Along with the author and greatest bulk of respondents to OLO, I share a concern about protecting minors and youth from those who would take advantage of them.

However as far as I can see the greatest dangers are neglect and poor parenting, followed by the legal drugs cigarettes and alcohol (illegal drugs cause nowhere near the amount of harm to the community).

I read some of the author’s interviews on the ABC, where this timeline was available:

“At 14 her grandmother sold her to a paedophile barrister
At 16 she was in a psychiatric hospital
At 18 she escaped Cambodia as it fell to the Khmer Rouge
At 19 she was a prostitute in Japan
At 21 she received death threats and caused national headlines
At 23 she becomes a mother
At 27 a classical pianist
At 30 a journalist
At 40 she becomes a property millionaire and finally confronts the man who almost destroyed her. And wins.”
Excerpt from http://www.abc.net.au/farnorth/stories/s1677469.htm

This timeline (first 13 years?) leads me to conclude that the primary cause of her suffering as a child and later as an adult was neglect by her mother and grandmother.

This does not diminish the disgraceful behaviour of the barrister, but it underlines the fact that although child molestation is topical, child neglect is usually implicated as the root cause of the suffering and death of children. However child neglect does not interest the media.

With the greatest respect to OLO authors, the ‘sexy’ feminist subjects such as rape or DV, though awful, are overexposed, while thousands of children (and old people) suffer silently from neglect. Child neglect is of endemic proportions.

It was right to allocate resources to the monitoring of child sex offenders but in a way that problem is just one aspect (symptom?) of the wider problem of child neglect.

It is time we dealt with children's and family problems holistically.

Corporations have figured out the obvious, Sex is a guaranteed pathway to increased sales. In men this testosterone fuelled urge is so overpowering that it brings down governments, destroys successful relationships and is shamelessly exploited by all with something to sell. Women are faced with the difficult prospect of finding a suitable lifelong partner and thus the flipside, sexual allurement becomes another perfect pitch on which to sell unneeded wares.

The Muslim male dominated faith have recognised the potentially destructive nature of sexual desire and allurement thus the Burka has become their crude method of sidestepping the issue. Unfortunately the ‘West’ wont play their game and the progressive Muslims have yet to develop an alternate solution. They at least recognise these biologically programmed urges hold them back from attaining a higher level of spiritual ‘being’. They unfortunately have hold of the wrong end of the stick, lets hope they find a more palatable solution soon!

Similarly Western religions all have their doctrine for dealing with the same problem. Lifelong marriage vows, threats of divine judgement, sexual segregation amongst their religious officers etc. All seem to be ultimately failing, but again credit has to be given in their recognition that in order to rise spiritually ‘higher’, our human 'base level' traits have to be mastered.

The western worlds Corporate development of ‘perfect allurement’ leads us all on a circular path of mutual dis-empowerment. In being constantly surrounded with sex, these unserving traits become re-enforced into the collective psyche. With women striving to be ever more alluring, men are being encouraged to ultimately fail, with both being the ultimate losers.

In recognising that crimes of rape and violence against women are associated with a lower and more sinister aspect of our human failings, I do not believe that the Corporations of the western world hold our best interests at heart when they encourage allurement, and sexual desire within scociety. The sooner we reject this notion and ever broadening pattern of behaviour, the better for all.

Cornflower,
Your last post was impossible to argue against, you are correct of course, how do we lobby for this to be enacted?

Why must we retreat to law. We are examining human behavour which is a social issue. Neglect of children could involve sending them to sunday school. The competitive nature of this society is the base problem,I have no idea how you will change that, but some, including me, have little of it and find no problem recognising male competitive behavour while in female company. I enjoy female company and conversation how often this is spoiled by men who would strut their stuff. Clothes or lack of them is just that, often the reason to talk to them. It matters little if the conversation is not edifying.
fluff