Where did you get that statistic from? I've actually never heard such a high number and the reports and such that I've read in the past weren't that high either.

OK,

I've read the Jim Hopper, PhD abstract and excerpt. Keep in mind, this is NOT the entire research project. I cannot seem to find the entire article and I cannot verify if this is even a peer-reviewed work, submitted to a peer-reviewed publication and then duly published.

I CAN however make very solid and scientifically-sound assertions based upon what we read in the link. That is, baring necessary and requisite information, we can actually dismiss the contents of the entire "excerpt and abstract."

1) No stated de>

Several places over the years. It could be wrong. What have you read?

That 33% is the number thrown-about by the popular media (e.g.: Law and Order SVU, NYTimes...). Its a popular figure that seems to go hand-in-hand with the street-myths. We need some scholarly professional to tell us some sound truths, cuz this is some serious *bleep* we are dealing with here.

AMEN, brother! Preach it!!!!!

{phoenix, forgive me the 'cherry picking' when I quote this excerpts from your post}

Let's say these number would be true, shouldn't that alarm everyone that survivors need more help, better access to therapy, more support?

What if we offer help to sex offenders instead of listing them in sex offender registry that can be accessed by the public, that ostracizes them, keeps them from getting a job, etc.?
What if every convicted sex offender in prison would have access to qualified therapists/therapy?

It'd be interested to find out how many victims become perpetrators BECAUSE they never had access to therapy.

Yeah...let's find out for that reason and:

-Divorce
-Spousal Relations
-Judges misunderstanding
-Therapists mis-informing us
-Child safety
-Societal regard for us
-Our own self-perceptions

THIS is a rather mega-issue for non-offending survivors. I would normally say "I don't give a rat's ass about imprisoned perps." But if 33% is true...Now i DO have to give a rat's ass.

Everything I've been telling people, living and relying-upon is in doubt till someone clears-up that number!

I'll do what I can to find the various articles etc that I read quite some time back that had a much lower number.

I've seen a misconception many times that says since X% offenders abuse then X% of abused will abuse as well... it's not the same thing and not the same number.

When I get some time I'll do some digging, hope I can find them.

Ok, I requested a copy of "Factors in the cycle of violence: Gender rigidity and emotional constriction." from my library which I'll have in a few days probably.

Phoenix, I think we all want to protect children and create a safer environment and world for all of us. It's just,... do you think this is the best way to do that? If you believe the 1 in 6 figure, ... stigmatize 16% of men? And, you said women, so include them? About 25% of women? Bar them all from being teachers, involvement in youth organizations, day care work, etc. ? Of course, I agree, if you're saying, it's not best, but our professional community isn't saying anything about it. Or parents just do their best with little or no guidance. I actually think this fearful environment that creates leaves children LESS safe because everyone's afraid of some punitive authoritative action. Look at the complete firing of all the staff at that Los Angeles Elementary school...

I have to think CSA survivors who've had therapy and recovery work would be a very different risk factor as well. So, yes, I think it speaks to how the tremendous lack of resources isn't making the world safer for kids.

Sort of like: 100% of all cancer victims consumed milk throughout their childhood. Thus, 100% of all milk drinkers will get cancer.

Some researchers, (especially in politics) will pull such a sht-head move. Many many people are just stupid enough to fal for it and sometimes the stats-abusers believe the crap too.