Boy Scouts "perversion files" released - Page 3

I don't read those...long, rambling, crazy posts of yours, didn't I tell you that already? What a waste of a dedication! 

Interesting statistics here:

Of about 3,000 reported cases of sexual misconduct among priests committed in the past 50 years, only 300, or 10 percent, of those cases involved true pedophiles. Pedophilia is psychologically classified as sexual attraction to prepubescent children, younger than 13. Ninety percent of the reported abuse cases involved Roman Catholic priests classified as ephebophiles, those attracted to teens between 13 and 19. Of those reported cases, 60 percent were homosexual abuse and 30 percent heterosexual abuse, according to the 2004 John Jay Report commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Thanks for the clarification Ninja, you do know your stuff. So the problems with sexual abuse by priests is more complicated than first thought and not the usual serial crimes of a pedophile.

I am all about believing a report commissioned by the very people who for years covered this abuse up. lmfao.

Who gives a flying fuck if it is gay, bi-sexual or straight, it is abuse of children and it makes no sense to walk around labeling those you disagree with Ninja. You seem to have that knack to label, name call and belittle those with a differing opinion. Who fing cares molestation is molestation.  Ever been molested Ninja?????

Boy scouts, coaching and religion seem to open the door for mostly men who pretend to come from a higher moral character to victimize children.

Make all the excuses in the world about who, what and where but this is still mostly men abusing children.

This is a non-admin opinion and doesn't reflect on admin duties or the opinions of other admins, this site or its owner.

Make all the excuses in the world about who, what and where but this is still mostly men abusing children.
 

Yes, to the statement above, when we talk about priests. Preteen-teen children abused by men who were boys, comprised 60%, versus preteen-teen children who were girls, and were abused by men was half that, at 30%, according to the statistics presented by a source you just blatantly disregarded. As if the Catholic Church had no interest to find the truth, I find that rude. I suppose the 10% leftover is of children who were girls, abused by their same sex, or even another student for all we know. 

When we talk about Scout Master abuse, we again are most likely talking men abusing young boys, and teen boys. I am sure some of these abusive men consider themselves homosexuals, just as some will surely call themselves bi-sexual. I think you are saying some will also call themselves heterosexual, but also have an incurable pedophilia? If yes, then that is hard to reconcile to some of us. Do we deserve abuse because of this difficulty? I don't think we do. 

What Ninja is trying to point out is there is a distinction to the perversions.  It really doesn't benefit any one to start screaming labels like "bigot", and it wasn't Ninja who began that. Must have felt compelled to finish it though. Usually happens when one gets attacked for no reason.

Any way, you neglected to notice GSDTravels changed the tone from discourse to attack. 


 

What I find rude is labeling someone who has differing opinions.

I see so saying  "You have recently become one of the smart-ass know-it all energy sucking posters."  and "MS. Relentlessly obnoxious." is okay, why? It started the name calling but twist how you want. I don't care. And yes I dismiss a church who for years claimed this abuse never happened. It is not in their best interest to tell the truth.

Just like scouts and all the people who covered it up for years, all in the name of scouting. Sick.

And BTW, I am not getting drawn into arguing with you people I have said what I wanted and any continued back and forth will only serve your NEEDS.

Ninja, you obviously have not one lick of understanding when it comes to sexuality.  Male on boy molestation is not homosexuality it.s pedophilia.  You are wrong and your "opinion" is utter nonsense.  Do a little research, please.

This is the volley that started the name calling. I am positive those words felt very insulting. Fine by me if you can't stand a rebuttal GSDAdmin. Makes me wonder why you even bothered with "us people" and whatever "needs" you are on about. So, instead you flew into the conversation just to drop your abuse, as I am sure it satisfied some need.

It is non-sense in her opinion but it should not have led to labeling and name calling. This is disagreeing on the opinion and not name calling and labeling. Now you are wrong if you believe disagreeing on a concept and an opinion should lead to name calling and labeling but it doesn't surprise me at all that you believe this should have led to labeling and name calling.

Maybe we all should be a little more understanding of peoples posts, as we do not know them, or what they have been through in their childhood.  If someone feels VERY strongly about a subject, maybe they have every reason to?  I don't know, just a thought.
My heart breaks for any child that has ever been sexually abused by an older person they trusted.  I've said it before.  I'd find it VERY  hard  not to kill someone who ever touched or harmed my child or grandchild.  I cannot even imagine.

Huh...?  Right then, I don't get what you wrote at all, but I have a feeling that's the point. Two people weren't nice, that's what happened. And the above pasted quote is accusing that a certain research was neglected. A post was made to disabuse that notion. That research was discounted with a dash of insult. I don't think it was fair. That's about it. 

Good post Red Sable, some topics ARE more touchy than others.