Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:46 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

What should be done to prevent this? By whom?

Obviously, they should not be permitted to leave the country, and equally obviously, by the only people able to prevent them, the government. As they indicate they plan to do.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

…in the last decade they have probably unwittingly committed a crime that you are insisting is worthy of sending them to jail and having all their children taken from them.

Please desist from making up opinions and attributing them to me. I will repeat once more that IF a crime has potentially been committed then it SHOULD be investigated and a decision taken on what if any action follows, in the time honoured way that our judicial process has worked for centuries. I am saying that IF a child is at risk (for example if one child in the past had FGM and there are young girls therefore at risk) Social Services SHOULD investigate and take whatever steps their investigations lead them to take.

The caveat is that neither the police, CPS or Social Services should hold back from doing their duty through either improper political pressure, or fear of upsetting vested interests, or being accused wrongly of racism or whatever. Like the statue, Justice should be blind, and applied equally to all. That includes their personal mitigation explanations and circumstances.

Now for fcsk sake stop parroting this ludicrous misrepresentation of my views, as it is getting boring.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

A campaign that mainly involves investigating them, convicting them and taking their children away from them.

I entirely disagree, and am quite shocked you would suggest this. You seem to have done a U-turn as weren’t you suggesting basically laissez faire before, or have I missed something?

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Unless a family is known to social services or reported by a teacher or doctor then most kids will go through life without being "protected" from sexual abuse. You are pretty much wanting every African immigrant to be automatically flagged as a potential child abuser simply because they have a daughter.

Your most ridiculous straw man to date! How do you make this stuff up?

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

It also has to be said that while social services have a duty to protect children under their care, they don't have unlimited powers or resources.

Because until you pointed this out, the world thought Social Services had unlimited money and manpower. What would we do without your insight?

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

And just because a white English girl in care had an older Asian boyfriend, it doesn't mean he was pimping her out all the time.

How crass and how insulting to the girls so badly let down in the Rotherham and other cases. No person has made such an outrageous suggestion. If we are looking at Rotherham then we have very young teenage girls and even pre-teens being systematically groomed and then being led captive into a lengthy period of sexual abuse and degradation very often by older men, even being transported around different cities to be used for sex. And you have th disgusting nerve to talk of “a white English girl in care had an older Asian boyfriend” when that is not remotely the issue at all.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Like I said, you're too extreme for the BNP. They admire you and will probably want to share fund raising ideas, but they can't risk being linked too closely with you.

What an utter asshole comment, I will not dignify such bilge with a response.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Who are you wanting to put in charge of banning orders for African families who say they want to take their daughters to visit their grandparents?

Your straw men are becoming increasingly embarrassing for you.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

You have argued clearly that FGM is child abuse ….

Well spotted, It is. I remain in the dark as to whether you agree. Some of the time you seem to suggest that while you are not in favour of it, we should let it go as it’s only being done by ignorant immigrants who don’t get it’s wrong. Where we differ is that I would not allow or condone it in the UK under any circumstances. Not for any child. Not in any community.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

… and that the child abusers should be jailed and have their children taken from them.

You are really on form for your straw men today, aren’t you? Are you involved in some sort of competition, like the Oxenhope Straw Race? I mean, they just keep on coming. I have made my view crystal clear, and it is not hard to understand, but don’t let that stop you. I will repeat it for your convenience, but don’t let me stop you from continuingto claim you know what I think better than I do:

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

I have suggested that people in the UK who commit serious crimes under UK law should be prosecuted under UK law. Parents of children are no exception. I do not advocate ignoring crime due to cultural or religious differences, which is what I understand you do.

If a parent is guilty of a crime then they should be dealt with by the criminal law. I am not “advocating” jailing them, I have faith in the criminal courts to, in the main, impose the correct sentences on convicted people, and if the COURT decides that jail is inevitable then so be it.

I am not “advocating” taking children from their families or putting them in care. I am saying that if a child is found to be at serious risk of FGM then social services need to do their job to protect the child, which may indeed involve removing them from the family. Or may not. I advocate the enquiries being diligently made, and if the evidence is there, then the required steps to be taken, not shirked from for fear of upsetting some section of a community or other or some religious or cultural sensibilities or whatever.

I have even highlighted a couple of key points. Are they too hard for you to grasp the distinctions? Or are you just trolling?

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Are you doing this by an ad campaign, or are you employing a team of enforcers to go and speak directly to nearly every African immigrant?

I’m not reducing my arguments to your puerile level of absurdity. Grow up and debate like an adult, FFS.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

If you read your links, there are plenty of girls who have had FGM performed on them and didn't actually know.

That is nonsense. Time may have erased the memory but only you could suggest that a human could be genitally mutilated without extreme pain and suffering. However I would be against the practice even if performed under general anaesthetic with full pain relief afterwards, it would be less barbaric, that’s all.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

I wouldn't convict her if she stabbed you to death. If your car was blown up in an attempt on your life I wouldn't consider them terrorists, I'd consider them freedom fighters.

And there was me thinking this was a forum for relatively civilized debate. But, I note that you are in favour of violent death for stating opinions that differ from your own. I think you are losing the plot, but won’t be going down your rather bizarre ad hominem route.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

You consider it to be an evil act. Many African women don't. I personally believe that African women's viewpoint on African women's vagina's are actually worth more than yours.

But you keep making conflicting claims. One minute you are against FGM, then you are back to saying the mutilators know best. Anyway to be clear, you have now confirmed that in your view, the viewpoint of certain African women that it is reasonable to have their daughter's clitoris and labia cut off and her vagina sewn up is worth more than my opinion that it is not reasonable, because I am not an African woman. So, for this paragraph at least, you ARE in favour of FGM, or at least you defer to the viewpojnt of those African women who are in favour? It is confusing but I hope I am following it.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

I think that many Papua New Guinean tribes have screwed up traditions with their boys (and probably girls) which would definitely be considered child abuse in the west. I implore you to go and educate them about their abuse of their children and I will mourn your death when they kill you and eat you.

Whereas you would presumably be delighted to jump into their cooking pot, as a respecter of cannibalistic tribes’ traditions, right? I mean, “screwed up traditions”, it is I who would describe FGM as a “screwed up tradition” – you argue it is their choice. yet in throwing in the random example of unspecified PNG tribes’ traditions, you feel able to refer to these as “screwed up”. Where’s your consistency?

PS it would probably calm you down to stop imagining the violent demise of those you can’t win an argument against.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Virtually 100% of the UK are united in their disgust of child abusers.

So what? The fact that the tens of thousand of children being sexually abused are only a miniscule proportion of all children isn’t the point either. The overwhelming majority would I expect be united in their disgust of all or most crimes. What does that nugget add?

Or, if you think this is a valid point, then I will turn it on its head for you and say that virtually 100% of the UK who know what FGM is would equally be united in their disgust of FGM child abusers.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

If public opinion was followed by the government then the punishment for child abuse would probably be slow death.

I disagree. I reckon the number in favour of the death penalty generally is gradually reducing and even if still a majority, I don’t think it is a substantial majority. Of those, I would expect the majority would only support a (relatively) humane form of death penalty.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

The same clearly cannot be said for FGM in Africa. There are millions of people who are for FGM, have had it performed on them and want it performed on their children.

So let me get this straight; is that a perfectly reasonable parenting choice for them to make, or is it a “screwed up tradition”? Maybe you could emigrate and get yourself a job as a FGM practitioner over there, to show your support for freedom of choice, and to spare us from any more of your nonsense.

Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 12:22 pm  

I'm not going to go through each point in your post again because it's clearly going nowhere.

IMO you are clearly in favour of prosecuting parents, jailing them labeling them as child abusers and having their children taken off them. I think this is blatantly clear in many of your posts, no matter how much you choose to deny it. This is what you think should happen and you are blaming the British authorities for not making it happen.

I do not believe that any other country prosecutes parents for this, all of the prosecutions that I've read about have been of people who either perform the procedures or arrange them. I do not believe anti-FGM campaigners would support the prosecution of parents. If you know of people who are, by all means post links to them.

Based on everything I've read about FGM I am against it. I do not believe I have ever made any arguments in favour of FGM. My arguments are against what I consider to be your crackpot solutions.

Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 1:09 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

...
IMO you are clearly in favour of ...

Don't need an opinion, I have put it in writing. You should read it instead of trying to invent stuff.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

...I do not believe that any other country prosecutes parents for this, all of the prosecutions that I've read about have been of people who either perform the procedures or arrange them. I do not believe anti-FGM campaigners would support the prosecution of parents.

Hypothetical scenario for you:

1. Family X has a girl at suspected risk of FGM

2. Authorities engage with the family, and do what they can to explain both why we do not permit FGM, and that if they were to go ahead they would be committing child abuse which could have serious consequences.

3. Despite the above, the girl shortly afterwards is smuggled abroad, and subjected to FGM, and in exactly the manner described in the blood-curdling account I linked to earlier, causing serious physical and psychological harm to the girl. This comes to light when she is admitted to hospital seriously ill with complications and infection.

Do you think the parents should face any form of investigation and potential prosecution for this, or is it your argument that they should be exempt?

The mutilated girl has 2 younger sisters. Do you think despite what has happened, Social Services and all other authorities should just leave the family alone, and let the same fate befall these girls?

Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 1:48 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Don't need an opinion, I have put it in writing. You should read it instead of trying to invent stuff.

I've read it. You clearly classify FGM as child abuse and argue for prosecuting and jailing parents.

Hypothetical scenario for you:

1. Family X has a girl at suspected risk of FGM

Which pretty much amounts to African immigrants have daughter.

2. Authorities engage with the family, and do what they can to explain both why we do not permit FGM, and that if they were to go ahead they would be committing child abuse which could have serious consequences.

I don't agree with the period of austerity we're going through. I think it's stupid to massively cut public budgets, which mean more people are out of work and services are cut. It seems utterly screwed up to me.

But anyway, I commend you in a period of austerity in being able to work the budget to put these massively expensive programs in place. You're clearly committed to the cause and are willing to spend a lot of money to further that cause.

I hope your agents are given very good training though, because pretty much accusing black immigrants of being possible future child abusers could be construed by people as being quite racist and offensive.

3. Despite the above, the girl shortly afterwards is smuggled abroad,

By smuggled abroad do you mean boarding a plane at Heathrow, or are they jumping in the back of containers? I assume by mentioning smuggling it's because you've banned Africans from returning to Africa at least until their daughters are 18. Personally I think that law is a bit risk of coming across as all racisty as well.

and subjected to FGM, and in exactly the manner described in the blood-curdling account I linked to earlier, causing serious physical and psychological harm to the girl. This comes to light when she is admitted to hospital seriously ill with complications and infection.

You do realise that was pretty much a worst case scenario and not all FGMs are like that?

But okay, this is a horrific example of FGMs going wrong.

Do you think the parents should face any form of investigation and potential prosecution for this, or is it your argument that they should be exempt?

Given that you've risen to power so quickly and put in place such blatantly strong measures the parents are never going to set foot in the UK again.

I think that the measures that you've put in place will paint the UK as pretty much as friendly towards Africans as Russia is to homosexuals. I think you will be a BNP hero and UKIP will be opening any seat for you whenever you want it.

The mutilated girl has 2 younger sisters. Do you think despite what has happened, Social Services and all other authorities should just leave the family alone, and let the same fate befall these girls?

I don't think there's anything the British can do, because I think the family has fled to Africa. I think some girls will decide they want to stay in the UK and we will be left to provide for them, and I support that.

I'll ask you a straight, simple question AGAIN.

Do you know of any country, or any person, who wishes the parents of females subjected to FGM to be prosecuted for it?

Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 2:33 pm  

You're the one that said 60,000 females in the UK have suffered FGM. Unless they were all deserted by their families this means 60,000 families that practised FGM are still here. Why do you think that is? Maybe because the State has hitherto turned an almost totally blind eye?

I'll ask you a straight, simple question AGAIN.

Do you know of any country, or any person, who wishes the parents of females subjected to FGM to be prosecuted for it?

I reject your question. I've no interest in investigating the hypothetical wishes of hypothetical people in other countries, nor do I "wish" for parents of females in this country to be prosecuted for it. As I've vainly explained several times but you're stuck on "transmit". IF THEY ARE FOUND TO HAVE COMMITTED OFFENCES then the law should apply to them like it applies to me. That is all.

You think even if they commit an offence they should be let off because they are parents. I think that decision is neither mine nor yours to make. The authorities need to make it, and whatever it was, fine, if due process has taken place. My problem is that we have been doing practically NOTHING, seemingly on the unacceptable grounds of how undoubtedly hard it is to do something, and the equally or more unacceptable grounds that we should act, but are scared to, as we don't want to cause upset.

What I "wish" for is the prevention of FGM to female residents of the UK and if FGM crime / abuse does take place then the UK to deal with it under due process, and not turn a blind eye.

Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:40 pm  

The fact that FGM apparently takes place here is a disgrace. It is yet another demonstration on the negative impact of allowing mass immigration from the third world. Our country has been dragged backwards by politicians allowing mass immigration and pursuing a policy of turning a blind eye to avoid racial tensions, etc. The law must be upheld for all - including the Arab boy racers in Knightsbridge - who appear to be immune from prosecution presumably because the government doesn't want to upset the high spending oil rich states?

It's getting to the stage where the law only applies to white British people who are non-violent! The law has been undermined by political incompetence and as a result our country is becoming corrupt.

Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:47 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

You're the one that said 60,000 females in the UK have suffered FGM. Unless they were all deserted by their families this means 60,000 families that practised FGM are still here. Why do you think that is? Maybe because the State has hitherto turned an almost totally blind eye?

I think the number is actually an estimated 66,000 females in the UK have had FGM performed on them. This is the estimate of all women who have had FGM and are now in the UK. This will include a lot of women who had FGM performed on them as children and later emigrated to the UK.

It's a estimate. Some estimates are roughly accurate and some are miles off. The truth is we really don't know how many women in the UK have FGM and we're never likely to know. And it will be difficult to determine how many UK residents are taken to Africa or the Middle East to have the procedure performed.

I reject your question.

Because you know the answer. No one else is prosecuting parents for it, it hasn't been used as a way to combat FGM anywhere.

I've no interest in investigating the hypothetical wishes of hypothetical people in other countries, nor do I "wish" for parents of females in this country to be prosecuted for it. As I've vainly explained several times but you're stuck on "transmit". IF THEY ARE FOUND TO HAVE COMMITTED OFFENCES then the law should apply to them like it applies to me. That is all.

You want the UK to combat FGM in ways that no other countries do. France has prosecuted people for FGM before, but they have all been practitioners, not parents.

The only way parents are going to be found to have committed offences is if social services and the police actively target this issue as a child abuse issue. But IMO for social services and the police to do that they will insist on the Home Office signing off that that is their instruction to go down this route. IMO the Home Office will never do this and nobody but one or two backbenchers would even dare suggest it.

You think even if they commit an offence they should be let off because they are parents. I think that decision is neither mine nor yours to make. The authorities need to make it, and whatever it was, fine, if due process has taken place. My problem is that we have been doing practically NOTHING, seemingly on the unacceptable grounds of how undoubtedly hard it is to do something, and the equally or more unacceptable grounds that we should act, but are scared to, as we don't want to cause upset.

Rather than pleading to the "authorities", I'd like you to nominate which authority should be placed in charge of eradicating FGM. Then write to them making your case and see what response you get.

What I "wish" for is the prevention of FGM to female residents of the UK and if FGM crime / abuse does take place then the UK to deal with it under due process, and not turn a blind eye.

IMO victims of FGM would chose for a blind eye to be turned rather than treating this as a child abuse issue.

Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:19 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: No one else is prosecuting parents for it, it hasn't been used as a way to combat FGM anywhere. You want the UK to combat FGM in ways that no other countries do. France has prosecuted people for FGM before, but they have all been practitioners, not parents. I frankly forgot that you know the stats for FGM related prosecutions in every country on the globe. Ooops - 0.00007 seconds on Google and already I have found this. Oh well, maybe Tanzania doesn't count. Wait - what's this - prosecutions in Ethiopia? Maybe that doesn't really matter either, I suppose. Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: The only way parents are going to be found to have committed offences is if social services and the police actively target this issue as a child abuse issue. But IMO for social services and the police to do that they will insist on the Home Office signing off that that is their instruction to go down this route. IMO the Home Office will never do this and nobody but one or two backbenchers would even dare suggest it. In July a certain David Cameron - not, currently, a backbencher - said parents will be prosecuted if they fail to prevent their daughter being cut. At the historic Girl Summit in London this week, the prime minister, David Cameron, announced that the government would legally oblige teachers, doctors and social workers to report FGM, train professionals and criminalise parents if they failed to protect their children: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... ha-dukureh Does he count? Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: Rather than pleading to the "authorities", I'd like you to nominate which authority should be placed in charge of eradicating FGM. With pleasure. I nominate the unit that the government is about to set up: The government is to set up a unit to tackle female genital mutilation as part of a wide-ranging package of reforms to stop the practice in the UK. Speaking at the Girl Summit – a major international conference in London designed to highlight the issues of FGM and child marriage – the home secretary, Theresa May, said the cross-party unit would help protect thousands of girls across the country. The unit, which could operate in a similar way to the government's forced marriage unit, has been a key demand of campaigners against FGM. "These measures will ensure that we can maintain the momentum on stamping out these harmful practices," May said. The home secretary said the government would also strengthen laws around FGM, and would hold parents responsible if their child was a victim of the practice. May also announced a consultation into making it mandatory for professionals to report FGM and said victims going through court cases would be given lifelong anonymity: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... irl-summit I further nominate Social Services, to act generally as suggested in this article Do you accept my nominations? I don't believe there is therefore any need for me to write to make any case, as if the government walks the walk, it is going down the lines I am arguing for. Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: IMO victims of FGM would chose for a blind eye to be turned rather than treating this as a child abuse issue. Many have, which is one reason why it has been so slow hard and difficult to build any momentum in relation to this vile practice, but despite shiverers like yourself who think it's too hard, there is now firm and concerted action promised in the UK and while we can't control what happens elsewhere, another few milliseconds on Google revelaed the (to me) very heartening news that in fact FGM has now been outlawed in at least 25 African countries. Some FGM victims may want a blind eye turning and I have no illusions about the situation their parents have put them in, but increasingly there is a groundswell of victims now prepared to come forward and you should be a supporter of them and encourage their cause, not an apologist for the perpetrators.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: No one else is prosecuting parents for it, it hasn't been used as a way to combat FGM anywhere. You want the UK to combat FGM in ways that no other countries do. France has prosecuted people for FGM before, but they have all been practitioners, not parents. I frankly forgot that you know the stats for FGM related prosecutions in every country on the globe. Ooops - 0.00007 seconds on Google and already I have found this. Oh well, maybe Tanzania doesn't count. Wait - what's this - prosecutions in Ethiopia? Maybe that doesn't really matter either, I suppose. Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: The only way parents are going to be found to have committed offences is if social services and the police actively target this issue as a child abuse issue. But IMO for social services and the police to do that they will insist on the Home Office signing off that that is their instruction to go down this route. IMO the Home Office will never do this and nobody but one or two backbenchers would even dare suggest it. In July a certain David Cameron - not, currently, a backbencher - said parents will be prosecuted if they fail to prevent their daughter being cut. At the historic Girl Summit in London this week, the prime minister, David Cameron, announced that the government would legally oblige teachers, doctors and social workers to report FGM, train professionals and criminalise parents if they failed to protect their children: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... ha-dukureh Does he count? Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: Rather than pleading to the "authorities", I'd like you to nominate which authority should be placed in charge of eradicating FGM. With pleasure. I nominate the unit that the government is about to set up: The government is to set up a unit to tackle female genital mutilation as part of a wide-ranging package of reforms to stop the practice in the UK. Speaking at the Girl Summit – a major international conference in London designed to highlight the issues of FGM and child marriage – the home secretary, Theresa May, said the cross-party unit would help protect thousands of girls across the country. The unit, which could operate in a similar way to the government's forced marriage unit, has been a key demand of campaigners against FGM. "These measures will ensure that we can maintain the momentum on stamping out these harmful practices," May said. The home secretary said the government would also strengthen laws around FGM, and would hold parents responsible if their child was a victim of the practice. May also announced a consultation into making it mandatory for professionals to report FGM and said victims going through court cases would be given lifelong anonymity: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... irl-summit I further nominate Social Services, to act generally as suggested in this article Do you accept my nominations? I don't believe there is therefore any need for me to write to make any case, as if the government walks the walk, it is going down the lines I am arguing for. Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote: IMO victims of FGM would chose for a blind eye to be turned rather than treating this as a child abuse issue. Many have, which is one reason why it has been so slow hard and difficult to build any momentum in relation to this vile practice, but despite shiverers like yourself who think it's too hard, there is now firm and concerted action promised in the UK and while we can't control what happens elsewhere, another few milliseconds on Google revelaed the (to me) very heartening news that in fact FGM has now been outlawed in at least 25 African countries. Some FGM victims may want a blind eye turning and I have no illusions about the situation their parents have put them in, but increasingly there is a groundswell of victims now prepared to come forward and you should be a supporter of them and encourage their cause, not an apologist for the perpetrators.

Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:11 pm  

Dally wrote:

The fact that FGM apparently takes place here is a disgrace. It is yet another demonstration on the negative impact of allowing mass immigration from the third world.

On the contrary. The fact that immigration has taken place between Africa and Europe means that the first world has been informed about appalling treatment of women in the third world.

The fact that the first world countries are taking an interest in this issue means that the world will hopefully be made better for the women of Africa because these practices will be eradicated.

Re: Rotherham : Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:09 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: I frankly forgot that you know the stats for FGM related prosecutions in every country on the globe. Ooops - 0.00007 seconds on Google and already I have found this. Oh well, maybe Tanzania doesn't count. Wait - what's this - prosecutions in Ethiopia? Maybe that doesn't really matter either, I suppose. Neither of those stories actually make any mention of parents being prosecuted. In July a certain David Cameron - not, currently, a backbencher - said parents will be prosecuted if they fail to prevent their daughter being cut. Does he count? He announced the introduction of new legislation that would prosecute parents for failing to stop FGM being performed on their daughters. I have reservations about the basic premise of that legislation. For example you've written many times that everyone should be the same under the law. So what would you think to a law which said that British parents should be prosecuted if their children suffer from sexual abuse? It suggests that they struggle to gain acceptable evidence over who is responsible for FGM so they are trying to get round that by forcing parents to remain responsible. That's all well and good if the families are perfect and all live together in harmony, but what happens when families are fractured and children spend time living with grandparents, aunts, friends etc? With pleasure. I nominate the unit that the government is about to set up: I further nominate Social Services, to act generally as suggested in this article Do you accept my nominations? To be honest most of the recommendations and policies seem very good. The Govt have definitely stepped up in response to the campaigning and produced a pilot project which seems very positive. But the fact that they are now setting up pilot projects and offering new instructions to doctors and police shows that the system wasn't equipped to deal with the problem in the past. I don't believe there is therefore any need for me to write to make any case, as if the government walks the walk, it is going down the lines I am arguing for. The government would never come up with a fantastic report and pilot project which was then ignored, would it? Many have, which is one reason why it has been so slow hard and difficult to build any momentum in relation to this vile practice, but despite shiverers like yourself who think it's too hard, there is now firm and concerted action promised in the UK and while we can't control what happens elsewhere, another few milliseconds on Google revelaed the (to me) very heartening news that in fact FGM has now been outlawed in at least 25 African countries. Some FGM victims may want a blind eye turning and I have no illusions about the situation their parents have put them in, but increasingly there is a groundswell of victims now prepared to come forward and you should be a supporter of them and encourage their cause, not an apologist for the perpetrators. I support the victims of FGM. I do not believe in the vilification of the perpetrators if they are not evil but are merely acting upon how they are brought up. I am also unsure whether the governments response to the issue is a response to the problem or a response to the publicity. Just looking at the numbers of girls born in England and Wales to mothers who have undergone FGM and that number is 60,000. Given that these girls are British African and will mostly be raised as British I'd question how many of them are actually going to be sent over to Africa to have this performed anyway. FGM is not something that is valued in GB at all and one would suggest that if they were going to be brought up under traditional African values then they wouldn't be here in the first place. Given that no actual estimates were made to how many UK girls are at risk of FGM I suspect that the number is left out because it's so small it would kill the attention it's getting. I suspect that the UK government is being pushed to solve a problem it really doesn't have because by doing that it will help eradicate it from Africa. I applaud this if it is true because it's pretty much genius and I hope it works.

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: I frankly forgot that you know the stats for FGM related prosecutions in every country on the globe. Ooops - 0.00007 seconds on Google and already I have found this. Oh well, maybe Tanzania doesn't count. Wait - what's this - prosecutions in Ethiopia? Maybe that doesn't really matter either, I suppose. Neither of those stories actually make any mention of parents being prosecuted. In July a certain David Cameron - not, currently, a backbencher - said parents will be prosecuted if they fail to prevent their daughter being cut. Does he count? He announced the introduction of new legislation that would prosecute parents for failing to stop FGM being performed on their daughters. I have reservations about the basic premise of that legislation. For example you've written many times that everyone should be the same under the law. So what would you think to a law which said that British parents should be prosecuted if their children suffer from sexual abuse? It suggests that they struggle to gain acceptable evidence over who is responsible for FGM so they are trying to get round that by forcing parents to remain responsible. That's all well and good if the families are perfect and all live together in harmony, but what happens when families are fractured and children spend time living with grandparents, aunts, friends etc? With pleasure. I nominate the unit that the government is about to set up: I further nominate Social Services, to act generally as suggested in this article Do you accept my nominations? To be honest most of the recommendations and policies seem very good. The Govt have definitely stepped up in response to the campaigning and produced a pilot project which seems very positive. But the fact that they are now setting up pilot projects and offering new instructions to doctors and police shows that the system wasn't equipped to deal with the problem in the past. I don't believe there is therefore any need for me to write to make any case, as if the government walks the walk, it is going down the lines I am arguing for. The government would never come up with a fantastic report and pilot project which was then ignored, would it? Many have, which is one reason why it has been so slow hard and difficult to build any momentum in relation to this vile practice, but despite shiverers like yourself who think it's too hard, there is now firm and concerted action promised in the UK and while we can't control what happens elsewhere, another few milliseconds on Google revelaed the (to me) very heartening news that in fact FGM has now been outlawed in at least 25 African countries. Some FGM victims may want a blind eye turning and I have no illusions about the situation their parents have put them in, but increasingly there is a groundswell of victims now prepared to come forward and you should be a supporter of them and encourage their cause, not an apologist for the perpetrators. I support the victims of FGM. I do not believe in the vilification of the perpetrators if they are not evil but are merely acting upon how they are brought up. I am also unsure whether the governments response to the issue is a response to the problem or a response to the publicity. Just looking at the numbers of girls born in England and Wales to mothers who have undergone FGM and that number is 60,000. Given that these girls are British African and will mostly be raised as British I'd question how many of them are actually going to be sent over to Africa to have this performed anyway. FGM is not something that is valued in GB at all and one would suggest that if they were going to be brought up under traditional African values then they wouldn't be here in the first place. Given that no actual estimates were made to how many UK girls are at risk of FGM I suspect that the number is left out because it's so small it would kill the attention it's getting. I suspect that the UK government is being pushed to solve a problem it really doesn't have because by doing that it will help eradicate it from Africa. I applaud this if it is true because it's pretty much genius and I hope it works.