Goodness gracious, a drunk young man (or not so young man) trying to kiss and touch the breast of a pretty young girl! I've never heard of such a thing. It must be something in their dna as well as their religion, because European descent men have never been known to do such a thing.
Some of you need to get a grip. I've climbed down a tree from a second story window to get away from grabby, drunk, fraternity brothers, and they were all typical American Euro mutts. Do you think the gropers on crowded subway trains were always Hispanic or black?
I feel as if I've dropped into an alternate universe.
Stop conflating this kind of behavior with actual rape or the kind of semi-ritualized sexual assault behavior that's been described as unfortunately not rare in the Maghreb.
Comments like this cheapen the whole discussion, even more than calling sex between two drunken or drugged out young people rape.
By the way, I presume this wasn't just a female festival. Where were the men? Were they just standing around twiddling their thumbs while a bunch of men surrounded a woman and sexually assaulted her? Were they too drunk themselves? Or was it the case that it happened in a few sporadic, isolated areas?
Get the facts, people.
Somebody send me a PM when there is actual evidence as to the precise nature of the contact, and by whom it was committed. Spare me the "we can't trust the police" comments. This is 2016. How many people must have had cell phones? Where's the video? Where are the pictures? Where is the documentation of more than one rape and a couple of these Maghrebi style attacks?
Until then, I'm out.
Are you really doubting the occurrences? Or are you joining the downplay crowd because you are afraid of the consequences? Anyway. Here are some of the "Neo-Nazi lies" your crowd talks about:
http://www.spiegel.tv/filme/rekonstruktion-der-silvesternacht-koeln/
I am disgusted by the insinuations, I have to say.
H
ere are Dutch stats showing that immigrants are over-represented in rape statistics (figure 2). Some claim that this is due to the fact that among migrants there are more youths, and rapists tend to be younger than average, which may skew the figures. But
here is a Dutch newspaper article from 20 years ago claiming that 3/4 of the rapes in the four largest Dutch cities are by migrants. Here is a
Danish newspaper (BT, don't know what it's worth) article claiming half of rapes in Denmark is by immigrants.
Here is a NYT article claiming 85% of the rapes in a large Norwegian town were by migrants (It's hidden in the numbers, but it's there).
The information is scarce and sketchy, so I don't yet want to present it as rock solid proof. I keep trying to find the sources of the figures but I can't seem to find them online. I find that surprising, because it is rather a stubborn rumour. You'd expect some one to debunk it.
If there is a deviation, perhaps the causes you try to put into our mouths indeed are at play. There are signs of a genetic (MAOA gene) link with violent behaviour unevenly
distributed among different ethnicities, but these aren't straightforward: The majority of the Taiwanese carry the violent version and I am pretty sure their cities are among the safest in the world for women.
However, my mind tends to go to this: feminist Susan Brownmiller
called rape an act of power rather than a crime of lust. In the article (it's from 1975) she states:
It's part and parcel of increasing violence rather than sex, partly because the criminal population is rising and becoming more adventurous. I think writers like Eldridge Cleaver and Franz Fanon, who tried to give rape an ideological justification, didn't help. They tried to justify interracial rape as some sort of political act. It's typical of the left to make a convicted rapist a hero.
That quote reminds me of a another quote, from the very amusing Tom Wolfe piece "
Mau-mauing the Flak Catchers" (Read entirely to put the quote into context):
When black people first started using the confrontation tactic, they made a secret discovery. There was an extra dividend to this tactic. There was a creamy dessert. It wasn't just that you registered your protest and showed the white man that you meant business and weakened his resolve to keep up the walls of oppression. It wasn't just that you got poverty money and influence. There was something sweet that happened right there on the spot. You made the white man quake. You brought fear into his face.
Black people began to realize for the first time that the white man, particularly the educated white man, the leadership, had a deep dark Tarzan mumbo jungle voodoo fear of the black man's masculinity. This was a revelation. For two hundred years, wherever black people lived, north or south, mothers had been raising their sons to be meek, to be mild, to check their manhood at the front door in all things that had to do with white people, for fear of incurring the wrath of the Man. The Man was the white man. He was the only man. And now, when you got him up close and growled, this all-powerful superior animal turned out to be terrified. You could read it in his face. He had the same fear in his face as some good-doing boy who has just moved onto the block and his hiding behind his mama and the moving man and the sofa while the bad dudes on the block size him up.
So I consider it an act of aggression. Of contempt for western women. Europe transformed itself in the second part of the 20th century from the worlds overlords to believers in soft powers, the meek and mild men that celebrate diversity. However, if migrants still perceive the Europeans as the worlds overlords, maybe the realization of the fear Tom Wolfe talked about, plus the cultural aspects, as I can't separate the view on women from the treatment of them in vasts parts of the world (Which goes beyond the islam), is causing this.