Wikipedia does it again – Steve Sailer

Wikipedia, that eternally reliable source of neutral knowledge, headlines:

Moral panic from gangs in Britain

You see, it wasn’t an industrial-scale scandal perpetrated by men of South Asian migrant descent against teenage English girls, it was a “moral panic” on the part of everyone concerned about it.

The Muslim grooming gang panic is a moral panic alleging that Asian (particularly South Asian, Pakistani and Muslim) men are sexually abusing young white girls in the UK. Right-wing and far-right activists, as well as more mainstream individuals, helped popularize the terminology in the 2010s.(1)(2)(3)(4)

Public concern about South Asian grooming gangs began after several high-profile child sex abuse scandals, mainly perpetrated by South Asian men, including the Rotherham child sex abuse scandal in late 2010, in which 1,400 girls as young as 11 were found to have been raped. trafficked, kidnapped, beaten and intimidated by men, mainly of Pakistani origin, over a period of 15 years, with limited prosecution.(5) This was later exacerbated by the Rochdale child abuse case and the Telford child sexual exploitation scandal. (6)(3)

A Home Office report failed to prove any link between sexual violence and South Asian ethnicity. It has been found that white perpetrators, who are the majority race in Britain, are more represented in crimes of sexual assault and group-based sexual abuse than any other ethnicity in Britain.(4)(7)(8) The report suggests that there is unlikely to be a link between ethnic groups and child sexual abuse.(9) Despite the lack of evidence, the British media has reinforced the stereotype by disproportionately reporting on South Asian group-related sex crimes, at the expense of others similar cases involving White abusers.(3)

Jonathan Pallessen explains:

So (the Home Office report) says 75% of the perpetrators were Asian! (In Britain this term is used for the Indian and Pakistani populations.) This equates to a share of 4.4-6.9% of the population in 2001-2011.

This means that not only is there a link between ethnicity and grooming gangs, but it is also an extremely strong link. How did the claims end up in the newspaper articles and the Wikipedia page? They come from the Home Office report, which also details two previous reports claiming that the majority of group exploitation of children was committed by whites. However, the Home Office report notes that the data from these two reports covers a period when many agencies were less familiar with gang grooming, and that “very little was recognized or recorded by the police at the time about this type of offenses or perpetrators. Furthermore, the reports say that “ethnicity and nationality were sometimes confused. Unless a perpetrator had actually been arrested, it was difficult to be sure whether or not his ethnicity had been correctly identified.” So clearly we should not place great confidence in the exact figures from these reports.

Curiously, the two reports were both by the same first author, Sue Berelowitz. She is a former deputy commissioner for child protection who was fired after failing to speak out about Pakistani grooming gangs.

So the papers skipped where the Home Office report says Asian ‘grooming gangs’ are the majority, and instead focused on the Home Office report, which also noted these reports were based on unreliable data and both of which were created by someone who was fired for failing. in exactly this case.

These statements were then taken from the newspapers and added to Wikipedia. And since the Wikipedia claim now states that there is “probably no link between ethnic groups and child sexual abuse,” the Wikipedia article goes further and calls it a moral panic when people talk about Pakistani grooming gangs.

I first wrote about the Pakistani pimp problem in Northern England in 2013after hearing about it for years. It sounded too horrible to be true: if it was that bad, it couldn’t have been so disguised. But when I finally did the work, I discovered that it was truly awful and that the British establishment had worked diligently to silence anyone who was so distasteful.

Keep in mind, however, that this was not pedophilia in the classic sense of the word: these were Pakistani-origin low-lifes who were extensively pimping underage but post-pubescent English working-class girls from their friends and uncles. But the BBC’s Nice People and the like thought it was racist and xenophobic to report this widespread sex abuse of teenage English girls by Pakistanis, so the establishment kept it hidden for decades.

Finally, a year later, in 2014, the obscure English town of Rotherham (not the great Dutch port of Rotterdam) commissioned a Official report about the pimp problem in Rotherham.

Reporters like official reports because they can’t get in trouble for citing them. They don’t have to weigh evidence and determine what really happened. They can just quote.

I am a big fan of the narrative value of official messages.

But because of the media focus on Rotherham, with its official report, the story-twisters were able to suggest that that’s just a peculiar problem in Rotherham.

All evidence shows that it was a major problem everywhere in England, where there were large Pakistani populations (particularly Pakistani Mipuris, who are considered a disgrace by other Pakistanis). The only thing different about Rotherham was that the city officials had the moxie to stop covering up the pimps and order an official report.

And then the liars went back to work claiming that The Science proves it’s not a Pakistani problem; white men are just as bad. That’s not true, of course, but numbers tire most people’s brains, so nice people outsource their quantitative analysis to people who tell them what they want to hear: white men are bad and immigrants are good.

In particular, Wikipedia has become increasingly corrupted by hate-filled obsessives: just look up, for starters, at my article or ‘Race and IQ’.