Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Who's Your Daddy? I Mean Rapist. Tips on How to Prevent Female Child Sexual Abuse: if we're going to deal with reality, that is, and not the myths

This man raped and burned his ten year old step-daughter. His name is Chris Newbury, and he is from Wichita, KS. He was caught in 2009:
[image of this child rapist/incest perpetrating arsonist is from here]

This next image is of a father who raped his daughters and made them bear his children, and killed his children who were also his grandchildren. 47-year-old Daniel  Rinehart faces charges of murder, statutory rape and incest, after admitting to investigators that he is the father of at least two of his daughter's four children. The bodies of two of the children were found earlier this month in coolers on the property. Investigators say one of the other daughters tipped them off about the alleged incest.

This is what he looks like. He has lived in Kansas City, Missouri:
 
[image of this rapist/incesting/murdering father/grandfather is from here]

What follows is the image of a father who raped and videotaped the rape of his daughter, and posted it online. He is also accused of having sexually abused other girls. His name is Kenneth John Freeman (ironically) and he is a former Washington State Sheriff’s Deputy. He was arrested and jailed in Hong Kong on Wednesday. Freeman is wanted for multiple counts of child rape and for videotaping and photographing these assaults. In plain English, he raped his daughter several times and then posted video and pictures of it online. He posted $50,000 bond and fled. This is what he looks like:


The following photo is of Jonathan Goodrum, a 19 year-old man who has pleaded guilty of raping his 1-day-old daughter.
1-day-old and still in the hospital, after a routine examination, vaginal tears were found on the infant. Police are only saying the tears were made with an “unknown object”. He may only serve 11 months in jail, and while he won't be able to have access to his infant daughter, he may be able to have access to his one year old daughter. This is what he looks like. I am not sure where he lives.

[image of this father-raper of his one day old infant girl is from here]

What are Father's Rights Activists doing about this? What laws are they working to change so this cannot happen?

Prevent fathers, step-fathers, and father figures from having unsupervised time with any children (including, especially, their own) and their nieces, any future grandkids, and neighbor's kids.

That alone would decrease child sexual abuse DRAMATICALLY. But who cares about girls being safe, right? (When father's "wrongs" are at risk?)

Fathers who care about girls would don't work to make fathers across the board have unlimited access or unsupervised time with their daughters. Not if they are clued into the reality of who is doing the abusing.

Whenever a social movement is organised by and for a structurally powerful groups's rights of access to be strengthened, enforced, bolstered, or buoyed, the movement is NOT a human rights movement, but one working AGAINST the oppressed.

If fathers care about girls more than they care about themselves, they will make sure laws, policies, and customs are strict when it comes to men having unsupervised time with girls, ESPECIALLY INCLUDING the known and trusted men in the girls' lives.

How can you know that girls' perp is most likely to be her father and fight for the rights of fathers to have more time with girls? What kind of deranged human "wrongs" proponents would organise around THAT?

23 comments:

Julian Real said...

From the comments that are coming in about this post--none of which will get posted, btw, as they are not respectful--it seems some men are deeply upset by my implication that more than one percent of fathers abuse their daughters. Or that fathers sexually abusing daughters is normal, not aberrant behavior. Or that rape is normal, not aberrant.

If I overstate a phenomenon, it is to get the apathetic and denial-clinging masses to wake the fuck up to the fact that there's an atrocity going on.

And if you're more upset about fathers being maligned than girls being raped by their fathers, well, that shows where your sympathies are.

The point of this post is to say: what are fathers, collectively, doing to end fathers raping their daughters? Are there ANY organisations of fathers designed to take this issue on? Is there, oh, say, ONE? Maybe two. Clearly it would be far too much to ask daddies to form three organisations to make sure fathers who rape their daughters are put away in prison forever.

Or is a girl's life not worth that much?

Julian Real said...

Let me put it this way:

What would have had to happen, socially, legally, and educationally, and in every other way, to prevent the victims of the men whose faces appear above, from being sexually abused by their fathers?

What would have worked to prevent those girls--aged one day to several years--from being violated, harmed, and having the whole course of their lives altered, their being traumatised and their humanity overridden by men's selfishness?

What would society have to do to prevent such crimes from ever happening again.

AND: is it not worth it to organise society so that such crimes CANNOT happen.

Are girls not worth that much?

0ok said...

Here's some questions for you:

Do you really think that only men sexually abuse children? What needs to be done to prevent the abuse of children by their mothers? http://www.montrealgazette.com/opinion/reader-comments/Sexually+abusive+unique/2502314/story.html for just an example.

If I say "do not leave children attended only by their mothers because they aren't safe", aren't I guilty of a fallacy? The same fallacy that you are guilty of?

You can't argue that the problem is too small (we don't know that, not enough research has been done, there is too much stigma attached), especially after overstating the phenomenon for male offenders.

There is an atrocity going on, and by focusing ONLY on male offenders, you are one of the apathetic denial clinging masses who needs to wake the fuck up, because you aren't helping.

This isn't an issue of "Men need to change/are unreliable". Nor is it women. Society needs to change, we need to figure out when children are at risk from either parent.

W said...

This exact same article could be written about mothers killing their own children. No one should have any unsupervised time with children by your logic.

Julian Real said...

0ok,

Do you really think that only men sexually abuse children?

No. I think any adult is in a position to abuse a child in any number of ways. Especially a parent.

What needs to be done to prevent the abuse of children by their mothers?

Children shouldn't be with mothers who sexually abuse their children.

If I say "do not leave children attended only by their mothers because they aren't safe", aren't I guilty of a fallacy? The same fallacy that you are guilty of?

No. Because the most common form of incest and rape is father-daughter rape. And men are overwhelmingly the perpetrators of children. That's what all the stats and studies say. So ignore them if you want to, but women aren't afforded the same entitlement rights to sexually abuse people of any age that men are. So, no, it's not the same at all. I stick to known reality, not some speculation on your part, which you state here:

You can't argue that the problem is too small (we don't know that, not enough research has been done, there is too much stigma attached), especially after overstating the phenomenon for male offenders.

My point isn't that any mother abusing their child is good. My point is that father-daughter incest is the most common form of incest and therefore deserves to be organised against and stopped by fathers.

There is an atrocity going on, and by focusing ONLY on male offenders, you are one of the apathetic denial clinging masses who needs to wake the fuck up, because you aren't helping.

Well, if Nazis killed lots of Jews and a few non-Jews, that doesn't make their policies not anti-Semitic, right?

So the fact that some women also sexually abuse children doesn't detract from the larger picture--if you're willing to see it, of course--that men abuse women and girls disproportionately, that misogyny, not man-hating, IS a specific social problem, an institutional problem, and girls are abused by fathers and father-figures more than any other demographic, and the girls are abused BECAUSE they are girls. So there's something to that, no? And the abusers abuse because they have learned to be that selfish and callous to suffering they cause. And maybe women can't afford that level of selfishness and callousness AND be full-time parents. Maybe part-time parents can afford to be that checked out emotionally and spiritually from the welfare of their own children.

Julian Real said...

This isn't an issue of "Men need to change/are unreliable". Nor is it women. Society needs to change, we need to figure out when children are at risk from either parent.

Society needs to change, yes. And we do need to figure out when a child is at risk from either parent.

And we need to not be in denial about social patterns of abuse, and the fact that, for example, het men tend to beat up gay men. And that's due to homophobia. And sure, some gay men may beat up the occasional het guy, but that's not due to some social problem called heterophobia, right? Gay boys take their lives more than straight boys, right? Due to homophobia, not heterophobia. Due to gay boys being harassed and beaten by peers at school.

"Heterophobia" is not a social problem in the way that gay men and lesbian women getting beaten and killed by het men is.

And het men batter their female spouses sufficiently to cause damage. Do some women hit their husbands and boyfriends? Sure. Do they tend to do irreparable harm, physically? No.

So there's a pattern here, like the patterns of the rich having advantages over the poor. Like the Western nations destroying many other nations and their people.

And if one Indigenous person fights back, that's not "the same" as what is being done to Indigenous people across the globe.

And if one Indigenous society does violence to another, that doesn't "equal" what whites do to people of color. That doesn't mean genocide isn't happening, right?

I'm not willing to pull the lens in so close as to miss what those patterns and horrific realities are. Maybe you can afford to ignore those realities. I can't.

Of course some women abuse their kids. But if we look at the stats, the studies, the first hand reports, the nightmares, the accounts by people with childhood related post-traumatic stress, if you just listen to everyone you know, we see something emerge that only a fool would deny: men are the prolific perpetrators of all forms of sexual violence WAY more than women are, against ANY population, including against adult men.

And if I say men raping men is a problem, are you going to say "Well, women raping men is a problem too!" I hope not. Because that wouldn't have much to do with "reality", would it?

Is men's rampant sexual abuse of girls and women "natural"? All the feminists and I say no. I say men can be humane, just as "naturally" as men can be inhumane". But most men I speak with think men ARE naturally predatory, and come up with all manner of ridiculous theories to let each other off the hook.

If we men do this harm, let's own up to it and stop talking about "well, SHE does it TOO!!!" as if we're five years old.

Are you really trying to tell me that there isn't a social problem called "men's sexual violence against women and girls" and that even if there is, it is equal to "women's sexual violence against men and boys"?

Please cite ANY studies that show that to be the case, anywhere around the world.

Women don't stone men to death, but men do stone women to death. And ex-boyfriends are known to hunt down and kill their ex-girlfriends, and I don't know of a single case of an ex-girlfriend doing that to a guy she is still in love with and wants to "possess" or "prevent anyone else from loving". Do you?

So let's not be so damned ignorant and defensive about what's happening, okay?

Lelon said...

You are a very sad person. I am a father and will under no circumstances be treated like a criminal for being a father. What is being done by mothers who turned a blind eye to the obviously abusive men in their lives. Are they not as responsible? Collectively as a society we have failed. So I will protect my children from all evils, even the further destruction of the family as you suggest.

JENNIFER DREW said...

'Are you really trying to tell me that there isn't a social problem called "men's sexual violence against women and girls" and that even if there is, it is equal to "women's sexual violence against men and boys"?

Well said Julian because whilst many feminists myself included have never denied some women do commit sexual violence against their children - overwhelmingly it is men who commit sexual violence against women and girls.

But of course such claims are always made in a deliberate attempt to hide male acountability and once again put the focus on women's behaviour and women's actions.

Yes indeed where are the fathers' organisations all busily working together to prevent other fathers from committing sexual violence against their female children?

Or are these fathers organisations too busy concerning themselves with retaining their pseudo male rights of ownership over women and children since male ownership of women and children is a 'right' not a violation of all female human rights.

Lynn said...

I completely agree with Julian. Let's *first* look at the endemic of men that are sexually abusing their children, and other children, with impunity and at alarmingly high rates. If society can ever accept the high levels of tolerance we have for incest and acknowledge that something needs to be done about changing men's attitudes, and IF men ever get on the bandwagon (like that's ever going to happen??..not) the stage is then set to tackle the issue of women abusing their children and other children. The incidences of female sexual abusers is small, so very, very small in comparison. Preliminary studies show that of all convicted sex offenders the number of women is less than 1%, and some studies, taking into account under-reporting believe that the count could go as high as 6% of child sexual offenders being female. So, even at our biggest stretch of imagination, we're still looking at men being +94% of offenders.

Let's fix that problem first, coz if we do, and men stop being offenders, only then can men stand on their righteous "high-horses" and call the shots. And they will be entitled to do so, until then, to look at female sexual offenders is nothing more than a distraction from the real issue at hand.

Brodie said...

Julian, in this instance, I think you've worked too hard to make the facts fit your argument rather than developing an argument based around the facts.

Though slightly off topic, I think you do children, including little girls, a disservice by focusing exclusively on sexual abuse. Sexual abuse is certainly a problem that we must confront, but only a tenth of child abuse is sexual, and the other forms of abuse can do just as much damage the abused child. Limiting your focus to sexual abuse helps obscure the fact that, far more than a gender issue, child abuse is really a class issue. Nearly equal numbers of boys and girls are abused, but the children of of our poor and working class are 15 times more likely to be abused than children in better economic circumstances.

I also think you err in focusing only on girls. Take the oft quoted statistic that one in four girls will be sexually abused before the age of 18. That same report also stated that one in six boys will be sexually abused. How is that not worthy of our attention?

In addition, sexual abuse is hardly confined to parents. According to the DoJ, only a third of child molesters in prison sexually abused their own children or step-children. Though you've cited three high-profile cases involving fathers, you ignore that the abuse is more likely to come from outside of that relationship than within.

Finally, you are far too quick to dismiss female perpetrators. 25% of sexual abuse is perpetrated by women (and women commit 60% of abuse overall). You are correct in asserting that men are more likely to commit sexual abuse than women. However, 25% is hardly a number you can simply sweep under the rug.

CuriousMagician said...

You're the one who needs a wake-up call! What you're implying - restricting all men's contract with their children - would criminalize millions of otherwise good and normal men. Furthermore, if this mindset "I'm not allowed to spend alone time with my kids because I *might* abuse them" were instilled in society, it would not solve ANY problem, it would only make the issue worse; if you tell a young boy/teenager he is a potential rapist, you will RAISE a rapist! I would support no end of harsher punishments on men convicted of these crimes, but I find your post deeply insulting to all good fathers out there, not to mention mine. Maybe someday you will realize women are capable of just as much evil as men, and that most men aren't child-raping animals.

Julian Real said...

Lelon,

You are a very sad person.

Actually, it's been a pretty good week and I'm feeling pretty good. But thanks for your concern. ;)

I am a father and will under no circumstances be treated like a criminal for being a father.

Unless you are a criminal, right? I mean I don't know you from Adam, and have no idea what's motivating you to get so upset about this. Good fathers should WELCOME a discussion on fathers' raping their daughters, right? Because why would any "good" father want that issue swept under the rug?

Whose interests does taking the spotlight off of this issue serve? The girls being raped? I don't think so.

What is being done by mothers who turned a blind eye to the obviously abusive men in their lives. Are they not as responsible?

Are women responsible for MEN raping THEIR OWN daughters?????

Um, that would be a big ol' NO. Men, you see, are adults, with things like will and agency. So when we "big boys" act, we are responsible for what WE do. No one else. Not our mothers for once taking our favorite toy away, or our wives or girlfriends for not putting up cameras in every room to watch out to be sure her beloved spouse isn't raping their girl-child.

See, my point here, Lelon, is that MEN are responsible for what MEN do, women are not.

And the question your comment rather neatly evades is this one: "Why aren't there Father's Groups dedicated to eradicating the rape of girls by their fathers and father figures?"

Can you answer me that, instead of trying to pass the buck to the mom who didn't rape her child?

Seriously, can you answer that directly without evasion?

Julian Real said...

Collectively as a society we have failed.

I'd say MEN have failed. And yes, society has also failed.

But given that men run it--men are still in charge of every social, legal, religious, economic, and political system in this world, right? So why can't we name those with the power as MORE responsible, just as we ought to name the perpetrating parents as MORE responsible than the non-perpetrating ones, which you try and duck out of doing by bringing the focus over onto that no-good mom who let the girl's father rape her. Trust me, he doesn't usually do it with her around.

And he doesn't go to his wife's bed at night and say "Honey, I'm raping our daughter. Just so you know. Like 2-4 times a week now, for like, two months. I'm planning to continue doing it. So if you want to stop me, now would be a good time. Here's the phone. Call the police and get them to arrest me so I'll stop.

If he did that and she said, "Not now, honey, I'm wanting to go to sleep" I'd hold her accountable to that decision, but, regardless, HE'D be the one arrested for RAPE, not her. That would be because HE'S the rapist.

So I will protect my children from all evils,

And how will you do that, good father? Seriously. How will you do that. You going on every date with your daughter or son, to make sure they aren't part of a date rape scenario? You keeping an eye on them every minute they are with male relatives? Do you work outside the home? Are they ever away from you? Do they sometimes see doctors and teachers alone? Or preachers?

How are you going to protect them from all evils? Does your home computer have pornography running into it? Do all their friends' fathers have pornography that is completely inaccessible to your children?

even the further destruction of the family as you suggest.

I wish you well in your effort to prevent your children from being abused or neglected in any way. I do.

And my point is they'd be a hell of a lot safer if for the last thirty-five years, instead of organising to protect men's right to have access to pimped and raped women and girls, all those dads had been organising to stop fathers from raping their daughters. Just like priests should have been doing, instead of moving around from parish to parish.

You see how this works, right? Men protect one another's right to rape girls and women. That's a harsh truth. Please face it and do something constructive about it for your own children. Organise that group of fathers in your area, okay? And let me know how that goes.

Julian Real said...

To Jennifer and Lynn:

Thank you so much for your comments! It's going to get increasingly clear, the more comments I let through from outraged men, that their outrage is displaced onto me, rather than onto the fathers who ARE raping their daughters. And one has to wonder why that displaced rage? What is it about organising to stop fathers from raping girls don't these find appropriate, in terms of activist work and work for the betterment of all of society?

Men will organise to help mostly male gang members, if they are young. Men will organise to run Boy Scout troops, right? Men will work to lead sports teams of boys.

So how come men WILL NOT organise to STOP the rape of girls, daughters, by men and fathers. As you WELL NOTE, let's solve THAT problem and then take on mothers who are abusive sexually to their own children.

Surely these angry, angry men will have PLENTY of work to do to stop other fathers. Like, say, a lifetime's work, or longer?

So get busy dads. Time's a'wasting. More girls will be raped today and tomorrow, by fathers who were not stopped by YOU. And they'd just as soon you NOT WAIT to focus on "Moms too". They'd just as soon you get to work stopping the other fathers. Do you care, or don't you?

Julian Real said...

Brodie,

I think you've worked too hard to make the facts fit your argument rather than developing an argument based around the facts.

I think you're working strangely hard to divert the focus of the conversation. Please answer the question: why won't fathers organise to stop other fathers from raping their daughters?

Though slightly off topic, I think you do children, including little girls, a disservice by focusing exclusively on sexual abuse.

Brodie, trust me. Anyone who focuses attention on any form of abuse or neglect of children is not doing children a disservice. They ARE doing perpetrators of sexual abuse of children a disservice.

You might note the focus of this blog, as well as its name. It's not a blog devoted to focusing on all the ways boys and girls are harmed by society.

It's a blog focused on how white heterosexual men, in particular, will not take responsibility for the particular and widespread abuses and atrocities committed by them.

Seems to me there ought to be ONE blog with that focus by a white man, eh? What's wrong with that?

Sexual abuse is certainly a problem that we must confront,

But apparently later, at some other time, eh? Because there's always something more urgent, or more widespread to deal with.

How about you help organise fathers to stop other fathers from raping daughters, just for 2010, and then move on to all the other ways children are hurt in society.

How about that, Brodie? Can you make that ocmmitment? We're approaching the middle of February. So you've got ten and a half months of work ahead of you. Any reason what that would be a BAD idea? Would girls being raped by daddy not like you to do that work?

but only a tenth of child abuse is sexual, and the other forms of abuse can do just as much damage the abused child.

Well, sexual abuse does particular kinds of harm to children, Brodie. It's different than being whacked and being yelled at. Yes, all abuse does harm, but sexual abuse does a specific and horrific kind of harm, including to the sexuality of those children.

So yes, there needs to be groups dealing with physical and verbal abuse, and all forms of neglect. AND there can be a few groups of men, right?, who are fathers or who are not, who focus on stopping fathers from raping their daughters, rather than passing the buck to the women in the house.

Julian Real said...

Limiting your focus to sexual abuse helps obscure the fact that, far more than a gender issue, child abuse is really a class issue.

How convenient to take the focus off of what I focus on, explicitly: men's sexual violence against women and girls.

That's a much-neglected area of sustained focused activism for men, I'd say. I know of a few men's anti-rape groups. You gonna tell those guys they really need to shift their focus, because "rape" is more of a class issue?

Straight up, okay? RAPE is not a CLASS issue. RAPE is PRIMARILY (if not only) an issue of men dominating women and girls, men controlling women and girls, men violating women and girls. Men thinking women and girls exist to service men sexually. RAPE and Father-Daughter incest--fathers raping their daughters, that is--is THE most COMMON form of child sexual abuse in the world.

So why should anyone take their focus off of it? And how callous of you to recommend I do so.

Tell your sports buddies to take their focus off their favoritey sports and organise to stop fathers from raping their daughters, okay? Tell them to stop focusing on the pornography they are consuming, and get busy organising neighborhood by neighborhood, to stop fathers from raping their daughters.

Then, when you're done with that, come back here and tell me what I should be focused on. This blog focuses on quite a bit actually. Have you bothered to notice? I take on genocide, racism, misogyny, and sexual violence, primarily.

YOU go to work on the other issues that impact children negatively, but don't forget about that one issue that is socially real and endemic: fathers raping their daughters.

Nearly equal numbers of boys and girls are abused,

Where did you get that statistic, Brodie? Because, as is pretty self-evident, girls are abused by boys, by girls, by women, and by men. Boys are also abused by adults and by other boys, but not in any significant way by girls. So how do you arrive at that statement?

And the issue at hand is SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE HOME, by fathers against their daughters.

but the children of of our poor and working class are 15 times more likely to be abused than children in better economic circumstances.

Please produce the studies that demonstrate that. Obviously rich kids don't have to face certain kinds of violence, but nor do many working class kids either. And all the rich kids I know of were horribly neglected and abused, by alcoholic/absent parents, by peers who had plenty of money with which to by the most expensive recreational drugs that no working class kid could afford. And the rich kids typically didn't have to look after their younger siblings as in working class and poor families.

So you're statement reads to me as utterly classist (and also racist, given that most of the poor are of color). And let's not get sidetracked, okay?

Why won't fathers organise to stop one another from raping their daughters? They sure find the time to look at pornography, eh? And to watch or play sports. Or to fix or buy cars.

Fathers are capable of activism. They are activists when it comes to changing laws, filing suits against mothers, stealing children from their homes, and going on and on and on about their "rights" to have access to those girls? Please tell me what you think the reason is there's this gap in consciousness and effort when it comes to working to stop other fathers from incesting their kids, disproportionately female children?

Julian Real said...

I also think you err in focusing only on girls. Take the oft quoted statistic that one in four girls will be sexually abused before the age of 18. That same report also stated that one in six boys will be sexually abused. How is that not worthy of our attention?

Brodie, how is it worth your time to derail an important social conversation about an area of activism fathers REFUSE to engage in, on a massive scale.

And, I assume you are aware that boys are allowed to go farther from home than girls, and due to parental concerns about girls being away from home, out on dates, and out late at night, girls, sociologically, are home more than sons, that girls are disproportionately raped by fathers, who rarely, but sometimes, do also rape their sons. The predominant perpetrators of boys are heterosexually-identified men who gain boys' trust in some way. Often and usually they are men who are known to the boys, as is the case with girls who are molested and raped outside the home. No matter how you look at it, girls being raped by their fathers IS a serious social-political human rights issue. Right?

In addition, sexual abuse is hardly confined to parents.

And who said that sexual abuse was confined to parents-as-perps? Where did you read that? Not on this blog. Ever.

According to the DoJ, only a third of child molesters in prison sexually abused their own children or step-children.

Brodie, NONE of the child molesters and rapists who assaulted me and my friends--not one of them was prosecuted, let alone spent a day in jail. Most child molesters and rapist have dozens to hundreds of victims, and they are never put away. So going by who is in prison is going to give you a VERY skewed idea of what forms of abuse are happening in the world.

Let's keep in mind, since you raise the issue of classism, that the criminal justice system is profoundly classist and racist. So that population conveniently leaves out the sex crimes of the upper middle class and wealthy, who, due to having access to attorneys and connections to others in power, rarely are put in prison.

Though you've cited three high-profile cases involving fathers, you ignore that the abuse is more likely to come from outside of that relationship than within.

Not for girls, Brodie. And that IS the focus of this post, right?

Girls are FAR more likely to be raped before the age of eighteen by their father or a father figure and also by male relatives. That's the truth of it. So what are you and the men you know who are fathers going to do about it?

Finally, you are far too quick to dismiss female perpetrators.

No, Brodie. I'm not dismissing anyone. I'm holding men accountable to taking on a subject that they'll squirm and avoid at all costs: men holding other men accountable for what we do to women and girls.

Let's keep the focus right there. Not move on inch. Right there. For, say, the next twenty years. And then let's talk about what you think I'm dismissing.

25% of sexual abuse is perpetrated by women (and women commit 60% of abuse overall).

Are you factoring in number of hours each parent spends with children? When those calculations are done, it is astounding the amount of abuse fathers do with the few hours a week they have with their daughters.

And the results also show that most women do not do much abusing to the majority of children, but do neglect themselves profoundly, often.

You are correct in asserting that men are more likely to commit sexual abuse than women.

Well, it's fairly obvious, wouldn't you say?

However, 25% is hardly a number you can simply sweep under the rug.

I'm not holding any brooms, Brodie. And I'm not willing, for your sense of "fairness" to take the focus off THIS issue in THIS post. Got it?

Julian Real said...

@Curious Magician,

You're the one who needs a wake-up call! What you're implying - restricting all men's contract with their children - would criminalize millions of otherwise good and normal men.

OH MY GOD!!! Really??? And what about those raped girls? You don't seem especially concerned about them in your rant here. Why is that?

Furthermore, if this mindset "I'm not allowed to spend alone time with my kids because I *might* abuse them" were instilled in society, it would not solve ANY problem, it would only make the issue worse;

Well, it might reduce the rate of rape of daughters by fathers, eh?

if you tell a young boy/teenager he is a potential rapist, you will RAISE a rapist!

And where in my post do you hear me calling for raising boys telling them each night before they go to sleep, "Now remember, honey. Don't forget to grow up to be a big strong rapist!"

I don't say that. Do I? Ever. Anywhere.

I would support no end of harsher punishments on men convicted of these crimes,

You know how trite that sounds? It is said all the time here by men. Well, of course those other men who are rapists should be strung up by the balls.

Hold on. The rapists aren't "those men". They are the men you know. Got it?

How many conversations have you had with fathers around you about the sexual abuse of girls by fathers?

How many girls have to be raped by daddy before it becomes a serious issue to you? As serious, say, as one white gay male blogger suggesting that fathers' rights be limited due to the preponderance of girls' rapists being daddy?

Which is worse, socially, C.M.? My post or girls being raped by their fathers. I hope that's a rhetorical question for you.

I hope you'd agree that fathers organising to stop other fathers from raping girls is a GOOD thing to do, not a waste of time.

And my one little weeny blog post isn't going to become legislation any time soon. I promise.

In fact, I promise not to ever make such a suggestion again if, within the year, there are formed in the U.S. and the UK, and Australia, one hundred groups of fathers in each country, dedicated to holding other fathers accountable for raping their daughters, and to preventing this rape from occurring in the first place.

Julian Real said...

but I find your post deeply insulting to all good fathers out there, not to mention mine.

And my own father was not a rapist (as far as I know). He was a loving, responsible care-giver. Then again, he had all boys. But I'd like to think he wouldn't have raped his daughters. Then again, I'd love to believe that about my mom's dad, who was a loving man, and my aunt's uncle, who was a loving man. The latter two men did rape girls in their family. So there you go.

When I listen to the stories of boys and girls, women and men, what emerges, curiously, is a pattern: and that pattern is one which reveals that men, overwhelmingly, abuse children (and women) they have access to. Women do not tend to be the sexual abusers. Women are capable of it, and occasionally do it. But the pattern is this: fathers and father-figures rape their daughters. Take a deep breath and let that in. Because you seem mighty determined not to face that reality. And you seem ready to throw "feeling insulted or hurt" in the way of us actually getting somewhere together on this issue.

As you know, or I hope you know, it is the seemingly caring, nurturing, attentive men who are more likely to be incest perpetrators than the angry, irritable, uncaring men. Because most child molesters groom their victims for a while before abusing them. Exempting the fellow above who raped his daughter on day one.

Your irritation is misplaced. I post no threat to you, sir, unless you are accessing internet pornography of girls, that is, or unless you are having sexual thoughts about your daughters. Or unless you are raping them.

So take your anger and put it where it belongs: aimed squarely at men who DO rape their daughters. Because it is THEM, after all, who make it more difficult for YOU to parent without being thought of as a potential rapist. I don't make that socially present as a concern. Rapists do.

And if you get enraged reading that, let me ask you why? Is your "good father" ego so fucking fragile?

Let's assume you're father of the fucking year, okay? Let's say you're the most loving dad on the face of the Earth. Okay? Your ego feeling better?

Now, why wouldn't you want to organise with other fathers, maybe even "just" the good ones, to stop those "bad" ones from raping their daughters and other daughters as well. What would be so damned terrible about you doing just that?

Maybe someday you will realize women are capable of just as much evil as men, and that most men aren't child-raping animals.

You apparently cannot read. I never call men "child-raping animals": that's what YOU call those fathers, not me. I believe every rapist is fully human. Just like you and me, sir. Just like you and me.

And women are capable of whatever women do. And what women do not do is rape their daughters or sons to the degree that fathers do.

So get to work stopping dads from sexually assaulting their girls, and don't worry your head about one little blog post. Really. The rape of girls IS more important. Really. It is.

W said...

Lets do a thought experiment: for the sake of argument lets assume we ban men from one on one contact with children (and for some odd reason we will assume this is even enforcable).... Since approximetly 80% of child sexual abuse by a parent is commited by fathers then we have just eliminated 80% of child sexual abuse by a parent...huzzah!

apparently the other 20%...the ones abused by the mother...they must be an acceptable number of sex abuse cases eh? cause the only way to stop that fifth of sexual abuse would to limit the mothers access to the children.

W said...

I will readily acknowledge men are responsible for most sexual abuse. period. but where do you get off saying that the victims of sexual abuse by women are somehow not deserving of the same protection?

Julian Real said...

W,

Your thought experiment failed.

The other twenty percent of perpetrators are far more likely to be a grandfather, boyfriend of mom, uncle, older male cousin or brother.

Sorry to disappoint you with the harsh glare of patriarchal/misogynistic/misopedic reality.

Let's try this experiment, but not in thought, in action in society:

Men, married or not, care enough about sexual violence against girl children enough to organise against it.

And men can also (and do) organise against sexual violence against boys.

There are no acceptable percentages of abused or neglected children, W.

Duh.

Julian Real said...

@W,

Re:
This exact same article could be written about mothers killing their own children. No one should have any unsupervised time with children by your logic.

No, it couldn't. Sorry to disappoint you or ruin your distorted and liberal view of social reality.

I will readily acknowledge men are responsible for most sexual abuse. period.

I'm glad that's not something you need to be in denial about. Can you please make that point to the people in your social spheres--who ARE in denial about this--that it is unambiguously the case? Just as it is unambiguously the case that men harm men more than women harm men; women take care of men and other women FAR MORE than men take care of women or men.

Men are the killers of the world, including of children, with bombs and other weapons of massive destruction, including polluting industrial plants, that kill more children annually than all the mothers who have killed their children in the last hundred years. Do you know how many children the U.S. government, under the leadership of men, has killed in Iraq and Afghanistan? Do you care to wager a guess? Still just as concerned about those homicidal moms?

but where do you get off saying that the victims of sexual abuse by women are somehow not deserving of the same protection?

I don't say it. Period. So please stop making CRAP up and pretending I say it. Feel free to quote where I say that, okay?

And, do you get how fucked up stating such things is in a context where men's violence agaisnt women functions to socially subordinate women to men globally?

Please clue yourself into social/structural/systemic/political/institutional reality, and stop with the liberal diversionary tactics.

I speak here about white violence against people of color. You gonna come here and tell me about those cases of some person of color harming a honky? You get that this society is white AND het male supremacist, right?

If not, welcome to the real world. (No pun intended.) And if you're oblivious of the many forms of violence men do to females--interpersonally and institutionally, intimately and socially, at home and at work, in the so-called First and Second Worlds and in the so-called Third World--including the violence white het men do to women in all those worlds and in the Fourth World (of international Indigenous societies), and still want to compare that, in some anecdotal way, to what some women do to males, it is, of course, your positional privilege, unjust entitlement, and oblivious worldview that allows you to do so.

Please go spend time talking with women around the world, and get back to me on what you find out, okay?

Have you read "Conquest" by Andrea Smith? Have you read "Lakota Woman" by Mary Crow Dog? Please read them and get back to me on what you learned from them, okay?