child abuse
2 Nov 2009
We Need To Talk About Dennis
If we're serious about protecting kids, we need to deal with the problem of paedophilia like adults, argues Rachel Hills
Like a lot of people, I felt sick when I saw convicted paedophile Dennis Ferguson plastered on the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald last week. Not because of his frail, almost-naked body — or even because of the children who were just visible in the background — but because it seemed so unnecessary and exploitative. The guy was at the beach. Why was it in a newspaper at all, let alone front page news?It turns out the exploitation went both ways. The photo was submitted by Ferguson's chief supporter, prisoners' rights activist Brett Collins, in attempt to show him in a different light; as Collins put it to Sydney radio station 2UE, as "a human being who's fragile and entitled to support the same as the rest of us".
As a PR move, it showed little understanding of either how the modern media works or how child sex offenders tend to be received by it. Yet on another level, it made a mysterious sort of sense. Dennis Ferguson wants to tell his story, to have some say in the media coverage that follows him wherever he goes.
And why wouldn't he? Personal stories are powerful things. They have the potential to change the way the public thinks about an issue and — importantly, from Ferguson's perspective — to humanise and make sympathetic the person doing the telling. When they are broadcasted far enough and with sufficient frequency, they become part of the fabric through which others make sense of their own experiences.
But not all stories — or storytellers — are embraced with the same enthusiasm, and paedophilia is one subject that remains strictly outside the bounds of politically correct discussion. As UK sociologist Ken Plummer has written, "Very rarely [do we hear] the tale of a paedophile, a rapist or even a serial murderer from their point of view. When these stories are told, they are trapped in the language of authority which pathologises, demonises, trivialises or sensationalises."
And not without reason. It's natural to feel fear and repulsion at the thought of someone whose sexual practices necessarily involve the exploitation and abuse of some of the most vulnerable members of our society — members most of us feel compelled to protect. And while Ferguson has his own history of victimisation and abuse, the details of his crimes are horrifying — showing an incredible capacity for cruelty and a complete lack of empathy for his victims.
But part of it is also that the act of listening to someone like Ferguson, of expressing disapproval at the way he's been treated since his release, of suggesting — like Collins — that he deserves to be treated like a human being, is so often read as an expression of support for his crimes. Anything less than run the man out of town, and you run the risk of implicating yourself.
But perhaps it's time we did listen. We constantly debate the sexualisation of children, and yet we are unable to speak like adults about the people who lay implicit at the root of these fears. If we're serious about protecting our kids, surely we'd do better to take the time to understand someone like Ferguson, than to enter into another round of pointless discussion about raunchy Miley Cyrus performances, bralettes and shag bands. Hopefully tonight's Four Corners will do just that.
Speaking about paedophilia in only the most outraged, dehumanising of terms also has another downside: it makes it easier to ignore the fact that most child abuse happens at the hands of someone the child knows, and keeps such abuse hidden from view. It also makes it more difficult to deal with the dissonant reality that many paedophiles are people who are otherwise liked and respected by their families and communities.
But that's just the thing — people don't come in clear cut categories of good and evil. And pretending they do makes it harder to both spot the dangers in our midst, and to recognise the humanity in those we deem dangerous.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Newsvine
Facebook
Kwoff
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
I agree with the premise that we should talk about paedophilia like adults, however, I think we have spoken about Denis Ferguson far too much. As Rachel Hills points out, our stereotypes of the stranger-danger phenonmenon has made it very difficult for those to believe instances of sexual abuse perpetrated by their relatives and close friends - despite the fact that they are the most likely perpetrators. By obsessing over Ferguson we have reinforced the stereotype, rendering us even more incapable of responding to abuse.
sammic
Absolutely, spot on.
As a survivor of a paedophile’s interference, I want it to be talked about. I want it to be taken off the "taboo" list and more importantly, I want to understand what leads a person to behave in this way. The paedophile who abused me, was someone I knew and loved. I spent nearly my entire life, trying to understand what in a person led them to behave in this way. I could not simply accept that they were straight-out ‘bad’ as a murderer is ‘bad’ but need time, effort and energy put into the stigma attached to it from both perspectives; to bring it ‘out’ just as incest has been.
I think their stories should be allowed to be told, not to sensationalise it all, but to help us understand it better. I simply cannot rule in either way; that a person is born predisposed to this kind of behaviour - particularly within their own inner circle, or whether it is a mental illness that is allowed to amplify somehow.
Let’s not profile him (although he has become the scapegoat) but let’s profile the issue. I believe they need psychological assistance, not so much retribution. It reminds me of AIDS when it first hit the forefront of our minds; fear drove a lot of misunderstanding and controversy. If you recall, people were afraid to even be in the same room as a person with AIDS for fear they would catch it. In reality, that’s what’s happening here. People are afraid to even be on the same beach as him…
I think people who do this are in some way sick because their mind has no conscience and we need to be in a position of helping them somehow once they have been identified. Cheers,
Great article. It reminds me of research by psychologist Phil Tetlock on sacred values: he finds that there are some things people feel should not even be within the realm of rational consideration, enough so that people feel tainted when they do actually think about them. Reactions to pedophilia may be a case of that phenomenon.
Isn’t it true that Dennis Ferguson has become some kind of weird poster boy of paedophilia? A media "phenomenon"? It’s a strange world where this guy can have achieved a kind of inversion of super-stardom because of a media and public obsession which is based in a fantasy and totally belies the reality: that paedophiles are freaky, ugly strange old men in raincoats rather than close family members and relatives.
It’s this latter fact that we don’t want to deal with, because of the way it makes us all squirm.
It’s not paedophiles that we don’t want to talk about: the media have been talking about Ferguson lately like he’s the next big hit.
The reason ironically we’re talking so very loudly about Ferguson is because we’re in the deepest denial about the everyday facts of paedophilia. It’s not freaky guys like Ferguson we should go hysterical about, but Uncle Jim and Neighbour Bob and Teacher Susan. But of course that would make this world impossible to live in.
Just to clarify - I want the issue of paedophilia to be discussed, it’s the obsession with Ferguson that I have a problem with. We like to personify issues because it makes us think we can relate to them better, but it often makes us more likely to make gross generalisations. People need to understand that there are different classes of paedophiles and more broadly, types of sex offenders.
I was also interfered with by a paedophile, not someone I loved but someone I knew. I think knowing why people become paedophiles is very important and far more interesting and productive than just incarcerating them. However, I find it very frustrating when the media continues to portray child abuse as something perpetrated by strangers - which is what the latest Ferguson saga has perpetuated. Those ideas have made my situation, and many others, much more difficult because apart from all the other issues, we have to convince people that it happened and that their preconceived ideas of some creepy Ferguson kidnapping you at the beach isn’t the typical situation. People already prefer to believe that victims are lying because it makes them more comfortable, having to fight that on top of inaccurate but prolific stereotypes is exhausting. This makes it even harder to talk about.
douglas jones
Talk indeed, about the whole issue and with as many facts as have been determined so far.
Taboo, why is it? Because sex nudity etc are overindugled topics in our media? Because our belief system ensures that sex is something about which we should be ashamed so that until reltivally recently the idea of teaching children not only the biology but also the pleasure, guilt, power and all the rest which go to make up any subject man uses in many ways. We might even define the imperative of sex an urge we all to greater or lesser degree possess and control.
Alexander Cockburn points out that " the control of sex and pornogaphy is a major part of promulgating a prudish political culture without even imposing an overt poliotical censorship regime. This is about America but its not all that different here. We also have the hyped mania for indulging in black pleasure.
I hasten to add that the problem, if not as big as media sensation would have it, is real merely hyped out of proportion and this research says can increase any damage inflicted on the victim. Not all perpetrators are male aproportion are female. The definition of unwanted acts is often fuzzy and concentrating on whether it was just looking, touching, penetrating andif so how deeply does litte to calm any situation.
So yes discuss get accurate data on the extent categroiused of course. Discuss also the effect of lack of trust the ease with which a teacher friend or even parent can be ruined by emotive enjoyment.
With all this furore very few people seem to be offering solutions as to where we put sex offenders who have completed their sentences.
One solution might be to offer them housing in a closed community, free of children, run for the most part by those who lived there, with some sort of work program so that they could earn enough of an income to buy things things that they wanted, with the only fences being those that enclosed it.
I’m sure many would leap at the chance to have a secure place to live, with a small plot of land to garden and grow vegetables on, where they could own a pet, where there were recreation facilities and where they could receive the therapy that they need.
They could do most of their shopping online, and the only time they would need to report their movements would be when they chose to go out the front gate- though it would probably be necessary for them to have their internet access restricted and for outgoing phone calls to go through an operator to prevent them contacting victims or accessing electronic forums and content that could encourage their re-offending.
Housing these people in this way would also be far cheaper than keeping them in prison, and would give both them and the community at large some peace of mind.
Of course while homeless people in this country do not have access to anywhere near the same level of shelter and support as the above, it is hard to justify offering it to people convicted of very serious crimes.
Is there an actual problem with the current system? Denis Ferguson isn’t the first child sex offender to be released from prison. I don’t know how many, but there are definitely quite a few who have been released and are subjected to extra monitoring. This happens, the general public is unaware of it and for the most part, nothing happens. People haven’t offered a solution because the problem doesn’t really exist.
I’m not really sure whether the community would have peace of mind. First of all, you’d have to find somewhere to establish this communal living system. Secondly, you’d have to be careful with who you put together, I’m not sure if the community actually wants paedophiles forming friendships with each other, to the point where they live together in a secret gated community where their crimes would be normalised. It’s one thing if its part of the prison system but do you want maintain it outside of it? Also, I think paedophiles would gain a lot from talking to other people who are not paedophiles.
Spot on, AMP. Isolated but productive communities are the civilised alternative for everybody. It’s a shame that vilification is the popular sport instead of harmonious solutions.
And for sure, let’s provide a comprehensive system of support for homeless people at the same time. That would require, however, some sort of public serving government instead of an agent for shortsighted corporate profiteering.
What an excellent article. After watching Four Corners on Monday night I was left feeling sick inside. No one denies that what Dennis Ferguson did all those years ago was a vile abuse of those children however what the lynch mobs, the media and gutless politicans have been doing to this man over the years is equally wrong. He looked more like a frail frightened caged animal than a fellow human being. I just wish they would all leave him alone so that he could see out his remaining years in peace.
Without understanding there can be no effective prevention. That idea is implicit in the ancient adage: Hate the sin but not the sinner. We still don’t get it.
agree, great article and yes, we do need to talk about pedophilia and get it out in the open. In the first place this might release the ‘victims’ of pedophiles to speak out more readily and for them to seek protection and might I add, some sort of justice.
I watched 4 corners last night, I thought Liz Jackson took on a particularly tough gig. As other contributors have pointed out, most pedophiles attack children they know, usually family members. So it was with some interest I watched those mobs outside of Ferguson’s residences demanding his removal all the while wondering (since the stats for incest are so alarmingly high), if this was some kind of public externalisation of what so many people know to be going on or to have gone on within their own homes and families. Ferguson is not the only released pedophile living within communities across the country. So where is the real threat here?
Incest and pedophile have been a taboo subject for too long and they need greater recognition as one of the most serious problems that effects not only the victims but our entire society and how we function.
The behaviour of the media in Ferguson’s case also seems to wreak of some sort of witch hunt, you could lead one to think he is the only pedophile in the country.
Sammic: the reason the media are in a state of love & adoration with Dennis Ferguson is because he fits the classic stereotype of a paedophile to a tee.
Just by existing and by the fact they can chase him down, he makes them a truckload of money in (ratings and therefore) advertising revenue.
The media, while they no doubt wail about how they are serving their predetermined "public interest", can hardly contain their collective glee that someone like Ferguson has fallen into their caring arms. It’s all about the people after all.
Ultimately you could go as far as asking what comes first: the chicken or the egg? Does a community breed its media, or do the media nowadays breed the community? There’s more than one town in Australia where this question is more than just rhetorical.
http://zielwolf.blogspot.com
Oh Zielwolf I am under no illusions as to why the media has focused on Denis Ferguson, their reasons are varied but certainly the convenience of him fitting the stereotype is there. One of the other factors as to why Denis is identified whilst others aren’t stems from the reality - most paedophiles prey on their own family, which means identifying such a person creates the possibility of identifying victims. The real paedophiles are harder for the media to personalise and sensationalise - so we are left with those like Denis reinforcing our own misguided views. It’s not just the media’s fault, but the media has far more power to change it.
You couldn’t ask for a better drooling posterboy than dennis. "Kids - avoid men who look like Riff Raff and who tend to salivate over you". But if your parents are your yardstick for normality as a kid, and they are toxic, it leaves you with few alternatives.
Stragely enough, I WAS one of the (estimated) 4% who went down to a stranger. A stranger who became a "friend", just a friend I didn’t tell people about. At 8-9. I still had a safe supportive family to go home to tho. I was safe in my own bed, wasn’t ALWAYS available. So in a way, I am conscious of having had a better deal than some.
Friday 13th begins international Child Abuse Prevention Week.
If you are an ASCA member, it is ForgetMeKnot week. d.
Vilifying one man does nothing to protect children. As long as the general media continue to stir the pot and make the issue a straight forward battle of good vs "evil kiddy-fiddler", it’s near impossible to get a conversation on an actual solution going. Great to see a piece on that, and a reasoned discussion following.
My 2 cents on gated communities – I don’t think they are the answer; closing a social circle encourages people to assume everyone agrees with them, it’s called the false consensus effect. Rehabilitated sex offenders need to be part of society, not shoved into a community like lepers. I had wondered if the answer might not to be to place people like Ferguson in Aged Care Communities where they could earn a living and live with a degree of normalcy, but not be publicly perceived as interacting with children.
http://sadhbh.blogspot.com
Aged care facilities would still pose serious problems - vulnerable and elderly people also need to be protected, the abuse cases currently being exposed in the industry are quite shocking. I’m not saying that paedophiles necessarily pose a threat to them but sexual assault is often about power. Placing child sex offenders in aged care, where the patients are extremely vulnerable, is not the answer.
As I said above, for the most part, sex offenders are released from prison and monitored. They usually do not pose an additional threat, although yes, it depends on the nature of their crimes etc. But the idea that we don’t know what to do with them and need to figure out where to place them is flawed. We do know what to do with them - we have been doing it for years. Of course the media isn’t going to report, ‘Sex offenders released from prison… and nothing happened.’