John Sundman wrote: > > Shiv says "In Britain the state attempts to protect vulnerable > children from physical and emotional abuse by parents," and then > insinuates, if I understand him correctly, that this impulse to > protect children from abusive parents is somehow correlated to the > kidnapping and rape of children in Rotherham.
Yes. There is a correlation. Parental control of children has loosened up from state intervention. You cannot regulate a rebellious 12 year old child's ill advised actions because if parental actions go beyond a point that can even be called "emotional abuse" let alone physical beating - the parents can get arrested, which sort of defeats the purpose. The state watches the parents. Once the child is out on the streets she can be tempted by older wealthy men - as described in the article, if you actually bothered reading it. Somehow, it appears that Asian families with their restrictions on their daughters do not get subjected to the same standards of state scrutiny on whether there is any emotional abuse going on there > > I'm not even going to try to parse the discussion of "honor > killings" or of how "consensual sex" is somehow tied to child rape. Honor killings is about excessive parental control over the sexuality of the child. Sex, consensual or not is just not on - the girl is not even allowed out of home without supervision. However, once a child is out on the street her abuse (as described in the article) starts with consensual sex, drugs and later blackmail. shiv
