Session 5A: Incest and Abuse
1st Global Conference
Friday 1st May 2009 – Sunday 3rd May 2009
Budapest, Hungary
Conference Programme, Abstracts and Papers
The Spotlight on Motherhood in Early Twentieth Century Britain
Cathy Hunt
Coventry University, Coventry, United Kingdom
Arguably, at the opposite end of evil can be found the sacred bonds of motherhood, the haven of a mother’s arms, protecting and nurturing her infant. At least this is the image reinforced by the modern media every time a story is reported in which it appears that those bonds have come asunder or were never ‘properly’ formed by a deviant mother. To be a mother is generally regarded as the highest ideal of womanhood and the severest public reprobation is directed at women who harm their children in any way, with disbelief expressed at behaviour that goes against nature. This paper suggests some of the possible origins of the intensifying of society’s critical gaze on mothers in Britain. It looks at the ways in which mothers, particularly those of the working class, came under the spotlight of public attention in the early years of the twentieth century. As Anna Davin’s seminal work on imperialism and motherhood has shown, among grave concerns that those working class men needed to protect the interests of the British Empire were not healthy enough to do so, mothers were scrutinised by national and local government, by welfare organisations, charities and voluntary groups. Support for mothers came also from a range of women’s interest groups, including those with socialist, labour and/or feminist agendas intent on finding ways to improve the lives of working class women. Despite pronouncements of sympathy from many within these groups for women who, for a variety of social and economic reasons, were seen to be unable to become the ‘good’ mothers that society so desired, ultimately mothers were blamed when things went wrong and their voices seldom heard over the increasingly loud ones of social commentators and professionals. Whether they were seen as deviant or merely ignorant, mothers who did not care for their children in the way that the developing professional services of the day prescribed, were regarded as ‘bad’ or ‘unfit’ mothers. At the same time, women saw a reduction in their autonomy in matters of maternity and infant welfare in this period, as medical and social services became increasingly professionalized and the male ‘expert’ took centre stage.
The paper traces some of the roots of the modern notion of the sanctity of motherhood and suggests that this has in turn encouraged and strengthened the belief that mothers are a danger to their children. It draws on writings from the women’s and labour press in Britain from the early years of the twentieth century in order to question the extent to which women’s trade unions and socialist groups, with welfare interests or agendas, while trying to ‘raise’ and glorify the status of motherhood, in fact contributed to a culture of blame that has increasingly become attached to mothers whenever things go wrong with their children.
Download Conference Paper (pdf)
Mummy Wouldn’t Do That
Helen Gavin
Division of Psychology and Counselling, University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield, United Kingdom
Despite their evolving role in society, the perception of women is still subject to stereotyping; the female offender is no exception (Herzog & Oreg, 2008). Female offenders are seen as either victims of crime and oppression themselves, or as evil diversions from “normal” womanly behaviour. This is true of female sex offenders, women accused and convicted of child sex abuse are more likely to be seen as victims of abuse themselves.
Women’s perceived natural role is as the caregivers, the nurturers in society, and women who step outside of these persona are viewed with either suspicion, distaste or ignorance (see Yoder, 2003). In addition, a sex offender, particularly an abuser of children, who is also female, is regarded with disbelief, coupled with a range of conflicting assessments of her character and behaviour. A worrying outcome of this perception is that many sex crimes committed by women may remain unreported, due to society’s view of such women and their victims. The image that is brought to mind by the term “sexual predator” is predominantly male. The term “child sex offender” will probably lead to a representation of a perpetrator who is an older stranger, with uncontrollable sexual urges, innately evil, and male, with predominantly female victims (Gavin, 2005). People who abuse children sexually are often familiar to the child, in a position of trust and/or authority, and this is no different for female abusers. However, the victim, once he or she is able to discuss what has happened, will often not be believed, or, for teenage boys, told that they are lucky to be sexually initiated this way. Society, particularly male society, still perceives underage sex between an underage boy and an older woman as an accomplishment. Shoop (1997) suggests that female sex offenders are more likely to receive suspended sentences, whereas male offenders receive long custodial sentences. He suggests that it is difficult for people to accept that sentences should be the same for both sexes, even though the destructive nature of the behaviour may be the same. This means that there may be differentially imposed sentencing and an implicit distinction between male and female child sex offenders in either the mind of the public or the judiciary. What is clear is that the damage to the victim is the same, and may even be worse in the cases of female offenders/male victims, as the victims are less likely to be believed. Male victims of female abusers suffer twice, once at the hands of the abuser, and once at the hands of those they tell, but who do not believe them (Shoop, 2007). The recognition of female perpetrators of child sex abuse is impeded by the perception of women as incapable of such acts. Why is such perception persistent in the face of information to the contrary? This research uses a social constructivist approach to examining perceptions of female sexual abusers, to try to determine the answer to why we think mummy wouldn’t do that.
Download Draft Conference Paper (pdf)
Woman as Molester; Implications for Society
Theresa Porter
Connecticut Valley State Hospital, Hartford, CT, USA
Despite the relatively new-found ability to acknowledge that women can be murderers, serial killers, suicide bombers and genocide organizers, western culture remains in denial of the idea that women rape, that women commit sex crimes, and most denied of all, that women sexually molest children.
Female sex offenders of children represent a blind spot of our jaded society. In 1909, police arrests for male sex offenders were rare, with only the most violent crimes being prosecuted. For the issue of female child molesters, it is still 1909 rather than 2009. If we use only criminal justice reports, estimates of prevalence appear low; less than 2% of all cases. However, if we ask victims who their perpetrators were, we find the rate of molestation by women becomes approximately 40%-60% of all cases.
Why are we unable to admit that women sexually molest children, just like men? This paper will examine the culturally important myths that western society would have to give up if it admitted the existence of molesting women; myths such as “as “Bad things are caused by Strangers Out There (rather than by family, here at home)”, “Mothers are non-sexual (unlike Fathers)” and “Women protect children (unlike Men)”. The myths we make about women are in reaction to those we make about men; women are the Other, the alternative to men. I will also show how we came to be in this position of needing these myths and requiring women to be the only non-sexual, non-aggressive, Non-Evil caregivers of children by reviewing how cultures have grappled with the concepts of women as “Other” intermittently since the beginning of civilization, switching back and forth on extremes over the centuries. These cultural flip-flops bring us to the current status of women; Equal but Better, sexually non-aggressive, despite at times being physically aggressive and even murderous.
This paper will demonstrate that in allowing the sexual assault of children to become part of a gender mythos, society has trapped both men and women in stereotyped thinking that blind us to the diversity of behaviors that people commit and unconsciously colludes with the perpetrators against their victims.
Entries (RSS)