The_Dungeoneers's profile . The_Dungeoneers's homepage
 |
| The_Dungeoneers |
Caveat: The following is an extract taken from a larger work written by me for the purpose of training Sentencers, Police Officers, Probation Officers, Social Workers, Health Workers and others whose employment requires them to be involved in the management, control and retraining of convicted sexual aggressives. It is reproduced here solely for the purpose of information and should not be applied as an evaluation tool by any person or organisation who has not had the benefit of formal training in the field of psychosexual evaluation / intervention techniques.
The extract looks at a broad profile and, as with any broad brush stroke, lacks the fine detail of specific cases – this is quite intentional as no two cases are identical. For convenience I have referred to the perpetrator as 'he'. This reflects the fact that the training programme to which the document is linked is designed to address the issues of male sexual aggression. It should not be assumed that males are the sole perpetrators of sexual aggression.
Laurence
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~
<Extract begins>
The programme has been designed to address the issues of management, control and retraining of sexual aggressives. To undertake such work it is necessary to have a detailed plan. The formulation requires a series of basic assumptions and theories on which to build the programme and to provide an ongoing direction.
The following has as its basis the principal theoretical model developed by Stephen Wolfe of the Chicago Group for the Study of Inter-personal Violence. The Sexual Offenders Initiative, with adaptations to take account of certain social and cultural differences that exist between the United States and the United Kingdom, has adopted this model. The model takes as a principal that sexual offending is invariably premeditated.
There are four recognised basic preconditions to the commission of a sexual offence and they are -
(1) A potential offender needs to have some motivation to abuse sexually
(2) The potential offender has to overcome their own internal inhibitions against acting on that motivation
(3) The potential offender has to overcome external impediments to the commission of the offence
(4) The potential offender or some other factor has to undermine or overcome the victims resistance to the offence.
As can be seen items (1) and (2) fall into an area which may be thought of as internal to the perpetrator and items (3) and (4) as external to the perpetrator. Under the terms of that rather crude classification it is to items (1) and (2) that this model addresses itself.
In the actual application of this model we operate in reverse beginning with the offence, which is the point at which the perpetrator has come to our attention in our respective roles within the Criminal Justice System. However, in an attempt at clarity this document will put forward a chronological study of the factors that go to make up the whole.
We begin with the Fixed Historical Facts (Fig.1.) This is the perpetrator's history. Within this history we will usually find experiences of victimisation, sexualisation and neglect which may act as potentiators to that person becoming a sex offender. It is not just experiences of being a victim themselves that we must consider but also the notion of 'witness'. This does not mean necessarily being present whilst the abuse takes place nor for that matter even knowing about it for sure. When abuse takes place in a family it 'colours' the atmosphere, affects the family dynamic, which, in turn, affects the other members of the family group.
Of course there are clear-cut cases of witness - an example of this is of a perpetrator who recalls his two sisters being systematically abused by their father who was, in all other respects, an ideal paternal parent. His sisters did not disclose to the authorities, he experienced positive parenting throughout his childhood and thus felt his father's activities were acceptable ways of behaviour. When he himself married and had children he conducted himself in the way of his parental paternal role model, and abused his own children. An example of cognitive distortion developed at an early age.
Isolation as a child tends to feature quite commonly in the background of perpetrators and we are looking here at emotional isolation in the family unit. For example - the child that is 'different' and this can be a child who is bright in a family broadly of low intellectual capabilities (or vice versa), a child who is very shy or even aesthetically not particularly pleasing - the unplanned, unwanted child – the child who feels unloved.
Scapegoating often goes hand in hand with isolation although not in every case. Being continually blamed for everything that goes wrong within the family unit is one form, experiencing systematic bullying at school (peer group or teachers), experiencing systematic bullying within the neighbourhood and even later in life at work or within a relationship are all forms of scapegoating.
The notion of the dysfunctional family also features in this history. Of course, all of the other items on this list are types of dysfunction, and most families experience short periods of dysfunctionality from time to time, but under this heading we are looking at additional experiences of multiple divorce, ill concealed affairs, unusual sexual practices between parents, in some extreme cases children who may not even know to whom they are related biologically. Six children - six different fathers.
It is accepted there will be, on occasions, an exception to every rule and there may be a perpetrator whose history contains none of these factors. However, at the time of writing this paper neither I, nor any of my colleagues whose work I have studied have come across such an individual. A rough rule of thumb when studying the history of perpetrators is that the more of these potentiators which are present the higher the risk of that individual becoming an offender in adult life.
~
The Potentiating Experiences in the perpetrator's background have an influence on the development of the perpetrator's personality, and this brings us to Fig.2. - which is a schematic representation of the primary personality elements developed within sex offenders.
Working round clockwise from 12 o'clock we have sexual preoccupation. Every human being has sexual thoughts to a greater or lesser degree. The potential sex offender gives a lot of time to the consideration of this subject. It will exist fairly well up in their consciousness and show itself in a number of ways.
The most obvious example is the person who talks about sex openly and all the time, to whom innuendo is second nature. Interestingly, this is perhaps less of an indicator than the person who talks about it much of the time but depreciates sexuality, giving almost the impression of being sexually phobic.
There is a school of thought that postulates the individual who is violently anti-homosexual and may indulge in what is termed 'queer bashing' may well be doing so to conceal their own feelings of latent homosexuality and using a negative response to alleviate their perceived guilt. Likewise, a sex offender may spend much time in verbal tirades of what they would like to do to an offender, seeking, as it were, to expunge the guilt feelings which they themselves are prey to.
Social isolation/alienation. The individual has acquaintances but not many friends and experiences personal difficulties in forming relationships. Because of this the individual functions best in situations with well-defined parameters in which they are in control. They may quite successful in terms of career, especially if that career is within an organisation with a rigid hierarchical structure. In terms of social gatherings there tends to be a preference towards the smaller grouping but even here the probability is they will only engage in limited interaction.
Moving into the defensive section we find a level of defensiveness significantly above the norm, bordering on the hyper state. The individual tend to apportion blame anywhere else but at their own door. The world is against them; any lack of 'success', which they may experience, is either something or someone else's fault. This links directly into the ruminative aspects of their personality. For the ruminant person, life's small setbacks are rarely taken in their stride. An inordinate amount of time may well be spent dwelling upon the heroic failures of their life - cursing their bad luck and re-living past humiliations.
The poor self-image amplifies and accentuates the negative aspects of the previous three factors. We are dealing with individuals who, in the main, feel very inadequate, and secretly quite powerless. I will come back to the notion of power later in this document, but for the moment it is worth considering the notion that the individual can build a compensatory facade, which superficially, at any rate, may mask the poor self-image.
Part of this facade manifests itself as narcissism. Here we have an attempt to bolster poor self-image by an overly large degree of narcissistic behaviour - put simply the individual perceives themselves as the centre of a universe in which they are the only inhabitant worth considering. Preening is a common trait amongst such individuals.
We are now halfway through the whistle stop tour of this model.
We have the elements of history, the personality and the developmental system. Up to now all of these factors suggest a potential for offending but do not necessarily mean the individual will offend. It would be most unsafe for any untrained person to attempt to evaluate another using just the factors given.
~
Now we move on to Fig.3. The Precipitating Conduit.
On the left-hand side of the diagram is a vertical high/low axis. Moving to the right of this axis we have, at the top, the inhibition curve and at the bottom the abusive sexual behaviour curve (referred to in some quarters as deviance). The horizontal axis at the bottom of the diagram represents the progression of time.
The potential perpetrator is primed as it were by his experiences, personality and development - essentially he has some motivation to abuse. Although he has the inclination he may also have a high level of inhibition - the internal controls which govern behaviour. As long as the potential perpetrator's level of inhibition is higher (stronger) than his inclination to abusive sexual behaviour an offence is unlikely.
Unfortunately, the potential perpetrator's world is laden with disinhibitors - alcohol and drugs are two of the more obvious. Compulsive masturbation can also act as a disinhibitor - which connects with the potential perpetrator's high level of sexual preoccupation. Couple this with the distorted view of what is, for him, sexually appropriate - concepts developed usually from an early age and add the almost certainty that he will be creating abusive sexual fantasy images in his own mind then we are looking at a very powerful disinhibitor indeed. As time progresses the disinhibitors become more powerful and inhibition is suppressed accordingly. Thus the line on the diagram follows a downward curve. At this point we can apply a principle of physics. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. As the 'pressure' of the individual's inhibitions is lessened so the propensity towards abusive sexual behaviour rises by a corresponding amount. At the point where the two lines cross the first actual offence is committed. This is the moment at which they seek to turn fantasy into reality. Of course reality never quite measures up to fantasy because in fantasy whatever the individual wants to happen will happen and so, after committing the first offence, there is always a part of the perpetrator that feels unfulfilled.
This lack of fulfilment can also act as a disinhibitor itself and serve to increase the depression of inhibition making follow on offences far more likely. We frequently hear of how ashamed and guilty a perpetrator feels having committed his offence. Why then do these very unpleasant feelings not restore the level of inhibition to its previous setting?
~
Fig.4 may suggest an answer. The Cycle of Offending.
Starting at 12 o'clock we have an individual with a poor self-image, negatively reinforced by the other factors of his personality. Because of this he expects rejection. People are always going to put him down. He is going to be taken advantage of - the 'poor me' syndrome. Accordingly he withdraws, levels of social isolation increase, which serves to accentuate the already established negative aspects of his personality. He experiences bad feelings.
In order to make himself feel better he devises maladapted coping strategies and because of his personality construction he resorts to sexualised escapism. Behaviour plus reinforcement equals learning. The more the individual engages in this sexualised escapist behaviour coupled with the reinforcement of the 'good' feelings afforded by his masturbation and fantasy the more ingrained (learnt) this behaviour becomes. As has already been said eventually, with the successful suppression of his inhibition, he will seek engagement, the reality of the fantasy and this will then move him into the outlet phase, which is the abusive offence.
It should be noted that engagement may be of indeterminate duration. A paedophile may offend only after months of careful 'grooming' of the victim whereas another perpetrator may be far more opportunist – particularly if triggered by 'affect' such as rage in a rapist.
Immediately after the offence the perpetrator often experiences guilt. This guilt is a complex structure for it has with it shame, fear, in some cases revulsion but the guilt is transitory, for, at the same time as those emotions are experienced, there is an elation, elements of satisfaction and a feeling of partial fulfilment. This tends to push away those feelings that the perpetrator identifies as unpleasant such as guilt etc.
The perpetrator then proceeds to undergo a period of reconstitution - dismantling his guilt and suspending it so it does not trouble him. Here we find the justifications for his actions in terms such as 'she seduced me'; 'he asked me to do it'; etc. The perpetrator will then begin to short circuit the system and move from reconstitution rapidly back to his maladapted coping strategies with sexualised escapism and thus the circle is complete.
An interesting point which has been noted in the vast majority of studies on this subject is that when using this model the time distance between offences committed by one perpetrator has a correlation to the length of time they have been indulging in their offending behaviour. A perpetrator who offends once a week tends to have been offending for a longer period then one who offends once every two months. I stress this is not a hard and fast rule but is worthy of note when considering offending patterns.
I have referred to cognitive distortions and thinking errors at several points – it may be appropriate to take a moment to reflect upon their place in the picture.
A person's cognition is about how that person perceives the world. Ideally, individuals should see things clearly and take account of all factors contributing to a situation. If we were all able to do this then the world would be free of misunderstanding. Unfortunately, human beings have many others agendas, many of which are not apparent to the observer and, to complicate matters, the observer will have their own agenda and view of the world which will serve to colour their own decision making process.
Part of a sexual offenders system needs to be a level of cognitive distortion - that is to say they view parts of the rest of the world in a different light to non offenders. An example of this is the man who said that despite his attraction to children he would never have actually touched his daughter if she had not danced and posed provocatively in front of him, taunting him to be sexual with her. She would enter the living room where he was sat watching the TV; she would be naked; she would lay on the floor with her legs in the air revealing her vagina and anus; she would deliberately bend over in front of him displaying her nether regions and she would sit on his lap and deliberately wriggle on his penis to stimulate an erection.
Factually, all of the physical actions outlined above took place and were witnessed by the perpetrator's partner who confirmed her daughter was indeed naked from time to time in the living room, did lie on the floor, did dance around and run about and did sit upon the defendant's lap.
However, these occasions were at the childs bath time - the child was at the early toddler stage, still in nappies, and it is not surprising that, at the time of bathing (in a portable tub in front of the fire) she would wriggle from her mother's grasp and run about enjoying the freedom of expression that her release from a great wedge of terry towelling between her legs afforded. She also loved her daddy, toddled around the room, climbed upon daddy's lap and jumped about as any happy, healthy child would. It was the father's cognitive distortion with which he chose to sexualize his daughter's behaviour; to see her not as a happy liberated child but as a potential sexual target who was acting with full knowledge of her own sexuality. Of course, this is an absurd notion. Nevertheless, it highlights the complex systems that sexual offenders will construct in order to rationalise their abusive behaviour.
Similarly statements such as: “She (the victim) must have wanted a man to have sex with her because she was wearing a short skirt and a low cut top”, reflect the way in which a perpetrator will adjust his reality in order to overcome his internal inhibition, justify his abuse, transfer responsibility, attempt to avoid consequences etc. “She (the victim) gave her consent for me to have sex with her.” This statement was offered as defence during a rape case in which the perpetrator had held a broken glass to the victim's throat whilst penetrating her anally.
Having made the statement that, to some degree, everybody possesses some level of cognitive distortion, it is appropriate to consider how individuals deal with this themselves. In general terms we will seek the opinions of others, by way of discussion and personal research, the results of which we strive to interpret within our own personal systems accepting/ rejecting counter arguments or data and ultimately self modifying our behaviour accordingly.
Sex offenders do not voluntarily discuss their inappropriate thoughts or behaviour with others (except in certain cases such as rings, that is to say, in the company of other offenders of a similar persuasion). Of course, in such a setting the individual is putting forward distorted views to other people who hold similarly distorted views and thus the distortions are constantly being validated and reinforced. Some primary examples of uncontrolled validation, reinforcement and support systems are:-
. P.I.E. (Paedophile Information Exchange);
. Gang Rapes (where the participants will recount their activities);
. The Charles Dodgson Club (Paedophiles);
. Vulnerable Prisoner Units in the prison system (which serve to identify the type of offender and obliges them to live in close proximity to each other where they can validate and reinforce each others behaviour and sexual preference.)
Although, in general terms, sex offenders do not voluntarily discuss their preferences nor check the social validity of their behaviour in the wider sense by way of open discussion, they do engage in a form of research.
It is an attractive notion to consider that pornography is the primary source of such 'research' however, this may be something of a red herring in this context. Certainly such material cannot be discounted in terms of use by sex offenders as masturbatory aids nevertheless sex offenders are not universally stupid people. Most are well aware that the imagery contained in this medium is considered as being on the fringe of the social mores of British society and consequently it has little value as 'social validation' for the offender or would be offender.
What is needed are items and statements from quasi 'respectable' sources which can be combined with their own arguments and adapted as necessary, in order to support their views. Documentary programmes on radio and TV, articles in magazines and newspapers and academic third person discussions are seized upon and examined for validation of their behaviour. The press (tabloids particularly but not exclusively) generates its own form of cognitive distortion. Accounts of rapes are printed adjacent to pictures of nude or topless models. Exposes of group sex clubs, massage parlour, raids and a whole host of individual indiscretions are published in a high moral tone whilst elsewhere in the publication dozens of small advertisements carry premium rate telephone numbers offering "hard sex talk for instant quickie relief/indecent sex talk/over boss's knee/Kinky Kate loves nasty talk" etc.
Reported cases of sexual harassment tend to refer almost obliquely to the perpetrator but give detailed physical descriptions of the victim peppered with adjectives such as 'vivacious, attractive, leggy, buxom etc'. Where photographs are used to support the story, more often than not, the perpetrator will be represented by a passport sized study of his head and shoulders yet the victim will appear 'full figure'. The implication seems to be that the harassment was somehow the fault of the victim because of her appearance.
Continued in next post
Edited Thu 21 Jul 11, 10:56 AM by The_Dungeoneers
| 4 Sep 06, 10:40 PM The_Dungeoneers UK(NR), 5 yrs |
Having got the component parts of the model it now remains to link them. This has been done in Fig.5.
Starting at the top on the left-hand side, the social and family environment affects the child; this is the perpetrators early history. The child moves through adolescence to become an adult. During this period the personality development takes place in which the individual experiences personal vulnerability and their social and emotional congruency is established - the way they perceive the world and other people in relation to themselves. This cognitive distortion (thinking errors, mistaken interpretations etc.,) will often cause lifestyle imbalance (magnifying the bad things in life), which will need to be coped with and this is where maladapted coping and disinhibitors come into play. We are now at the bottom of the diagram moving from right to left. The precipitating conduit (see fig. 3) operates and the perpetrator, as he now is, moves into the cycle of offending (see fig. 4) around which the perpetrator will continue to go until that cycle is interrupted. On the left of the diagram is the term 'interpersonal transmission'. This refers back to Fig.1. and onward to Fig.6. - the potential effect of abuse on the victim.
Should they be unable to become re-empowered they will remain 'stuck' in a form of limbo, almost an 'eternal victim', prey to depressions and paradoxically there is a tendency to gravitate towards people who possess abusive characteristics thus perpetuating their victimisation. For many this situation is untenable and so they eventually seek re-empowerment because limbo is an uncomfortable place. There are two principal ways that can happen - the first and the desirable course is by the use of re-empowering strategies which are positive via supportive empathic therapies designed to reduce victim guilt feelings and provide positive self imaging. By this process we move the individual from the victim state into a situation whereby they become a survivor. That is to say they have survived their negative experiences and are proceeding to rebuild their lives. It is a process of recovery, if you will and, although the memories will endure, the learned strategies allow the survivor to cope appropriately with them. The other route is via re-empowering strategies that are negative. Fig 6 gives a few examples but there are many more than the ones listed. Negative strategies invariably involve a victim. In some cases this may take the form of self-victimisation. Statistically an abused person is twice as likely to abuse drugs and/or alcohol and four times as likely to attempt suicide as compared to a non-abused person. Self-denigration and self-loathing are quite common, as is self-sabotage. All three activities are rooted in low self-esteem and the personal expectation that no matter what the individual does things will go 'wrong' for them. By denigrating themselves they are 'getting in first' thus when things do go wrong they are proved 'right' which they can then secretly chalk up as a small victory because they predicted it would be so. This type of cognitive distortion is dangerous in that it becomes habitual, it buys in to the 'poor me' stance and generates the 'self fulfilling prophesy' scenario. The motivation underlying self-mutilation is slightly more complex although the low self-esteem factor is fundamental to the syndrome. "I cut myself because I can" is neither a foolish nor trite statement. For many cutting represents a ritual of power, the one area in which they feel they can have control. Blood is life - the symbolism is very powerful. Self-destruction does not always mean taking ones own life. It can also be the alienation of those around the self-destructive individual, behaviour that strains relationships or throws doubt on the veracity of their social reputation. A proxy version of this is the individual who spends hours creating something then smashes it to pieces. It is perhaps easier to identify those who seek to re-empower themselves by the victimisation of others. Essentially the offender is trying to re-empower themselves by taking 'power' from other vulnerable individuals - the victims of their abuse. <End of extract> Laurence Posted to Backlash Group 08/10/2005 ___________________________________________________ ___ Edited 21 Jul 11, 10:58 AM by The_Dungeoneers | |
| 5 Sep 06, 12:57 AM playzone UK, 5 yrs  |
Thats one long blog. Best to print it off and read later I think. Da mihi castitatem et incorruptus, sed noli modo | |
| 5 Sep 06, 1:27 AM obey1976 UK, 8 yrs |
Fascinating, thankyou. | |
| 5 Sep 06, 2:10 AM Space_Pony UK, 9 yrs |
i have used very similar material with my therapist understanding the loops and spirals of behaviour patterns, which are sometimes set in place very young in life can take a lifetime to understand and escape out of . very informative and useful , thankyou playing with fire , sometimes burns people space pony | |
| 5 Sep 06, 4:23 AM The_Dungeoneers UK(NR), 5 yrs |
My thanks to you obey1976 and space_pony for your kind responses. I pondered posting the piece on the twin grounds of appropriateness and relevance. I was finally prompted by several discussion threads that wound around the subject and so I thought it might be helpful. I am most gratified to learn that it was so. Laurence | |
| 5 Sep 06, 4:24 AM The_Dungeoneers UK(NR), 5 yrs |
I am nothing if not prolific playzone Laurence | |
| 5 Sep 06, 5:26 AM Strummy UK(SW), 6 yrs |
Very interesting reading. Thank you, Laurence. xxx Jade Be excellent to each other | |
| 5 Sep 06, 8:29 AM Rosalee UK, 7 yrs |
Thank you for posting this. I recognised much of myself in the section on victims and reempowerment. The whole piece made interesting reading. | |
| 11 Sep 06, 12:27 PM The_Dungeoneers UK(NR), 5 yrs |
Thank you for taking the time to read and acknowledge it Jade. Laurence "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are reaching for cigars" | |
| 11 Sep 06, 12:31 PM The_Dungeoneers UK(NR), 5 yrs |
Thank you Rosalee. I am always glad to hear that some bits of my writing strike chords with others - even more so if the chords are relevent and not damaging. Laurence "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are reaching for cigars" |
