While pedophilic priests get the publicity, we know that parents, grandparents, and older siblings wreak havoc on young children's developing sexuality in greater numbers than strangers do. What have we done, or not done, to produce people who have so little self control, empathy and compassion to others that they will risk damaging a child and also risk their own liberty, shame and debasement in order to slake their lust.

 

Is it, that as a culture we have devised a system of upbringing and education that denies people the opportunity and skills to attain a satisfactory and fulfilling sex life? That we do not teach them to put another's basic needs before their selfish wants, and encourage people to separate sexual gratification from love, closeness and emotional fulfillment. If so, why? These questions have occupied a major portion of my life for the last forty years.

 

I am not an expert but someone who is curious as to why we seem to be able to create so much pain in the sexual aspects of our lives, instead of fulfilling pleasure. I hope that this article will stimulate, provoke and garner forth solutions from experts and lay persons alike, so that we can mitigate and eventually cure this disease, if disease it is.

 

I contend that perhaps there is no mystery to this whole tragic scenario. That this particular social political and economic structure that we have, requires an emphasis on sexual frustration and violence to stimulate its citizens to produce and consume in excess of their need. It is only in sharing and caring cultures such as the early Polynesians, that guilt and shame free sexuality was taught and accepted as a birthright. Most indigenous peoples were considered to be lazy and indolent, whose habits of casual nudity and sensual life styles made it difficult for colonialists to motivate them to produce and consume in excess of their need.

 

It is interesting to note that even now there is virtually no production of pornography in the Polynesian culture. Neither is child sex abuse or incest a problem compared to our culture.Pedophilia may be a delayed deficit disorder--a normal biological drive that has been denied for political, economic and social reason. If the sexual learning continuum between peers, (not adult/child) is denied in childhood, a deficit is created, and if the potential pedophile has not been taught self control and empathy for young children may, when he is in a position of power, molest and sexually abuse victims. I suspect that this is incurable in most cases.

 

There is another form of pedophilia which comes from identifying with someone who abused them while they were a child. This behavior is then mimicked when they have younger children in their power. This form of pedophilia can sometimes be successfully treated.

 

It was always a puzzle to me as a young child, (I was born in 1930 in Britain) that the only images that I could see were violent ones. No soft, loving, romantic visions of sexual intimacy that would also instruct and inform as well as entertain were available throughout my formative years. Only a never ending panorama of torture, rape, death and hostile behavior between the sexes.

 

My peers and I were not taught sexual anatomy or physiology let alone sexual competency; much less how to be a tender, accomplished lover or to have a capacity for intimacy. Or how to parent for that matter. Only how to ravage, kill, torture, rape and despise the opposite sex and to compete with our own. Why was this, I often wondered as I struggled through the Pubic Wars. Why did my parents, teachers and the society which I lived in, look upon me with such scorn and disgust if I expressed an interest in becoming a competent lover? There didn't seem to be any shame or guilt involved in reading books or watching movies that described all the various methods of hurting and killing people.

 

It was not until the mid-sixties when I went to live Sweden and Denmark did some glimmering of understanding come, as to why my culture seemed to be geared towards portraying sexual frustration and violence instead of pleasure and health.

 

Scandinavia at that time had very low levels of violent crime compared to Britain. The figures for rape, sexual assault, child sex abuse and unwanted teenage pregnancies were miniscule compared to most other countries. The contrast between the culture of Britain and Scandinavia in how the sexes interacted was most startling. Nordic women would meet one's eye in the street and would return a smile, seemingly unafraid of predators even late at night in some deserted public places.

 

Casual nudity in the public parks, beaches and in the home was common place. Pornography, which was openly displayed for sale at newspaper and cigarette kiosks, could be seen by children passing by or purchasing candy, and appeared to have little interest to locals. Such lurid displays of pornography were of considerable interest and some concern to tourists mainly from Britain who were shocked and troubled that their children may be corrupted by such sights.

 

Movies that were shown in theaters and rated for general family viewing, would, if in context of the story line, include nudity and quite explicit scenes of sexuality. Such scenes would only be shown in Britain in private clubs and never to minors.

 

A sex education movie, with all the production values of a Hollywood feature movie made by the Kraunhausins, the leading sociologists of their day, was rated for family viewing even though the actors and actresses with a wide range of ages were not simulating the sexual acts. Some of the minors taking part appeared to me to be younger than fourteen, which was the minimum age of sexual consent at that time in may European countries. At that time the filming of minors having sex with each other was not illegal.

 

When I questioned social workers, psychologists and the police they explained that many years of research  and cross cultural studies had not produced any evidence that watching images led to negative changes in behavior. Obviously if research had shown it did, many other countries such as Britain and America would have banned violent movies being shown to the public.

 

However, having observed the increasing levels of violence in Britain and America, the Nordic group of countries had decided, to be on the safe side, that they would limit public exposure to violent images. As they could not see any harm in watching images of nudity and explicit sexuality that were in context with the story line, such images were permitted to be shown to all age groups.

 

This I found to be in complete contrast to the view held in Britain and quite shocking at first. However, the more that I studied their culture and observed the very low levels of violence, the friendliness, warmth and openness that existed between children and adults, even to strangers, the more curious I became and to question the validity of my particular cultures attitude to images of violence and sexuality.

 

The more I delved into their educational, nurturing, judicial, and social system, the more I became convinced of the validity of their beliefs and practices. Many of the beliefs held by us British about Nordic peoples were untrue. They were not at all cold and reserved; far from it. I found them to be warm, hospitable, patient with my questions and remarkably frank about their sexual beliefs. mores and practices.

 

I found that sex education in the schools was obligatory and of greater depth and explicitness than in Britain. Sexual desire in women, a subject almost totally taboo in Britain at that time, (one definitely had the impression that as far as sex educators were concerned, women didn't have sexual desire of their own, only men possessed this!) was regarded as quite natural and on par with the male. This would have been regarded as heresy in Britain. Woman were mainly interested in romance and love, cuddling was OK, but sexual desire and fulfillment was way down the list of desirable qualities that most women sought in Britain.

 

In Scandinavia, the dangers of incest and inappropriate touching, and sexual exchanges between disparate ages also was explored in depth. It was felt by child educators that shame and guilt free explicit discussions and educational movies led to a greater awareness by children of these dangers and a willingness to tell teachers, parents and friends about molestation and incest. They felt that this was why they did not suffer from high levels of serial sex offenders. They were reported early enough to prevent further damage and tragedy to other children.

 

Sexual exploration by children of equal age was considered to be benign, and quite a normal process, as long as the power differential was not unbalanced. Bullying and fighting were of much more concern to the parents I interviewed. Corporal punishment was illegal in the home and at schools.

 

There was a refreshing absence of the sexual double standard. Women were considered to have as strong a sexual desire and as much right to pursue that as men. Among the Swedes and Danes of both sexes that I interviewed, it was considered ludicrous and infantile for women to be regarded with scorn and distaste for expressing and acting on their sexual desires. Men did, so why shouldn't women, was the consensus.

 

What I found fascinating, was how, not only had sexual desire been taught, but also political, economic and social equality too. In these countries, women occupied nearly 50% of the Parliamentary and government posts. Forty-six percent of the CEO's of major corporations were women. Child care was heavily subsidized, and of excellent quality with high wages for staff. Maternity leave was fully paid for 1 1/2 years with a return to one's job guaranteed. Fathers could take a year's paternity leave at 80% of salary with a job guarantee.

 

I never did discover why Nordic men were willing to relinquish 50% of their political, social, and economic power. Or women their sexual power. The dating scene was strikingly different from Britain. Men appeared to be "cool" and didn't look at and pursue women as avidly as British men did. Women were much more responsive to any slight interest displayed , and were infinitely more aggressive about initiating conversation and sexual invitations.

 

From recent conversations with friends from these countries, these circumstances have changed. Women are finding it much more difficult to obtain the most prestigious governing and professional positions, and are losing parity in wages with men. Norway may be an exception. It was recently found to be the most desirable place in the world to live. The Norwegians have recently extended their paid maternity leave to 3 1/2 years. Less stress, less violence?

 

The penal system was very benign compared to Britain. Incarceration for non-violent crimes was discouraged. Restoration of property ands money to victims by garnishing of wages and court ordered work camps was usual. Community work and an emphasis on contributing to society was used in rehabilitation, as was further education and trade apprenticeships.

 

A high standard of living was apparent. Homelessness, extremes of poverty, lack of universal health care, dirty streets and rampant crime were all absent. Children were polite, spoke excellent English, were kind to strangers and particularly attentive to the elderly. Even teenagers while displaying the creative decorations  and clothing common to their age group seemed benign and helpful. Never once did I feel threatened or loath to approach a stranger for directions late at night. The Nordic countries did not have a perfect society of course. Alcoholism and suicide rates were reputedly high, but I put much of that down to the several long dark months of the winter which would daunt the most cheerful of souls.

 

What fueled this benign and desirable culture? The generous social services, subsidized housing, inexpensive transportation costs, universal health care were funded by taxing upper incomes. If I remember rightly, income over $150,000 a year was taxed at the rate of 60 to 80% depending on a number of factors. Tax rates which of course would not be tolerated in Britain or America.

 

Many wealthy Swedish and Danish business and professional men, did complain about the high taxation rates. You could become a millionaire but not a billionaire they complained. Most of them, however, on reflection would not trade that for the problems that they could see in the cities they visited on vacation or on business trips.

 

One of the reasons I went to Scandinavia was because I had become increasingly aware that in my practice, the majority of my female patients and the minority of my male patients had traced the origin of their chronic pain to incidents of child sex abuse. I specialized in treating certain types of chronic pain that were resistant to the types of treatment then available. This was in the late 50's and early 60's when child sex abuse was not considered to be all that common.

 

At that time sex therapy was not widely available in Britain and I was having difficulty in finding suitably qualified therapists for my patients. As I had read of the interesting sex research and methods of treating these symptoms in Scandinavia, I decided to go and study there.

 

In addition, at that time, there was a fascinating program on the BBC on pornography and censorship. On the program, the censors from Britain, Sweden and Denmark were in the studio. The BBC first showed a typical British movie, full of gore and violence, although excellently made, which the British censor had passed as suitable for general viewing. Both the Swedish and Danish censors agreed that this movie would be unacceptable to show on public television in their respective countries.

 

Then a Danish movie was shown, that was about a married couple going through the normal ups and downs of married life. The opening shot showed an idyllic scene of a river as the early morning mist was rising. As the camera tracked down the river, it showed a boat moored to the bank and the couple who had been sleeping on the deck. As they awoke, they began to affectionately caress each other. As their exertions began to slide the covers off their naked bodies the scene was abruptly cut. This was too racy for the sensitive British.

 

The Swedish censor turned to the British censor and told him that he had carefully chosen that movie as being an interesting , well scripted story about fidelity and the joys of a stable, strong marriage that was founded on mutual interests as well as good sex and intimacy. The nudity and sex was in harmony with the story line and would be perfectly suitable for family viewing in his country. Why could British audiences see such violent movies  which would be banned in Scandinavia and not such a beautiful and loving movie?

 

There was a long pause and then the British censor said, "I don't know!" That statement had me dumbfounded. The other censors and the BBC interviewer just sat and looked at him for a long moment. Here was an erudite, well-educated man from one of our finest universities who had no philosophical basis for his profession! Amazing. Later on, the British censor interjected into the conversation that he knew why Britain censored sex and nudity in the public media. "It's illegal to show it!" he declared then looked somewhat confused as he realized what he had said.

 

Meeting with a Tahitian family living in Britain gave me further insights into the differences in how sexuality is viewed and experienced in different cultures. I was interested to hear that most Pacific Island cultures did not produce pornography and child sex abuse was rare. Shortly after, I went to Hawaii to study the sexual and nurturing patterns of the many Pacific Island cultures. The splendid resources of the University of Hawaii and its very extensive library that covers early Pacific Island cultures and the cross cultural studies of Dr James Prescott led me to the following conclusions.

 

It is basically economics which have determined how a particular culture views sexuality - whether or not children will be raised in a guilt and shame free manner with the minimum of exploitation and abuse or whether their culture will condemn a high proportion of them to abuse and sexual dysfunction  and create a plague of predators.

 

Most Pacific Island cultures are sharing and caring with basic necessities being easily obtained because of the climate. When you have tropical heat coupled with amble rainfall you can achieve four harvests a year. If game and fish is plentiful and renewable building materials such as wood, bamboo and banana leaves are there for the taking, land is free and building permits and licenses are non-existent, basic survival needs are easily met. Time and attention then can be given to family, love and pleasure. It was not for nothing that early explorers though they had discovered Paradise when they encountered Polynesian peoples who were renowned for their hospitable, loving and sensual ways.

 

Children were encouraged to become caring, empathetic and competent lovers by observing adolescents and adults in sex play and not being prohibited from experimentation in a positive, guilt-free atmosphere. Something which of course is impossible to permit in our present day cultures because of the high proportion of dangerous and exploitive predators our cultures produce.

 

Exploitive pornography and child sex abuse was mostly unknown in Pacific Island cultures perhaps because from an early age the unclothed human form and kind, mutually respectful love making could be observed. Perhaps some sexual predators are created by being deprived of these experiences during the sexual learning continuum. When they are older and have access to younger children, devoid of empathy and compassion for their helpless victims, they attempt to recreate that deficit with disastrous results. More research, particularly with regard to cross cultural studies is badly needed.

 

At the other extreme, you have a culture which lives in an arid environment, where there is sparse vegetation and little rainfall, where the desert will only support meager herds of sheep and goats. Wealth from trading, oil and other mineral resources is hoarded by an elite minority. You then have the circumstances of extreme poverty, a sexually frustrated and violent male population who struggle to survive with little time or incentive for intimacy and sexual pleasure.

 

Historically most most of these desert states have had their lands constantly invaded over the generations by outsiders seeking domination over their lands access to their mineral wealth. Having to constantly to battle these invaders leaves little time for growing crops and educating their young except to become warriors.

 

Women's sexual pleasure is destroyed and their lives are put at risk by the widespread use of genital mutilation. Men's sexual fulfillment is also limited by the agony and distress experienced by their wives when having sex. In some tribes after genital mutilation has been carried out the vaginal opening is stitched shut with only a small opening left for the passage of urine and menstrual blood. Each act of sexual intercourse and birth requires the removal of the stitches and their replacement, usually in very un-hygienic and agonizing circumstances. Such barbarity is difficult to comprehend. The virtual absence of alternate outlets for sexual and romantic release compounds the problem. Adultery and out of marriage fornication is met with severe flogging and stoning to death. Homosexuals, in some Arab states, are be headed when discovered.

 

Their misery and rage, passed on to generation after generation, (can you imagine being born and raised in such an atmosphere of pain and frustration?) is compounded by the knowledge that countless numbers of  their countries elite, princes and sheiks  who do not contribute to their welfare, jet over to the west and indulge in the forbidden fruit of alcohol, drugs and illicit sex. Little wonder that they seek solace in religion, fanaticism and violence directed at what they have been taught are the exploiters and ravagers of their lands and culture.

 

Countries such as ours cannot permit the positive sexual learning and gratification that most tropical countries permit. In all my years in Hawaii, I rarely met a motivated Pacific Island entrepreneur who would put ambition before sensual and loving gratification, and caring for his family and friends. We need highly productive and consuming citizens to maintain our economy and acquire great wealth. Hence our tendency to encourage images of violence and not sensuality, unless they are used to sell goods and motivate high achieving executives and workers.

 

It is interesting to note, that countries that are progressively lenient about consumption of soft drugs and have lower ages of sexual consent, are those countries which tax upper incomes at high rates. As the wealthy and powerful in those countries have to pay taxes unlike the super rich in capitalistic cultures, perhaps they do not appreciate having to support high rates of incarceration for non violent crimes. 

 

Rayner Garner

 

Much of my ideas and conclusions were gleaned from the following writers to whom I owe a great debt of gratitude.

 

(1) Liedloff, Jean. The Continuum Concept
(2) Miller, Alice. For Your Own Good. 1983
(3) Prescott, J.W. Handbook of Human Sexuality, Wolman, B. and Money, John. 1983
(4) Ford, C. and Beach, A.. Patterns of Sexual Behavior
(5) "SAHARASIA: The 4000BCE Origins of Child Abuse, Sex-Repression, Warfare, and Social
      Violence in the Deserts of the Old World" by James DeMeo