Absolute centrist

More center than the center of a center, centrally speaking Leftists generally don't think so, though.

[evidence-based-activism]

More Than 1 in 3 Men Admit to Raping or Abusing Women

Earlier I made a post about how many men will openly admit to abusing or raping women. 

This post expands on that by looking at a few specific publications from that post and introducing some other publications on the same issue.

First, a study examined multiple sites in East and Southeast Asia, and, uniquely, aggregated the data across sites (Fulu, 2013):

33% of men admit to perpetrating physical intimate partner violence (IPV)

46% of men admit to perpetrating either physical or sexual IPV, or both

53% of men admit to perpetrating at least one emotionally abusive act; 30% admit to at least three different acts

34% of men admit to perpetrating economic IPV

24% of men admit to perpetrating rape against a partner

11% of men admit to perpetrating rape against a non-partner

4% of men admit to perpetrating gang rape

Of the men who admitted to committing any type of rape, 58% admitted to perpetrating rape more than once and 33% admitted to more than one victim

67% of the men who committed rape faced no legal consequences 

14-52% of men said had transactional sex at least once

Second, a study examined multiple countries in the Middle East and North Africa. The data was not aggregated across country, so the range of responses is provided (UN Women, 2017):

10-45% of men admit to perpetrating physical IPV

20-80% of men admit to perpetrating emotional IPV

31-64% of men admit to perpetrating street-based sexual harassment; in addition, more educated men were more likely to admit to having sexually harassed a woman, and more educated women were more likely to have experienced sexual harassment

Third, a study examined multiple countries from around the world (Brazil, Chile, Croatia, India, Mexico and Rwanda). The data was not aggregated across country, so the range of responses is provided (Barker et al., n.d.):

25-40% of men admit to perpetrating physical IPV

6-29% of men admit to perpetrating sexual violence against women and girls

16-56% of men said they had transactional sex at least once

Fourth, smaller studies provide data from a range of different countries:

28% of men in South Africa admit to having ever raped a woman; many perpetrated rape more than once; 2% admitted to perpetrating gang rape; more than 30% faced no consequences and over 80% faced no legal consequences (Jewkes et al., 2011)

46% of male undergraduate students in the USA admit to perpetrating  some form of sexual coercion (Young et al., 2017)

Finally, some studies with related data:

13% of men in the UK admit to perpetrating sexual violence over the past twelve months; importantly, this figure is not comparable to the lifetime prevalence estimates given above (Hales & Gannon, 2021)

35% of male undergraduate students in the USA reported some likelihood of committing rape, in a review of earlier studies (Malamuth, 1981)

The wording of these studies is crucial, as some men will endorse behaviorally descriptive items, but reject labeling items - where the word rape is used (Edwards et al., 2014); these differences may explain at least part of the reported victimization-perpetration gap (Kolivas & Gross, 2007)

In addition, these studies all used self-report measures (asking men if they committed particular violent acts). Therefore, the reported prevalence is likely based on (1) the true prevalence rate and (2) the social acceptability of that form of violence. Some estimates may therefore be much lower than the true prevalence rates.

References under the cut:

Weiterlesen

[bbmbaby1]

Men, men, men. That’s men for you.

[80sdragonbreath]

One of the biggest problems I find among women's rights activists is their reliance on data when it supports them, at the same time as their absolute inability to understand (or, in some cases even read) the papers they are citing. This is then compounded by logical fallacies such as "guilt by association".

Study 1.

(Fulu, 2013) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25104345/

They studied ONLY 3rd tier economy countries, and only in Asian countries. Despite 50+ years of IPV research showing that most IPV is bi-direcitonal, and rarely happens in a vacuum (but when it does it's mostly women perpetrating alone), no mention of the woman's perpetrating role of IPV was mentioned or studied. Be that as it may, they did at least mention that poverty, alcoholism and low education were factors.

Result: Poor, illiterate Asian men are violent. Poor, illiterate Asian women might also be violent, but they never tested for that.

Study 2.

(UN Women 2017) https://arabstates.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Field%20Office%20Arab%20States/Attachments/2017/arab-women-report-violence-against-women-english.pdf

It's not actually a study, it's a report to the UN on violence against women in Arab countries. The data is scarce, inconsistent and riddled with problems. For example, on p.4 it gives an info-graphic on the Global prevalence of violence against women, and gives all sorts of statistics in the following paragraphs.

One such statistic, pulled at random is:

"In Saudi Arabia, nearly 80% of women respondents aged 18-48 reported experiencing sexual harassment, including on the street." (15)

When you check the source it gives this: https://stopstreetharassment.org/resources/statistics/statistics-academic-studies/ which gives its source as [page not found]. It's not backed up by any data at all.

Just in case this was a random glitch, I tried another reference at random, no.22. That was also a dead link.

Study 3.

(Barker et. al. n.d.) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30335574/

It does actually have a date - 2019 - but the main worry is that the publication does NOT make ANY of the claims that OP does, because principally it didn't study for them!

Study 4.

(Jewkes et. al. 2011) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3247272/

This studied ONLY Zulu men ONLY living in rural areas run in traditional ways. However the headline makes it read that all South Africans are represented by rural Zulu nations.

Result: Zulu men rape sometimes. The most notable finding is this:

"A further difference was that men who raped had more educated mothers, with a greater proportion having completed school or attended further education."

Wouldn't that be an L for feminists??

Study 5.

(Young et. al. 2017) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sarah-Desmarais-2/publication/303696511_Sexual_Coercion_Practices_Among_Undergraduate_Male_Recreational_Athletes_Intercollegiate_Athletes_and_Non-Athletes/links/59305690aca272fc55e158af/Sexual-Coercion-Practices-Among-Undergraduate-Male-Recreational-Athletes-Intercollegiate-Athletes-and-Non-Athletes.pdf

Only a single university was studied, and the study only looked at inter-collegiate athletes. However, OP claims that 46% of all undergrad students in the entire USA admit to perpetration of sexual violence. The study does not back that statement up.

Result: 29 intercollegiate athletes at an unidentified US university may have used some kind of coercion in a previous relationship.

Study 6.

(Hales & Gannon 2021) https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/10790632211051682

My massive concern for this one is the demographic makeup. In the supplementary tables, the researchers break down the ethnicities of the perpetrators:

54% of Other Asian men were perpetrators 50% of Pakistani men 33% of Black Caribbean men 33% of Arab men 20% of Irish men 18% of Indian men ...

Starting to sound a bit racist to me...

Study 7.

(Malamuth 1981) https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1981.tb01075.x

Seriously though. This did an Aristotelian logic, by looking at two groups of people, identifying similar traits between the two, and concluding backwards that A must be like B:

Convicted rapists score high on believing rape myths, and arousal to rape scenarios - therefore - ANYONE who believes rape myths and is aroused by rape scenarios is likely to become a rapist.

In case there are people reading this that don't get the logical fallacy, let me describe it in a different way: Oranges have been found to be high in spherical shape, and usually consistent in orange color. Therefore ANYTHING that is high in spherical shape and usually consistent in orange color, must be the fruit of an orange tree.

I think you can see the problem.

I do actually have problems with the studies beyond just demographics - many of them use Koss as a sexual misconduct benchmark, and Koss was the first to state that any alcohol consumed (by a woman only!) makes any subsequent sexual act, rape. Even her participants did not view their consensual loving sexual encounters as rape, but Koss didn't listen.

Koss also went on to say that men can't be raped, period. No amount of inebriation of the man results in him being able to be taken advantage of by a woman, apparently.

...

In short:

...

...

...

None of these studies is representative of White Western men, or even men more broadly.

But it takes a frikkin essay to explain why feminists are so routinely wrong, so not many people bother, they just ignore feminists, which ironically perpetrates these rape myths, because no one corrects them.

...

Seriously, Zulu men??

[liberalsarecool]

The Right Wing are morons benefitting from structural white supremacy that give below average conservatives too many advantages.

House Republicans are morons.

Senate Republicans are morons.

Republican SCOTUS are morons.

Look how much money they get from corporations and Citizens United-backed influential donors.

The constructs have to go to unrig the systems.

[reading-writing-revolution]

Why we can't have nice things.

[80sdragonbreath]

You can't have nice things because you keep voting for Democratic councilors who defund the police, decriminalize actual crimes, force law-abiding citizens out of their rightful homes to favor illegal immigrants, and their leader is a gibbering dementia patient unfit to even stand trial.

How did you miss all of that happening on your watch??

[toomuchlabor]

Posted by justinontikt0k

[80sdragonbreath]

I looked up this study.

It's interesting what sort of spin you can put on "academic research". Really interesting.

For example, the study claims that these are the demographics of the perpetrators:

[Quote]:

Most men who had sexual feelings towards children were heterosexual (91.9%), did not work with children (81.6%), participated in the workforce (73.4%), only ever had sex with women (64.9%), were born in Australia (62.9%), had no children in their household (62.8%), were married or living with their partner (60.5%), white (57.2%), and lived in the city (50.5%). The greatest proportion of these men were aged 18 to 34 years (47.8%), had a university degree (39.8%), and had an annual household income of less than AUD $80,000 (36.5%).

[End quote]

But here's where it gets interesting:

If you look at what they are NOT saying with those stats (i.e. the reverse of each stat):

8% of men were gay (only 2% of the general population is gay) 18% worked with children 26% were unemployed 35% had had gay sex 37% were immigrants 37% had children of their own 40% were single parents 43% were non-caucasian 50% lived outside the city 60% were uneducated

...

So we know who we're looking for: uneducated gay brown immigrants living outside the city who work with children.

I can't tell you which demographic that is, but the clue is their prophet was also like that.

...

But why waste the opportunity to tar ALL men with the brush that should rightfully be reserved for those 294 mostly immigrant men that they found? It's cheap and easy and sells newspapers.

...

And there's yet another way of looking at this study, which would have been the default if they were looking at female offenders:

Men were 2x more likely to offend if they had been abused as a child. And since we know that the majority of child abuse is carried out by mothers acting alone (and of that, 2/3rds is the mother abusing BOYS), we should be strategizing to stop mothers abusing boys.

Boys abused by mothers end up abusing children later in life.

I GUARANTEE that if we were looking at female perpetrators, we would be saying "Oh those poor women! They obviously need MUCH MORE SUPPORT!"

So why the hate against men? Why don't men and boys need our support?

Because of "The Empathy Gap".

Literally no one cares. "Cry me a river". "But muh menz".

...

You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys.

[vulturesbones]

"You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys."

This is an awful take on the topic of pedophilia.

Below the cut I will cover:

OP's viewpoint

Pedophilia and gender

Risk factors for pedophilia

Abusive mothers

Abuse and gender

The 'empathy gap'

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.

I think you need to deeply reevaluate your "egalitarianism." And rid yourself of double standards; the men who commit violence hold the responsibility for the violence they commit.

[80sdragonbreath]

I don't appreciate the sharing of private messages to a public space. You don't have my consent to do so.

But to address just a couple of your points:

You're demonstrably wrong about men committing the lion's share of IPV, and you ARE aware of this since we covered it in PRIVATE messaging, which now makes you disingenuous.

(PDF) References Examining Assaults by Women on Their Spouses or Male Partners: An Updated Annotated Bibliography

PDF | This annotated bibliography describes 343 scholarly investigations (270 empirical studies and 73 reviews) demonstrating that women are

343 scholarly articles showing that women are as violent as men in IPV.

...

Female pedophilia:

Introduction to The Female Pedophile - Interview with expert Dr Michelle Elliott, Psy.D.

Dr. Michele Elliot, Psy.D., is the leading world expert on women who rape and molest children. She shares her startling research that shows

^^ We're not even looking for female pedophiles, which makes it all the more dangerous, as they get jobs with children. For your info, Michelle Elliott (above) got booed off stage at a conference to counter child abuse and child rape for merely suggesting that female pedophiles existed.

It's a taboo topic, so it's no wonder the stats are skewed to make it look like men are the sole perpetrators. Even world-class researchers on the subject are deplatformed, quite literally.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/please-help-im-30-and-obsessed-with-justin-bieber/news-story/a6240759aa107a4440f7f2c04a135440

Middle aged women frequently get obsessed with child stars

Justin Bieber's Middle-Aged Female Fan Is Arrested for Trespassing at His Beverly Hills Home

The 40-year-old woman was said to be coming at Bieber's temporary house multiple times as she was caught showing up at the house two times l

Lastly, I can recommend you research "The Empathy Gap", rather than just assume stuff that you don't know about.

[vulturesbones]

I'm sorry for sharing one sentence of a private message that does not reveal anything deeply personal or compromising and simply states your viewpoint shortly. I hope you can see why I wouldn't think it would matter, having seen considerably more personal matters shared publicly on your page. I can remove it from the post, not that it makes a great difference.

Under the cut:

IPV assessments' methodology issues

IPV outcomes by gender

IP murder

Female pedophiles

The empathy gap, again

"[I claim men commit] the lion's share of IPV" - Nope, re-read.

I stated that you managed to observe that men commit the majority of IP murder. This extends to other severe forms of IPV, including sexual violence (under cut)

Female pedophiles exist, I did not claim they didn't. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men. (under cut)

Studies' standard use of CTS methodology in assessing gender symmetry in IPV has been criticized, as it excludes a separation of conflict-motivated aggression and control motivated aggression, and fail to rightly assess severity of injury, sexual violence, and ex-partner violence (Kimmel 2002).

Studies do support symmetry in IPV, but this is only when "no contexts, motives, and consequences are considered" (Chan 2011). Women typically undergo more long-lasting and severe forms of abuse, with fewer opportunities to escape the relationship (Wallace & Roberson 2016).

This is also evidenced by the psychological outcomes of IPV by gender. A review found "women suffer disproportionately from IPV, especially in terms of injuries, fear, and posttraumatic stress." (Caldwell et al 2016) while 85% of men reported "no fear" during their experience of IPV (Caldwell et al 2016).

Multiple reviews [x] [x] [x] which consider forms and motives have found gender symmetry in the rate in which IPV is committed, but gender asymmetry in the methods and motivations; men's does prove more severe.

Men still do commit the majority of IP batteries, strangulations, beatings, violence with weapons, sexual violence, stalking, and, absolutely undeniably, IP murder; murder being the key point of that discussion, and what you also observed.

"No wonder the stats [on pedophiles] are skewed"

These statistics comparing CSA perpetrators by gender come from self-reported victims of both sexes. They don't have any motivation to depict men in any particular light.

What I did say: The majority of pedophiles are men, or at least child predators, as we see the majority of people who self-report victimization expressing having had exclusively male perpetrators.

What I didn't say: No pedophiles are female.

Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men.

You have to accept that. And not excuse it either. Some crimes just are genuinely committed mostly by men.

I have researched "The Empathy Gap." You must know I have. The points made by (I assume, the book of such title, where the term in reference to men seems to originate from) are the exact same MRA talking points you dish out, which can be debunked or explained as not originating from a "lack of empathy" for men.

I can suggest you continue working on your own blatantly revealed empathy gap, especially before telling anyone else to fix theirs.

[80sdragonbreath]

Consent is something I thought you might be well-versed on, don't reduce your accountability to obtain consent, EVER, like you just tried to do.

Say it with me: "Consent. Is. Mandatory."

I really get tired having to explain consent to feminists, of all people.

...

"men commit the majority of IP murder." - This is correct now, but it used to be equal in the 1970 and 1980s. What changed was the invention of women's shelters, that ironically gave murderers a place to remove themselves to. There are no such shelters for men, nor any societal pressures for men to remove themselves to a place of safety where they aren't going to murder. Funnily enough, those 343 studies actually cover equal IP murder rates, which you would have spotted if you had read them...

...

"Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men."

This is the same argument as "men commit the vast majority of rapes". In the case of rape, it's because we legally define rape so that women are incapable of raping men. This skews the stats, because every time a woman rapes a man, it's defined as "an unwanted sexual encounter", and not rape.

In the case of female pedophiles, we're not even looking for them, and we're booing professional female-pedophile-researchers off stage and deplatforming them simply for suggesting that there are any female pedophiles. This skews the stats almost exclusively towards your opinion. This doesn't make your opinion correct.

...

Consent. Learn it. Obtain it. Stop if you don't have it.

[vulturesbones]

I really hope you're not comparing sharing a sentence from a message, something with reversible consequences, to sexual consent... as the same man who called cat-calling minors just being called "pretty"... And you're not talking about reducing accountability after attempting to take accountability away from male murderers and pedophiles... This makes me wonder if you are truly concerned or looking for a "gotcha; feminists don't care about consent."

Sharing a message of such nature is not a legal violation, nor typically considered a violation of person. Regardless, I understand your wishes and I have deleted the screen capture from the original post. I do sincerely apologise if this made you uncomfortable.

Now, your points.

We know men commit the majority of CSA because victims themselves report this. I am not using legal stats/conviction rates but rather surveys to elimate potential biases caused by lack of reporting, for example.

This is my third time explaining this.

Here CSA is a catchall for all sexual contact in childhood so there is no issue on definitions excluding forms of assault either.

It seems you vaguely skim my posts then spit out the same response.

I'm sorry - DV shelters give place for "murderers to remove themselves to"?

Your argument doesn't make any sense; someone who hasn't committed murder isn't a murderer. I am supposing you mean "potential murderers" - so let's explore that.

The majority of cases of women murdering their IPs were to escape abuse; this is why rates were higher before shelters existed, and before in many places, divorce would be near impossible, leaving them hopeless for another form of escape.

To this day, a large quantity of women who are incarcerated for murder had murdered in self-defence or to escape abuse; up to 90% of incarcerated women killed their abuser.

The majority of cases of men murdering their IPs happens after they perpetrated abuse, as I covered.

"There's no place for men to safely remove themselves where they aren't going to murder"

I can't tell if this is incorrectly attributing men's IP murders, the majority of which happen after a relationship has ended, to escaping abuse (which is wrong) or that men can't help themselves but to murder when frustrated in a relationship (which is insane).

Either way, terrible, terrible argument.

[80sdragonbreath]

The reason I bought up the issue of consent is because you should know better, especially as a feminist.

No respect for boundaries is what leads to boundaries being routinely violated (in both directions), and no, it doesn't matter if those boundaries are regarding the public sharing of private messages. No, it also doesn't matter if the content of those private messages are relevant to public conversation.

The fact that you went against a natural boundary, without asking, had to be chastised twice for it, AND you tried to minimize your violatory behavior (twice) to excuse your wrongdoing suggests very loudly to me that you actually don't understand the inviolable principles for which you say you stand.

This worries me, as poor boundaries in one area are correlated with poor boundaries in other areas. If you don't understand consent after being chastised twice, perhaps you are better to remove yourself from ANY place where consent is mandatory:

Men. Women. Children. Animals. Work.

I will suggest that a reason you may be attracted to write about issues of consent that women face is that you yourself are a woman who needs to learn about consent.

[vulturesbones]

What a useful way for you to diverge away from your horrific victim-blaming.

I did not "minimise the violation"; I simply stated how it is factually; the sharing of a message of such nature is not typically considered violatory and not unlawful. Especially in the context of our conversation; the only reason our conversation took part privately was to stop cramming the comments of the public post we were responding to. Upon your expressed concern, you have received my apologies; something you are yet to replicate after your poor behaviors.

I do not have "poor boundaries in other areas," but you already know this.

You have simply found a way to steer the focus from your own behaviors.

What does it say about your ability to function in society if you sympathize with murderers and minimise the crimes of child abusers?

Can a man who thinks murdering an ex-partner and children in hatred is an understandable response be trusted in society at all?

Especially around women and children?

You are yet to even apologise for your victim-blaming after being chastised multiple times.

Where else does your victim-blaming extend to?

And how much do you really care about "violations" if you can't even acknowledge street harassment as violating?

All very concerning for someone who has children.

"Might be attracted to write about issues of consent... [because you need] to learn about consent"

Now I know you know you're not being serious. What a contradiction. I am so well read on the topic of consent... because I don't respect it?

Quit trolling and fix your own horrible mistakes.

[80sdragonbreath]

"I am so well read on the topic of consent... because I don't respect it?"

You've already proved you don't. People tend to stick to topics that they need to learn about.

[vulturesbones]

> read > past tense

I was going to point out how you managed to ignore the rest of my post once again.

How you have avoided any other topic or the actual talking points at hand, too.

How you've avoided taking accountability, apologizing, or even commenting on your own behaviors, instead resorting to making the same comment - again.

You ignored 14 sentences from the last reblog alone. Incredible!

But I think the fact you don't even refute a single claim speaks volumes itself.

Your removal of accountability from male murderers and abusers and downplaying of men's crimes pairs well with how you yourself avoid accountability for your own highly disrespectful comments on the victims of murders.

In your eyes: I need to take accountability for the disrespect of your boundaries. Yet neither you nor other men need be held accountable. The belief behind it is simple: men are never at fault. And if they are, they're not responsible.

I will point it out again: you complain of those who remove a woman's accountability, as if she is not autonomous...

No further comment needed.

Evidenced also by me having to explain an earlier point three times over, you either do not read or ignore my writing.

What's the point in responding to someone who can not even be bothered to read what they're responding to?

You seem to just be scrambling to have the last word said, regardless of its usefulness or relevancy to the original dialogue.

But please, do rewrite your same response. Your ignorance and avoidance speaks volumes.

[80sdragonbreath]

We're done with this conversation, that's why I stopped responding.

But just for clarification, you appear to be trying to hold me to rules that I haven't agreed with (responding to every. single. line. and. point. made. in. all. your. very. exhaustingly. long. responses). I don't have to, I haven't agreed to, and this is yet more evidence of your lack of understanding about consent. You're trying to force me. Don't.

It seems like I was right: you need to work on the issue of consent. I didn't consent to your unwritten rules, and you're getting annoyed with that and berating me for it.

You literally sound as bad as the men feminists hate on so much.

Man: "Oi darling!...." Woman: "No." Man: *verbally berates woman*

Say it with me: Consent :clap: is :clap: mandatory :clap:

Respond again once you've got it figured out.

[80sdragonbreath]

Good Friday Wisdom

It does seem like there's a correlation between "women-disillusioned-with-men" and "catladies".

This is my tongue-in-cheek take on it.

Men do domestic violence Cats do domestic violence

Men are useless Cats are useless

Men choose when and if they love you Cats choose when and if they love you

Men flirt with your female friends and neighbours Cats flirt with your female friends and neighbours

You have to feed men You have to feed cats

You have to clean men's poop tray You have to clean cats' poop tray

Most men are a bit fluffy Most cats are a bit fluffy

Even non-hairy men can find someone who thinks they are cute Even non-hairy cats can find someone who thinks they are cute

...

You get the drift.

Cats are women's surrogate for men. The ONLY difference is the power imbalance. Women are larger than cats and can physically dominate them.

[misandresther]

73% of all Russian women who died in 2023, died because of domestic violence...

[80sdragonbreath]

This is what happens when you teach gender studies without requiring any academic ability at all.

Russian deaths are around 150,000 people every month. [source: https://www.economy.com/russian-federation/deaths]

Domestic violence deaths range widely from 253 actual confirmed deaths in "family conflicts", to 14,000 estimated domestic violence-related deaths [source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_in_Russia]

Even if we take the high number of 14,000 that makes up less than 10% of all MONTHLY deaths, meaning well less than 1% of yearly deaths. Allowing for half of all deaths occurring in women makes this around 1.5% of all female estimated deaths attributable to domestic violence.

But the CONFIRMED deaths due domestic situations is still 253, making the official total 0.015% of all female deaths each year.

0.015%

Pulling numbers out of your ass like 73% isn't helpful to anyone.

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

[dieselfumesniffer]

For a while, when my daughter was 3, she thought she was a dinosaur. Looking back, I am so glad we didn't go through with the dinosaur affirming surgery.

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

Dinophobe.

[80sdragonbreath]

When my son was 3 he wanted to be a train. It was obvious to us that he was really a steamtrain trapped in a little boy's body. He made noises, had arms like coupling rods, and had a fine "choo-choo" whistle.

I'm so glad we went ahead with industrial surgery, his wheels instead of legs get him around so much better. We were worried that the lack of tracks along our living room floor might be a problem, but some helpful activists told us we were bigots, and we realized we were.

We replaced my son's brain with two locomotive engineers. Swarthy, coal-shoveling types. Strong. Virile. My wife seems so much happier now, it's really helped us as a family.

I live in the coal shed. It's just the right thing to do.

[jeunefillerangee-deactivated202]

Sex is natural, and it is frustrating to be horny and not have a partner, but I refuse to believe people are driven to the depths of despair because they don't have sex. And even if they were, I would still not support "sex work" because a person's dignity and physical integrity will always be more important than someone's else feelings.

[80sdragonbreath]

Almost all men live in a perpetual (platonic) affection drought.

We never get touched affectionately, by anyone. The only time we ever have skin-to-skin contact is shaking hands. Or sex. Shaking hands isn't affectionate touching, and sex is the only other way we get to be touched.

This means that sex is our ONLY way of having any affectionate touching at all.

The problem compounds itself by the fact that women find most men "creepy" (i.e. in some way undesirable), and women naturally refrain from touching most men in any way at all, as they do NOT want to give those men the wrong impression. Ironically this furthers the situation that men never get touched platonically or affectionately outside of sex, meaning that IF a woman touches a man, the man automatically think she must be interested in him!

For us, sex IS affection. We don't get affection anywhere else.

We don't blame women. It's not women's fault. And it's not men's fault either, it's just one of those things. Men just live with it.

Society is set up to refrain from showing men any affection at all. Is it a surprise that men use the only avenue open to them to get affection? (i.e. sex, or sex work) Is it a surprise that - in the absolute total absence of any human affection - some men get driven to the depths of despair?

...

Side note: ask your dad when he last got given a bunch of flowers.

[toomuchlabor]

Posted by justinontikt0k

[80sdragonbreath]

I looked up this study.

It's interesting what sort of spin you can put on "academic research". Really interesting.

For example, the study claims that these are the demographics of the perpetrators:

[Quote]:

Most men who had sexual feelings towards children were heterosexual (91.9%), did not work with children (81.6%), participated in the workforce (73.4%), only ever had sex with women (64.9%), were born in Australia (62.9%), had no children in their household (62.8%), were married or living with their partner (60.5%), white (57.2%), and lived in the city (50.5%). The greatest proportion of these men were aged 18 to 34 years (47.8%), had a university degree (39.8%), and had an annual household income of less than AUD $80,000 (36.5%).

[End quote]

But here's where it gets interesting:

If you look at what they are NOT saying with those stats (i.e. the reverse of each stat):

8% of men were gay (only 2% of the general population is gay) 18% worked with children 26% were unemployed 35% had had gay sex 37% were immigrants 37% had children of their own 40% were single parents 43% were non-caucasian 50% lived outside the city 60% were uneducated

...

So we know who we're looking for: uneducated gay brown immigrants living outside the city who work with children.

I can't tell you which demographic that is, but the clue is their prophet was also like that.

...

But why waste the opportunity to tar ALL men with the brush that should rightfully be reserved for those 294 mostly immigrant men that they found? It's cheap and easy and sells newspapers.

...

And there's yet another way of looking at this study, which would have been the default if they were looking at female offenders:

Men were 2x more likely to offend if they had been abused as a child. And since we know that the majority of child abuse is carried out by mothers acting alone (and of that, 2/3rds is the mother abusing BOYS), we should be strategizing to stop mothers abusing boys.

Boys abused by mothers end up abusing children later in life.

I GUARANTEE that if we were looking at female perpetrators, we would be saying "Oh those poor women! They obviously need MUCH MORE SUPPORT!"

So why the hate against men? Why don't men and boys need our support?

Because of "The Empathy Gap".

Literally no one cares. "Cry me a river". "But muh menz".

...

You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys.

[vulturesbones]

"You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys."

This is an awful take on the topic of pedophilia.

Below the cut I will cover:

OP's viewpoint

Pedophilia and gender

Risk factors for pedophilia

Abusive mothers

Abuse and gender

The 'empathy gap'

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.

I think you need to deeply reevaluate your "egalitarianism." And rid yourself of double standards; the men who commit violence hold the responsibility for the violence they commit.

[80sdragonbreath]

I don't appreciate the sharing of private messages to a public space. You don't have my consent to do so.

But to address just a couple of your points:

You're demonstrably wrong about men committing the lion's share of IPV, and you ARE aware of this since we covered it in PRIVATE messaging, which now makes you disingenuous.

(PDF) References Examining Assaults by Women on Their Spouses or Male Partners: An Updated Annotated Bibliography

PDF | This annotated bibliography describes 343 scholarly investigations (270 empirical studies and 73 reviews) demonstrating that women are

343 scholarly articles showing that women are as violent as men in IPV.

...

Female pedophilia:

Introduction to The Female Pedophile - Interview with expert Dr Michelle Elliott, Psy.D.

Dr. Michele Elliot, Psy.D., is the leading world expert on women who rape and molest children. She shares her startling research that shows

^^ We're not even looking for female pedophiles, which makes it all the more dangerous, as they get jobs with children. For your info, Michelle Elliott (above) got booed off stage at a conference to counter child abuse and child rape for merely suggesting that female pedophiles existed.

It's a taboo topic, so it's no wonder the stats are skewed to make it look like men are the sole perpetrators. Even world-class researchers on the subject are deplatformed, quite literally.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/please-help-im-30-and-obsessed-with-justin-bieber/news-story/a6240759aa107a4440f7f2c04a135440

Middle aged women frequently get obsessed with child stars

Justin Bieber's Middle-Aged Female Fan Is Arrested for Trespassing at His Beverly Hills Home

The 40-year-old woman was said to be coming at Bieber's temporary house multiple times as she was caught showing up at the house two times l

Lastly, I can recommend you research "The Empathy Gap", rather than just assume stuff that you don't know about.

[vulturesbones]

I'm sorry for sharing one sentence of a private message that does not reveal anything deeply personal or compromising and simply states your viewpoint shortly. I hope you can see why I wouldn't think it would matter, having seen considerably more personal matters shared publicly on your page. I can remove it from the post, not that it makes a great difference.

Under the cut:

IPV assessments' methodology issues

IPV outcomes by gender

IP murder

Female pedophiles

The empathy gap, again

"[I claim men commit] the lion's share of IPV" - Nope, re-read.

I stated that you managed to observe that men commit the majority of IP murder. This extends to other severe forms of IPV, including sexual violence (under cut)

Female pedophiles exist, I did not claim they didn't. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men. (under cut)

Studies' standard use of CTS methodology in assessing gender symmetry in IPV has been criticized, as it excludes a separation of conflict-motivated aggression and control motivated aggression, and fail to rightly assess severity of injury, sexual violence, and ex-partner violence (Kimmel 2002).

Studies do support symmetry in IPV, but this is only when "no contexts, motives, and consequences are considered" (Chan 2011). Women typically undergo more long-lasting and severe forms of abuse, with fewer opportunities to escape the relationship (Wallace & Roberson 2016).

This is also evidenced by the psychological outcomes of IPV by gender. A review found "women suffer disproportionately from IPV, especially in terms of injuries, fear, and posttraumatic stress." (Caldwell et al 2016) while 85% of men reported "no fear" during their experience of IPV (Caldwell et al 2016).

Multiple reviews [x] [x] [x] which consider forms and motives have found gender symmetry in the rate in which IPV is committed, but gender asymmetry in the methods and motivations; men's does prove more severe.

Men still do commit the majority of IP batteries, strangulations, beatings, violence with weapons, sexual violence, stalking, and, absolutely undeniably, IP murder; murder being the key point of that discussion, and what you also observed.

"No wonder the stats [on pedophiles] are skewed"

These statistics comparing CSA perpetrators by gender come from self-reported victims of both sexes. They don't have any motivation to depict men in any particular light.

What I did say: The majority of pedophiles are men, or at least child predators, as we see the majority of people who self-report victimization expressing having had exclusively male perpetrators.

What I didn't say: No pedophiles are female.

Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men.

You have to accept that. And not excuse it either. Some crimes just are genuinely committed mostly by men.

I have researched "The Empathy Gap." You must know I have. The points made by (I assume, the book of such title, where the term in reference to men seems to originate from) are the exact same MRA talking points you dish out, which can be debunked or explained as not originating from a "lack of empathy" for men.

I can suggest you continue working on your own blatantly revealed empathy gap, especially before telling anyone else to fix theirs.

[80sdragonbreath]

Consent is something I thought you might be well-versed on, don't reduce your accountability to obtain consent, EVER, like you just tried to do.

Say it with me: "Consent. Is. Mandatory."

I really get tired having to explain consent to feminists, of all people.

...

"men commit the majority of IP murder." - This is correct now, but it used to be equal in the 1970 and 1980s. What changed was the invention of women's shelters, that ironically gave murderers a place to remove themselves to. There are no such shelters for men, nor any societal pressures for men to remove themselves to a place of safety where they aren't going to murder. Funnily enough, those 343 studies actually cover equal IP murder rates, which you would have spotted if you had read them...

...

"Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men."

This is the same argument as "men commit the vast majority of rapes". In the case of rape, it's because we legally define rape so that women are incapable of raping men. This skews the stats, because every time a woman rapes a man, it's defined as "an unwanted sexual encounter", and not rape.

In the case of female pedophiles, we're not even looking for them, and we're booing professional female-pedophile-researchers off stage and deplatforming them simply for suggesting that there are any female pedophiles. This skews the stats almost exclusively towards your opinion. This doesn't make your opinion correct.

...

Consent. Learn it. Obtain it. Stop if you don't have it.

[vulturesbones]

I really hope you're not comparing sharing a sentence from a message, something with reversible consequences, to sexual consent... as the same man who called cat-calling minors just being called "pretty"... And you're not talking about reducing accountability after attempting to take accountability away from male murderers and pedophiles... This makes me wonder if you are truly concerned or looking for a "gotcha; feminists don't care about consent."

Sharing a message of such nature is not a legal violation, nor typically considered a violation of person. Regardless, I understand your wishes and I have deleted the screen capture from the original post. I do sincerely apologise if this made you uncomfortable.

Now, your points.

We know men commit the majority of CSA because victims themselves report this. I am not using legal stats/conviction rates but rather surveys to elimate potential biases caused by lack of reporting, for example.

This is my third time explaining this.

Here CSA is a catchall for all sexual contact in childhood so there is no issue on definitions excluding forms of assault either.

It seems you vaguely skim my posts then spit out the same response.

I'm sorry - DV shelters give place for "murderers to remove themselves to"?

Your argument doesn't make any sense; someone who hasn't committed murder isn't a murderer. I am supposing you mean "potential murderers" - so let's explore that.

The majority of cases of women murdering their IPs were to escape abuse; this is why rates were higher before shelters existed, and before in many places, divorce would be near impossible, leaving them hopeless for another form of escape.

To this day, a large quantity of women who are incarcerated for murder had murdered in self-defence or to escape abuse; up to 90% of incarcerated women killed their abuser.

The majority of cases of men murdering their IPs happens after they perpetrated abuse, as I covered.

"There's no place for men to safely remove themselves where they aren't going to murder"

I can't tell if this is incorrectly attributing men's IP murders, the majority of which happen after a relationship has ended, to escaping abuse (which is wrong) or that men can't help themselves but to murder when frustrated in a relationship (which is insane).

Either way, terrible, terrible argument.

[80sdragonbreath]

The reason I bought up the issue of consent is because you should know better, especially as a feminist.

No respect for boundaries is what leads to boundaries being routinely violated (in both directions), and no, it doesn't matter if those boundaries are regarding the public sharing of private messages. No, it also doesn't matter if the content of those private messages are relevant to public conversation.

The fact that you went against a natural boundary, without asking, had to be chastised twice for it, AND you tried to minimize your violatory behavior (twice) to excuse your wrongdoing suggests very loudly to me that you actually don't understand the inviolable principles for which you say you stand.

This worries me, as poor boundaries in one area are correlated with poor boundaries in other areas. If you don't understand consent after being chastised twice, perhaps you are better to remove yourself from ANY place where consent is mandatory:

Men. Women. Children. Animals. Work.

I will suggest that a reason you may be attracted to write about issues of consent that women face is that you yourself are a woman who needs to learn about consent.

[vulturesbones]

What a useful way for you to diverge away from your horrific victim-blaming.

I did not "minimise the violation"; I simply stated how it is factually; the sharing of a message of such nature is not typically considered violatory and not unlawful. Especially in the context of our conversation; the only reason our conversation took part privately was to stop cramming the comments of the public post we were responding to. Upon your expressed concern, you have received my apologies; something you are yet to replicate after your poor behaviors.

I do not have "poor boundaries in other areas," but you already know this.

You have simply found a way to steer the focus from your own behaviors.

What does it say about your ability to function in society if you sympathize with murderers and minimise the crimes of child abusers?

Can a man who thinks murdering an ex-partner and children in hatred is an understandable response be trusted in society at all?

Especially around women and children?

You are yet to even apologise for your victim-blaming after being chastised multiple times.

Where else does your victim-blaming extend to?

And how much do you really care about "violations" if you can't even acknowledge street harassment as violating?

All very concerning for someone who has children.

"Might be attracted to write about issues of consent... [because you need] to learn about consent"

Now I know you know you're not being serious. What a contradiction. I am so well read on the topic of consent... because I don't respect it?

Quit trolling and fix your own horrible mistakes.

[80sdragonbreath]

"I am so well read on the topic of consent... because I don't respect it?"

You've already proved you don't. People tend to stick to topics that they need to learn about.

[toomuchlabor]

Posted by justinontikt0k

[80sdragonbreath]

I looked up this study.

It's interesting what sort of spin you can put on "academic research". Really interesting.

For example, the study claims that these are the demographics of the perpetrators:

[Quote]:

Most men who had sexual feelings towards children were heterosexual (91.9%), did not work with children (81.6%), participated in the workforce (73.4%), only ever had sex with women (64.9%), were born in Australia (62.9%), had no children in their household (62.8%), were married or living with their partner (60.5%), white (57.2%), and lived in the city (50.5%). The greatest proportion of these men were aged 18 to 34 years (47.8%), had a university degree (39.8%), and had an annual household income of less than AUD $80,000 (36.5%).

[End quote]

But here's where it gets interesting:

If you look at what they are NOT saying with those stats (i.e. the reverse of each stat):

8% of men were gay (only 2% of the general population is gay) 18% worked with children 26% were unemployed 35% had had gay sex 37% were immigrants 37% had children of their own 40% were single parents 43% were non-caucasian 50% lived outside the city 60% were uneducated

...

So we know who we're looking for: uneducated gay brown immigrants living outside the city who work with children.

I can't tell you which demographic that is, but the clue is their prophet was also like that.

...

But why waste the opportunity to tar ALL men with the brush that should rightfully be reserved for those 294 mostly immigrant men that they found? It's cheap and easy and sells newspapers.

...

And there's yet another way of looking at this study, which would have been the default if they were looking at female offenders:

Men were 2x more likely to offend if they had been abused as a child. And since we know that the majority of child abuse is carried out by mothers acting alone (and of that, 2/3rds is the mother abusing BOYS), we should be strategizing to stop mothers abusing boys.

Boys abused by mothers end up abusing children later in life.

I GUARANTEE that if we were looking at female perpetrators, we would be saying "Oh those poor women! They obviously need MUCH MORE SUPPORT!"

So why the hate against men? Why don't men and boys need our support?

Because of "The Empathy Gap".

Literally no one cares. "Cry me a river". "But muh menz".

...

You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys.

[vulturesbones]

"You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys."

This is an awful take on the topic of pedophilia.

Below the cut I will cover:

OP's viewpoint

Pedophilia and gender

Risk factors for pedophilia

Abusive mothers

Abuse and gender

The 'empathy gap'

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.

I think you need to deeply reevaluate your "egalitarianism." And rid yourself of double standards; the men who commit violence hold the responsibility for the violence they commit.

[80sdragonbreath]

I don't appreciate the sharing of private messages to a public space. You don't have my consent to do so.

But to address just a couple of your points:

You're demonstrably wrong about men committing the lion's share of IPV, and you ARE aware of this since we covered it in PRIVATE messaging, which now makes you disingenuous.

(PDF) References Examining Assaults by Women on Their Spouses or Male Partners: An Updated Annotated Bibliography

PDF | This annotated bibliography describes 343 scholarly investigations (270 empirical studies and 73 reviews) demonstrating that women are

343 scholarly articles showing that women are as violent as men in IPV.

...

Female pedophilia:

Introduction to The Female Pedophile - Interview with expert Dr Michelle Elliott, Psy.D.

Dr. Michele Elliot, Psy.D., is the leading world expert on women who rape and molest children. She shares her startling research that shows

^^ We're not even looking for female pedophiles, which makes it all the more dangerous, as they get jobs with children. For your info, Michelle Elliott (above) got booed off stage at a conference to counter child abuse and child rape for merely suggesting that female pedophiles existed.

It's a taboo topic, so it's no wonder the stats are skewed to make it look like men are the sole perpetrators. Even world-class researchers on the subject are deplatformed, quite literally.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/please-help-im-30-and-obsessed-with-justin-bieber/news-story/a6240759aa107a4440f7f2c04a135440

Middle aged women frequently get obsessed with child stars

Justin Bieber's Middle-Aged Female Fan Is Arrested for Trespassing at His Beverly Hills Home

The 40-year-old woman was said to be coming at Bieber's temporary house multiple times as she was caught showing up at the house two times l

Lastly, I can recommend you research "The Empathy Gap", rather than just assume stuff that you don't know about.

[vulturesbones]

I'm sorry for sharing one sentence of a private message that does not reveal anything deeply personal or compromising and simply states your viewpoint shortly. I hope you can see why I wouldn't think it would matter, having seen considerably more personal matters shared publicly on your page. I can remove it from the post, not that it makes a great difference.

Under the cut:

IPV assessments' methodology issues

IPV outcomes by gender

IP murder

Female pedophiles

The empathy gap, again

"[I claim men commit] the lion's share of IPV" - Nope, re-read.

I stated that you managed to observe that men commit the majority of IP murder. This extends to other severe forms of IPV, including sexual violence (under cut)

Female pedophiles exist, I did not claim they didn't. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men. (under cut)

Studies' standard use of CTS methodology in assessing gender symmetry in IPV has been criticized, as it excludes a separation of conflict-motivated aggression and control motivated aggression, and fail to rightly assess severity of injury, sexual violence, and ex-partner violence (Kimmel 2002).

Studies do support symmetry in IPV, but this is only when "no contexts, motives, and consequences are considered" (Chan 2011). Women typically undergo more long-lasting and severe forms of abuse, with fewer opportunities to escape the relationship (Wallace & Roberson 2016).

This is also evidenced by the psychological outcomes of IPV by gender. A review found "women suffer disproportionately from IPV, especially in terms of injuries, fear, and posttraumatic stress." (Caldwell et al 2016) while 85% of men reported "no fear" during their experience of IPV (Caldwell et al 2016).

Multiple reviews [x] [x] [x] which consider forms and motives have found gender symmetry in the rate in which IPV is committed, but gender asymmetry in the methods and motivations; men's does prove more severe.

Men still do commit the majority of IP batteries, strangulations, beatings, violence with weapons, sexual violence, stalking, and, absolutely undeniably, IP murder; murder being the key point of that discussion, and what you also observed.

"No wonder the stats [on pedophiles] are skewed"

These statistics comparing CSA perpetrators by gender come from self-reported victims of both sexes. They don't have any motivation to depict men in any particular light.

What I did say: The majority of pedophiles are men, or at least child predators, as we see the majority of people who self-report victimization expressing having had exclusively male perpetrators.

What I didn't say: No pedophiles are female.

Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men.

You have to accept that. And not excuse it either. Some crimes just are genuinely committed mostly by men.

I have researched "The Empathy Gap." You must know I have. The points made by (I assume, the book of such title, where the term in reference to men seems to originate from) are the exact same MRA talking points you dish out, which can be debunked or explained as not originating from a "lack of empathy" for men.

I can suggest you continue working on your own blatantly revealed empathy gap, especially before telling anyone else to fix theirs.

[80sdragonbreath]

Consent is something I thought you might be well-versed on, don't reduce your accountability to obtain consent, EVER, like you just tried to do.

Say it with me: "Consent. Is. Mandatory."

I really get tired having to explain consent to feminists, of all people.

...

"men commit the majority of IP murder." - This is correct now, but it used to be equal in the 1970 and 1980s. What changed was the invention of women's shelters, that ironically gave murderers a place to remove themselves to. There are no such shelters for men, nor any societal pressures for men to remove themselves to a place of safety where they aren't going to murder. Funnily enough, those 343 studies actually cover equal IP murder rates, which you would have spotted if you had read them...

...

"Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men."

This is the same argument as "men commit the vast majority of rapes". In the case of rape, it's because we legally define rape so that women are incapable of raping men. This skews the stats, because every time a woman rapes a man, it's defined as "an unwanted sexual encounter", and not rape.

In the case of female pedophiles, we're not even looking for them, and we're booing professional female-pedophile-researchers off stage and deplatforming them simply for suggesting that there are any female pedophiles. This skews the stats almost exclusively towards your opinion. This doesn't make your opinion correct.

...

Consent. Learn it. Obtain it. Stop if you don't have it.

[vulturesbones]

I really hope you're not comparing sharing a sentence from a message, something with reversible consequences, to sexual consent... as the same man who called cat-calling minors just being called "pretty"... And you're not talking about reducing accountability after attempting to take accountability away from male murderers and pedophiles... This makes me wonder if you are truly concerned or looking for a "gotcha; feminists don't care about consent."

Sharing a message of such nature is not a legal violation, nor typically considered a violation of person. Regardless, I understand your wishes and I have deleted the screen capture from the original post. I do sincerely apologise if this made you uncomfortable.

Now, your points.

We know men commit the majority of CSA because victims themselves report this. I am not using legal stats/conviction rates but rather surveys to elimate potential biases caused by lack of reporting, for example.

This is my third time explaining this.

Here CSA is a catchall for all sexual contact in childhood so there is no issue on definitions excluding forms of assault either.

It seems you vaguely skim my posts then spit out the same response.

I'm sorry - DV shelters give place for "murderers to remove themselves to"?

Your argument doesn't make any sense; someone who hasn't committed murder isn't a murderer. I am supposing you mean "potential murderers" - so let's explore that.

The majority of cases of women murdering their IPs were to escape abuse; this is why rates were higher before shelters existed, and before in many places, divorce would be near impossible, leaving them hopeless for another form of escape.

To this day, a large quantity of women who are incarcerated for murder had murdered in self-defence or to escape abuse; up to 90% of incarcerated women killed their abuser.

The majority of cases of men murdering their IPs happens after they perpetrated abuse, as I covered.

"There's no place for men to safely remove themselves where they aren't going to murder"

I can't tell if this is incorrectly attributing men's IP murders, the majority of which happen after a relationship has ended, to escaping abuse (which is wrong) or that men can't help themselves but to murder when frustrated in a relationship (which is insane).

Either way, terrible, terrible argument.

[80sdragonbreath]

The reason I bought up the issue of consent is because you should know better, especially as a feminist.

No respect for boundaries is what leads to boundaries being routinely violated (in both directions), and no, it doesn't matter if those boundaries are regarding the public sharing of private messages. No, it also doesn't matter if the content of those private messages are relevant to public conversation.

The fact that you went against a natural boundary, without asking, had to be chastised twice for it, AND you tried to minimize your violatory behavior (twice) to excuse your wrongdoing suggests very loudly to me that you actually don't understand the inviolable principles for which you say you stand.

This worries me, as poor boundaries in one area are correlated with poor boundaries in other areas. If you don't understand consent after being chastised twice, perhaps you are better to remove yourself from ANY place where consent is mandatory:

Men. Women. Children. Animals. Work.

I will suggest that a reason you may be attracted to write about issues of consent that women face is that you yourself are a woman who needs to learn about consent.

[toomuchlabor]

Posted by justinontikt0k

[80sdragonbreath]

I looked up this study.

It's interesting what sort of spin you can put on "academic research". Really interesting.

For example, the study claims that these are the demographics of the perpetrators:

[Quote]:

Most men who had sexual feelings towards children were heterosexual (91.9%), did not work with children (81.6%), participated in the workforce (73.4%), only ever had sex with women (64.9%), were born in Australia (62.9%), had no children in their household (62.8%), were married or living with their partner (60.5%), white (57.2%), and lived in the city (50.5%). The greatest proportion of these men were aged 18 to 34 years (47.8%), had a university degree (39.8%), and had an annual household income of less than AUD $80,000 (36.5%).

[End quote]

But here's where it gets interesting:

If you look at what they are NOT saying with those stats (i.e. the reverse of each stat):

8% of men were gay (only 2% of the general population is gay) 18% worked with children 26% were unemployed 35% had had gay sex 37% were immigrants 37% had children of their own 40% were single parents 43% were non-caucasian 50% lived outside the city 60% were uneducated

...

So we know who we're looking for: uneducated gay brown immigrants living outside the city who work with children.

I can't tell you which demographic that is, but the clue is their prophet was also like that.

...

But why waste the opportunity to tar ALL men with the brush that should rightfully be reserved for those 294 mostly immigrant men that they found? It's cheap and easy and sells newspapers.

...

And there's yet another way of looking at this study, which would have been the default if they were looking at female offenders:

Men were 2x more likely to offend if they had been abused as a child. And since we know that the majority of child abuse is carried out by mothers acting alone (and of that, 2/3rds is the mother abusing BOYS), we should be strategizing to stop mothers abusing boys.

Boys abused by mothers end up abusing children later in life.

I GUARANTEE that if we were looking at female perpetrators, we would be saying "Oh those poor women! They obviously need MUCH MORE SUPPORT!"

So why the hate against men? Why don't men and boys need our support?

Because of "The Empathy Gap".

Literally no one cares. "Cry me a river". "But muh menz".

...

You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys.

[vulturesbones]

"You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys."

This is an awful take on the topic of pedophilia.

Below the cut I will cover:

OP's viewpoint

Pedophilia and gender

Risk factors for pedophilia

Abusive mothers

Abuse and gender

The 'empathy gap'

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.

I think you need to deeply reevaluate your "egalitarianism." And rid yourself of double standards; the men who commit violence hold the responsibility for the violence they commit.

[80sdragonbreath]

I don't appreciate the sharing of private messages to a public space. You don't have my consent to do so.

But to address just a couple of your points:

You're demonstrably wrong about men committing the lion's share of IPV, and you ARE aware of this since we covered it in PRIVATE messaging, which now makes you disingenuous.

(PDF) References Examining Assaults by Women on Their Spouses or Male Partners: An Updated Annotated Bibliography

PDF | This annotated bibliography describes 343 scholarly investigations (270 empirical studies and 73 reviews) demonstrating that women are

343 scholarly articles showing that women are as violent as men in IPV.

...

Female pedophilia:

Introduction to The Female Pedophile - Interview with expert Dr Michelle Elliott, Psy.D.

Dr. Michele Elliot, Psy.D., is the leading world expert on women who rape and molest children. She shares her startling research that shows

^^ We're not even looking for female pedophiles, which makes it all the more dangerous, as they get jobs with children. For your info, Michelle Elliott (above) got booed off stage at a conference to counter child abuse and child rape for merely suggesting that female pedophiles existed.

It's a taboo topic, so it's no wonder the stats are skewed to make it look like men are the sole perpetrators. Even world-class researchers on the subject are deplatformed, quite literally.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/please-help-im-30-and-obsessed-with-justin-bieber/news-story/a6240759aa107a4440f7f2c04a135440

Middle aged women frequently get obsessed with child stars

Justin Bieber's Middle-Aged Female Fan Is Arrested for Trespassing at His Beverly Hills Home

The 40-year-old woman was said to be coming at Bieber's temporary house multiple times as she was caught showing up at the house two times l

Lastly, I can recommend you research "The Empathy Gap", rather than just assume stuff that you don't know about.

[vulturesbones]

I'm sorry for sharing one sentence of a private message that does not reveal anything deeply personal or compromising and simply states your viewpoint shortly. I hope you can see why I wouldn't think it would matter, having seen considerably more personal matters shared publicly on your page. I can remove it from the post, not that it makes a great difference.

Under the cut:

IPV assessments' methodology issues

IPV outcomes by gender

IP murder

Female pedophiles

The empathy gap, again

"[I claim men commit] the lion's share of IPV" - Nope, re-read.

I stated that you managed to observe that men commit the majority of IP murder. This extends to other severe forms of IPV, including sexual violence (under cut)

Female pedophiles exist, I did not claim they didn't. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men. (under cut)

Studies' standard use of CTS methodology in assessing gender symmetry in IPV has been criticized, as it excludes a separation of conflict-motivated aggression and control motivated aggression, and fail to rightly assess severity of injury, sexual violence, and ex-partner violence (Kimmel 2002).

Studies do support symmetry in IPV, but this is only when "no contexts, motives, and consequences are considered" (Chan 2011). Women typically undergo more long-lasting and severe forms of abuse, with fewer opportunities to escape the relationship (Wallace & Roberson 2016).

This is also evidenced by the psychological outcomes of IPV by gender. A review found "women suffer disproportionately from IPV, especially in terms of injuries, fear, and posttraumatic stress." (Caldwell et al 2016) while 85% of men reported "no fear" during their experience of IPV (Caldwell et al 2016).

Multiple reviews [x] [x] [x] which consider forms and motives have found gender symmetry in the rate in which IPV is committed, but gender asymmetry in the methods and motivations; men's does prove more severe.

Men still do commit the majority of IP batteries, strangulations, beatings, violence with weapons, sexual violence, stalking, and, absolutely undeniably, IP murder; murder being the key point of that discussion, and what you also observed.

"No wonder the stats [on pedophiles] are skewed"

These statistics comparing CSA perpetrators by gender come from self-reported victims of both sexes. They don't have any motivation to depict men in any particular light.

What I did say: The majority of pedophiles are men, or at least child predators, as we see the majority of people who self-report victimization expressing having had exclusively male perpetrators.

What I didn't say: No pedophiles are female.

Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men.

You have to accept that. And not excuse it either. Some crimes just are genuinely committed mostly by men.

I have researched "The Empathy Gap." You must know I have. The points made by (I assume, the book of such title, where the term in reference to men seems to originate from) are the exact same MRA talking points you dish out, which can be debunked or explained as not originating from a "lack of empathy" for men.

I can suggest you continue working on your own blatantly revealed empathy gap, especially before telling anyone else to fix theirs.

[80sdragonbreath]

Consent is something I thought you might be well-versed on, don't reduce your accountability to obtain consent, EVER, like you just tried to do.

Say it with me: "Consent. Is. Mandatory."

I really get tired having to explain consent to feminists, of all people.

...

"men commit the majority of IP murder." - This is correct now, but it used to be equal in the 1970 and 1980s. What changed was the invention of women's shelters, that ironically gave murderers a place to remove themselves to. There are no such shelters for men, nor any societal pressures for men to remove themselves to a place of safety where they aren't going to murder. Funnily enough, those 343 studies actually cover equal IP murder rates, which you would have spotted if you had read them...

...

"Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men."

This is the same argument as "men commit the vast majority of rapes". In the case of rape, it's because we legally define rape so that women are incapable of raping men. This skews the stats, because every time a woman rapes a man, it's defined as "an unwanted sexual encounter", and not rape.

In the case of female pedophiles, we're not even looking for them, and we're booing professional female-pedophile-researchers off stage and deplatforming them simply for suggesting that there are any female pedophiles. This skews the stats almost exclusively towards your opinion. This doesn't make your opinion correct.

...

Consent. Learn it. Obtain it. Stop if you don't have it.

[toomuchlabor]

Posted by justinontikt0k

[80sdragonbreath]

I looked up this study.

It's interesting what sort of spin you can put on "academic research". Really interesting.

For example, the study claims that these are the demographics of the perpetrators:

[Quote]:

Most men who had sexual feelings towards children were heterosexual (91.9%), did not work with children (81.6%), participated in the workforce (73.4%), only ever had sex with women (64.9%), were born in Australia (62.9%), had no children in their household (62.8%), were married or living with their partner (60.5%), white (57.2%), and lived in the city (50.5%). The greatest proportion of these men were aged 18 to 34 years (47.8%), had a university degree (39.8%), and had an annual household income of less than AUD $80,000 (36.5%).

[End quote]

But here's where it gets interesting:

If you look at what they are NOT saying with those stats (i.e. the reverse of each stat):

8% of men were gay (only 2% of the general population is gay) 18% worked with children 26% were unemployed 35% had had gay sex 37% were immigrants 37% had children of their own 40% were single parents 43% were non-caucasian 50% lived outside the city 60% were uneducated

...

So we know who we're looking for: uneducated gay brown immigrants living outside the city who work with children.

I can't tell you which demographic that is, but the clue is their prophet was also like that.

...

But why waste the opportunity to tar ALL men with the brush that should rightfully be reserved for those 294 mostly immigrant men that they found? It's cheap and easy and sells newspapers.

...

And there's yet another way of looking at this study, which would have been the default if they were looking at female offenders:

Men were 2x more likely to offend if they had been abused as a child. And since we know that the majority of child abuse is carried out by mothers acting alone (and of that, 2/3rds is the mother abusing BOYS), we should be strategizing to stop mothers abusing boys.

Boys abused by mothers end up abusing children later in life.

I GUARANTEE that if we were looking at female perpetrators, we would be saying "Oh those poor women! They obviously need MUCH MORE SUPPORT!"

So why the hate against men? Why don't men and boys need our support?

Because of "The Empathy Gap".

Literally no one cares. "Cry me a river". "But muh menz".

...

You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys.

[vulturesbones]

"You want to stop child abuse? Stop mothers abusing boys."

This is an awful take on the topic of pedophilia.

Below the cut I will cover:

OP's viewpoint

Pedophilia and gender

Risk factors for pedophilia

Abusive mothers

Abuse and gender

The 'empathy gap'

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.

I think you need to deeply reevaluate your "egalitarianism." And rid yourself of double standards; the men who commit violence hold the responsibility for the violence they commit.

[80sdragonbreath]

I don't appreciate the sharing of private messages to a public space. You don't have my consent to do so.

But to address just a couple of your points:

You're demonstrably wrong about men committing the lion's share of IPV, and you ARE aware of this since we covered it in PRIVATE messaging, which now makes you disingenuous.

(PDF) References Examining Assaults by Women on Their Spouses or Male Partners: An Updated Annotated Bibliography

PDF | This annotated bibliography describes 343 scholarly investigations (270 empirical studies and 73 reviews) demonstrating that women are

343 scholarly articles showing that women are as violent as men in IPV.

...

Female pedophilia:

Introduction to The Female Pedophile - Interview with expert Dr Michelle Elliott, Psy.D.

Dr. Michele Elliot, Psy.D., is the leading world expert on women who rape and molest children. She shares her startling research that shows

^^ We're not even looking for female pedophiles, which makes it all the more dangerous, as they get jobs with children. For your info, Michelle Elliott (above) got booed off stage at a conference to counter child abuse and child rape for merely suggesting that female pedophiles existed.

It's a taboo topic, so it's no wonder the stats are skewed to make it look like men are the sole perpetrators. Even world-class researchers on the subject are deplatformed, quite literally.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/please-help-im-30-and-obsessed-with-justin-bieber/news-story/a6240759aa107a4440f7f2c04a135440

Middle aged women frequently get obsessed with child stars

Justin Bieber's Middle-Aged Female Fan Is Arrested for Trespassing at His Beverly Hills Home

The 40-year-old woman was said to be coming at Bieber's temporary house multiple times as she was caught showing up at the house two times l

Lastly, I can recommend you research "The Empathy Gap", rather than just assume stuff that you don't know about.

[embrace-the-matriarchy]

Human anatomy. It’s really just that simple and straightforward, y’all.

Images (except for Twitter screenshot, obvs) found here [x]

[radfem-is-rad]

The penis has this weird acceptance in our daily lives: boys and men will sketch a poorly made drawing of a penis and put it everywhere (buildings, playground equipment, school bathrooms, the list goes on) and they get little to no punishment and no one bats an eye because it is normal.

But then, a woman constructs this beautifully artistic depiction of a vagina and really truly, it is breathtaking. Except, this is apparently the biggest taboo one can commit. Suddenly you get people yelling at you “not all women have vaginas” and it’s offensive and inappropriate and think of the children (who 50% of have a vagina) and a shit ton of other things telling us that it is unacceptable in our society to have a vagina.

Well fuck you, I am female, I have a vagina, and I don’t shave it. The double standard is old, tired, and needs to be put to rest. Women will always exist with their physical bodies, get over it. Female has meaning. Woman has meaning. The vagina, vulva, ovaries, and other female exclusive body parts are beautiful and I will never feel bad for having them.

Why is it that no one contests that men have penises. Why is it only women who are forced to say that some women have penises. God I hate this whole thing.

[just4catsinatrenchcoat-deactiva]

Man: Draws dicks everywhere.

Populace:

Woman: Draws a vulva or uterus once

Populace: Wtf? You know kids will see that? Why are you obsessed with your genitals you freak?

[mistmoonandheart]

I was watching a documentary the other day on buildings in ancient Britain and during the Roman period as a protection spell they put penises carved into the rock all over this huge wall in Britain that separates the north and the south when the Romans first came and colonized Britain and it’s just so funny to me that the penis is used as a protection symbol because it’s supposed to be strong and variable when if you kick them they go down like a sack of potatoes

[femclasscirce]

Not to derail this important post, but I just wanna add something to that last comment - which is 100% true.

The penis was a protective symbol in ancient Rome, and was a visible part of daily life. Dick carvings were usually located on bridges, at road crossings, on street corners, anywhere accidents were likely to happen. That’s because Romans conceived of the penis as apotropaic - that is, a protection against the evil eye.

The tradition actually goes back to ancient Greece. There, you would find statues combining the bust of a deity, whether male or female, with an erect penis. These statues, called hermai, were placed at locations prone to accidents (such as a stadium, roads, bridges etc) but also at borders and boundaries, as means of security. The penis was crafted on the statues irrespective of the deity’s sex, to symbolize the protection of that specific deity - it had nothing to do with the physique of the goddess/god in question. (And yet today hermai are used by TRAs who didnt do their research as “proof” that “Aphrodite was trans”)

So ancient Greeks and Romans conceived of the penis as a repellant against the evil eye, which was *surprise surprise* represented by the vulva. In their minds, the penis repelled the evil eye by essentially breaking through it, in a manner that is pretty obviously a metaphor for intercourse.

(There is a lot to say about the associations of female biology with evil in Greek & Roman culture, as well as the idea of “domesticating” women through intercourse, but we dont have the time to unpack all that right now)

So here you go people - men have drawn dicks, worshipped dicks, sculpted dicks for various (often misogynistic) reasons for literal millennia, but a woman who creates beautiful diagrams of female genitalia for educational purposes is “obsessed with genitals” and a “vagina fetishist”.

[80sdragonbreath]

Woman: goes out naked

Populace:

Man: goes out naked

Populace: SEX OFFENDER

Yeah, there are double standards everywhere you look.

[80sdragonbreath]

Female beauty standards

As usual - for those who don't get the point of my posts - this is mostly NOT about female beauty standards, but the title is a way of introducing a topic that I want to write about.

I seem to have a lot of radfem posts on my feed, which is fine by me.

Some of them talk about how female beauty standards are enforced by (oppressive) males. I'm sure they mean "men", but they simply want to slide in a covert and subtle dehumanization, because why not.

A few of the commenters (also radfems) suggest that ALL of men's sexuality is pedophilic in nature, being that men apparently prefer hairless women, and younger women in general.

Logic, reason and biology have never been radfems' strongest skills, so let's unpack it here.

...

PCOS - PolyCystic Ovarian Syndrome - is an endocrine imbalance most often caused by late-gestational maternal stress events.

The symptoms include: deeper voice, higher-than-normal (and darker) body hair sometimes verging on excess hair (mustache, sideburns, arm hair, leg hair, pubic hair, and even chest hair), and reduced reproductive function.

A percentage of PCOS sufferers also have body dysmorphia, and when coupled with additional biological issues such as lack of dihydrogentestosterase, results in the woman identifying as lesbian.

So we can expect radfems to be overrepresented in the sample size of PCOS sufferers.

...

I find this interesting for the following reasons:

The dig at men finding excess body hair unattractive could be seen as a hidden factor in PCOS sufferers disdain for men not finding THEM attractive. It's personal.

It wasn't ever about beauty, that's a primary school level analysis. It's actually about fertility - which in my opinion is the primary attraction factor that men judge women by.

It's this second point that is worth looking at.

It is in humanity's best interests for men to avoid mating with women who have lower reproductive capability, and vice-versa.

If excess body hair is a sign of lower fertility, then it stands to reason that men would prefer a woman with less excess hair. Not NO hair, just less excess hair. No visible mustache, for example.

From a radfems' perspective, it will look as if men are oppressing all women by demanding unrealistic beauty standards (such as a lack of body hair in places where many radfems find it growing).

However this is a) confirmation bias, and b) actually natural and not oppressive. It's ensured the survival of the species. It's men's automatic judgement of who is MORE fertile or LESS fertile.

My opinion is that men's attraction to women is primarily based on fertility. Women are at their most fertile around the ages of 21-23 and men consistently rate women in that age range as the most attractive, with attraction waning on both sides of the age range.

...

A point of honesty: I find women with a little more body hair than usual more attractive.

...

And in a rare moment of self-reflection, it could well be that I am unconsciously attracted to the stressed-out maternal figures that are or were in my family line. It would stand to reason.

Thoughts below:

[normalfeminist]

Male rage is so immature. Like a little hissy fit. Two year old having a temper tantrum -behaviour.

Women's anger simmers, it is righteous and justified. It is ultimately driven by love, because hate will ultimately show when you love enough.

[cheshireinthemiddle]

Clearly you havent been watching reality shows or even just the common social media video.

Women are not above men. They are equal and are capable of the ssme irrational anger and stupidity.

And if you disagree, you probably see women as inherently superior.

[80sdragonbreath]

"Women's anger ... is ultimately driven by love" #killallmen #yesallmen #just read a radblr post once in a while I'm not sure women are capable of real love. But they ARE capable of real anger.

[marbleguard]

it's so creepy that everything about males is parasitic, all the way from the way sperm invades the egg and then uses a woman's body for 9 months, to the parasitism of all forms male-female relationships-- the brother is a parasite on the sister who is made to cook and clean up after him whenever mom is not around, the husband is a parasite on the wife in much the same way with the addition of the sacrifice of her own ambitions and labor (both physical and emotional) in support of her husband's life plans. Even the male pupil is the parasite of the female pupil, as when he becomes disruptive he is put next to a well-behaved girl who suffers as a result, having to sacrifice her learning time to teach him what he missed while he was being a nuisance. Everywhere you turn you'll find a male sucking the life out of a female in one way or another.

[80sdragonbreath]

(Cave) Men: WE KIL BIZN. NOW FUD.

(Cave) Women: Erhmergerd that's so PARASITIC.

(Cave) Men: WE MAK FYRE! FUD TAST BETTA

(Cave) Women: Erhmergerd that's so PARASITIC.

Men: Hm. This rock burns slowly releasing heat to keep our women and children warm! Let's dig up thousands of tonnes of it so our women are safe warm and happy!

Women: Erhmergerd that's so creepy AND PARASITIC.

Men: Uh, what? Anyway, we made communication devices so you can talk to your female relatives many miles away!

Women: Erhmergerd that's so creepy AND PARASITIC.

Men: Hey, hold on? Wait are you also taking my taxes and paying for all your stuff, and then taking half my belongings ad salary too? I'm not sure that was part of the deal.

Women: Erhmergerd that's so creepy AND PARASITIC.

...

I'm guessing women haven't collectively looked in the mirror recently. Taking what isn't yours is....literally creepy and parasitic.

[crabs-and-bongos]

Why do people need subtitles to watch a show in English? I don't get it. What is wrong with the ears of young people?

[0ttosbackinpurgatory]

Modern movies and shows tend to have very unbalanced mixing. Also, a common trend in modern movies is more realistic dialogue (mumbling) that is not as crisp as it was in previous eras of film making.

[khanuckle-deactivated20250628]

I’m eating corn chips and they be crunchy and loud as hell and also I’m half deaf I think

[kragehund-est]

audio processing issues and also crunchy food

[mornington-the-crescent]

I read faster than they speak.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

ditto. And I'm hardly 'young'.

[cheshireinthemiddle]

I dont trust my hearing sometimes. I gotta make sure.

[80sdragonbreath]

THIS is the reason for subtitles. He's speaking English.

[cheshireinthemiddle]

I dont wanna sound offensive, but that is gibberish to me.

[80sdragonbreath]

Me too. And I'm originally from England! But I understand him more than I understand Liberals.

[crabs-and-bongos]

Why do people need subtitles to watch a show in English? I don't get it. What is wrong with the ears of young people?

[0ttosbackinpurgatory]

Modern movies and shows tend to have very unbalanced mixing. Also, a common trend in modern movies is more realistic dialogue (mumbling) that is not as crisp as it was in previous eras of film making.

[khanuckle-deactivated20250628]

I’m eating corn chips and they be crunchy and loud as hell and also I’m half deaf I think

[kragehund-est]

audio processing issues and also crunchy food

[mornington-the-crescent]

I read faster than they speak.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

ditto. And I'm hardly 'young'.

[cheshireinthemiddle]

I dont trust my hearing sometimes. I gotta make sure.

[80sdragonbreath]

THIS is the reason for subtitles. He's speaking English.