SMF 205 notes *really detailed*

49 Pages
Unlock Document

Sexuality, Marriage, and Family Studies
SMF 205
Chris Burris

SMF 205 – The Dark Side of Sexuality th Wednesday September 11   What do we mean by the “dark side of sex”? First, what do we mean by “sex”? The different domains of sex include the following: • Physical • Emotional, which can be associated with the physical, physical interactions generate emotional responses • Cognitive, thinking about things concerning sex: o Interpretive, making sense and ascribing meaning to things. It’s fair to say that nothing is inherently sexual. Things become sexual when we interpret them that way. Interpretation is the only way we can understand sexual variation. This interpretive element gives the space for diversity to exist. o Fantasy, imagining something extended from reality • Motivational, goals and drive, wants and needs. This begs the question, what’s the ultimate goal of sex?: o Reproductive survival, though this reason doesn’t account for many variations in sexual behaviour such as masturbation or same sex relationships. o Pleasure, this explanation covers a much more broad range of behaviours but still some people engage in sexual acts which aren’t pleasurable. o As a means to another end such as power or security. Whether or not we behave Motives Power Security Do act Consider language like: screw, bang, score, Fear of abandonment, giving it up to it’s competitive and aggressive. maintain a relationship Don’t Punishment, taking away something that Fear of commitment, trying to prevent act your partner wants. attachment from growing. How we behave Motives Power Security “Normal” Play bondage, consensual but plays Lights off, shirts on. Keeps both partners with power dynamics comfortable, safer “Pathological Sadism, no safe words, getting off on Infantilism, being sexually aroused by ” the legitimate suffering of another being treated like an infant, being taken person. care of provides security “Sexual vandalism”, leaving remnants of sexual activities for others to see, marking territory • Cultural, informs our autonomy, community, and divinity which are frameworks for knowing what’s acceptable. These differ by culture and determine what each culture’s “dark side” is. For example, in a culture which values autonomy, having consenting adults will be a high priority. So, what’s the “dark side”? It falls to the same domains as before: • Physical, places where nerve endings are can feel very good when stimulated or can feel very serious pain. • Emotional, where positive emotions can arise, so can negative ones and even those so severe that they can create trauma. • Cognitive o Interpretation, gross misinterpretation of what are appropriate motivations to justify pathological behaviours. Example: that 5 year old was being so flirty, they obviously wanted it. o Fantast, when what starts as a dark fantasy isn’t real enough and the person goes on to actually acting out the fantasy in a harmful way. • Motivational, to what extent will people go to gratify certain wants and needs? When they sacrifice the wellbeing of themselves or others, that’s when it gets dark. • Culture, each culture has good and bad behaviours, these depend on their hierarchy of values. Wednesday, September 18 AROUSAL General Arousal: • Increase heart rate/breathing  preparing for a response to an unexpected change – ANS response (i.e. emotions) • Rapid, unconscious Sexual Arousal: • General arousal is a component of sexual arousal • Sympathetic ANS + parasympathetic response  physical changes (genital) • “Make-up sex”  conflict arousal • More sexual activity on holidays  new and different = energizing, attraction • Masters and Johnsons Sexual Response Cycle: o Excitement o Plateau o Orgasm o Resolution • Helen Singer Kaplan: o Adds desire as a precursor to excitement (motivation, “I want this”) o We could also add interest as the step before desire Individual Differences in Arousal: • Likelihood of interest  openness to the idea • Speed and level of desire  when partner looks good, it doesn’t take much for some to feel desire • Ease of arousability  how quickly/easily one gets excited • Likelihood, speed, and level of sexual activity  likelihood, speed and extent of activity may differ • Likelihood, speed, and level of orgasm  not everybody climax’s every time, some people take longer than others to climax (women vs. man, older) Cognition and fantasy: Attribution and interpretation: • The brain is the biggest sex organ o Average erect penis: 5-5.9-6.3/4 inches (15 cm (13-17cm)) o Circum: 4 ½-5 ½ (12 ½ cm) • “Sex is composed of friction and fantasy” (Kaplan) o Fantasy without friction & friction without fantasy is very rare o Anxiety, sex guilt, the wrong place Barlow’s Model of Sexual Dysfunction: Demand for sexual performance: • Sexually functional people -sexually dysfunctional people • + emotions, accurate perception of arousal -negative emotional feelings (anxiety) • Attention focused on erotic cognition -cognitive interference: focused on failure and non-erotic cognition • Increased autonomic arousal (sexual arousal) -increased autonomic arousal (anxiety) • Attention increasingly focused on erotic cognition -increased cognitive interference • Successful sexual functioning -sexual dysfunction • Approach motive toward sex (wanting it again) -avoidance motive toward sex *Thoughts, physiological arousal Fantasy: Creating Sexual Arousal • Conceptualizing brain • Imaginary world • Complex plans and expectations – prepare/anticipate seduction scenario • Interpret non-sexual stimuli as sexually arousing (inanimate objects – i.e. balloons? Feet? Shoes?) • Fantasy can be a sex substitute but it is not typically a response to deprivation or a substitute for actual sexual interaction Fantasy and the “Dark Side” • Positive correlation between fantasy and action (more you think about it, more likely to do it) • The more extreme the sexual behaviour (dark/crossing boundaries), the stronger the correlation between fantasy and behaviour • Strongest for sexual serial homicide o Why? o More extreme sexual behaviour has fewer acceptable satisfying alternatives (wanting someone to actually hurt and die – pretend dying won’t be good enough, group sex – pretending to be different people) o With fewer alternatives the fantasy is more dominant o Thwarted goals are more salient and enduring (things you can’t have, you want more – i.e. unacceptable sexual desire like sex with children, will think more about it – also like people on diets who think about food) The Role of Constraints: • Internal constraints – conscience, guilt (not wanting to feel bad about yourself/vulnerable) remorse  keep one from acting • External constraints – legal action, public humiliation, etc.  dark sexual desires are anti-social • Constraints are stronger for more extreme sexual behaviour o Overcoming constraints requires thought and planning (i.e. not getting caught) o Greater desire to act on available opportunities b/c opportunities are limited o Greater drive to justify the behaviour o “nothing left to lose” The Perverted Oreo Model: Fantasy: perverted Oreo (creamy white centre) many dark fantasies Constraints: if break through... Behaviour: “fudgeo” - all dark - no white centre Fantasy: inverted Oreo (white outside, chocolate inside) only few dark fantasies Constraints: dark stuff is deflected by constraints (diverted Oreo) Behaviour: “vanilla girl guide cookie” Burris and Mathes: • Sexual fantasy and self-report biases • The “bogus pipeline” – a fake lie detector • A practical alternative – the “hidden observer” (Hilgard) – studied hypnosis • Experiment: randomly assign to standard or Hidden Observer cdn • Code text responses: o 1. Hesitation Index – apologies/denial/refusal o 2. Erotic details – juicy details o 3. Explicit language o 4. Peripheral details – irrelevant/fillers (weather, time of day, etc) o 5. Euphemistic language (“avoidance” “proper” “prude”) • When given HO vs. standard instructions: o People refused much less o Gave more erotic detail o More explicit language Dark Side Week 2 – Motivational Issues: • Motive defined – motivation (persistence) + goals “Why Humans Have Sex” – Meston & Buss 3 different contexts: 1. Partnership 2. Casual 3. Extradyadic (seeking sex outside relationship) WHY? 4 big themes, 13 subthemes: 1. Physical Reasons: • Stress reduction • Pleasure – feels good • Physical desirability – person was attractive, smelt nice • Experience seeking – curiosity, adventure, excitement 2. Goal Attainment Reasons: • Resources – get a job/raise/promotion, for money/drugs, wanted to be used/degraded, wanted to give someone an STI • Social Status – to be popular, someone dared me • Revenge – cheating, make someone jealous, break up another couple, hurt an enemy, • Utilitarian – keep warm, help fall asleep, get out of doing something, person took them out for expensive dinner, change the topic of convo., I wanted to burn calories 3. Emotional Reasons: • Love and commitment – feel connected, emotional closeness, natural next step • Expression – welcome someone home, say “I’m sorry” 4. Insecurity Reasons: (no gender difference) • Self-esteem boost – feel powerful, boost self-esteem, feel attractive, manipulation, security • Duty/pressure – felt obligated/pressured, physically/verbally forced • Mate Guarding – keep partner from having sex with someone else, thought it would trap partner Frequent = “Light Side” Everyone said that one of the above reasons was the most important reason for having sex Less frequent = “Dark Side”  users, abusers and victims • Motives for having sex • Broader (unconscious?) motives – not always aware of our motives/things that affect our behaviour • Like protecting the self  arousal Security for the Self (Burris & Rempel) • “Me”  the skin becomes the focus of attention to how we process threats • “Us”  more focus on redrawing the boundaries to include partner • Some people are more sensitive to bodily “penetration” “harm” – i.e. giving blood, tattoos o Single people were less likely to donate blood o People in relationship had no correlation • Single: “self” = “me” (bounded by skin) o IF sensitive to skin penetration  the more turned off they were by sloppy sex (i.e. penile/vaginal secretion, food, oil, etc) o People in relationship  no correlation • In relationship: “self” = “us” (identity outside) o IF sensitive to identity threat  turned off by “sex on the side” o Single people  no correlation ***relevance (i.e. small person walking alone in scary part of town vs. walking with 4 people, your size/scariness of town hasn’t changed, relevance has changed) “Darkness” and interpersonal consequences... • A useful distinction: participant vs. object o Consensual play?(i.e. BDSM activity)  Participant and participant (communication, trust, “safe words”) o Mismatched motives?  Participant and object (power reasons + insecurity reasons) o Matched motives?  Object and object (not the same feel as consensual play, takes away people’s intention/choice/relevance of meaningful choice)  OR participant and participant and object ? Wednesday, September 25 Sex Scandals What makes a scandal “scandalous?” • The more public, the greater the scandal • The more well known the person • Prohibited/disapproved/frowned upon behaviour  the more extreme/disgusting the behaviour, the greater the scandal • Why can sex be (especially) scandalous? o Sex as symbolic significance o Sex as a “central trait” (Asch) o Sex as highly culturally regulated – borderlines • Why do we care about sex scandals? (Enjoy?) o Entertainment – shock, intrigue, curiosity, drama  Pseudo intimacy  a lot of sexual behaviour we keep private – knowing someone’s secret (celebrities) o Self-protection/self-enhancement – “whatever people think of me, at least I’m not doing that” or “bringing down” the high and mighty (gratifying for some?), excusing your behaviour o Reinforce cultural regulation – “point and laugh,” “if you do that, this is what will happen” Values and Core Motives • Schwartz (1992) values theory as a foundation for identifying core motives • Values: trans-situational goals that vary in importance and serve as guiding principles (we see these things as good/important) o Motives drive our behaviour – they have direct implications of what we do o We don’t all value the same things to the same degree • Developed using a bottom-up process Schwartz’s Values Circumplex: • Power – dominance, control over others • Achievement – ambitious, successful • Hedonism (enjoying pleasure) – enjoying life • Stimulation – being daring, wanting excitement/change • Self direction – we determine our own destiny, independence, choice, freedom • Universalism – environment, valuing nature; social justice, a world of peace • Benevolence – mature love, true friendship, meaning in life, loyal, etc. • Conformity + tradition – self discipline, politeness, obedience, doing what others expect of you + humble, moderate, being satisfied with your position in life • Security – national security, sense of belonging, reciprocation of favours (giving back), being clean/healthy, social order, family security Core Motives: • Approach/avoidance o The most well established motives in the psychological literature o Corresponds to conservation and openness to change values o The goals of avoiding harm and acquiring benefits are common to all living creates (innate) • However, the values circumplex indicates that among human beings, there is a second dimension that is of central importance • Self Transcendent and Self Enhancing o This dimension captures values related to prioritizing self vs. prioritizing others o “The morality dimension” – dominating/control vs. compassionate, caring, forgiving o Haidt: [...]all the things that allow us to suppress selfishness, to communicate and coordinate efforts, capacity to work together Big Three of Morality: (Schweder, 1997) • Autonomy o Base our moral system on: harm, rights, justice o Strong concept of individualism (pursuit of happiness) o Doing what you want as long as it doesn’t hurt others, “my choice” • Community o Duty, hierarchy, interdependence (what I do does have an impact on others and society) o Part of a social network/community o Have responsibilities o E.g. pointing and laughing vs. other parts of the world saying, “that’s what NA is like” • Divinity (Absolutism) o Sacred order, natural order, personal sanctity o Sex shouldn’t control you, you should control sex, don’t get carried away with lust and passion o Often “anti-sex” (?) Moral foundation theory Form the ethic of autonomy: 1. Harm/care (H) - basic concern for the suffering of others, including virtues of caring and compassion 2. Fairness/reciprocity (F): concerns about unfair treatment, inequality, and more abstract notions of justice o “That’s not fair” 3. Ingroup/loyalty (I): concerns related to obligations of group membership, such as loyalty, self sacrifice and self vigilance against betrayal/seeking out traitors (whistle blowers) 4. Authority and respect (A): concerns related to social order and the obligations of hierarchical relationships, such as obedience, respect and proper role fulfilment 5. Purity/sanctity (P): concerns about physical and spiritual contagion, including virtues of chastity, wholesomeness and control of desires o Connecting to the group (community) Moral Frameworks, Sex and Political Ideology Haidt and Hersh Necrophilia – fetish of having sex with the dead Comparison groups: liberals and conservatives Sexual domains: • homosexual sex • “Unusual” masturbation • Consensual incest (half brother/sister  protection vs. JUST NO) Conservatives: 1. More negative evaluation 2. More universalizing 3. More “dumbfounding” 4. More ambivalence 5. More frameworks – may conflict, may point in same direction: yes this is okay or no this is not okay Liberals: 1. More appeal to ethics of autonomy – esp. individual rights Disgust and Moral Judgement: Haidt, Rozin (1997) • Disgust and preservation o “core disgust” physical contaminants (goose shit, clumpy milk) rejection response • Disgust and divinity o “Symbolic disgust”  condom/scale/ Paul Bernardo, “you disgust me,” gagging/same bodily reactions (symbolic contamination) Application to sexual expression: Disgust and disorder: people who throw the world out of balance (conservation – keeping things as they are) Wednesday, October 2 *TEST NEXT WEEK: OCT. 9 * th Disgust and the Law: Nussbaum (1999) • Things that evoke disgust in us probably have some sort of law against them (dark) • “Obscenity” • “Prurient interest” o shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion (disgust) o (Ethic of divinity=purity – opposite=contamination) • “Obscene” o  root=”filth”=disgusting • “Pornographic” o root=”whore”=sexually exciting • Thus, disgusting  “sexually exciting” • Arousal for its own sake is problematic Canadian Criminal Code: • The exploitation of sex • Crime, horror, cruelty and violence • Publicity exhibits a disgusting object o Ethic of and divinity (Dark) Sex Symbols: • Symbol: something that is used to represent something else o Sex can be used to represent something else/something else can be used to represent sex A sampling of sexual symbolism: • Sacred practice  Tantra (Hinduism tradition-sexual interaction can be a means of spiritual attainment) vs. celibacy (no sexual interaction b/c distracts from spiritual attainment) o Tantra –right hand(clean) vs. left hand (dirty)  having sex with a menstruating woman from lower social class (disgust) • (Sacred) art genitals of gods and humans o Ranges of genital portrayals:  “Distorted:” 1. enlarged 2. infantilized (opposite) – Brazilian wax? (desexualize) 3. absent – Barbie and Ken  “Realistic:” 4. concealed – i.e. Adam and Eve/leaves 5. revealed – reveal genitalia • (not-so-sacred) language  continuum of sexual referents o Euphemisms  i.e. putting your mouth down there o Terminology – ‘by the book,’ clinical  i.e. performing fellatio/cunnilingus o “Dirty” words  i.e. sucking cock/eating pussy  can serve a variety of different functions • some functions of dirty words: o exclamation – bumping something, “Fuck!” o humour – i.e. going into a stag shop, laughing at penis shaped candy (safer than embarrassment) o substitution – substitution for physical aggression o correction – concerned b/c someone wronged you so use angry energy vs. hate/hurting someone o degradation – they’re called dirty words for a reason; disgust; used to degrade/verbally contaminate an individ. – not to correct, to hurt/bring person down o arousal – dirty words vs. intensify your penile thrusting – enhances own and partners arousal  most commonly used to arouse= degradation  all of these have emotional energy to them/highly energetic expressions/activities – says something important about dirty words – have something that euphemisms and terminology do not – have evocative capacity • The use of dirty words can be problematic – work vs. consensual play Evil and Sex Two ways to link sex and evil: 1. SEX  “EVIL” – if you do certain sexual things, perceived as evil o Real, human perpetrators o *(psych 232)* o Behaviour judged to be harmful, intentional and not justifiable = label “EVIL” 2. EVIL  SEX o Evil can manifest itself in the form of sexual acts o Mythological perpetrators o i.e. vampires... angels? asexual? o Lilith (Adams first wife) had a bad attitude, sex on top, divorced, had sex with fallen angels:  Kids=Soncuby, ancuby? Original exorcist – possessed by demon, stabs vagina with crucifix “let Jesus fuck you” • Evil, sex and power  people who want to stir things up: are aware that sex can be used to evoke strong (negative) reactions in people/themselves o i.e. black mass? o Sexually sadistic serial killers – necrophilia • Evil, sex, and protection (security)  o HIV/AIDS = gods judgement o Gays want your children Why the links? 0. Evil is special (“fine china” word) 1. Sex is universal – every individual has to deal with it 2. Sex is a powerful motivator – sex engages people – to what degree will people put sexual gratification over everything 3. Sex is symbolic – it’s never just sex 4. Sex is a threat to the self – vulnerability (always potentially a victim) 5. Sex is about control and loss of control – regulating one’s own impulses 6. Sexual motivation is often nonconcious – why is something sexy to us, different for others? *5. Don’t try to make LT decisions during climax: study: Ariely and Loewenstein - 3500 males respond to sexual stimuli, questions, etc. answer q’s while aroused/not aroused (masturbation) results: sexual tunnel vision – urgency for sexual gratification i.e. drug – 5-26% non-aroused vs. aroused Can evil be sexy? “Evil deeds” vs. “Evildoers” Evildoers the “myth of pure evil” (MOPE) “Evil” symbols cues MOPE “Symbol ID task”: • Evil symbols • Religious symbols • Neutral symbols o MOPE scale for each o “evilrotic” – seductive, sexually attractive, interested in sex, engage in harmful sex (evil sexuality scale) • Relationship between MOPE and scores on evilrotic scale? – yes • Single people- no link bt MOPE and evilrotic (what people are like sexually) • People in relationships- very strong link bt MOPE and what evil people are like sexually especially when evil symbols o Why?  People in relationships see evil as homewreckers and will threaten security of relationships (more sensitized to seductress) After Midterm 1: Wednesday, October 9 Lecture 5 October 9th, 2013 Sexual Serial Killers “Traditional” definitional criteria-- (sexual homicide) 1) input-- what’s the motivation? (sexual homicide is a motivational outcome of sexual fantasy) 2) outcome-- injury pattern (FBI focuses on results; interested in what actually happened) 3) - if they see injury in genital/rectal regions they will start thinking sexual homicide But... 1) “nonsexual” acts -- can have sexual outcomes (non-anticipated outcomes) 2) - i.e., in the 30s somebody liked blowing up trains, in the midst of a very good train explosion he would climax 3) - would this be considered sexual homicide? it had a sexual outcome 4) any body part can be eroticized-- i.e., when a body appears and there are no injuries in genital areas but the feet are missing- could be from someone with a food fetish 5) - FBI definition is too narrowly focused An expanded definition of sexual homicide: 1. any homicidal act motivated by or resulting in sexual pleasure Sexual Serial killers are RARE-- - roughly 300 out of 370 million are serial killers - 150 individuals (approx.) sexual serial killers - serial killers seldom stop; only stop when they die or get caught - overwhelming majority of sexual serial killers are male (although there are documentations of female partners; only charged as accomplice -- doing it to ‘make man happy’) “Turn-ons include”: - Ted bundy would fake an injury to get women to help them; then would bludgeon them and while still conscious or unconscious would commit sexual acts upon them; dismember their body parts when dead, and continue to commit sexual acts - i.e. Kemper 1) pre-mortem-- anticipatory, sadistic 2) post-mortem-- necrophilic, fetishistic, nostalgic Why? (Part 1) “The Predatory Fun Spectrum” 2. furthest level back= virtual level 3. - involves gaming i.e., Chase Monica (a game set in perspective of a rapist) 4. simulated-- more live action; i.e., Hunting for Bambi (chase and shoot women with paintballs while it gets videotaped and you can take the video home to watch) -- turned out to be a hoax but how many inquiries were made about it? 5. actual-lite-- i.e., sport hunting -- involve preparation, search, hunt, trophies (excitement) 6. - sport hunting= killing animals for fun 7. - i.e., torturing animals for pleasure/ fun 8. Expedience--- critical factor that separates the ‘actual’levels from all the other levels 9. - mind over matter -- “I don’t mind, and you don’t matter” 10. - making somebody suffer is the aim 11. - all of the constraints don’t matter 12. ACTUAL Expedience-- How (does someone break through wall)? Two dimensions 1) severity- consequences for self and for others; especially when talking about violence 2) “calling”- is it more of a ‘way of life’for the individual/ part of their identity? 3) - difference between impulsive act and pre-meditated act (and especially several pre-meditated acts) Diagram -- Minor/ Isolated Influences-- i.e., starting off with jaywalking(against the law but isn’t a ‘big’deal) -- a lot of people do this Multiple/ Pervasive influence-- sexual serial killing -- not a lot of people do this -- severity & “calling” increasing; this is more likely to happen 1) physical history- biological contribution to what is going on 2) - some suggestion that individuals born with higher threshold to stimulation (takes more to get stimulated) will be drawn towards more extreme things for stimulation “high sensation seeking” 3) - doesn’t necessarily mean its bad 4) social history- don’t have a normal attachment with people; at some point early on their capacity to form bonds with people was disrupted 5) emotional history- rage, sense of entitlement, lack of empathy= narcissistic 6) mental history- dissociation is a massive component (being able to de-compartmentalize killings with life) 7) - serial killers lead double lives--- otherwise they can not make it to that extreme level 8) - religious themes show up a lot; i.e., Jeffrey Dommer (cross of bones) 9) sexual history- most likely to be sexually dysfunctional in consensual sexual situation 10) criminal history- impulse control issues 11) - violent activities such as animal torture 12) - bedwetting (around age 12) Why? (Part 2) 13. “Locally” -- motives: 1) fairness 2) - retribution-- feel they were mistreated in someway, so they are ‘getting back’at society 3) - entitlement-- “why shouldn’t I do this?” 4) significance 5) - accomplishment (self)-- take great bride in what they’re doing 6) - fame (others)-- like to be recognized by others; desire for recognition 7) “leaving mark on the world” 8) pleasure 9) - entertainment-- 10) - sexual gratification-- only way to achieve gratification 14. “Cosmically” 1) statistically speaking-- scary and self-focused; low end of morality scale 2) qualitative or quantitative? -- making a qualitative distinction between ourselves and serial killers brings comfort (“I am not like that”) 3) - quantitative perspective suggests we all want the same things; sexual serial killers have just broken through wall of expedience- that’s the only thing that separates us Wednesday, October16 Video Women who love killers • “Hybristophiles” – women who are erotically attracted to killers • Fantasy rapists – not an uncommon fantasy among women samples who have been surveyed • “Bad boys” Manipulate: physical strength, sexual potency (1.strong enough to pin down, got an erection, 2.strong enough to pin down, no erection, an erection, not strong enough, erection and not strong enough, 5. drug) Assess: negative qualities (abusiveness) positive qualities (charisma, long-term potential) neutral/ambiguous qualities (alpha male, assertive, dominant) neg. traits subtract positive traits Predictions: 1. Rape by force  alpha male compared to other 4 conditions (bigger number, more neg. effects) 2. Strong, not erect  lowest evaluative disparity  smaller number compared to 4 other conditions *women feel bad for case 2.  Interpreting sexual dysfunction in psychological terms, if he is strong enough he can do it, but he can’t get it up b/c he knows what he’s doing is wrong/he doesn’t want to hurt her/she hasn’t given him consent Two benign explanations: 1. Attack of conscience 2. Need for victim’s consent • Derogation = I can’t do this, you’re not worth it • Conscience = I can’t do this, this isn’t right • Permission = I can’t do this, unless you want me to When the (would be) rapist is strong, not erect... (and needs Mary’s permission)...  Genital arousal linked to greater perceived positive qualities (women aroused if rapist showed charisma)  Charisma and LT potential more strongly linked  “adversary transformation” narrative – “bad boy” gets tamed b/c woman is capable of taming him, takes woman in fantasy (potential victim) and makes her less of a victim – gives power back to her, in subtle ways Mary Kay Letourneau American schoolteacher had sex with 12 year old student, had 1 child with him while on bail, was found again with him in a car, went to jail for another 7.5 years (had another child with him), married him when released from prison (ET tonight filmed wedding) What constitutes sexual abuse? Is it abuse? • Moral framework/moral foundations theory o Divinity: “sex with __ is wrong” - b/c it’s not right  Purity/sanctity  Isn’t about the sex act, it is about who you are having it with (i.e. mother and son) o Community: “sex with ___ disrupts the social structure or group order” – this causes trouble  Ingroup/loyalty  Authority/respect o Autonomy: “sex with ___ creates harm or restricts freedom of choice or consent”  Harm/care  Fairness/reciprocity  This is wrong b/c it hurts someone...creates an injustice  What about “freedom of choice” and “consent?”  Freedom of choice is critical for whether something is moral or not  What am I putting at risk?  People have to be able to freely, consciously choose and know what they’re choosing  i.e. teaching someone to ski, put them on bunny hill first, got to know what you’re getting into and understand what is involved  Same for any risky activity... including sex o Attributional ambiguity  creates a power difference (i.e. if large age difference)  Power differential between participants  Responsibility – if you’re in the higher power, your responsibility to say no • i.e. if naked patient came onto therapist, therapist says no  Increases risk  i.e. could drive home on other side of the road and not get hit - but going to get a ticket – going to have sex with the wrong people – going to say it’s wrong  Are you doing this because you want to or has there been some sort of pressure/manipulation – even if you are not aware Impact of Sexual Abuse on Children: • Emotional effects: predominantly negative emotions o Depression, anxiety, despair, grief, shame, anger, fear, confusion, impaired impulse control... • Perceptions and cognitions o Lower self esteem o More self blame – why is this happening to me? o Distorted belief about others o • Physical effects o Health problems o Somatization effects – acting out anxiety/depressive effects • Post-traumatic effects o Intrusive re-experiencing symptoms (“reliving experience”) o Numbing detachment and avoidance symptoms (coping mechanism, has negative consequences)  Feeling nothing is better than feeling what you’re feeling • Interpersonal effects o Impaired trust – “these people shouldn’t be wanting to have sex with me, now I can’t trust anyone, even though the people who are supposed to protect me are not doing these things” o Isolation and alienation o Increased vulnerability and tendency to be re-victimized o Difficulty with intimacy – with partners and children o Sexual dysfunctions The impact is worse when: • The children are younger – preverbal or latency age • The abuse is of a longer duration (the more damaging) • Abusers are: adults, parents, males • Force is used • There is penetration – more damaging than touch • There are multiple of occurrences or perpetrators (i.e. a father passing child around to his friends)... • The victim lacks resiliency factors – emotional sensitivity, capacity to rationalize things...some people have more character traits that make them resilient – not everyone is going to be negatively impacted to the same degree • If the victim lacks supportive relationship Sexual Misconduct and Abuse in the Content of a Religious Institution: -Cultures sending child to be a prostitute as a means for the family Sexual misconduct and abuse occurs within a specific content and there is a direct and powerful impact when the context is a religious institution • Group dynamics and principles of group psychology – impact on self identity of people who are members “it is not supposed to happen here” • The traditions, doctrines and teachings of the group – sense of security/belonging/being with others you can trust – becomes violated (can’t trust other people with my children) ...”how can God let this happen? I thought people here were supposed to be different” • The social image and stereotypes of the group in society – the social image that the group is trying to portray – abuse happening in church context is the fact that they become targets of ridicule and anger - if associated with that group, feel shame Responses of the victim: • Typically in a lower power position - often targeted (a child that is going to be compliant, more vulnerable, more sensitive, more likely to agree with you, quieter) • Confusion • Shame and self blame • “you’re so beautiful, you’re making me do this” • Isolation – these are the kids who are more vulnerable “I can be your special friend” • Question personal beliefs Responses of the Perpetrator: • Denial • Admit guilt but remain defensive o Pastor groomed young girl for a while, stopped, she buried it, got married, tried to live normal life, pastor confessed to “having an affair” (she was 14..presented it as a mutual), she ended up institutionalized...couldn’t handle it...pastor ended up having another victim (one of his twin daughters)...admit full guilt, fell apart, begged for help and forgiveness o Become the center of attention for the group Responses of the Group or Congregation: • Central focus of the group • Resistance to believing that it happened – people picking sides (“this didn’t happen here”...not thinking it’s OK, but pressure to forgive) • Blaming the victim “what did you do that he would abandon his family for you”...why didn’t you say something • Keep it quiet • Group division (can be extraordinarily damaging) o Some condemn the perpetrator o Some blame the victim o Some push for forgiveness – for the need to make this go away, just forgive and forget WED. OCT 23 2013   Sexual Influence   Mutual Both same mind. Choice Agreeing
More Less

Related notes for SMF 205

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.