UK Rape Gang scandal, up to 1000 victims.

[Liriena]

I'll hazard a guess.
They're talking about the people who deny cultural problems in minority communities, and continue to suppress discussion of them or attempts to fix them because they think offending minorities is the same thing as being racist.

I gathered this by following the direction his finger was pointing and from context clues, by the way.

They're doing it while speaking at a single individual who may or may not, in fact, belong to this group of people he's accusing.

Pluralizing the individuals you argue with like that seems, to me, like a tactic that only serves to reveal that the person in question isn't trying to engage in a discussion so much as they are trying to project and vent for their own satisfaction. I'd call it the political equivalent of a Tolkien fan seeing someone in a Harry Potter T-shirt and saying "we told you people real-life Quidditch looks dumb".

[Ostroeuropa]

I can't help the metaphors, it's an obsession

I didn't see how you addressed it. What's your solution?

So he's pointing at you and you think that's unfair. Maybe he's pointing behind you. Who do you think he's pointing at?

I don't know what the solution might be. I don't know what UK government institutions exist that could effectively tackle this scandal.

He's pointing at us only insofar as he's projecting his preferred "Other" on us for his own ideological indulgence. Which I suppose happens to most of us sometimes, but is still bad.

"We people told you people this" makes little sense in this context because he has failed to establish exactly what groups he is identifying us and himself with, and he has failed to establish an actual precedent of this supposed past "telling". This is self-indulgent because what it ultimately means is him taking credit for a larger group's discourse towards another group that we may or may not in fact belong to.

I've already gone over my proposed solution. What do you think is wrong with it?

Ban faith schools, ban gender segregated facilities, institute comprehensive sex education and teach it from a younger age, end the demonization of white organizations, integrate them into institutions the way lobby groups for minorities have been integrated and recognize that at least on some issues they serve a purpose, give those organizations a line of communication with the institution like other groups have and allow them to organize, thereby giving their communities the means to be protest-ready when they feel they have grievance with an institutions treatment of them and thereby altering the balance of power to be more equal. The police offending muslims can spark an immediate and organized protest, this is not the case for them offending whites. In situations where those interests conflict, it is in the polices interest to always side with muslims, and these kind of incidents arise from it.
From there, begin criticizing minority cultures where those cultures are lacking, the same as we would continue to do for the majority white culture.

I am not opposed to the notion that someones demography impacts the way they experience institutions and that their demographic should have a means of communicating those differing needs and impacts.
I am opposed to the notion that whites and males should not also have that opportunity based on some vague generalizations and ideological assertions.

[Liriena]

I can't help the metaphors, it's an obsession

I didn't see how you addressed it. What's your solution?

So he's pointing at you and you think that's unfair. Maybe he's pointing behind you. Who do you think he's pointing at?

I'll hazard a guess.
They're talking about the people who deny cultural problems in minority communities, and continue to suppress discussion of them or attempts to fix them because they think offending minorities is the same thing as being racist.

I gathered this by following the direction his finger was pointing and from context clues, by the way.

Its amusing when he gets like this

It ain't half as delightful as your transparent wording. It gets my inner semiotician all moist. ;3

[Chernoslavia]

Its amusing when he gets like this

It ain't half as delightful as your transparent wording. It gets my inner semiotician all moist. ;3

“Transparent” right!...well whatever helps you sleep at night pal....

[Ostroeuropa]

And before you throw out the usual "Jews killed jesus so they're different and can't have one" argument, i'll point out that the Muslim community especially have used their lobby to shill for genital mutilation, faith schools, gender segregation, etc. So the "Well white power so all whites forever can't organize because we're outright assuming nefarious intent is behind all white attempts to organize because they killed jesus" doesn't fly in this context, else we would have to demonize and marginalize muslims who dared to note people treat them unfairly for bullshit reasons or tried to organize on that basis. After all, "Islamophobia" is a code word for muslim supremacy and means genital mutilation, sexism, etc, so they aren't allowed organizations either in any context. That's how it works, right?

That a demographic lobby has absurd demands resulting from insularity is half of the bloody reason whites need a seat at the table to point out when others are doing that to them.

The progressive ideology and its insistence on denying men and whites a seat at the table denies their humanity, their equality, and their rights.

[Liriena]

I don't know what the solution might be. I don't know what UK government institutions exist that could effectively tackle this scandal.

He's pointing at us only insofar as he's projecting his preferred "Other" on us for his own ideological indulgence. Which I suppose happens to most of us sometimes, but is still bad.

"We people told you people this" makes little sense in this context because he has failed to establish exactly what groups he is identifying us and himself with, and he has failed to establish an actual precedent of this supposed past "telling". This is self-indulgent because what it ultimately means is him taking credit for a larger group's discourse towards another group that we may or may not in fact belong to.

I've already gone over my proposed solution. What do you think is wrong with it?

Did I signal I thought something was wrong with it?

Ban faith schools,

I could definitely get behind this. We're talking all faith schools, right? Of all religions?

ban gender segregated facilities, institute comprehensive sex education and teach it from a younger age,

Yes yes yes!

end the demonization of white organizations, integrate them into institutions the way lobby groups for minorities have been integrated and recognize that at least on some issues they serve a purpose, give those organizations a line of communication with the institution like other groups have and allow them to organize, thereby giving their communities the means to be protest-ready when they feel they have grievance with an institutions treatment of them and thereby altering the balance of power to be more equal. The police offending muslims can spark an immediate and organized protest, this is not the case for them offending whites. In situations where those interests conflict, it is in the polices interest to always side with muslims, and these kind of incidents arise from it.

Do you mean all existing white organizations or...? I need some clarification here. Would "Britain First" be worthy of protection from "demonization"?

From there, begin criticizing minority cultures where those cultures are lacking, the same as we would continue to do for the majority white culture.

Agreed with the caveat that "white culture" still sounds artificial and politically motivated as a concept to me. Do you really believe that the northern English share a common "white culture" with the Welsh, the Polish, the Spanish or the Russians?

I am not opposed to the notion that someones demography impacts the way they experience institutions and that their demographic should have a means of communicating those differing needs and impacts.
I am opposed to the notion that whites and males should not also have that opportunity based on some vague generalizations and ideological assertions.

I see your point.

[Ostroeuropa]

I've already gone over my proposed solution. What do you think is wrong with it?

Did I signal I thought something was wrong with it?

Ban faith schools,

I could definitely get behind this. We're talking all faith schools, right? Of all religions?

ban gender segregated facilities, institute comprehensive sex education and teach it from a younger age,

Yes yes yes!

end the demonization of white organizations, integrate them into institutions the way lobby groups for minorities have been integrated and recognize that at least on some issues they serve a purpose, give those organizations a line of communication with the institution like other groups have and allow them to organize, thereby giving their communities the means to be protest-ready when they feel they have grievance with an institutions treatment of them and thereby altering the balance of power to be more equal. The police offending muslims can spark an immediate and organized protest, this is not the case for them offending whites. In situations where those interests conflict, it is in the polices interest to always side with muslims, and these kind of incidents arise from it.

I see your point.

I appear to have pre-empted resistance that wasn't there, so sorry for that.
I agree it's nebulous, but it's related to how non-whites treat whites.
In terms of how whites treat other whites, the whole "Poles, welsh" etc becomes more important to discuss.

i gather this is also true for other races, and the particulars of the different black tribes and nations only really comes into play when not dealing with Klansmen and their kin.

I also think that the Nationality thing for whites is falling by the wayside, in part because of criticism of whites as privileged and denying them access in a way seen by many as unfair.

Much like "Homosexual" came about due to persecution, progressive abuses are causing white identity to become more prominent, and this is reflected in the rise of the far-right too.

Before the train ride to Alsass, we were bavarians, hannoverians, and prussians.
After we shot the french shoulder to shoulder, we were germans.

Similarly, welsh, english, russian, pole, the distinction is fading in the modern culture war.
We are merely white.

The EU is also likely partially responsible in some senses.

[Liriena]

It ain't half as delightful as your transparent wording. It gets my inner semiotician all moist. ;3

“Transparent” right!...well whatever helps you sleep at night pal....

Bailey's helps me sleep at night. You-people'ing just gets me all hawt and nitpicky. ;3

You never did explain what "you people" Bombadil belongs to.

[Ostroeuropa]

Do you mean all existing white organizations or...? I need some clarification here. Would "Britain First" be worthy of protection from "demonization"?

No. They are racists.
The difference is accepting white people may have grievances as white people, without that immediately being cause to demonize.

If their next sentence is "Blacks sleeping with our women." then you can write them off, provided that kind of thing doesn't fall under the kind of banal insularity and lack of perspective common to all lobby groups and is more of a "Let them eat cake" racism, in which case, attempt outreach and education.

If their next sentence is;
"Pakistani communities think we're decadent whores and alcoholics and treat us like scum" then maybe we should sit up and pay attention.

[Val Halla]

another excuse for islamaphobia, because christians have not become involved in assault scandals at all have they?

[Knask]

I don't know what the solution might be. I don't know what UK government institutions exist that could effectively tackle this scandal.

He's pointing at us only insofar as he's projecting his preferred "Other" on us for his own ideological indulgence. Which I suppose happens to most of us sometimes, but is still bad.

"We people told you people this" makes little sense in this context because he has failed to establish exactly what groups he is identifying us and himself with, and he has failed to establish an actual precedent of this supposed past "telling". This is self-indulgent because what it ultimately means is him taking credit for a larger group's discourse towards another group that we may or may not in fact belong to.

I've already gone over my proposed solution. What do you think is wrong with it?

Ban faith schools, ban gender segregated facilities, institute comprehensive sex education and teach it from a younger age

Back to that old "teach men not to rape" song and dance, eh?

Look, just because the almost universal common denominator within all these rape gangs are men, doesn't mean that all men are rapists.

[Vassenor]

Ri-ight.. progressives.. what's your point in posting this. The BBC is as much an institution that appeared to cover up paedophiles in the 70's and 80's.

I mean if your aim is to attack 'progressives' then that's one thing. If it's to genuinely decry a horrible practice that's carried out among many institutions then that's another.

Depoliticise and focus on the actual issue, same as guns. Don't try lay the blame on one side in cheap point scoring using a horrific situation to think you've scored a point.

We warned you people in the European Migration thread that this shit was happening but y’all were in complete and utter denial to the point where you (not you in particular) called our sources fake! And don’t you fucking talk about “depoliticizing” when it was you people who have constantly blamed law abiding gun owners and the NRA for shit that others do!

You see this right here? This is what we mean when we say conservatives want people to be raped and murdered so they can push their narratives.

[Ostroeuropa]

I've already gone over my proposed solution. What do you think is wrong with it?

Ban faith schools, ban gender segregated facilities, institute comprehensive sex education and teach it from a younger age

Back to that old "teach men not to rape" song and dance, eh?

Look, just because the almost universal common denominator within all these rape gangs are men, doesn't mean that all men are rapists.

Comprehensive sex education would cover female perpetrators, and victims of them, both male and female.

Given the silence surrounding the issue of rape in the muslim community, and that gender roles appear to be stricter in their communities (likely due to religious influence), I would not be at all surprised to learn rape of men by wives and such was also common, merely not acknowledged or discussed. The studies show even western men agree to unwanted sex due to social pressure, turn that up to 21.

It's also possible that misogyny is present there that isn't as present in the western culture anymore and women are raped more frequently than men, in which case we should endeavor to present a balanced view from the start anyway to avoid the mistakes our attempt made that institutionalized the hostility to recognizing male victims and female perpetrators, and created a trajectory toward inequality of a different type rather than one toward equality.

[The East Marches II]

We warned you people in the European Migration thread that this shit was happening but y’all were in complete and utter denial to the point where you (not you in particular) called our sources fake! And don’t you fucking talk about “depoliticizing” when it was you people who have constantly blamed law abiding gun owners and the NRA for shit that others do!

You see this right here? This is what we mean when we say conservatives want people to be raped and murdered so they can push their narratives.

I don't think most people want to be right when it comes to making your arguments look garbage. Way to transfer the moral opprobrium though. I wonder if you'll grace me with a real reply or just let that shameful move stand.

[Chernoslavia]

“Transparent” right!...well whatever helps you sleep at night pal....

Bailey's helps me sleep at night. You-people'ing just gets me all hawt and nitpicky. ;3

You never did explain what "you people" Bombadil belongs to.

I would but it’s more fun to watch you split hair over this.

[Liriena]

Bailey's helps me sleep at night. You-people'ing just gets me all hawt and nitpicky. ;3

You never did explain what "you people" Bombadil belongs to.

I would but it’s more fun to watch you split hair over this.

Laziness is cute in cats, not in people. Just sayin'. ;3

[Chernoslavia]

I would but it’s more fun to watch you split hair over this.

Laziness is cute in cats, not in people. Just sayin'. ;3

Neither is obsessiveness

[Betoni]

And before you throw out the usual "Jews killed jesus so they're different and can't have one" argument, i'll point out that the Muslim community especially have used their lobby to shill for genital mutilation, faith schools, gender segregation, etc. So the "Well white power so all whites forever can't organize because we're outright assuming nefarious intent is behind all white attempts to organize because they killed jesus" doesn't fly in this context, else we would have to demonize and marginalize muslims who dared to note people treat them unfairly for bullshit reasons or tried to organize on that basis. After all, "Islamophobia" is a code word for muslim supremacy and means genital mutilation, sexism, etc, so they aren't allowed organizations either in any context. That's how it works, right?

That a demographic lobby has absurd demands resulting from insularity is half of the bloody reason whites need a seat at the table to point out when others are doing that to them.

The progressive ideology and its insistence on denying men and whites a seat at the table denies their humanity, their equality, and their rights.

What are the actual realworld obstacles for white men organizing and having a seat at.. what table exactly? You keep harping on about this, but never really specifying or giving realworld examples. I'm not sure if its just me, not having a comprehensive understanding of uk politics, but I'm kind of puzzled.

[Chernoslavia]

We warned you people in the European Migration thread that this shit was happening but y’all were in complete and utter denial to the point where you (not you in particular) called our sources fake! And don’t you fucking talk about “depoliticizing” when it was you people who have constantly blamed law abiding gun owners and the NRA for shit that others do!

You see this right here? This is what we mean when we say conservatives want people to be raped and murdered so they can push their narratives.

And now you try to put the moral blame on others when you find out you’re wrong. Pathetic.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

And before you throw out the usual "Jews killed jesus so they're different and can't have one" argument, i'll point out that the Muslim community especially have used their lobby to shill for genital mutilation, faith schools, gender segregation, etc. So the "Well white power so all whites forever can't organize because we're outright assuming nefarious intent is behind all white attempts to organize because they killed jesus" doesn't fly in this context, else we would have to demonize and marginalize muslims who dared to note people treat them unfairly for bullshit reasons or tried to organize on that basis. After all, "Islamophobia" is a code word for muslim supremacy and means genital mutilation, sexism, etc, so they aren't allowed organizations either in any context. That's how it works, right?

That a demographic lobby has absurd demands resulting from insularity is half of the bloody reason whites need a seat at the table to point out when others are doing that to them.

The progressive ideology and its insistence on denying men and whites a seat at the table denies their humanity, their equality, and their rights.

What are the actual realworld obstacles for white men organizing and having a seat at.. what table exactly? You keep harping on about this, but never really specifying or giving realworld examples. I'm not sure if its just me, not having a comprehensive understanding of uk politics, but I'm kind of puzzled.

Yeah, I'm slightly confused about that too. Ostro also said that white people are prevented from forming activist orgs, which seems untrue to me.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Given the silence surrounding the issue of rape in the muslim community

It's not silent.

and that gender roles appear to be stricter in their communities (likely due to religious influence)

Eh, that depends on the Muslim.

[Ostroeuropa]

And before you throw out the usual "Jews killed jesus so they're different and can't have one" argument, i'll point out that the Muslim community especially have used their lobby to shill for genital mutilation, faith schools, gender segregation, etc. So the "Well white power so all whites forever can't organize because we're outright assuming nefarious intent is behind all white attempts to organize because they killed jesus" doesn't fly in this context, else we would have to demonize and marginalize muslims who dared to note people treat them unfairly for bullshit reasons or tried to organize on that basis. After all, "Islamophobia" is a code word for muslim supremacy and means genital mutilation, sexism, etc, so they aren't allowed organizations either in any context. That's how it works, right?

That a demographic lobby has absurd demands resulting from insularity is half of the bloody reason whites need a seat at the table to point out when others are doing that to them.

The progressive ideology and its insistence on denying men and whites a seat at the table denies their humanity, their equality, and their rights.

What are the actual realworld obstacles for white men organizing and having a seat at.. what table exactly? You keep harping on about this, but never really specifying or giving realworld examples. I'm not sure if its just me, not having a comprehensive understanding of uk politics, but I'm kind of puzzled.

Which institutions engage in discourse with a group specifically designed to address white or male perspectives on an issue?
When those groups attempt to form, how many are immediately written off as unnecessary or necessarily racist/sexist?

When an issue impacts whites or males disproportionately, which organizations have pre-prepared plans and structures to organize an immediate protest that calls upon all its members?

The narrative that male or white organizations are necessarily reactionary disadvantages those groups and makes their problems less important to those in charge, especially as they are less able to protest and crucially less able to garner support for their protests if and when they happen.

The police check in fairly frequently with Muslim organizations to find out the communities unique needs and perspectives. But there is no such group for whites and males.
As I pointed out, this also means that in a situation where the police are presented with a choice between potentially angering Muslims, or Whites, they are pressured for political and PR reasons to side with the Muslims, regardless of the justice of the situation, since Whites cannot spontaneously protest with as much effect as Muslims whose organizations are socially tolerated. So it goes with men and women too.

The police don't check in with Mens groups to discuss how to deal with and treat men fairly, but they do so for womens groups.
In fact, for women and muslims, some of those organizations have a line directly to the police to discuss how better to protect their group.

What are the actual realworld obstacles for white men organizing and having a seat at.. what table exactly? You keep harping on about this, but never really specifying or giving realworld examples. I'm not sure if its just me, not having a comprehensive understanding of uk politics, but I'm kind of puzzled.

Yeah, I'm slightly confused about that too. Ostro also said that white people are prevented from forming activist orgs, which seems untrue to me.

They are prevented from forming activist organizations about being white, since that gets immediately demonized and no institution can associate with them without the progressive press absolutely losing its shit and asserting that by definition whites have no issues that effect them for being white so it must be a racist group, rinse repeat for men (Sometimes with some extra rationalizations).

The police being disproportionately white doesn't matter for this either, as attempts to proportionally represent minorities are underway and beyond that, the police aren't disproportionately mega wealthy CEOs either, but we all understand that their interests are represented due to power and influence they hold over the institution. The ability of whites and males to influence institutions in general is severely limited and those communities are marginalized by progressive politics, and kept in a state of disorganization with regards to their issues.

As an example of progressive politics denying resources and demonizing groups dedicated to these issues:
https://globalnews.ca/news/4057239/dani ... ee-speech/

(The mens group.)

This kind of thing is frequent.

[Mujahidah]

Yeah, I'm slightly confused about that too. Ostro also said that white people are prevented from forming activist orgs, which seems untrue to me.

They are prevented from forming activist organizations about being white, since that gets immediately demonized and no institution can associate with them without the progressive press absolutely losing its shit and asserting that by definition whites have no issues that effect them for being white so it must be a racist group, rinse repeat for men (Sometimes with some extra rationalizations).

Maybe if so-called "white groups" didn't behave needlessly antagonistic towards people they don't like they wouldn't be so demonized.

[Ostroeuropa]

They are prevented from forming activist organizations about being white, since that gets immediately demonized and no institution can associate with them without the progressive press absolutely losing its shit and asserting that by definition whites have no issues that effect them for being white so it must be a racist group, rinse repeat for men (Sometimes with some extra rationalizations).

Maybe if so-called "white groups" didn't behave needlessly antagonistic towards people they don't like they wouldn't be so demonized.

Is Hamas representative of Muslims too?
Or do you suddenly think it would be racist to suggest that.
Yet, you're acting the same way here when it applies to whites.

So i'll just assume you're fine with everyone saying "Maybe if Hamas wasn't shit, people wouldn't hate muslims and seek to demonize them and prevent them influencing politics to redress prejudice against them."

The existence of supremacy groups does not detract from the point for whites, just like it doesn't detract from the point for muslims.

This, somehow, escaped your attention, despite Muslim supremacy groups having a high body count in recent years.

Can you explain why what you just did wasn't racist, but acting like all muslim organizations are bad because Hamas would be?

[Mujahidah]

Maybe if so-called "white groups" didn't behave needlessly antagonistic towards people they don't like they wouldn't be so demonized.

Is Hamas representative of Muslims too?
Or do you suddenly think it would be racist to suggest that.
Yet, you're acting the same way here when it applies to whites.

Ok stop right there. Thats not how I'm acting. I said that "White Groups" as you termed them generally behave more like "supremacist organizations" than simply the "We Like White People Club." Name one so-called "White Group" that isn't just a front for extremism.