Dear Prudence: Did my ex-dominatrix sister molest my son

[cereta]

Dear Prudence,
My sister used to be a professional dominatrix. She was quite open with me about this and said that she stopped because she was tired of being “topped from the bottom”; she wanted “real” control. We haven’t discussed this for some years now, and it never occurred to me that it might not be a good idea to leave my preteen son alone with her. The other day, I arrived early to pick him up, and it took my sister a while to answer the door. It appeared that she and my son may have both hastily put their clothes back on. I later asked my son what happened in general terms, so as not to sound accusing of anyone. His answer was plausible, but it almost sounded rehearsed. I’m not sure what to do. Maybe nothing untoward happened and I’m just being paranoid. I love my sister, and I really think she would know better than to do anything remotely sexual with her nephew or anyone his age. Should I talk to my sister and hope she can assure me that everything’s OK? Or should I just assume the worst and never again leave my son in her care?

I am trying to imagine why, if you had a suspicion that your sister was molesting your son, you did not ask more questions of her immediately. Her past work as a dominatrix has nothing to do with your current situation, although it sounds like at least part of you believes that if she was willing to tie up adult, consenting men for a living she’d be equally willing to abuse a prepubescent child, which is a horrific false equivalence. Set aside your assumptions about her former employment. You say they “may have” been rushing to put their clothes on—how do you know? Did your latent fears about your sister’s past cause you to imagine that as an excuse for the delay, or did you truly see something (a missing button, your sister pulling a shirt back over her head?) that ought to have prompted a serious, in-the-moment investigation? You missed an important opportunity to gather information. Don’t make that mistake again now. Tell her that you were concerned and upset by what you think you saw when she babysat him, and ask her to tell you exactly what happened. If you haven’t already, talk to your son about privacy and the right he has not to be touched by anyone he doesn’t want to be, no matter who they are, and that he can come talk to you about anything. You can make this clear to him without directly accusing your sister.

It concerns me deeply that you consider “not molesting children” to be a question of “knowing better,” as if it were a mere lapse in judgment or matter of taste rather than a violent crime. Talk to your sister immediately. Either you’re working on the assumption that a woman who once had a sex work–adjacent job is thus likelier to molest a child, which is unjustifiable paranoia, or you saw something incredibly suspicious about your sister, and your child, and failed to follow through.

Comments

[cereta]

I am just kind of blinking at this. I keep thinking I have something to say, and then it dies between brain and keyboard. Thoughts?

[nonethefewer]

[cereta]

Pretty much. I mean, I agree with a lot of what Mallory said, especially the part where a WHOLE LOT comes do to WHY the LW thought her sister and son were hastily dressing. But ultimately, as awkward as it is, the LW has to talk with both of them.

[recessional]

. . . .welp I think Prudence gave the only possible answer there?

Because, well. Yeah.

[lone_lilly]

This might be the first time I have zero complaints about the advice given.

[greenygal]

And I'm really glad that this is the question that got the good response.

[lone_lilly]

Absolutely agreed!

[kaberett]

Yeah, all these things.

[shirou]

Isn't sexual abuse usually about power, not sexual desire? I can understand why the LW raised the "real control" comment and the sister's prior work as a dominatrix, to put the comment in context. I am not convinced that the LW is making the false equivalence Prudie claims, although to be fair, I'm also not convinced that s/he isn't. It would have been nice if the LW had explained why s/he thought that piece of information was relevant.

I agree with the advice, but I also expected Prudie to say that the LW's first responsibility is to his/her son. Although exposing the LW's suspicions might be hurtful to the sister if it is a case of unjustified paranoia, the LW absolutely must uncover the truth of the situation. Equating sex work with molestation is horrific, but, quite frankly, not when compared to child molestation.

[likeaduck]

"Isn't sexual abuse usually about power, not sexual desire?"

That's a fairly simplified version of the concept, but sure...but that doesn't mean that all sexual desire that involves power exchange is relevant to discussions of sexual abuse?

Equating sex work to child molestation isn't as bad as child molestation, but...I don't think we have to pick? We can not endorse either of them?

[shirou]

Haha, well, I'm certainly not endorsing either. Let me try again. If the LW's suspicions are wrong, further investigation may result in hurt feelings and exposing an ugly part of the LW. The LW has to risk it, though, because if the LW's suspicions are correct, the consequences of failing to investigate are much worse.

The comment about power was just to say that I can understand why, after seeing something suspicious, the LW might recall what his/her sister said about control and attribute new significance to it.

[minoanmiss]

Isn't sexual abuse usually about power, not sexual desire?

In my experience it's a varyingly ratioed combination.

Also, in my experience, BDSM is as orthoganal to sexual abuse as is 'vanilla' sex. I want to say even more so, due to the necessity of discussing one's desires in detail, but that might just be the culture of the BDSM practitioners I have been fortunate enough to know.

Now, the LW's first duty is to her child, but I think she really needs to consider if she has actual reason to be suspicious (such as the circumstnces of the seeming hasty dressing). I don't think an interest, professional or otherwise, in BDSM is actually a relevant indicator of one's likelihood of being a sexual abuser.

And if I were her sister, well.... here's my particular monkey in this circus: if anyone decided that due to my past interest in BDSM (or history of enduring sexual assault) I was at all likely to be sexually abusing my little roommates, I suppose at best I would try to thank them for their concern about little roomamtes' welfare before informing them that I would never talk to them again in this life or the next.

ETA: After taking a breath, I thought I needed to add some context beyond my provisional sympathy for LW's sister. I think LW may have brought up her sister's dominatrix past as an expression of a very prevalent idea, the particular suspicion of anyone whose sex life includes anything not heterosexual, monogamnous, and vanilla. It's the "anything not within these paricualr boundaries is deviance, and anyone who'll be deviant in one dway will necessarily be deviant in any and all ways." It's a cliche that ho,ophobes accuse glbtq people of pedophilia, but/and that's because it's such a common accusation. When I worked in a school my boyfriend worried that my writing erotic fanfic would get me fired because when *he* was in school the best chemistry teacher was seen walking out of a porn theater and was then fired.

Which is why... concern over whether someone is sexually abusing a child due to their having had an unorthodox sex life in other ways is not necessarily simply an individual case where the worry must have arisen from a legitimate cause. I think LW needs to make sure her worry is not influenced by this idea in order to be able to talk to her son in as non-leading a manner as possible, to find the actual truth and not one a stereotype might be leading her to fear.

[shirou]

I agree, but I'd be kind of surprised if the LW were able to deconvolve the reasons for his/her suspicions. That requires a lot of personal insight. Telling the LW to get lost would be a totally reasonable reaction on the part of the sister, assuming the suspicions are false, but I maintain that it's a risk the LW has to be willing to take to protect his/her child.

If the suspicions are false, we have an adult making some ugly assumptions about a sister who will have to decide how to deal with them. If the suspicions are true, we have a child victim of sexual assault. I appreciate that the first scenario is mean and gross, but seriously, the latter is so much worse, so the LW's priority has to be to investigate and protect the child.

If the LW is smart, s/he can talk to the son or sister about the hasty dressing and leave the sister's past as a dominatrix out of it.

[minoanmiss]

So I've been staring at this for... awhile. And I keep trying to figure out two things:

1) Where I managed to inadvertently say that the LW shouldn't investigate -- I absolutely agree that the LW needs to know what's going on for the sake of the child.

2) How I can manage to prove that people into BDSM are no more likely to be sexual abusers, of children or anyone else, than anyone else is. It's an assumption that in my experience is widespread, untrue, and dangerous.

But, or maybe and, I agree that if the LW is smart, and wants an accurate answer, they will ask both the son and the sister without reference to the sister's BDSM past.

[shirou]

You don't have to prove that people into BDSM are no more likely to be abusive. I believe that. I don't think we actually disagree on anything, we would just emphasize different parts of the response. That was what my comment was about originally. I agree with everything Prudie wrote, I just think she should have emphasized more the LW's responsibility to his/her son.

Eta: I do appreciate you sharing your experience and perspective on this topic. I'm generally much more sympathetic to children than adults, but perhaps I underestimated the pervasiveness and dangerousness of the false equivalence. I wasn't ready to condemn the LW for making the false equivalence based on a single comment, but it seems this is a broader issue than I realized.