And we’ll show you the outcome:
British mothers who bring their children with them when returning to the UK after fleeing from domestic abuse abroad – which can lead to them being accused of abduction – could be given greater legal protection and support.
The government has agreed to examine how domestic abuse features in international child abduction cases, with a view to giving survivors of domestic abuse more help fighting partners’ demands that they return children to their home countries.
Cue a rise in divorcing mothers insisting they were subject to domesti abuse by dastardly foreigners.
That some really are isn’t the point being made here, it’s that change the incentive to so claim – like, not going to jail for abduction – and you’ll change the number who do claim.
Domestic Abuse is a regular weapon in a woman’s armoury when divorcing.
I am informed by someone who has just gone through the process, that is almost a tick box in divorces that are less than… amicable.
Difficult to disprove …
That’s the point of it.
Working as intended, in other words…
Otto
100% – in fairness to those making false claims if you have a ‘Traitor’s Parliament’ – or as I call them ‘The Forever criminals’ (Starmer/ Burnham and their minions) who give you this as a ‘trump card’ you’d need to be either exceptionally principled or stupid not to play it.
Believe all wimmin. Of course.
Custody is a local issue.
Guardian encourages kidnapping.
Helpful hint: Get a divorce and legal custody before returning.
Very hard to do in the particular jurisdictions that are unsaid here. Of course the women were really silly to have got involved with the guy in the first place. Hard to give guidance about cross-cultural relationships too as it’s raacisst!
Hmm. Are there really that many British women marrying men from ‘particular jurisdictions’? I would have thought that many/most such disputes would involve spouses from European/Western countries, in which case, the treaty of (can’t be bothered to look it up) governs child custody issues and the UK would have very little to say about it – the general rule is deference to the decisions of the courts where the family/child was/is domiciled.
Are they seriously suggesting that a UK court will decide child custody based on unprovable claims of crimes committed in a foreign country, over children who may not be UK citizens and may never have resided in the UK in the first place? Really?
llater,
llamas
The Grauniad only cares about the law when it suits The Grauniad.
Are there really that many British women marrying men from ‘particular jurisdictions’?
The depends on what you call a “British woman”, llamas. A passport will do; they don’t have to have been born here or speak English. Look at the “British citizens” being repatriated from ME shitholes and you can’t tell them apart from the locals. That’s because they’re the same people.
And that’s all before we delve into the reasons for such marriages, in arranged marriage cultures.
I mentioned this before, it’s still true, so I’ll mention this again.
Everything in British politics is now binary: Reform, or Stop Reform
Clown World is badly scared by women shifting “right”. They need those votes, women are supposed to be a reliable client bloc for Clown World politicians. A lot of women had their eyes opened by the Axel Rutabaga murders of helpless little white girls. The Lowe report on the mass Islamic rape of British girls and women is toxic to TPTB. Lot of Mums are now fedposting on social media every day about rapefugees and toxic migration. Losing women means losing the mandate of heaven – they are the ones who decide what society is. Them giving social permission to men to be “far right” is a heart attack for the status quo.
Labour (and the Tories) won’t do anything to reduce the inflow of uneducated Third World men coming here from countries where rape and beating up women is more popular than football. The government knows perfectly well what the consequences of resettling primitive tribesmen from central Asia to rural England are, that’s why they kept the £17Bn Afghan influx secret.
So what do you offer to women if you refuse to do anything to make them and their children safer?
You offer shiny cat toys and bullshit.
So, abortion to 9 months. Special rape courts with feminist trained judges to jail a few more white men who might have gone free under a jury trial due to lack of evidence. A national task force on “misogyny”. The kitchen sink.
Anything except stopping the RNLI bringing foreign sex offenders to our shores to consume our resources and prey on women and girls. They would do anything for love, but they won’t do that.
Reform has a woman problem and they need to fix it asap. Nigel Farage is a great man, I mean that objectively, he’s a political giant among the pygmies. But he’s also a Marmite character. He defaults to sensible Thatcherism, which is what the country needs, but not what Reform needs to get into office. Farage is not the best pitchman to speak to women. They need someone more emotionally articulate to speak to them. Doesn’t have to be a woman, but does need to be someone who speaks the language and cadences of Mumsnet rather than Tory Boy.
No, Steve, British women of voting age are not moving right; and they are not giving their men permission to move right, either. Recent electoral data indicate that British women—particularly younger and middle-aged demographics— increasingly tend to lean left.
…
Yes they are. Reform wasn’t polling ~30% and above for a year without a lot of women being willing to consider voting Reform. They’ve since had an annus horriblis (not Burnham, he’s just an anus) but the vibe shift since 2024 is real, hence desperate attempts to stuff the Gill back into her box.
However, this is still all potentiality and quantum probability clouds until a GE is announced.
Younger demographics in general are an absolute, civilisational disaster and the yoof – after being headfucked by yooni and fucked out of being able to afford houses or start families by immivasion and Net Zero – are more likely than ever to vote Full Commie. That’s an unfolding problem for anyone who is a fan of not living in a filthy, impoverished shithole full of retarded Third Worlders, not just a Reform problem.
People who won’t fuck, won’t fight, so if there’s hope, it lies with the middle aged. Not childless Millennial renters with Funko Pop collections.
But you’re dead wrong about women, and I’m 100% right. 5 years ago, even mentioning remigration was the equivalent of exiling yourself to political Siberia. Now it’s a mainstream opinion. That’s why all the hot girls across Europe are supporting “far right” parties. Ugly munters vote Green.
“Data says…” is for the birds and Reddit mitwits. My polling is much more accurate because I listen to people.
The pollsters’ *job* is to listen to people.
It’s to please their commissioners. Also, you forget the difference between expressed and revealed preferences.
And Steve’s auditorium is wonderfully free of such effects?
Beside the point.
Not my point! Steve is claiming superior knowledge through listening to people, specifically a sub-category of people who talk to Steve. It *may* be better than a poll commissioned by the Labour Party, or Reform, but it is unlikely to be a less biased sample than Gallup’s or Yougov’s.
We’re not even talking about the same thing. Polling is useful but limited, and sometimes badly wrong – but that’s not the point I was trying to explain, before you got all excited about defending “experts”.
Politics is downstream from culture. Culture is vibes based.
You can’t capture vibe shifts through strangers asking multiple choice questions. Need to actually listen to people who trust you for that. Need to have long-form conversations for that.
Given the volatility of public political sentiment in the UK, and given FPTP arithmetic and the effect it has when voting intentions meet a pencil in the polling place, it’s important to pick up on vibes. Because that has predictive value of its own.
And I say unto you most candidly, those vibes have shifted massively since 2023. Not just in Britain of course. Everything’s up for grabs.
People talk to Steve?
Do you think they don’t operate under constraint when reporting their findings? I don’t.
That varies from polling company to polling company – some people want a soundbite to publish, others actually want to know the truth so that they can make plans grounded on reality.
Can you tell the types apart?
Given a published poll, is it the truth or is it propaganda?
I was called by someone from a polling organisation a few years ago, and made the mistake of agreeing to answer their questions – at least until I hung up in disgust.
The questions were all stupidly binary, and follow-ups were ignored where convenient, so you as correspondent ended up on the bottom branch of a decision-tree indicating you think one thing when actually you wanted to get off the tree three branches up.
So, as I say, I hung up. It plainly wasn’t interested in what I actually thought.
I was a YouGov contributer for a while, but they dropped me after a few months because, apparently, I was giving them too many wrong answers. For that reason I don’t pay much attention to polls.
All please their commissioners.
I once worked for Ipsos-Mori and that was not my impression. Sure, there are polls commissioned and designed to produce an answer like ‘59% of voters support LD policy on x’, but the pollsters were scrupulous about the methodologies of their political polling.
That’s not where the money is.
Some people will pay to know the real answer while Alastair Campbell is bullying the press to report a convenient fiction, so there is *some* money in providing the correct answer.
Given the extent of the hit job they have been able to undertake against Reform this year do you think they (the Uniparty organization I’m calling the ‘Forever Criminals’ – a hat tip to the Germany of the 1920s – after all, if we’re ‘Far right’ why not go the whole hog?)can still prevail or is rather akin to the last 15 minutes of ‘V for Vendetta’?
I don’t think Reform has a “ceiling”, other than the one they make for themselves. In other words, enough normies are disgusted with the status quo that they could potentially run the board.
Or be dragged down by retards voting Conservative. That’s why the Conservative Party exists now, it’s entirely to Stop Reform by hoovering up enough RW votes to deny Reform victory. The Conservative Party is a contraceptive sponge, it soaks up the votes of conservatives and renders them harmless.
That’s why the Indian midget Rishi Sunak was given a hero’s exit as he danced out of Downing Street after delivering the most crushing electoral defeat in Conservative Party history. He was laughing, and so were they, because he’d successfully handed the baton over to Labour rather than Reform.
Can the Uniparty prevail? Absolutely. British society is in an advanced state of illness, very close to death now. It’s all up for grabs, but what isn’t avoidable is significant social unrest, economic failures, and lots more “random” violence. The time to avoid those things was during the 14 year Long Con, but of course the Conservatives made sure we couldn’t vote our way out of impending trouble then.
But at least we still have King Charles. Allah save the king! Because I won’t.
Not sure. I think they may have wanted to appeal to Guadianistas by demonstrating their inclusion bonafides by actions rather than words. They’ve persisted with this misplaced idiocy by being led by Nigerian Olukemi Olufunto Adegoke. I doubt they’re sucking up many “right wing” votes now. A husk of momentum keeps them alive.
The Tories are still pretending to be a conservative, centre right party – at least half of Kemi’s policies are nicked from Reform. They’re consistently criticising Labour from the right, trying to give the impression the Tories want to cut taxes, reduce immigration and deport illegals. (I.e. all the things they refused to do in 14 years of power)
You could park a BMX bike between Kemi’s front teeth, if not for the opposing hurricane force pressure of brazen lies emanating from her wordhole. But they’re definitely still marketing themselves as RW.
But children shouldn’t play with dead things, Reform is probably best ignoring the Tories as a matter of general policy, focus on their own song.
Or be dragged down by retards voting Conservative.
This.
Tangent:
Gamecock was at a telecom convention circa 1990. George Gallup Jr gave a speech. In it, he said:
“We conducted a poll. We asked if there was too much ignorance and too much apathy.
“The majority of respondents replied that they didn’t know, and didn’t care.”
Indeed. The mass of people who wish to see the back of the foreign invaders and their treasonous enablers include a great many “benefits scroungers”. In that sense, “sensible Thatcherism” is not what the country needs. The country needs a temporary political accomodation of opposites to get rid of a bigger threat.
Farage is yesterday’s “great man”. He’s fighting the EU and fiscal irresponsibility. The real enemy, the enemy that will destoy the British peoples, is mass muslim immivasion. Farage will barely mention a problem with Islam. He’ll tell outrageous lies about Rupert Lowe to the Police for internal political games; he’ll tell outrageous lies about Tommy Robinson on TV just to not be seen as racist by Guardianistas. In both cases he’s alienating masses of people who are way ahead of him in awareness of the threat. All the while he’s using his political skills to put himself in the same integrity league as the Bidens. The bloke is a shit (which is okay) and a fool (which is not).
Reform may still win in spite of him. But years we can’t afford will be lost because he and his party are no closer to the answer than the Tories.
Look at Zia’s Twitter, and compare with Nigel’s.
Would you be annoyed if I told you Zia seems a lot closer to your views than Our Nige? Yet he does.
Yusuf is a Gen Xer so he gets it. Boomers are generally quite clueless and naive people, which is why we are where we are. Nige is a Boomer. Alas.
Yet I can’t spare Nigel, he fights. I wish he’d fight less with Rupert Lowe and more with Andy Burnham-Rapem, but he fights. He’s got the job till he dies or I find someone better.
Now come on, you apes. You wanna live forever?
The mass of people who wish to see the back of the foreign invaders and their treasonous enablers include a great many “benefits scroungers”.
Yes, though:
78% of Reform supporters say that ‘benefits for unemployed people are too high’, compared with 60% of the general public..[while]…27% say they are ‘struggling’ on their current household income, five points above the figure for the general public (22%)
Of course. Actual members or supporters of parties are more solid in their positions than potential voters are. At the moment, 100% of Reform supporters do not add up to enough to get them elected.
A “deal” needs to be made. Some cans (NHS, bennies) get kicked down the road until the big can of invasion worms is dealt with. I’m happy to be proved wrong but I don’t think all these competing issues can be adressed at once.
“He defaults to sensible Thatcherism” Really? Where does he say he’s in favour of extensive privatisation?
You’re right about Reform. The problem right now is that the women are voting left (also the case in the USA) because we have a bloated state, with spending out of control and a huge amount of it is going on employing women to do wealth-destructive jobs. Social services, academia, all the bureaucracy that exists because of government.
Most women would be no worse off if their job was destroyed but we simply taxed their partner less. Money is siphoned from his pay packet to the state. The state then pays her. She pays out for a car she now needs and childcare.
I don’t think there’s much we can do until the Denis Healey moment, when we are bankrupt as a nation and Shit Gets Real. Because when Shit Gets Real, you have to cut, and you can’t cut the useful bits of the state. You still need people to be trained and educated in engineering and bricklaying. What you can do is cut the army of graduates doing photography and psychology.
Right now, everyone is living in fantasy land. Where we can be a giant refugee camp for the world, building stupid railways no-one wants etc etc. So saying “we should cut spending” has almost no votes. Everyone thinks this is fine. The politicians are lying to people and saying that the stupid railways are an investment, that immigrants from some shithole like Somalia are going to make us richer. Prudence is an almost impossible sell when government can just keep adding to the debt.
The mothers will come, claim abuse, get asylum – and then bring their husband’s over. And they will be allowed to stay because their child is in the UK and they would be ‘denied a family life’ if they were deported.