New Year Eve's Coordinated Sexual Assault Attacks in Cologne

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:
You know, I'm a bleeding heart liberal who would never close the door on a legitimate refugee. So, if the study came to specific conclusions like you suggest, I'd hope that such folks could get some sort of specialized accommodation that is more than a door slammed in their faces. You are correct that I don't know what a serious analysis would discover. So, I avoid making blanket statements about all members of a religion, culture, ethnicity, etc. I think the people we should focus on are those who commit violence against women. That is the common trait that they have.

Who are "those" men who commit violence against women? Certainly not every man. I know you wouldn't, and neither would my husband. It seems like it might be a good idea to study and discuss "those" men to get a better idea of what's going on. Maybe they have common traits beyond just being males.

I'm not opposed to studying. To the contrary, I encourage it. But, just as you recognize that "male" is too general of an attribute, I believe that religion and ethnicity are too broad. Studies should go deeper.

Taking this discussion back to Cologne, there were so many men involved that there must have been some sort of organization. Does anyone know anything about that? There have been some suggestions that there were criminal gangs involved. I would focus more on how 1,000 guys all found themselves at the same place. Once you have a mob, mob mentality takes over and a lot of judgement goes out the window. It's the "everyone was doing it" excuse. But, how was that mob formed in the first place? If you knew that, you could might be able to prevent it from recurring. That seems like a more reasonable course of action then closing the door to refugees.

It seems like there was some coordination. It's possible there wasn't, or at least not all of it was coordinated. In many European cities, there is an area were everyone goes, a square or downtown or somewhere where all the people know to go. If all the citizens of Cologne went to the central area, and all the refugees went there too, there may have been no large coordination, merely the fact that that's the place where everyone goes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Apparently this has vanished down the memory hole:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tailhook_scandal

"The Tailhook scandal was a series of incidents where more than 100 U.S. Navy and United States Marine Corps aviation officers were alleged to have sexually assaulted 83 women and 7 men, or otherwise engaged in "improper and indecent" conduct at the Las Vegas Hilton in Las Vegas, Nevada"

Tailhook was inexcusable. This is not the same thing. First, this was in Vegas and occurred among people who knew each other and were partying and drinking together. There are conflicting stories, but, for sure, wrongdoing occurred. People were punished--because they knew who the people were. Some were "protected" and that was wrong and there were lots of reports about this and action was taken to stop it from occurring again. (There are some reports that it did not stop the activity.) This is just not the same thing.

The incidents being reported in Cologne and other German cities are quite different. It was totally unexpected and involved strangers. It also appears to be massive.

Exactly!

Jeff, why is your first post on this thread to chime in with "look at the Americans who did this too years ago?"

I agree Tailhook was agregious, but it is very different than what happened to those innocent people, women, daughters, mothers, wives, husbands, boyfriends and fathers.

What if this was your wife with your sons and you watching helpless to do anything?

I would have hoped your first post would have been to post support for the women and outrage for the deviants who think this is acceptable behavior.

Everything they did runs in complete opposition to what is supposed to be liberal, civilized values. Yet your first post is about Tailhook?

I am disappointed.

That was my first post because I hadn't read the thread and clicked on the last page. The first thing I saw was a post saying Americans wouldn't do this. Of course Americans not only would, they have. I'm disappointed at the hair-splitting that is all but excusing Tailhook. Some of the replies practically mimic those who defended it as simply what happens in "Vegas". I don't know about you, but I wouldn't feel better if my wife was a Tailhook victim rather than one of the victims in Cologne.

Of course the behavior in Cologne was reprehensible. I doubt that anyone has suggested otherwise. But, to act like such an occurrence is completely limited to one culture and completely alien to ours is factually inaccurate.

No, they haven't. I have been in large crushes in DC, and having a phone snatched is a real danger. Getting roughly groped by hundreds of men is not a real danger, and has never happened here. Women were bruised black and blue, at least one was raped. This is not like Tailhook, or spring break/hookup culture, etc.

+1 the apologists are grasping at straws. To defend this atrocity they are trampling all over women's rights

Nope. Some of us just see how this story is being used to further stir up emotions about the refugee crisis.

Where's the outrage over all the rapes happening at Oktoberfest and Karnival/ Fasching in Germany every single year? By our "good" German boys. If you've been at any of these events as a woman in Germany, you know what I'm taking about.

Born and raised in Germany, close to Cologne where Karneval is huge and I don't know of a single person on our Karneval community in our town or others that have ever been raped during Karneval festivities. My parents were members and organizers of our towns Karneval and nothing ever happened in our town or others.

A police men after the assaults reported that he took care of women who had their underwear removed by the mob. That's horrifying.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It becomes part of the discussion when it is part of the reason for this incident of alarming sexual assault.

For instance, of the 30 men now apprehended, almost 50% of them are asylum seekers. All the attackers were described as been of arab or north african origin. If culture did not matter some of the european countries would not now be included classes on how to respect women to the new refugees that arrive. When discussing the problem and the solution, sometimes it is not agenda pushing to also discuss what is obviously there - that culture is part of the equation. Not everybody concerned about this is a right wing islamophobe.

Certainly cultures and religions can be part of the discussion. My suggestion was that you concentrate on behaviors and actions, not that you ignore everything else. There are huge cultural differences between North Africa and countries such as Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq. There are also important social class differences. If you want to address cultural aspects, you are probably going to require a lot more expertise on cultures or you will be getting a lot of things wrong.

Back to my point, if you focus on unwanted behaviors, I think you will find more success in achieving your goals. Classes for new refugees on how to respect women seem like a great idea. They should be offered -- along with other classes aimed at easing adjustment to the host nation -- to refugees of all origins. There are no circumstances under which I am suggesting such behavior should be ignored or tolerated.

I'm not one of the super-sensitive PC types, but it is genuinely offensive that you are talking about "unwanted behaviors" on a thread about sexual assault. Sexual assault (even when it doesn't meet the legal definition of rape) should in no way be categorized as "unwanted behavior." My MIL questioning my wardrobe choice last Thanksgiving was "unwanted behavior."

There is always someone who wants to miss the big picture and nitpick. Given that you are not "super-sensitive", you probably didn't pick up that used "unwanted behavior" because I was including behaviors beyond sexual assault. I once had a guest who was new to the US who didn't know that we flush toilet paper. After finding some smelly deposits in the bathroom trash can, I discussed that particular unwanted behavior with him. That could also be covered in a class.

But, please proceed with your outrage. I wouldn't want you to be distracted by a larger point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Quote from He Who Must Not be Named:"Might I make the suggestion that you concentrate on behaviors and actions rather than cultures and religions?"

Cultures matter. That's just how the world works. For example, in the U.S., males (especially white males) have been raised for generations to think they have some sense of ownership or superiority over others, whereas their female counterparts were raised differently. In some parts of the U.S., this is a more pronounced part of the culture than in others. Each culture throughout the world may have taught similar lessons to a larger or smaller degree. They certainly all have their idiosyncrasies. But certainly what we choose to teach males and females about each person's relative worth in society matters. And that's part of each society's culture.

Cultures matter, but they are not definitive. If all white males are raised in a misogynistic culture and culture is determinative, then all American white males would be misogynists. Do you hold that view? On a broader level, many white males are Trump supporters, but many white males aren't. Clearly, white male culture in the US is not homogeneous or there are other factors besides culture at play. That is even more true when you are discussing a religion that spans continents and which has significant internal cultural differences. Going back to your original example, the issue with misogynist white men is not that they were white. If they were misogynist green men, it would be just as bad. The problem is that they are misogynist. Why not focus on that?

To your example. Obviously not all white men are trump supporter red necks. Obviously not all muslims are supporters of terrorism and sexual assault.

Yes misogynistic white men are just as bad as misogynistic green men, or purple colored men.

However when there is a mass attack by purple colored men unseen before, then the question must be asked, why?

Many so called "redneck white Turmp supporters" are actually kind, gracious, thoughtful men. If you are going to decry the criticism of one group of men based on 1000s of them sexually assaulting women then you need to refrain from stereotyping white rural men too, just because of the action of some Trump supporters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't a class for these men be the equivalent in giving members of the KKK a class on race relations and expecting them to change? Not likely to happen. I suspect that it is very likely that these men knew that their behavior was inappropriate.

They may or may not have known their behavior was inappropriate, but they also probably didn't expect to get in trouble for it -- police are sort of a western invention, as is reasonably even enforcement of laws.

I have been reluctant to wade into this discussion as there seem to be so many minefields related to feminism, racism, anti- and pro-refugee asylum.

But here I have to disagree. I lived in a Middle Eastern country for some years--granted, a while ago and before hijabs became dominant among women.

I can say unequivocally that harassment of women was a crime and those who did it and were caught were treated as criminals. The papers from time to time would report on police arrests of harassers. This is still the case in the country where I lived.

One time a Muslim colleague was called to the police station. His (non-hijabi) wife had beaten a harasser unconscious with her handbag. He had to be taken to the hospital. The police had taken her to the station to press charges against him. Everyone involved thought the harasser had gotten exactly what he deserved and her husband was quite happy she'd been able to mete out such a harsh punishment. There was not the least thought that the harm she did was disproportionate or in any way unjustified even if he had later died from her blows.

If there is a cultural difference it may be that Western women are too inclined to accept the subtle sexual brushing as perhaps accidental. Arab women do not accept this--they curse loudly and fight back. They are not afraid of making a scene. Arab men who engage in these behaviors (and the one who do are considered wastrels) expect women to fight back. And they know the women can do anything they want with impunity, like my colleague's wife.

When women don't fight back they get the impression the women enjoy it and are easy.

Obviously, none of this would have helped in Cologne as there are too many too packed together, but whenever they can women should be encouraged to call men on every incident no matter how small it seems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Quote from He Who Must Not be Named:"Might I make the suggestion that you concentrate on behaviors and actions rather than cultures and religions?"

Cultures matter. That's just how the world works. For example, in the U.S., males (especially white males) have been raised for generations to think they have some sense of ownership or superiority over others, whereas their female counterparts were raised differently. In some parts of the U.S., this is a more pronounced part of the culture than in others. Each culture throughout the world may have taught similar lessons to a larger or smaller degree. They certainly all have their idiosyncrasies. But certainly what we choose to teach males and females about each person's relative worth in society matters. And that's part of each society's culture.

Cultures matter, but they are not definitive. If all white males are raised in a misogynistic culture and culture is determinative, then all American white males would be misogynists. Do you hold that view? On a broader level, many white males are Trump supporters, but many white males aren't. Clearly, white male culture in the US is not homogeneous or there are other factors besides culture at play. That is even more true when you are discussing a religion that spans continents and which has significant internal cultural differences. Going back to your original example, the issue with misogynist white men is not that they were white. If they were misogynist green men, it would be just as bad. The problem is that they are misogynist. Why not focus on that?

To your example. Obviously not all white men are trump supporter red necks. Obviously not all muslims are supporters of terrorism and sexual assault.

Yes misogynistic white men are just as bad as misogynistic green men, or purple colored men.

However when there is a mass attack by purple colored men unseen before, then the question must be asked, why?

Many so called "redneck white Turmp supporters" are actually kind, gracious, thoughtful men. If you are going to decry the criticism of one group of men based on 1000s of them sexually assaulting women then you need to refrain from stereotyping white rural men too, just because of the action of some Trump supporters.

deaf ears

Look at the terms used to described the militia men in Oregon. And I'm not a fan; believe me - but . . . what's fair is fair.
Y'all Queda
WhiteSIS
Vanilla ISIS

There was a derogatory term used to describe the teens who assaulted the man on the metro that was removed instantly, yet Vanilla ISIS is acceptable.

hypocrisy

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It becomes part of the discussion when it is part of the reason for this incident of alarming sexual assault.

For instance, of the 30 men now apprehended, almost 50% of them are asylum seekers. All the attackers were described as been of arab or north african origin. If culture did not matter some of the european countries would not now be included classes on how to respect women to the new refugees that arrive. When discussing the problem and the solution, sometimes it is not agenda pushing to also discuss what is obviously there - that culture is part of the equation. Not everybody concerned about this is a right wing islamophobe.

Certainly cultures and religions can be part of the discussion. My suggestion was that you concentrate on behaviors and actions, not that you ignore everything else. There are huge cultural differences between North Africa and countries such as Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq. There are also important social class differences. If you want to address cultural aspects, you are probably going to require a lot more expertise on cultures or you will be getting a lot of things wrong.

Back to my point, if you focus on unwanted behaviors, I think you will find more success in achieving your goals. Classes for new refugees on how to respect women seem like a great idea. They should be offered -- along with other classes aimed at easing adjustment to the host nation -- to refugees of all origins. There are no circumstances under which I am suggesting such behavior should be ignored or tolerated.

I'm not one of the super-sensitive PC types, but it is genuinely offensive that you are talking about "unwanted behaviors" on a thread about sexual assault. Sexual assault (even when it doesn't meet the legal definition of rape) should in no way be categorized as "unwanted behavior." My MIL questioning my wardrobe choice last Thanksgiving was "unwanted behavior."

There is always someone who wants to miss the big picture and nitpick. Given that you are not "super-sensitive", you probably didn't pick up that used "unwanted behavior" because I was including behaviors beyond sexual assault. I once had a guest who was new to the US who didn't know that we flush toilet paper. After finding some smelly deposits in the bathroom trash can, I discussed that particular unwanted behavior with him. That could also be covered in a class.

But, please proceed with your outrage. I wouldn't want you to be distracted by a larger point.

Oh, I'm not outraged by your comment; I know you're well meaning. But it is offensive, especially to women who have been sexually assaulted. Not flushing toilet paper is in practically no ways like sexual assault.

Maybe there can be a class to teach about toilet norms, but it might not work for sexual assault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't a class for these men be the equivalent in giving members of the KKK a class on race relations and expecting them to change? Not likely to happen. I suspect that it is very likely that these men knew that their behavior was inappropriate.

They may or may not have known their behavior was inappropriate, but they also probably didn't expect to get in trouble for it -- police are sort of a western invention, as is reasonably even enforcement of laws.

I have been reluctant to wade into this discussion as there seem to be so many minefields related to feminism, racism, anti- and pro-refugee asylum.

But here I have to disagree. I lived in a Middle Eastern country for some years--granted, a while ago and before hijabs became dominant among women.

I can say unequivocally that harassment of women was a crime and those who did it and were caught were treated as criminals. The papers from time to time would report on police arrests of harassers. This is still the case in the country where I lived.

One time a Muslim colleague was called to the police station. His (non-hijabi) wife had beaten a harasser unconscious with her handbag. He had to be taken to the hospital. The police had taken her to the station to press charges against him. Everyone involved thought the harasser had gotten exactly what he deserved and her husband was quite happy she'd been able to mete out such a harsh punishment. There was not the least thought that the harm she did was disproportionate or in any way unjustified even if he had later died from her blows.

If there is a cultural difference it may be that Western women are too inclined to accept the subtle sexual brushing as perhaps accidental. Arab women do not accept this--they curse loudly and fight back. They are not afraid of making a scene. Arab men who engage in these behaviors (and the one who do are considered wastrels) expect women to fight back. And they know the women can do anything they want with impunity, like my colleague's wife.

When women don't fight back they get the impression the women enjoy it and are easy.

Obviously, none of this would have helped in Cologne as there are too many too packed together, but whenever they can women should be encouraged to call men on every incident no matter how small it seems.

White women don't fight back?

Here we go - spouting off more bullshit.

b/c obviously ALL whites are the same - But you, PP, are clearly a genius.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't a class for these men be the equivalent in giving members of the KKK a class on race relations and expecting them to change? Not likely to happen. I suspect that it is very likely that these men knew that their behavior was inappropriate.

They may or may not have known their behavior was inappropriate, but they also probably didn't expect to get in trouble for it -- police are sort of a western invention, as is reasonably even enforcement of laws.

I have been reluctant to wade into this discussion as there seem to be so many minefields related to feminism, racism, anti- and pro-refugee asylum.

But here I have to disagree. I lived in a Middle Eastern country for some years--granted, a while ago and before hijabs became dominant among women.

I can say unequivocally that harassment of women was a crime and those who did it and were caught were treated as criminals. The papers from time to time would report on police arrests of harassers. This is still the case in the country where I lived.

One time a Muslim colleague was called to the police station. His (non-hijabi) wife had beaten a harasser unconscious with her handbag. He had to be taken to the hospital. The police had taken her to the station to press charges against him. Everyone involved thought the harasser had gotten exactly what he deserved and her husband was quite happy she'd been able to mete out such a harsh punishment. There was not the least thought that the harm she did was disproportionate or in any way unjustified even if he had later died from her blows.

If there is a cultural difference it may be that Western women are too inclined to accept the subtle sexual brushing as perhaps accidental. Arab women do not accept this--they curse loudly and fight back. They are not afraid of making a scene. Arab men who engage in these behaviors (and the one who do are considered wastrels) expect women to fight back. And they know the women can do anything they want with impunity, like my colleague's wife.

When women don't fight back they get the impression the women enjoy it and are easy.

Obviously, none of this would have helped in Cologne as there are too many too packed together, but whenever they can women should be encouraged to call men on every incident no matter how small it seems.

White women don't fight back?

Here we go - spouting off more bullshit.

b/c obviously ALL whites are the same - But you, PP, are clearly a genius.

Oh dear. This thread may have gone off the rails at this point. I appreciated your perspective and thank you for sharing your story about when you lived in the Middle East.

Maybe we all need to turn down the offense-o-meter a little bit. Geez.

[Anonymous]

Just why I was reluctant to wade in. Obviously if the man is obviously groping her, women of all cultures fight back. But Western women tend to let go the casual brushing that could be accidental, giving the benefit of the doubt.

An Arab woman wouldn't give any benefit of the doubt--she'd cause a scene even for the mildest of contact that could be inappropriate. And her response could be wildly disproportionate by our standards, but no one would call her on that as it is her right to defend her honor however she sees fit.

My colleague's wife would have been arrested for what she did if it had happened here and undoubtedly charged with assault. She also likely would have been subject to a civil suit for the harm she inflicted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just why I was reluctant to wade in. Obviously if the man is obviously groping her, women of all cultures fight back. But Western women tend to let go the casual brushing that could be accidental, giving the benefit of the doubt.

An Arab woman wouldn't give any benefit of the doubt--she'd cause a scene even for the mildest of contact that could be inappropriate. And her response could be wildly disproportionate by our standards, but no one would call her on that as it is her right to defend her honor however she sees fit.

My colleague's wife would have been arrested for what she did if it had happened here and undoubtedly charged with assault. She also likely would have been subject to a civil suit for the harm she inflicted.

I understand what you are saying and appreciate the distinction. However, saying that the onus is on western women to conform the expectations of these refugees is backwards. They are coming to a foreign counry, seeking "asylum". It is the refugees' responsibility to act properly, not for women to jealously guard their bodies from encroachment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just why I was reluctant to wade in. Obviously if the man is obviously groping her, women of all cultures fight back. But Western women tend to let go the casual brushing that could be accidental, giving the benefit of the doubt.

An Arab woman wouldn't give any benefit of the doubt--she'd cause a scene even for the mildest of contact that could be inappropriate. And her response could be wildly disproportionate by our standards, but no one would call her on that as it is her right to defend her honor however she sees fit.

My colleague's wife would have been arrested for what she did if it had happened here and undoubtedly charged with assault. She also likely would have been subject to a civil suit for the harm she inflicted.

In Cologne about 120.women called the police to report assaults that evening. That was smarter than :fighting back" given the circumstances don't you think?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Quote from He Who Must Not be Named:"Might I make the suggestion that you concentrate on behaviors and actions rather than cultures and religions?"

Cultures matter. That's just how the world works. For example, in the U.S., males (especially white males) have been raised for generations to think they have some sense of ownership or superiority over others, whereas their female counterparts were raised differently. In some parts of the U.S., this is a more pronounced part of the culture than in others. Each culture throughout the world may have taught similar lessons to a larger or smaller degree. They certainly all have their idiosyncrasies. But certainly what we choose to teach males and females about each person's relative worth in society matters. And that's part of each society's culture.

Cultures matter, but they are not definitive. If all white males are raised in a misogynistic culture and culture is determinative, then all American white males would be misogynists. Do you hold that view? On a broader level, many white males are Trump supporters, but many white males aren't. Clearly, white male culture in the US is not homogeneous or there are other factors besides culture at play. That is even more true when you are discussing a religion that spans continents and which has significant internal cultural differences. Going back to your original example, the issue with misogynist white men is not that they were white. If they were misogynist green men, it would be just as bad. The problem is that they are misogynist. Why not focus on that?

If the green men demonstrate through their behavior and actions that they may be more misogynistic than other men, then I would absolutely want to analyze the green men's culture to figure out if there are societal underpinnings to explain why the green men show so much more discrimination toward women than others do.

I am not suggesting otherwise. I would assume that a serious analysis would determine that factors other than greenness were responsible.

Fine, so assuming that the factors were greenness, with broken family, from a lower socio economic level, with mental issues, from a particular sect of green religion. Then we should not let those green people into the country. Assuming all those 1000 men had those issues. A serious analysis might also proclaim otherwise, the fact is, you don't know either.

You know, I'm a bleeding heart liberal who would never close the door on a legitimate refugee. So, if the study came to specific conclusions like you suggest, I'd hope that such folks could get some sort of specialized accommodation that is more than a door slammed in their faces. You are correct that I don't know what a serious analysis would discover. So, I avoid making blanket statements about all members of a religion, culture, ethnicity, etc. I think the people we should focus on are those who commit violence against women. That is the common trait that they have.

If these study came to specific conclusions like you suggest, I know I would choose the preserve the safety of the women already in my country vs some refugee with traits that pose a danger to those women. If the people who commit violence against women have those particular traits...one of them including the religion and culture they come from, then no I don't welcome them. Its not a blanket statement if there's a high probability and incidence of that happening. If the accommodations require substantial resources on my part, I have better things to spend those resources on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Quote from He Who Must Not be Named:"Might I make the suggestion that you concentrate on behaviors and actions rather than cultures and religions?"

Cultures matter. That's just how the world works. For example, in the U.S., males (especially white males) have been raised for generations to think they have some sense of ownership or superiority over others, whereas their female counterparts were raised differently. In some parts of the U.S., this is a more pronounced part of the culture than in others. Each culture throughout the world may have taught similar lessons to a larger or smaller degree. They certainly all have their idiosyncrasies. But certainly what we choose to teach males and females about each person's relative worth in society matters. And that's part of each society's culture.

Cultures matter, but they are not definitive. If all white males are raised in a misogynistic culture and culture is determinative, then all American white males would be misogynists. Do you hold that view? On a broader level, many white males are Trump supporters, but many white males aren't. Clearly, white male culture in the US is not homogeneous or there are other factors besides culture at play. That is even more true when you are discussing a religion that spans continents and which has significant internal cultural differences. Going back to your original example, the issue with misogynist white men is not that they were white. If they were misogynist green men, it would be just as bad. The problem is that they are misogynist. Why not focus on that?

If the green men demonstrate through their behavior and actions that they may be more misogynistic than other men, then I would absolutely want to analyze the green men's culture to figure out if there are societal underpinnings to explain why the green men show so much more discrimination toward women than others do.

I am not suggesting otherwise. I would assume that a serious analysis would determine that factors other than greenness were responsible.

Fine, so assuming that the factors were greenness, with broken family, from a lower socio economic level, with mental issues, from a particular sect of green religion. Then we should not let those green people into the country. Assuming all those 1000 men had those issues. A serious analysis might also proclaim otherwise, the fact is, you don't know either.

You know, I'm a bleeding heart liberal who would never close the door on a legitimate refugee. So, if the study came to specific conclusions like you suggest, I'd hope that such folks could get some sort of specialized accommodation that is more than a door slammed in their faces. You are correct that I don't know what a serious analysis would discover. So, I avoid making blanket statements about all members of a religion, culture, ethnicity, etc. I think the people we should focus on are those who commit violence against women. That is the common trait that they have.

If these study came to specific conclusions like you suggest, I know I would choose the preserve the safety of the women already in my country vs some refugee with traits that pose a danger to those women. If the people who commit violence against women have those particular traits...one of them including the religion and culture they come from, then no I don't welcome them. Its not a blanket statement if there's a high probability and incidence of that happening. If the accommodations require substantial resources on my part, I have better things to spend those resources on.

What is offputting is how much you care about those "potential refugees" regardless of how many crimes they commit, instead of the victims they committed atrocities against. For all the protestations that you find this crime terrible, you have not even tried to view it from the woman's perspective at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just why I was reluctant to wade in. Obviously if the man is obviously groping her, women of all cultures fight back. But Western women tend to let go the casual brushing that could be accidental, giving the benefit of the doubt.

An Arab woman wouldn't give any benefit of the doubt--she'd cause a scene even for the mildest of contact that could be inappropriate. And her response could be wildly disproportionate by our standards, but no one would call her on that as it is her right to defend her honor however she sees fit.

My colleague's wife would have been arrested for what she did if it had happened here and undoubtedly charged with assault. She also likely would have been subject to a civil suit for the harm she inflicted.

I understand what you are saying and appreciate the distinction. However, saying that the onus is on western women to conform the expectations of these refugees is backwards. They are coming to a foreign counry, seeking "asylum". It is the refugees' responsibility to act properly, not for women to jealously guard their bodies from encroachment.

+1000 An Arab women may also not go out at night, wear a hijab or a burka, and stay away from men. Are you also proposing that western women do that too? Why stop at raising your voice loudly if someone gropes you? And to say that western women don't do that is BS. I was groped by a group of foreign looking men while traveling through europe once, same situation. I took my hands and hit them and struck them and loudly screamed. Did not help. What utter nonsense. In Morocco men followed me everywhere, I rose my voice and said leave me alone. Did not help. In Egypt a man saw me in a train cabin and chased me through the train cabin, and only stop when he saw my male companion. What utter nonsense to say that Western women don't fight back.