Political Correctness

[Scaff]

To be fair it's not just the Mail:

https://www-independent-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grooming-gangs-sex-abuse-manchester-police-exploitation-asian-a9283146.html?amp&usqp=mq331AQOKAGYAevPwN6cx5O1qAE=&_js_v=a2&_gsa=1#referrer=https://www.google.com&share=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grooming-gangs-sex-abuse-manchester-police-exploitation-asian-a9283146.html

But I dunno guys - when you've got Rotherham, Telford, Oxford all saying prosecutions weren't forthcoming in part because of the fear of racism it seems a stretch to say it didn't influence decisions in this case. Especially since a cop in the report contradicts 1081s point that it had no bearing on investigations as they were quoted as saying "What had a massive input (in one particular successful prosecution) was the offending target group were predominantly Asian males and we were told to try and get other ethnicities.”

Damn you do love conflating correlation with causality, it's like catnip to you.

 

[TenEightyOne]

To be fair it's not just the Mail:

https://www-independent-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grooming-gangs-sex-abuse-manchester-police-exploitation-asian-a9283146.html?amp&usqp=mq331AQOKAGYAevPwN6cx5O1qAE=&_js_v=a2&_gsa=1#referrer=https://www.google.com&share=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grooming-gangs-sex-abuse-manchester-police-exploitation-asian-a9283146.html

The Daily Mail is presenting concerns over racial tension as the entire cause of the failures found by the inquiry. The Independent takes that populist line but presents it only as a factor. There's a world of difference unless a reader is led more by confirmation bias than the actual words.

But I dunno guys - when you've got Rotherham, Telford, Oxford all saying prosecutions weren't forthcoming in part because of the fear of racism it seems a stretch to say it didn't influence decisions in this case.

It isn't a stretch, they were different cases under different authorities.

Especially since a cop in the report contradicts 1081s point that it had no bearing on investigations as they were quoted as saying "What had a massive input (in one particular successful prosecution) was the offending target group were predominantly Asian males and we were told to try and get other ethnicities.”

That doesn't contradict the point at all. The victim wasn't part of the reviewed investigation and wasn't part of the group of At Risk children being investigated. Because of the difference in demographic and area the investigation looked beyond the suspects who were part of Augusta.

The whole paragraph helps:

Outcome 2 – This individual was not a designated suspect. The offender was acting as a bogus taxi driver and a child in care reported that he had raped her. This child was one of the three designated victims added on 21 March 2005. He was charged with two accounts of inciting a female under 16 to engage in sexual acts. The two victims cited in the evaluation report did not have designated victim status within Operation Augusta and were from outside the Manchester area. The individual was a known sex offender and it was reported that he had offered the two victims money for a sexual act. Subsequently, the suspect was arrested and charged for a crime of rape against the original complainant. Detective Constable B informed the review team: “He was grooming kids, the demographics didn’t fit as it was a prosperous middle-class area, and they were well to do kids. They weren’t from the original tranche of children that were in children’s homes. What had a massive input was the offending target group were predominantly Asian males and we were told to try and get other ethnicities.” The offender identified in Outcome 2 was not of Asian heritage. He was sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment with a sex offender’s notice.

 

[huskeR32]

I'll reply when on computer. I wasn't ignoring the question it's just that I'm on phone so am limited.

*crickets*

 

[HenrySwanson]

To your mind, what is "political correctness"? What is the aim of its proponents and how does it accomplish that?

To identify it you should first be able to define it. It's a bit like intelligence in that regard.

I think the wiki definition is mostly accurate but I'd also add that it seeks to create a certain narrative and ostracizes those that don't attempt to follow it.

Damn you do love conflating correlation with causality, it's like catnip to you.

Hold on....

1) The police force involved in Operation Augusta was the same one involved in another grooming scandal, Rochdale, which The Times revealed that in this case " [a] Greater Manchester police source [described abandoning a] 2008 child sexual exploitation investigation in Rochdale, Jan 2011: “The inquiry was crippled by misplaced fears about upsetting racial sensitivities.”"
2) There were causative factors listed in my post and the article.
3) A whistle-blowing policewoman who was actually part of Operation Augusta said she thought the force was afraid of being racist among other things

Related as well, another ruling that admits they didn't act in part because of the fear of racism in Rotherham (different police force):

A senior police officer admitted that his force ignored the sexual abuse of girls by Pakistani grooming gangs for decades because it was afraid of increasing “racial tensions”, a watchdog has ruled.

After a five-year investigation, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) upheld a complaint that the Rotherham officer told a missing child’s distraught father that the town “would erupt” if it was known that Asian men were routinely having sex with under-age white girls.

The chief inspector is said to have described the abuse as “**** shagging” and to have said it had been “going on” for 30 years: “With it being Asians, we can’t afford for this to be coming out.”

The Daily Mail is presenting concerns over racial tension as the entire cause of the failures found by the inquiry. The Independent takes that populist line but presents it only as a factor. There's a world of difference unless a reader is led more by confirmation bias than the actual words.

So political correctness is a factor....

It isn't a stretch, they were different cases under different authorities.

Rochdale was under GMP

That doesn't contradict the point at all. The victim wasn't part of the reviewed investigation and wasn't part of the group of At Risk children being investigated. Because of the difference in demographic and area the investigation looked beyond the suspects who were part of Augusta.

The whole paragraph helps:

You're proving my point.

I'll ask a simple question:

Why do you think the outcomes were so poor in Operation Augusta in comparison to Outcome 2 as listed in the report, where a non-Asian received the stiffest sentence?

 

[MatskiMonk]

Yes, yes, yes, this is all fascinating...

But more importantly, Hank Azaria is stepping down from voicing Apu Nahasapeemapetilon, as the character reinforces racial stereotypes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51158261

I'm not normally one to wave the PC card... but this seems like an odd stand to take. Stereotyping characters is part of comedy, and it's not like it was that offensive, or even that far fetched.

 

[baldgye]

I'd also add that it seeks to create a certain narrative and ostracizes those that don't attempt to follow it.

If you can't be decent, inclusive and/or nice, why should people want to engage and include you?

3) A whistle-blowing policewoman who was actually part of Operation Augusta said she thought the force was afraid of being racist among other things

: "Being accused of being racist perhaps, causing riots. I know that Operation Augusta was shelved or buried when the London bombing went off.

She was specifically asked if she thought if being perceived as being a racist was a motivation... and the strongest response was, perhaps... gottem! ...oh wait there is more..

"I think it's gone way beyond the racial debate, I see it as a class debate also.

Oh, so race isn't the major factor and was only introduced because of the way the question was framed...

Related as well, another ruling that admits they didn't act in part because of the fear of racism in Rotherham (different police force):

I assume this is related because it feeds into your own narrative, rather than them actually being related?

So political correctness is a factor....

I would imagine in your mind, political correctness could be a factor in almost any human interaction

 

[HenrySwanson]

If you can't be decent, inclusive and/or nice, why should people want to engage and include you?

It's rather more than just manners

She was specifically asked if she thought if being perceived as being a racist was a motivation... and the strongest response was, perhaps... gottem! ...oh wait there is more..

Wrong.

She was asked an open question (When asked what she thought GMP were "scared of"). She wasn't asked if she thought racism was a motivation (a closed question) - she came up with that in response to the open question.

Oh, so race isn't the major factor and was only introduced because of the way the question was framed...

See above, open vs closed questions

I assume this is related because it feeds into your own narrative, rather than them actually being related?

What was I saying about political correctness again?

I would imagine in your mind, political correctness could be a factor in almost any human interaction

I don't understand

 

[baldgye]

It's rather more than just manners

Oh I agree!

..that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society.

It's about supporting inclusion (something you are strangley averse to..)

Wrong

When asked what she thought GMP were "scared of" she said:

(this isn't even a quote of the full question!)

I don't understand

We're aware.


Edit: Also, don't you think it's odd that in order to try and present a 'clear PC' narrative through this story, you've had to link so many other things together? Like, if it was an open and shut case of some evil PC-Pro (unrelated to the magazine) they'd be some clear evidence?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Related as well, another ruling that admits they didn't act in part because of the fear of racism in Rotherham (different police force):

Different police force and different authority. Not related.

So political correctness is a factor....

Political correctness isn't a factor because it doesn't exist, it must be something else you're scared of. That's your conclusion from a standpoint that's made up.

Rochdale was under GMP

Different authority, unless you think these investigations are solely under the police force? The case you started with shows that they very clearly are not. In any case the SIOs were different, as I understand it?

Why do you think the outcomes were so poor in Operation Augusta in comparison to Outcome 2 as listed in the report, where a non-Asian received the stiffest sentence?

I thought this was about the police? The Crown Court hand down sentences, not the police. You sample one outcome against several when there are other individual outcomes that match the conviction rate and exceed the charge rate - last week you were lecturing us on the mathematics of it all. I've explained already why the balance of outcomes is poor, you should re-read that post and the conclusions of the report, try and avoid Murdoch papers like The Sun and The Times

 

[TexRex]

To your mind

wiki definition

I'd also add that it seeks to create a certain narrative and ostracizes those that don't attempt to follow it.

Ah, so reductio ad Stalinum then. That would be the supposed normative agenda.

Just how do its supposed proponents accomplish this through "political correctness"? [he asks, fully aware the solicited's inability to grasp the difference between freedom of speech and freedom of consequences from speech will likely rear its ugly head]

Are rules against accosting and verbally abusing others--such as the one established in this very site's Acceptable Use Policy--an example of "political correctness"? Why or why not?

As an aside, I'm curious why a blurb containing a wiki link necessitated use of a computer over a mobile device when much more lengthy responses containing multiple links have been tendered since my solicitation. Seems to me what was provided was negligibly more involved than the response explaining the supposed need.

 

[HenrySwanson]

(this isn't even a quote of the full question!)

For brevity I'll answer this as you're incorrect:



The original question was:

"Why was it made so difficult for you to get justice for these girls" (an open question]
Maggie Oliver then responds to the question including references to the ethnicities of the offenders

Follow up question:

"What were they scared of then" (another open question)

Different police force and different authority. Not related.

I thought we were talking about political correctness and its effects:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/grooming-scandal-hollow-denials-exposed-by-the-watchdog-lfsdzdm32

• Confidential 2010 report for Rotherham safeguarding children board: such crimes have “cultural characteristics . . . which are locally sensitive in terms of diversity . . . It is imperative that suggestions of a wider cultural phenomenon are avoided.”

• West Mercia chief inspector, Jan 2011: “It’s a damaging taboo. These girls are being passed around and used as meat. To stop this type of crime you need to start talking about it, but everyone’s been too scared to address the ethnicity factor . . . we need to stop being worried about the racial complication.”

• Greater Manchester police source describing abandoned 2008 child sexual exploitation investigation in Rochdale, Jan 2011: “The inquiry was crippled by misplaced fears about upsetting racial sensitivities.”

• Jun 2012: The Times reveals Rotherham council censored the report of a serious case review into the murder of a 17-year-old girl by redacting information that revealed the ethnicity of the British Pakistani men suspected of using her for sex from the age of 11.

• Jay report on Rotherham, Aug 2014: there was a widespread perception that “some senior people in the council and the police wanted to downplay the ethnic dimension . . . because it might damage community cohesion”.

• Casey report on Rotherham, Feb 2015: “People were unable to tackle race issues because they were too worried about being called racist.”

• Review of bungled Greater Manchester police inquiry, Jan 2020: “The SIO attended a meeting at GMP headquarters to discuss communications. This meeting acknowledged that the enquiry was sensitive due to the involvement of Asian men. Concerns were expressed about the risk of proactive tactics or the incitement of racial hatred.

Different authority, unless you think these investigations are solely under the police force? The case you started with shows that they very clearly are not. In any case the SIOs were different, as I understand it?

Not solely - hence why the scandals involved other bodies apart from the police force. The police force however for Rochdale and Operation Augusta are the same.

I thought this was about the police? The Crown Court hand down sentences, not the police. You sample one outcome against several when there are other individual outcomes that match the conviction rate and exceed the charge rate - last week you were lecturing us on the mathematics of it all. I've explained already why the balance of outcomes is poor, you should re-read that post and the conclusions of the report, try and avoid Murdoch papers like The Sun and The Times

It's about all authorities involved in the prosecution of offenders and protection of victims.

Just how do its supposed proponents accomplish this through "political correctness"? [he asks, fully aware the solicited's inability to grasp the difference between freedom of speech and freedom of consequences from speech will likely rear its ugly head]

Are rules against accosting and verbally abusing others--such as the one established in this very site's Acceptable Use Policy--an example of "political correctness"? Why or why not?

No, those are rules for common decency.

Bans for expressing certain opinions on other forums, like Resetera are (I've seen people banned for stating they voted for the Conservative Party with the reason given as "supporting bigotry")

As an aside, I'm curious why a blurb containing a wiki link necessitated use of a computer over a mobile device when much more lengthy responses containing multiple links have been tendered since my solicitation. Seems to me what was provided was negligibly more involved than the response explaining the supposed need.

I thought I would link to more sources but the wiki link pretty much sums it up (plus my added thoughts). The other replies I made were pretty straightforward.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Double post

 

[baldgye]

For brevity I'll answer this as you're incorrect:



The original question was:

"Why was it made so difficult for you to get justice for these girls" (an open question]
Maggie Oliver then responds to the question including references to the ethnicities of the offenders

Follow up question:

"What were they scared of then" (another open question)

Thank you for finally posting a proper link and source

Unfortunately this has nothing to do with the Police force or the CPS being scared of being anti-PC etc.
As a police force dealing with race issues is a pretty complex affair. The fact that you’ve boiled this down to some one issue and then lumped other unrelated things together to help bolster your stance only shows that once again, you are engaging in Bath faith arguments.

The source of your argument doesn’t agree with you (race plays a part but then other factors like class and then London. bombings where also a factor), the facts don’t seem to agree with you either. So here we are again, with you presenting another bad faith argument.

 

[TexRex]

Bath faith

Or "loofah fides" for the Latin fans.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Thank you for finally posting a proper link and source

Unfortunately this has nothing to do with the Police force or the CPS being scared of being anti-PC etc.
As a police force dealing with race issues is a pretty complex affair. The fact that you’ve boiled this down to some one issue and then lumped other unrelated things together to help bolster your stance only shows that once again, you are engaging in Bath faith arguments.

The source of your argument doesn’t agree with you (race plays a part but then other factors like class and then London. bombings where also a factor), the facts don’t seem to agree with you either. So here we are again, with you presenting another bad faith argument.

Wait, what?

She was a police officer in the stated operation. How can you just disregard what she says?!

 

[baldgye]

How can you just disregard what she says?!

I didn't... I listed to and read what she's said on this matter... it's not a riddle and I've quoted her multiple times throughout the last few pages.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I thought we were talking about political correctness and its effects:

We're talking about something made up that you want to believe? There isn't any such thing as "political correctness", how many times?

Not solely - hence why the scandals involved other bodies apart from the police force. The police force however for Rochdale and Operation Augusta are the same.

And the challenges and failures of the authority are key to that. A different authority. Different. Not the same.

It's about all authorities involved in the prosecution of offenders and protection of victims.

Ah, you started with Operation Augusta, now it's a wider historical review. 'Kay.

Wait, what?

She was a police officer in the stated operation. How can you just disregard what she says?!

Read the report, it covers her speculations in some detail.

Ultimately the police can only proceed to the CPS with proof that will reach a bar for conviction. The failure of Social Services and the notable unreliability of in-care teenage witnesses in court cases is what's really horrible about this and is what makes abuse against these vulnerable teens so easy to perpetrate. All your "politcal correctness" flam about the police not investigating Asian men seems nonsensical, the only quotes to a similar effect that I can see are that it would be harmful for the public to know that the police suspect Asian men.

When your police force is down to 60% strength it's a bad idea to start a race riot, however good it is for arrest figures.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I didn't... I listed to and read what she's said on this matter... it's not a riddle and I've quoted her multiple times throughout the last few pages.

But you're listening to one report....and disregarding the interview?

Was she ever prompted by the interviewer to say that the fear of being seen as racist was a factor?

We're talking about something made up that you want to believe? There isn't any such thing as "political correctness", how many times?



And the challenges and failures of the authority are key to that. A different authority. Different. Not the same.



Ah, you started with Operation Augusta, now it's a wider historical review. 'Kay.



Read the report, it covers her speculations in some detail.

Ultimately the police can only proceed to the CPS with proof that will reach a bar for conviction. The failure of Social Services and the notable unreliability of in-care teenage witnesses in court cases is what's really horrible about this and is what makes abuse against these vulnerable teens so easy to perpetrate. All your "politcal correctness" flam about the police not investigating Asian men seems nonsensical, the only quotes to a similar effect that I can see are that it would be harmful for the public to know that the police suspect Asian men.

When your police force is down to 60% strength it's a bad idea to start a race riot, however good it is for arrest figures.

Sigh....I have just one question:

Was GMP influenced by fears of being classed as racist in the course of their investigations into child grooming by predominantly Pakistani men in Operation Augusta?

 

[baldgye]

But you're listening to one report....and disregarding the interview?

Was she ever prompted by the interviewer to say that the fear of being seen as racist was a factor?

Quote me where I said I mm disregarding the TV interview.
The second question you asked here shows your blind ignorance to the concept of nuance.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Quote me where I said I mm disregarding the TV interview.
The second question you asked here shows your blind ignorance to the concept of nuance.

Unfortunately this has nothing to do with the Police force or the CPS being scared of being anti-PC etc.

As for nuance and "ignorance", care to elaborate further?

 

[baldgye]

*my quotes*

That's not what those words mean... *exhales* that interview (and the news articles I found that were not paywalled) together form a pretty clear picture that while race did play some part... THAT ASPECT ISN'T RELATED TO BEING PC.

As for nuance and "ignorance", care to elaborate further?

It would seem to be a waste of time as you are really struggling with reading. It isn't just my posts you are struggling with either, it's the news articles and things you have linked. Sorry.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Yes, yes, yes, this is all fascinating...

But more importantly, Hank Azaria is stepping down from voicing Apu Nahasapeemapetilon, as the character reinforces racial stereotypes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51158261

I'm not normally one to wave the PC card... but this seems like an odd stand to take. Stereotyping characters is part of comedy, and it's not like it was that offensive, or even that far fetched.

That's stupid.

So am I as a half Caribbean/half Asian forbidden from imitating voices from Europe/North America?

 

[TexRex]

No, those are rules for common decency.

What's the difference?

I'll note that thus far you've demonstrated an inability to explain...anything.

Bans for expressing certain opinions on other forums, like Resetera are (I've seen people banned for stating they voted for the Conservative Party with the reason given as "supporting bigotry")

I don't believe you.

You'll need to show evidence of this in order to use it as evidence for whatever argument you're attempting to make. As it stands, it's purely anecdotal.

I thought

So that's what that smell was.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I don't believe you.

You'll need to show evidence of this in order to use it as evidence for whatever argument you're attempting to make. As it stands, it's purely anecdotal.

Original ban:
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/rese...rsonal-keep-it-in-here.1506304/post-256201420

Another one stating "The Conservative Party is not facist. What is wrong with you people? Read up on real facist parties and movements which you all are seriously downplaying If you really believe that the Tories are facists"
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/rese...rsonal-keep-it-in-here.1506304/post-256192687

These bans happened around the time of the general election in the UK and were changed subsequently (although the members were banned from posting at that time)

* For the record I didn't vote Tory - I abstained.

 

[TexRex]

Original ban:
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/rese...rsonal-keep-it-in-here.1506304/post-256201420

Another one stating "The Conservative Party is not facist. What is wrong with you people? Read up on real facist parties and movements which you all are seriously downplaying If you really believe that the Tories are facists"
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/rese...rsonal-keep-it-in-here.1506304/post-256192687

These bans happened around the time of the general election in the UK and were changed subsequently (although the members were banned from posting at that time)

* For the record I didn't vote Tory - I abstained.

Great. Social media platform exercises right to revoke posting privileges.

You've also abstained from actually explaining how any of this is "political correctness". Just admit you can't because it doesn't exist as you allege.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Was GMP influenced by fears of being classed as racist in the course of their investigations into child grooming by predominantly Pakistani men in Operation Augusta?

No.

So am I as a half Caribbean/half Asian forbidden from imitating voices from Europe/North America?

No.

What would be crappy would be to perform "comedic" stereotypes where mockery lies at the basis of the performance. It's a nuance.

 

[VBR]

The police and social services turned a blind eye to dozens of victims because they didn't want to appear racist since the vast majority of the perpetrators were Pakistani.

👍

 

[UKMikey]

Not him again...

 

[Scaff]

Hold on....

1) The police force involved in Operation Augusta was the same one involved in another grooming scandal, Rochdale, which The Times revealed that in this case " [a] Greater Manchester police source [described abandoning a] 2008 child sexual exploitation investigation in Rochdale, Jan 2011: “The inquiry was crippled by misplaced fears about upsetting racial sensitivities.”"

Which doesn't prove causality, the same overall investigating force is a correlation.

2) There were causative factors listed in my post and the article.

No, they were correlations that you have forced causality onto.

3) A whistle-blowing policewoman who was actually part of Operation Augusta said she thought the force was afraid of being racist among other things

'she thought', that the standard you are using to assert causality?!

Related as well, another ruling that admits they didn't act in part because of the fear of racism in Rotherham (different police force):

Which once again is a correlation, not causality.

 

[Imari]

Yes, yes, yes, this is all fascinating...

But more importantly, Hank Azaria is stepping down from voicing Apu Nahasapeemapetilon, as the character reinforces racial stereotypes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51158261

I'm not normally one to wave the PC card... but this seems like an odd stand to take. Stereotyping characters is part of comedy, and it's not like it was that offensive, or even that far fetched.

If you look at where The Simpsons is now compared to what it was when it originally began, it starts to make more sense. The characters were/are all some sort of negative stereotype, Homer the fat lazy slob, Marge the nagging housewife, Lisa the nerd, Bart the destructive rebel, Flanders, Skinner, Moe, Chief Wiggum, and so on and so on.

And while the stereotyping let us see those characters in the people around us (as stereotyping does), The Simpsons was also very clever in that for the first ten seasons or so it had the characters mostly trying to be better people despite the stereotypes. Take Apu; workaholic immigrant at a convenience store. Also, a committed vegan with a whole episode that goes into that, someone who is lined up for an arranged marriage and all the difficulty that entails, the struggle of an immigrant to be accepted by their community and make their way to being a citizen, and that's just what I remember from twenty years ago when I actually watched the show.

Modern Simpsons is much less character and story driven and much more wacky and mean. In such a show there's no moral backbone to a stereotyped character like Apu, nothing positive to balance him out and make him appear like a real human. He's gone from being a believable person to a true caricature, and when the caricature gets mean then people (probably rightly) start to take offense. And it's awfully easy to make mean-spirited jokes about a caricature like Apu.

I don't doubt that people have been criticising Apu since day one, but I think that early Simpsons had valid things to say with the character despite any negative aspects. I'm not sure that The Simpsons in 2020 can say the same. Stereotyping characters is part of comedy, but it should always serve a purpose other than simply punching down.