# First the Catholic Church. Then Penn State. Now the Boy Scouts. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 17, 2012, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935 "2012-09-17T03:22:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/41 "2012-09-18T14:32:08Z")
Add the US Swim Team to the list of organizations that tries to ignore problems in hopes that they will go away: > **[Ex-Olympics coach accused of ignoring inappropriate behavior](https://www.latimes.com/local/la-xpm-2012-sep-18-la-me-swimming-coach-20120918-story.html)** > > Ex-Olympics coach accused of ignoring inappropriate behavior > [@](#): > > The lawsuit charges that while Schubert was involved with a Fullerton swim club, he failed to report allegations of improper conduct between coaches and some of the club’s young athletes. Instead, the suit contends, Schubert hired a private investigator to gather evidence against one of the coaches and used it as leverage to extract a $625,000 settlement from USA Swimming after he was dismissed in 2010. > > Schubert also failed to promptly tell authorities about another coach who had a sexual relationship with a swimmer in the 1980s, according to the suit, which charges that even after the coach finally told USA Swimming officials about it, they also failed to act. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/42 "2012-09-18T15:07:13Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > That’s a hell of a charge to throw out there with nothing more to support it than a vague “I thought I read..”-cite please. What do you mean, “a hell of a charge”? Are you really under the impression that priests are far more prone than other men, e.g., teachers, to commit child sexual abuse? No, **Shodan** ’s perfectly right: there is no evidence that incidence of sexual abuse among Catholic clergy is higher than among males in general. [Cite](http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/04/07/mean-men.html). > [@](#): > > No formal comparative study has ever broken down child sexual abuse by denomination, and only the Catholic Church has released detailed data about its own. But based on the surveys and studies conducted by different denominations over the past 30 years, experts who study child abuse say they see little reason to conclude that sexual abuse is mostly a Catholic issue. […] > > Since the mid-1980s, insurance companies have offered sexual misconduct coverage as a rider on liability insurance, and their own studies indicate that Catholic churches are not higher risk than other congregations. Insurance companies that cover all denominations, such as Guide One Center for Risk Management, which has more than 40,000 church clients, does not charge Catholic churches higher premiums. “We don’t see vast difference in the incidence rate between one denomination and another,” says Sarah Buckley, assistant vice president of corporate communications. “It’s pretty even across the denominations.” It’s been that way for decades. […] > > Experts disagree on the rate of sexual abuse among the general American male population, but Allen says a conservative estimate is one in 10. Margaret Leland Smith, a researcher at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, says her review of the numbers indicates it’s closer to one in 5. But in either case, the rate of abuse by Catholic priests is not higher than these national estimates. The public also doesn’t realize how “profoundly prevalent” child sexual abuse is, adds Smith. The Church hierarchy has a much more heavily soiled record of **institutional cover-up** of such abuse than most other organizations where it has occurred (although it looks as though the Boy Scouts may give them some competition). But that’s not the same as saying that they actually have a disproportionately higher number of abusers. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/43 "2012-09-18T15:56:57Z")
:eek: That would have to mean that everyone personally knows such men. Even the 1 in 10 figure would indicate that. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/44 "2012-09-18T16:18:53Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > The Church hierarchy has a much more heavily soiled record of **institutional cover-up** of such abuse than most other organizations where it has occurred (although it looks as though the Boy Scouts may give them some competition). But that’s not the same as saying that they actually have a disproportionately higher number of abusers. Nonetheless, the part about the insurance companies, who are more concerned with _incidence of abuse_ than the _number of abusers_, surprises me. If there are roughly the same proportion of pedophiles in the Catholic priesthood as in the adult male population generally, but the Catholic hierarchy systematically covers up incidents of child sexual abuse and enables abusers to find greener pastures in new parishes from time to time, you’d expect a higher _frequency_ of abuse per pedophile in the Catholic priesthood than by ministers, Sunday school teachers, etc. in other denominations where covering up may have happened from time to time, but wasn’t systematic. And while I am not questioning the information in your cite, it’s certainly a counterintuitive result, at least per my intuition :), that there’d be no greater concentration of pedophiles in the Catholic priesthood than among adult males generally. If you’re a straight male Catholic, the Church says you can have a sex life if you don’t join the priesthood, but can’t if you do: you have to give up something pretty damned important to join. But if you’re gay, or a pedophile, then the Church says you can’t have sex either way: there’s one less barrier to joining the priesthood than is there for straight males. Logically, if you’re placing a filter like that for one group, but not for others, you ought to filter out more of that one group and wind up with a higher concentration of the others. So I agree with **Czarcasm** that it IS ‘a hell of a charge’ to toss out there without evidence, even though the evidence seems to back it up. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/45 "2012-09-18T16:36:25Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > :eek: > > That would have to mean that everyone personally knows such men. Even the 1 in 10 figure would indicate that. Those figures definitely seem high. In fact, they are significantly higher than the known incidence of child sexual abusers among Catholic clergy, which in about a half-century has had about 1 in 25 priests accused (not all necessarily convicted) of abuse. But if we consider that about a quarter of a million child abuse sex crimes are reported to the cops every year, and then start trying to make some plausible (but admittedly unverified) guesses about the data… 1. Seems reasonable that the actual occurrence of such crimes would be significantly higher than that, because there’s a lot of disincentive to report them. But let’s stick with the quoted figure of 250,000. (And let’s assume for simplicity that they’re all committed by males, which isn’t true but is close enough for this exercise in WAGgery.) 2. There are about 120,000,000 adult males in the US. 3. If only, say, 1 in 100 adult males was a child molester, we’d have 1,200,000 men responsible for 250,000 reported molestation incidents annually. On average, each molester would be responsible for a _reported_ molestation every four or five years or so. 4. When you consider (in light of the Gladwell article above) that abusers often go for years at a time without molesting anybody, and that many abuses don’t even get reported, that doesn’t seem unreasonable. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the rate were several times higher than that, which would put us at our 1-in-25 or even 1-in-10 estimates suggested by the data. 5. Yes, I agree that the 1-in-5 figure is either incomprehensible or horrifying. However, one de-randomizing factor is the apparent influence of child sexual abuse on its victims’ own behavior as adults. Child sexual molestation might be disproportionately concentrated in certain families rather than being totally random among all our acquaintances. This concludes our exercise in wild-ass guessing, none of which I bothered to look for any cites for except the initial figure of annual reported incidence of child sexual abuse. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/46 "2012-09-18T16:42:15Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > That would have to mean that everyone personally knows such men. Even the 1 in 10 figure would indicate that. Nothing more than the Carny Decade equivalent of the the bogus “Satanic Cult Abuse” accusations of the 80’s and 90’s. In other words, pure made up bullshit. But mark my words. It will be the Girl Scouts next… 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/47 "2012-09-18T16:50:33Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > And while I am not questioning the information in your cite, it’s certainly a counterintuitive result, at least per my intuition :), that there’d be no greater concentration of pedophiles in the Catholic priesthood than among adult males generally. If you’re a straight male Catholic, the Church says you can have a sex life if you don’t join the priesthood, but can’t if you do: you have to give up something pretty damned important to join. But if you’re gay, or a pedophile, then the Church says you can’t have sex either way: there’s one less barrier to joining the priesthood than is there for straight males. Logically, if you’re placing a filter like that for one group, but not for others, you ought to filter out more of that one group and wind up with a higher concentration of the others. Your argument sounds very reasonable, but I think the “counterintuitiveness” of the data about the non-disproportionate frequency of abusers among Catholic clergy may be exaggerated. While I’m on a WAG roll, let’s consider the possibility that there might be a **bimodal** distribution of tendency towards child molestation among Catholic clergy, with peaks on both the high and low ends. That is, the priesthood might get a disproportionate percentage of men who are strongly inclined to molestation, both because they’re not dissuaded by the prospect of renouncing sex with adults and because the priestly lifestyle offers lots of opportunities for contact with children. But it might **also** get a disproportionate percentage of men who are strongly **disinclined** to molestation, because they’ve got a very idealistic view of the sacred calling of the priest and the need to be very dedicated to their parishioners’ welfare and etc. etc. etc. So that could explain why the Catholic clergy might have **both** a special attraction for child molesters **and** a percentage of child molesters not significantly greater than that found among males in general. ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/48 "2012-09-18T17:44:27Z")
Didn’t someone report that all three organizations have signed a pledge to reduce molestation to “acceptable levels”? ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/49 "2012-09-18T17:50:25Z")
I would like to know what these levels are. All this time I’ve been molested at an unusually high level! Who knew? ---
**Author:** ![Kenm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kenm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kenm)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/50 "2012-09-18T18:57:53Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > I would like to know what these levels are. All this time I’ve been molested at an unusually high level! Who knew? Next you’ll claim they weren’t legitimate. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/51 "2012-09-18T19:25:07Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > That’s a hell of a charge to throw out there with nothing more to support it than a vague “I thought I read..”-cite please. Why would that even be surprising? I’d expect to find somewhat more pedophiles in any place that offered both access to troubled children and a modicum of generic social trust in the “goodness” of people in the profession: Teaching, priesthood, social work, scoutmaster, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/52 "2012-09-18T19:39:12Z")
In the church it may well be men saying “I know I have bad urges, going into the church may help me stop them”. Which of course, fails miserably. In the Boy Scouts, it cannot be anything but “This lets me go on camping trips with boys”. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/53 "2012-09-18T19:47:10Z")
> [@Chimera](#): > > In the Boy Scouts, it cannot be anything but “This lets me go on camping trips with boys”. Hmm, I think you may be overestimating the amount of mental and moral clarity that some pedophiles have about their tendencies. I wouldn’t be surprised if there have been a lot of Scoutmasters desperately insisting to themselves that their affectionate concern for boys is normal and healthy, that helping them acquire Scouting skills is a praiseworthy act, that there’s no unhealthy attraction involved in their feelings of good clean manly fellowship, etc. etc. And then they find themselves in a situation where they have an opportunity to molest, and their desires overpower their denials. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/54 "2012-09-18T22:01:39Z")
> [@madmonk28](#): > > > [@silenus](#): > > > > The Scouts were out hawking something at the grocery store yesterday. I was fully prepared to be an ass and tell them that until there was a merit badge for cocksucking, I would refuse to support their organization. Gay Rights and all that. But they were busy scamming some other poor soul when we left so I didn’t get the chance to make a fool of myself and embarrass my wife publicly. 😛 > > Wait, what? You were going to tease a bunch of little kids of being the victims of pedophiles because of something that adults have done? Why would that be a good idea? And considering that many merit badges have a “Scoutmaster Examination” requirement (several of mine did, anyway), a “cocksucking merit badge” is… Ummm… _problematic_, at best, under the circumstances. **silenus** , you do not _begin_ to comprehend how much assholishness you were saved from by fate… ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/55 "2012-09-18T22:38:47Z")
The irreproachable Father Ted: > [@](#): > > Say if there’s two hundred million priests in the world and five percent of them are pedophiles, that’s still only ten million ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/56 "2012-09-18T22:46:04Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > That’s why I didn’t do it. Nobody said the idea was a **good** one. Besides, I wasn’t going to harass them over pedophilia. I was going to harass them over their stance on admitting gays. Completely different subject entirely. Like the kids you were about to harass, and about to be an asshole toward, would you have known? Would _they_ have understood the distinction? Asshole is as asshole does. Don’t be an asshole. _I_ put you in the ‘Asshole’ category. Sorry, nothing personal, but you _are_ an asshole. And an idiot. You molest kids, politically, and can’t understand why they don’t get it. The idiot in question is _you_. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/57 "2012-09-18T23:27:35Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > Asshole is as asshole does. Don’t be an asshole. _I_ put you in the ‘Asshole’ category. Sorry, nothing personal, but you _are_ an asshole. And an idiot. You molest kids, politically, and can’t understand why they don’t get it. The idiot in question is _you_. 😕 Da hell? **silenus** made it very clear that he abandoned the notion of making a jerk of himself to a troop of Boy Scouts precisely **because** they were kids: > [@silenus](#): > > The kids were all too young to make a reasoned decision about such things, and there weren’t any adults around to yell at. And metaphorically equating snide obscene taunts about a discriminatory BSA policy with actual _child molesting_?! For heaven’s sake, **Cheshire Human**. Somewhat surprisingly, given how enthusiastic he originally was about the prospect, it’s not **silenus** whose asshole-idiot behavior is really standing out here. (How do you like that, **silenus**? Not only did you fail to make an ass of yourself to the Boy Scouts but you haven’t even managed to out-ass **Cheshire Human** in this thread. Maybe you’re just having a bad day with your ass chops.) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2012, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/58 "2012-09-19T02:14:21Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Your argument sounds very reasonable, but I think the “counterintuitiveness” of the data about the non-disproportionate frequency of abusers among Catholic clergy may be exaggerated. > > While I’m on a WAG roll, let’s consider the possibility that there might be a **bimodal** distribution of tendency towards child molestation among Catholic clergy, with peaks on both the high and low ends. > > That is, the priesthood might get a disproportionate percentage of men who are strongly inclined to molestation, both because they’re not dissuaded by the prospect of renouncing sex with adults and because the priestly lifestyle offers lots of opportunities for contact with children. But it might **also** get a disproportionate percentage of men who are strongly **disinclined** to molestation, because they’ve got a very idealistic view of the sacred calling of the priest and the need to be very dedicated to their parishioners’ welfare and etc. etc. etc. > > So that could explain why the Catholic clergy might have **both** a special attraction for child molesters **and** a percentage of child molesters not significantly greater than that found among males in general. I love debating with a fellow math geek. 🙂 My problem with that argument is that you don’t get much in the way of reduced incidence out of people who are strongly disinclined to molestation, as compared to normal disinclination, because even normal disinclination is the absence of pretty much any interest in having sex with children. For that reason, I just don’t think that pole of the bimodal distribution you propose can do much in the way of balancing out the other pole. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/59 "2012-09-20T13:14:59Z")
Well at least we now know of one catholic priest who is clearly not at all creepy. No siree. [A little harmless, whipped cream fun.](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2206008/Probe-launched-Polish-priest-gets-young-children-lick-whipped-cream-knee-creepy-school-initiation.html) > [@](#): > > A police investigation has been launched after a series of disturbing photos emerged showing schoolchildren licking whipped cream from the knee of a Polish priest. > > The images - which are apparently part of an ‘initiation ceremony’ at Salesians High School in Lubin, southern Poland - show both male and female 13-year old pupils taking part in the bizarre practice. > > Father Marcin Kozyra, who is also the school’s principal, has defended his actions by saying such ceremonies for first year pupils have been an annual event for many years. > > In the photos the Catholic priest is shown sitting on a battered armchair, wearing shorts and with some form of stick across his knees. > > The pupils are shown kneeling around Father Kozyra as they watch each other lick cream from his bare knee. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2012, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935/60 "2012-09-20T19:37:35Z")
That’s not a stick… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/first-the-catholic-church-then-penn-state-now-the-boy-scouts/634935.md?page=4)