6 ms·

> the rate of child sexual abuse has steadily decreased since the 1990s, down by almost 50%. That's kind of remarkable if true, because the openness of both in

by api 2y ago

> the rate of child sexual abuse has steadily decreased since the 1990s, down by almost 50%. That's kind of remarkable if true, because the openness of both individuals and institutions to taking reports of it seriously has increased. Before all our modern awareness of stuff like "consent" a lot of reports were dismissed, especially if the pedophile was someone trusted in the community and especially if they came from women. Boys often didn't report at all out of shame. Usually when there's an increase in awareness you see a phantom increase due to reporting, as has happened with things like rates of homosexuality or with diagnostic categories like autism and ADD/ADHD. Of course maybe there's less of it today because abusers are getting caught more often. That's possible too. Edit: this wouldn't surprise me at all given that there appears to be zero relationship between public panics about something and its actual incidence. Street crime, for example, was orders of magnitude worse in the early 1990s vs. today but people were less panicked about it. Public panics are media driven.

throwanem 2y ago
I'd certainly also like to see a source for the basic claim. It would be wonderful news if true.
- jchw 2y ago
  Why don't you Google it? This is fundamental basic knowledge about CSA incidence.
  - throwanem 2y ago
    If it's so trivial, you should find the claim no harder to substantiate than to insist upon as here. I encourage the attempt. Seriously. Go show me how easy reliable data is to find on this. Prove me wrong and you'll have earned a friend for life, or at least a dinner at the nice place down the street the next time you're in town.
    - jchw 2y ago
      OK... but there really are so many results upon literally just searching it. You immediately get multiple prominent results. You'd think if people actually cared about substantiating this, they could do one (1) Google search to find out. But here you go, courtesy of lazyweb. https://files.calio.org/BIBS/declining-rates-bib4.pdf https://files.calio.org/BIBS/declining-rates-bib4.pdf https://www.stopitnow.org/sites/default/files//prevalence-rate-white-paper-d2l.pdf https://www.stopitnow.org/sites/default/files//prevalence-ra... https://www.unh.edu/ccrc/resource/decline-sexual-abuse-cases https://www.unh.edu/ccrc/resource/decline-sexual-abuse-cases (Of course the answer is that people don't care. They'd be happy to ignore the lack of sources if the conclusion being drawn agreed to them, but can't do a single fucking Google search if it doesn't.)
      - throwanem 2y ago
        I'd be interested to know what search query you actually used. It's also been a while since I compared DDG and Google result quality. Maybe I'm getting poorer results than in the past. Queries on the theme of "child sexual abuse statistics US by year" don't get me anything very useful from DDG, much more advocacy around headline prevalence figures than anything relevant to incidence. (Statista does reflect a drop, but I didn't want to make an account to see their sources. Fair, my fault, I can't evaluate that well.) The bibliography is interesting and useful but not immediately evaluable, and seems mainly Canada-focused. The Stop It Now/D2L data is very clear up front that it relates to prevalence and not incidence, a distinction that matters for reasons to which we'll return in a moment. The UNH data substantiates some level of decrease since the early 90s, as does every other source, but disagrees with itself on magnitude in different places and comes out of one researcher's shop, which does not invalidate it but does mean I'd like to see someone else produce something similar before I weight their novel results too heavily. I guess maybe we have differing definitions of "reliable," but I think you and I have clashed on this subject before. I don't blame anyone for assuming that a victim of such abuse would tend to overestimate its prevalence, and I try to watch out for the tendency in myself, but what's all the anger about? The difference between prevalence and incidence matters because the former tells us how many people have been abused as children, and the latter tells us how frequently children are abused over time, which is the thing we're actually talking about. How we count multiple instances of abuse against the same person confounds everything, and intuitively I would expect prevalence by victim (ie for a given victim how frequently they themselves were abused) to follow something like a power-law distribution, but in general if we just take the headline number of "X total kids" it's hard to see how that gets us to a nuanced understanding of incidence rates that lets us talk knowledgeably about how and to what extent the shape of this problem is changing over time.
- jmull 2y ago
  My basic search turned up: https://www.unh.edu/ccrc/trends-child-victimization https://www.unh.edu/ccrc/trends-child-victimization Scroll down to the "Updated Trends" link and click it for more up-to-date info. In the latest one (looks like it covers 2023, released last month), child sexual abuse is down 67% since 1990. (Also, physical abuse is down 63% and neglect down 27%.) Child sex abuse down 63% from the '90s.
  - throwanem 2y ago
    Since you turned up one of the same sources as my other interlocutor, I'll refer you to my reply there at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43593671 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43593671
solumunus 2y ago
I would guess that pedos today are far less likely to commit sexual abuse given that the chances of being caught are high and the repercussions are extreme. In the past this was much less the case.
- brookst 2y ago
  Perhaps? With no evidence, it strikes me as a crime that is not weighed in ROI terms; it’s people with a sick compulsion, and I have always believed that kind of thing isn’t affected by the severity of possible punishment. I’d be interested in data for sure.
  - pseudalopex 2y ago
    With no evidence the proper assumption would be no assumption. But evidence was presented child sexual abuse declined since 1990. The question was how to explain it. Punishment severity doesn't much reduce child sexual abuse probably. But not because it's a sick compulsion. Punishment severity doesn't much reduce most crimes. Financial crimes included. They mentioned chances of being caught also. Punishment likelihood is an effective deterrent generally. Pornography could be a factor. Many studies found rape decreased in countries when pornography became more available.
  - solumunus 2y ago
    You're way off but I don't feel like taking the opposite side of this argument. If you want to research this there's plenty of data and information available.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
RajT88 2y ago
Indeed, people like to label anyone who is attracted to people under the age of consent as "pedophiles" but the definition is as you point out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronophilia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronophilia
jijijijij 2y ago
There is a categorical difference with your examples for "phantom increase due to reporting". On one side it's something done to you/someone, in particular a serious crime, on the other side it's something about you/someone, in particular not a crime. This is important, because the risk of getting caught, not necessarily severity of punishment, is the main factor in crime deterrence, as far as I know. I presume, increased vigilance and ease/encouragement of reporting has a significant deterring effect on potential perpetrators. As with all sexual abuse, the vast majority of cases happens in settings where the victim knows/trusts the abuser beforehand, therefore conviction entirely depends on the victim's willingness, prospect and ability to name/accuse the abuser. Coming with the reporting, there is probably also greater awareness and knowledge about the manipulation tactics and situations enabling abuse, helping guardians, friends and authorities to identify concerning dynamics and encounters. However, I presume, the increased ease of reporting and awareness also indirectly prevents further abuse by subsequently encouraging victims to seek help and work with their trauma. I've heard a significant share of perpetrators have been victims of abuse themselves in the past, so seeking therapy after being victimized may also break the cycle of violence.

by api 2y ago

throwanem 2y ago

I'd certainly also like to see a source for the basic claim. It would be wonderful news if true.

jchw 2y ago
Why don't you Google it? This is fundamental basic knowledge about CSA incidence.
- throwanem 2y ago
  If it's so trivial, you should find the claim no harder to substantiate than to insist upon as here. I encourage the attempt. Seriously. Go show me how easy reliable data is to find on this. Prove me wrong and you'll have earned a friend for life, or at least a dinner at the nice place down the street the next time you're in town.
  - jchw 2y ago
    OK... but there really are so many results upon literally just searching it. You immediately get multiple prominent results. You'd think if people actually cared about substantiating this, they could do one (1) Google search to find out. But here you go, courtesy of lazyweb. https://files.calio.org/BIBS/declining-rates-bib4.pdf https://files.calio.org/BIBS/declining-rates-bib4.pdf https://www.stopitnow.org/sites/default/files//prevalence-rate-white-paper-d2l.pdf https://www.stopitnow.org/sites/default/files//prevalence-ra... https://www.unh.edu/ccrc/resource/decline-sexual-abuse-cases https://www.unh.edu/ccrc/resource/decline-sexual-abuse-cases (Of course the answer is that people don't care. They'd be happy to ignore the lack of sources if the conclusion being drawn agreed to them, but can't do a single fucking Google search if it doesn't.)
    - throwanem 2y ago
      I'd be interested to know what search query you actually used. It's also been a while since I compared DDG and Google result quality. Maybe I'm getting poorer results than in the past. Queries on the theme of "child sexual abuse statistics US by year" don't get me anything very useful from DDG, much more advocacy around headline prevalence figures than anything relevant to incidence. (Statista does reflect a drop, but I didn't want to make an account to see their sources. Fair, my fault, I can't evaluate that well.) The bibliography is interesting and useful but not immediately evaluable, and seems mainly Canada-focused. The Stop It Now/D2L data is very clear up front that it relates to prevalence and not incidence, a distinction that matters for reasons to which we'll return in a moment. The UNH data substantiates some level of decrease since the early 90s, as does every other source, but disagrees with itself on magnitude in different places and comes out of one researcher's shop, which does not invalidate it but does mean I'd like to see someone else produce something similar before I weight their novel results too heavily. I guess maybe we have differing definitions of "reliable," but I think you and I have clashed on this subject before. I don't blame anyone for assuming that a victim of such abuse would tend to overestimate its prevalence, and I try to watch out for the tendency in myself, but what's all the anger about? The difference between prevalence and incidence matters because the former tells us how many people have been abused as children, and the latter tells us how frequently children are abused over time, which is the thing we're actually talking about. How we count multiple instances of abuse against the same person confounds everything, and intuitively I would expect prevalence by victim (ie for a given victim how frequently they themselves were abused) to follow something like a power-law distribution, but in general if we just take the headline number of "X total kids" it's hard to see how that gets us to a nuanced understanding of incidence rates that lets us talk knowledgeably about how and to what extent the shape of this problem is changing over time.
jmull 2y ago
My basic search turned up: https://www.unh.edu/ccrc/trends-child-victimization https://www.unh.edu/ccrc/trends-child-victimization Scroll down to the "Updated Trends" link and click it for more up-to-date info. In the latest one (looks like it covers 2023, released last month), child sexual abuse is down 67% since 1990. (Also, physical abuse is down 63% and neglect down 27%.) Child sex abuse down 63% from the '90s.
- throwanem 2y ago
  Since you turned up one of the same sources as my other interlocutor, I'll refer you to my reply there at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43593671 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43593671

solumunus 2y ago

I would guess that pedos today are far less likely to commit sexual abuse given that the chances of being caught are high and the repercussions are extreme. In the past this was much less the case.

brookst 2y ago
Perhaps? With no evidence, it strikes me as a crime that is not weighed in ROI terms; it’s people with a sick compulsion, and I have always believed that kind of thing isn’t affected by the severity of possible punishment. I’d be interested in data for sure.
- pseudalopex 2y ago
  With no evidence the proper assumption would be no assumption. But evidence was presented child sexual abuse declined since 1990. The question was how to explain it. Punishment severity doesn't much reduce child sexual abuse probably. But not because it's a sick compulsion. Punishment severity doesn't much reduce most crimes. Financial crimes included. They mentioned chances of being caught also. Punishment likelihood is an effective deterrent generally. Pornography could be a factor. Many studies found rape decreased in countries when pornography became more available.
- solumunus 2y ago
  You're way off but I don't feel like taking the opposite side of this argument. If you want to research this there's plenty of data and information available.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

RajT88 2y ago

Indeed, people like to label anyone who is attracted to people under the age of consent as "pedophiles" but the definition is as you point out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronophilia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronophilia

jijijijij 2y ago

There is a categorical difference with your examples for "phantom increase due to reporting". On one side it's something done to you/someone, in particular a serious crime, on the other side it's something about you/someone, in particular not a crime. This is important, because the risk of getting caught, not necessarily severity of punishment, is the main factor in crime deterrence, as far as I know. I presume, increased vigilance and ease/encouragement of reporting has a significant deterring effect on potential perpetrators. As with all sexual abuse, the vast majority of cases happens in settings where the victim knows/trusts the abuser beforehand, therefore conviction entirely depends on the victim's willingness, prospect and ability to name/accuse the abuser. Coming with the reporting, there is probably also greater awareness and knowledge about the manipulation tactics and situations enabling abuse, helping guardians, friends and authorities to identify concerning dynamics and encounters. However, I presume, the increased ease of reporting and awareness also indirectly prevents further abuse by subsequently encouraging victims to seek help and work with their trauma. I've heard a significant share of perpetrators have been victims of abuse themselves in the past, so seeking therapy after being victimized may also break the cycle of violence.