What is wrong with our society?

[anotheoldgit]

There has been many postings of Asian child paedophile gangs on Answerbank, but these were classed as child abductions, why is it then that in this equally disgusting story, they are openly called paedophiles?

http://www.telegraph....ountry-farmhouse.html

But it doesn't stop there it would seem that it is prolific across the whole of the country.

http://www.telegraph....amlet-in-England.html

/// “What I am finding, I regret to say, is that there are parts of every single community – white, Pakistani, Afghan, Gypsy and Romany traveller, you name it – who are seeing children as easy access in terms of sexual exploitation. In terms of victims, we are seeing the same kind of profile.” In London, black gangs were attacking black children while on an estate in the north of England, white men were pursuing white girls. ///

And includes perverts from every walk of life, religion, colour and race.

http://www.telegraph....aedophiles-probe.html

[ChuckFickens]

Do you actually know the definition of paedophile? because if you do that would make it obvious why one was referred to a paedophilia and the other one wasn't.

[rowanwitch]

Nothing wrong with society the problem is with those who by their actions set themselves apart from it.

[ummmm]

Like Chuck said. Paedophiles find prepubescent children sexually attractive. The Asian gang targeted girls who'd gone through puberty.

[anotheoldgit]

ummmm

Thank you for the explanation, I obviously wrongfully assumed that it was such acts against anyone under the legal age.

Why such a curt answer Chuck?

[rojash]

AOG:

In this thread http://www.theanswerb.../Question1132609.html

you asked: "Surely a person of 13 is still a child, why else are they entitled to Child Benefit?"

and I replied: "the definition of a paedophile is someone who likes sex with prepubescent children"

[andy-hughes]

If I understand the point of your post correctly AOG, you appear to take issue with the fact that the Asians in the stories were refered to as child-abductors, and the Whites were called paedophiles, thus - agaib if I interperet correctly - drawing attention to what you see as a soft touch for an ethnic minority not extended to the domestic (white) population.

I am sure that the media are well-versed in the law regarding discrimination - all reporters who are qualified have studied it, and all national newspapers emplpy qualified lawyers to assess their content for any legal transgresssions in their material.

Therefore - as has been pointed out - they are extremely careful to ensure they use the correct legal terminology, and differentiate in print, as in law, between a paedophile and a child molester.

It is a small but important point, but if my perception is correct, you are attempting to raise an issue where none exists, that of racial preference given to the indiginous populace - however abohernt their behaviour may be.

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

My question regarding Asian child abductions and other paedophile rings, was a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

Please read the answer I gave to ummmm, I admittedly made a genuine mistake regarding the definition of a paedophile, no need to read into it more than that.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - anyone who posts on here would perceive their Question as 'reasonable' - who would ever post an 'unreasonable' question?

My point is that your Question is not reasonable - you are raising an element of perceived racial favouritism based on political correctness where clearly none exists.