From: fedora@fea.st   
      
   On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 13:16:48 -0500, Wilson    
   wrote:   
      
   >On 2/16/2026 11:12 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >> On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 10:42:33 -0500, Wilson    
   >> wrote:   
   >>> On 2/16/2026 10:30 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>> On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 09:48:30 -0500, Wilson    
   >>>> wrote:   
   >>>>> On 2/15/2026 4:29 PM, Tara wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Feb 15, 2026 at 4:25:11?PM EST, "Noah Sombrero"    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 20:22:59 -0000 (UTC), Tara    
   >>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On Feb 15, 2026 at 2:37:22?PM EST, "Noah Sombrero"    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 19:05:01 -0000 (UTC), Tara    
   >>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> I fail to understand the denial that when you bring men from a   
   deeply   
   >>>>>>>>>> patriarchal culture where there are high levels of (accepted)   
   gender-based   
   >>>>>>>>>> violence against women and dump them in a society where women and   
   girls are   
   >>>>>>>>>> ?available?  that this could and will happen.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Especially india.  Common but not accepted.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_women_in_India   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> You might remember that in canada within the past 10 years or so   
   there   
   >>>>>>>>> was one case of an honor killing of a wife and daughters of a   
   >>>>>>>>> pakistani immigrant family.  The father in that case will likely not   
   >>>>>>>>> ever get out of canadian prison.  He thought they were straying from   
   >>>>>>>>> sharia law and so bringing dishonor on him.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> The fact that there has been one such case has not meant that there   
   >>>>>>>>> have been multitudes in the minds of canadians.  It did encourage an   
   >>>>>>>>> awareness that people from other cultures need to become aware of   
   >>>>>>>>> canadian values when they come here.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> We haven't had to deal with anything like the scope they've had   
   happen in the   
   >>>>>>>> UK.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Taking julian's article at face value then:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> The indians and pakistanis that come here must be quite similar to   
   >>>>>>> those that go to uk.  It cannot be simply a matter of culture or race   
   >>>>>>> or of hormonal problems.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I don't know   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> It could be the attitude of the people and the police that make a   
   >>>>> difference.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Agreed.  Pervasive criminality is a symptom of a sick society.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> If society turns a blind eye to wrongdoing and does not discourage it,   
   >>>>> it is effectively encouraged.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> This is the opposite of the above.  I don't see any blind eyes up   
   >>>> here.  I see absence of accused indian/pakistani inherent behaviors   
   >>>> that manifest elsewhere.   
   >>>   
   >>> Again you pretend to not understand what I am saying.   
   >>>   
   >>> Canada does not have the problems of England because they have not   
   >>> turned a blind eye to them and enforces the law. Pervasive criminality   
   >>> grows out of not doing that.   
   >>   
   >> And it has nothing to do with being tolerant as tara says?   
   >   
   >Tara's said nothing in this thread regarding Canadian tolerance.   
      
   Actually she did.  It is there if you want to read it.   
      
   >>   
   >> You say criminality flourishes when laws are not enforced.  I say   
   >> criminality is a response to how people are treated.   
   >>   
   >> There has been no flood of indian/pakistani criminal behavior to   
   >> respond to.  Although it is very likely that canadian prisons have   
   >> populations of such people proportional to their presence in society.   
   >   
   >The apparent lack of widespread criminal behavior by migrants in Canada   
   >could be because they are treated well there. One way to test this is to   
   >determine if they've been treated worse in England.   
   >   
   >If England hasn't treated them worse than Canada we have to look for   
   >other reasons.   
      
   That would be true, if england has treated them as well.  One place to   
   start looking would be the general attitude towards immigrants.  Does   
   julian's article give you some indication of that?   
      
   What we know is that since it seems unlikely that uk and canada get   
   different indian and pakistani immigrant populations, it can't be a   
   matter of race, culture or hormones.   
      
   >   
   >It seems to me England has gone out of its way to treat migrants lightly.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> One thing that gets reported from time to time is that blacks are   
   >> highly overpresent in us prisons proportional to their presence in   
   >> society.  I would observe that fact does not seem to be dampening   
   >> black criminality, otherwise black populations would be decreasing in   
   >> prison.   
   >>   
   >> I have no doubt you want to put the blame for that on the inherent   
   >> nature of black people.  Right?   
   >   
   >"Right?"   
   >   
   >I've never "put the blame" on the inherent nature of any group. In fact   
   >over the years I have repeatedly said that differences in group behavior   
   >are mostly due to cultural influences which vary around the world.   
      
   We are talking about prison populations in the us.   
      
   >So you're wildly misrepresenting what I believe.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> One thing that a person might notice about prison, is that criminals   
   >> plan to get away with it.  So the prospect of prison is not going to   
   >> be a big deterrent.   
   >   
   >What people think about their chances of getting away with their crime   
   >is not the only reason for holding criminals accountable.   
      
   It has nothing to do with holding people accountable.  It has to do   
   with why incarceration does not prevent crime.   
      
   >If nothing   
   >else, prison removes the offender from society so they cannot continue   
   >harming the general public for a time.   
      
   As if that should be the goal in dealing with those people.  Why put   
   criminals in a situation where they can learn to be more effective   
   criminals?   
      
   >>   
   >> I fundamentally disagree with many things you believe even if it seems   
   >> to you that you do not believe such things.  That does not mean I use   
   >> dishonest tactics in debating with you.  It means I do not accept what   
   >> you say no matter how many times you say it.   
   >   
   >So you're accusing me of holding beliefs (and being wrong about them)   
   >while claiming I might not even recognize those beliefs as my own.   
      
   Racism.   
      
   >You're saying, "I can see through you in ways you can’t see yourself".   
      
   You don't see it.   
      
   >And that's an impossible thing to answer. Even if I deny holding the   
   >beliefs you can just say, "That's exactly what I mean, your denial is   
   >exactly what I’d expect".   
   >   
   >A "Kafkatrap" is where any denial can be used as evidence of guilt or   
   >hidden motives.   
      
   True, your denial proves nothing.  Your behavior is what does that.   
      
   >Rather than provide real evidence to support the things you believe, you   
   >pretend to not understand and to misrepresent what others say and think.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)