If women are treated more leniently, it may be that there is a pervasive view that no real harm is done. But there is growing evidence that not only are young male victims of female sexual abuse severely affected, but that they are also at higher risk of going on to become abusers themselves.

This excellent article out of Australia deals with sexual abuse of boys by older women, its effects on them later in life, attitudes about that and the lenient sentences women who commit statutory rape incur (The Age, 3/10/06).  It's not a new piece, but it's worth revisiting, particularly since the Rudd government seems poised to roll back equally shared parenting laws on the flawed premise that men are uniquely dangerous to children.

The article points out that boys who are sexually abused by older women are potentially harmed for life.  Specifically, they themselves tend to incur short term depression and long time problems with intimacy with women.  Worse, it cites four Canadian studies as finding,

"an alarmingly high rate of sexual abuse by females in the backgrounds of rapists, sex offenders and sexually aggressive men (and) male adolescent sex offenders abused by 'females only' chose female victims almost exclusively".

Obviously, those are correlational, not necessarily causative factors, but, as with all significant correlational data, they may suggest a measure of causation.

Whatever the case, researcher Patrick O'Leary of the University of South Australia has found that the effects of female sexual abuse of boys is, if anything, greater than that of male abuse of boys.

As to sentencing of female abusers of boys, the article says,

A series of research papers released last September by Victoria's Sentencing Advisory Council has noted that women convicted of manslaughter and murder receive shorter prison terms and shorter non-parole periods than male offenders. That difference may be partly explained by the differing circumstances underlying male and female homicide, but even in cases of culpable driving women are treated more leniently, with shorter average sentences — although the latest statistics show the gap is closing.

Given that background of leniency in sentencing of female perpetrators, the article wonders if the same might be true of female sexual abusers of boys.  It goes on to cite several cases in which female perpetrators were given suspended sentences and quotes one judge as saying,

"It does seem to be an offensive principle that a female teacher in these circumstances is treated more leniently than a male teacher would be."

One of the possible reasons for the leniency is the widespread public perception that boys are willing participants and therefore no harm has been done.  The article, to its great credit, is a pains to dispel that notion. 

While it's true that, for many adolescent boys, having sex with an older woman may fulfill a fantasy.  But boys have lots of fantasies that we would hesitate to exonerate adults for helping them act on.  A boy might fantasize about using crack cocaine.  Would it be OK for an adult to buy it for him and show him how to smoke it?  The point is that boys aren't adults and don't always know what's good for them.  To exonerate or treat with leniency an adult because of a child's misconceptions simply doesn't make sense.

As Dr. O'Leary says,

"The idea that it's some sort of fantasy or that it will be a rite of passage is a myth." 

Thanks to Michael for the heads-up.

This entry was posted on Monday, October 26th, 2009 at 9:51 am and is filed under Crime/Criminal Justice System/Police, Men and the Media, Child Abuse, Rape/Sexual Assault/Statutory Rape. You can trackback from your own site.