J
JimG
Guest
Some reflections on recent events, by Anthony Esolen.
I feel like we’ve gone over this a thousand times on CAF. But really, why can’t Esolen speak to the fact (or heck, even acknowledge) that priests traditionally have had greater access to males?Second, the whole of the meta-crime was homosexual. That is, we do not have examples of womanizing priests or priests with fetishes for girls going out of their way to recruit other such priests, forming a tight little cabal, covering for one another, suborning young men into this wicked way of life, issuing veiled threats against anyone who would go public, and snubbing those who did not approve. There was no network of abusers of girls. This network was about men who wanted to do things with boys and men.
I simply don’t think that’s the case. Priests have access to both boys and girls, men and women. There was an outlier case in the Kansas City Mo. diocese–a priest whose favored group was elementary school girls. Obviously he wasn’t pat of the 81%. And the homosexual cliques in various seminaries have been commented on in recent months as well as in Michael Rose’s book Goodbye Good Men.I feel like we’ve gone over this a thousand times on CAF. But really, why can’t Esolen speak to the fact (or heck, even acknowledge) that priests traditionally have had greater access to males?
Are you suggesting that sexual preference is driven by access? More than a few priests have been caught while visiting a red light district on personal time. They have ample non church access if their intent is to sin.I feel like we’ve gone over this a thousand times on CAF. But really, why can’t Esolen speak to the fact (or heck, even acknowledge) that priests traditionally have had greater access to males?
Many pedophiles express no specific preference for boys or girls, which means for many, access does matter.gracepoole:![]()
Are you suggesting that sexual preference is driven by access? More than a few priests have been caught while visiting a red light district on personal time. They have ample non church access if their intent is to sin.I feel like we’ve gone over this a thousand times on CAF. But really, why can’t Esolen speak to the fact (or heck, even acknowledge) that priests traditionally have had greater access to males?
I read the pedophiles in general show a clear preference for girls. Priests had fairly equal access to either sex in the families in their parish.Many pedophiles express no specific preference for boys or girls, which means for many, access does matter.
First, a look at the statistics: The most detailed statistics on child abuse for the Catholic clergy that I can find comes from the special report based on a national survey of victimization conducted for the 2004 American Catholic bishops’ conference. The findings reveal that the frequency of child abuse among Catholic priests is not remarkable-involving around 4 % of priests and deacons who served in the U.S., but its pattern is. Outside of the Catholic Church, the overwhelming numbers of juvenile victims of sexual abuse are female. Within the church, however, four out of five of their victims are male. Most were adolescents aged 14 or over; 15% were under 10.
Priest Abuse: Male Compared to Female Victimization Impact | Psychology Today