What's new

British Home Office report - Most child sexual abuse gangs are white men

313ghazi

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
12,932
Reaction score
45
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
The majority of child sexual abuse gangs are made up of white men under the age of 30, an official paper has said.
The report, which covers England, Scotland and Wales and summarises a range of studies on the issue of group-based child sexual exploitation (CSE), also known as grooming gangs, said there was not enough evidence to conclude that child sexual abuse gangs were disproportionately made up of Asian offenders.

High-profile cases including in Rotherham, Rochdale and Telford have involved groups of men of mainly Pakistani ethnicity, fuelling a perception that it is an “Asian problem”.


As a result “Asian grooming gangs” have become a cause celebre for the far right, with a number of high-profile figures mounting campaigns across the country.

The Home Office paper into the “characteristics” of such gangs, first promised by the former home secretary Sajid Javid in 2018, says while some studies show a possible overrepresentation of black and Asian offenders, it is not possible to conclude this is representative of all grooming gangs.

The review was published after criticism that victims of child abuse had been failed because of fear of accusations of racism.
It said: “Research has found that group-based child sexual exploitation offenders are most commonly white. Some studies suggest an overrepresentation of black and Asian offenders relative to the demographics of national populations. However, it is not possible to conclude that this is representative of all group-based CSE offending.

“This is due to issues such as data-quality problems, the way the samples were selected in studies, and the potential for bias and inaccuracies in the way that ethnicity data is collected.”

It found that while offenders come from diverse backgrounds, groups tended to be of men of the same ethnicities. Money and sex were motivations as well as a sexual interest in children and misogyny, the review said.

The home secretary, Priti Patel, said: “This paper demonstrates how difficult it has been to draw conclusions about the characteristics of offenders.”

Sarah Champion, the MP for Rotherham, who has long campaigned on the issue, said: “Going forwards, I want to see a nationally recognised and approved set of triggers that, once met, require local authorities to provide support for children showing signs of harm, rather than the current postcode lottery when it comes to help.

“Finally, the government must accept that all children are vulnerable because they are children. However, children’s vulnerabilities would never be exposed without perpetrators looking to exploit them. All children deserve the protection of the state and appropriate resources must be found to allow that.”

Nazir Afzal, the former chief crown prosecutor in the north-west, who brought prosecutions over the Rochdale grooming gangs, welcomed the report. “It confirms that white men remain the most common offenders, which is something rarely mentioned by rightwing commentators,” he said.

“However, it is not shy in reflecting that south Asian and British Pakistani men are disproportionately found in high-profile cases.
“The danger is that by focusing entirely on the ethnicity of the offender, we miss the bigger picture, which is how the unheard, the left-behind women and girls, are invariably the victims. That’s where the government’s attention and action should be primarily focused.”

 
. . .
MOST- that's a nuanced word.
If most of the population is white, then most (number of ) crimes will be done by whites and is expected.

However, the PERCENTAGE to the population is different and the BEST metric if you want to prescribe 'affinity' to a group, to a certain behavior (in this case, child sex offenders).

For example.
Immigrant group 1, who is 25% of the countries population, commits 40% of the crime VS. saying whites, who are 90% of the population commit 100 (number) crimes versus immigrant group 1, who only commit 40(number) crimes.
 
.
MOST- that's a nuanced word.
If most of the population is white, then most (number of ) crimes will be done by whites and is expected.

However, the PERCENTAGE to the population is different and the BEST metric if you want to prescribe 'affinity' to a group, to a certain behavior (in this case, child sex offenders).

For example.
Immigrant group 1, who is 25% of the countries population, commits 40% of the crime VS. saying whites, who are 90% of the population commit 100 (number) crimes versus immigrant group 1, who only commit 40(number) crimes.
All I read is Bla Bla Bla
 
. .
MOST- that's a nuanced word.
If most of the population is white, then most (number of ) crimes will be done by whites and is expected.

However, the PERCENTAGE to the population is different and the BEST metric if you want to prescribe 'affinity' to a group, to a certain behavior (in this case, child sex offenders).

For example.
Immigrant group 1, who is 25% of the countries population, commits 40% of the crime VS. saying whites, who are 90% of the population commit 100 (number) crimes versus immigrant group 1, who only commit 40(number) crimes.
you read. thank you:meeting:
I guess our "white" BJP bots didnt read past the headline as usual. This is from the very first paragraph:

there was not enough evidence to conclude that child sexual abuse gangs were disproportionately made up of Asian offenders

This report is exactly about the perception of disproportionality due to media exposure and media hype vs actual or nonexistant evidence and reality. No further "nuance" or "however" needed. Nothing you said is relevant or contradicts the conclusion of this report.

I thought Indians were supposed to be good at English.
 
.
I guess our "white" BJP bots didnt read past the headline as usual. This is from the very first paragraph:



This report is exactly about the perception of disproportionality due to media exposure and media hype vs actual or nonexistant evidence and reality. No further "nuance" or "however" needed. Nothing you said is relevant or contradicts the conclusion of this report.

I thought Indians were supposed to be good at English.

I guess our resident wumao's are getting slower than usual and missed the claim both in the header and the article's first sentence. " The majority of child sexual abuse gangs are made up of white men under the age of 30, an official paper has said "

My comment addressed the "most" & "majority" claim in both instances. :yes4: AND I like to take this chance to clarify further the differentiators between most and percentage of with more examples

For example, Most Chinese brag their IQ is high, but by an overwhelming percentage, Chinese immigrants fare very poorly across every success measure in other countries. OR most Chinese "immigrants" like their freedoms, but overwhelmingly percentage of Chinese in the world are born into servitude to the CCP, told what to say/hear/behave/act/read/watch from their cradle to the grave. :meeting:

Lastly, I'm unsure what you mean by calling me a white BJP bot because of my post. Suppose it was an attempt (typical of racist Chinese) to comment on my skin color as perhaps being brown and not white. Why I will take it as a compliment, I rather have the tan than the sickly hue. 8-)
 
Last edited:
.
I guess our resident wumao's are getting slower than usual and missed the claim both in the header and the article's first sentence. " The majority of child sexual abuse gangs are made up of white men under the age of 30, an official paper has said "

My comment addressed the "most" & "majority" claim in both instances. :yes4: AND I like to take this chance to clarify further the differentiators between most and percentage of with more examples

For example, Most Chinese brag their IQ is high, but by an overwhelming percentage, Chinese immigrants fare very poorly across every success measure in other countries. OR most Chinese "immigrants" like their freedoms, but overwhelmingly percentage of Chinese in the world are born into servitude to the CCP, told what to say/hear/behave/act/read/watch from their cradle to the grave. :meeting:

Lastly, I'm unsure what you mean by calling me a white BJP bot because of my post. Suppose it was an attempt (typical of racist Chinese) to comment on my skin color as perhaps being brown and not white. Why I will take it as a compliment, I rather have the tan than the sickly hue. 8-)
美国网络战02.jpg
美国网络战03.jpg

United States Army Cyber Command :omghaha: :omghaha: :omghaha:
 
.
you read. thank you:meeting:
He read. However, you failed to read.

": “Research has found that group-based child sexual exploitation offenders are most commonly white. Some studies suggest an overrepresentation of black and Asian offenders relative to the demographics of national populations. However, it is not possible to conclude that this is representative of all group-based CSE offending."

I.e. it cannot be concluded that there is overrepresentation of Asians RELATIVE to their percentage of the overall population.

Your initial post was gibberish btw - even for a pretty decent and educated native English speaker like me. All you were trying to say was that a relative or proportionate comparison is more relevant than an absolute comparison. See? I said what you tried to say with your call-centre Hinglish in one simple sentence.

You're welcome.
 
. .
Brits sold their souls long ago. Tough luck.
Sad thing is that rich, like entertainers, can escape. Mick Jagger buying Mansion in Florida or Cleese moving to some place in the Caribbean. too bad.

Then those traitorous bastards have the gall to make movies crying for knights to come and save them. LOL
 
Last edited:
.
My comment addressed the "most" & "majority" claim in both instances. :yes4: AND I like to take this chance to clarify further the differentiators between most and percentage of with more examples


Why are you denying your own posting? It's right there in black and white. Post #4.

You argued that the usage of absolute comparisons is flawed (correctly) and that relative comparisons are preferable. You were then countered by several members that in fact, the original article DOES respond to this precise assertion by saying it cannot be reliably concluded that there is a relative excess or overrepresentation of the Asian population in this type of crime.

Again, you're welcome.
 
.
Why are you denying your own posting? It's right there in black and white. Post #4.

You argued that the usage of absolute comparisons is flawed (correctly) and that relative comparisons are preferable. You were then countered by several members that in fact, the original article DOES respond to this precise assertion by saying it cannot be reliably concluded that there is a relative excess or overrepresentation of the Asian population in this type of crime.

Again, you're welcome.

Your level of comprehension being that of a single Chinese member(whom you call several) is not my problem. Like him, you assumed I was contending the entire article while I was simply reemphasizing why the two precise comments (header/and 1st sentence were flawed). Thank you for dropping by :meeting:
 
.
Your level of comprehension being that of a single Chinese member(whom you call several) is not my problem. Like him, you assumed I was contending the entire article while I was simply reemphasizing why the two precise comments (header/and 1st sentence were flawed). Thank you for dropping by :meeting:
I see no reference to the title and 1st sentence in isolation in post #4. Since no reference is made by you in that post, respondents will default to the assumption that you are responding to the whole article, which is precisely why several responses redirected your attention to other parts of the article.

Had you stated clearly that your criticism was of the title and/or 1st sentence specifically, then your points may have been technically valid, nevertheless, the title and first sentence in any piece of newspaper journalism are not mandated to summarise the entire argument presented in the article. In short, your observations were pointless, had you actually stated that you were referring to the title and 1st sentence in isolation (which - I reiterate - you didn't actually do).
 
.
Back
Top Bottom