According to the Jay Report, 22.6% were age 10 or younger, and 51% were between the ages of 11 and 14. That means that 73.6% of the boys were 14 or younger. That’s hardly a lot of “post pubescent” boys considering that puberty in boys often extends up to the age of 14. The truly “post pubescent” boys, those 15-17, was 27% or a little over a third.
I was refering to England in the 1940s and 1950s. Boys were able to enter these establishments even if they failed the 11+. This was the exam in England that decided whether you stayed at the village school, or local primary school until you were 14 and then found a job or an apprenticeship, or went to a grammar school.
I still wonder what % of the abusers made the decision to enter the priesthood before they even knew themselves and I still maintain that in 1950s Britain (and I’m guessing the US too) it would be difficult enough to pack in training, let alone give an honest reason for doing so if you were strongly attracted to other men!WebMD had an article that boys are now starting puberty as early as 9 to 10; and while most reach full puberty by abt 15, about a third reach by 13.
What you say makes a lot of sense. It’s just that with the long process of seminary training, taking as long as a decade or maybe even more, it’s just that a weeding out process would be inevitable. Some poor boys who went that route, but couldn’t make it, as in Italy, wound up as monks, rather than priests.
…It was not at all uncommon for boys who hadn’t reached the 11+ standard to get into the seminary school. This was especially so in areas with a high Catholic population because, to use one example, the Catholic Grammar my father went to had a catchment area that just about covered 3/4 of the county. By comparison, there were Anglican grammar schools in just about every market town and city. Thus, the pass mark at 11+ to get into the Catholic grammar was considerably higher.
… I still wonder what % of the abusers made the decision to enter the priesthood before they even knew themselves and I still maintain that in 1950s Britain (and I’m guessing the US too) it would be difficult enough to pack in training, let alone give an honest reason for doing so if you were strongly attracted to other men!
Just my thoughts - I’m not trying to defend their actions - just trying to figure out how it happened in the first place!
There is no evidence that homosexual priests are substantially more likely to be unfaithful to their vows.
There is more to being gay than anal sex.
They actually are more likely to average 2-3 partners a year which includes those on the extremely high end (a small minority of gay men have a huge number of partners which can massively alter the average, for example if you have 100 gay men of which 99 have one partner in that year and 1 has 101 partners the suddenly everyone on average has had two sexual partners) meaning the average is likely to be somewhere between 50 and 100 with the median likely being a lot lower.
last time I checked under 14 didn’t qualify as post pubescent.
Problem is most of these cases were 1950s-1980s so the normal time for ending puberty was still 15-17
The high end is much higher than 3 digits and in fact makes the oft quoted 100-500 the median:
You still miss the point of the disproportionate percentage of molestation done by men on boys. This is borne out by the already quoted studies.
I don’t know whether this is supposed to be a shock statement, but seeing the frequency and quality of in-your-face exhibitionism coming from that area, maybe you can enlighten us about what noble qualities you are referring to, because I can give you plenty of unsavory ones.
Having previously reviewed that data it is four decades old and was gathered by going to cruising spots which are basically where gay men go to hook up and in the 1970s that was about as much relationship as they could have.
aidsmap.com/Consistent-decline-in-partner-numbers-in-US-gay-men-in-last-decade-but-no-change-in-condom-use/page/2635086/
As there is no solid data on the number of gay priests or on how faithful heterosexual priests are we cannot make an educated guess as to the odds of faithfulness to vows.
If that were true, why are their relationships so porous?
You always have such up-to-date information, only about 40 years old.
That data is 30 years old, wrong regarding the fidelity of straight men, straight women and gay men. Most men cheat at some point and the rate of open marriages for gay men is like 50%.
You can sneer at 40 year old information but not much has changed in the meantime. The scare of AIDS in the 80’s somewhat curtailed the enthusiasm of the sexually liberated but they were soon back to their own habits. This is a known fact inside and outside their communities. The bath house culture and the fixation on plugging into youthful males compounds the problem, not diminishes it.You always have such up-to-date information, only about 40 years old.
So what do you want to do about it? Lock all these people up? What’s you’re solution or do you just want to complain?
That data is specific to men who go to bathhouses which are specifically spaces for men to engage in sex with other men, it’d be like surveying men who frequent brothels on how many times the average heterosexual man cheats on his wife.
Indeed, complaining is a start. Complaining that an unnatural and destructive lifestyle is being whitewashed and foisted on the rest of society as though it is normal when it is far from it. Complaining that we hear of their whining 24/7 when they are their own worst enemies. Complain that once this Trojan Horse got a toe hold in the door that traditional marriage, together with the necessity of children having two opposite sex parents and religious freedoms are being undermined to the extent that they may never recover unless there is a breakdown of society like the Fall of the Roman Empire and a new civilization may replace it in a couple hundred years.
20% infected is not specific for those who frequent bathhouses. There are plenty of other places where one can get germs. Making excuses all the time is just living in denial. This is a clear and present danger to society.
I was referring to the promiscuity numbers.
Children don’t get corrupted and inducted into being gay. Being gay is not a lifestyle. Some young people just happen to grow up that way and gradually come to the realization that they are sexually attracted to their own sex as they mature. They then have to figure out for themselves how to deal with it. Some of them grow up in loving and supportive families but others are disowned and abused by their conservative families and end up on the street. Unfortunately, some of the latter become male prostitutes, commit suicide and abuse drugs. You can’t prevent people from becoming gay by forbidding it and punishing or criminalizing homosexuality.
Sorry, most of what you say are carefully constructed, white-washing myths.
A lot of it is based on my own life experience as a gay man, so maybe my life is just a myth. I had a good childhood with good and loving parents and was never abused in any way. I was never inducted or recruited into being gay but just turned out that way. But I have known gay men from conservative families who attempted suicide. I’ve also seen and talked to gay youth who live on the streets in big cities because they were disowned by their families.
