sexabuse of males

Dr.Joe's Data Base

Sexual Abuse of Males:
Prevalence, Lasting Effects, and Resources

By Jim Hopper, M.A.
(last revised 7/24/96)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
Approximately one in six boys is sexually abused before age 16.

(Conservative estimate of incidents involving physical contact in U.S. and
Canada. See below.)

Contents

Preface

I am a Ph.D. candidate in clinical psychology. For over seven years I have
participated in therapy and research with men and women subjected to
unwanted sexual experiences and other forms of abuse in childhood.

Here are the reasons I have published this page:

1. To help those looking for Web resources on the sexual abuse of boys
and the lasting effects of childhood sexual abuse in the lives of men.

2. To inform men who were sexually abused in childhood and want to know
what professional researchers and therapists have learned, but who
might not otherwise seek information in scholarly journals.

3. To help people understand how researchers come up with statistics on
child sexual abuse, because the popular media foster confusion and
most people don't read scholarly journals where researchers publish
their work.

Here are this page's messages for men who were sexually abused in
childhood:

1. You are not alone.

2. You can educate yourself.

3. Many others struggle with their masculinity too.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Words of Caution

* Statistics on rates of child abuse and neglect are controversial.

* All statistics on the incidence and prevalence of child abuse and
neglect are disputed by some experts. (Incidence refers to the number
of new cases each year, and prevalence to the percentage of people in
some population who have had such experiences.)

* Complex and subtle scientific issues are involved, including various
criticisms of the methods used in the studies that generate these
statistics.

* The most controversial issues are how to define abuse, especially
sexual abuse, and which definitions are applied to research data.

* Strong emotions and moral commitments influence everyone's reasoning
and judgement to some extent.

* Even experts who claim to be without bias are fooling themselves or
trying to fool you.

* The presentation of statistics and research on this page is influenced
by my values, my intellectual positions, and my experiences as a
therapist and researcher over a period of more than seven years.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Prevalence: Methodology

Please read this section before reading about or reading studies of child
abuse prevalence. It will take some time, but reading this will help you to
understand this research, and to think more critically about opinions you
encounter in the popular media.

When it comes to measuring prevalence--that is, how many (other) men were
sexually abused in childhood?--the methods used by researchers are
absolutely crucial.

Five important methodological issues are covered below:

1. Population from which the research sample is drawn.

2. Whether or not "gate questions" are used.

3. Wording of questions, especially whether or not the word "abuse" is
used.

4. Number of questions.

5. Definitions of abuse used to categorize research data.

Though listed last, the definitions of "sexual abuse" applied by
researchers to study data are most important. Indeed, this is the most
complex and controversial (methodological) issue, not only among
researchers but in society as a whole. And definitions can have decisive
effects on prevalence rate findings.

Please note:

I do not attempt or claim to address the definitional issue
completely or authoritatively. I will only touch on a few
important points. While this may be frustrating for some readers,
it would be wrong to go further here, since this document is not
a journal article and has not gone through a rigorous peer review
process.

An important methodological issue has to do with the population (group of
people) from which a sample, or selected group of a population actually
researched, is drawn. Different prevalence rates have been found in samples
of: college students; clinical populations or people receiving
psychological treatment; and community populations or whoever lives in some
area (e.g., a city, state, or country). Other methods being equivalent,
compared to samples of people receiving mental health treatment, broad
community samples will yield lower prevalence rates and provide more
accurate data about the rate of child sexual abuse in our society.

Whatever the population and sample, researchers have to ask questions. They
can ask questions by interviewing research subjects, over the phone or
face-to-face. They can also ask questions by giving people questionnaires,
typically anonymous ones. Some have argued that anonymous questionnaires
are better for research on men, who may be less willing to acknowledge
unwanted sexual experiences in the presence of another person. Some who
conduct interview studies disagree, and there is not yet sufficient
evidence to make this judgement. Whichever of these methods is employed,
there are other methodological issues related to the nature of the
questioning; for example, whether or not a subject must answer "yes" to an
initial "gate question" in order to be asked more questions, the wording of
the questions, and the number of questions asked. These are important
methodological parameters that have had significant effects on the
prevalence rates researchers have found.

For some studies researchers have used gate questions, in which a subject
is only asked a series of questions about possible abuse experiences if he
answers "yes" to an initial question. Not surprisingly, these studies have
tended to find lower rates of sexual abuse in their samples. For example,
someone may answer "no" to this question: "Before the age of 16, did you
ever experience unwanted sexual contact with someone more than 10 years
older than you?" But one minute later this same person may reply "yes" to
this question: "Before age 16, did anyone more than 10 years older than you
use threats or force to get you to fondle his or her genitals?" If subjects
in a research study are not asked further questions after answering "no" to
a general question about unwanted sexual experiences in childhood, many of
those who were in fact sexually abused will be categorized as never
sexually abused.

The wording of research questions is extremely important, and can
dramatically skew prevalence rates. Imagine that an interviewer or even an
anonymous questionnaire begins by asking, "Were you ever sexually abused
before age 16?" This question requires subjects to scan their memories, and
to decide whether or not to label any memories that come up as "abuse,"
which would be to accept the identity of "sexual abuse victim." Obviously
most people, especially men, will automatically resist doing these things,
even if they have experienced unwanted and emotionally harmful sexual
experiences in childhood. So any study that uses the words "sexual abuse"
will wrongly categorize some people who have been sexually abused--but
don't label their experience that way--as not having been sexually abused.

This same problem plagues research that employs the term "unwanted" in
questionnaire and interview items. Use of this word is likely to result in
under-reporting for similar reasons, though to a lesser extent, as using
the terms "abuse" or "abusive." That is, sexually abused children not only
may not label their experiences as "abusive," but may assume responsibility
for the sexual contact and not label it as "unwanted" (sadly, perpetrators
often convince children that they wanted it). In fact, this has been found
to be particularly true of males, and especially males who later become
perpetrators (Briggs & Hawkins, 1996).

This methodological issue, the wording of questions, touches on the issue
of definition, and all the attendant controversy. Some people given
attention by the popular media have focused on the wording of questions in
ways that misrepresent research on sexual abuse and rape. Major
publications like The New York Times Magazine have given cover-story
treatment to people who have minimal understanding of social science
methodology, and apparently even less interest in the truth about rates of
abuse and assault in our country. These people have claimed that
researchers "make up" abuse that never happened by labeling subjects'
experiences as abusive even though the subjects might not.

This charge has been made against Mary Koss, an accomplished researcher who
has conducted studies on prevalence rates of rape among college women (and
has found that one in four have experienced rape or attempted rape since
age 14). In constructing her questionnaire items, Koss made a good faith
effort to use language that fit the legal definition of rape in the state
where she lived when she conducted the research. Yet she has been accused
of irresponsibly mislabeling her subjects' experiences and exaggerating
rates of rape. (Decide for yourself: read Koss, M., Gidicz, C., &
Wisniewski, N. [1987]. The scope of rape: Incidence and prevalence of
sexual aggression and victimization in a national sample of higher
education students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55,
162-170.)

One way that Koss has answered this critique is by referring to an
analogous situation. I will paraphrase her argument. Imagine yourself
questioning an alcoholic: Do you have more than six alcoholic drinks in one
sitting several times a week? Yes. Do you often wake up with such a
hangover that you can't go to work? Yes. Have friends and family members
repeatedly tried to help you stop drinking? Yes. Do you suffer from
withdrawal symptoms when you stop drinking? Yes. Are you an alcoholic? No.

The point here is that good prevalence research must use behavioral
descriptions to which definitions like "alcoholic" or "sexual abuse" may be
applied. Researchers should not rely on people defining themselves as
alcoholics or defining their sexual experiences as abusive. Such
definitions can only be uninterpretable and unreliable. Again, for many
people who have been sexually exploited and hurt by others in
childhood--especially men, who aren't supposed to be victims--it's very
painful to acknowledge what has happened. Researchers must not ignore the
effects this can have on subjects' responses to questions about childhood
experiences that may have been abusive.

So clearly researchers seeking to determine prevalence rates should not use
the word "abuse" in their interviews or questionnaire items. Instead, they
should provide clear behavioral descriptions of experiences to which
subjects can answer "yes" or "no". When an answer is yes, further
information should be elicited, including: the age of the subject and the
other person involved; the nature of the relationship (parent, sibling,
friend, priest, etc.); the level of coercion or violence; the number of
times and period of time over which the experience happened; and the
person's emotional appraisal of the event when it occurred and at the time
of the research.

Here are two examples of questionnaire items employing behavioral
descriptions and follow-up questions. Both are from research on the sexual
abuse of males conducted by David Lisak and his colleagues (Lisak & Luster,
1994; Lisak, Hopper, & Song, in press):

1. Someone fondled you (i.e., touched your genitals or other parts of
your body) in a sexual way. YES____ NO____

If yes...
Who was the person?___________________
Was the person male or female?__________
How old were you at the time?____________
About how old was the other person?______
How many times did it happen?___________
For how long did it happen (i.e., days,
weeks, months, years)?_________________
How do you now feel about the experience
(i.e., negative, neutral or positive)_________
How distressing did you find this at the time:
Not at all distressing - A . . . . . B . . . . . C . . . . . D .
. . . . E - Very distressing

How much force or persuasion did the person use?
(Please check off the appropriate categories below.)
Activity was voluntary____
They took advantage of your trust____
They used bribes or enticements____
They used sexual seduction____
They used intimidation or adult authority____
They used threats against you or someone else____
They used physical force____
Other (please explain)_______________________

2. A woman had you perform vaginal intercourse on her. YES____ NO____

If yes...
Who was the person?___________________
. . . . [see above]

With this kind of information researchers are in a better position to
evaluate whether or not an experience fits a reasonable and understandable
definition of sexual abuse.

As noted already, the definition of child sexual abuse employed in a
prevalence study may be the most important methodological parameter. I will
only make a few points here, to suggest some of the definitional issues in
prevalence research. For example, it's easy to imagine the differences in
prevalence rates the very same data will yield when categorized with each
of these definitional criteria:

* A child is a person under 14 years old, and sexual abuse must involve
physical force.

* A child is a person under age 16, and a sexual experience is abusive
if verbal threats were used and the person feels negatively about the
experience.

Besides the age of the subject at the time and the level of coercion
involved, any age difference between the subject and the other person is an
important factor. If a twenty year old woman has sexual intercourse with a
ten year old boy, this is clearly abusive even if no physical force is used
or no threats are made. Because large age differences may constitute vast
discrepancies of power, especially with younger children, reasonable
definitions of child sexual abuse must address the issue of age difference.

Of course, there are no clear-cut answers when it comes to definitions of
child sexual abuse employed in research studies--or, for that matter,
definitions used by all of us in conversation and debate. There will always
be disagreements about what constitutes "sexual abuse," even among experts
in this area. Some will ground their definitions in the exploitive
intention of the person having the sexual experience with the child, no
matter how the child or remembering adult feels about the experience.
Others will believe this dilutes the meaning of the words and trivializes
the suffering of people who, for example, have been raped by a parent
repeatedly for years. These people will advocate for very conservative
definitions.

Though they will never all agree, researchers have become increasingly
sensitive to the need for carefully considered, and clearly articulated,
definitions of child sexual abuse. Unfortunately, this has not been the
case for most commentators and critics given attention by the popular
media.

Finally, the number of questions asked of subjects in a research study can
have a large effect on prevalence rate findings. Sadly, there are many ways
to sexually abuse a child. Thus only a number of specifically worded
behavioral descriptions of possible experiences (probably at least 10 to
15), will suffice for researchers trying to determine whether a person was
sexually abused in childhood. Having subjects answer a number of questions
also increases the likelihood that some memory of an abusive experience
will be accessed. For example, a subject may read several questions before
remembering and reporting an experience of sexual abuse, even though
earlier questions described aspects of the same experience. Thus only by
using multiple questions consisting of clear behavioral descriptions can
researchers generate sufficient data to which definitions of abuse may be
applied. Obviously, studies that ask fewer questions will yield lower
prevalence rates for childhood sexual abuse.

These are some of the most important methodological issues in research
conducted on adults to estimate prevalence rates of child sexual abuse.
Keeping these issues in mind, and the built-in biases of certain methods,
will help you to understand the research below or any other studies you
read about, and to think more critically about what you encounter in the
popular media--especially from people who claim abuse rates are exaggerated
and base their claims on uninformed or misleading critiques of research
conducted by social scientists.

And there is one more very important point to keep in mind:

Any research study, even one with the most effective methodology,
is likely to underestimate the actual prevalence of sexual abuse
in the population being investigated.

Why?

There is evidence emerging that as many as one in three incidents
of child sexual abuse are not remembered by adults who
experienced them, and that the younger the child was at the time
of the abuse, and the closer the relationship to the abuser, the
more likely one is not to remember. Please see the section on
Linda Williams' research on my Web page, "Recovered Memories of
Sexual Abuse: Scientific Research & Scholarly Resources" (link at
the bottom of this page).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Prevalence: Studies

Approximately one in six boys is sexually abused before age 16.

The following review is grouped into three sections, according to the
sample studied:

1. Male college students.

2. Men from an identified community.

3. Men receiving mental health services.

As noted above, please keep in mind:

All of the rates below are likely to be underestimates of the
actual prevalence of the sexual abuse of boys in our society.

Why?

Studies of male college students have found prevalence rates from 4.8% to
28%. At the lower extreme of 4.8% is a study by Fritz, Stoll and Wagner
(1981) in which 412 students responded to a self-report questionnaire that
required them to label their experiences as "abusive"--a method guaranteed
to cause under-reporting. Risin and Koss (1987) obtained a rate of 7.3% in
a national sample of 2,972 male college students. They used eight
self-report behavioral descriptions about sexual behaviors before age 14.
As pure behavioral descriptions, none of the items included the word
"abuse." Finkelhor (1979) used a similar list of behavioral self-report
items in a study of 266 college students and found an 8.3% prevalence rate;
he included non-contact experiences and used specific age criteria (if
under 14 there had to be a 5 year age difference with the perpetrator, if
14-15, a 10 year difference).

Higher prevalence rates of 20% and 24% came from Fromuth and Burkhart's
(1987) study of students in two separate schools. They compared the effect
of different definitions of sexual abuse on prevalence rates. However,
their questionnaire utilized a gate question. The highest rates of 20% and
24% came from the most inclusive definition: the same as Finkelhor's 1979
study (including non-contact and age differential criteria), but with the
addition that sexual contact between peers involving force or threat was
categorized as abuse.

Research on college students also has been conducted by David Lisak and his
colleagues, including myself (Lisak & Luster, 1994; Lisak, Hopper, & Song,
in press). The college samples in these studies were not typical, but
consisted of men who commuted to an urban university, were an average of 25
years old, and from socioeconomic background more typical of the
surrounding community than many college student populations used in this
research. This work yielded prevalence rates of:

* Approximately 17% for child sexual abuse of males involving physical
contact.

* Over 25% when non-contact forms of abuse were included.

Non-contact experiences (e.g., a relative exposing her or his genitals to a
child) were investigated because such acts are sexually exploitive and can
have negative long-term psychological and interpersonal effects. However,
this definition also includes experiences, like a single "flashing" episode
involving a stranger, that many would argue are not abusive because the
subject suffered no significant or lasting harm, if any at all. As
clarified below, Lisak and his colleagues (1994; in press) deliberately
chose to weight their definition of sexual abuse in terms of the power
differential accompanying significant age differences and the older
person's presumed deliberate sexually use and exploitation of the younger
subject. So long as significant differences in age and power existed, Lisak
et al. defined incidents as abusive, regardless of subjects' emotional
appraisal or lasting effects (the latter were not measured).

Lisak and his colleagues (1994; in press) used an anonymous questionnaire
which has 17 behavioral descriptions of possible experiences and an 18th
item for "other" experiences subjects describe. If subjects endorsed an
item, they were then directed to provide further information about the
experience, which was used to categorize the experience as abusive or not.
If the subject was age 13 or younger when the incident occurred and the
other person was at least 5 years older, the incident was classified as
sexually abusive. If the subject was age 13 or younger when the incident
occurred and the other person was less than 5 years older, two criteria had
to be met for the incident to be classified as abusive: the subject
reported feeling "negative" about it and reported that some degree of
coercion was used by the other person. Similar principles apply to
incidents occurring when the subject was age 14-15: the incident was
classified as abusive if the other person was at least 10 years older; if
the other person was less than 10 years older, the abuse classification was
assigned only if the subject reported feeling negative about it and
reported some level of coercion by the other person.

Though the definitional criteria in Lisak and his colleagues' studies are
complex, they address two important issues.

1. The reality of the power differential which characterizes
relationships between adults and children, and between young children
and adolescents, because whether or not a sexual experience is abusive
can depend on this dynamic.

2. The fact that whether or not a sexual experience is abusive can also
depend on one's subjective appraisal and emotional response to the
incident.

Lisak and his colleagues argue that the criteria they employed to assess
sexual abuse are clear and relatively conservative in their treatment of
the issues of power and subjects' responses.

A prevalence rate similar to the Lisak et al. studies was found in another
study of college males. Collings (1995) used an anonymous questionnaire and
defined sexual abuse as "unwanted" sexual experiences taking place before
the age of 18. The term "unwanted" is likely to bias rates downward, as
noted above, but the inclusion of subjects aged 16 and 17 is likely to
increase the found prevalence rate. Not surprisingly, Collings found that
29% of the 284 male respondents had been sexually abused, with 20%
reporting non-contact abuse and 6% reporting abuse experiences involving
physical contact.

Studies with community samples have ranged in their prevalence rates from
2.8% to 16%. Again, methodology has been crucial. Kercher and McShane
(1984) mailed a single self-report question including the word "abuse" to a
random sample of Texas drivers. They found a prevalence rate of 3%. Given
the wording of their single question, this rate is not surprising.

Two random-sample telephone interview studies by Murphy (1987, 1989, cited
in Urquiza & Keating, 1990) also demonstrate the profound effects of single
questions including the word "abuse" rather than instruments with multiple
behavioral descriptions. In one of the studies (1987) the former method was
employed, and it produced a rate of 2.8% with a sample of 357; in the other
study (1989) the latter method yielded a prevalence rate of 11% with a
sample of 777.

Bagley, Wood and Young (1994) conducted a community study of men aged 18 to
27 in the Canadian city of Calgary. They first contacted subjects by phone,
then administered anonymous questionnaires in their homes via programs on
portable computers. Their questionnaire asked about "unwanted" experiences
before the age of 17. This wording is likely to result in under-reporting
because people who have been sexually abused, but especially males, are
sometimes convinced that they wanted and were responsible for the sexual
contact. Bagley and his colleagues found a prevalence rate of 15.5%, and
that 6.9% of their subjects had experienced multiple episodes of sexual
abuse. Interestingly, this rate for multiple episodes was identical to that
found for women in a previous study that employed the same methodology,
despite the fact that the prevalence rate for any unwanted sexual
experiences in that study was 32%, or double that found for males (Bagley,
1991).

The highest community-sample prevalence rate of 16% was found in a random
telephone survey of 2,626 men, known as the "L.A. Times survey" (Finkelhor,
1990). However, these findings are very difficult to interpret, since the
wording of the questions would be expected to produce contradictory
effects: each question used the word "abuse," but ended with the phrase,
"or anything like that?"

In contrast to studies with women, published studies using face-to-face
interviews with men have yielded very low prevalence rates, perhaps due to
subjects' adherence to stereotypes about males not being victims (Urquiza &
Keating, 1990). Finkelhor's (1984) face-to-face interview with Boston-area
fathers yielded a rate of 6%. Siegel and colleagues (1987), using
gate-question interviews with 1,480 Los Angeles-area men, found a
prevalence rate of 3.8%. Baker and Duncan (1985) used a single question
that described various sexual acts and found the highest face-to-face
prevalence rate of 8% in their random sample of 970 men in Great Britain.

Finally, studies with clinical samples have obtained prevalence rates from
3% to 23%. The lowest rate was reported from a study that used
psychological records of 954 male and female patients of a large regional
medical center (Belkin, Greene, Rodrique, & Boggs, 1994). In a chart review
of emergency room records of a Buffalo, New York hospital, Ellerstein and
Canavan (1980) found an 11% prevalence rate. DeJong and colleagues (DeJong,
Emmett, & Hervada, 1982) reviewed several clinical studies and found rates
from 11% to 17%, and in their own hospital population found a rate of just
under 14% (1982). Metcalfe and his associates (1990) found a prevalence of
23% in their survey of 100 male psychiatric inpatients.

However, it is important to note here that assessment for sexual abuse
histories in hospitals has traditionally been extremely poor, and remains
so in many settings. Thus these rates, based on reviews of records, are
likely to be vast underestimates. For example, Briere and Zaidi (1989)
reviewed intake reports on women presenting to an urban psychiatric
emergency room. They randomly reviewed 50 charts before and 50 after the
intake staff were instructed to question clients about previous sexual
victimization. The first 50 charts had recorded rates of 6%, and the second
set, 70%.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Lasting Effects

This section reviews research on long-term effects of childhood sexual
abuse in men's lives. Several articles and books are listed along with the
symptoms and other effects. The complete citations for these articles and
books, which you can get from libraries and bookstores, are on the next
section of this page.

Findings on the long-term effects of child sexual abuse in males have been
more consistent than those on prevalence. Methodologies for determining
symptomatic outcomes are relatively straightforward, and many studies have
utilized standardized measures that are widely accepted in the field.

First, I want to recommend a paper by David Lisak, Ph.D. This paper
contains many powerful quotations from interviews with male survivors of
sexual abuse. Lisak groups the quotations into themes, and discusses them
with remarkable insight and compassion. The themes are:

* Anger
* Fear
* Homosexuality Issues
* Helplessness
* Isolation and Alienation
* Legitimacy
* Loss
* Masculinity Issues
* Negative Childhood Peer Relations
* Negative Schemas about People
* Negative Schemas about the Self
* Problems with Sexuality
* Self Blame/Guilt
* Shame/Humiliation

One man emailed me to share this experience: "reading 'The psychological
impact of sexual abuse: Content analysis of interviews with male survivors'
was the first time I realized that other people have the same issues I
have. I sat in the library and cried when I read that article. Not the
usual reaction to scholarly research, but I'm sure Prof. Lisak wouldn't
mind" (used with permission).

Lisak, D. (1994). The psychological impact of sexual abuse:
Content analysis of interviews with male survivors. Journal of
Traumatic Stress, 7, 525-548.

Using standardized measures of symptoms, researchers have found that men
who were sexually abused in childhood, whether or not they seek out mental
health services, may suffer from:

* Anxiety
* Depression
* Dissociation
* Hostility and anger
* Impaired relationships
* Low self-esteem
* Sexual dysfunction
* Sleep disturbance
* Suicidal ideas and behavior

The following researchers have used standardized measures and found
different combinations of the above symptoms:

* Bagley, Wood, & Young, 1994
* Briere, Evans, Runtz, & Wall, 1988
* Collings, 1995
* Fromuth & Burkhart, 1989
* Hunter, 1991
* Olson, 1990
* Peters & Range, 1995

Therapists working with men who were sexually abused in childhood have
conducted clinical case studies and consistently reported findings on
long-term problems including:

* Guilt and self-blame

Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Hunter, 1990.

* Low self-esteem and negative self-image

Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989.

* Problems with intimacy

Bruckner & Johnson, 1987; Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Krug,
1989; Hunter, 1990.

* Sexual problems, compulsions, or dysfunctions

Bruckner & Johnson, 1987; Johnson & Shrier, 1987; Dimock,
1988; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Hunter, 1990.

* Substance abuse and depression

Krug, 1989.

* Symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

Myers, 1989.

Some of the long-term effects of sexual abuse are related to the
development of gender identity. A number of clinicians' case studies
indicate that male survivors of childhood sexual abuse may experience:

* Attempts to "prove" their masculinity by having multiple female sexual
partners, sexually victimizing others, and/or engaging in dangerous or
violent behaviors

Bruckner & Johnson, 1987; Lew 1988.

* Confusion over their gender and sexual identities

Nasjleti, 1980; Bruckner & Johnson, 1987; Johnson & Shrier,
1987; Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Gilgun & Reiser,
1990.

* Sense of being inadequate as men

Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Pierce & Pierce, 1985.

* Sense of lost power, control, and confidence in their manhood

Myers, 1989.

Finally, some clinicians have noted that sexually abused males often
experience confusion and distress about their sexuality:

* Confusion about their own sexual orientation

Nasjleti, 1980; Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Gilgun
& Reiser, 1990.

* Fear that the sexual abuse has caused or will cause them to become
homosexual

Nasjleti, 1980; Finkelhor, 1984; Dimock, 1988; Gilgun &
Reiser, 1990; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989.

* Homophobia, an irrational fear or intolerance of homosexuality

Gilgun & Reiser, 1990; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Articles and Books

Abraham, Scott. Healing from Childhood Sexual Abuse: Book Reviews.

Bagley, C. (1991). The prevalence and mental health sequels of child sexual
abuse in a community survey of women aged 18 to 27. Canadian Journal of
Community Mental Health, 10, 103-116.

Bagley, C., Wood, M., & Young, L. (1994). Victim to abuser: Mental health
and behavioral sequels of child sexual abuse in a community survey of young
adult males. Child Abuse and Neglect, 18, 683-697.

Baker, A. W. & Duncan, S. P. (1985). Child sexual abuse: A study of
prevalence in Great Britain. Child Abuse and Neglect, 9, 457-467.

Belkin, D. S., Greene, A. F., Rodrique, J. R., & Boggs, S. R. (1994).
Psychopathology and history of sexual abuse. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 9, 535-547.

Black, C. A. & DeBlassie, R. R. (1993). Sexual abuse in male children and
adolescents: Indicators, effects, and treatments. Adolescence, 28, 123-133.

Blanchard, G. (1986). Male victims of child sexual abuse: A portent of
things to come. Journal of Independent Social Work, 1, 19-27.

Bolton, F. G. (1989). Males at risk: The other side of sexual abuse.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Briere, J., & Zaidi, L. J. (1988). Sexual abuse histories and sequelae in
female psychiatric emergency Room patients. The American Journal of
Psychiatry, 146, 1602-1606.

Brannon, J. M., Larson, B., & Doggett, M. (1989). The extent and origins of
sexual molestation and abuse among incarcerated adolescent males.
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 33,
161-172.

Briere, J., Evans, D., Runtz, M., & Wall, T. (1988). Symptomatology in men
who were molested as children: A comparison study. American Journal of
Ortho-psychiatry, 58, 457-461.

Briggs, F. & Hawkins, R. M. F. (1996). A comparison of the childhood
experiences of convicted male child molesters and men who were sexually
abused in childhood and claimed to be nonoffenders. Child Abuse and
Neglect, 20, 221-233.

Bruckner, D. F. & Johnson, P. E. (1987). Treatment for adult male victims
of childhood sexual abuse. Social Casework, 68, 81-87.

Collings, S. J. (1995). The long-term effects of contact and noncontact
forms of child sexual abuse in a sample of university men. Child Abuse and
Neglect, 19, 1-6.

DeJong, A. R., Emmett, G. A., & Hervada, A. A. (1982). Epidemiologic
factors in sexual abuse of boys. American Journal of the Diseases of
Children, 136, 990-993.

Dimock, P. T. (1988). Adult males sexually abused as children:
Characteristics and implications for treatment. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 3, 203-216.

Ellerstein, N. S., & Canavan, J. W. (1980). Sexual abuse of boys. American
Journal of Diseases of Children, 134, 255-257.

Estrada, H. (1994). Recovery for male victims of child sexual abuse. Santa
Fe: Red Rabbit Press.

Finkelhor, D. (1979). Sexually victimized children. New York: Free Press.

Finkelhor, D. (1984). Child sexual abuse: New theory and research. New
York: Free Press.

Finkelhor, D., Hotaling, G., Lewis, I. A., Smith, C. (1990). Sexual abuse
in a national survey of adult men and women: Prevalence, characteristics,
and risk factors. Child Abuse and Neglect, 14, 19-28.

Freeman-Longo, R. E. (1986). The impact of sexual victimization on males.
Child Abuse and Neglect, 10, 411-414.

Friedrich, W. N., Berliner, L., Urquiza, A. J., & Beilke, R. L. (1988).
Brief diagnostic group treatment of sexually abused boys. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 3, 331-343.

Fritz, G. S., Stoll, K., & Wagner, N. A. (1981). A comparison of males and
females who were sexually abused as children. Journal of Sex and Marital
Therapy, 7, 4-59.

Fromuth, M. E. & Burkhart, B. R. (1989). Long-term psychological correlates
of childhood sexual abuse in two samples of college men. Child Abuse and
Neglect, 13, 533-542.

Fromuth, M. E. & Burkhart, B. R. (1987). Childhood sexual victimization
among college men: Definitional and methodological issues. Victims and
Violence, 2, 241-253.

Gilgun, J. & Reiser, E. (1990). The development of sexual identity among
men sexually abused as children. Families in Society, 71, 515-521.

Hepburn, J. M. (1994). The implications of contemporary feminist theories
of development for the treatment of male victims of sexual abuse. Journal
of Child Sexual Abuse, 3, 1-18.

Hillary, B. E. & Schare, M. L. (1993). Sexually and physically abused
adolescents: An empirical search for PTSD. Journal of Clinical Psychology,
49, 161-165.

Hunter, J. A. (1991). A comparison of the psychosocial adjustment of adult
males and females sexually molested as children. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 6, 205-217.

Hunter, M. (1990). The sexually abused male: Prevalence, impact and
treatment. Vol. 1. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Johnson, R. L. & Shrier, D. (1987). Past sexual victimization by females of
males in an adolescent medicine clinic population. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 144, 650-652.

Kendall-Tackett, K. A. & Simon, A. F. (1992). A comparison of the abuse
experiences of male and female adults molested as children. Journal of
Family Violence, 7, 57-62.

Krug, R. S. (1989). Adult male reports of childhood sexual abuse by
mothers: Case descriptions, motivations and long-term consequences. Child
Abuse and Neglect, 13, 111-119.

Levesque, R. J. R. (1994). Sex differences in the experience of child
sexual victimization. Journal of Family Violence, 9, 357-369.

Lew, M. (1988). Victims no longer. New York: Nevraumont.

Lisak, D. (1994). The psychological impact of sexual abuse: Content
analysis of interviews with male survivors. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 7,
525-548.

Lisak, D., Hopper, J., & Song, P. (in press). The relationship between
childhood abuse, gender adjustment and perpetration in men. Journal of
Traumatic Stress.

Lisak, D. & Luster, L. (1994). Educational, occupational, and relationship
histories of men who were sexually and/or physically abused as children.
Journal of Traumatic Stress, 7, 507-523.

Metcalfe, M., Oppenheimer, R., Dignon, A., & Palmer, R.L. (1990). Childhood
sexual experiences reported by male psychiatric patients. Psychological
Medicine, 20, 925-929.

Mezey, G. C., & King, M. B. (Eds.) (1992). Male victims of sexual assault.
New York: Oxford University Press.

Myers, M. F. (1989). Men sexually assaulted as adults and sexually abused
as boys. 13th Annual Canadian Sex Research Forum Conference (1986,
Vancouver, Canada). Archives of Sexual Behavior, 18, 203-215.

Nasjleti, M. (1980). Suffering in silence: The male incest victim. Child
Welfare, 59, 269-275.

Olson, P. E. (1990). The sexual abuse of boys: A study of the long-term
psychological effects. In M. Hunter (Ed.), The sexually abused male: Vol.
1. Prevalence, impact and treatment (pp.137-152). Lexington, MA: Lexington
Books.

Peters, D. K. & Range, L. M. (1995). Childhood sexual abuse and current
suicidality in college women and men. Child Abuse and Neglect, 19, 335-341.

Pierce, R. & Pierce, L. H. (1985). The sexually abused child: A comparison
of male and female victims. Special Issue: C. Henry Kempe memorial research
issue. Child Abuse and Neglect, 9, 191-199.

Risin, L. I. & Koss, M. P. (1987). The sexual abuse of boys: Prevalence and
descriptive characteristics of childhood victimizations. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 2, 309-323.

Schacht, A. J., Kerlinsky, D., & Carlson, C. (1990). Group therapy with
sexually abused boys: Leadership, projective identification, and
countertransference issues. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy,
40, 401-417.

Siegel, J. M., Sorenson, S. B., Golding, J. M., Burman, M. A, & Stein, J.
A. (1987). The prevalence of childhood sexual assault: The Los Angeles
epidemiology catchment area project. American Journal of Epidemiology, 126,
1141-1153.

Summit, R. C. (1983). The child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome. Child
Abuse and Neglect, 7, 133-146.

Urquiza, A. & Capra, M. (1990). The impact of sexual abuse: Initial and
long-term effects. In M. Hunter (Ed.) The sexually abused male: Prevalence,
impact, and treatment. Vol. 1. Lexinton, MA: Lexington Books.

Urquiza, A. & Keating, L. M. (1990). The prevalence of sexual victimization
of males. In M. Hunter (Ed.), The sexually abused male: Prevalence, impact,
and treatment. Vol. 1. Lexinton, MA: Lexington Books.

Violato, C. & Genuis, M. (1993). Problems in research in male child sexual
abuse: A review. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 2, 33-54.

Watkins, B., & Bentovim, A. (1992). The sexual abuse of male children and
adolescents: A review of current research. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 33, 197-248.

Young, R. E. (1994). Comparison of the effects of sexual abuse on male and
female latency-aged children. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9,
291-306.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Female Perpetrators

I added this section because I received several requests for information
about the sexual abuse of males by females.

This is another controversial and complex topic that requires thoughtful
treatment. In the future I will add a section on research addressing
various characteristics of male sexual victimization, including findings on
perpetration by males and females.

For now, I can provide a list of books and papers. I know of one excellent
book that is accessible to all readers (the second listed below), two
others written for professionals, and a number of papers.

The books:

Allen, Craig. (1991). Women and men who sexually abuse children:
A comparative analysis. Brandon, VT: Safer Society Press.

Elliott, Michele (Ed.). (1993). Female sexual abuse of children.
New York: Guilford Press.
Mike Lew, author of Victims No Longer, an excellent book for
male survivors of sexual abuse, says of this book: "Michele
Elliot and her colleages guide us through denial, stereotypes,
and conventional misinformation to an unflinching examination of
painful realities. Theoretical, research, and clinical chapters
help to forge a new understanding of the issues and set
directions for further exploration. Many survivors, both male and
female, will finally have their experiences validated. The
powerfully moving survivors' stories will be vital tools for
survivors in their healing and will aid therapists in
understanding the complexities of recovery from sexual abuse by
females" (from the cover).

Mathews, R., Mathews, J. K., & Speltz, K. (1989). Female sexual
offenders: An exploratory study. Brandon, VT: Safer Society
Press.

The papers:

Allen, C. M., & Pothast, H. L. (1994). Distinguishing
characteristics of male and female child sex abusers. Journal of
Offender Rehabilitation, 21, 73-88.

Bachmann, K. M., Moggi, F., Stirnemann-Lewis, F. (1994)
Mother-son incest and its long-term consequences: A neglected
phenomenon in psychiatric practice. Journal of Nervous and Mental
Disease, 182, 723-725.

Banning, A. (1989). Mother-son incest: Confronting a prejudice.
Child Abuse & Neglect, 13, 563-570.

Baron, R. S., Burgess, M. L., & Kao, C. F. (1991). Detecting and
labeling prejudice: Do female perpetrators go undetected?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 115-123.

Condy, S. R., Templer, D. I., Brown, R., & Veaco, L. (1987).
Parameters of sexual contact of boys with women. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 16, 379-394.

Faller, K. C. (1987). Women who sexually abuse children. Violence
and Victims, 2, 263-276.

Fehrenbach, P. A., & Monastersky, C. (1988). Characteristics of
female adolescent sexual offenders. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 58, 148-151.

Finkelhor, D., & Russell, D. (1984). Women as perpetrators. In D.
Finkelhor (Ed.), Child sexual abuse: New theory and research
(pp.171-187). New York: Free Press.

Harper, J. F. (1993). Prepuberal male victims of incest: A
clinical study. Child Abuse and Neglect, 17, 419-421.

Johnson, R. L., & Shrier, D. (1987). Past sexual victimization by
females of male patients in an adolescent medicine clinic
population. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 650-652.

Johnson, T. C. (1989). Female child perpetrators: Children who
molest other children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 13, 571-585.

Krug, R. S. (1989). Adult male reports of childhood sexual abuse
by mothers: Case descriptions, motivations and long-term
consequences. Child Abuse and Neglect, 13, 111-119.

Marvesti, J. (1986). Incestuous mothers: American Journal of
Forensic Psychiatry, 7, 63-69.

McCarthy, L. M. (1986). Mother-child incest: Characteristics of
the offender. Child Welfare, LXI, 447-459.

O'Conner, A. (1987). Female sex offenders. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 150, 615-620.

Sarrel, P. M., & Masters, W. H. (1982). Sexual molestation of men
by women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 11, 117-131.

Wahl, C.W. (1960). The psychodynamics of consummated maternal
incest. Archives of General Psychiatry, 3, 96/188-101/193.

Wakefield, H., Rogers, M., and Underwager, R. (1990). Female
sexual abusers: A theory of loss. Issues In Child Abuse
Accusations, 2, 181-195.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Additional Resources

This section includes links to other sites on the Web with resources for
male survivors of sexual abuse.

For more links to child abuse resources, go from the bottom of this page to
"Child Abuse: Statistics, Research, and Resources." There are great
resources there that are not here.

Please send any link suggestions by using the comments box in the Feedback
section below.

M.A.L.E. - Men Assisting Leading & Educating
M.A.L.E. is an organization devoted to helping sexually abused boys
and men. This important new and growing Web site has several sections of
resources, including articles written by professionals and survivors.

Healing from Childhood Sexual Abuse: Book Reviews
Scott Abraham reviews eight books for men who were sexually abused in
childhood. Good review, very helpful. If you're considering buying a book,
read this first.

Male Rape
This page has links to a variety of useful resources on the rape of
adult males.

Male Sexual Abuse Recovery
Max Godfrey's excellent resource, with pages titled: Incidence and
prevalence, The child, The adult, Consequences, Coming to terms, and
Politics.

No More Victims (NMV)
"NMV is a moderated, anonymous, open membership mailing list devoted
to the discussion of abuse in general, and child sexual abuse and
pedophilia specifically.... Most of the topics on the list are from the
viewpoints of recovering offenders and those who feel that they may
offend."

Stop Prisoner Rape
This site has many informative and educational documents, including
Rape of Males, an illuminating paper written by SPR's founder, Stephen
Donaldson.

Vancouver Society for Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse
This site contains information about the organization, including its
mission, goals, and programs.

The Survivor's Page
"This page will hopefully be a comfort and an outlet for many
survivors. The letters, writings, and poetry listed below are by
survivors.... If you would like to post your writings on this page, mail
them to us, and we will add them to the page." The writings include some
moving poems written by male survivors of sexual abuse.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Giving and Receiving Guidance and Hope

From this section you can go to a page where men share their own brief
stories of:

1. Finding therapists, groups, and organizations that are helping or have
helped them recover from sexual abuse.

2. How these healing relationships are helping or have helped them
recover and transform their lives.

3. If applicable, how struggles with their masculinity have been related
to the healing process.

The stories are typically a few paragraphs, and are not focused on abuse
experiences (beyond basic information, including who was involved and ages
when it happened).

For men considering seeking help or beginning to do such work, these
stories can be sources of guidance and hope.

For men further along in recovery, this is an opportunity to offer guidance
and hope to many men around the world.

Go to Sexually Abused Males: Giving and Receiving Guidance and Hope

Credited authorship is anonymous (typically a first name or initials, and
one's city and country, if requested).

Contributions may be made by sending me:

Non-anonymous email
This allows negotiation over any editorial changes I might
suggest prior to publishing.

Anonymous email
Unless given permission to edit as I see fit, I can only
publish anonymously sent stories that I believe need no editing.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------