British values do exist. However, they have been forgotten and demonised in order to undermine the nation’s identity. In order to make Britain great again and to fight against the evil we see, we must rediscover our own myths and legends.

Britain is at a crossroads and must choose whether it wants to fight against the decline or let its values, culture and people be erased. The native population are becoming second-class citizens. They are discriminated against in employment and lectured in education that they are the problem, entire bodies of DEI groups and legally protected roles are dedicated to their marginalisation, and the state uses their money to fund anti-British organisations.

The worst of this is that our institutions are complicit in the mass rape of young white girls by Pakistani men to avoid raising community tensions. Rotherham. Rochdale. Telford. Too many towns are now stained with the trauma of their young girls being groomed by men who have arrived only in the past decade.

This isn’t the first time Brits have faced oppression like this in their own country. And the hard truth is that this isn’t the first time we’ve seen our daughters violated by invaders.

The warrior queen Boudica saw it in her time. She saw her daughters defiled by Rome, her people crushed under the boot of an empire that took and took, offering only humiliation in return. But she did not weep. She did not beg. She rose. She burned their cities to the ground. She made them fear her.

And now, centuries later, we face the same betrayal. The same silence. The same surrender. But the question remains—will we rise as she did? Or will we kneel, as cowards do?

To ignore Britain's decline, to ignore the cries of Britain’s daughters, is to be fundamentally anti-British. It is to disappoint the spirit of our ancestors. Perhaps we can learn a thing or two from the warrior queen about how to act when our country faces adversity.

Boudica: The Avenging Mother of England

Many will know little about Boudica’s story or symbolism other than that she was an Iron Age queen who fought against the Romans. Her only significance in the national curriculum is that she’s an example of a strong, powerful woman, paraded by feminists, not for what she’s done but for who she was. To champion Boudica as merely a feminist icon is to do her a disservice.

Boudica is not some DEI implant in the history books. Her place is rightfully earned as a warrior queen who led one of the biggest revolts in our history for England’s sovereignty.

In AD 60, upon his death, the Icenian (in modern Norfolk) king Prasutagus, decided that half of his kingdom would go to the Romans and the other half would go to his two daughters. This was to keep the Romans happy while preserving the Iceini identity.

However, the Romans ignored Prasutagus’s will. Following the death of Prasutagus, the Romans thought this was the perfect time to strike. They used the opportunity to seize and pillage the kingdom. The Iceni people were treated like slaves. As the Roman historian Tacitus wrote: “his wife Boudicca was subjected to the lash and his daughters violated: all the chief men of the Icenians were stripped of their family estates, and the relatives of the king were treated as slaves.”

The Romans expected that the humiliation of Boudica and the rape of her daughters would force her to submit defeat. However, it had the opposite effect, inflaming her to get revenge.

Boudica and her army flew to arms in response to the Romans and incited a rebellion. According to Roman historian Cassius Dio, Boudica rallied her people against the Romans, saying, “But now, it is not as a noble descended from illustrious ancestors, nor as one ruling over a mighty people, that I avenge my lost freedom, my scourged body, and the outraged virtue of my daughters. I am but a woman; but I will not let the injustices suffered go unpunished. The Roman arrogance, their greed, their weakness—these shall be their downfall.”

She gathered her forces and rallied neighbouring tribes, united over the desire to end the Roman subjugation. She devised a plan to go against Britain's three largest towns of Roman Britain. The unpredictable, guerrilla-style fighting devastated the Romans. This includes burning Roman London (Londinium) to the ground. Her army grew to 230,000 troops. As Cassius Dio wrote, “Eighty thousand of the Romans and of their allies perish, and the island was lost to Rome.”

Unfortunately, when the Roman army assembled at the Battle of Watling Street, Boudica’s army was crushed. The Romans, while outnumbered, were better equipped and had better tactics than the Celts. According to sources, 80,000 Celts died at the battle, and only 400 were killed by Boudica’s army. Tragically, Boudica passed away shortly after her army was crushed.

What we should learn

Of course, I’m not advocating violence. We should not forget the spirit of fighting for our country, freedom, and justice. Even when the odds are against us, we must continue to fight for what is right. Those who want to save Britain should consider Boudica a real British hero and a woman who would do anything to protect her people. It’s in our DNA and heritage to fight for our little island, even when power is against us.

As a great man once said, “Situations are never hopeless. We shall be great again.”

Sources / Further Reading

Tacitus (n.d.) Boudica – Sources: Tacitus. Warwick Classics Network, University of Warwick. Available at: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/classics/warwickclassicsnetwork/romancoventry/resources/boudica/sources/tacitus/

Cassius Dio (n.d.) The Revolt of Boudica according to Cassius Dio. Translated by J. Jackson. Warwick Classics Network, University of Warwick. Available at: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/classics/warwickclassicsnetwork/romancoventry/resources/boudica/sources/cassiusdio/

Biographics May 21, 2019 Boudicca - The Celtic Warrior Queen

History Hit January 1 2024 The True Story of Boudica’s Revolt Against the Romans. YouTube video Available at:

364 MPs have voted against having a national inquiry into the grooming gang scandal. No Labour, Lib Dem or Green MP voted in favour of the amendment. In order to prevent the amendment, the Labour Party whipped their MPs to vote against the inquiry. During the parliamentary discussions, MPs mocked, shamed and blasted the Reform MP, Rupert Lowe, for speaking out against the grooming gangs.

To anyone paying attention to British politics over the past decade, this shouldn't be a surprise. The authorities and the institutions have been ignoring the mass rape and abuse of young white girls for decades for the sake of political correctness. They even admit that the reason why they’ve been silent on this issue is because of fear of raising community tensions.

Meanwhile, anyone who has dared to speak out about this has been labelled a racist or a bigot. This is particularly true for the working class, who have witnessed their girls be groomed, and when they’ve spoken out about it, they’ve been dismissed as stupid and xenophobic. Take, for example, when the media laughed at a working-class man in 2011 who spoke to the press about the issue, mocking him for saying “Muslimic Rayguns.”

Honestly, the fact that we can’t even have a national inquiry about the race-based rape and abuse of thousands of girls in the UK shows how doomed we are. In a sensible country, the groomers would have been given the most severe sentence and this should have impacted the nation’s policy on immigration.

Labour’s reasoning for voting against the amendment was that it would torpedo Labour’s Schools Bill. Starmer said, “The time has passed for more inquiries and consultations, especially for victims and survivors who clearly want action.” This would be true if the liberal establishment didn’t constantly deny the existence of Pakistani grooming gangs to begin with.

Jess Phillips, the Under-Secretary of State for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls, argued that it should be done better on a local level. However, if Jess Phillips had listened to the people of Oldham, she would have known the inquiry needed to be carried out on a government level. Local authorities have failed. Victims have spoken out, saying Oldham Council did not have the finances to conduct a full review, and they worried about the independence of any inquiry.

The horrors of the grooming gang don’t just come from the volume of Pakistani men specifically targeting British girls but also from those in positions of authority trying to silence the stories of the victims. Pakistani Grooming Gangs are operating all over the country, with each case having the same stories of horrific abuse and cover-ups. It deserves a national inquiry.

You can also see this in Telford, where officials have denied the ongoing rape and abuse of young girls. According to Charlie Peters, there were at least 1,000 victims - most of these victims were in Telford alone white, and most of the abusers were Pakistani. In one of these cases, according to Sam Ashworth-Hayes, “abusers used the murder of a pregnant child and her family as a threat against victims. The police were worried that acting against the gangs would see them labelled racist.”

This is a disappointing day. But it doesn’t mean the fight is over. While we may have lost the battle, we’ve gained significant ground. Nigel Farage has already said that Reform UK will raise the money and hire independent arbiters to conduct their own enquiry. Similarly, the attention Elon Musk has provided towards the horrors of the grooming gangs and the corruption around them has ultimately been a step in the right direction to getting the girls justice.

There is still so much to do. I’d strongly recommend you donate or even volunteer at the Maggie Oliver Foundation to give the victims the support they need. Tweeting is easy - put your money where your mouth is. Keep the momentum up. Have difficult conversations around this with friends and family. Make this the key issue it deserves to be.

The driver told me he was in the queue for social housing.

Of course, this shouldn’t be too surprising, especially for London. Considering that a thirty-minute trip costs you around £15 after Uber takes its cut (around 25%), the fuel cost, and the cost of maintaining a car in London, I can’t imagine an Uber driver would earn an awful lot. So, how would an Uber driver afford to live in London?

On the cheaper end, rent in London is over a thousand pounds monthly. Most of my graduate friends pay over a thousand pounds to live in a house with four other people or live almost an hour away from their jobs in London. In terms of general day-to-day living, it is virtually impossible to survive in London on a low salary.

Over 300,000 households are on the waiting list for social housing in London. The prevailing sentiment of the British public is that government handouts should be for those who are most down on their luck, such as somebody who is disabled or untimely dismissed from their job. Indeed, this was the initial idea behind the welfare state. State-provided housing started after World War One when soldiers returning home after fighting for our country needed safe, affordable and comfortable housing.

Nowadays, social housing has acquired a reputation that goes against the original Christian and patriotic spirit in which it was introduced. The Sun goes nuts for this stuff. Even in reference to fellow native Brits, there is a common feeling of the welfare state being exploited by “benefit scroungers.” Recent arrivals have taken this to a new level. We can see this by looking at social housing in London, where almost half of the social housing is occupied by someone foreign-born. African-born households, in particular, have some of the highest rates of social housing occupancy. For example, 73.9% of Somalis in London live in social housing.

Immigrants can only receive benefits if they have lived in the UK for five years, upon which they would receive settled status. After they achieve this, they are entitled to a wave of benefits: income support, universal tax credit, housing benefits and a whole load of other social funds.

Even if they don’t use explicit benefits, they are still a net cost to the taxpayer whenever they use anything public - such as the NHS, prisons, policing, schooling, etc. While immigrants without settled status are charged if they receive NHS healthcare, most don’t pay.

AsReform MP Rupert Lowe revealed:

“In 2022/2023, the 'aggregate income identified' was £100,000,000. Enormous.

Cash payments received that year? Just £32,000,000. The year before - £67,000,000 with£25,000,000 recovered.

For 2020/2021? £61,000,000, and £21,000,000 paid. Not only are we losing vast amounts ofmoney, it's a rapidly growing problem.”

The immigrant population seems everywhere in the service economy: delivering pizzas at Dominos, scanning your shopping at ASDA, and providing your espresso at Costa.

Ready to serve up any corporate slop you desire, an immigrant will show up on his Deliveroo bicycle within 20-30 minutes to provide you with food you could collect in a ten-minute walk. Is this progress? The narrow-minded individual would say so.

In a now-infamous clip from BBC Question Time, a woman in the audience asks, with a heavy dose of snobbery in her voice:

“Without immigration, who will be serving our coffee at Pret?”

Academic Agent recently made a good video on how the price of a coffee is artificially low, and I want to piggyback on that. The reality is that non-EEA immigration has been a net negative for taxpayers. As the Centre for Policy Studies reported, working-aged migrants from the Middle East, North Africa and Turkey are almost twice as likely to be economically inactive as someone born in the UK. The Centre for Migration Control reported that over 70% of migrants who arrived in 2023 on a work visa impose net costs on the Treasury.

Not only is our taxpayer money subsidising immigrants, but it's also subsidising corporations using cheap labour instead of paying workers a decent and fair wage. Companies like Deliveroo or Starbucks hire immigrant workers to suppress wages, regardless of the legal minimum, keeping their employment costs down whilst maximising profit.

Profits skyrocketed for Uber Eats with turnover growing 55% in 2023. The same goes forDeliveroo and Just Eat.

I made a graph to summarise this information:

The cheap labour from immigrants has given Big Slop an edge to out-compete local shops. In a world where everything is fast-paced and convenient, there’s no need for friendly day-to-day interactions with customers.

I worked at my local Co-Op when I was eighteen. The staff, primarily working-class mums from my town, had worked at the shop for years—some had been there for almost a decade. They engaged with the customers and had personal conversations during their shifts—truly wholesome moments. About half a year in, the local manager suffered from a medical problem, which meant she could no longer work.

This led to regime change. The owner (who was South Asian) hired a relative to replace her. It was a complete vibe shift. Within a few months, the women who had worked at the shop had found work elsewhere, the customers seemed less chatty, and the new employees seemed less friendly and sociable.

Indeed, many British people won’t want these service-based jobs, but basic economics tells us that if there’s a shortage of workers, it would signal employers to increase their wages. As such, a substantial increase in the supply of immigrant labour has decreased British worker’s bargaining power, much to the delight of corporate executives.

Furthermore, you don’t necessarily have to pay your family a working salary for family businesses like my local Co-Op.

As Academic Agent says, the profits are privatised to the company. At the same time, the costs are socialised—both to the taxpayer who has to foot the bill and to the community who has to bear the social repercussions of allowing strangers to enter the gates.

While it’s easy to be offended by the appalling living standards he provides for his tenants, Mr Athwal is an ambassador of the growing class of new “Britons” he represents. Perhaps it's time to set aside our Western privilege and accept that embracing multiculturalism might also mean tolerating black mould and insect infestations!

The current housing crisis has led to many renters having very little choice over their accommodation. Tight government red tape restricts the supply side, and mass immigration increases the pressure on the demand side. This has given landlords the whip hand over renters, allowing them to charge an arm and a leg for rent and leaving them high and dry when the property has any issues. 

The reality of a renter in multicultural London isn’t just sharing a flat with your friends like the early noughties sitcoms presented. Instead, it’s being crammed into a small room with a single bed, sharing a toilet with five other young professionals. And that’s standard for the middle class! The lower incomes of Britain are either crammed into council housing or living in terrible conditions. 

The Guardian reported that 160,000 people in England are crammed in unlicensed housing in squalid conditions. In a shocking example of these appalling conditions, 16 adults and five children were crammed into an 11-room house, with entire families forced to share a single room. 

One of the most common London boroughs for this exploitation is Haringey in North London, which just so happens to be the 5th most ethnically diverse borough in the country, with over 65% of residents being non-White British. Since May 2021, 43 fines have been issued to landlords running unlicensed HMOs. The officers uncovering these accommodations found three or four, or sometimes whole families, were sharing a single room.

One dramatic example: eighteen Bangladeshis lived in a two-bedroom flat in Tower Hamlets. This was only uncovered after the property was set on fire, killing one of the inhabitants. Some of these were students, and some of these were UberEats and Deliveroo delivery couriers. They were living in bunk beds with sometimes ten people in a room.

However, this isn’t exclusive to the private sector. Earlier this year, the Sun reported on a single mum of four, Manuella Akona, sleeping in the same room with all her children. Akona is on benefits and has been waiting for a council house for six years. Within the same month, the Sun also covered another single mum, Divine Doti, on benefits with two sets of twins who were told she would have to wait eleven years for a larger home. 

Both were in London, where over 300,000 were on a waiting list for social housing. In London, almost half of the social housing is owned by someone foreign. African-born households, in particular, have some of the highest rates of social housing occupancy. For example, 73.9% of Somalis in London live in social housing. The questions must be asked. Why are people who cannot afford to live in Britain moving to the country in the first place? And why is the British government promoting immigration from those who can’t afford to live here?

The average white British London household is probably composed of working professionals in a flatshare. It’s hard to find a young white British person with a child living in London unless they are either extremely rich or poor. Most who can’t afford it have moved out of the city. Meanwhile, the new Britons have a different ethos than the highly atomised native population. 

Non-white British households have a higher birth rate than British households. Non-white-British families are likelier to have households requiring more space than the average British home. Most British houses have five rooms at most. Meanwhile, non-white-British families are having families that exceed this. An example is when the council tried to accommodate a family of eight into two houses on different sides of a dual carriageway since they couldn’t find a house big enough.

Our multicultural new residents are providing a new, updated look at what it means to be a British household. In the UK, Black people are disproportionately represented among single-parent households. South Asian households are more likely to live with their extended families. The National Centre for Social Research reported on South Asian backgrounds: “Participants’ cultural conceptions of the family (which include the importance of familial, social bonds and non-nuclear family structures) often meant that they required additional space within the home.” and “The Bedroom Standard criteria do not reflect participants’ understanding of ‘overcrowding’.”​​

Import the third world, get third world standards. 

Not only are immigrant tenants OK with lower-quality housing, but over the past year alone, there has been a trend of non-white landlords putting their renters in properties with poor conditions. These landlords would profit by cramming renters into a small property - giving slumdog millionaire a whole new meaning!

Here are some stories of nightmare landlords packing in tenants like sardines that have been reported just in the last year:

• In Hayes, a landlord named Tarsem Dhillon was fined for cramming fourteen people in a home made for six. 

• In Camden, landlord Alvaro Odeh-Torro was fined for “packing too many people in two homes—one of which had a faulty fire door.” 

• In Wembley, tenants reported a rat infestation, a leak, and a broken toilet, leading officers to raid the property belonging to landlord Sanjay Patel. They found eight people crammed in a semi-detached house that only had capacity for five.

• In Sudbury, landlord Yehuda Levhar was fined after he was found illegally renting out a large shed in north-west London as five flats.

Why is there a pattern here? If it were just landlords taking advantage of their renters’ desperation, then we would see landlords of all ethnicities overpacking their properties. But this isn’t the case. Instead of the magic soil bringing the new Britons to British standards, we are reversing to third-world standards. The new living standards are making black mould seem like a minimal issue. 

With it being known that hundreds of thousands are living in squalor conditions, yet only a handful of landlords are being held by the law, it makes you wonder why the law is there in the first place. The state is establishing a new norm by allowing the housing market to become oversaturated, leaving renters with limited options, and introducing a new demographic accustomed to lower living standards than those in Britain. Does sharing a mouldy room with five others look like progress to you?

This story is abnormally different from Netflix's usual political correctness. While the streaming service is keen to feature LGBT representation, it is rarely in a negative or critical light. However, the fact that this is based on the real story of Richard Gadd, the writer, enables a realism that doesn't usually make it to the screen. The diversity didn’t feel woke. It simply felt like modern-day London. 

Through being based on actual events, the series provides an insight into how modern day society corrupts what it means to be a man. 

The Corruption of Ambition

The drive for the protagonist, Donny, in the series is his ambition to become a successful comedian. He starts off in a pub in Edinburgh, where he soon meets a successful comedy writer, Darrien, who helps him with his routine which leads to him gain an audience. 

However, it begins to escalate when Darrien encourages him to take all kinds of drugs with him. Donny would wake up with all sorts of pains and in all types of positions, often with his pants down. Yet he still kept coming back. 

Why? Donny explained how Darrien made him feel special and that he could achieve great things in comedy. He would always promise a foot in the door, leading him on so he would continue to come around. 

Unfortunately, it surprises no one that these kind of things happen. Within areas where individuals have power and influence, sexual assault and abuse seem to be commonplace. We can see this in politics, as well as the entertainment industry, where, time and time again, political figures are accused of sexual assault. A well-known example is the Tory MP Chris Pincher who has been accused of groping two men at London’s Carlton Club. 

While this happens to women, not enough people talk about how often this happens to men. Within political spheres, the majority of my male friends (who are in their early twenties) have experienced, at minimum, uncomfortable sexual advances from men with political authority. It’s easy to understand why young men would feel pressured to accept the inappropriate behaviour from positions of authority to protect their careers, Especially the ambitious ones where their career means everything. 

Crying Your Way To The Top

Donny does eventually find success. However, the success is at the cost of his privacy. It is when he breaks down on stage about the abuse from his stalker, Martha, and his abuser, Darrian. This leads to the video of his breakdown going viral and him being praised online for his bravery. Of course, what happened to him was awful. We should sympathise with abuse victims. 

On a broader level, it speaks to how, as a society, we value people not based on their merit and ability but on their oppression and victimhood. A comedian no longer has to be funny. He is now meant to do the opposite of his job: make people sad. 

Not only is this just a wrong way of running a society, this is an incredibly feminised attitude towards what should be “successful.” 

Society shuns ambitious men. When I asked people in Shoreditch what men are good for, many of them couldn’t answer. This is wild considering that the majority of buildings around them, the technology they use daily, the safety of the country, and the production of the food they eat all mainly rest on men. 

Yet ambitious men are seen as dangerous or unwanted. Often, male bosses are seen as sleazy or entitled in the media, and any successful straight white man in a movie will inevitably get replaced by a minority or a woman. Men don’t have much positive representation in modern media. Is there any wonder why people like Dylan Mulvaney use transgenderism to gain fame when victimhood is one of the few ways to achieve success?

Actually, Maybe Liking it Rough isn’t a Flex?

One of the most interesting parts of Baby Reindeer is the reaction Donny has to the abuse of Darrien. It completely alters him and his sexuality from going from a seemingly normal man in a heterosexual relationship to wanting risky, meaningless, rough sex with strangers and putting himself in dangerous situations. 

Of course, this isn’t to say that everyone who has weird sexual desires has been abused. However, rough sex is becoming increasingly common. Just yesterday, I came across a post from a girl saying that she was injured from her first kiss because the boy thought it was normal to choke her. It is now commonplace that men learn about sex through pornography, which provides a catalog of weird kinks and fetishes for them to explore. Porn addiction leads to desensitisation around watching “vanilla” sex, leading to the viewer looking for more extreme material. 

Rough, promiscuous, or meaningless sex is seen as, at best, value-free and, at worst, a good thing. In fact, Baby Reindeer is the first time that I’ve ever seen rough sex be presented as a negative in the media. Normally, the mainstream media depicts “sex positivity” as a good thing, for example, with shows aimed at young people such as Euphoria and Sex Education.

The series goes as far as saying being attracted to transgender “women” is a product of the abuse. I don’t think they wouldn’t have been able to get away with this if it hadn’t been based on real-life events. However, it does raise that the rise in autogynophilia is a product of an overly sexualised and pornographied society. 

Maybe it isn’t desirable to be attracted to people who have mutilated their bodies to imitate the other gender. Maybe it isn’t desirable to want to be hurt and dehumanized during sex. When talking about kinks and fetishes, they are too often seen as a separate part of our identity, the Jekyll to our Hyde. However, the way we want to be treated during our most intimate moments in the bedroom reflects how we view ourselves. 

The Truth Is Right Wing

Throughout the series, Donny lacks agency and rarely acts confidently. The consequence of going NPC mode enables abusive and obsessive personalities like Martha to take advantage of his kindness. Even when Martha physically attacks his transgender girlfriend, it takes him a minute to intervene. 

The show demonstrates the need for society and men themselves to value masculinity. Men should be able to defend themselves and use their strengths to get ahead. Baby Reindeer proves their lives depend on it. 

A Blameless Crime

Then there’s the rise in cases of female genital mutilation. It is estimated that in 2011 were 137,000 women living with FGM in England and Wales. There are no benefits of FGM, with the practice resulting in all sorts of severe complications: painful menstruation, infection, difficult childbirth, along with the psychological problems that comes from the traumatic practice.

In a recent article, The Guardian places the blame on the doctors who are unfamiliar with how to deal with FGM. The government has dedicated over 1.4 million pounds in order to educate healthcare professionals. The emphasis is on attacking the NHS for not being equip to provide reconstructive surgery, framing this issue as a problem of inequity.

Yet no one is addressing the elephant in the room.

The mainstream narrative depicts FGM as just like any other medical issue, as if it’s just like having diabetes. It’s something that just happens. No explanation. Except unlike diabetes or any other medical issue, there is no discussion on prevention.

That’s because it’s uncomfortable to discuss. The reality is that to seriously address the issue would mean admitting that countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia have their faults. This disrupts the oppressor-oppressed narrative and would mean that the “oppressive” West would have to impose moral judgement of the practices in these countries. So they turn a blind eye as best as they can.

Only two people have been convicted of FGM in England and Wales: the first case was a Ugandan woman who was convicted in 2019 for mutilating her daughter; and the second woman was found guilty of taking a three year old girl for female genital mutilation in Kenya in 2019. To emphasise: out of the over 137,000 victims of FGM, only 2 of their perpetrators have been convicted. This is a complete failure towards women.

Murderers for Millions

During the summer of 2021, the feminist movement justifiably protested the disturbing murder of Sarah Everard, a woman who was kidnapped, raped and killed by a police officer. Later on in the year, Sabina Nessa was brutally murdered on her way home. This once again, rightfully sparked outrage. However, a conversation around racism was sparked due to this not receiving as much attention as Sarah Everard. This included Sabina Nessa’s sister saying that the media would have treated the case differently if she had been white.

“I’ve noticed she’ll have a little picture at the front and then she’ll make page nine or page seven. This has to be because my sister was not white.”

However, this isn’t the case. There were many other cases of women being killed by strangers on the streets which didn’t get the same attention as Sarah Everard, such as Ashling Murphy and Zara Aleena. There were many reasons why this received so much attention: a police officer perpetrated the crime and this was near the summer of 2021, only a year after the BLM protests where police brutality was also a key component.

Nevertheless, the tragic murder of Sabina Nessa was used as a way to fuel the narrative of Britain being a racist country that overlooks the abuses of ethnic minority women.

Unlike the murderer of Sarah Everard, whose name and identity was widespread news at the time, the murderer of Sabina Nessa hasn’t received the same publicity. The man who murdered Nessa was an Albanian immigrant with a history of domestic abuse. Recently, the UK government has agreed to pay Albania at least £4 million a year to take back 200 of its most dangerous prisoners, one of which is the murderer of Sabina Nessa.

Attacking in Broad Daylight

Early this December it was reported that a man named Ryan Johnston raped a woman in front of passengers on the London Underground in front of horrified passengers, including a child.

The Mirror reported on the event:

“Ryan Johnston also masturbated in front of two women before raping the passenger on a Piccadilly Line train in the horrifying event in February 2020. The 37-year-old had been seen standing outside a house near the entrance to Bounds Green Station in North London with his trousers around his ankles.

Johnston was masturbating while looking through a window of the house at the time, prompting the two women to run away out of fear. Spotting them, Johnston then shouted and started to chase them down the street to their home.

Inner London crown court heard how the terrified victims managed to get inside in time and hid under the stairs as he banged on the door, even putting his hand through their letterbox. Three hours after the terrifying incident, Johnston then boarded an Underground train heading towards Heathrow.

He approached a woman who was asleep on the carriage at the time before sexually assaulting and raping her.

Britain’s Biggest Shame

Over the past few decades, Britain has suffered from a grooming gang epidemic where thousands of young girls have been the victim of rape and abuse by predominantly Pakistani men. In 2019, it was reported that almost 19,000 children had been sexually groomed in England in the past year, compared to 3,300 five years before.

The stories of the abuse these young girls have faced are truly sickening. The Independent reported one example of a twelve-year-old girl went to a police station to report a rape where she was told to come back when she was “not drunk”. She was then taken in a car and raped, before being taken back into a house where she was raped multiple times by five different men. The Daily Mail reported that a ringleader of a grooming gang which exploited girls as young as thirteen was allowed to keep his job as a “welfare officer” at Oldham Council, despite multiple concerns raised about him and his arrest for the sexual assault of children.

However, despite the scale and horrific nature of this issue, it has mainly only been discussed by the right - with GB News’ debut documentary of the topic bringing a spotlight the issue. When the topic is raised, the arguments are mischaracterised and straw manned by the mainstream left. The previous Home Secretary, Suella Braverman was repeatedly called a racist for bringing attention to the grooming gangs.

Conclusion

This should be the main concern for feminists across the west. Yet for the sake of maintaining political correctness, the mainstream media is silent at the expense of hundreds of thousands of girls being subjected to rape, abuse and murder.