Fire fe de Vatican

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
!!

this might be a dumb or potentially offensive question: has anyone ever tried to demonstrate that some people are more genetically predisposed for paedophillia?

that's not a dumb question at all, but I don't think it's possible, at least with the current level of knowledge & technology. it's like the search for a "gay gene"; people have this idea that there's a genetic switch and you just flick it and bam! no more gay son. but that's not how genetics works, not at all. the issue is that sexual orientation/preference isn't a trait in the same way that eye color is. clearly genetic predisposition is a huge influence, but (especially w/r/t pedophilia) there are so many environmental factors and I think it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to separate out what influence comes from what, in terms of doing studies that would give you usable data.

incidentally, I encourage you to exhibit a healthy skepticism any time you see anyone making hard & fast genetic claims about a topic as fuzzy as sexuality.

edit: nomad beat me to the punch with a different answer, but I think both of our answers are right. it's true that many child molesters have high testosterone levels, which you can look at as a genetic disposition towards high production of that hormone. I don't know if any studies have been done to show a causation (rather than merely a correlation) between high testosterone and child molestation. even you did do such a study, again, you'd have to some way of separating out the influence of high testosterone levels from other factors.

chemical castration, AFAIK, just kills the sex drive altogether, it doesn't actually take away any of the underlying desires. likely explaining the high recidivism rate.
 
Last edited:

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
that's not a dumb question at all, but I don't think it's possible, at least with the current level of knowledge & technology. it's like the search for a "gay gene"; people have this idea that there's a genetic switch and you just flick it and bam! no more gay son. but that's not how genetics works, not at all. the issue is that sexual orientation/preference isn't a trait in the same way that eye color is. clearly genetic predisposition is a huge influence, but (especially w/r/t pedophilia) there are so many environmental factors and I think it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to separate out what influence comes from what, in terms of doing studies that would give you usable data.

incidentally, I encourage you to exhibit a healthy skepticism any time you see anyone making hard & fast genetic claims about a topic as fuzzy as sexuality.

edit: nomad beat me to the punch with a different answer, but I think both of our answers are right. it's true that many child molesters have high testosterone levels, which you can look at as a genetic disposition towards high production of that hormone. I don't know if any studies have been done to show a causation (rather than merely a correlation) between high testosterone and child molestation. even you did do such a study, again, you'd have to some way of separating out the influence of high testosterone levels from other factors.

chemical castration, AFAIK, just kills the sex drive altogether, it doesn't actually take away any of the underlying desires. likely explaining the high recidivism rate.

I think they're abandoning the progesterone therapy, more or less, because the guys themselves say it's also a psychological issue not entirely a baseline drive issue.

Yeah, with the high testosterone, it could be a cart/hourse question... certain high risk behaviors can elevate testosterone, so maybe some pedophiles are thrill seakers who are addicted to the adrenaile/testosterone boost it gives them.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Zhao, Well I really dont think its inherent and necessary to be a paedophilie if you want to be a catholic preist.

But it is inherent and necessary for paedophile's to have access to children, a feeling of power, the trust of parents and if being above the law and having a whole system in place to cover your tracks comes as part of the deal... The preisthood is a cushty number for them.

And think of it this way, its only concentrated in Catholicism because we know about it.
Who knows what happens else where? We only have more reported rapes now, but that doesnt mean there more concentrated in this decade then the 30s.

Yeah, but Section, there are few denominations that allow priests/leaders such an inordinate amount of unsupervised access to children as Catholicism does... I think that with paired with the fact that the RCC's strategy for dealing with problems is to "keep it in the family" and avoid allowing secular/legal authorities to prosecute or get involved is enough to make Catholicism a haven for pedophiles.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Yeah, with the high testosterone, it could be a cart/hourse question... certain high risk behaviors can elevate testosterone, so maybe some pedophiles are thrill seakers who are addicted to the adrenaile/testosterone boost it gives them.

I just mean it's much, much tougher to show causation than it is to show a correlation. you can do studies comparing testosterone levels in pedophiles to those of randomly sampled non-pedophile males, but that only indicates correlation. to show causation, you have to have some means of isolating the variable you're looking at, and I don't know if there's any way to do that in this case. not that we're in disagreement, but just to clarify.
 

Dr Awesome

Techsteppin'
I doubt people with high testosterone are attracted into gods service, none of the priests I've met (including young ones) are very "sporty", or act like alpha males.
In my mind, the danger of them becoming sex offenders is that:

1) As a pre-cursor they may have been sexually abused themselves
2) They are put into an environment where offending is easy, and the chances of getting caught slim
3) They have no "normal" sexual relationships
4) They may be aware that other priests are doing it (ie - normalising it)

After years of not having any sexual release they must have some very strong desires - I can't even begin to think what would happen to men everywhere if they were told they couldn't have sex and that wanking was sinful...
As the Stanford prison experiment showed - people can be made to behave very badly indeed in the right (wrong) situations.
 

grizzleb

Well-known member
I think it's been proven that actually, paedophiles have more in common genetically with crabs than with other people.
 

grizzleb

Well-known member
I think the point about not having any normal sexual interaction is an important one. Also - the way that normal sexual interaction is probably viewed morally within the church distorts it, so that any sexual interaction is viewed as this horrible evil that has to be purged or something. And I'm sure many of the priests are choking for a wee tug and a swatch of youporn all the time. And so then even the most basic, harmless sex gets turned into this horrible 'evil' that you can't avoid, meaning that you can't make a distinction between having a wank and molesting a child. The point about the structure of the organisation playing a part is important too. Th fact that priests are trusted, and up until recently would have certainly have been believed over children in most cases means that the likelihood of reprecussions are slim, and all you have is your own inner moral turmoil or whatever. Fuck knows, but I don't think paedophiles consciously enter the church to abuse children, I think that's mental. Priests become paedos is my line.
 
Last edited:
D

droid

Guest
There is some awful bollocks being talked in this thread. The fact is that the incidence of child sexual abuse amongst RC priests and brothers is statistically average and even less than other professions practised in many countries and cultures around the world.

50% of all children taken into care in secular Sweden have been abused. Academic studies have shown that the incidence of abuse amongst clerics is about 1% across all denominations.According to Phillip Jenkins, the numbers are 0.2-1.7% for priests, 2.0-3.0 for protestant clergy. A Catholic league study found that it was statistically safer to leave your child with a priest rather than a schoolteacher. IIRC this also applies to dentists.

So, this isnt about celibacy or homosexuality, nor are Catholic priests more likely to abuse than other clergy or professions. This is about institutional cover ups and abusers being protected by the Chruch and the state - thats where the real evil is.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
So, this isnt about celibacy or homosexuality, nor are Catholic priests more likely to abuse than other clergy or professions. This is about institutional cover ups and abusers being protected by the Chruch and the state - thats where the real evil is.

Droid is right. the only study I know of on the topic - the John Jay College one - suggests that priests don't have an abnormally high rate of molestation compared to other clergy, teachers, etc. unfortunately, this isn't b/c the RC priest rate is low, but b/c the rate of molestation in the general population is fairly high. the two strongest predictors of abuse are access to children & a preexisting relationship w/the victims. (tho again we're talking correlation, not causation)

However, the church has absolutely no one to blame but itself for the extremely negative public perceptions. Also, attempting to foist off its molestation/cover-up issues by saying "but everyone has this problem" - a line I've seen apologists take - is unconscionable. Other organizations don't go out of their way, generally, to foil criminal investigations and run interference for repeat offenders.
 

Tentative Andy

I'm in the Meal Deal
Yeah, and maybe this is an obvious point - but given the extent of the institutional cover-up, how accurate are the current figures likely to be? Surely there could be huge numbers of abuse victims who were prevented from coming forward or who had their allegations uncritically dismissed. Do those carrying out the studies have access to those people? (Honest question). My basic feeling is that it's too early to declare the true extent of abuse within the church.
(I take Droid's general point, though - to an extent).
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
There is some awful bollocks being talked in this thread. The fact is that the incidence of child sexual abuse amongst RC priests and brothers is statistically average and even less than other professions practised in many countries and cultures around the world.

50% of all children taken into care in secular Sweden have been abused. Academic studies have shown that the incidence of abuse amongst clerics is about 1% across all denominations.According to Phillip Jenkins, the numbers are 0.2-1.7% for priests, 2.0-3.0 for protestant clergy. A Catholic league study found that it was statistically safer to leave your child with a priest rather than a schoolteacher. IIRC this also applies to dentists.

So, this isnt about celibacy or homosexuality, nor are Catholic priests more likely to abuse than other clergy or professions. This is about institutional cover ups and abusers being protected by the Chruch and the state - thats where the real evil is.

First of all, where did you get your statistics? Because those aren't the ones I've seen. I've seen lots of conflicting data on this from different sources.

But let's pretend you're right-- Does any of this excuse the past several hundred years of cover up? Or the fact that after priests got caught by the church authorities, they simply were shuffled off to the next parish? NOPE. Does it excuse statements made by bishops comparing the public's outrage at the RCC coverups with the holocaust? NOPE.

If a school teacher molested someone, they'd be sent to prison. If a Catholic priest does it, he gets sent to another town that doesn't know he's a pedophile, because he's not a registered sex offender, because the church did not hand him over to the legal authorities.

This is just another instance of the Church putting itself above the law, and in manner that puts the public at risk.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Yeah, and maybe this is an obvious point - but given the extent of the institutional cover-up, how accurate are the current figures likely to be? Surely there could be huge numbers of abuse victims who were prevented from coming forward or who had their allegations uncritically dismissed. Do those carrying out the studies have access to those people? (Honest question). My basic feeling is that it's too early to declare the true extent of abuse within the church.
(I take Droid's general point, though - to an extent).

Those figures are not correct. Philip Jenkins? What is he world's resident statistician now? Nope, he's, what else, a Religious Studies professor! And a long-time contributor to Christianity Today. No formal training in mathematics whatsoever. Yeah, what a reliable source of statistical information.

Give me a break...
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Also, I'd guess that a statistic that claims 50% of Swedish children are abused in day car or school covers all abuse, not just sexual abuse. I can't find that anywhere, not a single reputable site made by a government or independent agency.

"All abuse" encompasses verbal and psychological abuse. And those sorts of metrics can be distorted very easily by someone with an agenda. It's much more difficult to distort statistics when there are formal, legal documents backing up the claims. Which there are more often than not in cases of "secular" abuse.

And yeah, I wouldn't doubt that there are all kinds of pervs at other churchs, too. That doesn't make it ok.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Does any of this excuse the past several hundred years of cover up? Or the fact that after priests got caught by the church authorities, they simply were shuffled off to the next parish? NOPE. Does it excuse statements made by bishops comparing the public's outrage at the RCC coverups with the holocaust? NOPE.

Come on, droid is scarcely trying to 'excuse' anyone, is he? And he mentioned the Church's cover-up operations explicitly.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Yeah, and maybe this is an obvious point - but given the extent of the institutional cover-up, how accurate are the current figures likely to be? Surely there could be huge numbers of abuse victims who were prevented from coming forward or who had their allegations uncritically dismissed. Do those carrying out the studies have access to those people? (Honest question).

that's broadly true with all situations of abuse. most cases aren't reported under any circumstances.

If a school teacher molested someone, they'd be sent to prison. If a Catholic priest does it, he gets sent to another town that doesn't know he's a pedophile, because he's not a registered sex offender, because the church did not hand him over to the legal authorities.

I think a fair # school teachers who molest kids don't go to prison because they're never caught. the main difference is between the institutional reactions to molestation. which is what droid was talking about. also tbc the only study I've seen that I'll stand behind is, again, the John Jay College one. I don't know anything the Swedish thing. also, I'd take anything the Catholic League says with an enormous grain of salt. however, there is no data (again, that I've seen) that does suggest priests molest at a statistically significant higher rate.

also, with Tea - come on people. no one's excusing anything.
 

Tentative Andy

I'm in the Meal Deal
that's broadly true with all situations of abuse. most cases aren't reported under any circumstances.

Yeah, fair enough, I'm aware of that. I just feel that the known history of manipulation of the facts means that in this case it's particularly difficult to believe fully in the accuracy of current statistics, and at least reasonable to suspect (though not with certainty, of course) that the true figures may be higher.
Anyway, don't want to elevate this into a bigger point than I intended. I'm not having a go at Droid and don't think he's excusing anything.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
also, with Tea - come on people. no one's excusing anything.

Nobody on this thread maybe... but the RCC's lamentable lack of ability to apologize and reform is the issue here. Not the words of the people on the thread.

And no one needs to tell me that school teacher's abuse kids, too, I was tortured by one myself, and lived to see them teach for another 20 years unpunished.

I've seen data that says the rate of molestation in the RCC is something like 3 times that of other denominations... but I will have to dig it up... can't remember the source off the top of my head...
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
I'm sorry, but I don't really have time for people who are going to play "let's compare statistics" when that's not the issue- everyone knows there are pedophiles in every profession. So why even bring that up?

It's the tactic being used by all of the foremost apologists for the RCC at the moment. Well, that, and blaming things on Zionists and/or Nazis in our midst. Same diff, I guess.

Edit: And celibacy has nothing to do with pedophilia, of course not. Everyone knows the real reason for celibacy in the RCC is this:

eyespy said:
The celibacy forced onto Catholic priests is actually not nonsense at all and has a very specific purpose--it allows the Church to inherit their property when they die without a lot of wives and kids making claims to Daddy's habits and rosary beads.

What's more brilliant than a protection racket? One where the capos don't have to feed the families of their casualties.
 
Last edited:
D

droid

Guest
I'm sorry, but I don't really have time for people who are going to play "let's compare statistics" when that's not the issue- everyone knows there are pedophiles in every profession. So why even bring that up?

It's the tactic being used by all of the foremost apologists for the RCC at the moment. Well, that, and blaming things on Zionists and/or Nazis in our midst. Same diff, I guess.
.

Seriously Nomad, please fuck off. Im not making excuses for anyone. This thread was discussing why there was such a high incidence of child abuse amongst Catholic priests, I was simply addressing the core of that question - so it is an issue.

It is true that in certain parts of the US the % rate is much higher btw. But all those figures are from memory so please feel free to do some research yourself. BTW the Ryan report covered all types of abuse - not just sexual. Id also like to point out that (as has been hinted at above), about 90% of sexual abuse is committed by members of the family or close acquantancies - not professionals.

None of this excuses anything the church and state did to cover up the crimes, thats implicit in my last post. If I had my way the Irish Catholic church would be stripped of its assets and all of those complicit in the abuse would be rooted out and prosecuted, that includes priests, bishops, judges, doctors and politicians.

We need a de-nazification programme for the RC church and its abetters in child absue.
 

vimothy

yurp
No need to attack Philip Jenkins either. He's a serious scholar, and, if memory serves, professor of criminology as well as religious studies.
 
Top