Brilliant piece!!
Read this to the end to get the point.... It belongs in this section

It's time to face up to the problem of sexual abuse in the white community

From Stuart Hall to north Wales, the issue won't go away. If you think I'm being ridiculous, read to the end of my argument.

Every day across Britain, it seems, there's a new and horrific revelation of sexual abuse: last week we had the guilty plea of veteran TV presenter Stuart Hall, who confessed to 14 cases of indecent assault against 13 girls, the youngest only nine years old.

Days earlier the possible scale of child abuse in north Wales children's homes was revealed. We now know there were 140 allegations of historical abuse between 1963 and 1992. A total of 84 suspected offenders have been named, and it's claimed the abuse took place across 18 children's homes.

But after the shock has subsided and we have time to reflect on these revolting crimes, the main question in most reasonable people's minds must surely be: what is it about white people that makes them do this?

Jimmy Savile is alleged to have abused 300 young people, and in his case and in north Wales, the abuse could not have happened without a wide range of co-conspirators either grooming children or ensuring the truth never got out. Hardly a week goes by without another white man being arrested in connection with sexual abuse.

I'm beginning to feel sorry for whites. I have many white friends and I know most of them are wholly opposed to sexual abuse. But they must be worried that their whole community is getting a bad name. I can imagine that, every day, with each unfolding case, they must be hiding their face behind their hands, pleading: "Please, God, don't let it be a white person this time."

And with so many senior community figures implicated, many of us are starting to wonder what will happen to the next generation of whites. How will today's young whites learn that abuse is wrong when their role models are so tarnished?

First, though, we need to find out what's causing the problem. Is it something to do with white people's culture? Is it something to do with their loss of empire, and their new role in the world, as a diminished state desperately clinging to its glorious past? Do they seek to impose their last vestiges of power on the most vulnerable in society?

Or is it that, having spent so much of their history waging wars against each other, they cannot cope with the relative peace of the last half-century, and their frustration at not fighting is taken out on the weakest? I may have no evidence for this, but that's not going to stop me putting it out there as a cause.

Or maybe it's their religion? Child abuse in the priesthood has, of course, also been tolerated for decades, allowed to continue unpunished through a conspiracy of silence among the church hierarchy.

And despite the recent falls in attendance, Christianity still dominates European culture. And the Bible, which many whites still look to, has such verses as: "Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not die. If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol [hell]." (Proverbs 23:13-14) It hardly fits with white society's claims to care for children. And even those who don't believe, such as Richard Dawkins, a senior cleric in the atheist community, have sought to downplay the gravity of child abuse, believing it's no worse than religion itself. As he wrote: "Horrible as sexual abuse no doubt was, the damage was arguably less than the long-term psychological damage inflicted by bringing the child up Catholic in the first place." Of course, what we really need now is for brave white community leaders to come out and distance themselves from the abusers.

Maybe, say, the new head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission should come out and admit the issue is "racial and cultural" and that she fears that "in those communities there were people who knew what was going on and didn't say anything, either because they're frightened or they're so separated from the rest of the communities". Or a white cabinet member could say: "There is a small minority of white men who believe that young children are fair game. And we have to be prepared to say that. You can only start solving a problem if you acknowledge it first." Or the head of a leading children's charity could say: "There is very troubling evidence that whites are overwhelmingly represented in the prosecutions for such offences." Yet none of this has happened. And this saddens me. Because until we hear those brave voices speaking out against abuse, what are we meant to think?

I urge white people to break this conspiracy of silence. Call on your leaders to show leadership. To show us all that you're not like the people who dominate the news headlines. That you really do care about protecting children.

You may think all the above is ridiculous; that I'm stirring ethnic tensions on an issue that is clearly about individuals and small groups of people and has nothing to do with race or religion. And that by making this spurious case I'm ignoring the core issue, which is that children, many of them in vulnerable situations, were terrorised and physically harmed by opportunistic men who were able to get away with their crimes for years. You'd be right.

But all of the above arguments were made within various parts of our print and broadcast media when similarly small numbers of Muslim men were revealed to be grooming young girls for sex. If you think the claims about white people are wrong, then so is the stereotyping of Britain's Muslims, and the widespread questioning of their culture and their religion, because of the perverted actions of a few.

Since the "black crime shock" tabloid stories of the 1980s, editors have known that stoking fears about misunderstood minorities is good for sales. If you object to this article, then you should understand how it feels to be a Muslim reading similar pieces pandering to Islamophobia day after day – and you should object to those too.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/06/sexual-abuse-in-white-community

Simplistic comparisons and generalisations made in that article. But the important thing is that at least the law is catching up with the offenders: Jail terms, derobings, fines, settlements, public discourse etc. In time the exposure will ensure that evryone is aware of the problem and its made a thing of the past.



As brilliant as the article is, how about facing child brides in the Muslim world? VVF in Northern Nigeria for starts, or even things like Boko Haram or the sectarian crisis in Pakistan, Iraq etc. Is there a public discourse about these chronic problems or an attempt by the Ummah to face them squarely? Or the usual refrain "they are not Muslims" and we continue to live with the wahala.

Good for the writer is a Muslim exercising his rights to free speech in Britain and is not a Christian trying the same in Pakistan, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi, or Malaysia.


The whites are facing and dealing with their problems squarely. Are the writer's people doing the same?

zit is the same simplistic comparisons that people like you make. In time?? Do you know how long priests in the catholic church have been molesting kids?? How much longer do you think it is going to be stopped with the church keeping it underground? Please!!'

What part of the muslim world have you been to?? Do you know the minimum marriage age in egypt for instance? This your bigotry never ceases to amaze me.

You should know that 'freedom of speech' means different things to different people, Go deny the holocaust in some parts of europe and see where you end up.. Even in the US, at the least you will lose your job if it is publicised.

With the amount of sexual abuse that takes place in many parts of the west, dealing with the problem doesn't sem to be working out very well. does it?

tiarabubu: Simplistic comparisons and generalisations made in that article. But the important thing is that at least the law is catching up with the offenders: Jail terms, derobings, fines, settlements, public discourse etc. In time the exposure will ensure that evryone is aware of the problem and its made a thing of the past.



As brilliant as the article is, how about facing child brides in the Muslim world? VVF in Northern Nigeria for starts, or even things like Boko Haram or the sectarian crisis in Pakistan, Iraq etc. Is there a public discourse about these chronic problems or an attempt by the Ummah to face them squarely? Or the usual refrain "they are not Muslims" and we continue to live with the wahala.

Good for the writer is a Muslim exercising his rights to free speech in Britain and is not a Christian trying the same in Pakistan, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi, or Malaysia.


The whites are facing and dealing with their problems squarely. Are the writer's people doing the same?

As usual Tiarabubu is here to say nay.

@OP, I knew where the article was headed after a few paragraphs. Nice satirical piece.

Deal with the problem like the fatwa a saudi cleric issued. You know Babies are sexy beasts. So sexy, in fact, that muslim men feel an uncontrollable urge to rape them. At least, this is, according to Saudi sheikh Abdullah Daoud. Hot and unable to keep his hand out of the proverbial cookie jar, Daoud issued a fatwa in an attempt to curb the temptations they're facing: baby girls must wear the burqa.

Daoud was very forward when asked to explain his fatwa: he cited statistics regarding child rape as justification for veiling babies.

Footage of a Saudi cleric calling for all female babies to have their faces covered with the burkha has surfaced.

Sheikh Abdullah Daoud delivered the fatwa on Islamic al-Majd TV and stressed his belief the veil would protect baby girls from being sexually molested.

The clip, flagged up by Al Arabiya, sees him attempting to back up the ruling by quoting unnamed Saudi Arabian medical and security sources.

Sheikh Adbullah Daoud stressed his belief the veil would protect baby girls from being sexually molested.

While Daoud’s comments were made in October last year, they have been revisited in light of the verdict against a Saudi cleric accused of raping and torturing his five-year-old daughter to death.

According to the Associated Press, Fayhan al-Ghamdi was ordered to pay $50,000 “blood money” to the slain girl’s mother,but was spared a jail sentence. He is said to have questioned the girl's virginity.

Under Saudi Arabian Islamic law, a father cannot be executed for murdering his children or his wife.

Of Daoud’s comments, Digital Journal writes: "Some agree that instances of reported sexual assault against young girls within Saudi Arabia are on the increase.

.http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/blackberry/p.html?id=2613803

tiarabubu: Simplistic comparisons and generalisations made in that article. But the important thing is that at least the law is catching up with the offenders: Jail terms, derobings, fines, settlements, public discourse etc. In time the exposure will ensure that evryone is aware of the problem and its made a thing of the past.



As brilliant as the article is, how about facing child brides in the Muslim world? VVF in Northern Nigeria for starts, or even things like Boko Haram or the sectarian crisis in Pakistan, Iraq etc. Is there a public discourse about these chronic problems or an attempt by the Ummah to face them squarely? Or the usual refrain "they are not Muslims" and we continue to live with the wahala.

Good for the writer is a Muslim exercising his rights to free speech in Britain and is not a Christian trying the same in Pakistan, Iran, Kuwait, Saudi, or Malaysia.


The whites are facing and dealing with their problems squarely. Are the writer's people doing the same?

On point

Paris-Love:
Deal with the problem like the fatwa a saudi cleric issued. You know Babies are sexy beasts. So sexy, in fact, that muslim men feel an uncontrollable urge to rape them. At least, this is, according to Saudi sheikh Abdullah Daoud. Hot and unable to keep his hand out of the proverbial cookie jar, Daoud issued a fatwa in an attempt to curb the temptations they're facing: baby girls must wear the burqa.

Daoud was very forward when asked to explain his fatwa: he cited statistics regarding child rape as justification for veiling babies.


.http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/blackberry/p.html?id=2613803

You do know what a fatwa means right?? It means an opinion... Every one is free to have an opinion no matter how ridiculous. It does not make it binding on muslims..

Islamic law is very straightforward in this regard, The veil is for women that have reached the age of puberty.

It seems you are totally lost on the purpose of the thread because you have projected it on all muslims again. But then again, it is you. With you, the bigotry always wins.

tbaba1234: zit is the same simplistic comparisons that people like you make. In time?? Do you know how long priests in the catholic church have been molesting kids?? How much longer do you think it is going to be stopped with the church keeping it underground? Please!!'

What part of the muslim world have you been to?? Do you know the minimum marriage age in egypt for instance? This your bigotry never ceases to amaze me.

You should know that 'freedom of speech' means different things to different people, Go deny the holocaust in some parts of europe and see where you end up.. Even in the US, at the least you will lose your job if it is publicised.

With the amount of sexual abuse that takes place in many parts of the west, dealing with the problem doesn't sem to be working out very well. does it?

Why are you more worried about white priests and oyinbos while you ignore a bigger problem in your own backyard? They are perfecting their system, dealing with crimes committed decades ago, and allowing people like you in to make a life and religion in relative peace. Your own people have not guaranteed that for others neither have their system ensured justice for young girls and even babies (as evidenced by that fatwa) nor for religious minorities and you come here to talk of bigotry.Some of us tell it as it is. That aint bigotry.

Please remove the log in your eyes before talking about the speck in another man's.

tbaba1234:

You do know what a fatwa means right?? It means an opinion... Every one is free to have an opinion no matter how ridiculous. It does not make it binding on muslims..

Islamic law is very straightforward in this regard, The veil is for women that have reached the age of puberty.

It seems you are totally lost on the purpose of the thread because you have projected it on all muslims again. But then again, it is you. With you, the bigotry always wins.

An opinion of a knowledgeable Sheik. An educated man with considerable following and an authority on the Quran. If Fatwas are just opinions (even ridiculous ones) why is Salman Rushdie on the run? Please remind us.

The Sheik recognized a problem and that was his way of solving it. The important thing is the problem at hand should be on the front burner even after dismissing his solution. But the baby was thrown with the bath water and problem still persist. Issues like these are what your writer should be dissipating his energy on.

Abeg make I go sleep joor.

tiarabubu:


Why are you more worried about white priests and oyinbos while you ignore a bigger problem in your own backyard? They are perfecting their system, dealing with crimes committed decades ago, and allowing people like you in to make a life and religion in relative peace. Your own people have not guaranteed that for others neither have their system ensured justice for young girls and even babies (as evidenced by that fatwa) nor for religious minorities and you come here to talk of bigotry.Some of us tell it as it is. That aint bigotry.

Please remove the log in your eyes before talking about the speck in another man's.

End of discussion.

tiarabubu:


Why are you more worried about white priests and oyinbos while you ignore a bigger problem in your own backyard? They are perfecting their system, dealing with crimes committed decades ago, and allowing people like you in to make a life and religion in relative peace. Your own people have not guaranteed that for others neither have their system ensured justice for young girls and even babies (as evidenced by that fatwa) nor for religious minorities and you come here to talk of bigotry.Some of us tell it as it is. That aint bigotry.

Please remove the log in your eyes before talking about the speck in another man's.

Tbaba dare not reply this because it is exposing the hypocrisy!



Tiarabubu, I love you!

Great post

Frosbel writes an interesting piece on this issue

https://www.nairaland.com/739883/hypocrisy-child-abuse-many-muslim#8961544

frosbel: Some Muslims are fond of condemning western morality – alcoholism, nudity, premarital sex and homosexuality often being cited as examples. But Muslims do not have a monopoly on morality. In the west, child marriages and sex with children are illegal. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for many Muslim countries.

I recently saw the documentary on the Dancing Boys of Afghanistan. It exposed an ancient custom called "bacha bazi" (boy for play), where rich men buy boys as young as 11 from impoverished families for sexual slavery. The boys are dressed in women's clothes and made to dance and sing at parties, before being carted away by the men for sex. Owning boys is considered a symbol of status and one former warlord boasted of having up to 3,000 boys over a 20-year period, even though he was married, with two sons. The involvement of the police and inaction of the government means this form of child prostitution is widespread.

The moral hypocrisy is outrageous in a country where homosexuality is not only strictly forbidden but savagely punished, even between two consenting adults. However, men who sodomise young boys are not considered homosexuals or paedophiles. The love of young boys is not a phenomenon restricted to Afghanistan; homosexual pederasty is common in neighbouring Pakistan, too. In my view, repression of sexuality and extreme gender apartheid is to blame.

And in the Middle East, it's young girls who are considered desirable and men are able to satisfy their lusts legally through child marriages. In Yemen, more than a quarter of girls are married before the age of 15. Cases of girls dying during childbirth are not unusual, and recently, one 12-year-old child bride even died from internal bleeding following sexual intercourse. In another case, a 12-year-old girl was married to an 80-year-old man in Saudi Arabia.

So why is the practice of child marriage sanctioned in Muslim countries? Unfortunately, ultra-conservative religious authorities justify this old tribal custom by citing the prophet Muhammad's marriage to Aisha. They allege Aisha was nine years old when the prophet married her. But they focus conveniently on selected Islamic texts to support their opinions, while ignoring vast number of other texts and historical information, which suggests Aisha was much older, putting her age of marriage at 19. Child marriage is against Islam as the Qur'an is clear that intellectual maturity is the basis for deciding age of marriage, and not puberty, as suggested by these clerics.

Whatever one's view on the prophet's marriage, no faith can claim moral superiority since child marriages have been practised in various cultures and societies across the world at one time or another. In modern times, though, marrying children is no longer acceptable and no excuse should be used to justify this.


............
I wonder how, then, Muslims can remain silent when it comes to the sexual abuse of children?

WOW Evangelism by diversion . . . any thaba nice peace!

Babadeen:



Tbaba dare not reply this because it is exposing the hypocrisy!



Tiarabubu, I love you!

Great post

You are declaring love here? I am watching you.

Babadeen:



Tbaba dare not reply this because it is exposing the hypocrisy!



Tiarabubu, I love you!

Great post

Thanks

maclatunji:

You are declaring love here? I am watching you.

egbon!

tiarabubu:



egbon!

tiarabubu:


Why are you more worried about white priests and oyinbos while you ignore a bigger problem in your own backyard? They are perfecting their system, dealing with crimes committed decades ago, and allowing people like you in to make a life and religion in relative peace. Your own people have not guaranteed that for others neither have their system ensured justice for young girls and even babies (as evidenced by that fatwa) nor for religious minorities and you come here to talk of bigotry.Some of us tell it as it is. That aint bigotry.

Please remove the log in your eyes before talking about the speck in another man's.

tiarabubu:


An opinion of a knowledgeable Sheik. An educated man with considerable following and an authority on the Quran. If Fatwas are just opinions (even ridiculous ones) why is Salman Rushdie on the run? Please remind us.

The Sheik recognized a problem and that was his way of solving it. The important thing is the problem at hand should be on the front burner even after dismissing his solution. But the baby was thrown with the bath water and problem still persist. Issues like these are what your writer should be dissipating his energy on.

Abeg make I go sleep joor.

Evidenced by what fatwa?? Is the fatwa law?? I have heard many ridiculous opinions from learned political activists and lawyers on political and constitutional issues. It does not make it law. You do not have to look far. watch the last series of republican debates. If every muslim in the world was hunting for rushdie's head, do you think he will still be alive?? A fatwa is not a binding opinion.

If you read the article properly, you would not miss out on the fact that it is a satirical piece that exposes the hypocrisy of people like you. It is not about removing logs, it is about looking at issues from another angle. The practice of painting an entire group of people with one brush .

Sexual abuse exists every where but that is not the point of the article (white or non-white). It is the practice of picking a problem faced by a society and using it to paint an entire society or group of people. You should be intelligent enough to figure that out. It has nothing to do with oyinbo society.

As regards removing logs, it is incorrect to suggest that societies are not trying to deal with the problems that ,might exist within them. It is simply untrue. They might not be effective or they might just face different challenges. For instance: What a militant fails to do for years in getting recruits, a single drone attack on a village will do for him. This is the complexity of the situation.

Face the trajectory of the writer's words and take its lessons (or not).

Thanks.

tbaba1234:



Evidenced by what fatwa?? Is the fatwa law?? I have heard many ridiculous opinions from learned political activists and lawyers on political and constitutional issues. It does not make it law. You do not have to look far. watch the last series of republican debates.

If you read the article properly, you would not miss out on the fact that it is a satirical piece that exposes the hypocrisy of people like you. It is not about removing logs, it is about looking at issues from another angle. The practice of painting an entire group of people with one brush .

Sexual abuse exists every where but that is not the point of the article (white or non-white). It is the practice of picking a problem faced by a society and using it to paint an entire society or group of people. You should be intelligent enough to figure that out. It has nothing to do with oyinbo society.

As regards removing logs, it is incorrect to suggest that societies are not trying to deal with the problems that ,might exist within them. It is simply untrue. They might not be effective or they might just face different challenges. For instance: What a militant fails to do for years in getting recruits, a single drone attack on a village will do for him. This is the complexity of the situation.

Face the trajectory of the writer's words and take its lessons (or not).

Thanks.

Truly you said it all, the point above underscores one key attitude that Islampbobe shares

Only a puny minority of Muslims acts in a violent manner, while the huge majority does not, though both are reading the same book. If Muslims don’t act in similar ways, the problem isn’t the Islamophobe’s interpretation of Islam, it’s anything else—perhaps the Muslims are practicing taqiyya! Or, perhaps, the Muslims don’t understand their religion.

Islamophobes resolve the challenges posed by reality by dismissing it. Hence, they’ll say things like “most Muslims don’t understand Islam.” This was the rebuttal Ayaan Hirsi Ali used against Zeba Khan during their Intelligence Squared debate on Islam. In her opening statement, Khan argued that her parents stressed tolerance as an Islamic value; Hirsi Ali responded that while that was very nice, it wasn’t Islam. https://www.nairaland.com/1264396/8-telling-signs-suffer-islamophobia#15338963

maclatunji:

Why na?! Wetin I do?

tbaba1234:



Evidenced by what fatwa?? Is the fatwa law?? I have heard many ridiculous opinions from learned political activists and lawyers on political and constitutional issues. It does not make it law. You do not have to look far. watch the last series of republican debates. If every muslim in the world was hunting for rushdie's head, do you think he will still be alive?? A fatwa is not a binding opinion.

If you read the article properly, you would not miss out on the fact that it is a satirical piece that exposes the hypocrisy of people like you. It is not about removing logs, it is about looking at issues from another angle. The practice of painting an entire group of people with one brush .

Sexual abuse exists every where but that is not the point of the article (white or non-white). It is the practice of picking a problem faced by a society and using it to paint an entire society or group of people. You should be intelligent enough to figure that out. It has nothing to do with oyinbo society.

As regards removing logs, it is incorrect to suggest that societies are not trying to deal with the problems that ,might exist within them. It is simply untrue. They might not be effective or they might just face different challenges. For instance: What a militant fails to do for years in getting recruits, a single drone attack on a village will do for him. This is the complexity of the situation.

Face the trajectory of the writer's words and take its lessons (or not).

Thanks.

How society treats a problem somewhat defined them as a people. One society acknowledges the problem and acts in a robust manner and welcomes public discourse, the other looks the other way. Are we to see the two in the same light?

And a similarly linked point; maybe he should write a satirical piece on his society and how their abuse has gone unchallenged thus far..... Or maybe he is afraid of the consequences.....? Lucky he can write a satire from where he is at....

I am surprised you also haven't seen the irony in that satire.... Enjoy!

*yawns*