🚨🏙️A police report showing a surge in sexual offences in Glasgow should stop everyone in their tracks. Instead, it’s sparked something depressingly familiar: rushed statements, closed ranks, and pre-packaged explanations that feel more like damage control than leadership.
🙉 “Nothing to See Here”: The Councillor Comfort Blanket
Councillors have been quick to insist that the rise in sex crimes has nothing to do with migration, full stop, end of discussion. Not unlikely. Not unproven. Just nothing to do with it. Case closed. Move along.
And here’s the issue: that certainty isn’t reassuring — it’s suspicious.
This isn’t about accusing migrants of crimes. It’s not about demonising anyone. It’s about questioning why some factors are declared untouchable, while others are freely blamed or waved away with vague claims about “changing attitudes” or “societal issues.”
If Glasgow is the migration capital of Scotland — which it is — then it is reasonable to ask whether rapid population growth places pressure on policing, courts, housing, and victim support services. That’s a question about capacity, not culture. About systems, not skin colour.
🚓 Pressure Without Honesty Equals Failure
Sexual violence doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It’s affected by:
- Police numbers and response times
- Case backlogs and collapsing conviction rates
- Overstretched local services
- Underreported crimes and low victim confidence
When those systems are strained, offenders thrive — regardless of where they’re from.
But instead of addressing these realities, we’re told the real problem is public perception. That asking certain questions is somehow more dangerous than failing women and girls who are being harmed right now.
That approach doesn’t protect communities. It protects narratives.
🧠 Shutting Down Debate Isn’t Leadership
The public isn’t stupid. They know the difference between blaming people and questioning policy. When officials refuse to even discuss certain variables, trust erodes — fast.
If councillors genuinely believe migration plays no role whatsoever, then they should be able to explain why, using data, policing capacity figures, and service demand — not slogans. Declaring topics off-limits only fuels suspicion and resentment.
And blaming “attitudes” among Glaswegians while ignoring structural strain? That’s not analysis — it’s deflection.
🔥 Challenges 🔥
Why are some questions treated as immoral instead of answered? Why is system pressure never part of the conversation? And how can women feel safer when honesty itself seems to be policed? Say what you think — carefully, clearly, and without being shouted down — in the blog comments. 💬🔥
👇 Comment. Like. Share. Demand answers, not slogans.
The strongest, most thoughtful responses will be featured in the next issue of the magazine. 🧨📝
Chameleon Magazine 
Leave a comment