Where did you get that from. That is not correct at all. " One in 9 girls and 1 in 53 boys under the age of 18 experience sexual abuse or assault at the hands of an adult. 82% of all victims under 18 are female. " https://www.rainn.org/statistics/children-and-teens#:~:text=One in 9 girls and,the hands of an adult.&text=82% of all victims under 18 are female.
I posted the source. Edit: CDC says https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/childsexualabuse/fastfact.html
You were just talking about the catholic church. That makes sense. One, there are few priests that abused a ton of kids. Secondly, Men are more likely to be the abuser by a long shot, and there are more unsupervised boys activities. Priests don't run girl schools, nuns do.
No, I wasn't, I literally posted the source, here it is again: https://victimsofcrime.org/child-sexual-abuse-statistics/ But I also looked up the CDC numbers, see post above.
Looking at more sources, the numbers are quite all over the place, depending on the source. https://www.parentsformeganslaw.org/statistics-child-sexual-abuse/ Who Are The Victims? One in three girls and one in six boys are sexually abused before the age of 18 [1] 1 in 6 boys is sexually abused before the age of 18.[2] References [1] Arata, C. (2002) Child Sexual Abuse and Sexual Revictimization. Clinical Psychology, 9: 135-164. [2] Hopper, J. (1998). Child Sexual Abuse: Statistics, Research, Resources. Boston, MA Boston University School of Medicine. Child Sexual Abuse: A Mental Health Issue. Kentucky Division of Child Abuse and Domestic Violence
So where do you get boys being effected more than girls when the numbers show girls are effected more by an order of magnitude.
In absolute figures, girls are affected more often than boys, according to each and every source. But: Above 95 % of abusers are men, most of the sources seem quite consistent about that. If 90 % to 97 % of men are heterosexual, then why aren't girls 10-33 x more often victims of sexual abuse than boys was my question. I guess my question was based on the assumption that the abuser's preference for the gender of the victim would be the same as their general sexual orientation. If that were true, then one would have to statistically assume that girls would be victims 10 to 33 x more often than boys, unless people of a certain sexual orientation have a higher propensity towards pedophilia than others. But Nook to some extent answered this question.
I might simply lack the imagination why that would happen, but then again, who knows what the hell goes on in the heads of child molesters. It still wouldn't quite explain the large statistical deviation.
I was having a discussion with a friend who is Filipino the other day and he talked about how he has a cousin who is a closeted gay man and their family forced him into the Catholic Priesthood. In many traditional cultures where homosexuality is very repressed forcing people into it the Priesthood was a way of hiding it. So it is possible that within the Catholic Church there might just be more priest who actually are homosexual than the larger population.
On the original question I brought this up. I’ve yet to hear any large movement of teachers who are not just encouraging acceptance and empathy of LGBT also encouraging acceptance of pedophilia. While groups like NAMBLA exist I’ve yet to hear any wide acceptance of them and my understanding is they are also disposed in the LGBT community. Further laws already exist outlawing sexual exploitation of minors and for teachers to sexual exploit their students. I’ve yet to hear anyone in these discussions say that those laws should be repealed. In fact the poster himself said that he wasn’t equating LGBT with Pedophilia yet is arguing for this FL law in the basis that not acting on it could lead to pedophilia.
You never heard of all the male basketball players and athletes abused by pedophiles? Dr. Richard Strauss of Ohio State committed more than 1,400 sexual assaults and 47 rapes while he worked as their physician from 1978 to 1998.
Gene Abel, a researcher in the field of sexual violence for over twenty-five years, wrote an article for the average parent in Redbook magazine to take the knowledge he gained in doing over 100 scientific articles to provide specific warning signs for parents and caregivers. In this article, he explicitly states that most cases of boys being molested are attributed to heterosexuals. "…[M]ost men who molest little boys are not gay. Only 21 percent of the child molesters we studied who assault little boys were exclusively homosexual. Nearly 80 percent of the men who molested little boys were heterosexual or bisexual and most of these men were married and had children of their own." https://www.zeroabuseproject.org/victim-assistance/jwrc/keep-kids-safe/sexuality-of-offenders
I wonder if people made the same stupid slippery slope argument when the gubment started allowing interracial marriages. “If they can marry a black, what’s to stop them from marrying a cow!”
A lot of the arguments were very similar. Even some of the 'It's unnatural' kind of arguments. I'll say it again, when a community is shouting out that they are being discriminated against...like 9x out of 10 history shows, that community is right and those that ignored those shouts will go down as the baddies. That's for history to decide though. But yeah, a lot of the anti-LGBTQ+ arguments have been used for a lot of civil rights stuff. People will say "It's not the same" but the arguments against are eerily the same... https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...-are-just-those-against-miscegenation/328362/
Okay I looked at rockbox's link and reading the citations it was based on a survey. This is how it was conducted. "Methods: This analysis draws on three very similarly designed national telephone surveys of youth in 2003, 2008, and 2011, resulting in a pooled sample of 708 17-year-olds, 781 15-year-olds, and 804 16-year-olds" Either way. Both of your numbers are alarming.
