I didn't really want to post about this but I can't get past it.
A new international survey has found one in four New Zealand girls is sexually abused before the age of 15, the highest rate of any country examined.
To be honest I am surprised that the figures are as low as they are. That 76.5 percent of girls did not experience any unwanted sexual touching before age 15.
That is not because I believe many men are sexual abusers. But one can spread himself around.
I have tried to estimate how many men or boys I came in contact with before the age of fifteen who had the opportunity to provide me with a positive answer to the question the survey asked. With three brothers, a father, uncles, great uncles and grandfathers, cousins, family friends, school mates and teachers I suppose the number must be over 100. I only ever encountered one. And I expect he messed with more very young girls than just me.
So what really worries me about the reaction to these sorts of 'horrific' findings is that suspicion is cast far and wide. 'Experts' are already telling parents and caregivers what signs to look for. People get hold of a statistics like, one in four females are sexually abused and mostly by their uncles and start looking sideways at completely innocent boys and men. Why, I expect many male readers of this blog are themselves uncles.
Let's not let 'uncle' become a dirty word. If there is a pervasive problem in young peoples lives today, girls and boys, it is a lack of warm and positive relationships with male figures.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
This is sad. And it will give the usual suspects an oppertunity to crawl out of the woodwork and continue their hate campaign against men - and more men will give up trying to provide the necessary male role models in society and just go fishing.
I also think this is so sad. I can remember 20+ years ago there was similar stuff in the press. I said to my wife that it almost gets to the stage where I did not want to bath and or dry my daughter for fear of this sort of label.
Also I wonder about the statistical basis of the survey, how were the respondents chosen etc.? 3,000 women 10 countries, so is the NZ sample only 300? Why only North Waikato and Auckland?
Paullaw, To clarify;
According to the NZ Herald, "The 2855 randomly selected women aged 18 to 64 in Auckland and northern Waikato were asked: "Before the age of 15, do you remember if anyone in your family ever touched you sexually, or made you do something sexual that you didn't want to do?"
After answering the question about their family, they were asked: "How about someone at school? How about a friend or neighbour? Has anyone else done this to you?" "
Listening to talkback yesterday I was pleased to hear the majority response to the description of the positive findings as 'sexual abuse' was met with skepticism.
Yet people like Cindy Kiro and Ruth Dyson are doing the usual hand-wringing and collective admonishment thing.
I'd like to see a more detailed analysis of what they found.
I don't know if it is as easy as a simple "hate campaign against men". It IS true that the bulk of abuse happens within the family (I have seen more cases of in my circle of family and friends than I'm really comfortable with). And it IS important that the public is made aware of that fact.
Post a Comment