Absolute centrist

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.

Studies' standard use of CTS methodology in assessing gender symmetry in IPV has been criticized, as it excludes a separation of conflict-motivated aggression and control motivated aggression, and fail to rightly assess severity of injury, sexual violence, and ex-partner violence (Kimmel 2002).

Studies do support symmetry in IPV, but this is only when "no contexts, motives, and consequences are considered" (Chan 2011). Women typically undergo more long-lasting and severe forms of abuse, with fewer opportunities to escape the relationship (Wallace & Roberson 2016).

This is also evidenced by the psychological outcomes of IPV by gender. A review found "women suffer disproportionately from IPV, especially in terms of injuries, fear, and posttraumatic stress." (Caldwell et al 2016) while 85% of men reported "no fear" during their experience of IPV (Caldwell et al 2016).

Multiple reviews [x] [x] [x] which consider forms and motives have found gender symmetry in the rate in which IPV is committed, but gender asymmetry in the methods and motivations; men's does prove more severe.

Men still do commit the majority of IP batteries, strangulations, beatings, violence with weapons, sexual violence, stalking, and, absolutely undeniably, IP murder; murder being the key point of that discussion, and what you also observed.

"No wonder the stats [on pedophiles] are skewed"

These statistics comparing CSA perpetrators by gender come from self-reported victims of both sexes. They don't have any motivation to depict men in any particular light.

What I did say: The majority of pedophiles are men, or at least child predators, as we see the majority of people who self-report victimization expressing having had exclusively male perpetrators.

What I didn't say: No pedophiles are female.

Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men.

You have to accept that. And not excuse it either. Some crimes just are genuinely committed mostly by men.

I have researched "The Empathy Gap." You must know I have. The points made by (I assume, the book of such title, where the term in reference to men seems to originate from) are the exact same MRA talking points you dish out, which can be debunked or explained as not originating from a "lack of empathy" for men.

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.

Studies' standard use of CTS methodology in assessing gender symmetry in IPV has been criticized, as it excludes a separation of conflict-motivated aggression and control motivated aggression, and fail to rightly assess severity of injury, sexual violence, and ex-partner violence (Kimmel 2002).

Studies do support symmetry in IPV, but this is only when "no contexts, motives, and consequences are considered" (Chan 2011). Women typically undergo more long-lasting and severe forms of abuse, with fewer opportunities to escape the relationship (Wallace & Roberson 2016).

This is also evidenced by the psychological outcomes of IPV by gender. A review found "women suffer disproportionately from IPV, especially in terms of injuries, fear, and posttraumatic stress." (Caldwell et al 2016) while 85% of men reported "no fear" during their experience of IPV (Caldwell et al 2016).

Multiple reviews [x] [x] [x] which consider forms and motives have found gender symmetry in the rate in which IPV is committed, but gender asymmetry in the methods and motivations; men's does prove more severe.

Men still do commit the majority of IP batteries, strangulations, beatings, violence with weapons, sexual violence, stalking, and, absolutely undeniably, IP murder; murder being the key point of that discussion, and what you also observed.

"No wonder the stats [on pedophiles] are skewed"

These statistics comparing CSA perpetrators by gender come from self-reported victims of both sexes. They don't have any motivation to depict men in any particular light.

What I did say: The majority of pedophiles are men, or at least child predators, as we see the majority of people who self-report victimization expressing having had exclusively male perpetrators.

What I didn't say: No pedophiles are female.

Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men.

You have to accept that. And not excuse it either. Some crimes just are genuinely committed mostly by men.

I have researched "The Empathy Gap." You must know I have. The points made by (I assume, the book of such title, where the term in reference to men seems to originate from) are the exact same MRA talking points you dish out, which can be debunked or explained as not originating from a "lack of empathy" for men.

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.

Studies' standard use of CTS methodology in assessing gender symmetry in IPV has been criticized, as it excludes a separation of conflict-motivated aggression and control motivated aggression, and fail to rightly assess severity of injury, sexual violence, and ex-partner violence (Kimmel 2002).

Studies do support symmetry in IPV, but this is only when "no contexts, motives, and consequences are considered" (Chan 2011). Women typically undergo more long-lasting and severe forms of abuse, with fewer opportunities to escape the relationship (Wallace & Roberson 2016).

This is also evidenced by the psychological outcomes of IPV by gender. A review found "women suffer disproportionately from IPV, especially in terms of injuries, fear, and posttraumatic stress." (Caldwell et al 2016) while 85% of men reported "no fear" during their experience of IPV (Caldwell et al 2016).

Multiple reviews [x] [x] [x] which consider forms and motives have found gender symmetry in the rate in which IPV is committed, but gender asymmetry in the methods and motivations; men's does prove more severe.

Men still do commit the majority of IP batteries, strangulations, beatings, violence with weapons, sexual violence, stalking, and, absolutely undeniably, IP murder; murder being the key point of that discussion, and what you also observed.

"No wonder the stats [on pedophiles] are skewed"

These statistics comparing CSA perpetrators by gender come from self-reported victims of both sexes. They don't have any motivation to depict men in any particular light.

What I did say: The majority of pedophiles are men, or at least child predators, as we see the majority of people who self-report victimization expressing having had exclusively male perpetrators.

What I didn't say: No pedophiles are female.

Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men.

You have to accept that. And not excuse it either. Some crimes just are genuinely committed mostly by men.

I have researched "The Empathy Gap." You must know I have. The points made by (I assume, the book of such title, where the term in reference to men seems to originate from) are the exact same MRA talking points you dish out, which can be debunked or explained as not originating from a "lack of empathy" for men.

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.

Studies' standard use of CTS methodology in assessing gender symmetry in IPV has been criticized, as it excludes a separation of conflict-motivated aggression and control motivated aggression, and fail to rightly assess severity of injury, sexual violence, and ex-partner violence (Kimmel 2002).

Studies do support symmetry in IPV, but this is only when "no contexts, motives, and consequences are considered" (Chan 2011). Women typically undergo more long-lasting and severe forms of abuse, with fewer opportunities to escape the relationship (Wallace & Roberson 2016).

This is also evidenced by the psychological outcomes of IPV by gender. A review found "women suffer disproportionately from IPV, especially in terms of injuries, fear, and posttraumatic stress." (Caldwell et al 2016) while 85% of men reported "no fear" during their experience of IPV (Caldwell et al 2016).

Multiple reviews [x] [x] [x] which consider forms and motives have found gender symmetry in the rate in which IPV is committed, but gender asymmetry in the methods and motivations; men's does prove more severe.

Men still do commit the majority of IP batteries, strangulations, beatings, violence with weapons, sexual violence, stalking, and, absolutely undeniably, IP murder; murder being the key point of that discussion, and what you also observed.

"No wonder the stats [on pedophiles] are skewed"

These statistics comparing CSA perpetrators by gender come from self-reported victims of both sexes. They don't have any motivation to depict men in any particular light.

What I did say: The majority of pedophiles are men, or at least child predators, as we see the majority of people who self-report victimization expressing having had exclusively male perpetrators.

What I didn't say: No pedophiles are female.

Female pedophiles exist. Of course they do. But the pedophiles committing the majority of CSA are men.

You have to accept that. And not excuse it either. Some crimes just are genuinely committed mostly by men.

I have researched "The Empathy Gap." You must know I have. The points made by (I assume, the book of such title, where the term in reference to men seems to originate from) are the exact same MRA talking points you dish out, which can be debunked or explained as not originating from a "lack of empathy" for men.

No amount of childhood trauma removes your crimes from being your responsibility. Something that should be evident to you from your logic. Unless you hold a double standard.

You have expressed distaste at those who remove responsibility from women, pretending they have a lack of agency and diverging the blame to men. Ironically, you do the same thing, with the sexes reversed.

Men sexually abusing children? Women's abuse made them do it. End CSA? Stop women from abusing boys first!

Maybe this is a one-off double standard you hold? Just a point you were trying to make?

Nope.

Men murdering their entire families? Women made them do it.

You seem to express more sympathy for a hypothetical man who has committed serial murder over an imaginary murdered woman who divorced him.

As if hurting a man emotionally constitutes being murdered alongside your innocent children.

This shocking level of victim blaming would be considered balantly misogynistic to most with a brain and a hint of compassion.

You made a good observation that men commit the majority of severe IPV, including partner or ex-partner homicide.

As a 2011 review found (Chan 2011) both sexes engaged in IPV similarly in rates of perpetration, but with much different severity - women kicking, biting, slapping, throwing objects, while men "beat up", "strangle[d]", and caused the majority of domestic batteries. Another review (Caldwell 2012) found that women were disproportionately injured and psychologically traumatized by IPV, while 85% of men stated they had "no fear" while experiencing their IPV. 82% of those murdered by IPs are women (UNODC 2018).

But is women's horrible treatment of men causing this severity of violence?

No. Unlike your imagined scenario of a rejected man, bullied into violence, these murders in fact, occur "from the culmination of prior ... violence." With the "vast majority" of cases occurring as the "final phase of [IPV]"

Escaping an abusive situation is one of the highest risk factors for IPV murder (Walby et al., 2017). The perpetrator’s motivation is rooted in a sense of ownership over the victim, often based on unequal and rigid gender stereotypes (Weil et al., 2018)

Are the murderers misunderstood? No. The typical profile of these cases exhibits anti-social or narcissistic traits (Garret 2023).

Familial murders by men have been happening long before mainstream feminism. There is no true correlation there, and your imagined scenario is just that - imagined.

Blaming murdered women for their homicide and the homicide of their children is a disturbing take for a self-proclaimed "egalitarian."

You don't seem to hold very negative views about men as you do women, seeing, apart from hating posts that criticise men, you criticise a hypothetical mean woman over a male murderer.

No amount of being mean or a turbulent divorce should constitute murder. That's why you're expected to "have genuine compassion" for these victims.

But let's get to the topic of pedophilia.

Men are overrepresented in those who express pedophilic desire, and those who sexually offend against children - this is well known.

A review found 3-5% of the general population of men are attracted to pre-pubescent children (Seto 2009) and pedophilia is regarded as a generally male phenomenon (Seto 2008). A 2019 survey for UK ONS found that 91.7% of adults who had experienced CSA reported exclusively male perpetrators versus 3.8% only female, or 8.1%, if you look at exclusively boys.

Men are overwhelming more likely to perpetrate CSA, with girls as the primary victims (Behl et al., 2003, Mileva, Goshev, & Alexandrov, 2020; Park, 2020).

If experiencing childhood abuse is a high-risk factor for committing CSA, it is surprising we don't see many more women offending, as girls are disproportionately victimized - over twice the rate of boys (Finkelhor et al 2014).

In the UK, a survey of over 22,000 women found before the age of 18 "80% were sexually touched without consent by someone and 44% were subjected to this at least 3 times" (Taylor 2021).

Interestingly, a different study from the original post (Leach 2016) with over 38,000 participants challenged the abused-to-abuser hypothesis, finding only 4% of male offenders confirmed a history of CSA victimization and finding overall no significant correlation between experiencing and committing CSA.

This Australian study finds men with pedophilic desire were "over six times more likely to report being sexually abused as children," making previous sexual abuse the highest risk factor for offending.

If the majority of sexual abuse against children is committed by men and may lead to the child abusing in the future, why is your message not "Men stop abusing boys"?

It should've already been the conclusion if we're not diverging the blame on the basis of the offender being a victim.

But what about other forms abuse?

You argue that "men were 2x as likely to offend if they were abused as a child" and that the "majority of child abuse is committed by the mother alone."

Let's see.

"They reported approximately twice the rate of adverse childhood experiences."

ACEs include household incarceration, mental illness, substance abuse, parental divorce, domestic violence, neglect, and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse.

These factors have been measured separately by the study. Let's look at the most significant.

Sexual abuse at x6.26 the rate in those who report both "feelings and offending"

Childhood neglect at x4.14.

Household domestic violence at x3.99.

Household incarceration at x3.67.

So, not exactly all mother-majority.

Physical abuse was found at x1.68 and emotional x1.99; but curiously, these drop below statistical significance when looking at offending only; 1.53 and 1.07.

Only one factor was found to be statistically significant for all groups, including feelings-only and offending-only, which was household incarceration (3.88, 2.93, respectively). And unsurprisingly, that criminal relative is most likely male.

On abusive mothers...

You are right in that women commit more physical abuse (CPA) than men (Behl et al. 2003).

However, this pattern of mothers appearing to show higher rates of abuse may be a methodological anomaly, since when accounting to the absence of fathers in the home, fathers are equally likely, or even more likely, to be the perpetrators of CPA (Nobes & Smith 2000). In fact, Nobes and Smith demonstrated that children were less likely to live in homes with their fathers, and after controlling for father absence, children living with both parents were 50% more likely to receive physical abuse from their father (Nobes & Smith 2000). Hence, the lower rate of CPA from fathers may reflect their absence from the home as opposed to an actual decreased risk for CPA perpetration.

When males commit CPA, the form of abuse is often more violent than that of females (Park 2020). Males are more likely to strike the victim, while females are more likely to pinch or bite the victim, so the severity of the injury is significantly greater with male perpetration (Park 2020).

Fathers were more likely to kill their children using more violent approaches (West, Friedman, & Resnick, 2009). Mothers were less likely than fathers to implement violence as a method of homicide, and they were more likely to commit homicide unintentionally (West et al., 2009). In a study in Australia, fathers were also more likely to kill their children as the result of use of physically aggressive responding than mothers (Scott et al., 2014).

So similar to IPV, we see both men and women committing this type of abuse, except men use considerably more violent, traumatic methods, resulting in higher chances of negative outcomes or death (Park 2020).

On CPA victims...

As for gender differences in victims, some studies found little difference in the rate of victimization by gender (Cui et al. 2016) while others find there is a higher victimization rate for boys; a ratio not as stark as CSA, but still relevant. Another study (May-Chahal 2006) estimates 62% of CPA victims are boys.

Though important to note is that girls appear considerably more traumatized by CPA. 18% of male CPA victims develop complex PTSD, compared to 50% in females (Ackerman 1998), and had worse overall long-term health outcomes (Thompson 2004).

There is a very clear-cut reason why the majority of CSA victims are female - the majority of child predators are men, and the majority of those men are heterosexual.

I can only theorize why more boys may experience CPA. A study (Tajima 2000) found that older children were more likely to experience CPA in two-parent households, as they were more likely to intervene with domestic violence to "protect their mothers" from abusive fathers (Tajima 2000).

“They ... provoke violence or intervene so they become the targets of physical violence rather than their mother,"

as Tajima explains. The likelihood is that capability or self-perceived capability in interfering with domestic violence increases CPA liklihood. This is particularly noticeable in adolescent boys.

Back to the main point. CSA.

Your point should be: men, stop sexually abusing children.

We see men make up the majority of CSA offenders.

We see this abuse, being majority perpetrated by men, being the most significant factor in predicting someone committing CSA themselves.

And don't forget: the blame is still on the perpetrator, whether they were abused or not.

And not abusing is very much still an option. Most girls who are victims of CSA have been choosing not to abuse just fine.

It's interesting - girls are much more likely to be victimized when it comes to CSA, have worse outcomes after CPA, and experience more traumatic stress, but still rarely commit CSA as adults - not anywhere close to the rate in which men do.

Makes me doubt that past abuse is the main factor in likelihood to abuse.

On the "empathy gap"...

I see you argue there is an "empathy gap" for men. That people aren't asking whether these men "need help." While there are, in fact, programs and organizations that support those with the desire to offend to not do so, I don't think this is a good example of that at all. I would argue that in this case, there actually is more simply, a lack of empathy for pedophiles, since most would agree that sexually abusing a child is one of the most heinous crimes, and the idea of pedophilia is met with pure disgust.

Though after seeing you comment hate on a post about young girls facing street harassment from adult men, I wonder if your clear lack of empathy in this regard would actually allow you to care about the victims of CSA, or if you're searching for another pawn to shift the blame to women for men's violence.

32% of girls (under 18) have been threatened with death.

94% of girls (under 18) have experienced cat-calling (Taylor 2021).

You appear to have an "empathy gap." All your empathy seems to be saved exclusively for men; even a hypothetical murderer receives more regard from you than a woman or girl.