[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Miscellaneous See other Miscellaneous Articles Title: Yes, The White Girls Involved with Pakistani Drug and Prostitution Gangs are “Guilty” and Should be Punished “He seemed nice.” In a recent article about the problem of Pakistani pimps picking up young girls outside school and turning them into hookers, I wrote: A lot of right-wingers want to come at the Paki Pimp Gang phenomenon from the Christian Feminist angle of “oh our poor sweet innocent princesses, corrupted by these evil foreigners.” A reader responded, outraged that I would label these girls “guilty.” How anyone could believe that young girls (age 11-14) from the white underclass who are groomed, given drugs, and taken advantage of at an extremely vulnerable age by men decades older are “just as guilty” is actually more tragic than it is offensive. These are not 16 and 17 year old experienced sluts, they are naive innocents being corrupted by foreign enemies of war who should have never had access to them in the first place. They target girls from troubled households right at the onset of puberty – so at a time when they are experiencing hormonal and emotional changes with no involved parents to guide and protect them. I would bet that the vast majority of these young victims were inexperienced virgins before they were targeted and abused by the Paki rape gangs, even if it’s only because they were 12 years old. The statement in question was made in a brief filler article. I can’t always give full explanations of every argument I make, but I repeat the same arguments over and over, so I assume that most people are familiar with them. It’s been a while since we talked about this, so I want to give a full explanation as to why I would identify these girls as criminals and co- conspirators with the Pakistanis, as opposed to victims of the Pakistanis. People want sound bites, and if you don’t give them sound bites, they will create their own sound bites while knowing that there are a large number of people who won’t read a thousands of words long essay explaining a position. So, before I give you the actual, lengthy explanation, let me give you the two paragraph sound bite: If you don’t mark young girls who join drug gangs as “guilty of a crime” and give them some form of punishment, young girls will continue to join these gangs in the future. If girls are punished for getting involved with drug-running gangs, girls will know that there is a consequence for getting in the car with a Pakistani man who is prowling around outside their school. Whether you believe these girls were totally unaware of sex or not, “don’t get in the car with a stranger” is something every child knows is a rule. When you make these girls “victims” after they’ve broken the rules, you are ensuring that as long as there are Pakistanis, there will be girls getting in cars with Pakistanis. By removing consequences for breaking the rules, and instead rewarding the rule-breakers with a prized status, you are sentencing future young girls to this fate. The purpose of punishing a crime is not to take revenge, it is to prevent others from doing it in the future. This is all so obvious that it’s difficult to process how someone would not immediately recognize this as true. So now, let me walk you through the long version. The Problems with Consent Theory The first point to recognize is that the traditional view of sex has been replaced over the last several decades with a new doctrine, surrounding the slippery concept of “consent.” Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||