OK, everyone (well, everyone apart from those who enjoy it!) understands that paedos are pretty much some of the lowest scum on earth, but here in the UK the media treats it very differently according to race of perpetrator and I can't really work out why.
If a white person commits an offence against a child, even if it is a 16 year old against a 15 year old, they will always be referred to in news reports, even if it is 'consensual' (in as much as a 'child' can be considered to consent), as a paedophile.
However, if a group of asian men, and they are usually old or middle aged, embark on an organised spree of rape and drugging of children then without fail the headlines always mention 'grooming' and the word 'paedophile' will not be seen anywhere.
I can t work out whether this is to portray white people as somehow more evil than the other races, or whether by downgrading the crimes of huge numbers of asian men they are trying to make what they did seem less nasty and pave the way for an acceptance of sex with children. It doesn't matter to them if they call the small number of white males paedos as the vast number of offences here in the Uk are committed by immigrants, and almost always as part of large groups, so instead of the horrible word 'rape' in those cases they use something which normally has positive and clean connotations.
There is a case where a local MP is on record of saying the kids in the big 'grooming' cases didn't matter and that no action should be taken in the interests of 'racial harmony' so it is likely they just want to make Muslim rapists sound cuddly and nice, but part of me thinks it is also part of a bigger agenda to normalise sex with children.