Saturday, 28 January 2017

HOMOSEXUALITY AND PAEDOPHILIA

BLOG NOW ALSO AVAILABLE ON   thinkingcatholicism.org

thinkingcatholicism.org




HOMOSEXUALITY AND PAEDOPHILIA


DR JOE KORT - PSYCHOLOGIST


Homosexuality and Paedophila: The False Link

BY: Joe Kort, Ph.D. Psychotherapist, Certified Sex and Relationship Therapist at Joe Kort & Associates, PC www.JoeKort.com

 It is so hard to believe that people are still trying to use the purported link between pedophilia and homosexuality. The old, tired argument that pedophilia is linked with homosexuality is wrong on many levels.

First, we need to clarify our definitions. When discussing sexual abuse and molestation of children, there’s often conflict over terminology. One frequently quoted researcher on the topic of homosexuality and child molestation, Gregory Herek, a research psychologist at the University of California, defines pedophilia as “a psychosexual disorder characterized by a preference for prepubescent children as sexual partners, which may or may not be acted upon.” He defines child sexual abuse as “actual sexual contact between an adult and someone who has not reached the legal age of consent.” Not all pedophiles actually molest children, he points out. A pedophile may be attracted to children but never actually engage in sexual contact with them. Quite often, pedophiles never develop a sexual orientation toward other adults.

Herek points out that child molestation and child sexual abuse refer to “actions,” without implying any “particular psychological makeup or motive on the part of the perpetrator.” In other words, not all incidents of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by pedophiles. Pedophilia can be viewed as a kind of sexual fetish, wherein the person requires the mental image of a child — not necessarily a flesh-and-blood child — to achieve sexual gratification.

Rarely does a pedophile experience sexual desire for adults of either gender. They usually don’t identify as homosexual; the majority identify as heterosexual, even those who abuse children of the same gender. They are sexually aroused by extreme youth, not by gender.



In contrast, child molesters often exert power and control over children in an effort to dominate them. They do experience sexual desire for adults but molest children episodically, for reasons apart from sexual desire, much as rapists enjoy power, violence, and controlling their humiliated victims. Indeed, research strongly suggests that a child molester isn’t any more likely to be homosexual than heterosexual.

In fact, some research shows that for pedophiles, the gender of the child is immaterial. Accessibility is more the factor in whom a pedophile abuses. This may explain the high incidence of children molested in church communities and fraternal organizations, where the pedophile may more easily have access to children.

In these situations, an adult male is trusted by those around him, including children and their families. Males are often given access to boys to mentor, teach, coach, and advise. Therefore, a male pedophile may have easier access to a male child. In trying to make sense of an adult male’s sexually abusing a male child, many of us mislabel it as an act of homosexuality, which it isn’t.

Feminists have argued for years that rape is not a sex act but an act of violence using sex as a weapon. In the same way, a pedophile abusing a child of the same sex is not perpetrating a homosexual act but an act of violence and exploitation using sexuality. There is a world of difference between these two things, but it requires a subtle understanding of the inner motivation of the abuser.

To call child molestation of a boy by a man “homosexual,” or that of a girl by a man “heterosexual,” is to misunderstand pedophilia. No true pedophile is attracted to adults, so neither homosexuality nor heterosexuality applies. Accordingly, Herek suggests calling men’s sexual abuse of boys “male-male molestation,” and men’s abuse of girls “male-female molestation.”

Interestingly, Anna C. Salter writes, in Predators, Pedophiles, Rapists and other Sex Offenders, that when a man molests little girls, we call him a “pedophile” and not a “heterosexual.” Of course, when a man molests little boys, people say outright, or mutter under their breath, “homosexual.” Herek writes that because of our society’s aversion to male homosexuality, and the attempts made by some to represent gay men as a danger to “family values,” many in our society immediately think of male-male molestation as homosexuality. He compares this to the time when African-Americans were often falsely accused of raping white women, and when medieval Jews were accused of murdering Christian babies in ritual sacrifices. Both are examples of how mainstream society eagerly jumped to conclusions that justified discrimination and violence against these minorities. Today, gays face the same kind of prejudice.

Most recently, we’ve seen gay men unfairly turned out of the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of this myth that gay men are likely to be child molesters. Keeping gays out of scouting won’t protect boys from pedophiles.

In reality, abuse of boys by gay pedophiles is rare, and the abuse of girls by lesbians is rarer still. Nicholas Groth is a noted authority on this topic. In a 1982 study Groth writes:



Are homosexual adults in general sexually attracted to children, and are pre-adolescent children at greater risk of molestation from homosexual adults than from heterosexual adults? There is no reason to believe so. The research to date all points to there being no significant relationship between a homosexual lifestyle and child molestation.

There appears to be practically no reportage of sexual molestation of girls by lesbian adults, and the adult male who sexually molests young boys is not likely to be homosexual.

Herek writes, similarly, that abuse of boys by gay men is rare, and that the abuse of girls by lesbians is rarer still.

The topic of female-female molestation continues to be largely ignored. There are few books on female sex offenders, particularly about mothers sexually abusing their daughters. I can find no books on mothers who sexually abuse their sons. There is one book by Hani Miletski, M.S.W., entitled Mother-Son Incest: The Unthinkable Taboo. Unthinkable is an appropriate word — so much so that there is nothing else in the literature on this topic, even though female pedophiles and female child molesters certainly exist.

We know so much more than we did historically and yet have a long way to go. We can understand child sexual abuse further when people’s bias and prejudice are removed and the evidence is empirical and scientific.

PAT SAYS:

Being attracted to adults of the opposite sex is to be a heterosexual.

Being attracted to adults of your own sex is to be a homosexual.

Being attracted to adults of both sexes is to be a bisexual.

Being attracted to pre pubescent individuals of either sex is to be a paedophile. 

Being attracted to post pubescent but minor individuals is to be an ephebophile.


I am sure there can be all kinds of variations that are best explained by science, biology, psychology and psychiatry.  

It is IGNORANCE to say that homosexuality and paedophilia are connected.

AND those of us who have spent our lifetimes dealing with PEOPLE are well aware that the world is not short of IGNORAMUSES !



******

BLOG NOW ALSO AVAILABLE ON    thinkingcatholicism.org

thinkingcatholicism.org


57 comments:

  1. Bishop Pat this is a timely and important contribution to the on-going and sensitive topic of priests who are acting out sexually. The more reactionary and Right Wing authorities of the Church have been keen to link gay priests with those who sexually abuse children; it is in their interests to scapegoat and to shift the blame. There is no connection whatsoever to gay men (who happen to be priests, and who may be acting out sexually with other men - adults fully able to give consent) and those who sexually offend against children (as you say, pre or just pubescent). However there is a striking feature of sexual abuse cases in the Western world involving priests, especially in the US and developed worlds. The vast majority of priests who have been sexually offending have been doing so with teenage males. This group far outweighs all other incidences. In many of these cases the priests (sexually active gay men) have been sexually offending with teenage boys who are gay and are in many cases sexually experienced. They may well not be emotionally or effectively experienced, but then that probably applies to the priests who are offending against them as well. I share this insight with you as a priest who has spent many years dealing with such situations. I share it with you in order to re-enforce what you say about this being a complex and certainly far from black and white situation. In no way am I doing so to justify, let alone excuse, sexual offending by priests, gay or straight, for I truly believe that priests are called to live lives of continence and chastity if they are to be faithful and true to their calling (I accept that you may well disagree with me on this). But I offer this to try to shed some light where more heat is generated than any other subject covered on your excellent and essential blog. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If we are all made in the image and likeness of GOD then the arguments that have been going on fail.

    GODs love is infinitely more capable than our version of understanding why it is there are more combinations of love and attraction in the human condition that purists can define.

    Yes it maybe said that in the act of procreation of the human species that a man and a woman are it and not let any man put it assunder. But apparently thats has even come to pass that procreation has no need of the token donation given by a man.

    If I have not LOVE then I am an empty vessel.

    Lets get with the acceptance LOVE programme lolol

    ReplyDelete
  3. Some people thrive on stereotypes which is not a good thing. Being gay or straight (terms I am not too fond of) has nothing to do with being a paedophile. I do not know why adults may be sexually attracted to children. The tendency has been around since the dawn of time it would seem. This does not make it acceptable or right. Why are religious types so apparently high on the alleged offender list I do not know. I can only hazard a guess it has something to do with lifestyle education and environment

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good comment at 11:32. I also think it is true, however, that some of these offending priests have targeted teenage boys who are not gay.

    If a young fellow "catches the eye" of one of those with this proclivity, they don't care if the boy is gay or straight.

    The priests may indeed be "emotionally or effectively inexperienced" like the teenage boy. However, there is an excuse for a teenage boy to be inexperienced, etc. - even if he is sexually active (as many boys are today).

    When I hear anyone refer to a perpetrator priest being "emotionally immature", etc., it smacks of making excuses for him.

    The power dynamic between a priest and a teenage boy is vastly different. The abuser priest ALWAYS abuses his power and trusted position.

    Offending ephebophile priests are criminals and there is no place for them in the priesthood. Potential offenders SHOULD and MUST be screened out in the seminary.

    What is most worrying about the Maynooth scandal and all the other related issues that have arisen and are arising, on Bishop Buckley's blog (including the malign and nefarious efforts to suppress and silence him), is that obviously sexually problematic men are being allowed to progress unimpeded through seminary, to ordination and into parishes, where they continue to misbehave and act out immaturely - with every potential of great scandal to the faithful.

    It is astonishing that bishops are permitting this to happen and, rather than purify a corrupted and corrupting system, are hellbent on "shooting the messenger".

    WE ARE ALL WONDERING WHY???? AND THE RIDICULOUS ATTEMPTS AT HACKING THIS BLOG ONLY AMPLIFIES THE QUESTION!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Being the father of a child who was raped I have to say that preditors, paedophiles or obviously not well or on the Evil side.

    I may have had to forgive them but not love, that would be a wrongly misplaced love.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somehow I cannot see how you can forgive them?

      Maybe you need to leave that to God - and only if they are truly sorry for hurting your child!

      Delete
    2. Hank I can't imagine what it's like being the parent of a raped child. I can only guess at using energy to help heal the child and those close to him/her and leave the rest to God and the law

      Delete
    3. Oh Big Hank. That must weigh heavily on your heart. Anything that hurts our children is hard to bear. If you can forgive them you are already a good man in my eyes.

      Delete
    4. So very sorry to learn that your child was raped. So very sorry indeed.

      May our Father bless that precious child. And may he bless you, Hank.

      Delete
    5. Big Hank, I don't know what words may offer comfort but I offer you and your family my prayers.

      May God bless, protect and heal ye all.

      CR

      Delete
  6. Bishop,
    Are these two sites identical in content?
    So far, they seem to be!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes they are.

      Because of this week's hacking I have thinkingcatholicism.org as a back up site.

      I may MIGRATE to it from BLOGGER when all my readers know about it.

      What do you think ???

      Delete
    2. I don't understand. Why the two sites.what purpose will it serve if it duplicates information

      Delete
    3. It will help stave off hacking

      Delete
    4. Good plan

      CR

      Delete
  7. When will the institutional Catholic Church accept that patriarchy, power and paedophilia are causally and proportionally linked?

    Until priests express in their lives and self-understanding the servant model of discipleship commanded by Christ himself (until they reject the self-aggrandizing and self-corrupting model of priesthood which makes demi-Gods of mere men), paedophilia will continue as a rotten legacy in the Church.

    Had I my way, I should bulldoze the Vatican to the ground and send out the pope and Curia members as barefooted beggars. What an example to priests this would set! What a return to spiritual basics it would mark? The early years of Christ's 'ekklesia' (NOT the Roman Catholic Church institution ) as a vibrant and persuasive sign of Jesus' actual presence in the world rather than just verbal affirmation of it. But then I awoke. It was all nothing more than a wonderful dream.

    The pope and episcopacy were meant to lead by example...Christ's example, not by a watered-down and worldly compromise. The episcopacy is failing the Church: it is failing Christ. And the buck stops with the papacy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I share your dream.

      Delete
  8. If it means an end to the comments section it would be great. less crap for the usual loons

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But what about all the excellent constructive comments.

      I think that these MAKE the blog ???

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 16:55

      You're definitely one of the loons.

      Farewell.

      Delete
    3. Plenty of good comments Pat and it makes for an interesting read or discussion at times, but I think many of them also have overstepped the mark and are off-putting. For me, the comments haven't always respected the fine line between free speech and invasion of privacy. There's no doubt that gossip will entertain and titillate people; I am just not sure it will advance your overall objective. I'd rather have a thought through, properly sourced story on a blog, than people putting out random comments that might or might not be true. Might be a shame to lose some of the other interesting contributions though I agree. I quite enjoy Magna Carta's and MMM's contributions for example.

      Delete
    4. I doubt if people appreciate being called "the usual loons"!
      I'm afraid I find that very disrespectful and arrogant. To refuse to give people a platform to voice their concerns would surely defeat the purpose of having a blog at all. Perhaps you can revise your attitude to the rest of us a little

      Delete
  9. Why was there basically zero coverage of the bishops' visit to Rome on the media? They mustn't have discussed much of importance. At least they got to say hello to the pope.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The comment section is definitely an important part of the blog in my opinion anyways.

    ReplyDelete
  11. God Pat you have such an unhappy face!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hate having pics taken.

      But I can assure you I am VERY HAPPY and DANGEROUSLY WELL :-)

      Delete
    2. Same, Bishop Pat. I end up looking jaw-droppingly handsome...or a total gargoyle on a wet and windy night.

      There's never a happy medium. (Sigh)

      Delete
    3. Pat was far from unhappy yesterday when I met him for Lunch and drinks in Belfast. In fact he was the happiest I have known him and he was in fighting mode when we met at the Europa Bus Centre. It was a great day out Pat.
      Armagh PP

      Delete
    4. Dear Fr? I thought our meeting yesterday was "confidential".

      You going public now?

      Delete
    5. Or have you been drinking too much?

      Delete
  12. MourneManMichael28 January 2017 at 19:18

    I agree with you @ 17:55. I find comments interesting when differing opinions are sensibly and cogently put, even when I disagree with them. I have to say though that I find some of the one line negative or hostile personalised rants of little value. But in posting them I suppose Pat's giving everyone equal fair play, but as someone said earlier, I think we just have to leave it to Pat's good judgement to bar the most extreme ones.
    To misquote Matthew 26:11: "The'poor' we will always have among us"
    MMM
    PS Thank you @17:46

    ReplyDelete
  13. To point out that the incidence of sexual assaults on boys is disproportionately high, when taking into account the numbers of homosexuals in the population, is not equating homosexuality with paedophilia but merely a matter of facing statistical facts. This is supported by numerous pieces of research published at the risk of academic isolation and attacks by those who wish it were not so. It is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you, slyly, equating homosexuality with paedophilia?

      Delete
    2. Looks like it.

      Delete
    3. 20:11, yes, it does. So, 19:23, care to take up the challenge? Or are you all mouth?

      Delete
    4. I can't imagine that the fact that during the 60s, 70s etc when schools and institutions were sex segregated and priests had access to boys while nuns had access to girls could possibly play a part in explaining the statistic....

      Delete
    5. My point is that if we look at most cases of sexual abuse they take place within the family. Why is that? Because the victim is easily accessible. If we apply that insight to the Church of the 60s, 70s, etc, it is also the case that the victims of abusive priests are much more likely to be boys because abusers had an ease of access to boys in a way they did not have with girls.

      @19:23 is disgracefully drawing a causal link between the incidence of homosexuality and the incidence of abuse. However, this is merely a correlation, not a causal relationship.

      If we take the general findings, these show that homosexuals are no more likely to abuse than heterosexuals. Therefore, this rules out the theory that a high number of homosexuals in the priesthood leads to a high incidence of abuse. Another theory might be that the priesthood attracts a very high percentage of paedophiles. Again, statistically, that has been shown to be untrue.

      Statistical facts are merely that. The chief challenge is in interpreting those statistics.

      Delete
    6. 21:36, you put your point very well, and I'm inclined to agree with you.

      Delete
  14. 17.53, 17.55, thank you. The comments make the blog in my opinion. The blog police officer has made another appearance at 17.46 questioning people's comments. If we lose free speech we lose the objective of the blog. He only likes Magna Carta' s and MMM's contributions by his own admission, but there are many more contributors to the blog like me and I want to hear so many of their views. Where has Dick gone in his armchair?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @19:42, I am pleased that you pay such close attention to my posts, though sorry that you have so little else to do or contribute. Are you not familiar with the use of the grammatical construction, "for example"? That's a pity, as that lack of familiarity causes you to lose the meaning of posts. Just think what else you are misunderstanding!

      It is of course ironic that your commitment to free speech does not extend to allowing anyone who disagrees with your rather disagreeable posts to write anything. So it is certainly to avoid this sort of petty drivel and attempts at policing opinion that I wrote my post.

      Delete
  15. 20.09 don't flatter yourself luv, I don't pay close attention to your comments. It's just that one tires of your same repetitive rant in the last week against fellow contributors. Your blog posts dear boy (shall we say) stick out like a sore thumb old chum.yawnnnnnn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well in the meantime, put your wig back on, reset your pacemaker and take your medication. Pat is perfectly capable of monitoring comments on the blog and really doesn't your ill-tempered and repetitive assistance. You like a story like they tell it in The Sun, I prefer it as they tell it in The Guardian. That's life, suck it up.

      Delete
  16. Yes in many ways I was raped as well but the important thing is always the child. Look after the child or any woman or man who has been raped or abused. Don't let them down always try to rebuild and protect them. The law by the way protects the guilty more than it fights for a victim.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Actually there is a link between homosexuality and paedophilia, or rather an overlap.
    The majority of paedophiles identity themselves as homosexual or bisexual.
    So men who happen to be attracted to men are more likely to be paedophiles compared to straight men.
    (N.B. I am NOT saying that they all have committed crimes or would act on it)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Paedophiles identify themselves as being sexually attracted to children. They are not, therefore, homosexual or bisexuals, or for that matter heterosexuals, who are people attracted to adults of the whatever gender. It is encouraging that you are NOT saying that not ALL have committed crimes. So what you are saying is that many have. As to the others you are NOT saying "they would act on it", implying that homosexuals or bisexuals have an intrinsic attraction towards children. I think your comment @22:42, is one of the more repulsive I've ever had the misfortune to read on this blog. Pure bigotry dressed up as imparting "facts" when you really don't know very much about your subject matter. Disgraceful.

      Delete
    2. Produce evidence for your claims.

      If what you said is true, then the same must be true of heterosexuality.

      Delete
  18. Anon9:40, you are making a logical error in assuming that someone who is homosexual cannot also be a pedophile. Just like a man who is attracted to women can also be attracted to men (bisexual). Sexual attractions are sometimes not simply limited to one category. I am sure this is why the above comment mentioned 'overlap'.
    To reply to the last comment, some evidence for that can be found in a psychiatric study by Freund and Watson in 1992. They found that convicted male pedophiles were 11 times more likely to also be attracted to men, that is, to have a homosexual orientation or homosexual tendencies.
    This is not to demonise gay people, but these figures are very disproportionate when you consider that they only make up approximately 1% of the population.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So what precise conclusion have you drawn from your extensive research on these statistics? That gay people are paedophiles?

      Delete
    2. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/04/22/cantor.homosexuality.church.abuse/

      Delete
  19. We are speaking about this from Bishop Pat's choice of topic today, and I imagine this is in the context of the Catholic Church.
    So, my conclusion is that, once someone looks into the facts, there seems to be ever more wisdom in why the Church teaches what it does in regard to men with a homosexual orientation or homosexual tendencies not being allowed to become Priests.
    As Dr Richard Fitzgibbons has unfortunately seen first-hand from the failure of Bishops and seminaries to enforce this, there is always a rationale behind all the Catholic Church's teachings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And let's not forget the perennial wisdom of the Church in banning men born outside of marriage or who are the products of a broken home. The Church has always taught that such men are not to be admitted to Holy Orders and we would do well to heed this wisdom.

      Delete
    2. Dr Fitzgibbons is so good at his job that he robustly declared Fr Shawn Ratigan to be in no way a paedophile.....the good Father then went along take lewd photos of children. Indeed, Father Ratigan's links with Opus Bono Sacerdotii rather indicate that he is not a man we would want to turn to for an objective assessment of the situation.

      Delete
  20. Just coming across this blog today. I want to add that the John Jay Report found that over 80% of clerical abuse of children (under 18) involved male children, and almost 80% of them were post-pubescent teenagers - between 13 and 17. That seems to be sufficient to conclude that this is an issue which has more to do with abusers who have a homosexual leaning, rather than outright 'pedophilia'. Given the recent revelations, let us hope that Maynooth is closed down before more abuse happens

    ReplyDelete
  21. Exactly. And let's hope that the sons of unmarried mothers and those from separated parents are also shown the door to avoid the pollution of the priesthood by these impure elements. We also need to fit machines to detect masturbators who are intrinsically disordered as the Church teaches. I wish we had more social science experts like 22:57 in the Church to help us! Also, what with Jews and Muslims getting cheeky again, I suggest we continue with the rules of the 4th Lateran enjoining that they wear different clothing.

    ReplyDelete