both mosques and government offices and in effect shout that classic line by Howard Beale, “we’re mad as hell, and we are not going to take this anymore.”

    The fact that nothing like this is happening worries me more than the actual crimes. If there were a Ferguson-type reaction, I might be confident that this won’t happen again. But with no reaction, I am sure it won’t be long before the next batch of girls are abused.”

    85 percent of the population in England (Whites) are scared to death of 2 percent of the population (Pakistanis). That is why the White community in the there is basically silent on this issue.

    The White British male is the epitome of the beta male.

    • Replies: @Lurker

    85 percent of the population in England (Whites) are scared to death of 2 percent of the population (Pakistanis). That is why the White community in the there is basically silent on this issue.
     
    Its not Pakistanis people are scared of. What they're scared of is public/media vilification, being arrested/prosecuted. Being sacked from their jobs. All measures the tolerant, enlightened elite and their SWPL hangers on wont hesitate to use.

    And as someone said above - if you're identified as a 'racist', you're on your own. The anti-racists can nestle together for safety, sticking it to The man while The Man supports them, protects them etc.

    Its a dismal state of affairs. But eventually the damn will break, I think, and then who knows where we go from there.

  61. WhatEvvs [AKA "Cookies"] says:

    Whenever you talk about the Catholic Church pederasty scandal, I notice that you like to give DOUBT as an example of what really happened, rather than what it was: a movie. In real life, the victims committed suicide in huge numbers. And I don’t think that the press has been very graphic about “Sandusky style sodomy.” Whenever it comes to sodomy we suddenly get very Victorian.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    In real life, the victims committed suicide in huge numbers.

    Rubbish.
  62. @Anonymous
    Art Deco. British General Elections are decided in what are called 'key marginals' is constituencies which the difference between labour and the Tories is small and variable. In many of these constituencies - enough to swing the results of a general election, the subcon population of the constituency is the crucial factor.
    Look stop all your blather about 2.5%. Obviously you know very very little about the reality of the UK political scene and all you are doing is annoying me and embarrassing yourself.
    If my words are not good enough for you, I suggest you go over to Lord Ashcroft's blog and read his conclusions. Lord Ashcroft is a very very rich Tory supporter and donor with a passionate interest in UK politics who has commissioned expensive and extensive research on this subject, but I suppose you know better than he does.

    Look stop all your blather about 2.5%.

    What are you going to do, sue me?

    You start with 2.5%. With scant doubt, that’s disproportionately composed of non-citizens. Then you subtract the portion whose electoral behavior is unaffected by this sort of thing, and then you have diddly/squat left, and diddly/squat of interest to the worst sort of Machiavellian in electoral politics, not a county civil servant.

    Obviously you know very very little about the reality of the UK political scene and all you are doing is annoying me and embarrassing yourself.

    One of us is innumerate. The other one isn’t.

  63. @Sam Haysom
    That scene in Doubt is weird because the mother tells the principal nun that the kids just don't like him, but doesn't imply it is about race. So that suggests that it might be because he is homosexual, but I'm not sure that's what was intended.

    What I don't understand is how Doubt got produced first as a play and later as a movie. Was it an attempt to critique the church that wildly misfired, or was it actually a play constructed to advance the most reactionary interpretation of the Church scandal, that left-wing priests over the objections of the forbidding but orthodox priests and nuns where the most likely predators?

    The reviews I read suggested it was as ambiguous as these situations often are. On a historical note, it has been difficult to discern much of a relationship between the degree of orthodoxy and decorum in a diocese and the extent of these problems. Wouldn’t blame modern priests, however annoying they are in other circumstances. Two thoughts:

    1. It is difficult to code dioceses correctly because the regime tends to change when the bishop changes and problem priests often went through formation under one bishop, worked under the disciplines of his successor, and then faced inquiries under a third.

    2. Another is that that simply was not an influential factor in determining the frequency of these problems. The Second Vatican Council was hideously damaging, but these problems were burgeoning when the Church was experiencing robust health in the United States and the perpetrators were generally priests formed under the ancien regime. Of course, the liturgical disasters have been perpetrated by those same priests.

  64. The Labour MP for Rotherham says Rotherham is not an isolated incident “I’ve also had [Muslim] family members come to my [parliamentary] surgery asking me to make representations on behalf of brothers who have been found guilty of child sex abuse. When I refuse, I frequently receive a tirade of abuse. “These girls are prostitutes,” one man shouted at me, and warned that I would pay a heavy price for not supporting him. He’d get thousands of people not to vote for me.”

    Read about the way the Mafia used political influence over Sicily, and even over Italy as a whole.

  65. @WhatEvvs
    Whenever you talk about the Catholic Church pederasty scandal, I notice that you like to give DOUBT as an example of what really happened, rather than what it was: a movie. In real life, the victims committed suicide in huge numbers. And I don't think that the press has been very graphic about "Sandusky style sodomy." Whenever it comes to sodomy we suddenly get very Victorian.

    In real life, the victims committed suicide in huge numbers.

    Rubbish.

    • Replies: @Sean
    Two are known to have been murdered in Blackpool.
  66. “The White British male is the epitome of the beta male.”

    Oh stuff it. You’re starting to sound like our resident troll Whiskey.

    They aren’t going to march because they know exactly what will happen. Screaming “anti-fascists” will show up and start a violent confrontation. They the police will arrive and arrest the leaders and send everyone else home. The leaders will be charged with “racism” (which is practically a capital crime to the modern day UK) and subject to lengthy trials and probably a jail sentence. And their families will be bankrupted and their reputations ruined.

  67. Our society is generally set up pretty well to keep adult men in positions of authority away from too much time alone with underage girls. So, a wildly disproportionate fraction of these kinds of abuse cases are gay.

    The men who commit them are adults around boys and girls alike.

  68. Dahlia says:
    @Anonymous
    Haha, reading the Readers Picks on the NYT is priceless.

    Not even on the most fundamentalist catholic website following the priest scandals would you have seen the top 20 most up-voted comments uniformly and vehemently reject the call for ideological soul-searching. Nope, no soul searching! The police, social workers, and govt. report authors who all claim that PC was a factor are just wrong.

    No soul searching required = upvote, upvote, upvote

    I noticed that, too, but not on the British and Irish side where it is happening or they’re now wondering if it is happening.

    On another aspect, that class is at fault, doesn’t seem satisfactory. Australia, Netherlands, and Scotland are places I can name off the top of my head that have had at least one arrest over sex slavery of minors but they don’t have England’s reputation for being class-ridden.

  69. “…why are the Tories and UKIP not saying–”This is the fruit of Labour’s plan to inundate this country with non-White immigration.”

    UKIP has been implying it. But they couldn’t outright say it or they would face prosecution. Those trying to shed light on this have been suppressed by government authority. In PC Britain, better to be a rapist than an accused racist.

    I strongly suggest people do more reading on this. PC sickness in Britain is systemic. And we’re not far behind.

  70. The situation in Rotherham, from what I’ve read, is about denigrating women, not about liberals giving foreigners benefit of the doubt.

    Yes, this is to be the Liberal Narrative: ignore the fact that the criminals were Muslim Pakis, trumpet the fact that they were men. The typical sort of misdirection we’ve come to expect from the lying left.

    Of course, it’s not men in general perpetrating this sort of ethnic community organized crime. And it’s not men in general getting the shield of protection of the PC media establishment. It’s Muslim Paki men.

    This is nothing new. When Jews do something wrong, the perps are “white.” When homosexuals abuse boys they’re “pedophiles.” When Blacks rape they’re “men.”

    Kidnapping seems to be way down over the course of my lifetime. Or the media doesn’t pay attention to it. It’s way up in Mexico over my lifetime, however.

    Kidnapping is almost impossible to get away with in a first-world society with a proper police force. It’s easier to get away with bank robbery, and last time I heard about the success rate for bank robbery it was under 10%. The key to kidnapping is a family that doesn’t trust the police, key to which is a population that doesn’t trust the police.

    Now, non whites in the UK and Pakistanis in particular vote for Labour at a rate of around 90%.

    The funny thing is, liberals are so firmly in charge of the media, that the rank-and-file openly present this trend as a good thing. Healthy people see that as cause to doubt the people and party getting the foreign vote.

  71. Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:
    @Sean
    That is what the Rothernam gang called them: 'white trash’. It is an American expression.

    “That is what the Rothernam gang called them: ‘white trash’. It is an American expression.”

    Bloody white trash?

  72. “They aren’t going to march because they know exactly what will happen. Screaming “anti-fascists” will show up and start a violent confrontation. ”

    White British males are not afraid of violent confrontations with other football fans during football games, so why should they be afraid of violent confrontations with Pakistanis ?

    ” They the police will arrive and arrest the leaders and send everyone else home.”

    How come White British males are not afraid of being arrested at football games when they cause chaos and violence ?

    White British males only act like bad ass alpha males during football games. But in the presence of Pakistanis they turn into girly men with no balls.

  73. They aren’t going to march because they know exactly what will happen. Screaming “anti-fascists” will show up and start a violent confrontation. They the police will arrive and arrest the leaders and send everyone else home. The leaders will be charged with “racism” (which is practically a capital crime to the modern day UK) and subject to lengthy trials and probably a jail sentence. And their families will be bankrupted and their reputations ruined.

    Who are the screaming anti-fascists? Are they muslims, or fellow white Britons? Now I have no doubt white Britons, or white Americans, marching or assembling for their interests would cause condemnation and social and employment backlash. But there has to be a critical mass of white Britons, or white Americans, that is large enough to become immune to such threats and retaliation.

    The question I have is how large a percentage is needed to achieve a critical mass? I don’t know the exact number, but here are some other data points to compare. Homosexuals comprise about two percent of the population. Yet the threat of a boycott drives many companies to cave to their demands. Ditto for blacks who make up about 12 percent.

    So what percentage of fed up whites would it take to accomplish the same thing? If at least 50 percent of whites are fed up, wouldn’t you believe 15 to 20 percent of whites would be willing to do something easy, such as a boycott, to further their interests? And shouldn’t that number be large enough to protect them from vindictive authorities? Remember, only around 10 percent of the US population at the time was ever actively involved in our Revolution. Surprisingly you don’t need a majority to push your views. But you do need a critical mass to help insulate the individual from the threats that you have pointed out.

    • Replies: @fnn
    The antifa are supported and funded by the state, trade unions, major political parties and likely other sources. "Racists" are on their own. You have to have money to get people organized- I think Saul Alinsky probably wrote something to that effect.
  74. @Anonymous
    Haha, reading the Readers Picks on the NYT is priceless.

    Not even on the most fundamentalist catholic website following the priest scandals would you have seen the top 20 most up-voted comments uniformly and vehemently reject the call for ideological soul-searching. Nope, no soul searching! The police, social workers, and govt. report authors who all claim that PC was a factor are just wrong.

    No soul searching required = upvote, upvote, upvote

    Orwell wrote that if there is hope, it lies in the proles. To paraphrase him, if there is hope, it lies in the comment sections.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    !
  75. I have often read on the Sailer blog that the Catholic scandal was really about homosexuals and I don’t doubt that there is some truth here but I was too young at the time so I simply absorbed the Narrative and I really didn’t get a whiff about the gay angle until I read Sailer.

    “the actual physical acts in most of the Catholic Church scandals were not as brutal as many people imagine (the reason you don’t hear Sandusky-style graphic descriptions of most of the priest and altar boy scandals is because there wasn’t much Sandusky-style sodomy”

    Can Steve(or anybody else) provide some evidence?

  76. @anon
    Orwell wrote that if there is hope, it lies in the proles. To paraphrase him, if there is hope, it lies in the comment sections.

    !

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    "In contrast, England got along fine before it had gangs of Pakistani pimps and it could no doubt get along fine without them in the future."


    Whoa, whoa, hold it, hold it. I'm sure you're not attempting to turn this into a Catholic vs Protestant issue, but, for the record, the Church of England's priests/clergy are not celibate and have been allowed to marry since its founding in the mid 16th century.

    Also, as you stated, the tradition of unmarried clergy dates from around the 11th century or so (e.g. In other words, it's not directly found in the Bible and so wasn't based on the Scriptures for justification).

    But I would assume your larger point was to speak directly to the issues involved and to differentiate them from Rotherdam and Catholic Priest scandals, which is of course the larger picture and fine enough as far as it goes.

    Just that you don't have to take some swipes at Protestantism to make your larger points.

    It's true that Luther's reputation isn't as strong as it once was, but let's not so quickly forget that he started out ordained as a priest (Augustinian order of friars) so his background and learning for better or worse came during his time while adhering to the Church in Rome.

    Just don't have to put down one religion to defend another one.

  77. “Who are the screaming anti-fascists? Are they muslims, or fellow white Britons?”

    Both. Most of the time it’s university students with nothing better to do.

  78. @Steve Sailer
    !

    “In contrast, England got along fine before it had gangs of Pakistani pimps and it could no doubt get along fine without them in the future.”

    Whoa, whoa, hold it, hold it. I’m sure you’re not attempting to turn this into a Catholic vs Protestant issue, but, for the record, the Church of England’s priests/clergy are not celibate and have been allowed to marry since its founding in the mid 16th century.

    Also, as you stated, the tradition of unmarried clergy dates from around the 11th century or so (e.g. In other words, it’s not directly found in the Bible and so wasn’t based on the Scriptures for justification).

    But I would assume your larger point was to speak directly to the issues involved and to differentiate them from Rotherdam and Catholic Priest scandals, which is of course the larger picture and fine enough as far as it goes.

    Just that you don’t have to take some swipes at Protestantism to make your larger points.

    It’s true that Luther’s reputation isn’t as strong as it once was, but let’s not so quickly forget that he started out ordained as a priest (Augustinian order of friars) so his background and learning for better or worse came during his time while adhering to the Church in Rome.

    Just don’t have to put down one religion to defend another one.

  79. Everyone knew what was going on, the police threatened and arrested victims’ fathers who tried to rescue their daughters…

    A desperate father struggling against both uncaring police and organized crime to save his 14-year-old daughter from a life of prostitution. Sounds like a great plot for an action thriller.

    Of course we will have to tweak the facts to suit an American audience. Make the father a poor undocumented immigrant, the cops racist rednecks (think Joe Arpaio) and the pimps blond Russian mobsters.

    Yeah, that’ll work!

    • Replies: @Voltaire's Spinning Corpse

    A desperate father struggling against both uncaring police and organized crime to save his 14-year-old daughter from a life of prostitution. Sounds like a great plot for an action thriller.

    Of course we will have to tweak the facts to suit an American audience. Make the father a poor undocumented immigrant, the cops racist rednecks (think Joe Arpaio) and the pimps blond Russian mobsters.

    Yeah, that’ll work!
     

    And the hero will be a (clearly) jewish lawyer or a black cop!
  80. The problem with White British males is they are a million times more passionate about football teams like Manchester United and Chelsea than they are about keeping Great Britain an ethnically British country.

    In Great Britain football trumps British ethnic tribalism among White British males by a huge landslide. Meanwhile Pakistanis in the U.K put their race and religion over football any day of the week.

    • Replies: @Lurker

    The problem with White British males is they are a million times more passionate about football teams like Manchester United and Chelsea than they are about keeping Great Britain an ethnically British country.
     
    So true. Why its almost as if the were a vast media operation in place to foster and encourage this. It seems to me 30 years ago the hardcore were really serious about their football, hooliganism and all that. But the wider population were just mildly supportive of their teams, it wasnt like the devotion one sees expressed today.

    Of course people are looking for identity, for community. But Big Brother media/politics/education tell them 24/7 they had better not look for that anywhere but sport, Star Wars fandom or whatever if they know whats good for them.
  81. The alleged sexism of the officers in question needs to be explored further. Someone suggested there is perhaps a class element to this: the girls in questions were “chavs”, the kind of girls who are usually reported in the Daily Mail smoking 2 packs of cigs a day and drinking while pregnant at 12. It doesn’t surprise me if this is another reason the police were reluctant to protect them. It’s the parallel development to the moral disintegration of the white working-class described over here by Charles Murray.

  82. @Sam

    Can Steve(or anybody else) provide some evidence?

    I went to an all boys Catholic junior high and high school. This was in the 70s. We all knew which priests were homos, and which liked the little boys and which liked the older ones. Sometimes, a priest would get a crush on a boy that was so obvious it was sad. Obviously, there were a few students who were equally enamored with some of the priests.

    However, 40 years later and I have never heard a single rumor of a priest actually engaging in any sort of sexual activities with a student.

  83. @iSteveFan

    They aren’t going to march because they know exactly what will happen. Screaming “anti-fascists” will show up and start a violent confrontation. They the police will arrive and arrest the leaders and send everyone else home. The leaders will be charged with “racism” (which is practically a capital crime to the modern day UK) and subject to lengthy trials and probably a jail sentence. And their families will be bankrupted and their reputations ruined.
     
    Who are the screaming anti-fascists? Are they muslims, or fellow white Britons? Now I have no doubt white Britons, or white Americans, marching or assembling for their interests would cause condemnation and social and employment backlash. But there has to be a critical mass of white Britons, or white Americans, that is large enough to become immune to such threats and retaliation.

    The question I have is how large a percentage is needed to achieve a critical mass? I don't know the exact number, but here are some other data points to compare. Homosexuals comprise about two percent of the population. Yet the threat of a boycott drives many companies to cave to their demands. Ditto for blacks who make up about 12 percent.

    So what percentage of fed up whites would it take to accomplish the same thing? If at least 50 percent of whites are fed up, wouldn't you believe 15 to 20 percent of whites would be willing to do something easy, such as a boycott, to further their interests? And shouldn't that number be large enough to protect them from vindictive authorities? Remember, only around 10 percent of the US population at the time was ever actively involved in our Revolution. Surprisingly you don't need a majority to push your views. But you do need a critical mass to help insulate the individual from the threats that you have pointed out.

    The antifa are supported and funded by the state, trade unions, major political parties and likely other sources. “Racists” are on their own. You have to have money to get people organized- I think Saul Alinsky probably wrote something to that effect.

  84. celibate priests are cheaper than Protestant preachers with families, which is why Protestantism is heading toward a superstar megachurch structure

    Or why Protestantism is heading toward a house-church structure with unpaid clergy as is commonly its structure in Africa and China.

  85. @Lot
    Scottish independence would have the following effect on UK Parliament

    Conservatives 303 to 302 (-1)
    Labour 257 to 216 (-41)
    LibDems 56 tgo 45 (-11)

    Seats needed for the majority 325 to 293.

    So conservatives become an absolute majority, no need to join with the pro-immigration LibDems to hold onto power. And the biggest threat to that majority is UKIP, so Conservatives will have to move to the right on national issues. Notice the biggest percentage blow is to LibDems, already facing rapid decline. This could be their death blow, allowing UKIP to become a real party in Parliament (they are still stuck at 0 in the Commons.)

    The Scotch electorate may also change its tune post-independence when it realizes that its immigration policy effects mainly Scotland, not mainly England with minor effects on Scotland.

    Going back to history, part of the deal for Union was that King James of Scotland also became king of England. But when the English dumped the Stuarts, the deal was broken. Scottish voters, your ancestors fought and many died for their freedom from perfidious Albion. You owe them your vote at least!

    MP Carswell defected to UKIP just a week or two ago. Tories have 302, and would have 301 after Scottish independence, which will actually happen after the next elections, if it happens.

  86. “I’ve also had [Muslim] family members come to my [parliamentary] surgery asking me to make representations on behalf of brothers who have been found guilty of child sex abuse. When I refuse, I frequently receive a tirade of abuse. “These girls are prostitutes,” one man shouted at me, and warned that I would pay a heavy price for not supporting him. He’d get thousands of people not to vote for me.”

    Sounds like “Ted” is an English Muslim.

  87. “it’s just one of many towns across England afflicted by Pakistani pimps and the politicians and media who covered up for them in the interest of making Labour’s massive immigration policy look better”

    This. A million times this.

    From a Labour Party perspective, ignoring the Paksitani rapists wasn’t about catering to the Pakistani community and fighting over their ~2% of the vote, most of which they’d get anyway. It was about not alerting potential white Labour voters to the consequences of Labour’s immivasion policy. Stories about Pakistani pimps raping tens of thousands of white, native Brits might be bad PR. If Muslims treat the natives this way when they’re only a few percent of the population, how will they treat them when they’re 20-30-50% of the population?

  88. ” Stories about Pakistani pimps raping tens of thousands of white, native Brits might be bad PR. If Muslims treat the natives this way when they’re only a few percent of the population, how will they treat them when they’re 20-30-50% of the population?”

    50 years from now, England will be indistinguishable from Karachi and Islamabad.

  89. “Someone suggested there is perhaps a class element to this: the girls in questions were “chavs”, the kind of girls who are usually reported in the Daily Mail smoking 2 packs of cigs a day and drinking while pregnant at 12.”

    Pregnant at 12 ? Chav girls sound similar to Mexican girls. Do you think it would be fair to say that Chavs are the Mexicans of the U.K ?

  90. @Paul Mendez
    Everyone knew what was going on, the police threatened and arrested victims’ fathers who tried to rescue their daughters...

    A desperate father struggling against both uncaring police and organized crime to save his 14-year-old daughter from a life of prostitution. Sounds like a great plot for an action thriller.

    Of course we will have to tweak the facts to suit an American audience. Make the father a poor undocumented immigrant, the cops racist rednecks (think Joe Arpaio) and the pimps blond Russian mobsters.

    Yeah, that'll work!

    A desperate father struggling against both uncaring police and organized crime to save his 14-year-old daughter from a life of prostitution. Sounds like a great plot for an action thriller.

    Of course we will have to tweak the facts to suit an American audience. Make the father a poor undocumented immigrant, the cops racist rednecks (think Joe Arpaio) and the pimps blond Russian mobsters.

    Yeah, that’ll work!

    And the hero will be a (clearly) jewish lawyer or a black cop!

  91. “Pregnant at 12 ? Chav girls sound similar to Mexican girls. Do you think it would be fair to say that Chavs are the Mexicans of the U.K ?”

    No. Chavs are just the left end of the bell curve of the native Brits. Every population has one. Mexicans are a separate race from the majority US race.

    “50 years from now, England will be indistinguishable from Karachi and Islamabad.”

    That would be, in effect, as the native English just deciding to lay down and die. It could happen, but I wouldn’t bet on it. I think sometime between now and then there will be either mass deportation or civil war. Muslims cannot peacefully coexist with non-Muslims. When the share of Muslims hits 20-30%, the consequences will be unbearable. The English still have some sense of England being their country. But why should they even let it get to that point?

  92. @Art Deco
    while priestly celibacy in the Roman Catholic Church is a 1,000-year-old tradition and is intertwined with the budgetary structure of the Church

    The preference for celibates dates from apostolic times, and there is scant evidence that the Church ever permitted priests to marry subsequent to their ordination (though married men were ordained). The eastern Churches came to be more congenial to a married parish clergy after the 6th century (not to married bishops), the western Church less so.

    There may have been a “preference” for celibacy, but the 11th century rule forbidding priests to marry was in response to the common problem of priests (yes, ordained ones) marrying into local political families, thus dividing their loyalty between state & church. An excellent account of the changes in that period is Harold Berman’s “Law & Revolution”.

  93. I tried editing my comment and got a notification that it was marked as spam. Haven’t seen that before here.

  94. @Jefferson
    "I still believe the reaction or non-reaction in the UK is the sign of a sick society. Most parents would sacrifice their lives if necessary to save their children. So much so that when a parent callously abuses or neglects their child, others find it abhorrent and step in to intervene. With 1400 girls or more being abused, I cannot believe that not one of their parents or relatives has taken matters into their own hands. I also cannot believe the community at large is not up in arms.

    Look at what happened in Ferguson when a non-black killed a black. Despite the narrative unraveling with the release of new evidence, the black community was upset that a white cop had killed one of their own, evidence be damned.

    Why haven’t the locals in Rotherham done the same? Leaving vigilantism aside, shouldn’t the locals march in the streets right up to both mosques and government offices and in effect shout that classic line by Howard Beale, “we’re mad as hell, and we are not going to take this anymore.”

    The fact that nothing like this is happening worries me more than the actual crimes. If there were a Ferguson-type reaction, I might be confident that this won’t happen again. But with no reaction, I am sure it won’t be long before the next batch of girls are abused."

    85 percent of the population in England (Whites) are scared to death of 2 percent of the population (Pakistanis). That is why the White community in the there is basically silent on this issue.

    The White British male is the epitome of the beta male.

    85 percent of the population in England (Whites) are scared to death of 2 percent of the population (Pakistanis). That is why the White community in the there is basically silent on this issue.

    Its not Pakistanis people are scared of. What they’re scared of is public/media vilification, being arrested/prosecuted. Being sacked from their jobs. All measures the tolerant, enlightened elite and their SWPL hangers on wont hesitate to use.

    And as someone said above – if you’re identified as a ‘racist’, you’re on your own. The anti-racists can nestle together for safety, sticking it to The man while The Man supports them, protects them etc.

    Its a dismal state of affairs. But eventually the damn will break, I think, and then who knows where we go from there.

  95. @Jefferson
    The problem with White British males is they are a million times more passionate about football teams like Manchester United and Chelsea than they are about keeping Great Britain an ethnically British country.

    In Great Britain football trumps British ethnic tribalism among White British males by a huge landslide. Meanwhile Pakistanis in the U.K put their race and religion over football any day of the week.

    The problem with White British males is they are a million times more passionate about football teams like Manchester United and Chelsea than they are about keeping Great Britain an ethnically British country.

    So true. Why its almost as if the were a vast media operation in place to foster and encourage this. It seems to me 30 years ago the hardcore were really serious about their football, hooliganism and all that. But the wider population were just mildly supportive of their teams, it wasnt like the devotion one sees expressed today.

    Of course people are looking for identity, for community. But Big Brother media/politics/education tell them 24/7 they had better not look for that anywhere but sport, Star Wars fandom or whatever if they know whats good for them.

  96. One of the main driving causes of the Catholic scandals is that the Church is the only world religion that is highly centralized and stable.

    The pedophile priest was ALWAYS a small but manageable part of the church. Members knew who to stay away from. &c,’

    And the same thing went on everywhere. On a relatively small scale and without the ‘life changing’ trauma that is attributed to a little fondling. Or ‘horse play’ short of anal sex. And, of course, there were a lot of gay priests. But they had plenty of other gay priests to choose from. I don’t even know if the percentage of pedophiles is higher among gays than non gays. But … it was don’t ask, don’t tell in those days. And in the privacy of their cloisters — did anyone really care in the least?

    BUT …. The Catholic Church was a perfect target for trial attorneys. The going rate for a blow job now is $1 million. That is, a blow job years ago in the basement of a Church.

    Every Protestant Church .. especially the smaller, evangelical types have problems .. but more often with heterosexual married clergy doing teenage girls. But there is no one to sue. And they can’t be bundled, because they are all different.

    However, they simply aren’t fodder for the trial lawyer grist mill.

    Plus, they can and do bundle the cases and settle as a package deal … and it is impossible not to, because even if there isn’t a run away jury, the press would kill them.

    I am not a Catholic and am not attracted to the Church. But they got a raw deal on this. And it has become a staple of comedians. It is a serious institution and has contributed a great deal to Western civilization.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Right. Similarly, everybody knows that Hollywood has a massive underage sex abuse problem, but you can't sue Hollywood the way you can sue Rome, you have to sue piecemeal with no clear organizational lines of command.
  97. In contrast, the Catholic Church scandals were statistically inevitable: when heterosexual priests and nuns left in large numbers from the 1960s onward, often to marry each other, the priesthood became increasingly gay dominated and gay protective: thus, the endless gay scandals.

    I understand the intent of this piece. Also, others have done a good job of explaining the media-fueled anti-Catholic reportage regarding the priest abuse scandals already. So I won’t add much.

    I will simply note that “the gay scandals” as such are not “endless” in the Catholic Church. It has cleaned up its recruitment, training, placement, and, where necessary, censure of priests, and the abuse cases have all but disappeared since the 1980’s.

    I am one of the Catholics who was very distraught by the abuse scandals. I am generally an obedient, orthodox Catholic, but one who is also strongly anti-clericalist (not anti-cleric; the Church is the whole body of believers, not the Vatican establishment) and support the reformist bishops. But facts are facts. As horrendous as they were, the abuses were greatly sensationalized by the anti-Catholic media who, at the same time, have all but ignored all sorts of other gross abuses of the young in this country (e.g. sexually predatory teachers at public schools being passed around different districts) that are sometimes far more frequent.

  98. @Anonymous
    I think it's interesting that East Asian (Oriental) females have much lower rates of violent crime victimization in the West than white, black, and Hispanic females. Any idea what accounts for this? Parents instilling helpful prejudices? Native intelligence and quick learning? Less socializing from youth to post-college adulthood?

    Perhaps East Asian women simply aren’t as attractive to Western rapists.

    Although they are getting popular as second wives.

  99. @FWIW
    One of the main driving causes of the Catholic scandals is that the Church is the only world religion that is highly centralized and stable.

    The pedophile priest was ALWAYS a small but manageable part of the church. Members knew who to stay away from. &c,'

    And the same thing went on everywhere. On a relatively small scale and without the 'life changing' trauma that is attributed to a little fondling. Or 'horse play' short of anal sex. And, of course, there were a lot of gay priests. But they had plenty of other gay priests to choose from. I don't even know if the percentage of pedophiles is higher among gays than non gays. But ... it was don't ask, don't tell in those days. And in the privacy of their cloisters -- did anyone really care in the least?

    BUT .... The Catholic Church was a perfect target for trial attorneys. The going rate for a blow job now is $1 million. That is, a blow job years ago in the basement of a Church.

    Every Protestant Church .. especially the smaller, evangelical types have problems .. but more often with heterosexual married clergy doing teenage girls. But there is no one to sue. And they can't be bundled, because they are all different.

    However, they simply aren't fodder for the trial lawyer grist mill.

    Plus, they can and do bundle the cases and settle as a package deal ... and it is impossible not to, because even if there isn't a run away jury, the press would kill them.

    I am not a Catholic and am not attracted to the Church. But they got a raw deal on this. And it has become a staple of comedians. It is a serious institution and has contributed a great deal to Western civilization.

    Right. Similarly, everybody knows that Hollywood has a massive underage sex abuse problem, but you can’t sue Hollywood the way you can sue Rome, you have to sue piecemeal with no clear organizational lines of command.

  100. @Steve Sailer
    Because there is an official report.

    The wind has been changing direction for several years as the evidence of a massive scandal across England has grown. Now, there is an official report.

    Once upon a time newspapers did a little thing called investigative journalism. They used to take pride in getting to the truth before the government.

  101. Well, I am sticking to thinking it’s the kids who are victims of genuine incidents of sex abuse, not the priests or the Church.

    I would assume that if any incidents had happened to people anybody here knew, they would also think that the kids who were targeted for lies, manipulation, “grooming”, sexual acts they did not want to participate in, etc. were victims.

    Some victims had worse things done to them than others. Just because there are degrees of horribleness doesn’t make anything OK or excuse the selfish perpetrators.

    The adults had choices. If they wanted sex they could go get it from another adult. If they wanted sex they could leave the priesthood.

    The Shakers who originally made “Shaker furniture” took vows of celebacy. They died out after a few generations. They decided to stick to their original beliefs. The Catholic Church can do that too. They do not have to change their beliefs or lower their standards for the priesthood or turn a blind eye to the homosexuality and sexual exploitation in their clergy that they preach against to their parishioners on Sunday. They can stick to their original beliefs and take the consequences, whatever they may be.

    It’s more than a bit much to expect the American public and judicial system to overlook criminal acts in order for a church — any church — to avoid either following its own rules or changing them.

  102. “From a Labour Party perspective, ignoring the Paksitani rapists wasn’t about catering to the Pakistani community and fighting over their ~2% of the vote, most of which they’d get anyway.”

    Not quite true – the Muslim communities are very geographically concentrated in various inner cities – Bangladeshis in Tower Hamlets and other parts of London, Pakistanis in Birmingham, Bradford, Blackburn, Burnley, Oldham etc. Often their concentration reflects the various areas they came from – Sylhet in Tower Hamlets, Mirpur in Birmingham and Bradford. So they can make a big electoral difference because they’re all in one place.

    Here’s a former Labour Cabinet Minister, Roy Hattersley :

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/apr/08/uk.religion

    “For more than 30 years, I took the votes of Birmingham Muslims for granted. The Muslims themselves I treated with more respect. But if, at any time between 1964 and 1997 I heard of a Khan, Saleem or Iqbal who did not support Labour I was both outraged and astonished.

    My presumption was justified. It was the Muslim vote – increased by an influx of families from Kashmir, the Punjab and other parts of Birmingham – which expanded my majority from barely 1,200 to more than 12,000. “

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The Labor party dissolved the English people and elected a new one.
  103. @Lugash
    Our society is generally set up pretty well to keep adult men in positions of authority away from too much time alone with underage girls. So, a wildly disproportionate fraction of these kinds of abuse cases are gay..

    For the safety of both boys and girls, I'd ban male teachers from kindergarten through junior high.

    For the safety of both boys and girls, I’d ban male teachers from kindergarten through junior high.

    But let them loose just when the girls (or boys, if you’re that way inclined) become most alluring.

    Makes sense.

    Seriously, there are very few men in K-8 schools, but, arguably, having more would be a good thing, given how many kids don’t have an adult male figure in their lives.

    • Replies: @Lugash
    Hopefully by the time the boys and girls reach the 10th grade the are mature enough to ward off adult male advances.

    It's much safer and effective to keeps dads in the family/relationship than introducing an outside male role model. The male feminist blogger Hugo Schwyzer posted that teenage girls would benefit from having a non-family member man act as a mentor, but not take any sexual interest. I commented that there aren't enough gay men around to make this reasonable. Given Hugo's zipper problems with his female college students, I think I was right.

    And looking at my nickname, you need to watch out for athletic coaches as well.
  104. @Art Deco
    In real life, the victims committed suicide in huge numbers.

    Rubbish.

    Two are known to have been murdered in Blackpool.

  105. @Laban

    "From a Labour Party perspective, ignoring the Paksitani rapists wasn’t about catering to the Pakistani community and fighting over their ~2% of the vote, most of which they’d get anyway."
     
    Not quite true - the Muslim communities are very geographically concentrated in various inner cities - Bangladeshis in Tower Hamlets and other parts of London, Pakistanis in Birmingham, Bradford, Blackburn, Burnley, Oldham etc. Often their concentration reflects the various areas they came from - Sylhet in Tower Hamlets, Mirpur in Birmingham and Bradford. So they can make a big electoral difference because they're all in one place.

    Here's a former Labour Cabinet Minister, Roy Hattersley :

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/apr/08/uk.religion

    "For more than 30 years, I took the votes of Birmingham Muslims for granted. The Muslims themselves I treated with more respect. But if, at any time between 1964 and 1997 I heard of a Khan, Saleem or Iqbal who did not support Labour I was both outraged and astonished.

    My presumption was justified. It was the Muslim vote - increased by an influx of families from Kashmir, the Punjab and other parts of Birmingham - which expanded my majority from barely 1,200 to more than 12,000. "
     

    The Labor party dissolved the English people and elected a new one.

  106. This is what all those Guys fought for in WW1 & 2? Crikey! England would have been better off under the Kaiser.

  107. “No. Chavs are just the left end of the bell curve of the native Brits. Every population has one. Mexicans are a separate race from the majority US race.”

    I don’t mean Chavs are like Mexicans in the racial sense, but in the economic sense. Mexicans on average are associated with the lower class in the U.S, similar to Chavs in the U.K. And the females from both groups are known for becoming sexually promiscuous at a very young age.

  108. @David R. Merridale
    For the safety of both boys and girls, I’d ban male teachers from kindergarten through junior high.

    But let them loose just when the girls (or boys, if you're that way inclined) become most alluring.

    Makes sense.

    Seriously, there are very few men in K-8 schools, but, arguably, having more would be a good thing, given how many kids don't have an adult male figure in their lives.

    Hopefully by the time the boys and girls reach the 10th grade the are mature enough to ward off adult male advances.

    It’s much safer and effective to keeps dads in the family/relationship than introducing an outside male role model. The male feminist blogger Hugo Schwyzer posted that teenage girls would benefit from having a non-family member man act as a mentor, but not take any sexual interest. I commented that there aren’t enough gay men around to make this reasonable. Given Hugo’s zipper problems with his female college students, I think I was right.

    And looking at my nickname, you need to watch out for athletic coaches as well.

  109. […] Modern western societies have relaxed penalties for violation of behavioural courtesies — even for violation of outright vicious crimes, especially if the crimes are committed inside the tent of multicultural political correctness. […]

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS