By Domenico Bettinelli, Jr. (articles ) | September 16, 2003 2:30 PM
This is interesting. A gay advocacy group says the secular media has "unfairly" stereotyped homosexuals in its coverage of the clergy sex-abuse scandal. The researchers claim that homosexuals are not more likely to commit child abuse than heterosexual men.
Of course, that claim obscures the fact that most of the cases involved adult men seeking to have sexual relations with post-pubescent males, which is not properly pedophilia, according to psychologists. (I know that CWN reader Shrink has much to say on this issue.)
The article linked above includes a similar rebuttal from a conservative pro-family group:
Russell's findings, however, are sharply at odds with the views of Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute with Concerned Women for America. "Since one-third to one-half of all child molestations are committed by men against boys, and homosexual men comprise less than 2 percent of the population, this means that the ratio of child molesters among homosexuals is far, far higher than among the rest of the population," Knight said.I would add that the homosexual sub-culture is far more prone to glorifying and promoting sex with young men. Many of the "mainstream" homosexual activist groups promote the lowering of the age of consent to as low as 11, and even much of homosexual media print stories about what they call "chicken-hawking."
"This doesn't mean all homosexuals molest children, but it means that the problem is far greater within the homosexual community, and the Catholic scandal only underlines that point. More than 80 percent of the victims were teenage boys molested by homosexual priests," Knight added.
My take is that the secular media avoided the homosexual sub-text of the Scandal rather than explicitly made the linkage. Any linkage they made was definitely unintentional.
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Progress toward our March expenses ($27,446 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: John J Plick -
Sep. 21, 2003 10:11 PM ET USA
No need to get so hot and bothered, pseudo... I think I can slow things down a bit. My dearest shrink, I think I might be able to guess at your general field by reasonable extrapolation, a field that I think we may share. First, do you realize that psychiatrists legitamized homosexuality a few years ago by removing it from the list of pathologies? Second, I believe that all we're doing here is autopsies. "Let the dead bury the dead..." If we don't start enforcing standards among the living...
Posted by: shrink -
Sep. 17, 2003 11:51 AM ET USA
The problem is complex since we don't have solid data on molestation rates. However, if there were no connection between adult male sexual orientation/identity and molesting tendency, we would expect the ratio of molested boys to girls to be about 1 to 25, accounting for the individual rate of molestation. In fact what we see in the survey data is a ratio of 1 to 3. Which means either, more gays molest than straights, OR, that those who do molest are very promiscuous. Take your pick!
Posted by: shrink -
Sep. 17, 2003 11:49 AM ET USA
…It's probably a some combination of the above. If we look at the priest abuse problem, the preliminary numbers are not encouraging. The NYTimes survey suggested that the ratio of boy to girl victims was approx. 9 to 1. These numbers are not solid survey numbers, and they don't account for age, but IF there was no lavender problem in the church we would expect the numbers to be reversed. The CWA report in my view is closer to the truth, and fit the scientifically solid survey numbers.
Posted by: patriot6908 -
Sep. 16, 2003 10:38 PM ET USA
Let's get some sense now. The mainstream press has bent over (no pun) backwards to "accomodate" a male homosexual prediction for male teens! It has put these kids firmly within the grasp of any and every pervert. And now a great hue and cry arises from this mass of nonsense. As they say, "Cut the S..t"--these guys are wonders of destroying young lives and have the nerve to even complain!
Posted by: Pseudodionysius -
Sep. 16, 2003 4:58 PM ET USA
I resent the fact that Shrink is getting more press around here than us Cynics. I feel that this is inappropriate, and oppressive to all Cynics, Skeptics, Stoics, Beatniks. We are made to feel different and isolated from our CWN. I hereby advise you that I am starting a new advocacy group, the St Diogenes Society, to expose these Postwww shams for what they truly are. As I recall, the Chicken Hawks' nemesis in Bugs Bunny cartoons was Foghorn Leghorn.