The Front Page Report on Abuse That Even The Government Finds Incredulous

 “We treat the issue seriously and want to do all we can to help victims. But this report is highly emotional. We have concern about some of the figures.” 

Well said our lovely government.

Oh how I long for clarity on this issue.

Here , and again here, and also here.

And the gravy train rolls on, we all know some awful things happen, they have and always will, this continuing barrage of "Abuse Propaganda" is still allowing the powers that be in this industry to avoid responsibility for where most abuse takes place, in the home.

Propaganda is defined as the following:

Information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicise a particular political cause or point of view.The dissemination of such information as a political strategy.

So straight away we have one article in the Sun, and another in the Daily Mail (who seem to have lost their critical faculties since my last post) One takes the angle on the abuse, the other on the fact it is related to porn on-line.  This is obvious from the headlines of each article. That, surely is propaganda?

In the Sun they quote the youngest as being 12, whereas in the report (or polemic, you decide) they state the earliest age of an "abuser" to be 14, then change their minds and say 12 later on, all rather confusing. Go figure. To me that illustrates something deeply wrong with the thinking, as if 14 is somehow less shocking than 12, so needed a bit of sexing up.

If the report is so accurate why would they make such a fundamental mistake or exaggeration? 


Now exaggeration, that's an interesting word I find, rolls of the tongue nicely and to put it mildly, is particularly appropriate to the narrative of abuse.

So back to the report which is predominantly about teenagers, not children per se! Just the definition in law of what a child is.It also interviews older people for its case, so we are talking retrospective here. Hmm, always worry about that one, retrospective re framing may have taken place.

"I Wasn't abused"

"Yes you were"

"No"

"Yes"

Ad nauseum until "victim" is coerced into belief. An example can be found here at 13:12 and continued here, her (Pamela Stephenson's) disbelief in Stephen and his obvious ability to define his own experiences outside her chosen narrative is nauseating. But, as with all things in this situation, complex and nuanced. 

The vast majority of the perpetrators of this terrible crime are male. They range in age from as young as fourteen to old men.

Well what a surprise, strangely enough if I go looking for crabs on a seashore I eagerly find them.The same is true here, how about a report in to why the vast amount of false allegations is made by women? Should not be hard to construct, especially if you only talk to the men accused. For me that is where the nub of it lies. I simply do not believe it.

Now lets not growl in haste, of course some of what has happened is no doubt disgusting and harmful, but hundreds  of bloggers and writers will give you all the gnashing and wailing of teeth if you go to the right sites, I prefer to take the side of sceptic.

What I simply do not believe is that this is as widespread or as cut and dried as Berelowitz and her followers would believe. Should we blindly accept this propaganda? To whit:

This report is a wake-up call. As one young woman said after telling us her story:

“I can let go now because you are dealing with this.” 

Each and every one of us owes it to her and all other victims to listen, to believe and to act to stop this terrible abuse. Using the warning signs lists, produced in this report, is the first step to identifying and protecting children.

A wake up call,to whom, who on earth is left that does not see through the eyes of abuse? Could this actually mean, "we need funding please, are you listening, FUNDING NOW!!!"

Then the the victim speaks to appeal to our emotions,, but not I hasten to add to our facility for critical enquiry.

After telling us her story? I would rather she prove her case.
How old was this young woman?
What is this terrible abuse mentioned?
Why would we encourage someone to let go and acquiesce to a specialist in the field rather than taking responsibility for their own life and move on through their own strength and fortitude, I smell victimology?
A warning list, god help us, but we will come to that.

So lets answer some of my questions using a couple of hypothetical.

Case A
She is 17, a spoilt, attention seeking brat,  who has had countless offers of help from her family and others but refused them all due to her own ego and arrogance.  Her behaviour is unexplainable, as the family is a loving unit and she adamantly maintains she has never been abused, in anyway, by anyone.

She propositioned a man who was 21 and he paid her for sex believing her when she said she was 18. She wasn't, subsequently read about the compensation possibilities in the media and realised a way she could make a few quid, great story for the press and a win for the child abuse industries trafficking nonsense.

He took his own life, how emotive of him!

Case B

She is 14, has been having sex with her 16 year old boyfriend, safely and in a loving context. A busybody child protection expert spotted this as school as the two of them truanted for a bit of rumpy pumpy one afternoon.

With glee they parted the two, brainwashed her into believing she was abused and charged the male, and he is now attending courses with the same guys you can hear about in...

Case C

She was 5, her father repeatedly raped her and then shared her with his brother till she was 11 years old, the Mother, who knew, did nothing, except film it and post it on the internet. 

No charges have been brought.

Further on in the report.

Without exception, all chose to share their accounts because they want to stop other children suffering as they did.

Really, without exception, are you sure, and if so how?

Are we to believe they are all telling the absolute truth?

I gave up halfway through reading, terrible I know considering I am writing about it, but it is an awfully damning report if just half of it is true. Again belief slips in, and the conflation of consensual acts, fantasy and distorted reality with horrendous abuse bores me. Can they not be more nuanced perhaps? To their credit they do mention consensual activities, albeit briefly.

And so to the list, had to include it, and have highlighted those that seem to be so nebulous as  to be meaningless.

APPENDIX A: WARNING SIGNS AND VULNERABILITIES CHECK LIST



The following are typical vulnerabilities in children prior to abuse:

• Living in a chaotic or dysfunctional household (including parental substance use, domestic violence, parental mental health issues, parental criminality).
• History of abuse (including familial child sexual abuse, risk of forced marriage, risk of ‘honour’-based violence, physical and emotional abuse and neglect).
• Recent bereavement or loss.
• Gang association either through relatives, peers or intimate relationships (in cases of gang associated CSE only).
• Attending  school with young people who are sexually exploited. (every child then!!! Overuse of exclamations called for sorry)
• Learning disabilities.
• Unsure about their sexual orientation or unable to disclose sexual orientation to their families.
• Friends with young people who are sexually exploited.
• Homeless.
• Lacking friends from the same age group. (older friends, oh the shame :) the horror)
• Living in a gang neighbourhood.
• Living in residential care.
• Living in hostel, bed and breakfast accommodation or a foyer.
• Low self-esteem or self-confidence. (The great catch all, an explanation for anything these days)
• Young carer. (This is an outrageous assertion, they should be ashamed)

The following signs and behaviour are generally seen in children who are already being sexually
exploited.


• Missing from home or care.
• Physical injuries.
• Drug or alcohol misuse. (teenagers like being pissed, so do I, and many of you, misuse is a fluffy idea at best)
• Involvement in offending. (Shagging the GF/BF perhaps?)
• Repeat sexually-transmitted infections, pregnancy and terminations. (you don't say)
• Absent from school.
• Change in physical appearance.
• Evidence of sexual bullying and/or vulnerability through the internet and/or social networking sites.
• Estranged from their family. (teenagers are supposed to, how else do we get them to leave)
• Receipt of gifts from unknown sources.
• Recruiting others into exploitative situations.
• Poor mental health. (Oh please!)
• Self-harm. (Fashionable isn't it?)
• Thoughts of or attempts at suicide. ( Piffle, teenage years are a misery, they often cry wolf and try as we might we cannot protect them all, and this lot can make it worse if your not careful)

So much for rationality in all things, in the next blog, I will attempt to explore a more nuanced and sensible view of some of this, as right now I am a bit to bumfuzzled to think straight, this report does that unfortunately, when it should be offering clarity.