(Part 2) Best family abuse books according to redditors

Childhood sexual abuse and assault, like he experienced, is often a huge issue for people's sexuality later in life. Especially when their body responds to the sexual stimulation as a child, even if they didn't consent to it (and that is extremely common)

It can be harder for boys, because of societal beliefs that they should be happy and grateful for this kind of sexual attention from adult women.

There are a lot of therapists who help people heal from sexual trauma like this, and some great self help books out there too, if he wants to go that route.


Edit:

This is my go-to list of rape recovery and sexual abuse recovery self-help books, including some of the precious few books for male victims, as well.

The Rape Recovery Handbook: Step-by-Step Help for Survivors of Sexual Assault by Aphrodite Matsakis

​

The Sexual Healing Journey: A Guide for Survivors of Sexual Abuse by Wendy Maltz

​

Healing Sex: A Mind-Body Approach to Healing Sexual Trauma by Staci Haines

​

The Courage to Heal: A Guide for Women Survivors of Child Sexual Abuse Laura Davis & Ellen Bass

​

Allies in Healing: When the Person You Love Was Sexually Abused as a Child Laura Davis

​

Coming Home to Passion: Restoring Loving Sexuality in Couples with Histories of Childhood Trauma and Neglect by Ruth Cohn

The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma by Bessel van der Kolk

​

Victims No Longer: The Classic Guide for Men Recovering from Sexual Child Abuse by Mike Lew

​

Abused Boys: The Neglected Victims of Sexual Abuseby Mic Hunter

​

Don't Tell: The Sexual Abuse of Boys by Michel Dorais

>The Dobashes from the first citation are sociologists, not feminists.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Violence-Social-Change-Emerson-Dobash/dp/0415036100

>"In their earlier book, "Violence Against Wives: A Case Against the Patriarchy, Dobash and Dobash identified themselves as committed feminist sociologists and clearly located the phenomenon of wife beating in its social and historical context. In the current book, they continue their passionate, scholarly analysis. "Women, Violence and Social Change reminds us of the traditions of social change within which we practice and the visionary and exhilirating movement of which we are a part.."

While I don't know the accuracy of those comments, the patriarchy book clearly does exist, and only feminists really use the term patriarchy.

>Lisa Colarossi from the second citation is a developmental psychologist and a clinical social worker, not a feminist.

>Further, despite 40 years of the feminist movement’s attempts to promote an understanding

Things like this are in the article several times. She talks about lesbians and patriarchy later.

http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/social_service/colarossi%20cv.pdf

>Adjunct Instructor: Interdisciplinary Seminar in Feminist Practice Department of Women's Studies

Research interests.

>Feminist methods in practice and research.

Onwards

>DeKeseredey and Schwartz from the third citation are sociologists, not feminists.

You're on a feminist site, they repeatedly mention feminism, they believe in the patriarchy. They say it here.

>The CTS, although it may accurately count numbers of blows struck, overlooks the broader social psychological and social forces (e.g., patriarchy) that motivate men to abuse their female partners.

I don't really see that as a reliable criticism- the CTS is wrong because the patriarchy.

http://www.xyonline.net/sites/default/files/DeKeseredy,%20Feminist%20contributions-to-understanding-woman-abuse-Myths,-controversies,-and-realities_2011.pdf

Here's a paper where DeK defends feminist scholarship.

>The NIJ is not a feminist organization.

As Straus mentions, and as you can see in their report, their main counter data source is from a modified CTS report. His analysis of it was that they modified it to exclude men.

There are those who criticize his methods. But the vast majority of the studies done use his methods, so most accept it. Even the feminist's studies often use a modified version of it. And your three random citations of scholars who disagreed with it did turn out to be feminist scholars.

>It's clear that you've never engaged criticisms of the CTS directly, and instead have just taken Straus at his word that the CTS is legit and criticism of it is unfounded because it's ideologically convenient for you.

I have, and I don't find their case hugely plausible, but my main issue is with their data collection. Ideologues may well not collect data properly.

>By "they" you clearly meant "MRA types."

Well actually I mean

>Reddit is strongly supportive of revenge and justice, and so it looks normal to the majority to cheer on when someone resists a bully.

Reddit. That is why I said reddit, and not "MRA types".

OP said MRAs and then linked to a group of random redditors. As such, I talked about redditors.