From: aero.spike@mail.com 
  
 Roger Hayter  wrote: 
 > On 3 Sep 2025 at 15:39:08 BST, "JNugent"  wrote: 
 > 
 >> On 02/09/2025 07:43 PM, RJH wrote: 
 >>> On 2 Sep 2025 at 14:45:40 BST, Spike wrote: 
 >>> 
 >>>>>>> Women and girls face a far greater risk in their own homes and the 
 spaces they 
 >>>>>>> share with their own family, and social and work networks. 
 >>>> 
 >>>>>>> Do you seriously believe the Epping protesters don't know that? 
 >>>> 
 >>>>>> This sounds very much like the disgraceful €€€It€€€s only a handful, 
 why does 
 >>>>>> it matter?€€€ mantra. 
 >>>> 
 >>>>> It can sound however you want it to sound. Do you happen to know the 
 answer to 
 >>>>> the question? 
 >>>> 
 >>>> Do you? All you have done is made an irrelevant assertion about VAWG by 
 >>>> trying to deflect the concerns expressed by the women and girls of 
 Epping 
 >>>> regarding unwanted sexual advances in public places, by referring to 
 >>>> violence expressed elsewhere. 
 >>>> 
 >>> 
 >>> Of course I know - as I suspect the hotel Epping lot know. Women and 
 girls 
 >>> face a far greater risk in their own homes and the spaces they share with 
 >>> their own family, and social and work networks. 
 >>> 
 >>> Which begs the question - why are they protesting outside hotels? 
 >>> 
 >>>> And waving a placard expressing their concerns doesn€€€t make them Nazis 
 or 
 >>>> racists, despite the best efforts of the bussed-in agitators. 
 >>>> 
 >>>>>> Women and girls should be safe on our streets, rather than touched up 
 and 
 >>>>>> asked to make babies as had been mentioned in court in a recent case. 
 >>>> 
 >>>>> Two things. One, generalising from the particular. Do you do that 
 often? 
 >>>> 
 >>>>> Second, 'mentioned in court'. Do you take all 'mentions' as fact? 
 >>>> 
 >>>> Why are you trying to minimise the seedy aspects of the issue? 
 >>> 
 >>> I'm not. I'm trying to explain that if people want to protest about 
 violence 
 >>> against women there are far better ways than terrorising some of the most 
 >>> terrorised people around. 
 >> 
 >> A lot of opinion-based assumptions masquerading as fact there. 
 > 
 > Any slightly honest commentator would have to accept that the fact that a 
 > resident of a migrant hostel has been charged with assaulting a girl does 
 not 
 > prove that the residents of such hostels are any more of a threat to women 
 and 
 > girls than any other men living in Epping. 
  
 So you seem to be saying that you know how many underage schoolgirls were 
 touched up or were asked to have someone€€€s babies, in Epping, at around 
 the 
 time of the incident under discussion, by men who were not accommodated in 
 hostels. Do tell, we€€€d like to know. 
  
 -- 
 Spike 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)