The Forum > Article Comments > Charity, celebrity and the corporate condonation of child sexual abuse > Comments
Charity, celebrity and the corporate condonation of child sexual abuse : Comments
By Jocelynne Scutt, published 19/11/2012Adult failures to be responsible.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
-
- All
An excellent article! We must and need to educate kids now in sexual abuse prevention education. We cannot wait until the royal commission recommendations. There are children going to bed tonight unprotected and let's not forget as the media hype continues around the Savilles and Sanduskies of this world, research shows the majority of sexual abuse of children happens in families. I hope this children's book Some Secrets Should Never Be Kept goes some way in helping as a preventative tool. Please contact me if I can do anything to help through www.somesecrets.info
Posted by Jayneen Sanders, Monday, 19 November 2012 8:15:17 AM
| |
Having never experienced any abuse as a child myself, I wonder what my own action might have been if I had. Would I have had the trust in adults to reveal abuse to them? Would I have simply retreated in shame? I am not sure.
And never having heard or seen abuse as an adult, I wonder whether I would have taken action to expose a perpetrator. Or would I have perhaps thought, "This is just the way of the world". I like to think I would have taken action ... but can we all be sure of that? I do remember that when I was at secondary school, there was an incident where a flasher exposed himself to a classmate on the way home from school. The police were called; my classmate interviewed. She said the police were brilliant - empathetic but matter-of-fact. And the school handled it brilliantly too. No sniggering, just concerned action. Seems to me the 'corporate culture' of an institution greatly influences the way these incidents are handled. Some do it well; others ignore it at first and then try to cover it up. The critical factor seems to be the presence of shame. An institution that socialises children into feeling shame is less likely to be able to deal with instances of child abuse in a mature and compassionate way. Posted by anaminx, Monday, 19 November 2012 9:35:10 AM
| |
The 'institution' that socializes shame is our western society - which is obsessed with being positive and putting on a happy face no matter what. Yes I was abused as a child and Yes I know what it is like to not be believed by pompous people in positions of power and authority - and to be shot down for daring to besmirch the reputation of a 'respectable' person. Ask Maggie Dawkins how it feels.
The problem is almost certainly linked to society's obsession with a right to privacy and legislated secrecy. Our courts - including Family Courts and (in)Human Rights Tribunals - refuse to disclose details for risk of exposing the identity of the victim, which means the offenders identity will also likely be withheld. The offenders also know that a child or a (claimed) mentally impaired adult is not allowed to testify. So if you are going to abuse anybody make sure they are underage or lacking mental capacity Posted by SHORT&SHARP, Monday, 19 November 2012 10:38:11 AM
| |
Let's not forget that Savile was an active Catholic; and the odour of sanctity around him that came from attending Mass every day may have helped to deter some would-be investigators.
In fact the UK Catholic Herald ran a wonderful article just after Savile's death, asking, in effect, 'Why don't we acknowledge how this man's Catholicism influenced his life?' http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2011/11/07/jimmy-savile%E2%80%99s-obituaries-mentioned-his-charity-work-but-why-the-conspiracy-of-silence-about-his-faith/ OK, let's do that. Posted by Jon J, Monday, 19 November 2012 12:49:49 PM
| |
This must be an uncomfortable story for Jocelynne Scutt, who generally takes a partisan line with the ladies against men. The sheer numbers of victims in this case is extraordinary, but even more so that the guardians of the vast majority must have kept the secret, and the vile Savile, from discovery.
Being the father of six and ever on the look-out for warning signs of such outrages, I find it impossible to conceive that depravity on such a monstrous scale was unobserved or perceived by the parents--the archetype being the mother. The same applies to the generational and, epidemic crimes against children perpetrated by priests--the majority of whose congregations are traditionally women. Men carry the larger burden, being by far in a way the main perpetrators, but women and mothers are also guilty, indeed accomplices in crime, in their willingness to turn a blind eye, or otherwise denying what must in may cases have been plain to see. Women have always drawn a great deal of kudos from their unimpugned maternal instinct, yet I say this affair exposes a widespread willingness to neglect and abuse that sacred duty. As in all matters of love and war, women are partners in crime. Men could not have gotten away with it without enjoying a large degree of immunity from prosecution. Posted by Squeers, Monday, 19 November 2012 7:04:12 PM
| |
...Saviles’ escape from the consequences of alleged crimes, expose the truth to the notion; “One rule for the rich, and another for the poor”.
Posted by diver dan, Monday, 19 November 2012 9:07:38 PM
|