One in ten men have carried out sex offences against children

[HelenFisksBrownSuit]

Have you seen this item?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/one-in-ten-men-have-carried-out-sex-offences-against-children-says-survey-fjhd59fhn

Is paedophilia really this common?
I once heard a man (a psychologist I think) say on Radio 4 that he thought most men look at very young teens or even children inappropriately. It's a very disturbing thought.

I didn't say all of them were morally inept, just that there are a lot of morally inept people out there.

Traffic offences don't count as a conviction I don't think so even then, nope.

its not clear from the article how they are defining children, ie age ranges, because as it stands the headline suggests 10% of men have committed paedophilic crimes, which is horrific. Are we talking one off catcalling or systematic and reoccurring abuse?

to be clear, none of it is good, and I don’t wish to imply that harassment of teenagers by sleazebags can be disregarded as less impactful than SA of pre-pubescents. But if I’m going to be horrified about a topic as important as this, I’d like the full facts.

Also, the suffragette movement was over 100 years ago so it's unlikely they will take up any of these percentages.

Drink driving does, don't know the stats about it though. There are others like dangerous driving.

Doesn’t anyone else find it suspect that the only suggested solution to this apparent child-perve pandemic, is to get rid of encryption?

There are so many solutions I can think of which would work better. For example, how about not letting people get off the sex offenders register once on it? Proper custodial sentences for those caught with child abuse images? More restrictions on pornography online? Not letting people trans out of punishment? Etc, etc.

We already know that sex offences are prolific.

Who do people think are committing them?

Elves?

The text reads in a way that people are imagining that 1 in 10 men have admitted to having a sexual relationship with a child, when they themselves were an adult, but I bet the questions that led to those statistics were worded quite differently. For example, me and my now husband formed a relationship when he was 19 and I was 17. So I'm assuming he'd fall into the 1 in 10 category, but certainly isn't a child abuser! Infact, at the age of 17, I'd had multiple sexual experiences and partners (mostly with boys and men older than myself, as they had cars and seemed way cooler than the 16-17 year olds I knew), none of those relationships/encounters were at all abusive or coersive. I was my husband's first girlfriend, when he was 19 and I was 17, there was never any control or coercion. I'm not saying there isn't a problem with child sex offences in this country, obviously there are, and it's absolutely horrific to think of the poor vulnerable children who have been exploited, had their innocence taken away, and been subjected to horrendous crimes against them. BUT, I'm not sure this "survey" and corresponding articles have laid this information out in a truthful manner. This actually is more damaging, as it's almost normalising and excusing real child abuse for the problem that it is, by making people feel like "oh it's actually quite normal for grown men to be attracted to young children, the statistics prove that", because that really isn't the case. Child abuse and peadophilia are NOT normal, and shouldn't ever be minimised, by making it seem like it's something that "just happens", and acceptable in any circumstances. A 18/19 year old lad having consentual sex with his 17 year old girlfriend for the first time is NOT child abuse. Muddying the waters like this is just taking up valuable time and resources that should be directed at the actual problem, and supporting real victims of real abuse.

I was sexually abused as a child by a female babysitter. Never met an elf though.

Ofc they are not in the current stats. My point was about the inference that a criminal conviction implies being morally inept. That's an incredibly socially biased view: lots of young men from deprived communities end up with convictions for petty crime in their teens/20s. The great majority settle down and lead normal lives.

Conversely, if the stats in the Times article are even anywhere in the correct ballpark, most men who commit sexual offences against children are never convicted.

Who do people think are committing them?

My money is on a much smaller minority of men perpetrating the majority of sexual crimes through serial offending.

Correcting myself here - the 1 in 5 stat is abuse of women and girls.

It is estimated to be somewhere around 1 in 10 to 1 in 20 children that are sexually abused.

Obvs this doesn't reflect the sex offences carried out against children by viewing child abuse online.

I agree. It doesn't even say what age is being defined as a child. Is it under 18, in which case would having sex with a 17 year old (even if the responder was also 17 at that time) count as sexual contact with a child?
Even if it's defining a child as under 16, a 16 year old having sex with a 15 year old would count. And while you can argue that's too young to have sex, it doesn't automatically make the 16 year old an awful predator.

Without definitions it's a bit meaningless.

I'm not sure this "survey" and corresponding articles have laid this information out in a truthful manner. This actually is more damaging, as it's almost normalising and excusing real child abuse for the problem that it is, by making people feel like "oh it's actually quite normal for grown men to be attracted to young children, the statistics prove that", because that really isn't the case. Child abuse and peadophilia are NOT normal, and shouldn't ever be minimised, by making it seem like it's something that "just happens", and acceptable in any circumstances.

Exactly.

Here's a Full Fact article...

It's not outside the previous research shown here...

4-13% of men have sexual fantasies about children

A massive range of 0.04% - 5% have had some kind of sexual contact, so this study matches the higher range.

I can't believe 0.04% could be correct when 1 in 10 children is abused...

fullfact.org/crime/how-many-men-have-sexual-interest-children/#:~:text=This%20study%20said%20previous%20research,for%20child%2Drelated%20sexual%20fantasies.

This study claims 1:35 men have a sexual interest in children though. Quite a difference from 1:10 (though still far too high).

I also think we really need to define "children". Because I definitely do think a 30 year old with a 16 year old is terrible and it infuriates me when it's normalised, but it's a completely different crime to a 45 year old touching a six year old.

Judging by the number of men who would leer at my DD from when she was around 12 to her current age of 17, this doesn't surprise me.

I couldn't imagine many women walking down the road openly gawping at boys of the same age.

Can completely imagine this. The man I know who was convicted of possession csa images and one count of making did not go to prison. wealthy professional in the nhs.

Of course, there are women offenders and prolific repeat offenders but 60% are by someone trusted by the family and my experience at Rape Crisis is that the number that fit the profile of a prolific offender were significantly outweighed by those where the offender likely had 1 or 2 victims.

I wouldn't even bother with this - the sample isn't randomised nor normalised and it should be checked against population norms (it doesn't appear to be).

Given the subject the respondents will be far more likely to be involved or interested in the subject which will mean a higher "yes" rate response. People who have not been involved in the subject (so potential "no" respondents) won't have been attracted to answer the online survey.

So the TLDR; it's a biased sample.

I remember a couple of scary things I have read about on here that may back up this survey.

One was a survey (I think it may have been on students) that asked men if they would rape a woman if they thought they would definitely get away with it. Shockingly one in five men said yes.

And the other sad fact that has stuck in my brain was from when that poor 14 year old girl was gang raped in the US and one of the rapists filmed it and put it on Pornhub. Even though she was a child and it was clearly rape, she couldn't get Pornhub to take it down.

But even more disturbing than that, it was one of the most popular things to watch on Pornhub for ages and I think they estimated that one in five men in the US actively searched for it.

It may have these figures slightly wrong, but it all points to a depressing number of men being unsafe.

I'm trying to find a digestible summary and I'm going from memory so may be incorrect but sometimes studies talking about pedophilia can underestimate the prevalence...

Strictly speaking pedophiles are exclusively or primarily sexually attracted to children under 16 whereas most sex offences are carried out by men who are primarily attracted to adults but will abuse a child if the opportunity arises.

People think I'm crazy and borderline abusive for not letting my infant daughter wear scanty clothes. But a lot of men are absolute beasts. I've always known it.

I think 1 in 10 a huge under estimation as 1 in 4 children experience sexual abuse, most of it perpetrated by men