TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Children's rights - Long rant
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Children's rights - Long rant - Page 2

post #31 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bumpy
What are the statistics for such crimes? Are they rising or falling in recent years? Also, when you mean people are not getting punished, what exactly do you mean? Are you saying that if a person is charged, he must then be guilty? Or that the punishment for those who are convicted is too low. Or are you perhaps extrapolating from a small number of prominent cases and predicting the general trend for the entire system?
Here are a few stats that I posted to an earlier thread - a good example of who the perpetrators are and just HOW much children are suffering. The statistics are from the Georgia Center for Children.

One of the myths regarding child molesters is that they “look different†or behave differently from others in some way. Here are some statistics describing child molesters:

97% are male
91% are heterosexual
91% are religious
75% are married or formerly married
73% are Caucasian
65% earn a middle income or above
48% are college educated

• The molester is not a stranger. Over 91% of children are molested by someone they know.

• Stepfathers are 7 times more likely to abuse than biological fathers, however, abuse by a biological parent tends to be more severe. (A child who is abused by a biological parent is at higher risk of sustaining an injury from the abuse than those abused by a non-biological parent.)

• Contrary to popular belief, only about 30-35% of molesters were sexually abused as children (Hanson & Slater, 1988).

And more valuable stats...

• In 1998, nearly 3 children died each day as a result of physical abuse or neglect. More than 3.15 million children were reported to be alleged victims of child maltreatment that year, an increase of 30% since 1988.

• Of the children who died in 1998 due to child abuse or neglect, 79% of the victims were under the age of five and 39% were less than a year old.

• Before the age of 18, one in four girls and one in six boys will experience some form of sexual abuse.

Source: Current Trends in Child Abuse Reporting and Fatalities: Results of the 1995 Annual Fifty State Survey, National Center on Child Abuse Prevention Research, 1995.

Yet more stats from the same site... alarming at that.

http://www.georgiacenterforchildren.org/statistics.html

Quote:
To be sure such crimes are terrible but I seem to sense (and I could be wrong) a tinge of hysteria (for lack of a better term) in your original post. It is somewhat similar to the media's fixation that there is a crime wave on abducted children, when in fact the statistics showed that in recent years such crime is on the decline.
Hysterical, no. Emotional, yes. ONE instance of child abuse is TOO much, Bumpy. I know you're a corporate lawyer, but not everyone thinks like a lawyer, thank heavens. Otherwise, we would not have nearly as many children's rights advocates as children do not have the ability and/or finances required to hire a lawyer. And any lawyer who represents a sexual predator should be living in shame eternally for representing such a "client".

Quote:
I thought that pedophiles are attracted to children because of their "non-sexual" look.
Can you provide some evidence, since you've asked me to do so? You also have provided a fair bit of debate fodder in your post without substantiating it with any background information. Only fair, isn't it?
post #32 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveysmummy
There are the familial offenders. Those who molest or offend against their own children or other relatives or family friends related to them. These can sometimes also be classified in two camps. Some familial offenders never offend against members of their own family but would offend against a step daughter or family friend.
These, for the most part, aren't classic pedophiles. They generally offend under stresses or triggers, believe it or not. They are often having domestic difficulties in their own relationships with wives or girlfriends. They may offend older female children.
What stress or trigger is justifiable or excusable when an adult abuses a child? And what do you define as a "classic" pedophile? A pedophile is a pedophile, no matter if it's an adult who views child pornography on the internet or a stepfather who rapes his adopted children. I am under the impression you are blaming the entire family unit for the perpetrators own personal issues.

Quote:
Then there are your "milder" (if you will) classifications of offenders. These are the voyeurs, the exposers, and those who are only titillated by pornography itself.
These kinds of offenders generally do go on to upping their offending to a more serious level but some never do...
Don't even go there with the "milder" business. Viewing child pornography (which includes ANYONE under the age of 18 - people often seem to "forget" that teenagers are still children) is still a crime and you are correct, these kinds of offenders generally DO up their offenses.

Quote:
As parents, caregivers, and protectors of family, neighbours, and friends, we have to take the responsibility on ourselves to be ever watchful of our children, and to insure that without hyper over-reacting, we are sure that they are able to know the difference between good touching and bad touching, what they can do to protect themselves, and that they know that there are adults out there they can trust.
Personally, I have been volunteering with the Children's Aid Society and other children's advocacy groups for years, and I believe there is no such concept as "over-reacting" in this point in history. I have seen and heard far too much to believe that the good in people heralds over the bad. Admittedly, men are predominantly the perpetrators, but also, women are the keepers of their secrets. Those women need to contribute to their children's welfare and address the INFINITE numbers of child abuse cases that are going unreported. We only hear the reported cases. The numbers of unreported cases is what is really alarming.

http://www.darkness2light.org/KnowAb...atistics_2.asp

Quote:
We can't monitor our children's every movement and we have to trust the world around us to know that the majority of humanity aren't abusers or the hurtful ones.
All I am saying is we have to keep a watchful, responsible and involved eye without over-reacting to certain events we hear around us. There is a balance.

I hope that makes some semblance of sense
You do raise many good points, some of which are accurate, but again, reacting to a phenomenon, which although is as old as time, is losing it's stigma and gaining momentum due to lack of control, especially in the past few years with the mainstreaming of and easy access to the internet.
post #33 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveysmummy
However, Many full grown heterosexual men who are attracted to adult women may find that 12-14 year old in those clothes more appealing than the pedophile would. Now, this doesn't make it any better, mind you, but its the truth. So, I think if we are talking about the sexualizing of young girls, we have to take the whole male/female sexual dynamic into consideration.
I can't believe what I'm hearing. Can you please substantiate this with some proof? How is it "the truth"? A pedophile prefers children, no matter how they are dressed. And I would question the motives and attraction of ANY adult male to a 12-14 year old girl in clothing intended for adults. A 12-14 girl is still a child. There is no excusing adult behaviour based on a child's wardrobe, no matter how risque it may or may not be.

Quote:
I, for one, am glad that my 12 year old likes to dress like a tomboy skater girl than a mini Britney Spears or you can bet we would have alot more arguments than we do.
Right, so how would you feel if your neighbour started to ogle your daughter if she began dressing like Christina Aguilera?
post #34 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by esrgirl
I think what Vespa Cat and others (including myself, but I am speaking from myself since I only know what I intended!) are saying is that children are highly sexualized in this culture. Molestation is about power, yes, but if you've ever known a molester (and believe me, I have all too well) you will find that they do have a form of sexual attraction to some children. They will comment on budding breasts on an 11 year old. They will comment on short skirts on a ten year old and the firmness of her bottom. They will make statements about what a slut the little girl is and how much she must want to be raped. They like the skimpy outfits. The fact that stores sell thongs for 10 year olds is a problem. Oversexualizing girls not only turns perverts on, but it also pushes girls to be sexual earlier and to grow up too quickly.
I agree with you wholeheartedly, on everything you've stated.

I believe the impact of the media in respect to the sexualization of children in recent years has greatly contributed to child sexual abuse. With child pornography being produced at a rapid rate throughout the world, specifically FOR the internet, it is simply allowing a numbed-out population to view it with perhaps less taboo and is likely encouraging more brazenness in sexual predators than ever.

Quote:
I've had enough classes on child abuse because of my BSW to know that what I'm saying has merit to it, but since my books are all packed up and waiting to be moved I can't really provide you with any research that would support what I'm suggesting. Take it at face value if you will. I honestly do not know if these crimes are going up, down, or staying the same. But they exist non-the-less.

I know of two men in my family, one immediate, and one married into, who loved it when little girls wore skimpy outfits.
Having volunteered with at-risk youth for over 10 years now (over 2 with CAS) I too feel I have enough familiarity with this topic to believe what I say also has merit to it, although apparently that merit isn't worth much to others who have posted on this thread.
post #35 of 45
Jenn, bless you for working with those kids. They need good role models, and I'm sure you're wonderful for them.

I'm sure that child molesters would look at kids no matter what the kids were wearing. But yeah, the grown-up clothes on 5 year old girls is just disgusting and encourages the sickos.

I wonder if part of the current trend in girls' clothes is the girls wanting to look more grown up? Sort of playing dress-up with your mom's heels and make-up taken to the extreme....
And the teenage girls' fashion might be a back-lash from the shapeless, baggy 90's grunge look.
Either way, kids need to dress like kids, and their PARENTS need to make sure they do.
post #36 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beckiboo
I agree; it is time to start locking away repeat offenders or violent offenders for life! Or death penalty is fine with me, if you can get it to stick!
But I also think the news media needs to quit the continual reporting of every detail of these cases. I can just picture a pedophile watching those programs and using the details to plan the next act! Also the fact that child sexual abuse is a common storyline on TV shows. Not that it should be banned, but they should consider if a pervert is watching, is he getting a vicarious thrill?
You're right, it is making people extra sensitive to what they're hearing in the media, which is downright horrifying for survivors to absorb when they are living it on a daily basis. My only hope out of that exposure is that one child might see some hope that others are being prosecruted for abuses suffered by other children and take action, and know that she/he is worth it.

Quote:
I am very sensitive to this issue as I have a daughter who was molested as a baby, before age 3. This does happen, way too often, and it is very damaging to the victims. Esrgirl, I'm glad you were able to stop the abuse! The reason my dd didn't say anything is that the man who did it threatened to harm his wife, my daughter's babysitter. So the baby tried to protect the adult, who did nothing to protect the baby!
I'm sorry that happened, Beckiboo. And Esrgirl, I'm also glad to see you stopped the abuse as well. It takes SO much strength to recover from an abusive situation, which takes it's toll on everyone around the victim, and once exposed, the entire family can then hopefully recover as a whole unit. Except the perp - he needs to be locked up forever.

Quote:
As for clothing, of course a certain outfit doesn't make a child a victim. But it teaches the child to view herself as a sexual object very early. My 9 y/o dd knows she can't wear belly shirts, and we often buy boys blue jean shorts because they are cut longer. She still dresses cute, and with some fashion. But when I see black leather for preschoolers, or writing across the backside of kids pants, I just wonder. I for one do not want to draw people's attention to my daughter's butt! Now the 22 y/o is aware of my values, and of course dresses more revealing than I would prefer, but she is old enough to make her own choices. I always wonder when I see a little kid dresses sexy, what do they hope she grows up to be?
Exactly. One does not have the same capability of making responsible decisions and choices when they are 11, as they are able to do at 21. When I was a kid I was wearing plain old shorts and t shirts, and loose fitting at that. I just wish kids could be kids, but our society in general just doesn't seem to allow for that anymore. It's such a sad thing.
post #37 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoe'n'MissKitty
Jenn, bless you for working with those kids. They need good role models, and I'm sure you're wonderful for them.

I'm sure that child molesters would look at kids no matter what the kids were wearing. But yeah, the grown-up clothes on 5 year old girls is just disgusting and encourages the sickos.

I wonder if part of the current trend in girls' clothes is the girls wanting to look more grown up? Sort of playing dress-up with your mom's heels and make-up taken to the extreme....
And the teenage girls' fashion might be a back-lash from the shapeless, baggy 90's grunge look.
Either way, kids need to dress like kids, and their PARENTS need to make sure they do.
Thank you, Liz. I really have tried over the years to provide a good role model based on my model of success which I have fought to acheive, having come from a very dysfunctional home myself.

Yeah, I actually preferred the unisex 90's baggy styles. I found the time wasn't as gender-biased and didn't focus nearly as much on sexuality, and the grunge "uniform" was definitely part of it. If anything, we had more girl power in the early 90's than we had for nearly 20 years, since the second wave of feminism took place back in the early 70's. The early 90's was a wonderful time for young women and female role models. Just remember all the female-positive media influece from that time. Now look who we have today.
post #38 of 45
I actually found those statistics (mentioned in the earlier post) before writing my earlier response that question whether is there a growth or decline in such crimes relating to pedophiles. But you will realise that the statistics describing the child molester does not address the question. When I saw the stats on physical abuse or neglect I thought, that perhaps there could be a growing trend in such crimes but notice that they use the terms "physical abuse or neglect" and "allegation of child maltreatment." Does physical abuse or neglect equate to child molest? I do not think it does. Physical abuse seems more to be of violence (non sexual) against the child. Also neglect definitely does not equate to child molest unless one defines the crime of child molestation as parents neglecting to take care of their child and thus resulting in the sex abuse. Although the title of the thread is children's right, the original post and bulk of the postings are related to sexual abuse or child molestation rather than physical abuse or neglect.

The reason I asked for statistics is simply because I cannot find any that really fits the topic at hand. I am having trouble finding official data on the US. The department of justice do provide some information but their statistics on rape (and attempted or threat) (0.5 per 1000) is limited to people aged 12 and above, and of course rape is not inclusive of molestation. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/welcome.html
The Canadian Department of Justice and Health Canada also have a more relevant report but it is dated at 1998 and obviously does not show the trends in the US. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb/lcdc/publ.../pdf/cis_e.pdf
If one assumes that every single investigation whether substantiated, suspected or unsubstantiated turns out to be true then the rate of sexual abuse (the whole range) is 2.48 per 1000. Even if there is 90% under-reporting (2.48 x 10 = 24.8 per 1000) the rate would be 2.5% of children far below the one in four or one in six claim. But the story could be different for the US which is why I wanted some statistics from official source.

As for the attraction to "non-sexual" looks notice I use the qualifier "I thought" rather than coming out to make an unqualfied statement that "Pedophiles are attracted ..." To me it seems logical since as you say they are attracted to children or someone that looks like a child. And putting on swabs of makeup in an overtly sexual manner does not seem to make a person more child like but rather more adult. Also I could just as well turn this around to ask you a similar question on the evidence that pedophiles prefer children in full make-up and skimpy clothing. Just because someone is sexually attracted to another does not mean that putting on make-up and little clothing would result in a greater turn on.

I have found that being emotional often is a barrier to clear thought and coming out with solutions. To be sure being passionate and committed is important but being too emotional often prevents one from viewing the matter clearly.

Sure one instance of Child Abuse is one too many just as one instance of murder is one too many or one instance of hate crime is one too many, etc. What is the underlying thought behind the statement? Is it that we should combat child abuse? I have no problem with that and I believe no one here has a problem with that. Or is it to expend all resources on it and forget about all other crimes, which I know cannot be your intention. That is why I say I sense some overt emotions coming because statement such as these do not really make any point that anyone is in disagreement about but rather serves only to stoke some base emotions.

Also just because one selects a job that makes money does not mean that the person does not care. A person who volunteers or work in an organisation that helps the less fortunate is great but what if another person works in a corporate environment and makes a lot of money but donates a huge amount such that the organisation in question can hire 10 workers. Can it be said that the contribution of the later is any less?

Remember that most of my points are directed at the response/solution you suggest to combat child abuse, which I am uncertain about whether does it work, rather than me being against combating child abuse.
post #39 of 45
I don't understand why you all are primarily concentrating on young girls being sexually abused. Look at Michael Jackson and his many allegations of sexual abuse to young boys. Perhaps this past "family" was not the best witnesses, however, it appears that Michael Jackson has been getting away with abusing boys for years, and even was allowed to go back after the 93 thing and continue to have young boys in his life. Plus there are all of those Priests in the Catholic Church that molested young boys. It isn't just girls being molested and sexually abused. Boys are victoms as well
post #40 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker
I don't understand why you all are primarily concentrating on young girls being sexually abused. Look at Michael Jackson and his many allegations of sexual abuse to young boys. Perhaps this past "family" was not the best witnesses, however, it appears that Michael Jackson has been getting away with abusing boys for years, and even was allowed to go back after the 93 thing and continue to have young boys in his life. Plus there are all of those Priests in the Catholic Church that molested young boys. It isn't just girls being molested and sexually abused. Boys are victoms as well
I don't know who you were directing this comment to, but my posted included all children, both male and female. There were particular reasons to use girls as an example, when responding to a comment, but I would agree that child abuse effects both genders. There are stats on one of my previous posts.
post #41 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bumpy
That is why I say I sense some overt emotions coming because statement such as these do not really make any point that anyone is in disagreement about but rather serves only to stoke some base emotions.
Listen, I think I've made my point. I'm not a lawyer and I don't have time and I'm not getting paid to do research all day. Again, there is nothing wrong with emotion, Bumpy. It's present when this topic is brought up for many people. I think I've included enough basic facts about sexual abuse (and I've heard of similar stats here in Canada), which is what my primary focus was on. This thread was created as an outlet to express how one may FEEL or THINK about the topic at hand. Not whether or not you can do legal research, which is what you're basically asking me to do.

Quote:
Also just because one selects a job that makes money does not mean that the person does not care. A person who volunteers or work in an organisation that helps the less fortunate is great but what if another person works in a corporate environment and makes a lot of money but donates a huge amount such that the organisation in question can hire 10 workers. Can it be said that the contribution of the later is any less?
I know from experience that many professionals in large corporations would not give the money if it wasn't expected of them. In fact, I worked a charity event at my firm and only a SMALL number of professionals donated. Some people give and some don't, and it doesn't matter how much income they have.
post #42 of 45
Re: know from experience that many professionals in large corporations would not give the money if it wasn't expected of them. In fact, I worked a charity event at my firm and only a SMALL number of professionals donated. Some people give and some don't, and it doesn't matter how much income they have.Today 08:01 AM



I soooo agree!!! I rep my colleagues (docs) on our hospital board as well as our Foundation (Money raising outfit sometimes referred to as "develpment" in the university sector and members of the Foundation are recruited for their corporate ties. It raised millltions mostly by businesspeople writing checks.

By the same token, the auxillary which is not surprisingly a largely women's organization, raises not as much money but every one of their members is VERY committed to the hospital and many of the members volunteer hours and hours of their lives to our work. The Foundation get much morwe credit yet the Auxillary should get much more. It is easy to write a check - especially one that is tax deducatable and will get you publicity. It is not so simple to spend time reading to kids or hwlping out a family who needs to know how to navigate a city they have never been to, never mind with a very ill child!
post #43 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by vespacat
Here are a few stats that I posted to an earlier thread - a good example of who the perpetrators are and just HOW much children are suffering. The statistics are from the Georgia Center for Children.

One of the myths regarding child molesters is that they “look different†or behave differently from others in some way. Here are some statistics describing child molesters:

97% are male
91% are heterosexual
91% are religious
75% are married or formerly married
73% are Caucasian
65% earn a middle income or above
48% are college educated
I said I would get back to this, Jen, so here I am. Sorry it took so long.
I don't know if Bumpy responded to this post but I may as well.

Firstly, I question why you used a US agency (I presume in Georgia) for the source of your statistics. I know we are both in Canada and there are many sources and transcripts available from the Correctional Services of canada, The John Howard Society and the Governor General reports.
There is nothing terribly wrong with using another country's statistics but you have to be careful as in many cases, they can be misleading.
If I wanted to view the relationship between teen crime and guns, for example, I couldn't possibly look to a US site for any references.

That being said...

I support for the most part what is said above. Its a great idea for people to realize that the "boogeyman" doesn't exist. As I stated in another of my posts, "he" (or even "she") is your father, family friend, coach, babysitter...
Although, we also have to be careful not to rely entirely on statistics in a population such as sex offenders. Its still a very new crime in the sense that our information is roughly only 30+ years old.
You also have to take into account the crimes that aren't reported or detected.
For example, the female sex offender population is estimated by prison population or rates of conviction at approx. 3%-10%. However, what has been found is that due to the sometimes non-detectable or reported nature of the crime, that this number can reach as high as %50 in some areas. (at the upper limit, that is)...
What I am saying is essentially, is that sometimes statistics can be very misleading.

By the way, did you know that the majority of sex offenders reside in the Ontario and Prairie Provinces? If I recall, its 25% and 25% respectively.
This would make for an interesting causal study.

Quote:

• Contrary to popular belief, only about 30-35% of molesters were sexually abused as children (Hanson & Slater, 1988).
I have to apologize here for seeming to mislead you when I said that many sex offenders were offended against as children.
Though the above study is from 1988, you are correct and this stat. seems to hold steady today and in Canada as well.
However, according to (Becker and Murphy, 1998), these statistics do not seem to apply to offenders of young boys where the numbers are much higher.

Also, in terms of adolescent sex offenders, the incidence of previous overall abuse and neglect remains at at least %50.

I only state this because compared to "general offenders", the population of sex offenders has a higher incidence of sexual assault in general. It is no excuse, but simply cannot be ignored for this reason. This is why previous victimization proves to be a valuable tool in therapies for sex offenders.

My point here is that when we use the catch all term of "molester", we aren't being realistic. There are so many different kinds of "molester" or sexual predator that the statistics vary, the therapy models vary, the offences vary in nature...We can't possibly say that the incest molester has the same numbers, motive or operative process as the non-bio offender, etc, etc..

Quote:

Hysterical, no. Emotional, yes. ONE instance of child abuse is TOO much, Bumpy. I know you're a corporate lawyer, but not everyone thinks like a lawyer, thank heavens. Otherwise, we would not have nearly as many children's rights advocates as children do not have the ability and/or finances required to hire a lawyer. And any lawyer who represents a sexual predator should be living in shame eternally for representing such a "client".
Emotional? Sure. I understand that. This is a hugely emotional area for many.
Do you think that when one works with offenders that you bring it up at dinner parties? Not likely.
The response you will get is the most stated one: "They should be strung up, castrated, sent away to an island"....
While this is a nice fantastic way of internally dealing with the horrific, its not realistic. It feels good to say, but it doesn't do much for the problem, does it?

It doesn't make the issue go away.

Its a nice balance of emotion and logic that is needed to address the problem.

And I don't think you can wholly condemn people who work with sex offenders (lawyers, police, social workers, judges, group home workers, etc, etc,)

Someone has to do the dirty jobs. And someone has to do this one.
Whom do you suggest do it?

While I can't speak for all professions, why do you automatically think that a social services worker that works with offenders is not also an advocate for children or women? I would tend to think the opposite.

Those are once again, my 10 cents..
post #44 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by vespacat
What stress or trigger is justifiable or excusable when an adult abuses a child? And what do you define as a "classic" pedophile? A pedophile is a pedophile, no matter if it's an adult who views child pornography on the internet or a stepfather who rapes his adopted children. I am under the impression you are blaming the entire family unit for the perpetrators own personal issues.

No stressor or trigger is justifiable or excusable. I never said that.
And would never say that. However, identifying basic causes is an extremely valuable tool in maintaining relapse prevention in offending (of any kind).
If the guy who is a domestic violence offender tends to hit his wife or girlfriend more when he drinks or smokes crack, this is something I would very much want to know. This is of course aside from the therapy his girlfriend or wife would require, which in a case like this, she would also be offered.

Quote:
Don't even go there with the "milder" business. Viewing child pornography (which includes ANYONE under the age of 18 - people often seem to "forget" that teenagers are still children) is still a crime and you are correct, these kinds of offenders generally DO up their offenses.
This is why I stated "if you will". I didn't intend to minimalize any offending behaviour, but wanted to illustrate that this type of offence is different and sometimes a precursor to "higher" level offending. There are more violent intimate types of offending is what I was getting at. Its a difficult thing to word and please try and look past the semantics.

Quote:

Personally, I have been volunteering with the Children's Aid Society and other children's advocacy groups for years, and I believe there is no such concept as "over-reacting" in this point in history. I have seen and heard far too much to believe that the good in people heralds over the bad. Admittedly, men are predominantly the perpetrators, but also, women are the keepers of their secrets. Those women need to contribute to their children's welfare and address the INFINITE numbers of child abuse cases that are going unreported. We only hear the reported cases. The numbers of unreported cases is what is really alarming.
I am really proud that you volunteer. This is a great and often difficult thing to do. I have talked to as many victims (or survivors) as I have offenders and its a painful and difficult job.
However, women aren't just the keepers of secrets, they are also the offenders on a smaller scale.

I feel sad that in this post and in others I have sensed that you seem to have given up on humanity. I find that knowing in my heart that most people are inherently good is what keeps me going in this life. Without hope and optimism, I think I would lose the best part of me.
I hope you change your mind.
post #45 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by vespacat
I can't believe what I'm hearing. Can you please substantiate this with some proof? How is it "the truth"? A pedophile prefers children, no matter how they are dressed. And I would question the motives and attraction of ANY adult male to a 12-14 year old girl in clothing intended for adults. A 12-14 girl is still a child. There is no excusing adult behaviour based on a child's wardrobe, no matter how risque it may or may not be.
I really should refrain from uttering absolute truths
What I intended to convey was that IN MY EXPERIENCE working with numerous offenders, is that they are more likely to find the childlike appearance of a child more appealing than a "womanly" appearing child.

Again, I don't see where you are getting that I am excusing any behaviour.
What I do is attempt to "Understand" the precursors to certain behaviors.
We don't live in a vacuum.


Quote:
Right, so how would you feel if your neighbour started to ogle your daughter if she began dressing like Christina Aguilera?
I wouldn't.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Children's rights - Long rant