Are We Remembering the Boys?

In most countries around the world, girls are disproportionately at risk of, and harmed by, both sexual abuse and exploitation. But we also know that all genders experience sexual violence. And every trauma victim and survivor deserves tailored treatment and care. So what do we know about how boys experience sexual exploitation? What are the unique stigmas and burdens that they bear? How do we tailor interventions to address their specific needs? And how do we ensure that every victim of every gender gets the help that they need to heal? 

Topics in this episode: 

• Origin story (1:25) 
• Not much research about boys (3:10) 
• The survey (8:55) 
• Positive examples (16:18) 
• Three specific findings (23:58) 
• Policy implications (31:15) 
• What’s next in research (36:04) 
• For more information (38:51) 

Links: 

Mark Kavenagh, Ph.D., founder and director of Evident Consulting (LinkedIn) 

“Sexual exploitation of children: Barriers for boys in accessing social supports for victimization,” Mark Kavenagh, Nicholas Hua, Christine Wekerle, part of a special issue of Child Abuse & Neglect: Global Insights on the Sexual Exploitation of Boys, Vol. 142, Part 2, August 2023 

ECPAT International 

Global Boys Initiative  

“A global systematic scoping review of literature on the sexual exploitation of boys,” Corrine Moss, Savanah Jordan Smith, Katherine Kim, Nicholas Hua, Noella Noronha, Mark Kavenagh, Christine Wekerle 

“Frontline support services for boys who have experienced child sexual exploitation: A thematic review of survey data from seven countries,” Marie Nodzenski, Jarrett Davis 

Sunflower Centers in South Korea

Jordan Greenbaum, MD, previously appeared on One in Ten: “The Trauma They Carried,” Season 3, Episode 10 (July 15, 2021) 

Thorn study, Self-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material: Youth Attitudes and Experiences in 2021 

“Growing Up Online: Addressing Child Sextortion,” with Katie Connell, MSW, (FBI); Season 5, Episode 5, of One in Ten (April 7, 2023) 

Transcript

Season 5, Episode 12

[Intro music]

[Intro]

[00:09] Teresa Huizar:
 Hi, I’m Teresa Huizar, your host of One in Ten. In today’s episode, “Are We Remembering the Boys?” I speak with Dr. Mark Kavenagh of Evident Consulting about the sexual abuse and exploitation of boys.

Media accounts, survivor narratives, and our own statistics are filled with all-too common and traumatic stories of the victimization of girls. And this makes sense in the fact that in most countries around the world, girls are disproportionately at risk of, and harmed by, both sexual abuse and exploitation. But we also know that all genders experience sexual violence. And every trauma victim and survivor deserves tailored treatment and care. 

So what do we know about how boys experience sexual exploitation? What are the unique stigmas and burdens that they bear? How do we tailor interventions to address their specific needs? And how do we ensure that every victim of every gender gets the help that they need to heal? I know you’ll be as interested in learning how to better help boys as I was. Please take a listen. 

[01:25] Teresa Huizar:
Hi, Mark. Welcome to One in Ten. 

Mark Kavenagh:
Hi, Teresa. It’s a pleasure to join you today. 

[01:30] Teresa Huizar: 
So I’m just wondering, how did you get started researching child abuse and come to this work looking at the way that boys in particular experienced child sexual abuse?

Mark Kavenagh:
I started out my career in Australia as a child psychologist, so I went through uni. There’s—as there is in the US—quite a stringent training process where you sort of first learn to be a scientist and then go on to be a practitioner. I worked in schools in Australia for a short time and then found my way to Southeast Asia and into development work. When I was working in development work, there was, you know, I think this is going back a few years, but you know, back 15 years or so, there was quite a need, I think, for people that had scientific skills, had research, design skills and things like that. So I actually found that part of my degree became really prominent in the work I was doing. They didn’t need psychologists and social workers as much, they needed people that would design that research.

Teresa Huizar: 
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
And so my career since that point has tended to involve a lot of research. But in the child protection space. 

The topic of boys, I think, particularly has been close to my heart since that training. When I was learning how to be a child psychologist in my class, I think there were three boys out of about 35 students. We had a particular focus on schools and education. So already, you know, having such a quite stark gender—I don’t know—breakdown that didn’t favor male practitioners meant that boy topics kind of got flicked to us when we were addressing them in school. And I mean, realistically that’s what I was interested in too. And it’s just sort of stuck through the career, I think. 

[03:09] Teresa Huizar:
You know, it’s interesting. When we first did our research-to-practice abstract on one of your recent articles—and I’m going to say one of your recent articles because you have a history of researching these issues. So there’s more than one article that we could be talking about. You know, I was really struck by how infrequently—because we’re constantly scanning for articles to share with our field—I was really struck by how infrequently we come across one that’s really about boys’ experience. And is that sort of true globally when you look at the literature, or is that something that, you know, we sort of experience a lot here in the US where it’s very focused on girls?

Mark Kavenagh:
It’s absolutely what we saw globally and the article that we will concentrate our attention on today is part of a special issue that specifically looks at sexual exploitation of boys around the world. One of the things that we did for that special issue is a global systematic literature review on that topic. It had to include identified samples of boys. So it might’ve included girls as well, but there had to be disaggregation. And we were looking beyond just Western contexts. We worked through the ECPAT International network with a hundred organizations, mostly in developing countries, to identify studies that weren’t in the literature.

In the end, we came up with, I think it was about 330 studies initially that met the first criteria, but through screening it was 81 studies over 20 years. So it’s—

Teresa Huizar:
Really?

Mark Kavenagh:
It’s not much, you know? 

Teresa Huizar:
Yes.

Mark Kavenagh:
And, yeah. So it’s incredibly infrequent, as you say—

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
—to have that focus, particularly on the experiences of boys on sexual exploitation. There’s a bit more broad literature when we talk about child sexual abuse, but—

Teresa Huizar:
More broadly. Mm-hmm. 

Mark Kavenagh:
Yeah. But it’s still, you know, the difference between the focus on girls and the focus on boys is dramatic. The evidence also suggests that the impacts and the vulnerability of girls is also higher. But I still don’t think it’s at balance with the extent of the issue, the level of research that’s out there. 

[05:14] Teresa Huizar: 
When you think—we’re going to, you know, drill down into the article in a moment—but just when you think about the special issue more broadly and your work more broadly, what do you think would surprise child abuse professionals about the experience the boys have and where things stand in our understandings—

Mark Kavenagh:
Hmm.

Teresa Huizar: 
—of the way in which boys experience both sexual exploitation and child sexual abuse?

Mark Kavenagh:
I like that question. I think there’s a few things in the data that we saw in a number of the articles in that issue that go to the influence that gender norms have on experiences for boys.

And I think while we’re conscious of how norms can influence the way that we provide services, the way that boys and girls may access services, I’m not sure that we’re fully conscious of that extent. And I think that goes to things like the idea that boys self-stigmatize themselves or feel responsible themselves, which is perhaps not something that a practitioner is necessarily conveying in the way that they engage but we’re not always conscious or seeing that that’s what might be playing out. So the data that interviews boys, that captured perspectives of frontline workers who work with boys, suggest that these norms are potentially playing out in ways that sometimes they’re conscious of, sometimes they’re not.

And I think, I’m a practitioner, you know, historically too, and I think that’s surprised me also to read. Because going into those conversations with young people, a number of years ago now, but going into those conversations, I felt like I had a grounding in that, both as a male practitioner— 

Teresa Huizar: 
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
—but also having, you know, learnt about gender. In hindsight, I didn’t have a full grasp of those issues. 

[07:02] Teresa Huizar: 
You know, as you’re talking, it’s making me wonder if sometimes we’re just sort of applying our own mental rubric for sort of “how these cases go” onto boys in which really the base of our knowledge is that experience for girls.

And so, you know, what disconnect or what tailoring do we need to do so that boys are really getting things that address their specific concerns? Especially as it relates to this issue you’re raising, which is our very expectations of boys may create some specific vulnerabilities or some specific cognitive distortions in the way they think about their abuse or exploitation experience too.

Mark Kavenagh:
I think we run the risk of perhaps perpetuating some of the gender stereotypes in the ways that we try to adjust ourselves to address boys, you know, more readily. I think things like saying, “Oh, well, boys prefer an active engagement” or “Boys prefer that we sit beside them or that we don’t directly speak about the abuse” are similarly stereotypes.

I think we need to approach every conversation as a practitioner fresh with a broad range of possibilities as to how the conversation plays out in front of us. So the, yeah, the idea that yes, we have to be gender sensitive and boy-friendly in the way that we provide services is for sure. But not to fall into the trap of thinking that being boy-friendly is a particular way for every boy that we encounter.

I think some of the research shows, certainly for gender diverse young people or young people with questioning or diverse sexuality, that’s even more complex for them. Because they’re going to a service that may focus attention on boys or may focus attention on girls, and they feel that they don’t necessarily fit either of those services. So that, you know, they won’t simply seek the help. 

[08:55] Teresa Huizar:
It’s a good point and a good reminder that we need to be thinking about the kid who’s right in front of us. 

Mark Kavenagh:
Yeah. 

Teresa Huizar:
And not making sort of initial assumptions about what their experience has been as well. 

So, I’m just, you know, sort of turning a little bit to the article—and not everyone who’s listening to the podcast read the article that led us to you, actually. Can you just sort of summarize it briefly for folks who haven’t read it? 

Mark Kavenagh:
Sure. So the discussion article actually looks at a number of the other pieces of research that are presented in the broader special issue. So one of the main sources of data, I guess, is that systematic literature review that we conducted through the ECPAT International network to identify both the peer-reviewed literature as well as, you know, what we call “gray literature.” So reports that had been conducted, perhaps by NGOs, perhaps by students, that didn’t make it to publication down the line and things like that. So that was one source. Looking across, really the globe, there were, as I think I mentioned already, 81 studies across 38 countries in a number of languages beyond English, which is also rare in those sort of systematic reviews. So that gave us a quite interesting global picture. 

The second source of information was analysis of the legal framework in 10 countries that was conducted as part of ECPAT International’s Global Boys— 

[Recording gap]

[Initiative. … Some countries,] for example, had laws that defined sexual violence and rape as something that could only possibly happen to women and girls. So that, you know, immediately excludes boys from being considered victims within the eyes of the law in those countries.

And then the third piece of information that the discussion article looks at was results from a frontline providers survey in the same 10 countries that was conducted. So we reached out—this is in my previous role with ECPAT International—those organizations around the world reached out to frontline providers and asked a number of questions. Some scenario-based, some about their attitudes, some about their practices. And that data we looked at as well.

So those three quite diverse pieces of information are brought together in a relatively short article. I think it’s only eight pages if we take out the references. So hopefully it’s not too lengthy. And we tried to boil it down into three sort of findings across that data that we then presented some solutions for.

[11:20] Teresa Huizar:
 So maybe we’ll just pick these apart a little bit. And I do appreciate the fact that you guys did such a helpful literature review. Because I sort of, when I read it myself the first time, I felt like I was getting a brief, very helpful education. Caught up to speed, so to speak, in that summary. So I appreciate that.

But maybe moving on to the frontline provider survey. First of all, I thought it was incredible that it even had been done and consistently across those 10 countries, so I was delighted to see that. But when you think about what came from that survey, what frontline providers actually said, was it the case that you expected the responses you got? Or did you find elements that were particularly surprising to you? Or were there things that, whether or not you thought they were surprising, you felt that they had a particular public policy implication that’s worth talking about?

Mark Kavenagh:
I like your questions, Teresa. I think that’s a really interesting way to dive into this data. The frontline worker survey did tell us a few things that were what we expected. So it’s data that actually confirms a few of those expectations. And so, for example, within the caseload of those that responded, boys made up a smaller proportion of the children that they were supporting for sexual exploitation. It’s not a representative sample, but they were quite good targeted samples in each of the 10 countries because of the way that the local organizations reached out in an existing network.

So we confirmed the fact that, you know, supports are being provided to girls more frequently than boys, which, you know, we sort of expected. There’s a couple of countries where that trend was bucked a little bit. And in South Asian countries in the sample, so Pakistan, India, and Sri Lanka, this wasn’t the case. In fact, we saw more boys in the caseloads of the respondents. So that was fascinating to dig a bit deeper into. 

And Jarrett Davis and Marie Nodzenski wrote the article and analyzed that data across the countries, and they touch on some of the potential reasons for that. 

So in those countries, girls are much more closely monitored and watched outside of the home. And we make some assumptions about whether that perhaps means that boys are perhaps a little more vulnerable. They’re in circumstances where they’re, you know, accessible by perpetrators outside the home. And I say that carefully because the data also obviously indicates that a lot of this abuse and exploitation is happening within communities, which, you know, in these countries, maybe it’s not as widely spoken about. But there did seem to be a sense in those parts of the world—

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
—that there was a more public kind of awareness, I guess, of boys being victims, which, to be honest, surprised me a little bit there.

Teresa Huizar:
Yes. 

Mark Kavenagh:
We did also say that there was practitioners that had, often, a quite strong focus. So, you know, delving into the fact that there was a lower proportion overall of boy cases, there was often like three or four practitioners who had almost all boy cases. So they were the specialists— 

Teresa Huizar:
I see.

Mark Kavenagh:
—that were getting these cases referred through to them, which I guess makes a bit of sense.

But then in terms of the unintended consequences of those sorts of circumstances, we saw instances where boys seeking help might be kind of turned away or referred on to someone else because, “Oh, well, we’re not qualified to deal with your concerns here because we don’t have specialist boy practitioners.”

And there’s a good heart behind that, in fact, you know. But there’s a sense that—and certainly in one case that we encountered, a boy’s family was referred four times before the boy received help.

Teresa Huizar:
Oh, dear.

Mark Kavenagh:
It’s like, you know, they got someone who was really a specialist, but they had to be very persistent. And it’s not a very friendly experience to be referred on four times.

Teresa Huizar:
I am incredibly impressed that they persisted through four referrals. I mean, I think—

[Cross-talk]

Teresa Huizar:
—it’s a little shocking, even.

Mark Kavenagh:
It’s an amazing father.

Teresa Huizar:
Yeah.

Mark Kavenagh:
Yeah. The dad deserves a medal. Yeah, absolutely. Yep.

[15:25] Teresa Huizar:
 Yeah, absolutely. But that’s an, that is an interesting thing that if you create too much of a sort of idea that it needs to be a subspecialty, then what that can mean for families is that they’re just experiencing a lot of barriers actually in getting service and getting sort of quick and ready access to services. That’s interesting. So—

[Cross-talk]

Mark Kavenagh:
I think it goes to— 

Teresa Huizar:
Go ahead. 

Mark Kavenagh:
Sorry. If I can pick up on a point there. 

Teresa Huizar:
Sure. 

Mark Kavenagh:
It goes a little bit to the research agenda, too.

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
In that, because this is seen as a specialist issue, then often we’re not disaggregating that data that’s generally looking at sexual exploitation, which would—

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
Yeah, boys are 50% of children, you know. 

Teresa Huizar:
Sure. 

Mark Kavenagh:
So, in fact, we should start to consider that when we explore sexual exploitation, um, the sample includes both boys and girls that may have these experiences. 

Teresa Huizar: 
Interesting. 

[16:17] 
 So one of the other things that I’m wondering about is, you know, I remember from your article, and also the special edition, there were instances—and not only the ones that you just mentioned, about Southeast Asian countries and their experience with boys. You know, there’s sort of a general awareness of boys experiencing these things, but there were also other sort of differences between countries. Are there any of those that you felt were positive variants, like something we should look at and say: “You know what? There are countries who are dealing—either universally or on individual subtopics—with this issue of how we recognize exploitation among boys and treat them following exploitation better. 

I’m not asking you to select those who are not doing well. I’m asking you, are there any examples where we’re like, “You know what? If we really looked at doing more of X, we can see that there’s a country that’s doing that well”?

Mark Kavenagh:
Yeah, I think when we look at the 10 countries that were explored, some countries had really strong legislative frameworks. And I think while I tended my work not to focus on the legislative side of things from a welfare perspective because it’s necessary, but that level of advocacy’s, you know, there’s lots of people doing that. There’s lots of lawyers doing that, you know. But it does have a really interesting impact. 

So one of the countries that was explored is Belgium, and they have like quite, quite strong legislative frameworks around sexual exploitation of children. There’s been a number of actors that have been really effective, I guess, in advocacy in that space over the years. And, you know, the legislation’s completely gender blind. They have quite good support mechanisms in place that young people can access for victims support for money, for accessing welfare services and support through the court system and things like that. So really strong legislative frameworks up. You know they’re not—I still, I feel frustrated at myself picking that first.  But I do think there was a really clear example in a couple of countries of how that sets the tone. 

A second example was South Korea, who until relatively recently had pretty rubbish legislative frameworks in terms of sexual violence and its impacts on young people. And so they’ve done some really substantial movement on legislation and policy approaches to these crimes in recent years and that, you know, it’s pushing water uphill. It’s quite a tough process, but you can see how that success at the legislative level has flow-on effects for those that are working in the welfare space. Because they now have, like, grounds for provision of support. 

So prior to those legislative changes, they have these centers across South Korea for sexual violence called Sunflower Centers. Until the law changed, boys couldn’t access these services. But there were quite a good set of services across the country that victims of sexual violence could access. And so now the laws changed and that immediately meant that those government services were available to boys. 

So, yeah, as I said, I’m frustrated that I picked that first, but I think a really strong legislative environment is really, really important for success. 

I mean, the other thing would be to talk about some of the examples where the advocacy work or the social welfare work considers the social and contextual environment around the issue, not just the issue.

So, you know, we’re not just trying to encourage reporting so that we can provide help seeking, but the reason why people aren’t reporting is because if in this country or this part of the world we’re really uncomfortable talking about sex. And so the solutions that are more openly talking about sex and running public campaigns that have high level, you know, even prime minister and presidential level support are quite influential. And there’s a couple of examples amongst countries and beyond those 10 countries that I’ve seen across my career. 

[20:18] Teresa Huizar:
 One of the things I’m wondering, because, you know, in some of the work that we’ve done, which has been helping other countries that want to develop Children’s Advocacy Centers do so, one of the things that I’ve been just so impressed by really has been the resourcefulness and inventiveness and creativity in many countries that just don’t have the resources we do in terms of providing help for victims, creating a legal framework, those kinds of things.

And I’m wondering, I think sometimes that surprises folks—not you, of course you’ve, you know, worked internationally, but I think for some people they expect there’s going to be good frameworks in countries that have more wealth, and there’s going to be terrible frameworks and response systems in those who don’t.

And I’m just about wondering your own experience as you’ve been looking at this issue because, you know, at least from my own—it’s not to say that resources don’t matter, it’s to say that I think that there are some really committed people all over the world who work on these types of issues. And they can draw on lots of resources that aren’t strictly monetary to get really excellent results. And I’m just wondering what you found in your own work?

Mark Kavenagh:
Teresa, I think that’s a really great reflection, and it’s absolutely what I say. As you’re speaking, I’m thinking back to a meeting I was involved in recently looking at legislative responses to sexual violence across borders in this part of the world. And it brought together representatives from a number of members of the Southeast Asian network of countries. And that’s exactly the situation. You know, like these people that are profoundly motivated to bring about change. There’s a couple people in that room who’ve been, you know, pushing those topics for 30 years. 

I heard this great story about a case that a prosecutor was working on where the offender was in the US, and the victims here in Thailand. And they had to work out who was going to pay for the online interview, because back then, this was the nineties. You know, it was like, I think he said it was $60 a minute or something insane—

Teresa Huizar:
Oh my gosh. [Laughter]

Mark Kavenagh:
—like that, you know? And from Thailand at that point, you know— 

Teresa Huizar:
Yeah.

Mark Kavenagh:
—there certainly wasn’t the money to support that. And so they had this back and forth. 

But I think the answer to the question is that it’s like the informal and the clever workarounds and the commitments that people use—

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
—and engage with each other. Rhey’ve also formed these lifelong relationships because there’s a bit of quid pro quo in—

Teresa Huizar:
Yes. 

Mark Kavenagh:
—in their engagements. So I would say that’s a big part of the success. 

As you mentioned, you know, Child Advocacy Centers, we’re super-jealous of those in this part of the world. They’re amazing. The model’s incredible. And it’s so victim-centric, you know. It puts the child at the middle of everyone’s focus. And it’s certainly something that across the world, you know, I’ve certainly been—part of my career has been advocating for that model. 

But as you said, those sort of structural things that—not only the financial barriers, but I think things like different ministries needing to collaborate and work together, which hasn’t necessarily always been the case in some countries. And in order to break down those barriers and build those relationships, it comes down to that they’re really motivated and quite phenomenal people that drive success. So yeah, I’ve absolutely seen it. And I’ve seen things that bring out the best in social workers particularly.

Teresa Huizar:
 Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
But prosecutors, police in Southeast Asia that are—police in this region don’t always get a great rap. But I’ve heard some amazing cases of people that go above and beyond the call. 

[23:57] Teresa Huizar:
 Because I am interested in this work around the world, I could explore that for quite some time. But I’ll try to bring us back to the study now for a moment.

Mark Kavenagh:
Sure. 

Teresa Huizar:
 So you teased it a moment ago to say that there were three specific findings. And rather than misquote you or misunderstand your work, I’ll let you tell our listeners about your findings yourself. So what were they? And what do you think the implications are of them?

Mark Kavenagh:
So look, the first one we’ve spoken already a little bit about. But that idea of challenging gender norms is just profoundly part of the solution. And that’s an easy thing to say and a really hard thing to action. As I mentioned, you know, in my own experiences over the years, the sense of: How do you actually do that in your practice? You can only be conscious of so much of your own behaviors. So I think that, you know, the solution to challenging gender norms is like listening and learning and continuing to question your practice and continuing to question the ways that systems do things. 

I think particularly the way that systems do things is important. 

So for example, when we look at boys—and many of the people listening will be really well aware of this—but the response to sexual violence can often look like problematic or acting-out behaviors. You know, it’s anger and then the associated behaviors that come with poor impulse control. And so that tends to mean that young boys’ first engagement with support service is potentially a justice response. 

Teresa Huizar:
 Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
You know, they’re in trouble for something or other, even if that’s initially at school. But they come into contact with those that are supposed to help them for, you know, being naughty. And so that sets us up with a bunch of preconceptions as practitioners we have to push past. 

I think another part of, you know, unpacking gender norms is the concept that every person that comes into the room as a practitioner has a different way of engaging. And so we have to keep challenging that and keep broadening that.

So what it means to be a boy can be a million different things. And that’s OK. And, you know, you’re well aware, Teresa, that there’s lots of ongoing conversation and debate about gender and diversity of ways of being. And lots of people are challenged by that and feel like it may be an attack on masculinity or traditional ways, but I think continuing to push those barriers is kind of important so we create a diverse expectation of, you know, ways of being for young people that then means that some of those barriers just don’t exist for them in engaging.

The second thing that we speak about in the discussion article is the idea of ensuring that services are safe and trauma-informed. So, you know, again, I’m sure that everyone listening is quite well aware of the ideas of being trauma-informed. You know, initially focused on physical and psychological safety, moving onto other basic needs, and then eventually engaging existing support services and moving beyond that. So that idea, we really push that in the discussion article. 

Really weirdly, I think, out of those 81 papers that we found looking at the sexual exploitation of boys around the world, only four of them made mention of trauma-informed, care-driven approaches. 

Teresa Huizar:
That’s interesting. 

Mark Kavenagh:
Yeah, it may be happening more than it was mentioned.

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
But to come from that perspective of understanding that the person in the room may not at all be ready for the sort of talk therapy that we might be used to providing is incredibly important to be aware of. 

The third sort of recommendation and set of solutions that we present is the idea of being boy-friendly. And you know, it’s a little bit linked to what I talked about in terms of gender norms, but making sure our services are open to receiving boys.

So, of course, the solution includes practitioners who are specialists in working with boys and their particular needs. But I strongly would argue that across the board, anyone who’s supporting children needs access at least to some training and support and supervision for engaging with boys, girls, and children of diverse gender identity as well, so that that first interaction is a friendly one. Even if they might be referred to a specialist, they’re not feeling like they’re extra hard because of who they are or what they’ve been through, or that, you know, a service is excluding them because they don’t fit what’s expected of victims, and things like that. 

[28:30] Teresa Huizar:
 As you were talking, Mark, one of the things I was thinking about is that, you know, even if a service is open to boys, and even if you have providers who are sensitive to those things, if the physical environment, you know, isn’t conducive, I think, you know—perhaps because of our work in Children’s Advocacy Centers, so many of us, you know we think about the physical environment a lot. What’s on the walls? Do kids see a representation of themselves in the visual imagery when they come into the building? Do they see it in terms of who’s providing service to them?

And so when I think about, in the US anyways, so much of human services is provided by women. Right? We have the overwhelming percentage of, you know, case workers and other sort of human service workers, CAC staff, those kinds of things. We have to be thoughtful about that. Because it isn’t to say that one can’t be successful in providing services to boys if you’re a woman or those sorts of things.

It’s to say that, as with any other thing that we’re sensitive about, you know, representation matters. And so if boys—I, you know, I don’t know if there are any studies on that, but I guess my sense would be like many other things, if boys cannot see themselves represented in the physical space, it would be hard for me to imagine that they would feel very welcome.

So I’m just wondering if there is any research on that, first of all, or if this is just Teresa’s own internal biases [laughter] and suppositions?

Mark Kavenagh:
I do agree with you. I think in a number of examples that I’ve heard of that not only a failure to recognize themselves being represented but in fact, as I said earlier, the idea that the systems are constructed in ways that exclude them.

Teresa Huizar:
 Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
So the practitioners might do a great job of including them. But they’re looking at an intake form that that says, things that simply assume that the victim is a girl.

Teresa Huizar:
 Don’t apply to them, yeah.

Mark Kavenagh:
Because it’s been built up around sexual violence being predominantly a problem that impacts women and girls. 

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
I’ve certainly heard about that.

So, you know, the picture where you’re supposed to draw where injuries might be indicated is a picture of a girl. There’s no option for there to be a picture of a boy. 

Teresa Huizar: 
Oh, that’s interesting. 

Mark Kavenagh:
Things like that that I’ve certainly heard about.

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
The flip side, however, and some of the research does touch on this in the—certainly in the systematic review, we saw some of the papers touched on the fact that sometimes boys will prefer a female practitioner to engage with. 

Teresa Huizar:
That’s interesting.

Mark Kavenagh:
We know that predominantly offenders are male. And so they feel safer speaking with women. But as you mentioned, I think the idea is that they have control over that. It’s a really important principle of trauma-informed care that they have, not necessarily choice, but influence over—

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
—how they’re accessing support or how support is being provided.

[31:14] Teresa Huizar:
You know, many of the things that we’ve been talking about so far have really centered on implications for program service. I’m wondering if, you know, beyond the issue of legal frameworks perhaps, but also including that, there are other things where you say, really there are policy implications of this that we need to—not just in those 10 countries, but all countries should be paying some attention to based on what we found in these 10 countries.

Mark Kavenagh:
Look, I think from a research perspective, the dramatic need to disaggregate data when we’re exploring sexual violence is really obvious to me. Now that I’ve been doing this so long, when I read an article or I read something, often they’ll talk about sexual violence against children. And then you look a bit deeper into the methodology, and they mean girls. And that’s OK to say that, but let’s not assume that data that’s collected only with girls is talking about the experience of boys. 

And that’s a reverse on how the world has worked for a long time. And I—

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
—you know, I’m certainly not arguing anything anti-feminist. But saying that we just need to be really careful about, you know, the idea that the data genuinely represents the diversity of people who are victimized.

So for me, that’s a really strong policy shift that needs to occur and that we can do something about relatively quickly. I do that with students who seek supervision or seek advice, I’ll advise that, yes, you can focus on a particular subpopulation or context for sure, but do consider collecting data across, you know, a range of genders, even if it doesn’t turn up. But you should be open to that and the potential to disaggregate. 

You know, it’s a prickly issue, the idea of specialists versus generalized training and support. I think there’s place for both, and I’m certainly not arguing that we don’t need specialist services for male victims. But I do think that sometimes that becomes the thing that sucks up everyone’s attention when those practitioners at the frontline—and I don’t mean only the welfare experts, but teachers and schools who are, you know, very commonly the sort of gateway into support or access to help that children experience. They need an understanding of these issues as well. And they need to understand how gender norms might be influencing the way they see whether a boy is or isn’t a victim.

The last one that I’ll point out in terms of the broader policy implications is the idea that services should be available to boys and girls and all children, regardless of whether they’ve made a disclosure. 

Teresa Huizar:
Mm-hmm. 

Mark Kavenagh:
So we know that child sexual abuse and exploitation is an incredibly tough thing to speak about.

You know, I think the circumstances should occur—they do often—but they should occur where, you know, your intake form doesn’t require you to have made a disclosure for you to access care. We can make assumptions about it, perhaps based on indicators, or we could simply provide care because young people are seeking it. With, you know, the idea that if we’re trauma-informed or we’re gender- and sexual-violence-informed that we’ll be able to recognize some behaviors may be indicating particular issues. 

[34:29] Teresa Huizar:
 You know, I think the last one you brought up is such an important one because I think that often rules are created that have really significant unintended consequences that you have to spend time then rolling back later. 

Mark Kavenagh:
Hmm.

Teresa Huizar:
You know, I think, many times we see things that I don’t think were really intended as gatekeeping necessarily.

It was sort of like, “Well, if a child discloses, of course they’re going to need X, Y, Z service. And they should move to the front of the line for that service.” But without being thoughtful about the fact that you could have a child that everybody believes has been sexually abused because there’s been lots of indications of that, but the child isn’t ready to disclose. But that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t have access to mental health supports or other things that they might need. 

And so I think that that’s something that we all could benefit from being thoughtful about. And our public policy work is making sure that we’re not creating—unintentionally—barriers for kids that just aren’t ready for whatever reason.

Mark Kavenagh:
There is some movement to introduce, kind of brief screening tools—

Teresa Huizar:
Mmm.

Mark Kavenagh:
—that I’ve certainly read about. So there’s an American researcher, Jordan Greenbaum—

Teresa Huizar:
Yes!

Mark Kavenagh:
—who has looked at some of this work. 

Teresa Huizar:
Yeah.

Mark Kavenagh:
So, you know, brief screening tools in emergency rooms and things like that. Although as I understand it—and I may be wrong here—but as I understand it, a number of the tools that do exist have been largely created with female samples. But those sorts of screening tools I think are really useful so that we’re proactively seeking out young people that may need our support. Both, you know, boys, girls, and children of diverse gender.

[36:03] Teresa Huizar:
 So I’m wondering what is next for you research-wise? What are you either working on now or think to yourself, “Gosh, if only a funder would come along and fund this really important research that needs to be done right now on X, Y, Z subject,” what would that be? 

Mark Kavenagh:
Thanks, Teresa! So Evident Consulting, my little company based here in Thailand, is actually just beginning some work on something that’s been close to my heart for some time.

So a couple—I can’t sort of disclose the direct details— 

Teresa Huizar:
Sure.

Mark Kavenagh:
—at the moment we’re still signing contracts, but a couple of donors have been quite amazing in supporting a partnership between us and an organization here in Thailand to explore self-generated sexual content—

Teresa Huizar:
Interesting.

Mark Kavenagh:
—that’s being exchanged via technology.

Teresa Huizar:
Mm-hmm. 

Mark Kavenagh:
So there was an amazing study in the US by Thorn a few years ago—

Teresa Huizar:
Yes.

Mark Kavenagh:
—that looked at the attitudes towards this. I listened to a podcast that you did a few weeks back or a few months back, I think, with a police officer from the FBI, which I found— 

Teresa Huizar:
Right.

Mark Kavenagh:
—really interesting. 

Teresa Huizar:
Mm-hmm. 

Mark Kavenagh:
But yeah, looking at that outside of a Western context, in—and quite specifically in—sort of rural parts of Thailand.

Teresa Huizar:
Mm-hmm. 

Mark Kavenagh:
So, Thailand’s an interesting place. It’s a place of dichotomies. You know, there’s often a sense of being a relatively open-minded place—you know, good attitudes towards the LGBT community and things like that. But there’s also quite a lot of conservatism around things like talking about sex within families and certainly with young people. And we’re seeing that play out in quite problematic ways. So kids are engaging through technology and having conversations and engaging in behaviors that are a big risk to them. 

Teresa Huizar:
Mm-hmm. 

Mark Kavenagh:
But no one’s feeling comfortable to have the conversation with them. So we’re going to look at that issue, and we’re going to use the data that’s gathered from some surveys directly with young people to develop an intervention that I think will largely end up looking like open discussion with young people about sex and consent and technology and peer pressure. They’re not new topics, but in a way that considers the role that, you know, the digital space is increasingly having on our lives. 

[38:12] Teresa Huizar:
 Well that sounds fascinating. So good luck with that project. Hopefully all will get kicked off well, and feel free to come back and talk to us about it when it’s all said and done. 

Is there anything else I should have asked you that I didn’t, or anything else you want to make sure we talk about today? 

Mark Kavenagh:
I usually really like that question. I usually have something on my list, but I kind of don’t today. I think we’ve had a really quite in-depth discussion. I really appreciate the thoughtful questions that have helped prompt my thinking a little more. But yeah, no, I think we’ve covered off everything I wanted to discuss. 

[Outro music begins]

[38:44] Teresa Huizar:
 Well, thank you again, Mark. We really appreciate you coming on to talk about such an important project.

Mark Kavenagh:
Thanks so much, Teresa.

[Outro]

[38:51] Teresa Huizar:
Thanks for listening to One in Ten. If you liked this episode, please share it with a friend or colleague. And for more information about this episode or any of our others, please visit our podcast website at OneInTenPodcast.org.

[Outro music fades out]