Actually, on reflection, that ABC news publication about the study is fare and reasonable. Leaving out the fact that half the duration – between 1964 and 1995 – homosexuality was illegal. So reporting being a victim of sexual abuse in the state of Victoria before the law reform, was a dangerous and frightening thing for a adolescent to do. And I don’t imagion there was a hell of a lot of reporting of female pedophiles in those days. The general number 10% of male CSA victims who where over 12 when they where victimised – and I like the way they say – need substantial support. In other words, I still think that stigmatising CSA vicloms isn’t a good idea. But using the best science we have (which isn’t abundant) in a way that’s not just click bait, is one way to reduce our mental health expenditure. If we invest now we save a lot of greaf later. And we get to feel less crappy about our society.
And not throwing people into prison for self medicating, would save money...
Neoconservative jokes aside, I think it’s safe to say that people who had experiences of CSA don’t get contaminated, they get traumatised. The study’s suggest that victims of sexual abuse need to feel supported – not suspected of contracting offender disease, and that some adolescent males need extra guidance about healthy sexual conduct.
So the cycle of sexual abuse argument is weak. The need for more grown up conversations about managing the social consequences of CSA is important. And that CSA isn’t going stop happening so it’s a good idea to sublimate vigilante aggression into something that’s not trodding over CSA survivors like they're contaminated. It’s not hard to understand the big silence around this stuff, but I’m talking from experience here, gradually telling my own truth about CSA hasn’t killed me. It’s made me a more complete person. I’m lucky, some people have a lot to loss if they talk about CSA.
We did it! The new artical that said child sexual abuse victims are likely to become sex offenders, has been understood to be incorrect by the New Zealand Herald.
I went to a seminar at Victoria university which was trying to get people thinking and talking about New Zealand males as victims. About forty people showed up which is apparently a big turnout. The audience was mainly women, but the organisers where very encouraged that a few men showed up. The four speakers, after giving brief accounts of there experience of abuse, all emphasised there struggles at having to live with there trauma in an environment where nobody talks about it.
I drove keen Clearwater to the airport, and thanked him for the work he's doing.
This is Ken speaking about Sexual abuse & violence is a human rights issue not a gender issue
Felicity-Goodyear-Smith still feted at NZ College of GPs conference https://twitter.com/FMresearchplcy/status/759278765239365632on this day.
Cracked mention NZ in a recent "5 Horrifying Laws It Took WAY Too Long To Fix" article saying that until 2005 women couldn't even be charged with sexual abuse of a minor because the law only recognised male perpetrators, citing an SMH article on the issue. Which is another legal problem.
I note that the Munster for Edumakaysian is once again trying to put at risk girls into a co-ed residential school, because closing Salisbury School will save money. No possibility of sexual abuse is being acknowledged by the munster.
Also, I keep coming back to this quote in the original article:
"That never happened. I don't remember that."
Some quite important events in my childhood have received that response from people involved. It's not just sexual abuse that people don't remember, it's part of the human-memory editing process to remove (some) things you don't want to remember. While some of the contested stuff I have evidence for, other things are just my opinion against an adults, and a good dose of denial/gaslighting deals with that as far as most people are concerned. Any later memory lapse is evidence of "he makes things up", and after a while people stop listening.