Over in MPSIMS, in a Paula Poundstone thread, Tedster said this:
When asked to support his assertion, he replied:
and
I responded in the following manner:
To which Tedster replied:
Ted, if you’re going to quote me, at least do it correctly. I said that they were “separate entities” not a “different entity”.
You seem to equate homosexual men with men who molest young boys, going so far as to say of men who molest young boys “The very fact one is attracted to little boys in a precludes one from being heterosexual.” You’re not the first to make this assumption, but it stills jars me as being an incredible and unfounded leap of logic every time I see it.
But what I find most interesting is that you equate “males (who) accompany Girl Scouts on overnighters” with “men who lust after Pre-Teen and Teen girls out overnight to sleep in the same tent”.
Does this mean we should not allow men to be elementary school teachers, day-care workers, pediatricians, social workers, or involved in other activities that would put them in contact with young children? Are all men who enjoy the presense of children potential child molestors? Can you offer any evidence to support your positions?
If I have summarized your position incorrectly, by all means, correct me. If you have any evidence to support your claims present it.
The rate of child molestation among PRIESTS (and other church-affiliated, “godly” people) is much higher than the rate of child molestation among the general population.
So, if you have a problem with gays being in the boy scouts because you fear your kids will be molested, you better think twice before you send them to church next sunday.
I can’t tell if it is stupidity/ignorance or hypocrisy, or a mixture of both.
Also, i think heterosexual child molestation is just as bad as homosexual child molestation. They are both equally evil IMO.
Wow. That means every textbook in Sociology, Psychology and Human Sexuality I’ve ever seen has been wrong. Every valid study I’ve every read was incorrect.
Because according to them, pedophiles are predominately white, male, straight, married and in an middle income bracket.
I would really like to see a cite for that statement, Tedster.
Well, the logic that says “If a man is sexually attracted to little boys, then he is not heterosexual” has a point, but only if it is extended thus: “If a man is sexually attracted to little girls, then he is not homosexual.” Either way, it doesn’t say much about the orientation of child molesters in general.
And as for male Girl Scout leaders, my father was a co-leader in my troop, and yes he went with us camping and stayed in the same tent as me and a few other girls. It was never a big deal. Just because someone is attracted to a particular gender doesn’t mean he’ll take advantage of anyone of that gender who is weaker than he is. Not to mention that most people aren’t pedophiles.
Of course, there are some people with whom no amount of rational argument will get anywhere.
The fact that priests (and other church-affiliated, “godly” people) are in a position of power and authority that makes their actions more reprehensible and the fact that the church has horribly bungled the situation when it has been discovered is an established fact. The idea that there any specific groups taht have a higher percentage of perpetrators than the general population seems more a matter of perception than reality.
Consider the whole population of post-puberty males. Most of them are normal, healthy guys. Some are sexually oriented toward the opposite sex; some toward their own sex. Either way, the people they find sexually attractive are their fellow post-puberty beings.
IMO, it’s a smear of the Big Lie variety to try to convince people that gays are child molesters or that child molesters are gay. It’s something the rabid anti-gay contingent keeps claiming. It’s on a par with the ridiculous things bigots say about blacks and Jews.
Last time I checked (and no, I don’t have a cite handy, but it’s 2:00 in the frellin’ morning, so I’ll get it later), over 90% of child molesters were heterosexual; additionally, whichever sex the perpetrator happened to molest was, wholly, irrelevent to the perpetrator’s sexual orientation; moreover, these were between adults who knew the child to more or less degrees.
Somebody back me up on this?
Tedster, your equating pedophilia to homosexuality is astoudingly ignorant and offensive.
The above site gives some statistics on pedophile priests. I don’t think that it is a matter of perception really because it seems to me that some pedophiles are drawn to the Church from the outset.
McMurphy - I’m not keen on your stats, but they don’t say at all where they get their estimate of 6.1 to 16.3% of all Catholic priests in America as being pedophiles from. It’s just drawn out of the air with no support. If there were a footnote saying that in 3000 cases against different individual priests they were found guilty, another 5000 cases against different individuals are still pending, the number would be fine. Until then, it proves nothing.
Another reason for there being a higher perception of abuse by priests could be that the children abused have their families to turn to, if not then, then at least later (perhaps in their teens, when they are less in contact with the abuser).
If they are abused by their family, it is a lot harder for them to find an adult they trust enough, even later when they are older, to talk to about it (or the non-abuser in the family hushes it up because they can’t or don’t want to believe it of their husband/son/brother/whatever), for the statistics to come out via therapists/victim support groups, whether or not the abuser is ever charged with it.
I’m still looking for the study I remember from a Human Sexuality class that had hard numbers on the sexual orientation of the perps. I distinctly remember having this same arguement in a class and the professors showing the study on an overhead.
As I understand it, there is a distinction between child molestors and pedophiles. A child molestor might not be sexually attracted to children at all. For some people who sexually abuse children it’s the abuse that is the significant part – they differ only in style, not substance, from other child abusers. A child molestor enjoys hurting children. A pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children, whether or not they ever act on these desires. Pedophiles rarely want to harm children, although they often end up doing so.
For a child molestor who feels no sexual desire for children, the sex of the child abused is largely irrelevant. As the old saying goes, it’s not about sex, it’s about power. You might compare it to a common prison rape scenario, in which an established gang boss rapes (or orders raped) a new inmate who hasn’t shown him proper respect. The gang boss isn’t acting for his own sexual fulfillment, in fact he is likely heterosexual and does not personally enjoy sex (consensual or non) with men at all. He is simply looking to hurt and humiliate the new guy, and sees rape as a better way to do this than a beating.
I guess Fenris 'cause the perception is that a sexual attraction to children is a different category (much like heterosexual, homosexual, bi. ).
Unfortunately, people tend to lump ‘child molesters’ into a single category, which isn’t particularly effective, either. There are some that are family preferential (ie molest their own children, and others that may see any child as a sexual object of desire. Some will only molest females, others only males, and yet others both sexes.
I’ll start digging through my ‘sex offender’ cites to see what I can find to explain it better.
As explained, pedophiles are sexually attracted to children - the gender of those children is irrelevant. How the perpetrator identifies with other adults in a sexual way is more akin to their sexual orientation. In a sense, pedophiles are their a wholly distinct sexual orientation (although I know that’s not quite accurate). Read the info posted for a better explanation from those more educated than I.
Looks like Tedster has declined my invitation. Since I helpfully provided a link to this thread in the thread where he originally posted his ideas, I can only assume that I correctly interpreted his remarks, and that he doesn’t dispute any of the counter arguments. Tedster, feel free to correct me if I have erred.
His remarks offended me a great deal, because whether he knew it or not they were directed at me. I happen to be one of those male Girl Scout leaders he referred to, and I have gone on overnight campouts with the girls in my troup. I have more than a few single mothers who specifically wanted their daughters in my troup because it would give the girls a chance to have a positive relationship with an adult male that they were missing.
I am single and have no children, and originally planned to sign up to be a Boy Scout leader, but there was no need for them. There was, however, a big shortage of Girl Scout leaders in the area where I live, and there was a group of girls at the school where I teach who wanted to join, but had no adult willing to be their troup leader.
Because of people like Tedster, I have to take precautions that female Boy Scout leaders (and there are bunches of them) don’t. I never hold a meeting without an adult female present. The first time I went on a campout (along with Mrs. Peel, a woman co-volunteer) I had planned on sleeping alone in my tent. I ended up with five little girls sharing my tent because they were scared by a noise they heard in the woods, and Mrs. Peel’s tent was already full.
Still, there are people who assume that there must be something “funny” about a single man who wants to be a Girl Scout leader. I’ve heard the rumors more than once. But just like Tedster, the people who say these things are content to drop their little hate grenades and disappear.
I understand and agree with Wring and Esprix’s points, up to a certain age.
When we are talking about kids under 9, I can understand how age rather than gender is what “attracts” a pedophile.
Somewhere between 9 and 13 the equation changes. Depending on the kid, they start to grow up and start to have hints of sexuality.
So as far as I can tell, that kind of molestor depends on gender as part of their “selection” process. They might be picking out young children because they are more vulnerable, but they are picking younger versions of what they want, but can not have.
I have often wondered about the truth of the claims I hear from both sides. Here are a couple of questions I have:
[1] Do people who molest children in the 9-17 age bracket tend to molest just one gender, or do they flip back and forth?
[2] Is there an established age where the gender becomes more of a factor than age?