16
   

Why is everyone so angry about rape of young boys when thousands of young girls are raped every day

 
 
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 08:34 pm
Both situations are repulsive and disturbing.

The sad part about all of this is the current uproar and how little actual change will happen. these perps may be punished, but how did it happen and how can we reduce that chance?

I hope Penn State ends up donating $50 million to an organization that fights pedophilia. That's what, a couple years for their football budget? And I don't want to single out just them. How about every Div. 1 football program get on board? Maybe $1 million apiece?

That might make a difference.

0 Replies
 
Look of Disapproval
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 08:45 pm
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
ಠ_ಠ
0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 10:07 pm
From the current research into sexual assault on children in western societies, one in four females, and one in six males, are survivors of childhood sexual assault.

Those estimates take into account the supposed percentage of unreported cases, as evidenced by those "coming out" long after the abuse has occurred, and often when other survivors of the same paedophile, finally decide to take action against their attackers.

It is often quite late in the lives of both the attackers, and the attacked, when the survivor/s come to terms with what happened, and what can now be achieved in the scope of the psychological health of the survivor/s. This reality can lead to often prolonged and painful episodes of awakening old memories, coupled with the doubts raised by defense counsel about those memories.

Some studies claim that as many as one in three females, and one in four males, are survivors of childhood rape, based on the premise that adult men are far more unlikley to divulge their "secret", no matter what the circumstances. While both genders are good at hiding emotions, even from themselves, men are less likely to want to dredge up a painful memory, no matter what the possible outcome.

Common behavioural traits exhibited by survivors of both genders, include post traumatic stress disorder, putting others' needs in front of self, being a super-coper, feigning trust without motive, substance abuse, gambling, and relationship problems.

It is a common fallacy that survivors of childhood rape become adult rapists of children themselves. Research would indicate that the opposite is true.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 10:16 pm
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
Obviously, both genders r = in this matter.
Builder
 
  2  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 10:35 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
I would disagree, David.

There is a misguided public perception that women and girls can dress "provocatively", indicating that they "wanted it".

There is also the commonly held belief that no real damage was done to the girl. She was "made for it".

Whereas boys could never be considered to have "dressed provocatively" or be "made for it". Do you see what I'm getting at here? It's about perception. It is children we are discussing here.

When you consider that (conservatively speaking) one in five children of either gender are attacked and traumatised, often for the rest of their days alive, the abhorrence factor is strong in any sane mind, regardless of the gender of the child.

Much publicity surrounds cases of child rape when the attacker murders their target, and yet some survivors claim that they wish they had been killed, rather than live with the constant memory of their torture and rape.

I can only imagine what it would be like. I escaped a paedophile when I was eleven, by jumping off a bridge and swimming for kilometres while he and his accomplice shadowed me from the shore.

The abuse he dealt me before I escaped was bad enough a memory, and it was only recently that I allowed my brain to recall that day.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 11:10 pm
@Builder,
Quote:
There is a misguided public perception that women and girls can dress "provocatively", indicating that they "wanted it".
This statement is a political statement....you are trying to impose your political views upon others. I on the other hand say that if women are going to transmit known sexual messages then they should not whine when they get sexual responses. If they dont like the response then it is up to them to change the message. What we have now is the feminists trying to legitimize cock teasing, because they move it when women demonstrate their power over men. I say no, that this is not right, that this is not civilized or considerate behavior on the part of women.
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 11:18 pm
@hawkeye10,
Are you Islamic, hawkeye10?

What would you perceive to be appropriate attire for a ten year old girl walking in public?

Same question for a seventeen year old female, and her mother?
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 11:25 pm
@Builder,
Quote:
Are you Islamic, hawkeye10?
no

Quote:
What would you perceive to be appropriate attire for a ten year old girl walking in public?

Same question for a seventeen year old female, and her mother
I have no idea where you are going with this, but a 10 year old is nether potentially sexually available nor fully responsible for their clothing choice, both the 17 YO and the mother are for theirs. If they dont want sexual attention then they should not be sending sexual messages.
Builder
 
  2  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 11:33 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote;

Quote:
If they dont want sexual attention then they should not be sending sexual messages.


Can you define "sexual messages" for the general populace, please?

I'm quite comfortable with g-strings and bikini tops. But I usually go topless myself. ;-)
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 11:36 pm
@Builder,
Quote:

I'm quite comfortable with g-strings and bikini tops. But I usually go topless myself.
Only the 1% or what ever it is of Americans who are confirmed nudists will claim till their blue in the face that baring boobs is not a sexual message, but I think that they are lying.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 11:38 pm
@Builder,
Builder wrote:
I would disagree, David.

There is a misguided public perception that women and girls can dress "provocatively",
indicating that they "wanted it".
For the record,
as a member of the public, I believe that women and girls
r hardwired to try to be attractive, but NOT that there is anything rong with that,
and NOT encouraging rape.




Builder wrote:
There is also the commonly held belief that no real damage
was done to the girl. She was "made for it".
The author of this thread says that she was twice raped at age 4.
Presumably, organic damage might well have resulted.




Builder wrote:
Whereas boys could never be considered to have "dressed provocatively" or be "made for it".
Do you see what I'm getting at here? It's about perception.
The public is also able to reason.
If I were on a jury, I 'd treat rape or forcible sodomy the same.
I 'd consider them to be the same.





Builder wrote:
It is children we are discussing here.
Adult women have also been raped.



Builder wrote:
When you consider that (conservatively speaking) one in five children of either gender
are attacked and traumatised, often for the rest of their days alive,
the abhorrence factor is strong in any sane mind, regardless of the gender of the child.
Of course; predatory violence is traumatic & alarming, whoever the victim is.





Builder wrote:
Much publicity surrounds cases of child rape when the attacker murders their target,
and yet some survivors claim that they wish they had been killed,
rather than live with the constant memory of their torture and rape.
Yes; some have attempted suicide.
Maybe others succeeded.




Builder wrote:
I can only imagine what it would be like. I escaped a paedophile when I was eleven,
by jumping off a bridge and swimming for kilometres while he
and his accomplice shadowed me from the shore.
I 'd have shot him 5 times with my Smith & Wesson .38 in the large intestine, if I were sufficiently accurate.



Builder wrote:
The abuse he dealt me before I escaped was bad enough a memory,
and it was only recently that I allowed my brain to recall that day.
If u like, I can suggest an ez technique that was employed by a suicidal woman who was raped
and used it successfully to ease her emotional pain.

I had years of emotional pain,
resulting from guilt for something that I failed to do (a faux pas)
when I shoud have done it. I remember how bad that felt.





David
Builder
 
  3  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2011 11:41 pm
@hawkeye10,
I'm a tradesman, hawkeye10. We all go topless when it's hot.

Now please describe for me/us what you personally would consider to be appropriate outdoor clothing for any woman over the age of consent.
0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Nov, 2011 12:29 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:-
Quote:
For the record,
as a member of the public, I believe that women and girls
r hardwired to try to be attractive, but NOT that there is anything rong with that, and NOT encouraging rape.


And men are "hardwired" to be attracted to women. I don't doubt that.

OmSigDAVID wrote:-
Quote:
The author of this thread says that she was twice raped at age 4.
Presumably, organic damage might well have resulted.


I have not heard the term "organic damage". Can you expand on that? My earliest memories are from four years of age. I can only imagine how the impact of rape would affect the development years.


OmSigDAVID wrote:-
Quote:
The public is also able to reason.
If I were on a jury, I 'd treat rape or forcible sodomy the same.
I 'd consider them to be the same.


I agree. Public perception on the whole is a variable. I can't give you any stats on that.


OmSigDAVID wrote:-
Quote:
Adult women have also been raped.


As have adult men. I don't see where you are going with this.


OmSigDAVID wrote:-
Quote:

Of course; predatory violence is traumatic & alarming, whoever the victim is.


Of the base sins/ crimes, even those incarcerated for life consider predation of children to be the lowest of the low.


OmSigDAVID wrote:-

Quote:
Yes; some have attempted suicide.
Maybe others succeeded.


Want the stats? Less than fifteen percent of survivors of childhood sexual assault "get over it". When you consider that one in five adults carry this burden, it's not really surprising that substance abuse, gambling, divorce, et al, are a major problem.

In fact, the enormous costs of this demographic to GDP is the only motivator for gov providors of healthcare for them.


OmSigDAVID wrote:-
Quote:

I 'd have shot him 5 times with my Smith & Wesson .38 in the large intestine, if I were sufficiently accurate.


I was eleven. David. Wearing shorts. Where exactly would I have carried my S'W???







David
snood
 
  5  
Reply Mon 14 Nov, 2011 12:33 am
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

"If the victims had been girls the story would have received the same coverage."

If it had been rape of little girls, it might have been noted by the Media for one report on the last page of the neighborhood newspaper.

I don't agree with you. Little girls are raped by males by the thousands. Have you ever heard of a female raping a little girl? I haven't. It's usually the rape of a young girl by a male and of a less raping of little boys by men, at least those that are discovered.

BBB


I think you're missing the point, BBB. I think the brouhaha would be just as big if there had been a Penn State Football Coach caught raping little girls, because the brouhaha has to do with cover-up and complicity and powerful institutions and the hero-worship and idolization of football by a city, not the identity, social class or gender of the victims.

This story has implications for many more things. What kinds of forces could make an otherwise decent person (assuming he is) witness such a brutal and horrible thing being done to a helpless child, and not step in to help the child, and not call the law? What effect or influence does a powerful institution like Penn State Football (or the Catholic Church) have on the moral compasses of the people who are dependent on that institution for their livlihood, status or identity?

Will the laws that decide what a person's responsibility is to report a crime have to be changed as a result of this event?

I think you're barking up the wrong tree, BBB.


0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  4  
Reply Mon 14 Nov, 2011 01:44 am
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
Sorry, BBB, but I have to agree with maxdancona. The Penn State story wasn't blown out of all proportion because the victims were boys. It was so terribly overblown in the media because of who the adults involved in the alleged cover-up were. Arguably the most admired college football coach of the last 50 years was forced to resign. The president of the university was sacked. The fact that some boys' lives were ruined was almost incidental to the story. It would have been handled exactly the same way if the victims had been female.

You say "thousands of young girls are rapedevery day." Probably so are quite a number of young boys. None of these stories ever make a big national impact in the news unless some noteworthy adults are involved somehow -- celebrities, sports stars, clergy. It's not about gender. It's about celeb watching.
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Nov, 2011 01:50 am
@Lustig Andrei,
And the following might shed some light on the WHY Lustig Andrei

November 13, 2011 By T Kelly 10 Comments
Victims of clerical sex abuse have reacted furiously to Pope Benedict’s claim yesterday that paedophilia wasn’t considered an “absolute evil” as recently as the 1970s.
In his traditional Christmas address yesterday to cardinals and officials working in Rome, Pope Benedict XVI also claimed that child pornography was increasingly considered “normal” by society.
“In the 1970s, paedophilia was theorised as something fully in conformity with man and even with children,” the Pope said.
“It was maintained – even within the realm of Catholic theology – that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself. There is only a ‘better than’ and a ‘worse than’. Nothing is good or bad in itself.”
The Pope said abuse revelations in 2010 reached “an unimaginable dimension” which brought “humiliation” on the Church.
Asking how abuse exploded within the Church, the Pontiff called on senior clerics “to repair as much as possible the injustices that occurred” and to help victims heal through a better presentation of the Christian message.
“We cannot remain silent about the context of these times in which these events have come to light,” he said, citing the growth of child pornography “that seems in some way to be considered more and more normal by society” he said.
But outraged Dublin victim Andrew Madden last night insisted that child abuse was not considered normal in the company he kept.
Mr Madden accused the Pope of not knowing that child pornography was the viewing of images of children being sexually abused, and should be named as such.
He said: “That is not normal. I don’t know what company the Pope has been keeping for the past 50 years.”
Pope Benedict also said sex tourism in the Third World was “threatening an entire generation”.
Angry abuse victims in America last night said that while some Church officials have blamed the liberalism of the 1960s for the Church’s sex abuse scandals and cover-up catastrophes, Pope Benedict had come up with a new theory of blaming the 1970s.
“Catholics should be embarrassed to hear their Pope talk again and again about abuse while doing little or nothing to stop it and to mischaracterise this heinous crisis,” said Barbara Blaine, the head of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests,
“It is fundamentally disturbing to watch a brilliant man so conveniently misdiagnose a horrific scandal,” she added.
“The Pope insists on talking about a vague ‘broader context’ he can’t control, while ignoring the clear ‘broader context’ he can influence – the long-standing and unhealthy culture of a rigid, secretive, all-male Church hierarchy fixated on self-preservation at all costs. This is the ‘context’ that matters.”
The latest controversy comes as the German magazine Der Spiegel continues to investigate the Pope’s role in allowing a known paedophile priest to work with children in the early 1980s.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Nov, 2011 04:09 am
@Builder,
OmSigDAVID wrote:-
Quote:
The author of this thread says that she was twice raped at age 4.
Presumably, organic damage might well have resulted.

Builder wrote:
I have not heard the term "organic damage". Can you expand on that?
damage to the sexual organ

Builder wrote:
My earliest memories are from four years of age.
I remember my 3rd birthday, and time leading up to it.



Builder wrote:
I can only imagine how the impact of rape would affect the development years.
Maybe planning vengeance, until vengeance were executed ?



OmSigDAVID wrote:-
Quote:
Yes; some have attempted suicide.
Maybe others succeeded.
Builder wrote:
Want the stats? Less than fifteen percent of survivors of childhood sexual assault "get over it". When you consider that one in five adults carry this burden, it's not really surprising that substance abuse, gambling, divorce, et al, are a major problem.
Gambling ????



DAVID wrote:
I 'd have shot him 5 times with my Smith & Wesson .38 in the large intestine, if I were sufficiently accurate.
Builder wrote:
I was eleven. David. Wearing shorts. Where exactly would I have carried my S'W???
Under your jacket, under a loose shirt, under your shorts; in a fanny pack; think creatively. Show some initiative.


This is not to imply that I recommend carrying a .38 with u.
Thay have insufficient stopping power, but I did not know that then.
I subsequently upgraded to a .44 revolver, in stainless steel mirror.





David
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Nov, 2011 04:37 am
@OmSigDAVID,
One day, David, I'd like to take up the old shotgun pump, and wreak some havoc on those who have hurt the people that matter to me. It's a fantasy.

Until that time, I will value my freedom, and work towards finding justice in a sometimes friendless and feelingless society. That's the reality.

OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Nov, 2011 04:45 am
@Builder,
I have no one upon whom to wreak any havoc.
I have no enemies; I never have had any.
The people for whom I cared, remained intact n unaffected.





David
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Nov, 2011 04:59 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I have no one upon whom to wreak any havoc.
I have no enemies; I never have had any.
The people for whom I cared, remained intact n unaffected.


So you live remote, and you're in your early teens, right?
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/23/2019 at 11:25:04