Sexual Abuse by Females

Nicholas J. Kovats wrote:

Walter, I thought of you immediately. Can you help? I do not have or remember the U.S. reference. Kind regards to you both...Nick

MYLES' MESSAGE:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:30:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Myles Fudge <ac027@freenet.toronto.on.ca>
To: "Nicholas J. Kovats" <cn650@freenet.toronto.on.ca>
Cc: Email Archive <filedaway@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: MEET DR. BRUCK AND ASSOC. RE: FALSE MEMORY AND CHILDREN

Nick, would you please qualify this statement from the message you sent out:

|  Indications that Large Scale Abuse Does Not Occur
| ..[SNIP]..
|       female child molesters are extremely rare.

I thought that a recent US study indicated that females commit 25% of sexual assault.  How does that make female child sexual molesters "extremely rare"?

Myles
"Daddy" to Joshua (3 1/2), and estranged stepfather to Jonathan (11)
Ontario, Canada                             Email: ac027@torfree.net

Dear Nick,

I'm a bit confused (I don't recall reading the original message that Myles is referring to).  It seems to me that the statement that Myles objects to wasn't yours, but rather one contained in an article that you posted.  Is that impression correct?

As to the frequency of sexual abuse by women (of boys), it isn't as rare as claimed in the statement.  Because no absolute figures are contained in the statement, it is not possible to determine what is meant by the dimension of "rare."  However, a number of references to studies that were done on the subject are contained in Frederick Mathews' report:

References to the studies can be found in the sections "Sexual Abuse" in chapters 2 and 3.  Chapter 2 contains a section that specifically addresses percentages of boys victimized by females.  The following quotes the paragraph containing that information.

The percentage of women and teenage girl perpetrators recorded in case report studies is small and ranges from 3%-10% (Kendall-Tackett and Simon, 1987; McCarty, 1986; Schultz and Jones, 1983; Wasserman and Kappel, 1985). When the victim is male, female perpetrators account for 1%-24% of abusers. When the victim is female, female perpetrators account  for 6%-17% of abusers (American Humane Association, 1981; Finkelhor and Russell, 1984; and Finkelhor et al., 1990). In the Ontario Incidence Study, 10% of sexual abuse investigations involved female perpetrators (Trocme, 1995). However, in six studies reviewed by Russell and Finkelhor, female perpetrators accounted for 25% or more of abusers. Ramsay-Klawsnik (1990a) found that adult females were abusers of males 37% of the time, female adolescents 19% of the time. Both of these rates are higher than the same study reported for adult and teen male abusers.

Here is another quote from the section "Dynamics of Female Perpetrated Abuse" in chapter 2.

There is some evidence that females are more likely to be involved with co-abusers, typically a male, though studies report a range from 25% - 77% (Faller, 1987; Kaufman et al., 1995; McCarty, 1986). However, Mayer (1992), in a review of data on 17 adolescent female sex offenders, found that only 2 were involved with male co-perpetrators. She also found that the young women in this study knew their victims and that none experienced legal consequences for their actions.  [That brings to mind Karla Homulka --WHS]

Self-report studies provide a very different view of sexual abuse perpetration and increase the number of female perpetrators substantially. In a retrospective study of male victims, 60% reported being abused by females (Johnson and Shrier, 1987). The same rate was found in a sample of college students (Fritz et al., 1981). In other studies of male university and college students, rates of female perpetration were found at levels as high as 72% - 82% (Fromuth and Burkhart, 1987, 1989; Seidner and Calhoun, 1984). Bell et al., (1991) found that 27% of males were abused by females. In some of these types of studies females represent as much as 50% of sexual abusers (Risin and Koss, 1987). Knopp and Lackey (1987) found that 51% of victims of female sexual abusers were male. It is evident that case report and self-report studies yield very different types of data about prevalence. These extraordinary differences tell us we need to start questioning all of our assumptions about perpetrators and victims of child maltreatment.

Finally, there is an alarmingly high rate of sexual abuse by females in the backgrounds of rapists, sex offenders, and sexually aggressive men, 59% (Petrovich and Templer, 1984), 66% (Groth, 1979), and 80% (Briere and Smiljanich, 1993). A strong case for the need to identify female perpetrators can be found in Table 4, which presents the findings from a study of adolescent sex offenders by O’Brien (1989). Male adolescent sex offenders abused by ‘females only’ chose female victims almost exclusively.

The report then shows a table depicting the implications of that last paragraph.  It is a shocker, although it doesn't permit any conclusions as to the frequency of female-perpetrated abuse.  However, it seems to me that Dr. Mathews made a statement somewhere in the report (probably in the conclusion, but I don't have the time to look for it), that female perpetrated sexual abuse of boys is most likely higher than any of the studies have found.  He urges that research be done to determine what solutions may be applied to end the problem of the invisible boys.

I'm not aware of the contents of any specific American studies.

At any rate, it is obvious that the statement that female perpetrated sexual abuse is rare is false.  If common sense is applied and judging from my life-experiences, it seems that serious and objective research will ultimately find that women perpetrate sexual abuse somewhat more often than men do.  It is people like Dr. Bruck who prevent the research from being done.

If you want to get an eye-opener, visit a bar on women's night when male strippers are on -- "Wehe wenn sie losgelassen!" (beware when they (women) are let loose!).  That is a popular adaptation of a phrase from Schiller's Song of the Bell, an ode that draws an analogy between the might of fire and those of human emotions.  "Benevolent is the fire's might, if it is tamed and minded by Man, but, beware when it's let loose."  He then draws the analogy to revolutions (during which it was women who showed themselves to be more merciless and depraved than men).  The phrase by Schiller has come to mean that untamed women, unconstrained by social conventions, are every bit as devastating as a conflagration.  It's not the politically correct view, but it's without a doubt true.

Schiller said (in 1798) in his ode, about the bell ringing in the revolution:

Freedom and Equality! one hears it sound,
The peaceful citizen is driven to arms,
The streets are filling, the halls,
The vigilante-bands are moving,
Then women change into hyenas
And make a plaything out of terror,
Still twitching, with panthers teeth,
They tear apart the enemy's heart.
Nothing is holy any longer, loosened
Are all ties of righteousness,
The good gives room to bad,
And all vices freely rule.
Dangerous it is to wake the lion,
Ruinous is the tigers tooth,
But the most terrible of all the terrors,
That is the mensch ^[1] when crazed.
Woe to those, who lend to the eternally-blind
Enlightenment's heavenly torch!
It does not shine for him, it only can ignite
And puts to ashes towns and lands.

Consider that society is giving women a virtually free hand these days to do with impunity anything they want.  It's an awful force let loose.

--Walter

______
Last updated:
1999 06 04 — mainly to incorporate the one verse from Schiller's Song of the Bell.
2001 01 31 (format changes)
2003 10 14 (updated link to The Invisible Boy)