xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (08/14/90)
travis@houston.cs.columbia.EDU (Travis Lee Winfrey) writes: >[...] For instance, you might take >a dim view of arguments that linked patriarchal structures to child >abuse, without knowing that over 90% of the incest cases reported to >the police and mental health professionals are in fact cases of >father-daughter incest, and most of them occur in stereotypically >patriarchal families. This datum does not indict that type of family >per se, but it is very disturbing, and it lends some weight in attacks >on inflexible patriarchal structures and gender roles. What a nearly perfect example of a statistic taken completely out of context to make a point it does not in fact support at all! First, consider "incest"; a less biased statistic would be "statutory rape", but "incest" pretty thoroughly narrows the focus away from the many other possible sources of children participating in unwilling sex to just the household adults or near adults. Second, consider "reported"; vaginal intercourse leaves much more compelling, easily noticed evidence than either anal or oral penetration, so this activity will be more "noticed", and thus more often reported about daughters. [Actually, anal penetration would leave just as compelling, easily noticed evidence - MHN] Third, consider "reported" again; societal values for a girl's first intercourse include such terminology as "deflowered", "violated", "devalued", and "spoiled", while a boy's first intercourse is more likely to be tagged "gaining experience", "sowing wild oats", or "marriage training". There is no compelling social call to report a boy's first sexual experience to the authorities, while we still try to protect our "weak, delicate girls" by doing so. Fourth, consider "patriarchal", the "traditional" family structure, a likely source of objection to incest on religious and other traditional grounds, as opposed to the "untraditional" family, which might well consider a little incest OK if it's kept in the family? Fifth, consider "patriarchial" again, the social structure where the lineage of children is assured by control of access of sperm to the mother-to-be's womb. In this "females as property" value system, reportage of property damage could be expected to be high, while the experienced male child (absent other abuse) is not necessarily "damaged property" in the view leading to the decision to make a report to the authorities. Sixth, if the topic is incest, I'm betting on grown siblings and cousins as the most frequent _participants_, infrequently if ever _reported_. Statistics are wonderful things, you can use them to prove whatever you want...to yourself. The wider audience is urged to take them with salt. Lots of salt. That 90% figure proves nothing about patriarchal families except that they report father-daughter incest a lot, a self-fulfilling prophesy. In responding, please answer what I wrote, not what your particular social agenda would like to have had me write. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
AR.KSR@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU (Kimberly Rollins) (08/17/90)
travis@houston.cs.columbia.EDU (Travis Lee Winfrey) writes: >[...] For instance, you might take >a dim view of arguments that linked patriarchal structures to child >abuse, without knowing that over 90% of the incest cases reported >to the police and mental health professionals are in fact cases of >father-daughter incest, and most of them occur in stereotypically >patriarchal families. This datum does not indict that type of family >per se, but it is very disturbing, and it lends some weight in attacks >on inflexible patriarchal structures and gender roles. Kent Paul Dolan replies: |consider "reported"; vaginal intercourse leaves much more |compelling, easily noticed evidence than either anal or oral |penetration, so this activity will be more "noticed", and thus more |often reported about daughters. |[Actually, anal penetration would leave just as compelling, easily |noticed evidence - MHN] True--also, the statistic says "reported" and not "proven". |"marriage training". There is no compelling social call to report |a |boy's first sexual experience to the authorities, while we still |try to protect our "weak, delicate girls" by doing so. I never heard the term "marriage training" used to describe father/son or mother/son incest, but maybe in your part of the world it's a common expression. If the statistics include reportings to mental health professionals I would assume that this figure represents a great deal of confessions by survivors, rather than solely protective reporting by parents and other concerned figures in girls' or women's lives. |Fourth, consider "patriarchal", the "traditional" family structure, |a likely source of objection to incest on religious and other |traditional grounds, as opposed to the "untraditional" family, which |might well consider a little incest OK if it's kept in the family? On the contrary: most traditional or religious families do *not* encourage the reporting of (possibly emotionally damaging) incest because they regard sex as something both private and dirty. Enlightened families would see victimizing incest as solely the fault of the perpetrator, and be more likely to report it to the police. If a young woman is made to feel guilty about sex, and is moreover taught to honor her mother and father, would she be more or less likely to report that her father occasionally rapes her? |experienced male child (absent other abuse) is not necessarily |"damaged property" in the view leading to the decision to make a |report to the authorities. If the (male) child feels damaged it will likely come out in counseling later in life, in which case I think it would be included in the statistic above. Since men are taught not to feel victimized by sexual activity, but rather that it is something that should be striven for, I would allow that male victimization is currently underreported; however, I don't think that makes up for the incredible statistical gap that we see between male-on-female sexual abuse and female-on-male sexual abuse. |Sixth, if the topic is incest, I'm betting on grown siblings and |cousins as the most frequent _participants_, infrequently if ever |_reported_. I would submit that as far as incest *where one participant is victimized by the other* (nonconsensual incest) there is a greater incidence among those whose relationship implies a power differential: older siblings with younger, fathers with daughters, uncles with nieces, and the like. For children, a few years can provide a tremendous difference in physical and emotional development. Consensual incest would not be reported to police or mental health professionals because there is no victim. One doesn't go to the police and say, "I just gave my friend some money," but one would go in the case of a mugging. |Statistics are wonderful things, you can use them to prove whatever |you want...to yourself. The wider audience is urged to take them |with salt. Lots of salt. That 90% figure proves nothing about |patriarchal families except that they report father-daughter incest |a lot, a self-fulfilling prophesy. Again, I don't think that a family where a girl is taught, "Be ashamed of your body, don't talk about sex, obey your parents and God" is an environment that supports telling strangers (police and counselors) about sexual victimization within the family. Kimberly Rollins (Preferred e-mail address: cirocco@max.u.washington.edu)
travis@houston.cs.columbia.edu (Travis Lee Winfrey) (08/20/90)
travis@houston.cs.columbia.EDU (Travis Lee Winfrey) writes: > ... over 90% of the incest cases reported to >the police and mental health professionals are in fact cases of >father-daughter incest, and most of them occur in stereotypically >patriarchal families. What a nearly perfect example of a statistic taken completely out of context to make a point it does not in fact support at all! I'm pleased I came up with a perfect example of something. You seem angry, but I'm not sure about what. Your article confused me more than anything else. The point I sought to support was that some writers may present confusing conclusions from apparently unknown bases. Since you were quite annoyed and confused by my presenting a single datum, I would say that we exhibited the effect rather well. First, consider "incest"; a less biased statistic would be "statutory rape", but "incest" pretty thoroughly narrows the focus away from the many other possible sources of children participating in unwilling sex to just the household adults or near adults. But I was not talking about statutory rape, my brief reference was to father-daughter incest and nothing else. Perhaps you're incorrectly assuming that I deduced "incest" out of some statistic on statutory rape? Besides, statistics on statutory rape are far from unbiased, since those laws are so frequently used to target male homosexuals. Second, consider "reported"; vaginal intercourse leaves much more compelling, easily noticed evidence than either anal or oral penetration, so this activity will be more "noticed", and thus more often reported about daughters. Actually, "reported" in this context means "reported", as in "announced, described, talked about," either to police or to mental health professionals. In fact, the more intimate an sexually abusive relationship is, the less likely it is to be reported immediately. Any discussion of physical evidence of abuse is beyond the scope of this (and your) article. Third, consider "reported" again; societal values for a girl's first intercourse include such terminology as "deflowered", "violated", "devalued", and "spoiled", while a boy's first intercourse is more likely to be tagged "gaining experience", "sowing wild oats", or "marriage training". There is no compelling social call to report a boy's first sexual experience to the authorities, while we still try to protect our "weak, delicate girls" by doing so. Yes, I would agree with this description of the double standard. There's also the use of stud vs. slut. However, its relevance to my article seems slight, since you're talking about consensual sex between teenagers of either sex, not the molestation of children. Also, you seem to believe that incest appears as a one-time incident, a "first sexual experience", when this type of abuse typically takes place repeatedly, over years. Fourth, consider "patriarchal", the "traditional" family structure, a likely source of objection to incest on religious and other traditional grounds, as opposed to the "untraditional" family, which might well consider a little incest OK if it's kept in the family? Again, this is beyond the scope of this article (i.e., what I'm willing to type in before I blow out of here), but "patriarchal" in this sense referred to the so-called traditional family structure, where the father makes the rules, mother is devoted to him and the children, and so on. It doesn't matter if that family doesn't actually exist, if the pressures on the people make them act in a certain way. In the context of child molestation, a common explanation is that the father obtains a desired feeling of power and control by exercising it over a malleable subject, his children. The abuse is aa response to feeling out of control and out of power, something his gender role tells him is unacceptable. Inevitably, I'm distorting this argument by presenting in such a brief form. I'm also not discussing other attempted explanations at why some adults damage their children so terribly. Please bear that in mind while replying. Fifth, consider "patriarchial" again, the social structure where the lineage of children is assured by control of access of sperm to the mother-to-be's womb. In this "females as property" value system, reportage of property damage could be expected to be high, while the experienced male child (absent other abuse) is not necessarily "damaged property" in the view leading to the decision to make a report to the authorities. I think you're trying to say that under patriarchy, abuse of male children is less commonly reported than abuse of female children. That may well be. It is certainly true when dealing with adult males who have been raped. Sixth, if the topic is incest, I'm betting on grown siblings and cousins as the most frequent _participants_, infrequently if ever _reported_. Quite possibly, but that has nothing to do with the type of crime that I -- oh so briefly! -- mentioned. "Father-daughter incest" in that context referred to the sexual abuse of minors. If Warren Beatty wants to marry Shirley McClaine, that may be weird and stupid, but that's not the type of crime I meant. Statistics are wonderful things, you can use them to prove whatever you want...to yourself. The wider audience is urged to take them with salt. Lots of salt. That 90% figure proves nothing about patriarchal families except that they report father-daughter incest a lot, a self-fulfilling prophesy. Skepticism is good, and I'm glad you have lots of it. However, you wrote a 70 line article discussing that single figure, when you had no idea of its validity, the studies I had in mind, or even of the terms of these studies. Also, I used that single figure _explicitly_ without attempting to draw any firm conclusion. Surely you exhibit skepticism without useful bounds. It would have been better for you to write to me and ask me what I meant. I suggest you find Judith Herman's "Father-Daughter Incest" (Harvard Univ. Pr., 1981). I haven't read it, myself; I was reading a brief article by her in another book, where she quoted a figure of 94% father-daughter incest out of all cases of incest reported to police, mental health professionals, and one other group I can't recall. She cited three recent studies for that figure. I'll be glad to send these references to anyone who asks. t
davids@mondo.engin.umich.edu (David Snearline) (08/21/90)
[Further discussion about what this or that religion believes should probably go to talk.religion.misc -- AMBAR] Kimberly Rollins writes: | On the contrary: most traditional or religious families do *not* | encourage the reporting of (possibly emotionally damaging) incest | because they regard sex as something both private and dirty. | Enlightened families would see victimizing incest as solely the | fault of the perpetrator, and be more likely to report it to the | police. If a young woman is made to feel guilty about sex, and | is moreover taught to honor her mother and father, would she be | more or less likely to report that her father occasionally | rapes her? I think the distinction should be made between a family that is nominally religious and one that _really_ attempts to live out their religious values. Both Judaism and Christianity condemn incest and believe that sex is a God-given blessing (to be practiced within the bounds of marriage, of course.) My guess is that incest (and covering it up) is more likely to occur in a semi- to non-religious family where they are less likely to believe in the true nature of sex as stated in Judeo-Christian beliefs. -- David Snearline Computer Aided Engineering Network davids@mondo.engin.umich.edu University of Michigan Engineering
rodvan@microsoft.UUCP (Rod VAN MECHELEN) (08/28/90)
In article <9008161903.AA06058@uunet.uu.net>, AR.KSR@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU (Kimberly Rollins) writes: > travis@houston.cs.columbia.EDU (Travis Lee Winfrey) writes: > |"marriage training". There is no compelling social call to report > I never heard the term "marriage training" used to describe > father/son or mother/son incest, but maybe in your part of > the world it's a common expression. If the statistics include Such terms are used in "men's" literature. ("Literature"? Uh-huh, like romance novels are literature.) <-: > If the (male) child feels damaged it will likely come out in > counseling later in life, in which case I think it would be > included in the statistic above. Since men are taught not to You may have viewed the recent broadcast by Channel 11 (Tacoma) entitled SURVIVORS, which looked at this very closely, and concluded there ARE many unreported cases where the male child did suffer severe psychological and/or physiological injury.
travis@houston.cs.columbia.edu (Travis Lee Winfrey) (08/31/90)
In article <1990Aug21.161820.3398@caen.engin.umich.edu> davids@mondo.engin.umich.edu (David Snearline) writes: > > Kimberly Rollins writes: > | On the contrary: most traditional or religious families do *not* > | encourage the reporting of (possibly emotionally damaging) incest > | because they regard sex as something both private and dirty. > | Enlightened families would see victimizing incest as solely the > | fault of the perpetrator, and be more likely to report it to the > | police. If a young woman is made to feel guilty about sex, and > | is moreover taught to honor her mother and father, would she be > | more or less likely to report that her father occasionally > | rapes her? > > I think the distinction should be made between a family that is > nominally religious and one that _really_ attempts to live out > their religious values. Both Judaism and Christianity condemn > incest and believe that sex is a God-given blessing (to be > practiced within the bounds of marriage, of course.) My guess is > that incest (and covering it up) is more likely to occur in a > semi- to non-religious family where they are less likely to > believe in the true nature of sex as stated in Judeo-Christian > beliefs. Well, since no one else jumped up to answer this... Your assertion is trivially true: many (most? all?) anthropologists believe that bans on incest are at the foundation of _all_ human cultures and religious beliefs. (I know Levi-Strauss held this view; I don't know if he originated it.) The Judeo-Christian-Islamic beliefs are not distinguishable in this regard from any other religion, either in its precepts or in the actions of its followers. I am charmed by the implicit idea that all we would have to do to stop child molestation is to convert to Judaism or Christianity. However, child molesters may be found among the followers of all beliefs, including their religious leaders, so it seems fair to conclude that something else other than lack of piety is behind these crimes. In fact, there was a UPI story in the last few weeks -- unrelated to the parallel investigation of Father Ritter -- that described how Roman Catholic church leaders had repeatedly squashed investigations into charges of sexual harassment and molestation from priests. However, it is interesting that you guess that incest is more likely to occur in non-religious families: the book I was reading (on therapy for various types of traumas) cautioned investigators that it is much more difficult to believe in a reported case of incest (among other things) when the investigator and the family member(s) are of the same race, gender, and class. It is always easier to suspect the Other. Although they didn't caution against it, religion is clearly a similar factor. I won't attempt to debate you on the "true nature of sex," nor would the moderators allow it. However, your assertion that you know what it is should greatly interest this group because any claim on absolute knowledge like yours _necessarily_ leads to intolerance of new forms of knowledge and to challenges to authority, both of which are found in feminism. In this case, I think Kimberly has a better handle on the social pressures than you: treating sexuality as something private and dirty inevitably leads to problems. Of course, I don't know how many religious families actually have such an attitude. t