Some reading material

http://www.bishop-accountability.org/pa_philadelphia/Philly_GJ_report.htm

"The report should be read by every Catholic, and indeed every U.S. citizen."

Section III is particularly disturbing.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/pa_philadelphia/Philly_GJ_report.htm

"The report should be read by every Catholic, and indeed every U.S. citizen."

Section III is particularly disturbing.

Presumably you mean US Catholics.

A sizable number of the world's 1bn Catholics have more pressing priorities -- and the vast majority of them have no problems with their priests.

EDIT: Exactly what's the point of digging up a 3-year old report again?

EDIT2: And haven't you started threads with the same material before?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
A sizable number of the world's 1bn Catholics have more pressing priorities -- and the vast majority of them have no problems with their priests.

How would you know whether they did or not? A lot of people are simply fatalistic, tolerating injustice of every sort with stoic, or bovine, resignation. They tend not to complain because complaints only cause more problems.

However,
''No one [in the Vatican] thinks the sexual abuse of kids is unique to the States, but they do think that the reporting on it is uniquely American, fueled by anti-Catholicism and shyster lawyers hustling to tap the deep pockets of the church. And that thinking is tied to the larger perception about American culture, which is that there is a hysteria when it comes to anything sexual, and an incomprehension of the Catholic Church,'' said John F. Allen Jr., Vatican correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter."

http://www.pulitzer.org/year/2003/public-service/works/globe14.html

(This article covers sexual abuse scandals worldwide.)

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
How would you know whether they did or not?

(a) Because I've been around a bit.
(b) Because, even if the number of priests molesting minors worldwide is at the same level as the US (which I don't believe it is), we're not looking at one in two priests being a minor-molestor. We're not looking at one in ten or even one in twenty.

The most common problems, in my experience, that people have with their priests is that they are too rude, or too haughty. A few are sometimes accused of dipping into church funds for personal use. Occasionally there are issues with priests having affairs.

EDIT: The article you cited quotes experts on Asia where there are celibate traditions and where people (the media?) are not fixated on sex.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
EDIT: The article you cited quotes experts on Asia where there are celibate traditions and where people (the media?) are not fixated on sex.

We've all been around a bit, haven't we.

Why does the problem seem to come the fore in "Western" countries (USA, Australia...)?

As for Asia, "...Jayawardene said there is no question that clergy sexual abuse happens in Asia. ''I have known clergy who have complained that their seminary rectors abused them as minors in South Asia - I know that was prevalent in South Asia,'' he said. ''The issue is not unique to the United States, but what is unique here is that it is possible to discuss the issue in the open. In Asia, I don't think the laws are strong enough to prosecute.''

Does a culture where people don't talk about sex actually make it easier for molesters to get away with it? (In South Africa this is certainly the case).

"''The whole world has a problem, but it gets brought into sharper perspective in the so-called First World,'' Pelton said. ''In Latin America, it's more difficult to challenge the church, and so many people will say they're worried about their next meal and these types of concerns.''" (This quote supports my basic intuition about the whole issue).

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
We've all been around a bit, haven't we.

Why does the problem seem to come the fore in "Western" countries (USA, Australia...)?

As for Asia, "...Jayawardene said there is no question that clergy sexual abuse happens in Asia. ''I have known clergy who have complained that their seminary rectors abused them as minors in South Asia - I know that wa for molesters to get away with it? (In South Africa this is certainly the case).

We've all been around a bit, haven't we.

I can only speak for myself.

Does a culture where people don't talk about sex actually make it easier for molesters to get away with it?

Possibly. Or maybe a culture that talks incessantly about sex makes it easier for such people to rationalise, and eventually act out, their tendencies.

This quote supports my basic intuition about the whole issue

I didn't say it in my first post -- but the majority of the world's Catholics have more pressing worries than whether their local priest is among the 4% (the US figure -- assuming for the sake of argument that figure is seen around the world, which I believe it won't) that molest minors (incidentally, a substantial chunk of those considered minors in West would be considered adults, culturally if not legally, in the developing world).

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Possibly. Or maybe a culture that talks incessantly about sex makes it easier for such people to rationalise, and eventually act out, their tendencies.

There's an enormous amount of sexual abuse in South Africa. Child rape of the most brutal kind. Sex is not greatly discussed by adults as a whole, especially in the more conservative parts of the population (the overwhelming majority). You seem to be rationalising here.

''The Vatican is a very protective world, and there's a whole way of proceeding with secrecy and denial,'' said the Rev. James F. Keenan, a professor of moral theology at the Weston Jesuit School of Theology in Cambridge. ''I think they think that eventually this is all going to fade away.''

Originally posted by lucifershammer
I didn't say it in my first post -- but the majority of the world's Catholics have more pressing worries than whether their local priest is among the 4% (the US figure -- assuming for the sake of argument that figure is seen around the world, which I believe it won't) that molest minors (incidentally, a substantial chunk of those considered minors in West would be considered adults, culturally if not legally, in the developing world).

"That may be changing, particularly in Chile, where there are currently at least five high-profile cases in which priests are accused of sexually abusing minors. Just this past Thursday, a leading Chilean magazine, Paula, featured a cover story on the Tierra del Fuego sexual abuse case, and the top-rated television news program ''Informe Especial'' featured a 90-minute report on sexual abuse by priests in Chile. "

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
There's an enormous amount of sexual abuse in South Africa. Child rape of the most brutal kind. Sex is not greatly discussed by adults as a whole, especially in the more conservative parts of the population (the overwhelming majority). You seem to be rationalising here.

Is it members of the overwhelming conservative majority that is committing the brutal child abuse and rape you're talking about?

EDIT: Are we talking rape by ordinary every-day doctors, teachers, managers etc.? What about by priests in South Africa?

EDIT2: Are we talking rape of pre-teens or teenagers?

EDIT3: I simply Googled "South Africa child sexual abuse". This is the first link that turned up:

http://www.rebirth.co.za/Child_abuse_and_sexual_exploitation_in_Africa.htm

The major reasons listed for the prevalance of child abuse in S. Africa:

- The production of pornography

- Hardcore sex

- Children being used as drug carriers

- The mistaken belief that having sex with a virgin will rid the perpetrator of HIV/AIDS.

- Children being used or trafficked for the use of their organs

- Children being made to work under inappropriate environments and conditions sweatshops, agriculture, domestic service, etc

- Sale of child brides

- Child prostitution

- Informal economy (hawkers and beggars)

- Children being murdered and gutted and their dead bodies used to courier drugs across country borders

- An increased demand for black children – especially from European and North American men, for sexual purposes

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Is it members of the overwhelming conservative majority that is committing the brutal child abuse and rape you're talking about?

Yes. My comment goes to your perception that a society that talks a lot about sex might encourage people to act out. Well, a society that doesn't talk about sex might have more of a problem. (South Africa is also tremendously and violently homophobic, apart from some elite "pink reserves" in Cape Town and other places).

The percentage of priests/teachers/whatever versus rest of population is not the issue--it's the protective behaviour of the institution (school, church, government office) which tends to favour its own interests before those of the public. Why do schools just move paedophile teachers on, rather than prosecute them? Why does an abusive priest just get move on to another parish? It's this perception you need to combat, rather than trot out your familiar argument that "only" X% of priests abuse kids versus X+% of the general population, so it's not so bad.

I would broaden the discussion to cover all aspects of sexual abuse, from child abuse to nun-rape (etc), with specific reference to the perceived failure by the institution in question to tackle such problems seriously.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Yes. My comment goes to your perception that a society that talks a lot about sex might encourage people to act out. Well, a society that doesn't talk about sex might have more of a problem. (South Africa is also tremendously and violently homophobic, apart from some elite "pink reserves" in Cape Town and other places).

The percentage of priests/te the perceived failure by the institution in question to tackle such problems seriously.

Yes.

Based on the report I cited (did you notice the last point?) I have to disagree.

Well, a society that doesn't talk about sex might have more of a problem.

Based on what I'm reading, South Africa's problems in this area have little to do with whether society talks about sex or not. I would expect fairly similar trends in a Western society with severe economic and organised crime problems as well.

The percentage of priests/teachers/whatever versus rest of population is not the issue--it's the protective behaviour of the institution (school, church, government office) which tends to favour its own interests before those of the public... It's this perception you need to combat, rather than trot out your familiar argument that "only" X% of priests abuse kids versus X+% of the general population, so it's not so bad.

If that issue must be tackled, first we must deal with facts, not hysteria. Scribs has been consistently trying to foster an atmosphere of "clerico-phobia" (he admits as much) -- which is not the suitable environment to tackle the problem you're talking about. You don't solve the issue of teachers abusing students by demanding that there should be no more schools.

Coming from a country where racial prejudice abounds, you should know better than most the harm such stereotyping and phobia does -- and how little it does to actually alleviate the problems that might lead to such stereotypes.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
[b]Yes.

Based on the report I cited (did you notice the last point?) I have to disagree.

Well, a society that doesn't talk about sex might have more of a problem.

Based on what I'm reading, South Africa's problems in this area have little to do with whether society talks about sex or not. I would expect fairly similar trends in a W ...[text shortened]... ittle it does to actually alleviate the problems that might lead to such stereotypes.[/b]

Your last point is arse-about-face--you list some examples of sexual abuse and claim that they are the reasons for sexual abuse. However you are clearly aware that the climate of sexual abuse is critical for primarily historical and economic reasons. The reluctance of children, spouses, prostitutes, etc to report crimes exacerbates the problem. Reticence in talking about sex is a factor in this reluctance, although hardly the basis of the problem. If you're implying that I think reticence is a primary cause of abuse, you have attacked a straw man. You've also ignored the reason why I made the comment about sex-talk in the first place, which was in response to your inane comment about supposedly sex-obsessed societies creating a climate conducive to sexual abuse. So, let's agree that the amount of sex-talk in a society is neither nor there in this discussion.

Of course the real topic is why institutions protect their own at the expense of the public interest. I'm not propagating any stereotypes--on the contrary, I'm trying to get to grips with the facts, if you can present any that relate specifically to how institutions deal with abuse scandals involving their staff. We can talk about "institutions" rather than single out the RCC if you like.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/pa_philadelphia/Philly_GJ_report.htm.

Michael C. Bolesta couldn't be less fortunately named.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Your last point is arse-about-face--you list some examples of sexual abuse and claim that they are the reasons for sexual abuse. However you are clearly aware that the climate of sexual abuse is critical for primarily historical and economic reasons. The reluctance of children, spouses, prostitutes, etc to report crimes exacerbates the problem. Reticen ...[text shortened]... their staff. We can talk about "institutions" rather than single out the RCC if you like.

Your last point is arse-about-face

I could've used some choice words myself to describe your disingenous attempt to muddy the issue by dragging the South African situation into this discussion when you know full well that we're not talking apples to apples here.

you list some examples of sexual abuse and claim that they are the reasons for sexual abuse.

They were listed as "contributing factors" in the source report I cited.

The reluctance of children, spouses, prostitutes, etc to report crimes exacerbates the problem. Reticence in talking about sex is a factor in this reluctance, although hardly the basis of the problem.

I've never denied this, although there are a few things we need to remember when talking about the "problem":

- You're talking about the effect of open/closed (to talking about sex) cultures on the victim; I'm talking about the perpetrator.
- We're not comparing similar situations (abuse in a "domestic" or familiar situation as with the US scandals vs. abuse in an organised crime/human trafficking setting).

If you're implying that I think reticence is a primary cause of abuse, you have attacked a straw man.

Really? What was your point in bringing up the whole "brutal child rape" issue in South Africa followed by "conservative majority"?

You've also ignored the reason why I made the comment about sex-talk in the first place, which was in response to your inane comment about supposedly sex-obsessed societies creating a climate conducive to sexual abuse. So, let's agree that the amount of sex-talk in a society is neither nor there in this discussion.

No, we're not agreed on that point. You've shown me no reason to think my comment was "inane"; you started a completely oblique discussion that implied (oh yes, I noticed the first time that you did not explicitly link the two -- which is why you're now able to claim it's a strawman) that the amount of sex-talk had an inverse (or at least neutral) relationship to the incidence of sexual abuse.

We can certainly focus on why institutions/organisations try so hard to maintain their credibility at the cost of allowing criminals within to go scot-free; but let's not pretend we've established that the cultural context affects only the victims and not the perpetrator.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
We can certainly focus on why institutions/organisations try so hard to maintain their credibility at the cost of allowing criminals within to go scot-free.

Let's do that.

Go ahead.