Further Reading: Prison Rape

>The Kibbutz experiment aspired to be a gender neutral regime, but those who initially and later joined (as opposed to those born into the community) still brought with them internalized traditional modes of the larger world in which they had resided. The "service" areas were still seen as "female work" and was deemed as non-productive since it didn't contribute to the economy of the community.The cooperative child care "experiment" compelled women to work in the service and child care areas moreso than in the agricultural areas, it didn't change the fact that child care was primarily seen as "female work" and non-productive. "The success of familism in kibbutzim reduced women's participation in Community life, pushing their struggle for equality into the background. Collective education failed to free kibbutz women from child care as their primary responsibility, or from leading a dual-career life in which motherhood and work are combined. Frustrated by their work options, many kibbutz women invested in motherhood, and were the leading proponents for changing the practice of collective sleeping for children. Thus, along with the men, rather than attempting to change the sex-typed occupational structure of kibbutzim, they instead helped to preserve it. For example, men are almost absent in the role of metapelet or Professional Caregiver." Sources for above (some of it paraphrased):Attachment in context. Kibbutz child-rearing äs a historical experimentKibbutz Ha-Dati Movement (1929-1948)Of the many reasons why women tended and still do tend to be the main care givers doesn't change the fact that, be it in the larger modern communities or the smaller communities of the Kibbutz experiment, care giving/service is seen as non-productive work and the persons who engage in it are stigmatized and treated as being non-productive. Many MRA voices have echoed that, and I have stated more than once on this blog that that is one of the biggest mistakes that feminism made, upholding the "non-productive work" meme instead of opposing it.So, what does that all have to do with the prevalence of child abuse by the main caregiver? Possibly the pain and frustration of being stigmatized and treated as a non-productive element…..a parasite, even…….. is taken out on the ones whom the main caregiver spends the most time around and who don't have the ability to fight back. By no means am I saying that child abuse is justified and shouldn't be punished, I'm just offering a possible explanation for it, and that also does not mean that there are not other factors involved. Your saying, " if it was genuinely about ending violence instead of advancing a political ideology. The focus would be where the majority of people first and most commonly experience violence, at the hand of the main care giver" doesn't help the matter if you want to keep thinking that taking societal factors into account, rather than looking for some kind of innate deficiency, is politicizing.And, seriously, if the majority first and most commonly experience violence at the hand of the main caregiver (typically, "Mom"), why are we all, women AND men, still content with having the default caregiving role default to "Mom"?

>Thomas at Yes Means Yes had a good post on this recently too:http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/a-game-preserve-for-sexual-predators/

>You're welcome, David, although the links that I provided aren't directly related to the original topic.

>As to the abstract which you are citing in general, the paper contains the disclaimer "The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official views of Health Canada." "According to the National Clearinghouse on Family Violence in Canada" This is a false statement, as Health Canada specifically says that these are not their words. http://www.canadiancrc.com/PDFs/The_Invisible_Boy_Report.pdfJohnson and Shrier's study was of a grand total of 25 abuse victims. We call these results 'not statistically significant'. With a sample size so low, and with the increased inaccuracy of self report vs other types of data, the risk of skewed and innacurate data is so high as to render these results meaningless (in a statistical or general sense, not in a personal sense for the victims involved). I could not find an explanation of the metholdology of Fritz's study beyond sample size and the fact that it only dealt with child sexual abuse http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7345149 I could only find an abstract, a link would be appreciated if someone has it.Knopp and Lackey's 1987 study was not an actual study at all, but a questionare about the opinions and/or experiences of 44 therapists who treated sex offenders, primarily those who treated juvenile sex offenders. Knopp and Lackey also noted, even in their sample, strong discrepancies in types of abuse. Exhibitionism or abuse with no physical contact were counted in these cases and these were the types of abuse reported as the primary types commited by females. While exhibitionism or showing porn with children is abusive and wrong, it is severely different in degree than what is generally discussed in studies about rape or sexual assault, such as penetration, fondling of genitals, removal of child's clothing, etc.While Risin and Koss did find a high rate of female abusers, they have been criticized for including consensual activity between adolescents in their abuse statistics (under the auspices of the notion that two disabled teens or children could not non-abusively consent to sex with each other). Risin and Koss's subjects were all in hospital situations. Disabled children in residential facilities have high rates of molestation and have different patterns of victimization in general. Fromuth and Burkhart found that 60% of the people they were classifying as victims reported a pleasurable experience. Related studies found that many boys under these criteria reported initiating the sexual contact. 5/6ths of their subjects were either not under the age of thirteen, had not had sexual contact with someone five years or more older, or had not viewed the experience negatively. It appears that statutory rape is extremely overrepresented in this sample, due to both the lower rate of sexual abuse of boys in general and the criteria used in this research. The Seidner and Calhoun study has similar issues with defining abuse and with wildly differing rates of abuse and sex of perpetrator depending upon definition. If you are talking non-coercive statutory rape of a child over thirteen, females are the primary perpetrators for male victims, if you are talking coercive cases and/or case involving a child under thirteen, males are the primary perpetrators by far. While statutory rape is a genuine problem to be addressed, the fact is that most discussions of child rape and abuse distinguish non-coervice statutory rape of a child over thirteen from 'child rape' in these discussions, including when citing statistics of child rape of females. Not seperating these results can result in potentially misleading reports, which appears to be the case here.Checking and analyzing sources, you can do it too!

>Women's Sexual Aggression Against Men: Prevalence and PredictorsDepartment of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Germany – 2003In this study, we investigated the prevalence of women's sexual aggression against men and examined predictors of sexual aggression in a sample of 248 women. Respondents reported their use of aggressive strategies (physical force, exploitation of a man's incapacitated state, and verbal pressure) to make a man engage in sexual touch, sexual intercourse, or oral sex against his will. Childhood abuse, gender role orientation, ambiguous communication of sexual intentions, level of sexual activity, and peer pressure were included as predictors of sexual aggression. Almost 1 in 10 respondents (9.3%) reported having used aggressive strategies to coerce a man into sexual activities. Exploitation of the man's incapacitated state was used most frequently (5.6%), followed by verbal pressure (3.2%) and physical force (2%). An additional 5.4% reported attempted acts of sexual aggression. Sexual abuse in childhood, ambiguous communication of sexual intentions, high levels of sexual activity, and peer pressure toward sexual activity were linked to an increased likelihood of sexual aggression. http://www.springerlink.com/content/h4038x61400l8273/?p=f4627938f6ee449bad67bc5f803aebf8

>Head's up: According to Amanda Hess the DOJ has (finally) gotten around to releasing its draft regulations for corrections facilities to end prison rape.They appear to have been very little input from Men's Rights groups, which is sort of a shame. The Prison Elimination Act was passed in 2003 and they're just now getting around to it issuing guidelines. And it's not like this was bleeding-heart legislation. Yes, Ted Kennedy was one of its prime sponsors but the other was the decidedly conservative Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions.figleafrealadultsex.com