So in my recent reading up on various Catholicy things, I've learned some things.
First, According to the John Jay study, only 3% of all priests against whom allegations were made were convicted and about 2% received prison sentences.
But the interesting thing is that 52 percent of alleged sexual abuses by priests involved children between the age of 14-17.
Yet in the media, it's often referred to as the pedophilia priest scandal or something with that word associated.
I don't disagree that 48 percent is a scandal, it certainly is. And 88 percent of the victims were male, and the majority of those victims were post pubescent. That indicates to me, and to several other blogger types, that the greater issue here is that there are a lot of predatory gay males serving as priests.
It's still a problem, still horribly wrong that any minor be subject to anything like this. It doesn't change what the scandal really is.
But why is this fact completely under the rug unless you read the John Jay report? I've never read a word on this in an AP or Reuters story and I read lots of them.
Would public perception be any different if it were known? I dunno.
What do you guys think?
What astonishes me most is your astonishment about this. As if the 52% 14-17 thing is some sort of game changer.
ReplyDeleteSince when is having sex with a 14 year old not seen as pedophilia? Or some vastly different condition than having sex with an 11 year old? Since when is having sex with a 14 year old boy equivilant to being a "predatory gay male"?
Of course, it was the gays all along!
I remember these factoids coming out a while back, and being confused by the supposed implications put forward by catholic leaders. Now I'm just creeped out. The last few blogs on here have been getting really fringe. It's like peeking into a white supremacy message board. Gays and militant liberals are going close down catholic charities. Gays will sue the church if they can't having a wedding there. Gays are really responsible for the pedophile priest scandal. And in every one this wierd under-vibe that secret conspiritorial forces are aligned against the Church. "But why is this fact completely under the rug unless you read the John Jay report? I've never read a word on this in an AP or Reuters story and I read lots of them." Well, isn't that obvious? It's the Trilateral commission, controlling the media. And yes, they are indeed aligned with the Reverse Vampires. In conjunction with... The SAUCER PEOPLE.
Creepy fringe.
This is a natural result of taking your faith seriously. You're getting all isolated and weird.
It is NOT a gamechanger. I'm simply soliciting you and Matt's opinion.
ReplyDeletePedophilia apparently involved pre-pubescent kids. It's a medical/psychological disorder.
Past the age of puberty, it isn't considered that. At least since 1973 is hasn't been considered a disorder for same sex attraction post puberty.
I'm talking about a fact here. Your response though indicates what I thought, that it doesn't make a difference. My only other concern would be that it is inaccurate reporting, but that's not such a big deal comparatively.
As for the state of the blog. I look forward to responding to that with another blog.
I read a summary of the John Jay report too. You conveniently neglected to mention the following stats.
ReplyDelete1. Of the 10,667 allegations made, 6,700 were substantiated by the church.
2. Of the 4,392 priests against whom accusations were substantiated, 3,300 were dead at the time the accusations were made. It's impossible to charge them after they've already died.
3. Of the 384 living priests who were charged, 252 were convicted. 100 were given prison sentences.
4. Two thirds of accusations were made after 1993. The majority of abuses happened in the 60's and 70's.
With those facts to give some context, it seems to spell out a case of people afraid to come forward until recently, explaining the low number of prison sentences. It fits the theme of crimes being covered up and victims being persuaded to keep their mouths shut until recently.
Why didn't you mention this from the start?
That wasn't so much the point of this entry. I was surpassed a little by the two stats I mentioned so I, I guess mistakenly, said so.
ReplyDeletesurprised not surpassed
ReplyDeleteThe first stat that suprised you had to do with the stats I cited. It was a part of the same analysis.
ReplyDeleteDid you see the stats that I cited before I cited them? Did you choose to leave them out?
I shoulda left the first one out. I tacked that on at the last second.
ReplyDeleteI didn't deliberately leave anything out, I just lazily made a post.
My comment on the other one I guess was just to say, huh, how about that. I didn't know that. I wonder if that means anything, probably not. Who knows. Then I asked for your opinion and you came at me like a spider monkey.
So you lazily made a post that basically says "huh, how about that?" about some facts you came across, and you named it "What no one is talking about..."
ReplyDeleteIf I come at you like a spider monkey it's because you scurry away like a cockroach when the lights come on.
I had neither seen nor heard this stuff anywhere else but the blog with links to the report. So....what was wrong with title again? I thought it was interesting, not reprehensible to discuss.
ReplyDeleteThe implication in the title is that it's not being talked about because someone swept it under the rug, again the conspiratorial angle. Again the implied victimhood by some shadowy alliance.
ReplyDeleteI'm not surprised it's not being talked about, but it's true. On further checking, the media is not calling it the pedophilia scandal, just sexual abuse crisis, which is completely accurate.
ReplyDeleteIt is the public opinion surrounding it, and the fact that yes my friend no one is talking about the age stat, that leads people to mistakenly label it so.
There is no implication, there is no evil conspiracy. But for some reason it's not been mentioned. Sheesh.
"On further checking, the media is not calling it the pedophilia scandal, just sexual abuse crisis, which is completely accurate.
ReplyDeleteIt is the public opinion surrounding it, and the fact that yes my friend no one is talking about the age stat, that leads people to mistakenly label it so."
WHO? You just let the media off the hook, after throwing an accusation at them. Now you're saying that "people" are mistakenly referring to this as pedophilia. Which people? You and me?
Anyway, we ACTUALLY KNOW now that it's only pedophilia 48% of the time. 52% of it's a different breed of buggering alltogether, since an adult is buggering a 14 year old, NOT AN 11 year old! SILLY PEOPLE! Don't call that pedophila! It's just called being gay!
"There is no implication, there is no evil conspiracy."
Here's how you ended the initial post: "But why is this fact completely under the rug unless you read the John Jay report? I've never read a word on this in an AP or Reuters story and I read lots of them."
"Sheesh."
Here's how I'm interpreting this: Sheesh. Stop calling me out on stuff that I said on the record, even when I deserve it. It's mean.
If I'm sounding crazed and manic - it's because I am. You're driving me up a wall with your insinuations, and then your constant evasions. You read a catholic news report about something accusing the media, then you write a blog repeating the accusation, but spin it into a question so you don't look so aggressive, and when the attempt backfires you act like your being persecuted for no reason. Yes, it truly is maddening. I am terribly vexxed.