|
|
Female
child sexual abusers are rare, and female paedophiles are extremely rare.
It has been suggested that the abuse perpetrated by females is inflicted
more subtly and therefore remains a hidden, but possibly extensive problem.
Research by Evans and Schaefer (1987) found that only after psychological
therapy could women identify sexual abuse by other women while treated and
untreated women did not differ in their recall of sexual abuse in childhood by
men. Surprisingly most boys
do not regard the incident as abuse.
“Miss K was an unmarried
Caucasian woman aged 20 who was referred for a pretrial examination having been
charged with two counts of sexual assault on two sisters, aged four and five. Sexual contact had occurred repeatedly over several
months, during babysitting. Abusive
acts included slapping the children, inserting pencils and other objects into
their vaginas and performing oral sex on them.
During these activities she usually felt angry, although not always with
the victims.
She had become increasingly
preoccupied with violent sexual fantasies involving the children and was
becoming more apprehensive about possibly acting these out.
Miss K also admitted that she had sexually molested several other young
boys and girls over the previous two or three years, again while babysitting”.
However,
these incidents had not come to police attention, and at the time of her
assessment, she had no known prior criminal record.
(i)
Miss K
claimed to have been sexually abused at 3 years of age by an uncle who has a
documented history of child abuse.
(ii)
She also
claims to have had incestuous relationships with 2 elder brothers involving
sadomasochism and bondage fantasies.
(iii)
She has
admitted initiating manual – genital and oral-genital stimulation with a dog
and a cat, both male family pets. Sex
with animals was and is a frequent fantasy for her.
(Cooper et al.,1990)
Findings
by Tingle (1986) &
Carlson (1991) indicate that female offenders may have a disproportionately
greater effect on their victim’s later sexual offending.
One study by Risin and Koss (1987) found research that indicated over 40%
of offenders against boys were female, often in caring roles such as
babysitters, teachers and parents friends.
About 30% of a sample of undergraduate males had been abused by females.
(Urquiza, 1988)
Studies
into abuse by females in American day care, providing care for 6 year-olds and
younger (Finkelhor and Williams,
1988) showed the following. This
was well documented and substantiation was provided by child protection
agencies, police, other responsible agencies or a combination of all three.
Females were common abusers in these settings.
About a fifth of both the girl and boy victims had been abused by a
female acting alone or with other females.
Males acting singly or together had abused about half of the female
victims and two-fifths of the male victims.
Female and male abusers accounted for the rest – more or less a third
of victims.
Women
were more likely to abuse with others than alone and were more likely to
threaten to harm the family. The
abuse was likely to involve kissing, digital-anal penetration, insertion of
objects into the vagina or anus, forced child-child activity or ritualistic
aspects. It would appear that
the characteristics of female offenders are dissimilar from those of male
offenders in this context, and that female offenders more commonly perpetrate
the penetration of orifices with fingers and objects.
Female
offenders are also much less likely than males to come to the attention of the
authorities. Child sexual
abuse by females is easily mistaken by the abused child as normal – though
often unpleasant – behaviour, this is in part due to the maternal view of the
mother that the child holds, and the trusting bond the child has believing the
mother could never intentionally hurt it.
Many
law enforcement and child care authorities find it hard to distinguish between
child sexual abuse and motherly behaviour, particularly if the accused is the
victim’s mother and is denying the allegations as a misinterpretation and
exaggeration.
The
under-representation of women as abusers is suggested by some to be due to
society’s failure to accept the concept that women could be abusers.
Some data would seem to indicate that women do offend, and perhaps in
larger numbers than anticipated:
“A Perth (WA) phone in from male
survivors of sexual abuse showed that more than a third of callers reported
sexual abuse by females. Some
of the female organisers rejected the information and sought alternative
explanations to account for the results.
The explanation which best fitted
their own ideology was that the calls were a “hoax” perpetrated by
paedophiles to implicate women and diminish the seriousness of their own
offences. Interestingly, the professionals who took the calls
were convinced of their authenticity”.
(In Briggs, 1995)
Nicholas Groth, a prison psychologist, reported that in his professional work, (in Finkelhor, 1984) he had only encountered 3 women out of 253 adult offenders against children. However, he went on to argue that female abusers might not be as infrequent as the numbers suggest. Reasons he offered for this theory were:
·
Women may
mask sexually inappropriate behaviour through the guise of bathing or dressing
the child;
·
Sexual
offences by females are more incestuous in nature, and the children are more
reluctant to report such contact when the offender is a parent, and someone they
are dependent upon;
·
It may be
that boys are more frequently the targets of female offenders than girls, and
boys are less likely to report or disclose victimisation than girls.
(This fact is discussed further in Chapter 7)
Psychologists
Blair and Rita Justice also suggest that mother-son incest is less likely to be
reported because:
(M)others engage more frequently
in sexual activity that does not get reported:
fondling, sleeping with a son, caressing in a sexual way, exposing her
body to him, and keeping him tied to her emotionally with implied promises of a
sexual payoff. (1979, cited
in Finkelhor, 1984)
Other
reasons suggested why women abuse less than men are:
·
Women are
socialised to prefer partners who are older, larger, and more powerful than
themselves. Being in a position of
dominance or authority is antagonistic to the role relationship which most women
find sexually arousing.
·
Women do
not generally act as initiators of sexual relationships.
Males are expected to take the initiative, and further, are encouraged to
overcome resistance, as this may be a cover for sexual desire.
·
Women are
less promiscuous, less likely to have multiple sexual partners, and less likely
to sexualise relationships with children.
·
Women are
less easily aroused, and such arousal is usually dependent on a range of cues
including the nature of the relationship with the sexual partner.
The child is therefore less likely to arouse a woman.
·
Women are
less likely to sexualise the expression of emotion, and can distinguish
situations of affection and intimacy that do not involve sex from those that do.
Men are more likely to see affectional contacts as sexual.
·
Having
sexual opportunities seems more important to the maintenance of self-esteem in
men than women. Thus when
other sexual opportunities are blocked, men are more likely to turn to children,
or other readily available outlets, to maintain their self-esteem.
·
Because
women are prepared for a maternal role, they may be more sensitive to the
well-being of children and therefore more inhibited from sexual contact with
children out of concern for the impact on them. The natural bonding relationship may also make women
more protective and give a greater sense of responsibility than men develop.
·
As women
are more often the victims of sexual exploitation they may be more able to
empathise with the potential for harm that may arise from exploitation to
children. Therefore they may
control any impulses.
·
Sexual
contact with children may be more condoned by male subculture than female
subculture. Without equivalent
encouragement, women are less likely to develop sexual interest in children.
(From Finkelhor, 1984)
One
source I can recommend for information regarding women and intergenerational
relationships is the Winter, 1992, issue of PAIDIKA: The Journal of Paedophilia,
which was written by and about women. It includes several interviews of women and female
youth as well as articles, such as: A “Crush on My Girl-Scout Leader” by
Nora de Ronde. “Feminism,
Paedophilia, and Children’s Rights” by Pat Califia.
“Sexual Revolution and the Liberation of Children”.
An Interview with Kate Millett.
“Speaking Out on “Women/Girl Love” - Or, Lesbians Do, “Do It”
by Beth Kelly and much, much, more. This
Journal is available by mail from: PAIDIKA, Postbus 15463, 1001 ML Amsterdam,
The Netherlands.
[Our
research indicates that women who have been physically and sexually abused
themselves are more likely to commit the same or similar abuse upon children.]
|
|
Back to 'An Investigation into Paedophilia'
